Cuerpos y rostros

Abstract

In a review of the book Líteratura nahuatl by Amos Segala, Miguel León-Portilla refers to two assertions of the book Cuerpo humano e ídeología by Alfredo López Austin. The first is the criticism of the philological interpretation of the word "tlacatl", and the second is the answer to the criticism that López Austin himself makes of his translation "ixtl, yollotl". In this article lópez Austin accepts the criticism of his philological analysis of "tlacatl", about which he himself had previously raised doubt. With regards to the second point, he strengthens his criticism of
the translation that León-Portilla makes of "ixtli, yollotl", and demonstrates, point by point, that none of the many exarnples that León-Portilla gives to verify his interpretation are valid. Finally, López Austin affirms that reconstructions of ancient Nahuatl thought based on mere philological analysis are weak and often false, especially when errors and misuses of analyses exist. He takes as an example an elaborate explanation which begins with a simple word, "ixtlamachiliztli", upon which León-Portilla based his analysis to construct an entire so-called philosophical concept of education that he attributed to the ancient Nahuas. León-Po¡tilla made an incorrect analysis of "ixtlamachiliztli", omitted elements of the word, strayed form the common usage of the term, did not take into account that a translation which reaffirms the correct interpretation appeared in the text, and, as if that weren't enough, did not translate text in which appeared both terms. In spite of all this, the false interpretation of the term "ixtlamachiliztli" has led to a so-called philosophical concept of prehispanic education that has been made known extensively by León'Portilla a¡d has been accepted by the lay public.