> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jens Wilkinson > No, they wouldn't. It's true that there are count words, but > they would only be used to distinguish eating one pig from > eating two or three pigs, which doesn't make a lot of sense. > :) If they wanted to emphasize eating the whole animal, they > would use a word "marugoto" which means "completely". Just to > give you an example, in Japanese, "ki" means both tree (an > object) and wood (part of the object). So "I saw a tree" is > "ki o mita", whereas "this chair is made of wood" is "kono > isu ga ki de dekite iru." So as you can see, the word "ki" is > used exactly the same. And there is no confusion, because > it's understood from the context. In English, you would never > say "I saw wood," and you would never understand a chair as > being made of a single tree. So with pig, if in Japanese you > said "buta o tabeta," it could either mean "I ate a pig" or > "I ate pork", but (1) it's understood from the context and > (2) in any case, it doesn't matter, unless you want to > emphasize that you ate the whole thing, in which case you > would make it clear by saying "I ate whole pig". Sasxsek does have a dictinction but not quite the way English does it because it's a derivatice. "suin" is "pig", as in the animal while "suino". roughly "pig product", would indicate something that comes from a pig like pork, though it wouldn't necessarily refer to the meat. Exactly what would have to be figured out from context though "suinxnik' (pig+flesh) could be used to be more specific.