Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jan 13, 2017 6:40:59 GMT 12
Hawke's Bay Today 13/1/17
TAONGA ABUSED
Jacqueline Braid of Dunedin, in reprimanding Judith Smith twice for her view of te reo, ( HBT, January 3 and 10) seems unaware of the old adage that “One man’s meat is another man’s poison”.
She can “treat te reo with mana” if she wants to but her demand that others do so is precisely the arrogance which she claims to deplore.
And yes, our primary school children are indeed indoctrinated with the statement that “taonga” means “treasure” but nobody tells them that in 1840 that was far from the truth when it meant no more than ordinary property which, by the Treaty of Waitangi, we all were and are entitled to possess.
Its meaning changed rapidly afterwards to include the rich array of material goods which Europeans brought to New Zealand and continues to expand today to include everything anybody might desire.
Thus we have Hugh Kawharu’s statement in the notes to his dubious translation of the Treaty: “Taonga refers to all dimensions of a tribal group’s estate, material and nonmaterial — heirlooms and wahi tapu (sacred places), ancestral lore and whakapapa (genealogies), etc.”
His implication that this was meant in the Treaty of Waitangi is pure hypocrisy motivated by greed.
Indeed recently a senior Auckland professor claimed that any Maori was entitled to kill and eat our beautiful native pigeons because they were a “taonga” guaranteed by the Treaty of Waitangi.
This is an abuse of the meaning of the Treaty and defiance of the law which protects them but evidently Kawharu and Braid’s “appropriate usage” of te reo.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
TAONGA ABUSED
Jacqueline Braid of Dunedin, in reprimanding Judith Smith twice for her view of te reo, ( HBT, January 3 and 10) seems unaware of the old adage that “One man’s meat is another man’s poison”.
She can “treat te reo with mana” if she wants to but her demand that others do so is precisely the arrogance which she claims to deplore.
And yes, our primary school children are indeed indoctrinated with the statement that “taonga” means “treasure” but nobody tells them that in 1840 that was far from the truth when it meant no more than ordinary property which, by the Treaty of Waitangi, we all were and are entitled to possess.
Its meaning changed rapidly afterwards to include the rich array of material goods which Europeans brought to New Zealand and continues to expand today to include everything anybody might desire.
Thus we have Hugh Kawharu’s statement in the notes to his dubious translation of the Treaty: “Taonga refers to all dimensions of a tribal group’s estate, material and nonmaterial — heirlooms and wahi tapu (sacred places), ancestral lore and whakapapa (genealogies), etc.”
His implication that this was meant in the Treaty of Waitangi is pure hypocrisy motivated by greed.
Indeed recently a senior Auckland professor claimed that any Maori was entitled to kill and eat our beautiful native pigeons because they were a “taonga” guaranteed by the Treaty of Waitangi.
This is an abuse of the meaning of the Treaty and defiance of the law which protects them but evidently Kawharu and Braid’s “appropriate usage” of te reo.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson