ABSTRACT
The shaman tends to view the common object as an art form, to be cherished for good taste and fine distinctions. The linguist is more apt to see it as a social phenomenon, with practical means adjusted to practical ends. The schools were to blame, that there was not enough silence, youth was rebellious, and the Merriam dictionary was an obscenity. An informed listener could be forgiven for concluding from this that shamanism is opinionated rubbish beyond saving. It would be a pity, because shamanite values are those of a majority of writers, critics, editors, and other members of the literary community, who certainly deserve to be heard, but desperately need to be jockeyed back from the extreme position they have allowed themselves to be pushed into. Generally what the shaman really means is consistency: there is some more general fact about the language that can be elevated into a rule, with which the doubtful usage conflicts.
