> > But then, there's not a perfectly good feminine word for shaman that
> > isn't othewise loaded with meaning.
>
> "Shaman" doesn't work? (I think I've seen "shamaness" used, though I
> find it klunky.) Don't forget, the <man> has nothing to do with being
> male -- it's not an Indo-European word, which is why the plural is
> "shamans
Though it doesn't share the Tungus root ('saman' relates to 'burning like
fire', or 'heating') the term 'shamanka' has gained some currency among
western practicioners. Most use culturally-specific words, which in some
cases (Korean for instance) are feminine.
John