DOI: 10.24308/iass-2014-153

University for Foreigners, Perugia

Abstract

This paper acknowledges a small yet significant contribution to semiotics made by an obscure Ethiopian literate called Alemayehu Mogos. The textual fragments under analysis represent some pioneering findings deriving from a preliminary probing into the field of Ethiopian humanities. The sources range from the IV century text, a philosophical work from the Greek, the Fisalgwos (aka the Physiologus in the classical world), written in ancient Ethiopic, to a more recent dissertation on qəne, a pseudo-rhetorical-philosophical form used in Ethio­pian tradition. This was described in greater detail by Alemayehu Mogos, and presented at a conference in Addis Ababa in 1966 (Mogos, 1966).

The specific aim of such deep delving into texts is to unveil the autochtonous speculations on semiotic concepts and studies.

The result of the research aims at highlighting a specific semiotic paradigm in the form of cluster of pre-philo­sophical practices (medical, magical, poetical, rhetorical, and anthropological) blended with explicit sign theo­ries as those specifically elaborated by philosophers (Manetti, 2013).

Conversely, there are scholars such as Lagopoulos and Stylianoudi who, to a certain extent have already offered their contribution, systematically analyzing some specific features derived from Ethiopian historical data, identi­fying a system of correlations between the organization of meaning and space (Lagopoulos and Stylianoudi, 2001), thus paving the way in terms of method to implement research framework.

In the approach and method adopted by our survey we have redefined the nature of the above-called ‘certain aspects’ (i.e. the space-related concepts and ideas) into a series of key words about semiotic-related terms, con­cepts or assumptions.

In this paper we present some findings about qəne, a specifically Ethiopian sign system using a linguistic language as its medium which seems to perfectly represent one item from the cluster of above mentioned prac­tices. The item is then consequently structured to configurate the space necessary for the construction of the semiotic paradigm.

The non-secondary level of reflection is, conversely, to assess the possibility of existence of an ‘Ethiopian semiotics’ (i.e. what we referred to as ‘specific paradigm’), whereas its merely possible contribution to theories on signs at global level, would be equally impacting.

The two positions are not self-excluding, and, as to the level of their combination, more definitive answers may be given as the digging into textual corpora progresses and comes to conclusive phase. This clearly calls for the emergence of wider studies, particularly conducted by local researchers in the challenging scenario of global semiotics, nowadays heavily overbalanced towards the Western concepts and practices. To put it more simply, in terms of questions and answers, must we rely on a local epistemological grid when dealing with interpreta­tions of local and native sign systems? An example will be given by comparing the etymology of the lexeme /mystery/ in Greek and Geez (ancient Ethiopic) languages, highlighting the different semes. In the case of Greek, significance is related to ‘something unspeakable’ from μυεω (‘I close the eyes, the mouth’), while in Ethiopian context – or grid – it is to be considered as leading to a thousand possible interpretations (ýamӓsṭӓrӓ [sӓṭӓrӓ]thus conveying the meaning of interpreting to something which is speakable to some extent, albeit cov­ering many different aspects. The case of qəne itself may well epitomize the difficulties one encounters, from rendering the word qəne to a transleme or translational equivalent (either literal and semantic, or pragmatic and dynamic), in any language, when dealing with such intriguing and totally Ethiopian texts.

Starting with the analysis of some fragments from the work of Ethiopian scholar Alemayehu Mogos, acknowl­edged by the authors as the first Ethiopian semiologist, the following observations are aimed at presenting the initial stage of the process of exploration of factors and data-mining, the consequent conceptual framework, and some preliminary directions and findings related to semiotics as gathered from within Ethiopian written culture.

1. The elsewhere: between tradition and innovation

As recently argued by Manetti (2010: 13), a comparison between the modern concept of semiotics and its sources of origin entails a radical change within the current paradigm of the discipline. Diachronic shifts and variational dynamics are likely to elicit innovative responses. In this sense then, a comparison with the notions set forth in the past could influence the current definition and the declarations of intent of semiotics. The same could, however, be true if referred to spatial perspectives and space-bound orientations. Moreover, furthering understanding of the concept of sign and signification, as represented and perceived by different cultures and organizations of systems of meaning, is the other key factor to innovation. Even if these cultures do not frequently appear to be part of the current Western-oriented debate because of linguistic barriers and lack of translation, they could stimulate innovation while preserving heritage. Something new could thus emerge not from the distant past, but from a culturally-remote spaceelsewhere. It is the case of Ethiopia and the unknown semiologist whose thoughts we shall discuss.  

2. Drafting the semiotic paradigm

2.1. The practices and the paradigm

In order to prevent dialectics and diverging points of views from leading us astray from the objectives of the present paper, it is useful here to introduce the notion ofparadigm. We shall discuss first of all how a paradigm can be reconstructed. Pre-theoretical practices related to the domain of magic, rhetoric and poetics have certainly had a role in building paradigms. It is also clear how much the discipline of signs is indebted to its roots (Manetti 1993: xiv-xv). The most convincing factor is that the ancient practices have often prepared and moulded the lexicon of semiotics upon which theoretical speculation has been exercised. Consequently, in order to draft and enucleate a paradigm, semiotic practices are amongst the most important materials to recuperate. In the course of our researches undertaken in Ethiopia, several practices were observed. Such activities and interactions actually range from ritual neck tattooing considered as a preventive treatment against iodine disorders, to the direct or indirect use of medico-magical treatises to empower spells. The habit of wearing magic scrolls, such as written amulets hung on the neck for protection, is a widespread practice, like other practicesprimarily involving verbal languages and ritual oral formulae. Such practices and rituals which form part of our collected data, even if not mentioned here, seem to converge on one factor, i.e., the incidence of different systems of signs acting upon the Physical World. Needless to add how in the Western tradition, rhetoric has been considered for a long period as a determinant factor acting through the medium of words, and a strategy of persuasion. The choice of a practice linked to rhetoric, therefore, seemed a valid reference to the present orientation.  Among the possible choices related to a range of practices, the Ethiopian qəne1 was our first choice and priority. Following field research, we also started the study of some fragments by Alemayehu Mogos, an Ethiopian ecclesiastic scholar. The religious man may have applied a kind of semiotic glance and perspective in Ethiopia, specifically when dealing with the issue of the nature of qəne. The present paper relies on the assumption that ritual and cultural practices can represent an interesting indicator to direct researchers to anthropological, philological and bibliographical data mining, towards definition and comparison of non-Western semiotics.

2.2. A religious practice. Brief introduction to Ethiopic qəne

Qəne has been a discipline and vital subject in the religious education of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.  It is a shared opinion that unless someone studies qəne, one will never be able to understand biblical interpretation. Ethiopian history and hymnal books with all the hagiographical works from different eras are preserved in Gəəz (ancient Amharic) qəne. The word qəne derives from a Gəəz root qӓnəy/qӓnəyot which means ‘to direct a form of melody with cantillations emphasizing rhythm, philosophical concept and reflections’. Gəəz qəne is also a form of oral literature that relies on emphasis and stresses rhythm. As a form of literature, it is also known to be constructed over the figure of speech called sam-na-warq ‘wax and gold’. There are conflicting argumentations and historical observations as to the origin of qəne. Some traditional and orthodox Ethiopian scholars believed that its source derived from universal concepts taken from the Graeco-Roman philosophy. Other scholars argue that a person by the name of Yohannes Geblawi went for a spiritual retreat to a place called Sayint, near Debre Tabor in 1450. There he would have asked the Almighty the grace to reveal to him the method of Gəəz qəne and eventually his wish was fulfilled.  Other scholars from Gojjam claim that a person by name of Tewaney went to Greece. There he would have studied the philosophical usage of language and from Greece he would have returned, after having acquired seven kinds and methods of wisdom. One of these methods was the qəne(Galaw 2009: 2-3; 235). There are currently more than 187 methods and typologies of Gəəz qəne. Qəne has an important function in different ceremonial Performance in Ethiopian Orthodox Tewado Church, for instance during the melodious order of Anthem ( ሥርዓተ መወድስ ) at least ten stanzas  of Gəəz qəne are chanted. At least forty verses are presented in the services of vigil ( ሥርዓተ ዋዜማ ). During the service of Matins of regular days ( ስብሐተ ነግህ ዘዘወትር ), four stanzas of Gəəz qəne are presented and chanted. During the same service on Sunday, at least fourteen stanzas of qəne are presented (see fig.1).

Fig.1  Church ceremony in Lalibela

Qəne, however, has not only a religious content. It also offers philosophical contributions in order to introduce ideas and cultural features.

2.3. What is  qəne. Approaching the verbal text

         The following couplet stands as an example of Ethiopic qəne under the verbal point of view.

(1)     ተ መ ሰ ለ ወ ል ድ ር እ ሰ ገጸ አ ዳ ም  ቅ ድ ስ ተ

           እ ን ዘ መ ዓ ል ት የ ሐ ው ር ወ እ ን ዘ ይ ከ ው ን ሌ ሊ ተ

         [The son resembles the head of the complexion of Adam

         While the day is going, and the evening is happening]

In this particular case, the double acceptation is based on the signifier both rhythmically and visually. There are two possible ways of interpreting the text. If one considers “the son” with the small letter, as a simple member of human society, the literal meaning will be the denotatum, in line with its referent in the Physical World. It is called “the wax”. There is yet a further hidden meaning called “the gold”. The second meaning is given by considering the Son with a capital S. Christ, during the exact instant of His death by crucifixion, has both a human and divine nature.  Amongst the shapes of the letters, one can clearly see the shape of a cross that way of seeming a T-shaped letter on which the double meaning is based on (see fig. 2).

Fig.2 The shape of the cross in the Amharic alphabet

The word tӓmӓssӓlӓ means also ‘seemed’ and in addition it carries the meaning of tӓ-mӓssӓlӓ or ‘seems T’ by interposing a brief break while reading. The lexical meaning is changed by inserting a pause inside the word where it is usually not expected. In this way one can perceive a resemblance with the line of Adam and a cross, symbolizing Christ’s sacrifice to redeem mankind. The hidden meaning carries theological and philosophical points for discussions or even opinions. In addition, the momentwherein action takes place is culturally relevant. The shift from day to night is referred to the darkening of the skies during Christ’s crucifixion as related in the Gospels. As in many Western and Mediterranean traditions, in the Ethiopian culture it is considered the climax of transformation. This moment may also be the peak-moment unleashing the evil black powers of sorcerers and spellers who in the dusk and darkness turn into hyenas. 

We shall not pursue here any in-depth textual and contextual analysis since the aim is not to expound textual meanings inside this specific example. Our attempt was simply to introduce the nature of the phenomenon to ease the understanding of the verbal-text involved in the semiotic process and only a brief recognition of the cultural context.

2.4.      What is qene. Approaching the religious practice

A different perspective from the didactic one we have examined so far is to ask oneself what is qene beyond the borders of the verbal dimensions. In other words: what is apart from being “a verbal meaning”? An obvious assumption would be that is all about poetry. Alemayehu Mogos denies this possibility since “the exact equivalent of poetry is getem and mazmur combined” (Mogos 1970: 57). 

The second hypothesis is to consider it as a rhetorical artifice, with which it seems to share a lot, at least at surface level. Here again, however, our Ethiopian scholar insists on the impossibility of a translation word-by-word. He defines the object of discussion as “invented by an isolated Ethiopian mentality”. He adds that it will “remain a mystery until it is thoroughly taught and adequately understood in other foreign countries and languages” (Mogos 1970: 56).

In 1950, Alemayehu Mogos launched an appeal to the international community, inviting to translate the word qəne. It was addressed in particular to individuals with linguistic knowledge. In fact, Mogos does not believe in the possibility of a linguistic translation, not only terminological or at word level, but also at textual level. He claims that “if any translated text gives some idea, it is something else but qəne” (Mogos 1970: 55). Mogos speaks about “drastic destruction” or “dilution” which even makes it to “cease to be qəne.” (Mogos 1970: 55). Here the scholar seems to enter into one of the more thorny and tight conceptual corners. The controversy whether, if in the interpretation of localized and culture-bound sign-systems, one is to depend upon a local epistemological grid to avoid misrepresention of  the phenomenon  under scrutiny.

2.5. The “mysteries” of qəne explained

It would be important here to digress to reflect on the lexeme / mystery / which can add some elements to this discussion. Accordingly, interpretation grids should eventually originate from the very same cultural context intended to be analysed.

The lexeme /mystery/, in Ethiopian culture and philology, is entirely different from Greek  μυστήριον that refer to ineffability from  μυω ‘I close myself; I am closed, locked’ (Rocci 1957: 1263). The issue is controversial to such an extent that Bornkamm (1971: 645-716) in the homonymous lemma in the New Testament Lexicon declares that “the etymology of  μυστήριον is a mystery itself.”

Opening the New Amharic Dictionary Desta Tekle Wold (1970: 860) one can read the lemma አ መ  ስ ጠ ረ (ሰ ጠ ረ), amӓsṭӓrӓ  (sӓṭӓrӓ):

አ መ  ስ ጠ ረ (ሰ ጠ ረ)= አ ረ ቀ ቀ ነ ጽ ር ኬ  ዘ ከ መ  አ መ  ስ ጠ ረ እ ሎ ንተ በአ ሐ ቲ ቃ ል ፤ በ ተ መ ሳ ጥ ሮ እ ት ና ገር ም ስ ሌ ከ

[He (someone) gave a deep interpretation = He (someone) gave the details. Example:  look at that he (someone) interpreted these deeply in different ways within a single word. He (someone) has given a detail of interpretation.]

Grids may provide a useful tool for a comparative and cross-cultural analysis. In fact, Mogos tries likewise to circumscribe some generic characteristic, some analogies it shares with other phenomena. He defines qəne as undoubtedly ascribable to the class of means of communication, to specify it better later on as being an art functioning through a language. The Ethiopian scholar proposes the definition of qəne as a means of communication whose expressive form is precisely a language. He argues that “since it transmits ideas from speakers to hearers, it is a language, an oral expression system and since it is not a collection of words but the code of the position and composition of, then it is an art” (Mogos 1970: 55). As means of expression its real raison d'être is to clarify: “it is a means of clear expression, as such it is an oral2 art of communication just as music and painting” (Mogos 1970: 55).

In a conclusive statement, to be more explicit, he defines qene as “an instrument to adequately elaborate an idea whenever words of language fail to do so” (Mogos 1970: 55).

2.5.      Understanding a local meaning

Lastly, a passage appearing in two different essays by Alemayehu Mogos must be quoted at length. It may well confirm an attitude to conform to a linguistic-semioticforma mentis. The fact that it even appears twice, exactly in the same expression, make this concept of meaning relevant in indicating a sort of epistemic recurrence of the semiotic conception of the scholar.

እ ን ደ  ኮ ረ ን ቲ  ሽ ቦ ተ ጠ  ማ  ም ሮ እንደ ገመ  ድ ተ ሸ ራ ር ቦ የሚ  ሄ ደ ው ን የ ቅ ኔ አ ች ን ን ም ስ ጢ ር አገኛ ለ ሁ ማ  ለ ት ከ መ ሬ ት  ቁ ጭ  ብ ሎ  ሰ ማ ይን ደግፎ በግራ እጅ ከዋክብትን መ ግ ፋት  ሆ ነብን፡፡

[To a person  who intended to know the mysterious concept of  our qəne ‘poem’ which is twisted like electric wire and like the interlaced cord, it seems to sit on the ground to hold the sky with his right hand and to push the stars with his left hand (Mogos 1958: 7, 1960: 115).]

These words would very perceivably imply that it seems difficult to read qəne separated from its religious and spiritual substrate (Lemma 1988: 729). Furthermore, in amore general way, it is coherent with the ongoing analysis: i.e., that content cannot easily be separated from context. It is like dividing stars and sky while sitting on the ground; Mogos says. Stars and sky form already an inseparable continuum. Moreover, the image of a man trying to reach the sky while he is sitting on the ground magnifies the idea of the impossibility of such a task. 

Sense (as a justified interpretation) is an indissoluble unit of content and context, which cannot be negotiated outside its borders and limits. In Alemayehu Mogos' comparison, the term must be understood in the literal sense. There seems to be a lot of potential materials to be unearthed, and the phenomenon is worthwhile to be investigated. One can infer that our Ethiopian author treats qəne, according to a tradition that most likely Alemayehu Mogos could not know, as a cultural factor, almost “semiologically”, as it were a language.

3. Conclusive remarks

To individuate a semiotic paradigm, understood as a specific form of reflection, the practice was taken as a vital link mediating between action and theory. The assumption made was about the fact that elements for a semiotic paradigm could be discovered just starting from such practices and the associated semantic fields.Ethnographic tools for social and anthropological works are a resource for our research on significance and meaning. However, an integrated approach based on semiotics seems to be more advisable here. The author we have considered is one the first theoreticians, producers of autochthonous discourses, to whom one could eventually ascribe thebirth of a local semiotic studies field. Does semiotics reach maturity when criticism comes into action, after being stirred by verbal and somatic behaviors, as a type of meta-action? Studies on local discourse and patterns of communication are fully functional and consistent with the analysis of the semiotic paradigm itself. This could also configurate a global semiotic form of reflection3. This research needs to receive supportive investment, in order to provide systematic evidence and compare results. 

Alemayehu Mogos' notes offer a contribution to the debate about the history and theories of semiotics. This discussion could be enhanced by a wider participation of cultural communities at a global level. Alemayehu Mogos, an Abyssinian scholar of the second-half of the last century, has been here introduced in a provoking way as the obscure and unaware semiologist. He actually has turned out to be the first voice in a local re-construction of meaning. And this is matter for new reflection about other possible echoes that could be tracked elsewhere in the world.

References

BORNKAMM, Gunther. 1971. «Mysterion». In Kittel Gerhard and Friedrich Gerhard (eds.) Grande Lessico del Nuovo Testamento, VII, Brescia: Paideia.

GALAW, Sergew. 2009. Historical development of Gəəz qəne in different periods, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University dissertation. 

GREIMAS, Algirdas Julien and Courtés, Joseph. 2007 [1979]. Semiotica. Dizionario ragionato della teoria del linguaggio, Milano: Paravia Mondadori.

LEMMA, Mengistu. 1988. A possible role for Geez Qene in Ethiopian vernacular poetry. In Taddese Beyene. (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Ethiopian studies, University of Addis Ababa, 1984, 729-737. Addis Ababa, Frankfurt-am-Main & Huntingdon UK: Institute of Ethiopian Studies, Addis Ababa University; Frobenius Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University; Elm Publisher. 

MANETTI, Giovanni. 1993. Theories of the sign in classical antiquiy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 

MANETTI, Giovanni. 2010. Ancient semiotics. In Cobley Paul (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Semiotics, 13-29. Abingdon: Routledge.

MANETTI, Giovanni. 2013. In principio era il segno, Milano: Bompiani.

MOGOS, Alemayehu. 1958. Geez grammary, Addis Ababa: Artistic Press.

MOGOS Alemayehu. 1960. The image of Ethiopia, Asmara: Kokebe Sibah the association of apostles the fruit of religion.

MOGOS, Alemayehu. 1970. Geez and Amharic study without Qəne is incomplete. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Addis Ababa. April 1966, 53-78. Addis Abeba: Haile Selassie I University, Faculty of Arts, Departments of Ethiopian languages and literature.

ROCCI, Lorenzo. 1957. Vocabolario greco-italiano, Città di Castello: Società Editrice Dante Alighieri; Società Editrice Lapi.

TEKLE WOLD, Desta. 1970. New Amharic dictionary, Addis Ababa, Artistic Press.

WANG, Youxuan. 2001. Buddhism and Deconstruction. Toward a comparative semiotics, Richmond: Curzon Press.