From: moonbroth (nick@etyries.com)
Date: Tue 09 Apr 2002 - 18:28:58 EEST
Last time I'll say this. Andrew wrote:
>> Initiands [*]: 4% 4% >> [*] I have always considered this category to be as-yet-to-be- >> initiated children, rather than freshly-initiated adults.
> Yes my thoughts as well. If you include those who have not yet
> completed there full initiation then it looks better.
Yes, BUT. If all* girls are initiated before age 15 and all* boys are initiated after age 15, it is *absurd* to use the term initiands to mean "girls and boys aged 15-19".
I agree that "initiands" (meaning something like "children who now qualify for initiation but haven't yet been initiated"?) could well be a useful term, but it *doesn't* mean "15-19 year olds".
Cheers, Nick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Thu 18 Sep 2003 - 23:03:15 EEST