<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [Lexicog] Using moccasin, canoe or other words with other Native etymology</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>Thanks for your thoughtful reply.<BR>
<BR>
I can relate to the sentiment of the advisory group. I’m also Karuk. We’re from Northwestern California, and sometimes it just gets old when you meet yet another person whose only understanding of anything Native American comes from the Plains – war bonnets, Dances With Wolves, tipis, buffalo. So I’m thinking the idea is to differentiate ourselves from those images as much as possible.<BR>
<BR>
But when I gave the éeyxuvik definition some thought, and even looked up the word moccasin on the Merriam Webster website, I thought myself that moccasin would be an easier word to use, and there is a long history by local tribes of using the word canoe to describe the boats that we have always bought from our downriver neighbors, the Yuroks. <BR>
<BR>
Our traditional houses don’t look anything like tipis, so it would be a stretch to use the word tipi. But the old style shoes resemble moccasins, and our canoes, resemble canoes. <BR>
<BR>
This thread has been helpful. Thanks Ron & Chaz!<BR>
<BR>
Susan Gehr<BR>
<BR>
On 4/8/08 5:36 PM, "Ronald Moe" <ron_moe@sil.org> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Susan Gehr wrote:<BR>
“</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'>it’s possible to write that kind of circumlocution</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>”<BR>
<BR>
Virtually any word you use conjures up an image. Ken McElhannon points out that ‘violin’ and ‘fiddle’ are essentially the same musical instrument. (There is a slight modification to the bridge.) But they conjure up very different images, especially of the social situation in which they are used (tuxedo in a concert hall versus suspenders in a barn). However it would take a great deal of verbage to adequately describe the form and function of a ‘fiddle’. It would be much more efficient to define a fiddle in terms of a violin (or vice versa) and clarify the different social situations in which each is used. In English we know that there are a variety of moccasins and canoes. The use of these terms merely serves to more quickly identify the type of object being described. If you use lengthy circumlocutions, the user may have a hard time understanding what it is you are talking about. But even lengthy circumlocutions are likely going to use words that conjure up images. For instance your definition ‘soft leather heelless shoe’ uses the word ‘shoe’ which conjures up its own image. In fact I wouldn’t call ‘a soft leather heelless article of clothing worn on the feet’ a shoe. I would call it a moccasin. The use of ‘shoe’ conjures up a quite different image. Likewise a definition such as ‘a vehicle used to navigate lakes and rivers constructed of bark sewn to a framework of wood…’ simply sounds silly. Using some other generic term like ‘boat’ or ‘ship’ or (worse) ‘rowboat’ likewise conjures up an image. Each of us has a prototypical image of a ‘boat’ along with a range of instances of ‘boats’. I picture a gleaming white fiberglass boat with a square stern on which is mounted a big outboard motor. I don’t think this is a better image than the one conjured up by ‘canoe’.<BR>
<BR>
So my recommendation is to pick the word in the analysis language that is closest in meaning to the vernacular word and add any modifications necessary to clarify the differences between (for instance) ‘</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'>éeyxuvik</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>’ and ‘moccasin’. An option is to use the classic Aristotelian analytical definition type in which you pick the generic term and then add criterial features that limit the meaning. In the case of ‘</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'>éeyxuvik</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>’ the generic English term is ‘shoe’ or possibly ‘footware’. In this case your definition would read, ‘a type of soft leather heelless shoe worn by the imusaan in ceremony…’ But to me your original definition </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'>‘type of moccasins worn by the imúsaan in ceremony’ </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> is superior.<BR>
<BR>
But I suspect that the real problem is not the adequacy of the definitions, but the attitudes of the speakers of the language. Your real problem may be to educate your users to accept the use of borrowed words such as ‘moccasin’ and ‘canoe’ in the definitions. When a language has been suppressed or neglected or demeaned, its speakers often want to rebuild its prestige. One frequently seen reaction is to reject foreign loans and seek the “pure” language. That may or may not be what is going on here. It is admirable that the Karuk people have pride in their language and want to promote accuracy and correctness in their dictionary. I just don’t think that rejecting words borrowed into English from other Native American languages is a healthy way to go about it. A better way is to write good descriptive definitions and include nice pictures.<BR>
<BR>
Ron Moe<BR>
SIL International<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT>
<P ALIGN=CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'><HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="2" WIDTH="100%"></SPAN></FONT></FONT>
<P>
<FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><B>From:</B> lexicographylist@yahoogroups.com [<a href="mailto:lexicographylist@yahoogroups.com]">mailto:lexicographylist@yahoogroups.com]</a> <B>On Behalf Of </B>Susan Gehr<BR>
<B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 08, 2008 4:19 PM<BR>
<B>To:</B> lexicographylist@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<B>Subject:</B> [Lexicog] Using moccasin, canoe or other words with other Native etymology<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
</SPAN><FONT SIZE="1"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'>I’m working with an advisory group on the second edition of the Karuk dictionary, and several of the group members have expressed a concern with using words like canoe or moccasin in the definitions of Karuk words. <BR>
<BR>
For example, the word éeyxuvik has the definition ‘type of moccasins worn by the imúsaan in ceremony.’ <BR>
<BR>
They are a soft leather heelless shoe, and it’s possible to write that kind of circumlocution in order to refrain from using words from other tribes. <BR>
<BR>
I think the feeling is that we want avoid using words that conjure up non-Karuk imagery. Is that a legitimate way of handling the concern of the advisory group?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><FONT SIZE="1"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:9.0px'><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>-- <BR>
Susan Gehr<BR>
Karuk Language Program Director<BR>
Karuk Tribe of California<BR>
PO Box 1016, Happy Camp, CA 96039<BR>
(800) 505-2785 x2205 NEW FAX # (530) 493-1658<BR>
<BR>
Karuk Language Resources on the Web - <a href="http://www.karuk.org/">http://www.karuk.org/</a><BR>
Karuk Section of William Bright's Site - <a href="http://ncidc.org/bright/karuk.html">http://ncidc.org/bright/karuk.html</a><BR>
Karuk Dictionary - <a href="http://dictionary.karuk.org/">http://dictionary.karuk.org/</a><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
<span width="1" style="color: white;"/>__._,_.___</span>
<!-- Start Recommendations -->
<!-- End Recommendations -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<img src="http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97476590/grpId=11682781/grpspId=1709195911/msgId=4401/stime=1207712818" width="1" height="1"> <br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<br>
<div style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 77%; border-top: 1px solid #666; padding: 5px 0;" >
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional <br>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJnbWlrODllBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzExNjgyNzgxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwOTE5NTkxMQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNzdG5ncwRzdGltZQMxMjA3NzEyODE4">Change settings via the Web</a> (Yahoo! ID required) <br>
Change settings via email: <a href="mailto:lexicographylist-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest">Switch delivery to Daily Digest</a> | <a href = "mailto:lexicographylist-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Fully Featured">Switch to Fully Featured</a> <br>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWM3am5lBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzExNjgyNzgxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwOTE5NTkxMQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNocGYEc3RpbWUDMTIwNzcxMjgxOA--">
Visit Your Group
</a> |
<a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">
Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use
</a> |
<a href="mailto:lexicographylist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">
Unsubscribe
</a>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<span style="color: white;"/>__,_._,___</span>
</BODY>
</HTML>