I understand that aloha 'aina is a complicated matter and it needs explanation and context, though I think the author is explaining it too much! sometimes it gets boring and not being effective, I think if the intention is to make people aware of aloha 'aina and hawaiian pilina, this is way too long for people to read and comprehend. I think if we wanna be effective, it is better to be more concise.

What a subtle, fragile, and intricate observation...

In Iran we did not used to talk about our belief because if we do not believe in Islam, we will be persecuted. So, we always keep in our heart and remain silent about who we believe in. There is a combination of fear and shame. It is very interesting for me to see that here, in old Hawaii, there was people who chose to be silent internally, not an outside force, to remain silent about their God and do not otter their their name.

So beautiful and subtle statement...

It is very interesting that they could not speak about pele and they had to keep it inside. Was it part of the old culture? Was it because Pele was too precocious and it had to be kept in heart?

For me reading this passage, 'i'i had a fascinating characteristic. In his childhood his mom taught him patience, forgiveness and tolerance and he obediently followed his mom's teaching. Also, despite Liholiho bullying him, he continued serving him because he had faith in him. Considering he was even younger than Liholiho, it reveals 'I'i 's level of maturity...

Growing up with a deep culture and belief system and transitioning to another belief must be challenging. Considering Hawaiian culture and identity was deep rooted in the land, makes me think how they could adopt another belief system and still keep their Hawaiian identity?

According to this passage and Alohalani, the concept of kuleana shapes the production and transmission of knowledge, highlighting one's right to information and the responsibilities associated with sharing that knowledge.

From what I have learned about Hawaiian culture, the term "kuleana" held significant importance and played an important role in the society. Thinking deeper into its meaning reveals for me that Hawaiian people were known for their sense of responsibility and proactive nature, rather than passivity. This leads me to ponder whether this cultural concept still persists in modern Hawaiian society or if there has been a shift towards a victimhood mentality. And if it it so, that people feel less responsible, what is the reason?

When I encountered to this term, it made me think it is interesting that a female having a female partner was okay in an extent that they even provided a word foe that. I was thinking is it because Hawaiian culture was more female oriented? or it was because of shortage of men at that time? Or it was just a norm in the society? I grew up in a country that it is male oriented and women do not have value. So, when I came to this term in this passage, it made me wonder about how interesting that a women having two partners was acceptable and the child was respected...

It is interesting that how creating new stories today is a way to connect with the past and understand the Native Hawaiian culture and values and how it helps to keep their traditions alive. I am thinking that some of the terms like kaukau ali'i , do not have any use in the modern world. However, when new generations create new mo'olelo they repeat the words and that keeps the culture alive.

When I learned about this culture of Hawaiian people, I was so amazed and in awe. I admired (and I admire) Hawaiian culture and people that they respect the land and it is for everybody, they do not have ownership. Aina, that which feeds... However, I still have this question that how come land was in the hand of wealthy people and ali'i and they would rent it to other people? For example, Kamehameha lands are for royals trust fund and they rent them. Though I am confused, who did assigned them for those lands in the beginning? Isn't it that aina is for everybody?

I used to see history very black and white, with good and bad and judge the people who made the mistake and think why they did such mistakes. As I learn more about history in different cultures, I realize that history is full of errors and mistakes. We, as human, either learn from the mistakes and evolve, or we keep doing the same mistake and repeat. For example, I think Hawaiian people in the past acted extreme to learn English and be progressive, but then nest generations realized that they are missing their culture and language. More, efforts are in place to revive the culture and teach Hawaiian language.

Based on our exploration of last week's material and Hawaiian Antiquities reading, I noticed the the importance of translation in mo'olelo. In this mo'olelo author is not trying to be biased and he is providing a world wide view for the reader to consider the context and look at what happened through wider eyes.

In both this thesis and Kamakau's mo'olelo, I've noticed a high emphasis on genealogy, underscoring its significance in Hawaiian culture. This raises this question: why was genealogy so crucial, and how did it correlate with social hierarchy? Did an individual's genetic lineage inherently determine their rank, or was it their personal attributes that elevated them, with later Hawaiians drawing connections to genealogy?

I am learning a lot about the Hawaiian culture and I think Artisa skillfully and fluently wrote this thesis.

I think it is highly important to understand, the process of translation is inherently complex and deeply reliant on interpretation. It involves more than just converting words from one language to another; it necessitates an understanding of the cultural nuances, context, and intentions behind the text. I think translators are, in essence, interpreters of meaning, navigating the delicate balance between fidelity to the source material and making it accessible and meaningful in the target language. However, it is prominent to keep in mind it is not easy to be able to convey the meaning in the source language thoroughly and it is a great responsibility. As this understanding deepens, it becomes evident that translation is not a mechanical task but an art that requires cultural sensitivity, linguistic mastery, and a profound grasp of the subtleties of human expression.

I think if all the schools would have practiced "Olelo Hawaii" and not teaching through Hawaiian language but teaching the "Hawaiian language" in their curriculum, would be more effective and more children could have learned 'Olelo Hawai'i and teach it to the next generations.

It is very fascinating how adopting to a language changes the thought process and we can only think through a language not out of it. It seems like created words in a language have a visceral meaning and you can only understand it through that specific language and when it translates, it loses its meaning. I think it is like the meaning of "pono" or "aina" . If we grow up with Hawaiian language we can fell meaning of aina and connection with it. Or similarly pono and the depth of its meaning. I do not know culture shaped the culture or language shaped the culture? Whichever is true, by changing a language, the culture starts to change or diminishes. It is very prominent that in this article it is mentioned the change in language first altered the cognitive process and then social consciousness.

Here and in previous pages, I noticed pono has been mentioned a lot. Was it the culture of Hawiian people to choose people who rule with pono nad promote pono deed? And did they always fight with a ruler that does not have pono?

I noticed in this reading they did not mentioned to 'Umi's adopted sons. I was wondering why? Is it because it was not important or because this in the way that this moʻolelo being told?

It is interesting that how a moʻolelo can be described in different ways and still keep its content. I found this text more easy to digest as compare to the first reading of 'Umi. I also think that when a moʻolelo is being told with pictures is easier to read and remember.

I have been thinking about how puny were the reasons of the war in the past. Over a neckless hundreds of men have been killed and wars had been happened. I am thinking about evolution of human being and I am asking myself: Is this one of the aspects that human being has been evolved that nowadays human life is more precocious as compared to the past? Or is it only because of the laws and effects of religion, concept of good and bad and morals that human being easily do not kill each other?

Not just here, but the whole story, the amount of details to describe the story is fascinating. Even the name of the fish that fisherman is catching, discussion about why the water is dirty, etc...

This sentence draw my attention that People did not used to pay attention to who is their chiefs because of the fear and tabus of the chiefs. It is interesting for me that old Hawaiian people even before Christianity used to have strong religion and chiefs used to control people the way that religion used to control people. With imposing fear on people and people forget to question and question their religion or chiefs.

It has been a question for me. Whet is the reason most of the Hawaiian names are very long?