<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16640" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>James,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In
Boas' "Kathlamet Texts" (1901) a word glossed 'yesterday' occurs a couple
of times at least which Boas spells <taqEL> with a stress mark over
the <E>. [His <E> is schwa and his <L> is tl (not
glottalized/ejective).] </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I've made a very quick search through Boas'
(Lower) "Chinook Texts" (1894) and didn't find 'yesterday'--but I may
have missed it if it's there.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
notice that in Holton's online vocabulary <A
href="http://www.adisoft-inc.com/chinookbook/">http://www.adisoft-inc.com/chinookbook/</A> 'yesterday'
is <tatlki [san]>, with first-syllable stress. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In both K and LC
there's a "relation-to-time" suffix <-iX> or often just <-i> in LC.
If that ever occurred on <taqEL> I think it's possible the word may have
been heard by English ears as something like <taqLi(X)>, with the
<E> missing. Even if it was there and stressed, however, I don't see it as
an impossible source for Horton's spelling, especially if the LC was commonly
<taq(E)Li> without the <X>.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=375005623-15052008>Those of you who know CJ and especially
the various spellings found in Gibbs, etc. are probably in a position
to judge whether the above is close enough to have been the source. I
don't know any of that, am just starting serious work on Lower Chinook, so
submit this suggestion with considerable hesitation and even more humility. :
)</SPAN></DIV></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=375005623-15052008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Jim</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>jlarmagost@verizon.net </FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> The Chinook List
[mailto:CHINOOK@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Francisc
Czobor<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:06 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
CHINOOK@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Source of tanlki
"yesterday"<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Hi Rein,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>on page 8 of "Chinook and Shorthand Rudiments", the 3 "blurred" letters
after tanke are the word "son", which comes from English "sun" and means "sun"
or "day"; in this context it means obviously "day", thus tanke-son =
yester-day.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Francisc<BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>Rein Stamm <stamm@TELUS.NET></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">James,<BR><BR>I
cannot answer your question directly but I can tell you this:<BR>Something
similar appears in "Chinook and Shorthand Rudiments, with which the
<BR>Chinook Jargon and wawa shorthand......." [I'll spare you the
rest]<BR><BR>It is "By the Editor of the "Kamloops Wawa"" and published in
Kamloops, B.C., <BR>1898.<BR><BR>I have a photocopy, on page 8
"tanke-[illegible]" appears with the meaning as <BR>yesterday. I cannot make
out the 3 (?) blurred letters that follow. The <BR>shorthand symbol is also
given. The words listed are seperated into a French <BR>and English section
"tanke-[illegible]" appears in what I presume to be <BR>the "Indian"
section.<BR><BR>Regrds,<BR>Rein <BR><BR><BR><BR>Quoting James Crippen
<JCRIPPEN@GMAIL.COM>:<BR><BR>> Does anyone know the etymology of tanlki
"yesterday"? I have it listed<BR>> in Sam Johnson's 1978 dissertation on
Chinook Jargon, but no info on<BR>> the source language. It doesn't look
like English or French.<BR>> <BR>> Also is the first or last syllable
stressed? I am curious because I am<BR>> looking at a possible loan of
this from CJ into Tlingit, but stress is<BR>> probably the deciding
factor.<BR>> <BR>> Mási,<BR>> James<BR>> <BR>> To respond to
the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'. To respond privately to<BR>> the
sender of a message, click 'REPLY'. Hayu masi!<BR>> <BR><BR>To respond to
the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'. To respond privately to the sender of a
message, click 'REPLY'. Hayu masi!<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P>To respond to the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'. To respond privately to
the sender of a message, click 'REPLY'. Hayu masi!
</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
To respond to the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'. To respond privately to the sender of a message, click 'REPLY'. Hayu masi!