Comments on esun

[janMato]

Even money first appears in the archeological record 40,000 years ago.

I dare to doubt. The linked page doesn't contain records confirming this thesis.

The better reference is in the book "Dawn of Human Culture" which is where I first read about Enkapune-- the kindle sample happens to cover that chapter.

Here's another:
"The ancient beads may thus symbolize a mechanism for increased social solidarity and adaptations to risky environments. They may be a symbolic currency for exchange and obligations that can be saved for times of need - like money in the bank."

The use of shells and beads in money has continued to today with the Kalahari Bushmen, who use the same technology (ostrich eggshell beads), although they use the same word "gift" for both gift and trading beads (hxaro). The idea is rather universal, with Spondylus shells appearing as traded grave good in Old Europe (6000BC+) the same shell was used on the other side of the world, too in the Americas.

A longer treatment is here.

Anyhow, the evidence that these shells and beads were money, to me is convincing. Ancient humans made far more beads than they needed for ornamentation, spent huge amounts of time on it despite normally being on the brink of starvation, eventually valued homogeneity over good looks, etc.

[janKipo]

I take jan Ote's point to be that it is doubtful whether the items were even beads, let alone whether they were used for money. That beads were eventually used for money (in some sense -- "money" is a rather shaky concept outside of the modern situation) is not in dispute, but when this shift from decoration to commerce (or perhaps the opposite shift -- which is clearly also the case) took place is an issue. Not one we need be concerned about, of course, since, while we have money, we don't have shells -- nor mollusks, for that matter.

[janMato]

I take jan Ote's point to be that it is doubtful whether the items were even beads, let alone whether they were used for money.

What a skeptical lot you all are! It's all archeology, inference and a dramatically reduced burden of evidence. If we hold archeology to same standard of truth as say the court of law or physics, then it's speculative fiction. If one believes that it's speculative fiction, then doubt is a given.

That beads were eventually used for money (in some sense -- "money" is a rather shaky concept outside of the modern situation) is not in dispute, but when this shift from decoration to commerce (or perhaps the opposite shift -- which is clearly also the case) took place is an issue.

Collectibles and commodities become currency (as in a portable store of wealth) when fiat currency isn't available. So we'd expect the world to be using mostly collectibles up until ~5000 years ago when the first governments came into existence. And even then, taxes were mostly paid in kind. Coin was a relatively recent innovation. Even if we restrict ourselves to coins and recorded history, we already had coins, 3000 BC in Sumer. One could imagine that the use of money went through intermediate steps and left archeological evidence behind. Someone other than me seems to think this dates back to 40,000 BC and I noted some of the evidence--it was ridiculously time consuming to make these decorations, they were portable and they look just like the sort of wampum and beads that later human cultures used as currency, etc.

Not one we need be concerned about, of course, since, while we have money, we don't have shells -- nor mollusks, for that matter.

Yes, but it would be useful to have a word for ostrich shell beads, wampum, spondylus shells. "mani" would be a good word for it, especially if the salient characteristic of the object was that it is used in trade (i.e. esun).

Getting back to socio-linguistics, jan ante seemed to think that esun was a word for specifically American culture. I was trying to make the point that the use of money appears to be as old as human culture.

For the above mentioned reasons, either these early humans were crazy or they were making money for barter (or something else but these beads look pretty useless-- they're not even good status symbols--not ostentatious enough). Thus, esun and mani are human traits, not the traits of a particular culture. Anyhow, if someone has a counter example, like a society with no fiat money or even customs of barter goods, that would be an interesting counterexample.

[jan-ante]

jan ante seemed to think that esun was a word for specifically American culture.

feel the difference:

shopping is an essential part of american life cycle

and even more difference:

I was trying to make the point that the use of money appears to be as old as human culture.

we probably need a logican to expain the logics of this reasoning. may be jan Kipo could help

If cars were basic to the toki ponan person, then we'd expect it to have one word for car, instead of a phrase.

two-word expression is still short for tp. all other types of vehicals have longer expression

[janKipo]

jan Kipo is confused about the whole thing and, frankly, doesn't give a damn (sorry, just found a Rhett Butler plate in an attic). I don't see that shopping is more central to American lifestyle than to say British or German or French, although stereotypes do have a grain of truth and there may be a higher percentage of the believers in retail therapy in America than in most other countries -- or else they show up more clearly. And, of course, I don't see what all this has to do with 'esun,' which will do for any sort of exchange of goods and services, not just shopping (which, in its purest American form, involves no exchanges whatsoever) nor even just those involving money (indeed, it is tricky to get money into an esun sentence, as so far developed). As for money being as old as human culture, that turns out to be tricky (as noted earlier); there may have been standardized exchange rates, for example (one lactating cow for a wife, say) without cows being money. You can even have government-issued tokens (and this is way late in civilization, maybe 5000 years ago) and still not have money (cf the notes of the Continental Congress, which were traded in free-fall). Cynically, I would say you don't have money until you have counterfeiters (back to that -3000 again, I think). So, anyhow, esun is an essential part of every culture and may, indeed, be part of what defines a culture as opposed to a species instinct (but then we do seem to get some culture among the other jan). And money comes in when it is handy to do so and a government to make it work. And the point of the cited article was that the so-called beads gave every indication of being the leftovers from a lunch, neither ornament or money (or trade goods) but just trash (and so available in excess of need for money and ornament.

[janMato]

...
feel the difference:
....

I'm not feeling it. Oh well.

[janMato]

Ok, I could have picked better references. Like I said, I wanted to point to first chapter of "The Dawn of Human Culture", outside of the kindle edition sample, there isn't a good page of the net to link to.

You can even have government-issued tokens (and this is way late in civilization, maybe 5000 years ago) and still not have money (cf the notes of the Continental Congress, which were traded in free-fall).

Whoah, I'm not following this. I think if you put a confederate note in front of a ordinary English speaker and asked them what it was, they'd say "money" without further hints. That money is worthless doesn't change that it is money.

And regarding lunch and money-- money could have more than one use and still be money. I suppose paper currency makes good toilet paper, but it's still money.

Anyhow, it will be interesting to see what happens to the words dengi and torgovlja when the communists achieve Communism and there won't be anymore money, especially seeing how fragile it's purported existence is.

[janKipo]

Well, we're getting all definitional now. Okay, a Continental is money as issued, but it doesn't function as money in use: as a fixed medium of exchange. Envisioning how exchange of goods and services (esun) is going to work in a thoroughly socialist economy is something that gives fantasy writers a field day -- and has for more than a century (at least -- it's hard to characterize some of the earlier utopias and dystopias). Btw, American bills are even worse than British toilet paper, they are non-absorbent and have funny little threads that prickle.

[janMato]

Btw, American bills are even worse than British toilet paper, they are non-absorbent and have funny little threads that prickle.

mi wile e ni. mi wile jo mani mute mute tawa ni. mi kepeken mani tawa ni. mi telo e ko jaki kepeken mani.
Gee, I wish had enough $ to use it as tp.

[jan-ante]

I'm not feeling it. Oh well.

not good for you. but try to think tokiponically:
jan-ante: "esun li suli mute tawa jan Mewika"
jan Mato: "jan ante li pilin e ni: nimi esun li lon la jan toki li tan ma Mewika"
tenpo ni la sina ken ala ken pilin e ni: toki ni tu li ante mute ?