Nage Birds 
97 
Anth¡ 
ropos 91.1996 
might synoptically describe them - serial linking 
was very consistent. 9 Thus nine of ten Nage infor 
mants named three or more raptors together, while 
the tenth gave the names of six raptors, in different 
Parts of his list, in three pairs. Furthermore, of the 
nine informants, one listed six kinds together; three 
listed five together; another two listed four kinds; 
while three gave just three. Similarly, with the 
Columbiformes, eight of the ten informants listed 
three or more kinds in succession, with six of these 
giving four or more. Six of ten informants named 
two or all three of the quails (piko, bewu, muki) 
together. 
Seven informants named in succession two or 
more of a group of black, crow-like birds. Al 
though just one person mentioned three or more, 
another two people mentioned the names of three 
°f these birds within a cluster of four bird names. 
The group of crow-like birds includes two mem 
bers of the genus Corvus, as well as the Common 
K°el (Eudynamis scolopacea) - a large black cuck- 
00 which parasitizes crows - and toe ou, a name 
w hich may in fact refer to a nocturnal vocalization 
°f the Koel. Another reputedly black and night- 
c alling bird, koa ka, was not mentioned with any of 
the foregoing, although this name too may in fact 
denote no more than a nocturnal instance of one of 
the foregoing kinds. One man thus speculated that 
^° a ka may be the same bird as toe ou, while other 
descriptions indicate a link with the bird named 
hega hea (apparently Corvus florensis). 
Although not listed with other crow-like birds, 
the two informants who spontaneously mentioned 
^° a ka placed it with the night birds. In this regard 
fi may be relevant that, with the exception of muta 
nie , all crow-like birds as well as the koa ka, are 
classified by Nage as “witch birds” (Indonesian 
hurung suangi”). So too are all nocturnal and 
murnal raptors (Strigiformes and Falconiformes). 
However, while crows, and especially the Large- 
filed Crow (ha), were named just before or after 
mrnal birds of prey by three of ten informants, 10 
this 
mystical grouping, as it might be called, is not 
io 
^ith regard to evidence suggesting that the same sorts of 
birds form named or unnamed intermediate groupings in 
unrelated languages and cultures, it is interesting to note 
that “hawks and falcons” and “doves” are two of the four 
mid-level complexes” that are named among the South 
American Aguaruna (Jivaro). Aguaruna recognize a further 
23 unnamed intermediate complexes (Berlin, Boster, and 
O’Neill 1981: 102). 
Another three informants had crows, or crow-like birds, 
Se parated from the raptors by just one other name. In two 
Cas es, this was kaka kea (Cockatoo), a bird whose name 
ls regularly conjoined with that of the crow to denote 
Pestilential birds that feed on ripening maize. 
apparent from the free recall lists. Nor is another 
mystical grouping of birds, a subcategory of the 
witch birds comprising kinds that are reputed to 
produce nocturnal sounds designated as po (al 
so the term for “owl”). This unnamed mystical 
complex comprises all Strigiformes and Falconi 
formes, yet owls and diurnal birds of prey were 
almost never listed together. Nor, of course, are 
Falconiformes actually classified as instances of 
po (“owls”). 
Although the Spangled Drongo (céce) is anoth 
er dark-coloured, ominous species reckoned as a 
“witch bird,” it was listed with none of the above. 
Rather, in free recall, the Drongo appears most 
strongly associated with the Paradise Flycatcher 
(lawi luja) on the basis, sometimes explicated by 
Nage informants, of its possession of a long and 
peculiarly shaped tail. As I discuss further below, 
this is one indication of how morphological and 
other perceptual criteria tend to supersede mysti 
cal or symbolic - and thus culturally particular - 
criteria in the context of ethnoomithological clas 
sification. In the same vein, morphological and 
behavioural traits (e.g., being observably active 
after sunset), appear to supersede purely auditory 
ones, since the Drongo (céce) is identified with 
witches specifically when it calls at night. 
Of the ten informants, six listed together three 
or more of the five terms applying to herons (o 
ae, gako tasi), watercocks and rails (wi, kuku ra- 
ku) and ducks (bébé ae). One man, however, was 
responding to a prompt regarding birds that lived 
near water. Informants’ remarks also revealed that 
all these birds, except the ducks, can be conceived 
as relatively large, long-legged birds, as well as 
birds associated with watery places. Gako tasi and 
o ae are the most closely associated kinds, being 
mentioned together by six of the ten informants. 
(The two varieties of o ae - o ae and o ae bha 
- are not counted separately for the purposes of 
these computations). By contrast kuku raku and 
wi were listed in succession by just two persons. 
Interestingly, the previously mentioned manu mesi, 
or “sea fowl,” was mentioned in free recall by no 
one. Water birds were also generally mentioned 
quite late in the lists, in contrast to Falconiformes, 
Columbiformes, and, to a lesser degree, quails and 
crow-like birds. 
Two or more of a group of five night birds, 
including owls (po), the Hawk-owl (je), the Savan 
nah Nightjar (leba), the black bird named koa ka, 
and the Flying Fox (méte) were listed in succession 
by five of the ten informants. This grouping must 
however be judged less coherent than others, since 
in the majority of cases names of nocturnal kinds