(BTW, @Shokhet, Guampedia's a good resource, but don't take everything at face value. The broad strokes of that article are accurate, but a lot of the things it says about chenchule' are very regional.)
The passage in question is:
The philosopher said "From an army of three divisions one can take
away its general, and put it in disorder; from the man the most abject
and vulgar one cannot take away his thought."
Who is Thoreau referencing here? Is it anyone in particular, or is he makin...
Like, it says "chenchule' is now often documented in writing among families, recording the date of the contribution and its type and amount." That's... not wrong... but you'll find at least as many families who laugh and say "What? How do you not know who you're chenchule'ing with? That must be embarrassing for you."
Or who say that keeping track of amounts so specifically goes against the spirit of chenchule'.
Also inafa’maolek is kinda... controversial? It's a relatively new phrase to describe very old social values, and people aren't all sure how they feel about it pushing out the older ways of talking about that stuff.
@BESW Maybe this is a good analogy to my question that started this conversation. guampedia was (presumably) written by Chamorro to describe Chamorro culture, and some will say that they got it wrong.
I know Chamorros who would get throwing-things mad at what it says about mamåhlao.
(Five years ago I was a designer and consultant on a social studies text for contemporary Chamorro culture. The project overseer wasn't from Guam, and had a lot of surprises about just how much variety in culture there is across our tiny islands.)
The passage in question is:
The philosopher said "From an army of three divisions one can take
away its general, and put it in disorder; from the man the most abject
and vulgar one cannot take away his thought."
Who is Thoreau referencing here? Is it anyone in particular, or is he makin...
