If you ask what kind of thing it is, whether it is a substance or an accident, it must be said that the sayable [enuntiabile], like the predictable, is neither substance nor accident nor any kind of other category. For it has its own mode of existence [Suum enim habet modus per se existendi]. And it is said to be extracategorical [extrapredicamentale], not, of course, in that it is not of any category, but in that it is not of any of the ten categories identifiable by Aristotle. Such is the case with this category, which can be called the category of the sayable [predicamentum enuntiabile].

I keep getting in trouble for referring to my spouse as 'my woman.' That's who she is to me--wanch ngatharam, and I'm pam nungantam, her man. Apparently that bit of paleo-misogyny loses something in translation for the metro middle-class people I'm attempting to mingle with lately, so I've had to alter my language and start saying 'my spouse.' The problem lies in the cultural baggage that comes with the possessive form in English grammar, and with the language of property law. In our Aboriginal communities, when people first meet you they will often ask, 'Who own you?' This doesn't signify a property relation--it is all about what groups, pairs and lands you belong to in your relationships, which are governed collectively. Belonging and ownership means something completely different from possession in our world. It means being in relation to family and community and place. Your belongings are not your property, but your connections. This worldview is not very compatible with the political economies, legal systems and marketplaces we must interact with to survive.