list of figures - Terry Sunderland

In the case of many of the non-Bantu language groups that predominate in the forests
of Upper Guinea, the hierarchical classification of rattans is relatively straightforward
and closely adheres to Berlin’s model. The fact that the Upper Guinea forests are
relatively species-poor in terms of rattan means that somewhat parsimonious
classification systems are encountered, with very few categories recognised below the
generic. Life-form categories within these classifications are named, are clear and
unambiguous, and refer to all palms with the climbing habit. At the generic level in
particular, it is also clear that there is considerable correspondence between
indigenous classifications and Western taxonomy (see Table 6). In this case it may be
argued that morphological considerations take precedence in the non-Bantu folk
taxonomies for rattan 8 .
Table 23. Selected examples of parity of generic categorisation of African rattans between folk
taxonomic systems and Western classification.
Language (Country) Laccosperma Eremospatha Calamus Oncocalamus 9
Loko (Sierra Leone) kafo mbalu tambe n/a
Akan-Asanti (Ghana) ayie mfia demmere n/a
Ijo-Izon (Nigeria) ukpa boru apie n/a
In contrast, the Bantu language subgroup, the use of intermediate categories is more
widespread and the life-form category for rattan is covert and, as discussed, the
climbing palms are essentially subdivided into two main categories and commonly,
one intermediate and one to several generic categories are recognised. This may be a
reflection of both increased rattan diversity (biologically) as well as increased ethnic
complexity (Brown, 1977), particularly the region from SE Nigeria to northern
Gabon, the most biologically and linguistically diverse area of Africa.
Berlin (1973) suggests that intermediate categories are rare in folk taxonomies and
that, because they often lack names, some doubt has been expressed as to whether
they might be included as an ethnobiological rank at all. However, the explicit use of
8 However, examples that lean towards functional utility being a major factor are also encountered. For
example, within the genus Laccosperma, L. opacum and L. laeve are treated as generics within most
non-Bantu classifications and, despite their close morphological similarities are often distinguished
based on their functional utility. In Twi, L. laeve, which is not used by that ethnic group, is called tehan
muhunu or “it lives in the world for nothing” whilst L. opacum is used for making specific baskets and
is called sayai.
9 The genus Oncocalamus does not occur in the Upper Guinea forest region.
237