[Algonquiana] Algonquian Cultures and Snakes
Robert Brightman
rbrightm at reed.edu
Fri Jul 31 20:08:13 UTC 2015
Frank Speck's immortal "Reptile Lore of the Northern Indians," /Journ of
Am Folklore/, 1922 I think.
On 7/31/15 12:11 PM, Roland Bohr wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I am looking for information on Algonquian ideas around snakes,
> especially for garter snakes in Blackfoot and Plains Cree cultures. So
> far, the works of Wissler and Mandelbaum that I could access, have not
> yielded much information.
>
> Any help with this would be much appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Roland Bohr
>
>
>
> Roland Bohr
> Director, Centre for Rupert's Land Studies
> 5CM12
> University of Winnipeg
> 515 Portage Avenue
> Winnipeg, Manitoba,
> R3B 2E9
>
> Ph.: (204) 786-9007
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ALGONQUIANA [ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG] on behalf
> of John Steckley [John.Steckley at HUMBER.CA]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:47 PM
> *To:* ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait Theor
>
> The Australians are way ahead of us in connecting Aboriginal languages
> to specific places. I learned this reading "Language in Native
> Title," edited by John Henderson and David Nash, 2002. Language
> classification there, however, is still a series of knots to be untied.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ALGONQUIANA [ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG] on behalf
> of Bernie [plnal at HOTMAIL.COM]
> *Sent:* August-19-14 12:59 PM
> *To:* ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait Theor
>
> I love our "creation story" in the Mi'kmaw culture too, variations and
> all. But of course I don't take them literally any more than I take
> the christian bible literally.
>
> Wela'lioq
>
> bern francis
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 2014-08-19, at 1:27 PM, "Michael Sullivan Sr" <sulli720 at UMN.EDU
> <mailto:sulli720 at UMN.EDU>> wrote:
>
>> Some very interesting points made and strong opinions expressed here.
>> I wonder though, why does the so-called "creationist" perspective
>> bother your "scientifically-sound" camp so greatly? More imposition
>> I assume. "Think like us, be like us."
>>
>> Thankfully, most of us ignorant "creationists" are taught to respect
>> other people's beliefs and teachings. If only that respect was
>> mutual, we might have a chance at saving some of these languages and
>> cultures that have endured more than their fair share of imposition.
>> To deny the truth of a people's tradition, is to deny the truth of
>> their elders, a cultural no-no. Like language, a people's traditions
>> shape them, don't let that bother you. We've been down that road
>> before.
>>
>> So, while the scientist digs up facts and measures skulls to "prove"
>> the "creationist" wrong (for purposes of discrediting Native American
>> people as being indigenous to North America), the creationist simply
>> glances outside into our creator's garden; for that is the all the
>> "proof" that we need.
>>
>> Chi-miigwech to all of you who post here. I truly enjoy the read...
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Danielle E. Cyr <dcyr at yorku.ca
>> <mailto:dcyr at yorku.ca>> wrote:
>>
>> Worth to mention:
>>
>> 1- Language changes are faster at the centre of a linguistic area
>> than farther away from the centre. The European migrations into
>> the New World demonstrate it quite clearly. Same with Icelandic
>> compared to Norwegian. Although some of us may think that this
>> notion doesn't apply to Aboriginal languages, my view is
>> different. For instance, the Mi'gmaq spoken in Listuguj, QC, is
>> more advanced than that of, say Burnt Church, NB. Listuguj was
>> considered the centre (i.e. major hub) of the Northern Mi'gmaq
>> area and the phonetic erosion there is way more advanced than at
>> the periphery.
>>
>> 2- As research in the domain of grammaticalization shows very
>> clearly, grammatical change is absorbed by different speakers at
>> different speeds.
>>
>> These two facts allow us to assume that language change, although
>> constantly in action through time, is very uneven in space and
>> among groups of individuals.
>>
>> Best to All,
>> Danielle E.
>>
>>
>>
>> >---- Original Message ----
>> >From: John Steckley <John.Steckley at HUMBER.CA
>> <mailto:John.Steckley at HUMBER.CA>>
>> >To: ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>> <mailto:ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
>> >Sent: Mon, Aug 18, 2014, 6:24 PM
>> >Subject: Re: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait Theor
>> >
>> >Michael:
>> >
>> >I like the coastal migration model for the first folks here,
>> possibly coming up from Southeast Asia, as some geneticists
>> suggest, but that's not what the writers were saying. They
>> worked very hard at not saying what their theory was. But I
>> have never believed, as there has never been any evidence backing
>> it up, that major language change operates at a uniform rate.
>> But then I also don't believe that long term genetic mutation
>> happens at a uniform rate, as that is often assumed but never
>> proven. Glottochronology has always had a little too much of the
>> assuming behind it for me to take it seriously. Language changes
>> most and fastest when major social events happen, like intense
>> contact, separation and long trail migration. And who is to say
>> that the language change happened in the Americas. It is just as
>> likely that that diversity existed in Asia before they came here.
>> There is no proof either way as yet.
>> >
>> >John
>> >
>> >________________________________________
>> >From: Michael McCafferty [mmccaffe at indiana.edu
>> <mailto:mmccaffe at indiana.edu>]
>> >Sent: August-18-14 6:11 PM
>> >To: Algonquian Conference List; John Steckley
>> >Cc: ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>> <mailto:ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
>> >Subject: Re: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait Theor
>> >
>> >The Pacific Coastal migration model has been around for quite a
>> while.
>> >James Dixon is a well known figure in explaining this path into the
>> >Americas. There's good evidence that even during glacial maxima
>> there
>> >were ice free coastal zones where bears and humans could and did
>> live,
>> >as well of course other sea mammals. The isotopic signature for the
>> >bone of a young man discovered in one of Dixon's digs was the
>> same as
>> >that of a seal. People were drawing their protein from the sea.
>> >
>> >The earliest migrants may have come out of Asia during not the
>> recent
>> >glacial maximum 14,000 years ago or so but the *previous* glacial
>> >maximum, ca. 35,000 years ago, and in fact are thought to be of the
>> >original migrants *into* Asia. (See Kennewick Man, Spirit Cave
>> Man, et
>> >al.). I haven't talked to all linguists, but I think there may be a
>> >somewhat shared sense that it would take a good 40,000 years for the
>> >American linguistic diversification to have taken place, not
>> counting
>> >new migrants.
>> >
>> >Michael McCafferty
>> >
>> >Quoting John Steckley <John.Steckley at HUMBER.CA
>> <mailto:John.Steckley at HUMBER.CA>>:
>> >
>> >> Unfortunately, this reads like a creationist story. It makes
>> >> reference to old works, such as that of Jefferson, who was
>> hardly a
>> >> scholar on the subject. The language diversity in Australia is
>> >> greatest in the northern points where new peoples entered.
>> There is
>> >> nothing dramatic about saying that 60,000 years ago there were
>> people
>> >> there. That has been known archaeologically for at least 20
>> years.
>> >> Africa has far greater language diversity than the Americas,
>> but then
>> >> anatomically modern Homo sapiens has been there for over 100,000
>> >> years. There might be a small backwards movement to Asia but the
>> >> evidence archaeologically and linguistically is weak.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The worst part of this is that no counter idea is proposed to
>> Bering
>> >> Strait. I suspect that they want to say that people have 'always
>> >> been here' which is a form of creationism. We are all
>> Africans, and
>> >> people who think differently do not know their science and
>> want to be
>> >> treated as somehow specially created. Unfortunately, in this case
>> >> where there is Smoke there is only the fire of creationism
>> that does
>> >> not want to speak its name.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> From: ALGONQUIANA [ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>> <mailto:ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>] on behalf
>> >> of Richard Preston [prestonr at MCMASTER.CA
>> <mailto:prestonr at MCMASTER.CA>]
>> >> Sent: August-18-14 3:22 PM
>> >> To: ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>> <mailto:ALGONQUIANA at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
>> >> Subject: Fwd: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering
>> Strait Theor
>> >>
>> >> cheers
>> >> Dick
>> >>
>> >> http://www.richardpreston.ca/
>> >>
>> >> Begin forwarded message:
>> >>
>> >> Fsrom: Jennifer Preston
>> >> <jennifer at quakerservice.ca
>> <mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca><mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca
>> <mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca>>>
>> >> Subject: Fwd: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering
>> Strait Theor
>> >> Date: August 18, 2014 at 3:17:22 PM EDT
>> >> To: Dick Preston <prestonr at mcmaster.ca
>> <mailto:prestonr at mcmaster.ca><mailto:prestonr at mcmaster.ca
>> <mailto:prestonr at mcmaster.ca>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Begin forwarded message:
>> >>
>> >> From: Daniel Smoke <dsmoke at uwo.ca
>> <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca><mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca>>>
>> >> Subject: Fwd: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering
>> Strait Theor
>> >> Date: 8 August, 2014 6:42:31 AM EDT
>> >> To: Jean Koning <jean.koning at live.ca
>> <mailto:jean.koning at live.ca><mailto:jean.koning at live.ca
>> <mailto:jean.koning at live.ca>>>
>> >> Cc: Al Day <aday at namerind.on.ca
>> <mailto:aday at namerind.on.ca><mailto:aday at namerind.on.ca
>> <mailto:aday at namerind.on.ca>>>, Pam
>> >> Palmater
>> >> <ppalmater at politics.ryerson.ca
>> <mailto:ppalmater at politics.ryerson.ca><mailto:ppalmater at politics.ryerson.ca
>> <mailto:ppalmater at politics.ryerson.ca>>>, Gary
>> >> Farmer
>> >> <garytroublemaker at gmail.com
>> <mailto:garytroublemaker at gmail.com><mailto:garytroublemaker at gmail.com
>> <mailto:garytroublemaker at gmail.com>>>,
>> >> Cyndy Baskin <cbaskin at ryerson.ca
>> <mailto:cbaskin at ryerson.ca><mailto:cbaskin at ryerson.ca
>> <mailto:cbaskin at ryerson.ca>>>, Raven
>> >> Redbird <sfive at rogers.com
>> <mailto:sfive at rogers.com><mailto:sfive at rogers.com
>> <mailto:sfive at rogers.com>>>, Carrie Lester
>> >> <lester.carrie at rogers.com
>> <mailto:lester.carrie at rogers.com><mailto:lester.carrie at rogers.com
>> <mailto:lester.carrie at rogers.com>>>, Jennifer
>> >> Preston-Howe
>> >> <jennifer at quakerservice.ca
>> <mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca><mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca
>> <mailto:jennifer at quakerservice.ca>>>, Ken
>> >> Deer <kennethdeer104 at hotmail.com
>> <mailto:kennethdeer104 at hotmail.com><mailto:kennethdeer104 at hotmail.com
>> <mailto:kennethdeer104 at hotmail.com>>>,
>> >> Deb Aaaron
>> >> <debaaron at newcreditfirstnation.com
>> <mailto:debaaron at newcreditfirstnation.com><mailto:debaaron at newcreditfirstnation.com
>> <mailto:debaaron at newcreditfirstnation.com>>>, Peter Cole
>> <coyoteandraven at mac.com
>> <mailto:coyoteandraven at mac.com><mailto:coyoteandraven at mac.com
>> <mailto:coyoteandraven at mac.com>>>, Anita Rooke <arooke at gcna.com
>> <mailto:arooke at gcna.com><mailto:arooke at gcna.com
>> <mailto:arooke at gcna.com>>>, Ward Churchill
>> <wardchurchill at yahoo.com
>> <mailto:wardchurchill at yahoo.com><mailto:wardchurchill at yahoo.com
>> <mailto:wardchurchill at yahoo.com>>>, Blanche
>> >> Meawassige
>> >> <meawassige at gmail.com
>> <mailto:meawassige at gmail.com><mailto:meawassige at gmail.com
>> <mailto:meawassige at gmail.com>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Mary Lou and Dan Smoke
>> >> Adjunct Professors
>> >> Smoke Signals, #3255 SSC
>> >> http://london.ctvnews.ca/more/smoke-signals
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/#1/ctvsmokesignals
>> >> http://www.chrwradio.ca<http://www.chrwradio.ca/>
>> >> http://chrwradio.ca/content/smoke-signals
>> >> 94.9 FM CHRW
>> >> Sundays 6:30 - 8:00 p.m. EST
>> >> CHRW 2013 Outstanding Specialty Program
>> >> 519 659-4682
>> >> 519 661-2111 x85083 for messages
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/150460689234/
>> <https://www.facebook.com/#%21/groups/150460689234/>
>> >> dsmoke at uwo.ca <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca><mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca
>> <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca>>
>> >>
>> >> From: Daniel Smoke <dsmoke at uwo.ca
>> <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca><mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca>>>
>> >> Subject: How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait Theor
>> >> Date: 8 August, 2014 6:33:19 AM EDT
>> >> To: Donald Smoke <donaldosmoke at gmail.com
>> <mailto:donaldosmoke at gmail.com><mailto:donaldosmoke at gmail.com
>> <mailto:donaldosmoke at gmail.com>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> [http://d1jrw5jterzxwu.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/article_media/lingusitic-families-of-american-indians-powell.jpg]
>> >> Close
>> >>
>> >> Read more at
>> >>
>> http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/03/19/how-linguists-are-pulling-apart-bering-strait-theory-154063?page=0%2C0
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> How Linguists Are Pulling Apart the Bering Strait TheoryAlex
>> >>
>> Ewen<http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/advanced/search?fq[0]=ts_field_full_name%3AAlex%20Ewen>
>> >> 3/19/14
>> >>
>> >> Over the past few weeks, new scientific discoveries have rekindled
>> >> the debate over the Bering Strait Theory. Two of the
>> discoveries were
>> >> covered recently in Indian Country Today. The first "More
>> Reasons to
>> >> Doubt the Bering Strait Migration Theory," dealt with the growing
>> >> problem of "science by press release," as scientific studies hype
>> >> their conclusions to the point that they are misleading; and the
>> >> second, "DNA Politics: Anzick Child Casts Doubt on Bering Strait
>> >> Theory," discussed how politics can influence science, and the
>> >> negative effects these politically-based scientific results
>> can have
>> >> on Native peoples.
>> >>
>> >> RELATED: More Reasons to Doubt the Bering Strait Migration
>> >>
>> Theory<http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/03/08/more-reasons-doubt-bering-strait-migration-theory>
>> >>
>> >> RELATED: DNA Politics: Anzick Child Casts Doubt on Bering Strait
>> >>
>> Theory<https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/03/11/dna-politics-anzick-child-casts-doubt-bering-strait-theory-153947>
>> >>
>> >> It is generally assumed that the Bering Strait Theory has almost
>> >> universal acceptance from scientists. So, for example, the New
>> York
>> >> Times, in an article on March 12, "Pause Is Seen in a Continent's
>> >>
>> Peopling<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/science/linguistic-study-sheds-new-light-on-peopling-of-north-america.html?_r=0>"
>> stated unequivocally that "The first migrations to North America
>> occurred between 15,000 and 10,000 years ago," with the new
>> wrinkle that maybe on their way from Asia Indian ancestors laid
>> over in the Bering Strait region (Beringia) for thousands of
>> years before traveling on to
>> >> the
>> >> Americas.
>> >>
>> >> Therefore it is usually presumed that the primary critics of the
>> >> theory must be anti-science, like the "creationists" who argue
>> >> against evolution, or New Age pseudo-scientific conspiracy
>> theorists.
>> >> Thus in 1995, when the late Sioux philosopher Vine Deloria Jr.
>> >> published Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of
>> >> Scientific Fact and challenged the Bering Strait Theory, he was
>> >> savagely attacked by many scientists who lumped him in with those
>> >> fringe groups.
>> >>
>> >> The vitriol that poured from some of the harshest critics, such as
>> >> John Whittaker, a professor of anthropology at Grinnell
>> >> College<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grinnell_College>, who
>> referred
>> >> to Deloria's book as "a wretched piece of Native American
>> creationist
>> >> claptrap," seemed excessive. The critics also demonstrated
>> that they
>> >> clearly did not comprehend Deloria's argument. Red Earth,
>> White Lies,
>> >> embroidered by Deloria's wry sense of humor and rambling musings,
>> >> shows he was not anti-science, but rather anti-scientist. In
>> >> particular, he was against those scientists who held narrow
>> views of
>> >> the world, who had no respect for other people's traditions, who
>> >> fostered a cult of superiority either for themselves or for their
>> >> society, and who were afraid to search for the truth unless it
>> >> already conformed with established opinion.
>> >>
>> >> Deloria also argued that science, when studying people, was not
>> >> neutral. In his view, some scientific theories harbored social and
>> >> political agendas that were used to deprive Indians and other
>> >> minorities of their rights. Many of the assumptions that underlay
>> >> certain scientific principles were based on obsolete religious or
>> >> social views, and he urged science to shed these dubious
>> relics. The
>> >> issue for Deloria was not science vs. religion (or tradition),
>> it was
>> >> good science vs. bad science, and in his view, the Bering Strait
>> >> Theory was bad science.
>> >>
>> >> Nor was Deloria alone in this opinion. Since it was first
>> proposed in
>> >> the late 16th century, and especially in its most recent
>> incarnations
>> >> in the late 19th and the 20th centuries, the most vociferous
>> critics
>> >> of the Bering Strait Theory have been scientists. Even among
>> >> archaeologists and physical anthropologists, generally the most
>> >> dogmatic proponents of this theory, it has always been extremely
>> >> factious. And the abuse they would heap upon each other was no
>> less
>> >> acidic than that they spewed on outsiders.
>> >>
>> >> In 1892, when the geologist George Frederick Wright published his
>> >> massive study, Man and the Glacial Period, which challenged
>> some of
>> >> the tenets of the Bering Strait Theory as it was then
>> formulated, he
>> >> was attacked, as David J. Meltzer pointed out in First Peoples
>> in a
>> >> New World, "with a barrage of vicious reviews which were
>> >> unprecedented in number and savagery." One critic of the book,
>> >> William John McGee, the head of the Bureau of American Ethnology,
>> >> "was especially bloodthirsty, labeling Wright's work absurdly
>> >> fallacious, unscientific, and an 'offense to the nostrils,' then
>> >> dismissing him as 'a betinseled charlatan whose potions are
>> poison.
>> >> Would that science might be well rid of such harpies.'"
>> >>
>> >> To understand just one of the many scientific criticisms of the
>> >> Bering Strait Theory, we go halfway around the world to the
>> >> continental mass known as the Sahul, which includes Australia, New
>> >> Guinea and surrounding islands. Like the Americas, it had long
>> been
>> >> assumed by archaeologists that the Indigenous Peoples who lived in
>> >> that region had migrated there from Asia just a few thousand years
>> >> ago. It then came as a massive shock to those same archaeologists
>> >> when in 1968, near Lake Mungo in Southeastern Australia, the
>> >> geologist Jim Bowler discovered the remains of a cremated
>> woman who
>> >> was subsequently radiocarbon-dated to be between 25,000 and 32,000
>> >> years old. Lake Mungo Woman, as she came to be known, was
>> repatriated
>> >> to the Aboriginal community in 1992.
>> >>
>> >> Yet this discovery had already been anticipated by other
>> scientists,
>> >> for example, the linguists. The Sahul is one of the most
>> >> linguistically diverse areas in the world, home to more than 1,000
>> >> languages, about one-fifth of the world's total. The linguists had
>> >> already predicted that the "time depth" required to achieve
>> this type
>> >> of linguistic diversity was clearly not in the thousands of years,
>> >> but in the tens of thousands of years. Subsequent archaeological
>> >> finds have now pushed back the date of human occupation of
>> Australia
>> >> to a minimum of 45,000 years ago and possibly 60,000 years ago.
>> >>
>> >> The only area in the world that has a comparable level of
>> linguistic
>> >> diversity as the Sahul is the Americas, and in certain very
>> important
>> >> respects, the Americas were even more diverse. Since the very
>> first
>> >> period of contact between Europeans and Indians, observers had
>> >> marveled at how many different languages and cultures were to be
>> >> found. Thomas Jefferson, among the leading scientists of his day,
>> >> wrote in 1785 in his Notes on the State of Virginia.
>> >>
>> >> Imperfect as is our knowledge of the tongues spoken in America, it
>> >> suffices to discover the following remarkable fact. Arranging them
>> >> under the radical ones to which they may be palpably traced, and
>> >> doing the same by those of the red men of Asia, there will be
>> found
>> >> probably twenty in America, for one in Asia, of those radical
>> >> languages, so called because, if they were ever the same, they
>> have
>> >> lost all resemblance to one another.
>> >>
>> >> Today, linguists call Jefferson's "radical languages," language
>> >> families or stocks, each made up of numerous languages and
>> dialects.
>> >> As Jefferson saw it, this diversity clearly pointed to the
>> great age
>> >> of American Indians; "A separation into dialects may be the
>> work of a
>> >> few ages only, but for two dialects to recede from one another
>> till
>> >> they have lost all vestiges of their common origin, must
>> require an
>> >> immense course of time; perhaps not less than many people give
>> to the
>> >> age of the earth."
>> >>
>> >> Based upon the linguistic evidence, Jefferson believed that "a
>> >> greater number of those radical changes of language having taken
>> >> place among the red men of America, proves them of greater
>> antiquity
>> >> than those of Asia," and led him to speculate that Asians may have
>> >> been the descendants of early American Indian migrations from the
>> >> Americas to Asia.
>> >>
>> >> Exactly how diverse the American languages were became clearer in
>> >> 1891, when the famed explorer and director of the Bureau of
>> >> Ethnology, John Wesley Powell, released the monumental work,
>> Indian
>> >> Linguistic Families North of Mexico. In his introduction, Powell
>> >> explained that, "The North American Indian tribes, instead of
>> >> speaking related dialects, originating in a single parent
>> language,
>> >> in reality speak many languages belonging to distinct
>> families, which
>> >> have no apparent unity of origin." Powell grouped the American
>> Indian
>> >> languages in the U.S. and Canada into 58 language families (or
>> >> stocks) that could not be shown to be related to one another.
>> >>
>> >> Since Powell's day his classification has been modified
>> somewhat and
>> >> attempts to link many of these language stocks together to create
>> >> "super stocks" have met with mixed success. Although what
>> constitutes
>> >> a family, stock or super stock is a matter of continuing
>> debate among
>> >> linguists, today it is generally accepted that there are 150
>> >> different language stocks in the Americas. To give some
>> perspective
>> >> to this diversity, there are more language stocks in the Americas
>> >> than in the rest of the world combined.
>> >>
>> >> One of the 150 New World language stocks, Eskimo-Aleut, also spans
>> >> the Arctic and so has Asian and European relatives. Another
>> language
>> >> super stock, Na-Dené, composed of the language stocks Athabaskan,
>> >> Tlingit and Eyak, and located in Alaska and the northwest
>> coast (but
>> >> also in the southwestern U.S.), is also believed to have
>> relatives in
>> >> Asia, possibly the Yeneisian languages of central Siberia.
>> >>
>> >> It has long been suggested, and the issue is not particularly
>> >> controversial, that peoples speaking Eskimo-Aleut and Na-Dené
>> moved
>> >> back and forth between Asia and the Americas. A new study
>> published
>> >> on March 12 in the journal PLoS, "Linguistic Phylogenies Support
>> >> Back-Migration from Beringia to Asia," found that Na-Dené is not
>> >> descended from Yeneisian (as the Bering Strait Theory would infer)
>> >> but the other way around, that there was a "back-migration into
>> >> central Asia than a migration from central or western Asia to
>> North
>> >> America." (As an aside, the study, true to "science by press
>> release"
>> >> fashion, argues that this supports the "Beringian Standstill"
>> >> hypothesis-that Indians paused in Beringia for thousands of years
>> >> before colonizing the New World-but the study only examined the
>> >> Na-Dené language stock, whose speakers still live in the
>> Alaskan part
>> >> of Beringia to this very day, and so it would seem the study would
>> >> just as easily support the Na-Dené view that they have been there
>> >> since time immemorial.)
>> >>
>> >> Other than Eskimo-Aleut and Na-Dené, linguists have yet to
>> find any
>> >> connection with any language stocks of the Americas and those of
>> >> Asia. Along with the tremendous hemispheric diversity, this
>> created
>> >> serious doubts about the dates proposed by archaeologists and
>> >> physical anthropologists for Indian origins. At the beginning
>> of the
>> >> 20th century it was held to be at most 10,000 years and generally
>> >> only 5,000 years. In 1916, Edward Sapir, among the most
>> important and
>> >> influential linguists in history, countered the prevailing
>> >> archaeological view; "ten thousand years, however, seems a
>> hopelessly
>> >> inadequate span of time for the development from a homogeneous
>> origin
>> >> of such linguistic differentiation as is actually found in
>> America."
>> >> Instead he argued that, "the best piece of evidence of great
>> >> antiquity of man in America is linguistic diversification
>> rather than
>> >> archaeological."
>> >>
>> >> One of America's greatest scientists, Franz Boas, generally
>> >> considered to be the father of modern anthropology and an
>> important
>> >> linguist in his own right, in his classic study, Race,
>> Language, and
>> >> Culture, published in 1940, wrote that not only were American
>> Indian
>> >> languages "so different among themselves that it seems doubtful
>> >> whether the period of 10,000 years is sufficient for their
>> >> differentiation," but that the evidence of extremely ancient
>> Indians
>> >> would some day be found, and that, "all we can say, therefore, is
>> >> that the search for early remains must continue." Indeed, Boas was
>> >> among the first to propose, based on the evidence from an
>> expedition
>> >> that he led to the Bering Strait region in 1897, the "back
>> migration"
>> >> from the Americas to Asia
>> >>
>> >> Linguists were not the only ones who recognized the importance
>> of the
>> >> linguistic evidence. The great British paleo-anthropologist Louis
>> >> Leakey firmly believed that the linguistic evidence showed that
>> >> Indians were likely to be many tens of thousands of years old and
>> >> possibly much older, and shortly before his death in 1972 he
>> began to
>> >> sponsor fieldwork in the Americas in the hopes of proving
>> this. But
>> >> most American archaeologists and physical anthropologists,
>> where the
>> >> dogmatism of the Bering Strait Theory is most pronounced,
>> dismissed
>> >> or ignored the linguistic evidence, leading people and the
>> mainstream
>> >> press to assume that linguists were silent on this subject, even
>> >> though the reverse was true.
>> >>
>> >> Starting in 1987, the tensions between the proponents of the
>> Bering
>> >> Strait Theory and linguists turned into open warfare as
>> >> archaeologists and geneticists used a highly disputed (and now
>> >> completely discredited) theory by the linguist Joseph Greenberg to
>> >> claim that the linguistic evidence now (after hundreds of years of
>> >> refuting it) showed that Indians migrated from Asia to the New
>> World
>> >> around 15,000 years ago. The dispute led to a torrent of
>> scientific
>> >> papers by the world's most prominent linguists denouncing the
>> use of
>> >> "non-science" and faulty data to back the Bering Strait
>> Theory. The
>> >> archaeologists and geneticists largely ignored the objections,
>> >> forcing a group of linguists-led by Lyle
>> >>
>> Campbell<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Campbell%20L%5Bauth%5D>,
>> >> author of the standard work in that field, American Indian
>> Languages:
>> >> the Historical Linguistics of Native America, and Ives
>> >>
>> Goddard<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Goddard%20I%5Bauth%5D>,
>> >> curator at the National Museum of Natural History at the
>> Smithsonian
>> >> Institution and the linguistic and technical editor of the massive
>> >> Handbook of North American Indians-to write to the American
>> Journal
>> >> of Human Genetics in 2004 and condemn the widespread use of
>> >> pseudo-scientific linguistic "evidence" in genetic studies about
>> >> Indian origins.
>> >>
>> >> The dispute also led the influential linguist, Johanna Nichols, to
>> >> publish "Linguistic Diversity and the First Settlement of the New
>> >> World," in the journal Language in 1990. In her introduction, she
>> >> first made two important scientific points: the diversity of the
>> >> languages of the New World is due to "the operation of regular
>> >> principles of linguistic geography;" and that the linguistic and
>> >> archaeological evidence from the Sahul clearly contradicted the
>> >> attempts to assign early dates for the Bering Strait
>> migration, since
>> >> the assignment of early dates in the New World would create a
>> >> scientific anomaly; "but such a discrepancy-one of at least an
>> order
>> >> of magnitude-must be assumed if we adhere to the Clovis
>> [15,000 years
>> >> ago] or received chronology [20,000 years ago] for the
>> settlement of
>> >> the New World."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Mary Lou and Dan Smoke
>> >> Adjunct Professors
>> >> Smoke Signals, #3255 SSC
>> >> http://london.ctvnews.ca/more/smoke-signals
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/#1/ctvsmokesignals
>> >> http://www.chrwradio.ca<http://www.chrwradio.ca/>
>> >> http://chrwradio.ca/content/smoke-signals
>> >> 94.9 FM CHRW
>> >> Sundays 6:30 - 8:00 p.m. EST
>> >> CHRW 2013 Outstanding Specialty Program
>> >> 519 659-4682
>> >> 519 661-2111 x85083 for messages
>> >> https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/150460689234/
>> <https://www.facebook.com/#%21/groups/150460689234/>
>> >> dsmoke at uwo.ca <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca><mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca
>> <mailto:dsmoke at uwo.ca>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and attached material are
>> intended
>> >> for the use of the individual or organization to whom they are
>> >> addressed and may not be distributed, copied, or disclosed to
>> other
>> >> unauthorized persons. This material may contain confidential
>> and/or
>> >> personal information subject to the provisions of the Freedom of
>> >> Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Municipal
>> Freedom of
>> >> Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and/or the Personal
>> Health
>> >> Information Protection Act. If you receive this transmission in
>> >> error, please notify me immediately and delete this message.
>> Do not
>> >> email, print, copy, distribute, or disclose this email or its
>> >> contents further. Thank you for your co-operation and assistance.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and attached material are
>> intended for the use of the individual or organization to whom
>> they are addressed and may not be distributed, copied, or
>> disclosed to other unauthorized persons. This material may
>> contain confidential and/or personal information subject to the
>> provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of
>> Privacy Act, the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection
>> of Privacy Act, and/or the Personal Health Information Protection
>> Act. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify me
>> immediately and delete this message. Do not email, print, copy,
>> distribute, or disclose this email or its contents further. Thank
>> you for your co-operation and assistance.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Sullivan
>> Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwe
>> PhD Candidate- Linguistics
>> University of Minnesota
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Algonquiana mailing list
> Algonquiana at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/algonquiana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/algonquiana/attachments/20150731/5b7d127b/attachment.htm>
More information about the Algonquiana
mailing list