University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education

Naming and the Transmission of Status in a Central Brazilian Society

Author(s): Joan Bamberger
Source: Ethnology, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1974), pp. 363-378
Published by: University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3773052
Accessed: 11/06/2010 08:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upitt.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Ethnology.

http://www.jstor.org

Naming and the Transmission of Status

in a Central Brazilian Society1
Joan Bamberger
Yale University

Morgan (1871: 133) interpreted reluctance to divulge personal names on the

part of the North American Indian as a conservative mechanism which he
said functioned "to prevent the relaxation of the usage of addressing by kin,
whilst, at the same time, it has contributed powerfully to the knowledge and
maintenance of the [relationship] system." In "more than fifty different nations" Morgan (1871: I32) observed that individuals addressed each other
"by the term of the relationship, and never by the personal name of the individuals addressed."This seeming neglect of names by native Americans
led Morgan, preoccupied with "systems of consanguinity and affinity," to
ignore the system of naming. Yet he was the first anthropologist to signal
the importance of names and to suspect, even as a negative factor, their systematic connection with relationship terminologies. Few anthropologists
since Morgan have made detailed investigations of personal names,2 and even
fewer have considered the problem which he initially posed: that there
might well be a connection between the usage of personal names and that
of relationship terms.
It is precisely this connection between names and relationship terms which
I wish to explore in the following pages. For the Kayapo Indians3 and other
of the Ge-speaking peoples of northeastern and central Brazil (c.f. Lave
1967,Da Matta 1973, Melatti 1971) the kinship system serves also as a mechanism for the transmission of personal names. As I will argue, the system of
name bestowal among the Kayap6 can be comprehended only as part of the
kinship system. Names, representing both kin connections as well as avenues
of access to positions of social prestige in village ritual, constitute a form of
symbolic representation which link generational succession with individual
social statuses.
THE FUNCTION OF NAMES

My experience of eliciting names from individual Kayapo was similar to

that reported by Morgan for North America. One of the first rules of discourse I learned during early field research4 was that I could never ask
directly for another person's name. Morgan, unable to account for this custom among North American Indians had supposed that name avoidance
contributed to the use and maintenance of the relationship terminology, but
363

364

ETHNOLOGY

this explanation can hardly account for the practice itself which for the
Kayap6 has to do with canons of etiquette and notions about the person
and persona. A Kayap6 will say that one has shame (pia'abm) to speak the
name of a kinsman (ombikwa),5 and under no conditions will he speak his
own name.
"What is your name?" is not considered a polite or even an appropriate
question and I confounded several would-be informants with this query
before perceiving that the question as phrased would not yield an answer.
I soon discovered that I was inadvertently showing the Kayop6 disrespectby
persisting in repeating the question. Although it was unacceptable for me
to ask someone's name directly, it was acceptable to ask an informant for
the personal name of someone else, providing the other person was not also
a kinsman, and therefore was subject to name avoidance. By asking, "What
is his or her name?" and pointing to the individual, names could be recorded
with little difficultyfor non-kin (mebaitebmn).
Since every Kayapo knows the names in use, but not necessarily all the
names of all the persons who reside within his particular village and sometimes those of residents in other villages, the entry of a stranger into the
village circle usually is an occasion for finding out who he is. However, this
is seldom dependent on the singularity of the individual in question, for a
Kayapo slowly gains his full adult identity in a long sequence of publicly
celebrated ritual stages. He accumulates his individuality as well as his social identity through rituals which confer upon him both his name and his
ceremonial statuses. These statuses are transmitted to him by persons designated by kin category.
The custom of finding out "who a stranger is" among the Kayapo is not
simply a traditional formality nor a question posed from idle curiosity, since
the discovery of the name and social identity of a newcomer establishes
his right to village hospitality. If it can be ascertained that a visitor has
kinsmen (ombikwa) in the village, he will not be considered an outsider
(mebaitebm). He becomes either a real or putative kinsman to a network
of individuals who are responsible for providing him with food and lodging
for as long as he chooses to remain in the village. Personal names thus serve
as a form of identification for Kayapo who leave their natal villages. These
displaced persons find their positions in the new village determined through
the system of personal names and become ombikwa even though the bonds
of kinship cannot be directly established.
Kayapo personal names are clear indications of relationship whether or
not the actual ties between persons are remembered. Kayap6 names classify
individuals according to a principle of cognatic kinship, and this system of
classification which binds names to kinship statuses also places a priority on
the use of kinship terms as the appropriateform of address at the expense
of names, which are prohibited as address terms among persons who recognize each other as ombikwa.
Persons are usually addressed throughout their lives by the names which
they received in childhood. Although there appears to be no limit on the
number of names which a Kayap6 may own, he is usually known in the

NAMING

IN A CENTRAL BRAZILIAN SOCIETY

365

village by only one name at a time. Should he so desire, however, he may

decide to exchange names with a friend or to bestow upon himself a new
appellation, often a nick-name which he then has the right to insist that
people use when addressing him. Sometimes on ritual occasions a person is
referred to by one's "great name" which signals certain ceremonial prerogatives, although the person does not use this name. Teknonyms are frequently,
but not necessarily, used to refer to parents of ceremonially named children.
There are no death-names among the Kayapo. Euphemisms, rather than
names, must be used when referring to recently deceased persons.
GREATNAMES: SOCIALVALUE AND RITUALRESTRICTION

Kayapo personal names are divided into two categories: the ceremonial
or "great names" (idji metch, idji rinh) and the common or "little names"
(idji kakrit). "Great names" constitute a limited set of personal names
which, according to Kayapo tradition, must be bestowed on very young
children of the appropriate sex in communal rituals. Idji metch may be
transferred from name holder to name receiver informally as well, but it is
thought that a private bestowal procedure considerably lessens the intrinsic
value of the name. Without the requisite public ceremony the name cannot
technically belong to the class of recognized idji metch. The recipients of
privately transacted "great names" are known as "persons with freely given
'great names' (nm idji metch kaigo)." Kaigo "great names" which have been
bestowed without the obligations of ceremony, and thus are given "freely"
or "falsely,"do not carry the same distinctions as those identical names which
are transmitted with all the pomp and circumstance of a ritual performance.
It is the public celebration of name bestowal which lends distinctive character and ritual quality to "great names" and their holders. Without the village
ceremony, those people who have received "great names" kaigo would thus
be "freed" of the ritual obligations contracted in the ceremony itself, and
their names would be empty of the symbolic meanings which are part of the
ceremonial transaction. The Kayapo realize that there is nothing "free"
(kaigo) which has intrinsic merit. They thus distinguish between a category
of "great names" for which ceremonial payment is made and a category of
"little names" for which no payment is offered. That these names may be
identical in every other way underlines the unique quality of Kayap6 "great
names," and the special power of ritually recognized name relationships.
If "great names" are to be transmitted in a public ceremony, they must
be bestowed on name recipients before the termination of childhood years,
but not before children are weaned to solid food or begin to walk independently. These stipulations refer to Kayapo beliefs of the intimate connection supposed to exist between physical growth and social maturity. It
is said that if a child were to receive his "great names" before he had become strong (taytch) enough to carry them, he would sicken and die from
a burden too heavy for his years. A child eight years of age, however, would
be considered too big, too mature, or too hard (taytch) to receive ceremonial
names which, according to the Kayap6, should be transmitted before the
social, moral, and physical person has developed. Generally, all the children

366

ETHNOLOGY

receiving "great names" in village ceremonies were at least two years of age,
and probably no older than four years.
By contrast, common, or "little names" (idji kakrit), belong to anyone and
everyone. They are bestowed upon, or merely taken by, individuals any
time after birth and prior to death. People who own idji metch also possess
a series of kakrit names as well. Kakrit names are given to babies at birth by
the same category of relative permitted to bestow metch names upon these
children a few years later. An individual, should he be orphaned before
he has been told his complete set of names, may not know how many kakrit
and metch names he has been given, or what they are. Invariably, however,
he will have a name by which he is known in the village. The "little names,"
as opposed to the "great names," do not carry any ritual significance. This
absence is communicated to the village in periodic ceremonies wherein the
me metch ("good," "great," or "beautiful people") are distinguished and
visibly set apart from the me kakrit ("common," or "little people"). It is
in these ceremonies that the me metch are reminded of their own ritual
significance as a unit, and of their separateness from the me kakrit. The
metch/kakrit dichotomy is readily perceived in the different styles of decorative ceremonial ornaments worn only by the holders of "great" names.
Otherwise the distinction between name categories is not obvious to a casual
observer.
Dietary restrictions frequently serve to set apart the people with metch
names. It is said that metch people should avoid eating kakrit food. The
Kayapo consider most animals (mrut) to be kakrit7 by nature, so that if the
ritual injunction were to be taken quite seriously at all times, the intake of
animal protein would be quite low for the "great people" when compared
with the diet of the "common people" who, it is said, may eat anything.
Although informants claim that me metch under no circumstances eat
kakrit food, it appears that the dietary restrictions of the metch people are
stringently adhered to only on ceremonial occasions and during life-crisis
periods.
Persons lacking ceremonial "great names" may eat mru kakrit without
any dire effects providing they are not pregnant, ill, or near death. Kakrit
named individuals, as a consequence of their omnivorous habits, are known
jokingly as the "people who eat birds roasted over the fire with the feathers
still on them (.me ngwoy tdboro)."8 By contrast, the idji metch people
are called "people who strongly keep the ritual restrictions (me iangri
taytch)." This label, however, appears to be more symbolic of me metch
ritual status, rather than indicative of their actual eating habits which appear less than well guarded on other than ceremonial occasions. In ceremony, at least, what is socially valued is kept separate from that which is of
no value in Kayapo society, and me metch during ceremonies observe their
dietary restrictions. Indeed, in order to meet these ritual restrictions, it is
one of the major burdens of the sponsors of village ceremonies to provide
adequate quantities of mentchmeat for the metch people during the entire
ceremonial period.
The possession of a "great name" carrieswith it certain ceremonial prerog-

NAMING IN A CENTRAL BRAZILIAN SOCIETY 367

atives besides the right to use, and be known by a particular name, or a

set of names.( Kayapo names are seldom passed on as single units, but rather
as sets of multiple names.) The privilege of bestowing these names in a
future ceremony, the wearing of a ritual garb associatedwith a name, and the
observation, however sporadic, of dietary restrictions are all part of the ritual
apparatus of me metch. Other than these few distinctions, which are communicated to the larger society in periodic village festivities, persons distinguished by "great names" are not differentiated from those with either
"little"or "free great names." Some people who have received "great names"
do not use them but are known by a "common" or "little" appellation instead; others who are called by ostensibly "great names" received them in
the "free"fashion. The only method of knowing for certain who has received
a "great name" in the grand manner, or according to the rules of ceremonial procedure, is by direct inquiry, or through careful notation of both
ceremonial dress and ritual position in village festivities. Name insignia, primarily decorative earspools, neck ornaments and bracelets, are the only
visible signs of the "great name" holders. The restrictions on diet, the right
to use certain decorative ornaments, and the "great names" themselves are
the only distinctive characteristics of persons not otherwise distinguished
in this small egalitarian society.
THE ECONOMICSOF NAMING

Name transmission ceremonies are tied directly to matters of family

economy and depend on the joint resources of real and fictive kin (ombikwa). Therefore, any decision to pass on names in a ceremony cannot
be an individual one. It must always concern a number of persons, related
through ties of kinship and marriage, who will be expected to devote several
months of intensive labor in order to provide the food and decorations necessary for honoring a young individual. Ceremonial activities, which may
take as long as four months for completion, reflect the resourcefulness and
the prestige of the child's immediate family.
The celebration of a name ritual depends on the ability and willingness
of the child's kin to undertake periodically to feed the entire men's house in
gratitude for male dance performances given during the long months of
ceremony. The heavy economic burden, plus the responsibility of the ritual
hosts to provide a final all-night village feast to close the ceremonial period,
exhausts their gardens which are virtually stripped bare to feed the village.
Unless the name-child's (mekraremetch) mother (na) and father (barn)
can rely on their kin for help, and they have planned ahead for a sufficient
surplus in their gardens, they may not be able to underwrite their child in
a name ceremony.
Co-resident members of an extended uxorilocal family, including all
females-mother (M), sister (Z), mother's sister (MZ), mother's mother
(MM) if living, and father (F)-provide the task force necessary for the
organization and material support for a name ceremony. In addition to this
unit, two other households, that of nggt (mother's brother MB) and kwatuy
(father's sister FZ) supply the names and decorative outfits for the ritual

368

ETHNOLOGY

protagonists (see Figure i). Within these three ritually-linked uxorilocal

households, kin are obligated to participate either in the economic or in the
purely ritual aspects of the ceremony, depending on whether they share
parallel or cross-sex sibling status with the parents of the name child. Both
mother's brother (nget) and father's sister (kwatuy) are the key figures in
the ceremonial transfer of names and social statuses to the children of their
cross-sex siblings. Father's brother (barn) and mother's sister (na) are not
important ritual figures. They are, however, the indispensable aids in
economic routines, helping in the hunting and the preparation of large
quantities of food needed for the village feasts. Like biological parents,
parallel-sex siblings perform supportive roles in all phases of the ceremony,
but they do not have special ritual assignments. In no instance, for example,
does a bar (father) or na (mother), either real or classificatory, bestow
names, dance, or take part in the actual ceremony for their kra (child).
Me idji metch ("people with great names") attain a special distinction
over and above that of the nmeidji kakrit ("people with common names").
But what is the nature of this distinction for the Kayap6? Considering the
large expenditures of time, energy and resources allocated to naming ceremonies, the few privileges of ownership at first glance hardly seem compensated by the arduous task of performance.Certainly the lack of a ceremonial
name does not hinder kakrit named Kayap6 from becoming village leaders,
shamans, or first-ratehunters. All of these social roles, it should be noted, are
earned on merit rather than inherited. In fact, "great names" and concomitant rights to ritual positions are the only forms of property which can
be inherited among the Kayap6. Every other kind of possession is destroyed
at the owner's death, including pets and garden plants as well as utensils,
weapons, and ornaments. As the only form of inherited wealth, bestowed
names are seen as the symbols of highly valued social positions which they
designate. Ownership of these positions is purchased in ceremonies which
Figure 1. Ritually-Linked Uxorilocal Households For Male and Female Name
Recipients

FZ

MBW

NAMING

IN A CENTRAL BRAZILIAN SOCIETY

369

publicly transfer this nominal form of wealth to the youngest generation in

the village. The prestige of named ceremonial positions alone may account
for the importance of name bestowals and for the ritual value of "great
name" bearers. In this respect the Kayap6 of central Brazil share a resemblance with the Indians of the Northwest Coast for whom the potlatch
served as a means for the public validation of personal names and ritual
statuses.
NAME RELATIONSHIPS:
OF TRANSMISSION
THE PRINCIPLES

Personal names of the "great" and "little" tradition are bestowed according to three invariant principles of transmission. The exceptions are nicknames and friendship names which are not considered here. These three
principles are (i) distinction of generational level, (2) equivalence of sex,
and (3) cross-sex sibling reciprocity. All three principles are illustrated in
Figure 2: five generational levels are subdivided into two columns of eight
paired kin terms which show the male terms on the left and the female
terms on the right. Cross-sex siblings (kamu and kanikw6y) male and
female ego, are representedat Zero generation.
The Kayap6 system of naming stipulates that personal names must pass
from the categories nget and kwatuy to either male or female tabdjuo respectively. In Figure 2 the terms nget/kwatuy appear only at the most senior
level. In this respect the figure is misleading for nget and kwatuy are terms
which designate kin types at all generational levels on the uterine side as well
as the first ascending generation of the agnatic side. The diagrammatic
positioning of nget/lwatuy is meant to indicate the number of steps these
categories are removed from ego's generation (kamu/kanikwoy). In the
case of grandparents,these steps correspond to two actual generations. In the
case of the mother'sbrother and father's sister, however, the two-step distance
is comprised of one generational remove and one collateral remove. In other
words, generation Zero will receive its names at a remove of two steps in the
terminology, but at a distance of only one biological generation if names
are transmitted according to the ideal, that is, from either mother's brother
for male ego or from father'ssister for female ego.
An injunction against the transmission of names between adults and
children above the age of eight years prevents the transference of names
between members of the same biological generation. Although the Kayapo
terminology awards seniority to some uterine relatives, for example, mother's
brother's son (nget) and mother's brother's son's son (nget), these individuals must have attained adulthood before they are qualified to pass on their
names to young father's sister's son (tabdjuo) or to father's father's sister's
son (tabdjuo). Where a nget is a mother's brother'sson or mother's brother's
son's son, he is usually the same age or younger than his tabdjuo and cannot
therefore bestow names upon the latter. Tabdjuo must be of a junior biological generation as well as a junior terminological level as his or her namegiver. Whatever the terminological usage might appear to permit, this downward flow of names from senior level name holders (nget and. kwatuy) to
junior level recipients (tabdjuo) cannot be reversed.

370

ETHNOLOGY
Figure 2.

NGET

KWATUY
NA

BAM

2 Generation
1 Generation

KAMU

KANIKWOY

0 Generation

KRA

KRA

-1 Generation

TABDJUO

TABDJUO

-2 Generation

Male Ego A
I NGfiT
2 KWATUY

3
4
5
6
7
8

Kayapo Kinship Categories

BAM
NA
KAMU
KANIKWOY
KRA
TABDJUO

men of second ascending generation, uterine male descendant

of NGfT and KWATUY, FZH.
women of second ascendinggeneration,FZ, wife of NG?iT.
male descendant of NGfT and KWATUY, husband of NA.
female descendant of NGPT and KWATUY, wife of BAM.
male descendantof BAM and NA, male sibling.
female descendantof BAM and NA, female sibling.
own descendant,descendantof KAMU.
descendantof KRA, descendantof KANIKOY, FZS, FZD.

Female Ego 0
I-6

7 KRA
8 TABDJUO

same as male ego.

own descendant, descendant of KANIKWOY, FZS, FZD.
descendantof KRA, descendantof KAMU.

According to the second principle of transmission, name-giver and namereceiver should be of the same sex, although there are occasional exceptions to
this rule.10 "Great names" are identified by sex. "Little names," however,
do not belong to one sex or the other; rather they become sex-linked through
the process of their transmission. "Little names" thus appear to carry sexual
connotations only after they have been in circulation for several generations.
"Great names" consist of at least two parts. They are constructed from
a fixed number of "great"or metch components to which are added "common" or kakrit suffixes. The "common" elements of the name are not sexually determined as are the "great" elements. It is rather the metch components or the prefixes, which declare the name to belong to one sex rather
than the other. Four of the "great names" are feminine, two of them are
masculine and one appearsto be bi-sexualin usage.

NAMING

Feminine Names
Bekwoy
Ire
Nhak
Payn

IN A CENTRAL BRAZILIAN SOCIETY

Bi-Sexual Name
K6ok

371

Masculine Names
Bemp
Takak

The "great"elements of names are not readily glossed, with the exception
of the feminine name, Payn (meaning "payment"). Suffixesto "great names"
and all "little names," however, lend themselves to attempts at translation.
They combine descriptive adjectives such as red, black, large, round, and
short with names or plants and animal species, or any parts thereof. "Little
names" may, in fact, be indistinguishable from either generic or specific
names for flora and fauna, thereby rendering it impossible to distinguish
out of context whether, for example, iot-tuk (black sweet potato) is a plant
or a person.
In theory, at least, Kayap6 names are infinitely variable. That they are in
fact not endlessly varied is a function of the process of transmission: a "great
name" which has never been given cannot be received. "Great names" are
thus passed to successive generations of name holders as they are, neither
abbreviated nor changed in any way. "Great names" such as Kok6-ma-ti
(K6ok-Big-Liver) and Nhak-tuk (Nhak-Black) may not be broken down
into their component parts nor recombined with any other name elements
in order to form new names. They continue to be transmitted as they were
received. New "little names" on the other hand may always be added to the
inventory of personal appellations.
The third principle of name transmission emphasizes the importance of
consanguineal kinship ties, and in particular, those links between a crosssex sibling pair. The stated preference is that mother's brother (nget) should
give his names to sister's son (tabdju6) and that father's sister (kwatuy)
should give her names to brother's daughter (tabdjuo), although the
Kayap6 rule of transmission may be stated that names go from one category
of kin (nget/kwatuy) to another (tabdjuo). The category of nggt as already
indicated includes all males of the second ascending generation, mother's
brother and his direct line male descendants while the category of kwatuy
includes females of the second ascending generation plus father's sister. It
is possible for tabdjuo (male and female) to receive names from ngSt and
wtatuyother than mother's brother or father's sister, although this form of
name exchange is not as desirable.
The ideal form of name exchange exists collaterally between cross-sex
siblings on the one hand, and inter-generationally,between mother's brother
and sister's son or father's sister and brother's daughter on the other. In
effect, Kayap6 naming practicesjoin adult cross-sexsiblings with each other's
parallel-sex offspring in solidary associations which cross-cut uxorilocal
domestic groups. Close ties between brother and sister pairs are reinforced
through a transmission rule which specifies that names are passed to opposite-sex sibling's same sex offspring.
Parents (bar and na) may not bestow their own names on either direct-

372

ETHNOLOGY

line descendants (kra) or on the children (kra) of same-sex siblings. It is

thought that should barn or na~ignore the injunction and mistakenly give
their names to kra, that kra will become ill and die as a direct result of the
impropriety. Therefore a Kayapo will not receive either names or ritual
status from parents. Names must be inherited from a nget if the namerecipient is male, or a ktwatuy,if female, according to the principle of sex
equivalence. Other than names, property such as ceremonial paraphernalia
and ritual positions, cannot be transferredfrom parents to children; nor can
parents sponsor the spiritual initiation of their own children, nor send them
forth if they are males into the men's house. For each of these ritual circumstances a ceremonial parental substitute is chosen to serve as a guide
for the child-neophyte by his or her same-sex parent. In the initiation
ceremonies the parental role is played by "godparents" (krabdjuo), a relationship between non-kin (nebaitebm) which is inherited patrilaterally.
In the "great name" ceremonies cross-sex siblings of parents (kamu/kaniktwoy)become the ritual donors who bestow their names and ritual identities on each other's children. The affective ties and physical bonds of parenthood are thus attenuated in the selection of either non-kin (krabdjuo) or
collateral kin (ngtt/kwatuy) as ritual guides in the ceremonies for initiation
and naming.
By stipulating cross-sex siblings as name-givers for young children and
non-kin as ritual sponsors for initiates the Kayapo avoid developing lineal
ties between sex-same members of adjacent generations. Instead, ceremonial
obligations are scattered outside the confines of the uxorilocal residential
unit and the biological family. Short-term,incipient two-generation lines of
descent are effectively annulled through cross-sex sibling name exchanges
and through non-familial ceremonial ties. Thus it seems that when the duties
of collateral kinsmen of adjacent generations are reinforced the responsibilities of parents are simultaneously diminished.
The effect of this arrangement is two-fold. First, the name bestowal relationship binds together two same-sex individuals who are, by preference,
non-coresident kinsmen of adjacent biological generations. Second, it
places the burden of the ritual relationship outside the nuclear family which
until then has been the major focus and source of many benefits to the child,
but whose members cannot pass on either names or statuses directly to their
offspring.
Parallel-sex siblings do not share these ritual functions with cross-sex
siblings. They are excluded from positions such as name-giver by virtue of
their shared attributes,sex and generation. This similarity is terminologically
specified: father's brother is called by the same term as father (barn);
mother's sister is called by the term for mother (nd). Same-sex siblings,
undistinguished by their spiritual ties to each other's children, are nevertheless important contributorsof materiel for family ceremonies. It is they who
provide food and labor, commodities not required from cross-sexsiblings, but
which are indispensable for family sponsored village feasts. Bar and na,
whom custom rules out as possible name givers for kra (child), have supportive roles in name ceremonies. Unlike nget and kwatuy, however, they

NAMINGIN A CENTRAL
BRAZILIAN
SOCIETY373
may not participate in the dramatic performance of the name ceremony.
Such ceremonial privileges and roles are the special domain of the nget/
kwatuy-tabdjuo relationship.
NAMING:THREEMODELS

The range and possibilities for name-giver relationships is limited by the

principle that a name-giver belongs to a senior biological generation as well
as to a senior terminological level from that of name-receiver.This factor effectively limits the name-giver to four possible kinship categories above gener-

ationZeroas shownin Figure2: two pairedmale/femaleterms(nget/kwatuy

and bamn/na).
Of these,barnand nd havebeeneliminatedas name-giver
The
categories. remainingcategories,
by
ngetandkwatuy,arename-givers
designation.

of Kayap6kinship,
Figure2, drawnas a modelof the eight categories
of nametransmission:
allthreeprinciples
seniorgenerational
status
expresses
of name-giver,
of
of
sex
and
and
equivalence
name-giver name-receiver,
the cross-sex
Nget andkwatuyappearin the figure
siblingnameexchange.
level,but are also foundat all generational
only at the "grandparental"
levelson the uterineside,as well as at the firstascending
of the
generation
side.
them
at
remove
of
a
two
levels
agnatic
By placing
generational in the
I
am
able
to
the
of two stepsmaintained
structural
distance
figure,
represent
betweenname-giversand name-receivers.
Name-giversare either two
removedin a directline from name-receiver
as in
ascendinggenerations
mother'smother,father'smother(kwatuy)or father'sfatherand mother's
father (ng;t); or they are placedat a single generationaland a single collateralremoveas in mother'sbrother(nget) and father'ssister(kwatuy).

In the contextof the figure,the termsnget and kwatuydo not reflectac-

curatelythe genealogicallevel per se. They must be understoodto represent

a category,seniornamesake,
for ego'sgeneration(kamuand kanikwoy).
They sharein commona seniorityexclusiveof that of bar (fatherand
father'sbrother)and nd (motherand mother'ssister),includingall other
seniorlinealandcollateral
kin.
The brother-sister
is the keystoneof the
(kamu/tanikwoy)relationship
of personal
namesis themostvital
Kayap6namingsystem,andtheexchange
It is thoughtthatchildrenshouldresemble
either
aspectof thatrelationship.
Themetaphor
theirngetor kwatuyin physiognomy.
of personal
appearance,
althoughit refersdirectlyonly to physicalfeaturesimpliesmoralqualities
and socialcharacteristics
as well. In fact,the inheritorof the namesand
statusesof a particular
nget or kwatuyinheritsmuchmorethanthese,for
namesby markingthe contributions
of a brother-sister
pairto the social
of eachother'scross-sex
also
extend
the socialworld
development
offspring
of the name-child
housebeyondthatof the nuclearfamilyanduxorilocal
hold.Namesandritualstatuses,
the socialattributes
of individuals,
contrast
the biological
withbodyandsubstance,
inheritance
whichthe Kayap6view
asflowingfrombothmotherandfather.Thesocialandthebiological
aspects
of an individualarethustransmitted
to separate
of inaccording
principles
andbotharenecessary
to hisdevelopment
andmaturation.
heritance,

374 ETHNOLOGY
In Figure 3 past and future name relationships are traced for a cross-sex
sibling pair at generation Zero. A reordering of the key cross-sex sibling
relations in Figure 3 reveals two symmetrical sets of name relationships in
Figure 4, the one lateral and indirect which exists between brother and sister, the other vertical and direct between name-giver and name-receiver.
In Figure 4, marriage ties are omitted and cross-sexsibling links emphasized.
The right-hand column shows the distribution of male names, the lefthand column of female names. As a result of the realignment, an exchange
of sex-linked names for five generations of cross-sex siblings emerges as two
distinct lines of transmission: male names move through a uterine line of
male kin (from sister's son to sister's son), and female names through an
agnatic line of females (from brother's daughter to brother's daughter).
Figure 4, not to be misconstrued as a portrayalof a hidden matriline for male
kin or a patriline for female kin, at once demonstrates the double structural
theme of Kayap6 name transmission: the inter-generational inheritance of
names by same-sex kin, and the cohesiveness of the cross-sex sibling bond.
In both Figures 3 and 4 names appear to link same-sex consanguines over
five generations. It should be noted that Kayap6 do not keep track of many
generations, nor would they articulate any systematic accounting of their
own naming system. No record is kept by anyone to indicate name transactions which took place before the time of living generations, and the
figures themselves demonstrate only the preferred forms of name transmission: from father's sister to brother's daughter and from mother's brother
to sister's son. Names are transmitted, however, between categories, nget to
Figure 3.

Preferred Form of Name Transmission

MB -> ZS
FZ-> BD

Male Names

Female Names
/\A

A
=-O
nA

AI

-*>

= ^

O12

A = O

-1
-2

NAMINGIN A CENTRAL
BRAZILIAN
SOCIETY375
Figure 4.

Parallel-Sex Name Transmission Showing Cross-Sex Sibling Links

Female Names

Male Names

tabdjuo for males and kwatuy to tabdjuo for females, and these include kin
types other than the stated ideals.
A naming relationship is establishd after a kin relationship, whether real
or putative, is recognized. The act of naming among the Kayap6 does not
seem to affect the usage of the kin terminology as it has been reported for
the Krah6, a northern Ge group (Melatti 197I), the !Kung Bushmen (Marshall 1957), and the Belcher Island Eskimo (Guemple I965). Names can
be used to ascertain the relationships of visiting Kayap6 in host villages, but
as Kayap6 villages are neither on good terms nor within walking distance
of each other visiting is only an occasional occurrence. Names do not otherwise provide a basis for the reorganization of kin ties, nor are there name
groups among the Kayap6 similar to those identified for other northern
Ge (Da Matta I973, Melatti I97I). Thus all females addressed by the "great
name" Payn (i.e., Payn-o, Payn-kadjara, Payn-ti) would not by virtue of
the shared name attribute also be members in a corporation of Payn namesharers.Although it may appear otherwise, the Kayap6 naming system does
not lead to the formation of name groups. All Payn owners may wear similar decorative clothing, observe identical dietary restrictions, and dance the
same dances, but this joint activity occurs only for the duration of a cere-

376

ETHNOLOGY

mony. The ownership of names cannot constitute the basis for a corporate
group formation, since all that "great name" holders share in common is
the convention which establishes name ownership.
CONCLUSION

The crucial naming relationships for the Kayap6 are composed of two
dyads: the first between cross-sex siblings, and the second between same-sex
name holder and recipient. Name-giver and name-receiver share life-long
mutual obligations to each other, but these are limited to each dyad and
do not extend beyond the particular name relationship. Name holders who
share the same name prefix therefore do not in any way share in the obligations established by the transmission of the name between name-giver and
name-receiver.These obligations are perceived as individual.
The dyadic name relationships among the Kayapo are given dramatic emphasis during "great name" ceremonies in which the principals, nget and
kwatuy, relinquish their names in favor of the younger generation tabdjuo.
The public displays that accompany name transfers stress the importance
not only of personal names but of name relationships. On the donor level,
"brothers" and "sisters" exchange names for the benefit of each other's
children. On the recipient side, names establish connections for name-receivers beyond that of nuclear family and uxorilocal residence. "Great
names," serving as both the means of introduction to village society through
ritual action and as the crucial links between non-coresident kin, were also
considered briefly as a form of inheritable propertywhich seems well adapted
for transmission in a small scale society where tangible wealth has little or
no meaning, but where sexual identity and the ordered progression of generations is paramount.
In 1871 when Morgan put aside the study of personal names from his
lengthy considerations of "systems of consanguinity and affinity" he did
so, not from any notion that names were insignificant, but because, as he
said of the Iroquois, "As their names are single, the connection of brothers
and sisters could not be inferred from them, nor that of father and son"
(Morgan 1871: I33). I think it can be said, more than one hundred years
after Morgan, that the connections between brothers and sisters may be
directly revealed from a study of personal names as the Kayap6 case clearly
indicates. In fact, the Kayapo system of naming is predicated on a brothersister exchange, and I would submit that a more thorough analysis of how
this system of exchange works for the Kayap6 would clarify not only the
intricate structure of naming and the related systems of social and kinship
statuses, but it could also provide a key to the structures of other northern
Ge societies which, like the Kayapo, place emphasis on dyadic cross-sex
sibling name exchanges.
NOTES
i. I wish to thank David Maybury-Lewis, Terence Turner, and Peter Hainer for their
comments on an earlier draft of this paper, and members of the Department of
Anthropology, Yale University, to whom this version was presented in a colloquium.
2. Personal names and naming systems began to receive significant notice in the

NAMING

IN A CENTRAL BRAZILIAN SOCIETY

377

ethnographic literature beginning with the publications of Fletcher (1899) and La

Flesche (I928) on Pawnee naming rituals. A number of titles have appeared since
then, including Hart (1930) on Tiwi personalnames, Thomson (1946) in Wik Munkan,
Needham (I954a, I954b, I954c, 1959, 1964, I965, I971)

on the usages of death-names,

teknonyms and friendship names in middle Borneo, Marshall (1959) on !Kung Bushmen naming, Middleton (I961) on Lugbara, Goodenough's (1963) comparison of
Truk and Lakalai names, Guemple (I965) on name-sharingamong the Eskimo, Benjamin (1968) on Temiar, Strathern (I970) for Wiru, and Price and Price (1972) on
Saramakanames.
3. The Kayapt of Paraiand Mato Grosso, Brazil have an estimated population of 1,400.
The hunters and gatherers who also garden are divided into eight named villages
which are politically independent and mutually hostile. The ground plan of a Kayapo
village accuratelydescribes the economic and political divisions of its 150 to 300 inhabitants.Women, whose lives are restrictedby domestic functions, live in uxorilocal
households on the periphery of a male world centered in the Men's House. The institution of the Men's House is based on the principle of segregation by sex and on a
system of age-grading which specifies that men do not have access to important political roles until they have been processed through the elaborate ritual of initiation.
The Kayapo lack both a system of descent and a rule of marriage.Kinship is reckoned
bilaterally.
4. Field work was carried out in 1962-63 and I966 in three villages of Northern
Kayapo, at the Brazilian government posts of the defunct Service for the Protection
of Indians at Gorotire on the Rio Fresco, a tributaryof the middle Xingu (Para), at
Nilo Pecanha (Kubenkranken) on the Riozinho, a tributaryof the Fresco (Para), and
at the recently abandonedvillage of Porori which in I966 was located on the northern
border of the Xingu National Park (Mato Grosso). For their encouragement and assistance in this research,I am grateful to ProfessorsDavid Maybury-Lewisof Harvard
University, Roberto Cardoso de Oliveira of the Universidade de Brasilia, members of
the Harvard-CentralBrazil Research Project, the staff of the Museu Nacional in Rio
de Janeiro, the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Reverend Earl and Ivy Trapp of the
Unevangelized Fields Mission, and Sr. Claudio Villas-Boasof the National Park of the
Xingu.
5. Ombikwa is a term used to refer to all of those individuals whom ego recognizes
and calls by a relationshipterm. Relationshipterms are applied to many persons who
are neither "kin" nor "affines"but adoptive or fictive kin. For an outside observer it
is quite impossible to distinguish between relatives by blood and marriage on the one
hand, and relatives by adoption on the other. The Kayapo will distinguish when
pressed to do so "those born from the same womb," half-siblings born of different
mothers or fathers, and putative kin.
6. Mebaitebm: "people to one side (or outside) of my own people." There are no
terms of relationshipfor mebaitebm, only names. They can become ombikwa by marriage.
7. The animal kingdom, like human society, is also divided into metch and kakrit
categories. Of the total range of South American fauna, there are only six or seven
animalswhich qualify as mru metch. The rest are kakrit.
8. This pejorative expression refers directly to the kakrit nature of birds in Kayapo
classification,as well as to a rather nonchalant method of cooking them, unplucked
and "roastedover a fire," rather than baked in the traditional earth oven, or kz.
9. There are occasions,other than at times of food shortage,when Kayapo decided not
to stage a major ceremony for the transmissionof names. Poor health, the lack of raw
materialsnecessaryfor decorativecostumes,or the absenceof crucial kinsmen are some
reasons which might dissuade doting parents from sponsoring a ceremony for their
children.
io. Occasionallyboys inherit women's "great names." A female kwatuy who wishes
to transfer her names, but lacks any female tabdjuo of the appropriate age, may
choose to bestow them upon a male tabdjuo who then holds them for future bestowal

378

ETHNOLOGY

upon a female tabdjuo of his own. During the interim, he can use the names should he
so desire. The reverse of this cross-sex form of transmission does not take place. Girls
do not receive male names to hold for boy tabdjub. These names are transmitted to
males only.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Benjamin, G. 1968. Temiar Personal Names. Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde 124: 99-I34.
DaMatta, R. I973. A Reconsideration of Apinaye Social Morphology. Peoples and
Cultures of Native South America, ed. D. R. Gross, pp. 277-291. New York.
Fletcher, A. C. I899. A Pawnee Ritual Used When Changing A Man's Name.
American Anthropologist. (n.s.) i: 82-97.
Goodenough, W. H. 1965. Personal Names and Modes of Address in Two Oceanic
Societies. Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology, ed. M. E. Spiro, pp.
265-276. New York.
Guemple, D. L. 1965. Saunik: Name Sharing as a Factor Governing Eskimo Kinship Terms. Ethnology 4: 323-325.
LaFlesche, F. 1928. Child Naming Rite. The Osage Tribe. 43rd Annual Report,
Bureau of American Ethnology (1925-26). Washington.
Lave, J. C. 1967. Social Taxonomy Among the Krikati (Ge) of Central Brazil. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
Marshall, L. I957. The Kin Terminology System of the !Kung Bushmen. Africa
27: I-55.
Melatti, J. C. I97I. Nominadores e genitores: um aspecto do dualismo Krah6. Verhandlungen des XXXVIII Internationalen Amerikanistenkongress, Stuttgart I968.
Vol. 3: 347-353Middleton, J. I96I. The Social Significance of Lugbara Personal Names. The
Uganda Journal 25: 34-42.
Morgan, L. H. I871. Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family.
Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, No. 17. Washington.
Needham, R. I954a. Reference to the Dead Among the Penan. Man 6: o0.
I954b. The System of Teknonyms and Death-Names of the Penan. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology Io: 416-43I.
I954c. A Penan Mourning-Usage. Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde I I: 263-267.
I959. Mourning Terms. Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde II5:

58-89.

1964. Temer Names. Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society 37: 121-125.
1965. Death-Names and Social Solidarity in Penan Society. Bijdragen tot de
Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde I2I: 58-76.
1971. Penan Friendship-Names. The Translation of Culture: Essays to E. E.
Evans-Pritchard, ed. T. O. Beidleman, pp. 203-230. London.
Price, R., and S. Price. I972. Saramaka Onomastics: An Afro-American Naming
System. Ethnology Ii: 341-367.
Strathern, A. I970. Wiru Pentonyms. Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkerkunde
126: 59-74.
Thomson, D. F. I946. Names and Naming in the Wik Monkan Tribes. Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute 6: I57-I68.