Food classification in three pacific societies: Fiji, Hawaii and Tahiti

Abstract

The concept of food in Fiji, Hawaii, and Tahiti contrasts markedly with that in parts of the western world. The most notable difference is that in Pacific societies the most general term for food is applied to the starchy component, particularly the root and tree starch foods such as taro and breadfruit. A second difference lies in the main components of a meal. In Fijian, Hawaiian, and Tahitian custom a meal consists of two parts, the starchy food and the accompanying item. Certain edible items, such as raw fruits and puddings, are not considered as components of a meal; they are not food in the same sense as the starchy foods and their accompaniments, but rather form a different category. A third difference lies in the structure of the language. In several central Pacific languages, such as Fijian, food items are marked by a specific term for possession by forming a class of nouns special to edible or food items. "My taro" is structurally distinct from "my hand." In eastern Pacific languages such as Hawaiian and Tahitian, food items are part of what Clark (1979:257) calls two "reduced" (relative to Fiji) categories of possession, one dominant and one subordinate. On the basis of these three major differentiating features, we can examine more closely how food is conceptualized in Fiji, Hawaii, and Tahiti. The fit between ideas in one language and those in another may lead to distortions. In her discussion of human categorization Wierzbicka (1984), dem? onstrates how exact translation differs from operational usage. In particular, it may be necessary to focus on one selected area of social life, such as foods and their edibility, to see how another society categorizes them. By focusing on the food domain we can begin to understand some of the conceptual difficulties in translating one set of ideas between these Pacific languages with their particular cultural frameworks and English. The implications of such a classification system for the way people use their foodstuffs are important to help us learn how eating relates to their view of health and the good life. As Edema (1981:714) has demonstrated, folk classification systems of foodstuffs are an important part of a program to change food behavior and thus improve nutrition. The study of food classification may alert us to difficulties that could arise if nutrition education were to be based entirely on English or other Western concepts of food. The data used here are drawn from both fieldwork and published sources. Through collecting dietary data on food habits in the Marshalls, Takapoto, French Polynesia, Niue, and Fiji, the difficulties of translating between local concepts and English became apparent. The literature on Hawaii (Pukui and Elbert 1965; Handy and Handy 1972; Titcomb 1967) provides a source of comparison in some