Penan Benalui Wild-Plant Use, Classification, and Nomenclature

The Penan Benalui, former hunter-gatherers, started becoming sedentary in the mid-1950s. They have a detailed classification system for wild plants and recognize many useful wild plants, but their use knowledge is relatively simple and differs from that of Bornean farmers. Men are more knowledgeable than women about forest plants. Men often hunt in the forest and collect forest products, whereas women spend most of their time in the village. This suggests that ethnobotanical knowledge is closely related to forest activities. At the same time, the Penan Benalui have more than enough knowledge from a utilitarian point of view, and gaining knowledge depends to some extent on personal experience. The nature of the Penan Benalui classification of wild plants does not support previous theories regarding the relationships among use, classification, and nomenclature of organisms. It is possible that nomenclature patterns affect the classification mechanism.

[1]  H. Conklin.  The relation of Hanunoo culture to the plant world , 1954 .

[2]  R. Puri.  Deadly Dances in the Bornean Rainforest: Hunting Knowledge of the Penan Benalui , 2006 .

[3]  GonzaloRodrguez,et al.  Honduran Folk Entomology1 , 2001 .

[4]  D. E. Breedlove,et al.  General Principles of Classification and Nomenclature in Folk Biology , 1973 .

[5]  R. Felger,et al.  People of the Desert and Sea: Ethnobotany of the Seri Indians , 1985 .

[6]  R. Voeks.  Disturbance Pharmacopoeias: Medicine and Myth from the Humid Tropics , 2004, Annals of the Association of American Geographers.

[7]  T. E. Hays.  Mauna: explorations in Ndumba ethnobotany , 1974 .

[8]  Lisa X. Gollin.  The taste and smell of Taban Kenyah (Kenyah medicine) : an exploration of chemosensory selection criteria for medicinal plants among the Kenyah Leppo' Ke of East Kalimantan, Borneo, Indonesia , 2001 .

[9]  J. Slik,et al.  A floristic analysis of the lowland dipterocarp forests of Borneo , 2003 .

[10]  B. Berlin,et al.  Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. , 1994 .

[11]  J. Rousseau.  Central Borneo : ethnical identity and social life in a stratified society , 1990, The Journal of Asian Studies.

[12]  R. Puri.  The Bulungan ethnobiology handbook : a field manual for biological and social science research on the knowledge and use of plants and animals among 18 indigenous groups in northern East Kalimantan, Indonesia , 2001 .

[13]  M. Dove.  Swidden Agriculture in Indonesia: The Subsistence Strategies of the Kalimantan Kant , 1985 .

[14]  W. Balée,et al.  Footprints of the Forest: Ka'apor Ethnobotany-the Historical Ecology of Plant Utilization by an Amazonian People. , 1995 .

[15]  R. Puri.  Hunting knowledge of the Penan Benalui of east Kalimantan, Indonesia , 1997 .

[16]  Julie Anne Waddy,et al.  Classification of Plants and Animals from a Groote Eylandt Aboriginal Point of View , 1988 .

[17]  Bernard Sellato.  Nomads of the Borneo Rainforest: The Economics, Politics, and Ideology of Settling Down , 1995 .

[18]  P. Dwyer.  The Pigs That Ate the Garden: A Human Ecology from Papua New Guinea , 1990 .

[19]  Robert Blust.  Linguistic Evidence for Some Early Austronesian Taboos , 1981 .

[20]  K. Cao.  Leaf anatomy and chlorophyll content of 12 woody species in contrasting light conditions in a Bornean heath forest , 2000 .

[21]  Richard B. Lee.  The !Kung San: Men, Women and Work in a Foraging Society , 1979 .

[22]  P. Cox,et al.  Nomenclature of breadfruit cultivars in Samoa: Saliency, ambiguity, and monomiality , 2004 .

[23]  D. Medin,et al.  Folkecology, Cultural Epidemiology, and the Spirit of the Commons , 2002, Current Anthropology.

[24]  R. Needham.  The System of Teknonyms and Death-Names of the Penan , 1954, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology.

[25]  R. Voeks,et al.  The scope of hunter-gatherer ethnomedicine. , 2000, Social science & medicine.

[26]  V. Nazarea.  Cultural memory and biodiversity , 1998 .

[27]  J. Brosius.  Foraging in tropical rain forests: The case of the penan of Sarawak, East Malaysia (Borneo) , 1991 .

[28]  Cecil H. Brown,et al.  Mode of Subsistence and Folk Biological Taxonomy [and Comments and Reply] , 1985, Current Anthropology.

[29]  Roy F. Ellen,et al.  The Cultural Relations of Classification: An Analysis of Nuaulu Animal Categories from Central Seram , 1993 .

[30]  H. Terashima.  The Relationships Among Plants, Animals, and Man in the African Tropical Rain Forest , 2001 .

[31]  K. Jernigan.  AN ETHNOBOTANICAL INVESTIGATION OF TREE IDENTIFICATION BY THE AGUARUNA JÍVARO OF THE PERUVIAN AMAZON , 2006, Journal of Ethnobiology.

[32]  W. Batchelder,et al.  Culture as Consensus: A Theory of Culture and Informant Accuracy , 1986 .

[33]  T. Scudder.  Gathering Among African Woodland Savannah Cultivators: A Case Study: The Gwembe Tonga , 1971 .

[34]  R. Primack.  Forester's guide to the moraceae of Sarawak : a report prepared for the Forest Department of Sarawak, Malaysia in cooperation with the Man and Biosphere Program of the United States Department of Agriculture , 1983 .

[35]  James S. Boster,et al.  Exchange of Varieties and Information Between Aguaruna Manioc Cultivators , 1986 .

[36]  G. Martin,et al.  Ethnobotany: A Methods Manual , 1995 .

[37]  J. Brosius.  The axiological presence of death: Penan Gang death-names. (Volumes I and II). , 1992 .