From kdshea at ku.edu  Thu Jul  5 19:07:44 2001
From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea)
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:07:44 -0500
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
Message-ID: <THU.5.JUL.2001.140744.0500.>

I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for 'ribs' in Ponca
is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/ as in /athi/
'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I asked him.)

Kathy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Koontz John E" <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 4:34 PM
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)


> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote:
>
> > Bob just e-mailed me that the Kansa and Quapaw cognates don't contain an
> > aspirated consonant, so I'm probably wrong.
>
> So, presumably it is dhitti (in OP).  Note that Dorsey actually has just
> "edh"  + i + t + i, where edh is written cent-sign as usual.  This is
> consistent with either version (dhitti or dhithi), though actually I
> normally assume the latter in such cases.  Fletcher & LaFlesche's "t" is
> also ambiguous.  I have not heard the word pronounced.
>


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:10:48 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:10:48 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141048.0600.>

Having received permission from the principles, I'm posting this exchange
here on Siouan terms for 'bow'.  This is primarily an issue of
historical/etymological and archaeological interest.  My apologies to the
long suffering syntacticians on the list.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:12:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: Robert L. Rankin <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Cc: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net
Subject: Re: bow

...

I've been looking at the bow and wanted to get your input. I've included
Dave in this message just to keep my linguistics in line.

There are two terms for 'bow' in the Algonquian languages. One, which
means 'wood string' --from /PA *me?tekwa:pyi/-- is found in the Great
Lakes Algonquian languages and in Cheyenne and Arapaho. (Interestingly,
it's also the basis for the term 'mulberry tree' in Miami-Illinois and
Shawnee.)

The other term, PA */ahta:pya/ (this is Ives' reconstruction. I think
others have reconstructed this with a glottal stop rather than /h/). I'm
not sure what the /aht-/ means. Dave?) This term is found in
Miami-Illinois, Ojibwe AND the Eastern Algonquian languages. It is found
in the Old Illinois sources and (apart from one small window of contact
opportunity in the form of the Eastern Algonquian Indians who accompanied
La Salle down into the Illinois Country and thus might have taught the
Ojibwe La Salle met at Green Bay and the Illinois Indians that they hung
with on the upper Illinois River) probably is, given its
farflung distribution, precontact.

What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow was
something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian. Strange, since the bow
did not appear, as far as we know, in Illinois until after 400 A.D.
(Klunck mound, I believe) and doesn't seem to be in the Illinois-Indiana
area generally until around 600 AD, way too late for Proto-Algonquian.
(i'm not implying here that folks in Illinois and Indiana at that time
were necessarily Algonquians).

I asked Munson what he knew about the bow and he sent this:

"I don't know if anyone has tried to trace the spread of the bow into
eastern N. Am.  It was present in SW US by first centuries (or
earlier??), and a good guess, I'd think, is that it came across southern
Plains, and if that is correct, then should be earlier in Caddo area than
in Great Lakes and New England."


Another ingredient in this mix is the fact that terms for 'bow' in Siouan
come from Algonquian, which seems to turn what Munson is saying on its
head, and, at least to my peapicking mental powers, seems to imply that
the spread of the bow was north to south--Algonquians generally north of
Siouans. I wonder if the Eskimos had bows prehistorically.

So, what's my question? Or is this just a rant?

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:12:24 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:12:24 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141224.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:19:19 -0500
From: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To: 'Michael Mccafferty ' <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>,
     'Robert L. Rankin ' <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     'Koontz John E ' <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Cc: "'pankihtamwa at earthlink.net '" <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: bow


>There are two terms for 'bow' in the Algonquian languages. One, which
means 'wood string' --from /PA *me?tekwa:pyi/-- is found in the Great
Lakes Algonquian languages and in Cheyenne and Arapaho. (Interestingly,
it's also the basis for the term 'mulberry tree' in Miami-Illinois and
Shawnee.)

>The other term, PA */ahta:pya/ (this is Ives' reconstruction. I think
others have reconstructed this with a glottal stop rather than /h/). I'm
not sure what the /aht-/ means. Dave?) This term is found in
Miami-Illinois, Ojibwe AND the Eastern Algonquian languages.

But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
term, second name or what?


>What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.

I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
reconstructible to PA and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
string", is a compound. Both 'wood' and 'string' are presumably
reconstructible, but that doesn't mean the compound was. It could have
arisen independently many times, since it is descriptive in nature. This is
essentially the argument given by Hockett and others for "fire-water"; both
terms are primitives but 'whiskey' isn't.

>I asked Munson what he knew about the bow and he sent this:
"I don't know if anyone has tried to trace the spread of the bow into
eastern N. Am.  It was present in SW US by first centuries (or
earlier??), and a good guess, I'd think, is that it came across southern
Plains, and if that is correct, then should be earlier in Caddo area
than in Great Lakes and New England."

>Another ingredient in this mix is the fact that terms for 'bow' in
Siouan come from Algonquian, which seems to turn what Munson is saying on
its head, and, at least to my peapicking mental powers, seems to imply that
the spread of the bow was north to south--Algonquians generally north of
Siouans. I wonder if the Eskimos had bows prehistorically. So, what's my
question? Or is this just a rant?

Dunno about the Eskimos. I'd say the borrowing by Siouan from Algonquian is
well-established, originally by John, with only some additional elaboration
from me. And it was apparently borrowed numerous times from several
different Algonquian languages in different places. I look upon it as
basically East to West, but N to S makes just as much sense as far as it
goes. A roughly spiral movement is possible also. I don't know that anyone
has looked at the Caddoan 'bow' terms. Other intermediate families
(Uto-Aztecan, etc.) should also be looked at. I guess that's the next step.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:14:14 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:14:14 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141414.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 08:41:44 -0700
From: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
To: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     Mike McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

...

> But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
> term, second name or what?

What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

>>What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
>>was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.
>
> I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
> reconstructible to PA and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
> string", is a compound.

True, tho I think PA */ahta:pya/ is left unexplained (the */aht-/ there has
no etymology that I can see). That one is the 'bow' word in Eastern
Algonquian, tho outside Eastern it's usually 'bowstring', when found.
Phonologically a lot of languages screw it up in small ways (like Miami
/neehtiaapa/ 'bow'). The poor phonological matchup across the daughter
languages strongly supports the idea that it entered Algonquian after the
languages were already somewhat differentiated.

...

Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those meant
'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

We'd have to see what other families in North America have to say about
this. For instance, Iroquoian? Muskogean?

Dave


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:15:36 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:15:36 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141536.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:11:36 -0600 (MDT)
From: Koontz John E <koontz at spot.colorado.edu>
To: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     Mike McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:
> Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
> 'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those meant
> 'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

Arrows are essentially light throwing spears launched with the aid of a
taut string.  The usual evidence for a transition from throwing spears to
arrows is a reduction in the size of the points recovered, I think.  As
far as I know the usual Siouan terms for 'arrow' are actually 'arrow
head'.

...


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:19:33 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:19:33 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141933.0600.>

Costa, originally:

What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

Corrected to:

Oh yeah -- please fix my typo in the Miami 'bow' word -- it should be
/mihte(h)koopa/~/mihte(h)*k*waapa/. (In addition to the /neehtiaapa/
alternate.)


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:23:20 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:23:20 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142320.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:49:46 -0500
From: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To: 'David Costa ' <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>,
     'John Koontz ' <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     'Mike McCafferty ' <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: RE: bow

>What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

Sorry, Dave, I didn't have your dictionary here at home and was relying on
memory of Dunn/Voegelin's mitaekopa where ae = a-umlaut as usual. Knew it
was something like that.

>Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those
meant 'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

That's standard. 'Dart' or 'spear' is reconstructible to PSi too, but it
presumably referred to atlatl darts. 'To shoot' still has the Mandan cognate
with the meaning 'throw'.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:20:47 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:20:47 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142047.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:22:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
Cc: 'Robert L. Rankin ' <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     'Koontz John E ' <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>,
     "'pankihtamwa at earthlink.net '" <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: bow


On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
> term, second name or what?

mihtekwaapa (also mihtekoopa is attested). same term. animate ending stead
of inanimate.

> >What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
> was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.
>
> I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
> reconstructible to PA

well, ahta:pya seems almost unitary cause i think the aht- is unknown.
:)


> and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
> string", is a compound. Both 'wood' and 'string' are presumably
> reconstructible, but that doesn't mean the compound was. It could have
> arisen independently many times, since it is descriptive in nature. This is
> essentially the argument given by Hockett and others for "fire-water"; both
> terms are primitives but 'whiskey' isn't.
>

yeah, this was munson's thrust, too. i figured that since it occurred in
Eastern Algon. AND way out there in Ojibweland and Miami-Illinoisland that
the term was ancient.

...

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:22:38 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:22:38 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142238.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:25:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

> True, tho I think PA */ahta:pya/ is left unexplained (the */aht-/ there
> ...

it would almost seem to mean 'wood' ...

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 10 04:38:55 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 22:38:55 -0600
Subject: Mississippi Valley Siouan 'bow' Terms
Message-ID: <MON.9.JUL.2001.223855.0600.>

Here are the Mississippi Valley forms.  The Dakotan ones are from Buechel,
and Riggs/Williamson.  The Dhegiha forms are from Dorsey/Swetland, Rankin,
and LaFlesche.  The IO and Winnebago are from Good Tracks and Miner.
Back constructions and analysis are mine except for the suggestion that
Dakotan itazipA is from *mitazipA by renalysis, which is from Rankin (and
Carter?).  The development of the medial cluste rin IO is along general
liens suggested by Rankin.

Teton ita'zipa 'bow', mita'zipa 'my ~'; thitazipe 'his (alienable) bow'
Santee (W) ita'zipe 'bow'; (R) ita'zipa 'bow', mit(h)i'nazipe 'my ~' (t >
n in all persons)

Presumably the present third person is derived by false analogy from an
original form *mitazipA, reanalyzed as a first person possessed form.
Note that the stem does (or did) undergo ablaut, and the e-grade is the
possessed grade, cf. s^uNka ~ thas^uNke.

The t>n shift could be interpreted at suggesting the stem *(m)i(N)t=azipA.
The only gloss for (a)zipA I know is zipe=la 'thin, fine', given in
Buechel.

Omaha-Ponca maN'de 'bow' (cf. also maN'de hi 'spear' < 'bow' + 'stem',
i.e., 'bowstave')
Osage miN'ce 'bow'
Kaw miN'j^e 'bow'
Quapaw maN'tte 'bow'

Note the difference in the root vowel between OP/Quapaw and Osage/Kaw.
The gemination of t is normal in Quapaw for *t in this context.

Ioway-Otoe ma(N)hdu < Pre-IO *maNtku > *maNktu > maNhdu
(cf. also mahdu<th>rudada a game spear with a u-point)

Winnebago maNaNc^gu' < Pre-Wi *maNaN'tku

The forms are supposed all to come from the Algonquian form reconstructed
as *me?tekwaapyi or perhaps only from *me?tekw-a 'wood (animate)' (that
was the form in Aubin, I believe).  In essence, *me?te... alone (with the
final syllable(s) omitted) accounts for the *mi(N)te ~ and *ma(N)te like
forms, while *me?tekw... (with the internal e syncopated) accounts for the
Chiwere and Winnebago *maN(aN)tku version.  Given the variation in
completeness of the form adopted, and the variation in the initial vowel
(aN ~ iN), it's assumed that the borrowing occurred at several different
places, based on different Algonquian souce forms.  The initial m of the
Algonquian forms causes the root vowel to be taken as nasal.

It's not clear why the vowel after kw is omitted, though, if it is the
animate marker it may be handled as a noun-forming affix comparable to the
ablauting/deleting final a ~ e of some Siouan nominal root sets.  (I've
suggested elsewhere that the Siouan suffix may be essentially
demonstrative in origin, based on Greenberg's theory of the origin of
nominalizing and gender marking affixes.)

Loss of the animate suffix is perhaps actually typical of Algonquian loan
in Siouan contexts, cf. MI s^iihs^iikwia 'black rattlesnake' > OP s^e'kki
'rattlesnake'.

JEK


From rankin at ku.edu  Tue Jul 10 19:08:38 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:08:38 -0500
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.140838.0500.>

> I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for
> 'ribs' in Ponca is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/
as in /athi/ 'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I
asked him.)

That's pretty interesting. It would be virtually the only word I know of out
of thousands where the stop correspondences don't seem to match exactly as
expected for the Dheghiha dialects. The only other case I can think of is
'four' which has tt instead of the expected d in Kaw.

Since I can no longer double-check it with another speaker, perhaps you can,
but La Flesche's Osage also signals an aspirate in thitsi.  It's possible I
just transcribed it wrong in Kaw and Quapaw.

bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 10 20:24:22 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:24:22 -0600
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
In-Reply-To: <5823BD992D67D3119F630008C7CF50FC0D462DA8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.142422.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> > I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for
> > 'ribs' in Ponca is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/
> as in /athi/ 'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I
> asked him.)
>
> That's pretty interesting. It would be virtually the only word I know of out
> of thousands where the stop correspondences don't seem to match exactly as
> expected for the Dheghiha dialects. The only other case I can think of is
> 'four' which has tt instead of the expected d in Kaw.

There was a case where I thought I heard OP kkide 'shoot' with aspiration
(khide), but I think that was bad hearing on my part.  Maybe I have this
reversed.  I think there are some anomalies in this set - do Chiwere or
Winnebago have g?

Then there's the little known infamous case of ppahe (not sure on stress)
'hill' vs. Dakotan pa'ha, which has an irregular initial correspondence.
This, along with the restricted distribution of the term, suggests a loan
is involved, but the source is obscure.

Also, as far as the attestation of the form in LaFlesche and Dorsey, like
Buechel, these authorities are generally more reliable with the marked
case than the unmarked, e.g., for them, if a stop is turned (over) or
there's a dot or x under it, it's explicity unaspirated (tense), but
unmarked cases are probably aspirated but not certainly so.  This is the
picture for Omaha-Ponca.  For Osage Dorsey sometimes has a turned h in
front of a tense (preaspirated) stop, and, as I recall it, both Dorsey and
LaFlesche indicate a following s^ (c for Dorsey, sh for LaFlesche) with an
aspirate preceding (i or e).  These are also pretty reliable clues.  In
general, the marked/unmarked case rule changes in details with the Dhegiha
language and the linguist/orthography.  Bob can probably clarify the
situations for the languages other than OP better than I can.  I do know
of some cases where an explicit encoding by Dorsey or LaFlesche is wrong
...

In this case, of course, we don't have to rely on heuristics, because Bob
and Kathy actually heard/hear the words.


From simpsond at email.arizona.edu  Wed Jul 11 01:52:13 2001
From: simpsond at email.arizona.edu (Erik)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:52:13 -0700
Subject: Bows
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.185213.0700.>

I have not noticed any differences between the self-bow (the east coast
type) and the recurved-sinew backed bow that was so common on the plains.
         The recurved-sinew backed bow is supposed to have come down into
the plains  (by Athabascans ?) before any Siouan peoples and would likely
have been adopted there. Does anyone know of any lexical differences between
the two bow types?

erik


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 03:37:31 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:37:31 -0600
Subject: Bows
In-Reply-To: <3B1F829E00014E45@phobos.email.Arizona.EDU>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.213731.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Erik wrote:
> I have not noticed any differences between the self-bow (the east coast
> type) and the recurved-sinew backed bow that was so common on the plains.
>          The recurved-sinew backed bow is supposed to have come down into
> the plains  (by Athabascans ?) before any Siouan peoples and would likely
> have been adopted there. Does anyone know of any lexical differences between
> the two bow types?

Buechel gives t(h)ak(h)aN ita'zipe and t(h)ak(h)iNtazipa (contracted) for
'sinew-backed bow' in eton.  I've parenthesized the aspiration because I'm
assuming it's there, but Buechel doesn't indicate it definitively.  I
can't explain the variation in ablaut grades.

I suspect the conception that bows or sinew-backed bows are northern in
origin might stem from a supposition that they are derived from Asia.  I
don't know if this is born out by dating or not.  To some extent the date
of introduction of bows in the general sense can be deduced from the
presence of smaller projectile points, but I think there may be some
overlap in sizes of points for arrows and throwing spears.  I haven't
stumbled on any survey of the dating of bow technology and I have the
impression that this may not yet have been attempted in archaeological
terms.  I don't know if there is any indicator for sinew-backed bows as
opposed to bows in general.  There seems to be some ethnographical support
for a late spread of bows in North America, but bows were fairly
widespread by the end of the early contact period and I don't know if
there is any survey literature from this approach either. Anyone know any
archaeologists or ethnographers interested in this area?


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 03:53:33 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:53:33 -0600
Subject: Bows
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107102125180.1863-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.215333.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:
> Buechel gives t(h)ak(h)aN ita'zipe and t(h)ak(h)iNtazipa (contracted)
> for 'sinew-backed bow' in *T*eton.  ...

Sorry - the Unversity connection is slow and it's affecting my editing.


From ioway at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 11 04:50:34 2001
From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:50:34 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.225034.0600.>

Two things, a comment and a question..

1. Regarding bows, one thing that Skinner notes (1925) is that there was an Ioway
tradition that the Wolf Clan "spoke a different language" when they met up with
the other clans. This is notable, as the Wolf Clan brought the bow and arrows.
Could the IO Wolf Clan originally have been an Algonquian group? This would
explain a number of things, including some archaeological situations and gray
areas. I would double-check the Skinner reference but all my Ioway stuff is in
storage. I am pretty sure it was in "Traditions of the Iowa Indians" (1925), in
the section on clan stories.

2. Does anyone have a good authoritative reference for Yankton sociology (kinship
and leadership structures)?


--
Lance Michael Foster
Email: ioway at earthlink.net
-------------------------
NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com)
Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org)
Homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway


From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu  Wed Jul 11 13:02:10 2001
From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 08:02:10 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.080210.0500.>

11 July 2001
Aloha All,
I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole. It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.

wibthahoN
uthixide


Mark Awakuni-Swetland, Lecturer
Anthropology/Ethnic Studies-Native American Studies
c/o Department of Anthropology-Geography
University of Nebraska
Bessey Hall 132
Lincoln, NE 68588-0368
Office 402-472-3455
Dept. 402-472-2411
FAX 402-472-9642
mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010711/2e785a74/attachment.html>

From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 17:56:34 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:56:34 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.125634.0500.>

Mark and others,

I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking
about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more
interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems
that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to
this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of
course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has
apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance
chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the
chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply
milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were
copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago
RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for.

Bob


I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the
topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole.
It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010711/bfaae42e/attachment.html>

From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 18:11:36 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:11:36 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.131136.0500.>

> 1. Regarding bows, one thing that Skinner notes (1925) is
> that there was an Ioway tradition that the Wolf Clan "spoke a different
language" when they met up with the other clans. This is notable, as the
Wolf Clan brought the bow and arrows. Could the IO Wolf Clan originally have
been an Algonquian group?

Possibly so. The Ioway-Otoe-Missouria and the Winnebago words for 'bow' seem
to be from a different Algonquian language than the Dakotan or (probably)
Dhegihan terms. The most likely extant candidate is Menomini (which has an
[ae] vowel rather than the more common [i]).

I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
stem-formative vowel. So for some of the languages we are faced with more
than one possible direction of spread. The Ioway term, with its [tk]
cluster, is clearly from Algonquian though.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 19:48:22 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <5823BD992D67D3119F630008C7CF50FC0D462DAF@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.134822.0600.>

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> stem-formative vowel.

Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
the Algonquian sets are.

Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
-a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
*miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
Stoney.

Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.

JEK


From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 21:03:46 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:03:46 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.160346.0500.>

> Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in
> early attempts at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some >
generally resemblant forms?

That's certainly the question to ask. But it's not one I can answer. I don't
think they've gotten a whole lot farther than Wick's "UA Cognate Sets" from
about 1986 in an overall understanding of things. The person to contact
might be John McLaughlin, who is supposedly continuing Wick's comparative
work.

I think Kay Fowler said something about someone having looked at the terms
continent-wide and found look-alikes all over the place. But that doesn't
tell me much, since, the older the source, the more the terms look alike
just because of sloppiness in orthography and wrong assumptions about
phonology.  E.g., using old sources some people have turned wagmu and wathan
(squash) into "cognates".

There is no question in my mind though that the Dakotan, Chiwere-Winnebago
and probably all Dhegiha plus Tutelo 'bow' terms are borrowed from
Algonquian, no matter where bows originated.

Bob


From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu  Thu Jul 12 13:34:57 2001
From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:34:57 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.083457.0500.>

12 July 2001
Bob:
Yes, a common (although not exclusive) theme running through these situations seems to be the role of self-serving outsiders. I have not been able to sort out the exact beginning or catalyst for the example I posted. However, it clearly has one or more non-community/non-Tribal-type folks sitting in the background. 

I posed several questions to the community member "writer" of the draft resolution about such things as unenforcability of the proposed law, academic cooling towards the community, disfranchisement of unenrolled members, the divisive impact it would have on the community, and the potential for extreme political manipulation of the language. The responses given made it clear that the person either 1) just had not thought out much of the details of the possible impact of the resolution, or 2) the "writer" was just fronting something instigated elsewhere. Whatever the case, it will require some more investigation on my part.

best
uthixide
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Rankin, Robert L <rankin at ku.edu>
    To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu' <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
    Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:56 PM
    Subject: RE: language as property, follow-up
    
    
    Mark and others,
     
    I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for. 
     
    Bob
    
        I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole. It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010712/185654bd/attachment.html>

From rankin at ku.edu  Thu Jul 12 17:44:35 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:44:35 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.124435.0500.>


Mark,

Yeah, I know of several cases of this sort ot thing. Actually, as you no
doubt know, this is an old story in Americanist linguistics, going back a
century or more.  A lot of the Berkeley linguists especially began to think
of languages as "their" languages.  It was both selfish and paternalistic.
I've always lectured my students against such proprietary thoughts; it takes
a whole team of good linguists to document a language thoroughly. I don't
think that one person working alone could ever do it justice.

There are amusing stories of the infamous John P. Harrington hiding his
notes away in peoples attics so that Franz Boas couldn't get his hands on
them.  If you have never read  the book "Encounter with an Angry God", you
really ought to.  It is about Harrington (a very talented linguist, but
paranoid) written by his ex-wife, Carobeth Laird.

Nowadays, of course, the proprietary notions all come under the guise of
"political correctness", but it sure smells like the same old dead rat to
me. :-)

By the way, maybe I should clarify my position.  I think things like
stories, songs, particular prayers or rituals, etc. can certainly be
intellectual property (although I expect it would be difficult to determine
whose a lot of the time).  There've been many cases where such things have
been ripped off, but I know that among Dhegiha speakers many songs are
property of a particular family or clan.  I certainly have no argument with
that, but I'm glad I don't have to sort it all out!

Sounds to me like you've picked a really interesting and current topic.
I'll look forward to reading it sometime when you've finished.

Best,

Bob



Bob:
Yes, a common (although not exclusive) theme running through these
situations seems to be the role of self-serving outsiders. I have not been
able to sort out the exact beginning or catalyst for the example I posted.
However, it clearly has one or more non-community/non-Tribal-type folks
sitting in the background.

I posed several questions to the community member "writer" of the draft
resolution about such things as unenforcability of the proposed law,
academic cooling towards the community, disfranchisement of unenrolled
members, the divisive impact it would have on the community, and the
potential for extreme political manipulation of the language. The responses
given made it clear that the person either 1) just had not thought out much
of the details of the possible impact of the resolution, or 2) the "writer"
was just fronting something instigated elsewhere. Whatever the case, it will
require some more investigation on my part.

best
uthixide

-----Original Message-----
From: Rankin, Robert L < rankin at ku.edu <mailto:rankin at ku.edu> >
To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu' <mailto:'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'>  <
siouan at lists.colorado.edu <mailto:siouan at lists.colorado.edu> >
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:56 PM
Subject: RE: language as property, follow-up


Mark and others,

I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking
about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more
interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems
that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to
this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of
course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has
apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance
chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the
chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply
milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were
copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago
RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for.

Bob


I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the
topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole.
It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010712/2db080f3/attachment.html>

From ioway at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 12 18:59:11 2001
From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:59:11 -0600
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.125911.0600.>

"Rankin, Robert L" wrote:

> Yeah, I know of several cases of this sort ot thing. Actually, as you
> no doubt know, this is an old story in Americanist linguistics, going
> back a century or more.  A lot of the Berkeley linguists especially
> began to think of languages as "their" languages.  It was both selfish
> and paternalistic.  I've always lectured my students against such
> proprietary thoughts; it takes a whole team of good linguists to
> document a language thoroughly. I don't think that one person working
> alone could ever do it justice.

I totally agree.... for "secret knowledge" the tribes had their
"shaman's language." Language must live and grow to live and grow... One
person cannot do the work.. plus it is always good to have a difference
in opinion because that is how new directions and corrections of
inaccuracies are made. I am always very happy to have more people
working with Chiwere, as many as possible.... professional and
avocational, tribal and nontribal... I only stress the necessity to
share and compare data/findings and truthfulness in how one protrays
themselves as a linguist, tribal, nontribal whatever.. integrity in
language work is reflected by the integrity of the language worker..
integrity reflects integrity.

I am perhaps most frustrated by the lack of published material that I
can point interested tribal folks to.. Jimm's work is good and I look
forward to his final versions.. I look forward to Louann's work in a
published and accessible form... I would like to see much more
available.. perhaps re-analysis of Marsh's work and other texts...
perhaps CD-ROMs of elders' speaking the language, or songs. There are so
many interested in our membership, and there is not a lot I can point
them to.

I have several times offered to join in such collaborative efforts with
other Chiwere students.. I make the offer again, in a spirit of
collegiality, collaboration and sharing, for the good of the language,
the people, and our ancestors who have passed on. I will continue to
make such offers until I myself have gone from this world.. otherwise
how can I face those who will meet me there, who may say, "Why did you
stop trying?"

I would suggest linguists always remember that accessibility to their
work by tribal members at least should be INTEGRAL to any study. Not
just at some magical future publication date, but an ongoing cycle
DURING work... we all pass on someday, and many have gone on sometimes
before their time, and the people and the language suffer for it. I
would ask all people on this list to consider this request.. to make
ongoing research accessible to the people of the communities.


--
Lance Michael Foster
Email: ioway at earthlink.net
-------------------------
NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com)
Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org)
Homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway


From BARudes at aol.com  Sat Jul 14 17:00:37 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:00:37 EDT
Subject: Iroquoian bows
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.130037.EDT.>

Iroquoian words for bow

(Note: except where noted, accent falls on the second to the last vowel.
Accent placement in Huron, Laurentian and Nottoway is unknown.  Cherokee has
pitch accents on each vowel.)

Set 1

Proto-Lake Iroquoian    *a?eN:na?  pole, stick; bow
Cayuga                            a?eN:na?  pole, stick
Laurentian                       Ahena      bow
Mohawk                          a?vN:na?  bow
Oneida                             a?vNna:    bow (accent on last vowel)
Onondaga                        a?eN:na?  bow
Seneca                          wa?eN:noN?  bow, u?eN:noN? pole, stick (no
accent on either word)
Wyandot                          a?eN:nda?   bow

Set 2

Proto-Iroquoian                  *a?ta?  wood, stick
Cherokee                              ada     wood, stick
Proto-Northern Iroquoian  *a?ta?   bow
Laurentian                            Cacta   bow
Nottoway                             ata       bow
Seneca                            kaeo?ta?   gun (accent on first vowel)
Tuscarora                             a?neh   bow; gun
Wyandot                              a?ta?    bow

Other

Cayuga                           atota:?  bow
Huron                             anda     bow (possibly related to set 1)
Cherokee                       gahlja?di bow

The Catawba word for bow, ic^ika:, is a loan word from a Muskogean language,
compare Creek icca-kotaksi bow (lit. gun-crooked [Creek data from Karen
Booker]).

Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
words for bow submitted previously to the list.

Blair


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 14 22:14:51 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:14:51 -0600
Subject: Siouan & Caddoan Conference (fwd)
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.161451.0600.>

A brief report on the Siouan and Caddoan Conference, 2001, Chicago.

I'd like to thank John Boyle and the CLS for hosting (and overfeeding) us!
Next year in, not Jerusalem, but South Dakota.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:24:13 -0600
From: John P. Boyle <jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Re: Siouan & Caddoan Conference

John P. Boyle
________________
21st Annual Siouan and Caddoan Languages Conference
Ida Noyes Hall
June 15 - 16, 2001

Friday, June 15th

11:30 - Registration and Welcome Lunch

12:30 - John P. Boyle (University of Chicago) Cliticization verses
Inflection: Another look at the Hidatsa Mood Markers

1:00 - Randolph Graczyk (St. Charles Mission) The Crow and Hidatsa
Lexicons: A Comparison  [historical phonology and cognates]

1:30 - Hartwell Francis and Armik Mirzayan (University of Colorado, Boulder
and the Center for the Study of Indigenous Languages) Chiwere Word Classes

2:00 - Coffee

2:30 - Paul Kroeber (Indiana University, Bloomington) Morphological
ordering in Lakhota Adverbials

3:00 - Robert Rankin (University of Kansas) On Dakotan Syllable-Final and
Cluster Phonology

3:30 - Coffee

4:00 - Blair A. Rudes (University of North Carolina at Charlotte) The
Historical Significance of John Buck's "Tutelo" Vocabulary [Catawba forms
recorded in the north]

4:30 - Ted Grimm (Wichita, Kansas) TBA [The n-Phoneme in Siouan
Languages] [unable to attend]

=====

Saturday, June 16th

9:30 - Coffee and bagels

10:00 - Wendy Branwell (Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas) A
Wierzbickan Treatment of Human Emotion Words in the Dhegiha Languages: Some
Preliminary Considerations [typology of emotion terminology]

10:30 - Kathleen Shea (University of Kansas), Alice J. Anderton (Executive
Director, Intertribal Wordpath Society), Henry A. Lieb (Ponca language
teacher at Frontier High School, Red Rock, OK), Parrish Williams (Ponca
Elder and Native American Church leader) "Ponca Culture in Our Own Words":
A Progress Report

11:00 - Ardis Eschenberg (State University of New York, Buffalo) Omaha
Article Mismatches [=> The quotative ama in Omaha narative]

11:30 - John Koontz (University of Colorado, Boulder) Omaha-Ponca Verbs of
Motion [including new form noticed in Shea's handout ...]

12:00 - 1:30 Lunch

1:30 - Andreas Muehldorfer (University of Colorado at Boulder/University of
Cologne) Wichita System of Reference

2:00 - David S. Rood (University of Colorado, Boulder) The Wichita
Dictionary Project

2:30 - John P. Boyle (University of Chicago) The Siouan Languages Bibliography

3:00 - Business and Next Year

5:00 - Siouan and Caddoan Conference Barbecue Party


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 14 23:00:02 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 17:00:02 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.170002.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 06:56:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:
> It occurs to me to wonder how regular the Algonquian sets are.

They're super regular and super transparent.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 04:53:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:53:46 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12.f7e05b8.2881d4b5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.225346.0600.>

On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:
> Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
> words for bow submitted previously to the list.

I also notice a resemblance to the *wata PUA bow word.  What is the status
of initial labials like w or m in PI?


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 05:10:38 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:10:38 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12.f7e05b8.2881d4b5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.231038.0600.>

On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:
> Iroquoian words for bow
> Set 1
> Proto-Lake Iroquoian    *a?eN:na?  pole, stick; bow
>
> Other
> Huron                             anda     bow (possibly related to set 1)
>
> Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
> words for bow submitted previously to the list.

Actually, the Huron anda form is pretty close to the Algonquian *me?tekw-a
forms, as they come out in Siouan, cf. OP maNde, except, again, for the
missing initial labial.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 05:38:29 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:38:29 -0600
Subject: Bow Dating
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.233829.0600.>

Per Melvin L. Fowler & Robert L. Hall, 1978, 'Late Prehistory of the
Illinois Area' in HBNAI 15, "The bow and arrow was introduced into
Illinois by A.D. 700 and replced the atlatl and throwing spear as a
principle weapon."  (560a) "The earliest radiocarbon evidence in Illinois
for the bow and arrow comes from Klunk Mound 8 in Calhoun County with a
date of A.D. 600 +/- 110 (M-1233; Crane & Griffin 1964:6) and from the
Scovill site with its date of A.D. 450 +/- 120.  Wray & McNeish 1961
suggested that "The use of the bow and arrow may have made available new
sources of food and new methods of warfare which helped break up the old
[Hopewellian] order."  (561a)

Unfortunately, this sort of summary comment can get rapidly out of date.


From BARudes at aol.com  Sun Jul 15 14:26:19 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:26:19 EDT
Subject: Iroquoian bows
Message-ID: <SUN.15.JUL.2001.102619.EDT.>

Initial /m/ exists only in Wyandot, where it is the reflex of a *w before a
nasal vowel.  Initial *w before a noun root is the third person singular
neuter agent prefix (it).  It comes from Proto-Iroquoian *w.  Initial *w is
dropped in Huron and in Wyandot (unless nasalized to /m/), and in Cherokee.
Huron, Wyandot and Cherokee develop new cases of initial /w/ from the
fricativization of the Proto-Iroquoian labiovelar *kw.

Blair


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 20:55:55 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:55:55 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12b.16d5a61.2883020b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.15.JUL.2001.145555.0600.>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:

> Initial /m/ exists only in Wyandot, where it is the reflex of a *w before a
> nasal vowel.  Initial *w before a noun root is the third person singular
> neuter agent prefix (it).  It comes from Proto-Iroquoian *w.  Initial *w is
> dropped in Huron and in Wyandot (unless nasalized to /m/), and in Cherokee.
> Huron, Wyandot and Cherokee develop new cases of initial /w/ from the
> fricativization of the Proto-Iroquoian labiovelar *kw.

Thanks, Blair!

So, *w is interpretable as the 3rd singular neuter agent.  Would
*w-a?ta?(-...)  be 'it is wood, a stick, a bow', etc.?  Or proceding to
implications, would it be possible to suspect *wa?ta? instead of *a?ta?,
especially given the frequency of things like |[wata]| in the sense of
'bow'?

What's puzzling me here is the extent to which |[wata]| shaped things turn
up in the sense 'bow', but the correspondences are regular (Algonquian,
Iroquoian, Uto-Aztecan?, not Siouan) and, where the correspondences are
regular, intepretations like wood, pole, stick are also feasible.  I'm
pretty sure this isn't, say, a Proto-Amerind word in any of these senses.
It could be a series of coincidences, but I also doubt that.  At least it
seems worthwhile proceding on the presumption that it is not.

In regard to the problem of the underlying sense of 'pole, stick', notice
that Omaha-Ponca has maN'dehi 'spear', transparently a compound 'bowstave'
< 'bow' + 'stick, stem, trunk, bone', where clearly the order of
derivation of the terms is the reverse of the historical introduction of
the things named.  (The contradictory orders are an observation from
Michael McCafferty.)  Perhaps the sense of 'pole' > 'stick' is actually a
common secondary derivation from 'bow' instead of the original sense.

The other puzzling thing here is the distribution of |[wata]|-like forms,
currently Uto-Aztecan (not considered a borrowing), Siouan (three or four
forms, all considered borrowings), Algonquian (two forms, both vaguely
resemblant, neither considered borrowings), and Iroquoian (two forms plus
some change, one form and some of the change resemblant, the others not,
none considered borrowings).  The last three families are a
not-unreasonable continuum for a widespread loan, which, quite frankly,
seems not unlikely as the explanation for the resemblances, attested
regularities aside, but the first, UA, seems to require some path of
transmission not as yet noticed, most likely not, say, direct transmission
from Algonquian or Siouan to Numic.

It would definitely be interesting to know any further extent of
|[wata]|-like forms for 'bow' (or 'stick, pole'), and any reflections on
regularities, anomalies, and distributions in the terms in particular
languages or language families.  The north (Athabascan?) and the west
coast would seem profitable places to look.  It would also be interesting
to know of any archaeological surveys on bow technology.

JEK


From ird at blueridge.net  Mon Jul 16 16:18:49 2001
From: ird at blueridge.net (ird)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:18:49 -0400
Subject: Bow Dating Summary
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.121849.0400.IRD@BLUERIDGE.NET>

In the Ohio Archaeologist Vol. 43, No. 2 (Spring, 1993) is a detailed article by Leland Patterson, "Current Data on Early Use of the Bow and Arrow in Southern North America."  It is reprinted from La Tierra, Quarterly Journal of the Southern Texas Archaeological Association.  The date for that isn't given, but Patterson's bibliography covers 1991.  If these journals are hard to get and there's interest, I'll summarize with a quote or two.

Incidentally, I doubt if Catawba speakers received either their first bows or better bows from the Creeks, or had any particular reason to borrow a Creek word at what would have had to be a rather late time period.  Somewhere I found a much closer cognate with a maverick Algonquian language, and will add it to our collection when I re-find my notes on it.

Irene


From BARudes at aol.com  Mon Jul 16 16:40:13 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:40:13 EDT
Subject: Fwd: Bow Dating Summary
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.124013.EDT.>


-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: BARudes at aol.com
Subject: Re: Bow Dating Summary
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:38:48 EDT
Size: 1074
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010716/a3ef0399/attachment.mht>

From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 17 00:00:29 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:00:29 -0600
Subject: Athabascan 'bow'
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.180029.0600.>

Courtesy of Jeff Leer, suggested by Giulia Oliverio.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:17:40 -0800
From: Jeff Leer <jleer at mosquitonet.com>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RE: (none) (fwd)

Hi John,

We don't have a plausible match in AET. PA reconstructs more or less as
follows, with an extremely irregular onset in the first (prefix) consonant:
*k'[superscript y]i[nasal][long][barred l]-t[schwa][engma][superscript
y][glottal]. The second syllable is the stem, meaning "handle", and the
meaning of the prefix is unknown. In place of the onset *k'[superscript y]
we also find *[glottal stop], *ts', and very rarely also *t[s hachek]'.
Tlingit uses saGs 'yew', and Eyak has Xahd-[barred l], lit. 'pull-INSTR.N'.

Best,
Jeff


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 17 05:39:45 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:39:45 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.233945.0600.>

It occurs to me to mention for the benefit of the IO scholars out there
that there are some possible IO song texts embedded in Fletcher &
LaFlesche.  An example would be p. 465:

WakoN'da thani ga the ke  (repeat three times)
Eha thani hiNga we tho he thoe

(repeat whole twice)

This is rendered something like:

Wakonda we offer this tobacco.
Now we are smoking it.

The th (edh) is presumably /r/.  Thani is not the usual word for tobacco
in OP, where it would be nini.  I was particular struck by the final
k[h]e, which F&LaF interpret as the 'horizontally extended' article,
though it is also the declarative.  But except for words that are more or
less invariant all across Mississippi Valley Siouan this text gives F&LaF
considerable difficulty.

How about:

WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.

Now is it IO?

There's an OP verb gadhe 'to donate' (a g-stem), which may figure in "ka
re".

There are also a fair number of IO names in the Dorsey texts, and some
songs explicitly identified as IO.

There is an Omaha-Ponca exclamation hiNda(khe) which occurs frequently in
the Dorsey texts glossed as 'let's see'.  I'm always thought it was
remarkably close to IO 'we see (DECL)', where the verb form should be
haNda < hiN + a...da.  OP would have aNdaNbE < aN + daNbE, with a totally
different stem for 'to see'.

There is also a point in the story of Haxige (in Dorsey 1890) that seems
to involve some language humor at the expense of IO speakers, though it
could also simply be a left over from an IO telling of the story.  I
suspect humor, however.  Haxige's brother is killed by the Watermonsters.
He tries to kill the children of the Watermonsters, but only wounds them.
Learning that Buzzard is going to doctor them, he kills Buzzard and goes
himself, disguised as Buzzard.  He shoos everyone out and starts cutting
up the children and boiling them.  The Watermonsters get suspicious and
send the grass-snake to spy on him.  He catches the snake and to gag him
he stuffs boiled watermonster strips down his throat.  The snake returns
to the Watermonsters to report what's happening and can only mutter
"Haxuka! Haxuka!"  Nobody can figure this out at first, but then someone
exclaims "Wait!  He's got something stuck in his throat!  Pull it out!"
I strongly suspect that Haxuka (Haxuga) is IO for Haxige.

JEK


From bi1 at soas.ac.uk  Tue Jul 17 14:28:48 2001
From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:28:48 GMT
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107111335430.21447-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.142848.GMT.>

I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
likely form?  I had thought, purely impressionistically,  that it had
something to do with yajipa 'sting, prick'.  What about 'spear'
wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from something like hu
'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk etymology.  Similarly
with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide', chaN
'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.  This takes us back
to the discussion earlier this year about the seeming morphological
transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are the spear and
shield words thought to be borrowings?

Bruce at .Date sent:      	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600 (MDT)
Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
From:           	Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To:             	<siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Subject:        	RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> stem-formative vowel.

Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
the Algonquian sets are.

Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
-a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
*miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
Stoney.

Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.

JEK

Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS


From simpsond at email.arizona.edu  Tue Jul 17 17:32:52 2001
From: simpsond at email.arizona.edu (Erik)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:32:52 -0700
Subject: Athabascan 'bow'
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107161758510.14324-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.103252.0700.>

Navajo has 'aLti' and Western Apache has 'iLti'.


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Jul 17 17:32:21 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:32:21 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <148A14B6898@soas.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.123221.0500.>

Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.

Michael McCafferty

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> likely form?  I had thought, purely impressionistically,  that it had
> something to do with yajipa 'sting, prick'.  What about 'spear'
> wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from something like hu
> 'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk etymology.  Similarly
> with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide', chaN
> 'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.  This takes us back
> to the discussion earlier this year about the seeming morphological
> transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are the spear and
> shield words thought to be borrowings?
>
> Bruce at .Date sent:      	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600 (MDT)
> Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> From:           	Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
> To:             	<siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
> Subject:        	RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
>
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> > I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> > mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> > the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> > stem-formative vowel.
>
> Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
> at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
> forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
> the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
> we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
> accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
> the Algonquian sets are.
>
> Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
> -a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
> *miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
> understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
> in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
> Stoney.
>
> Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.
>
> JEK
>
> Dr. Bruce Ingham
> Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
> SOAS
>
>


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 18 02:39:16 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:39:16 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1010717123135.2890C-100000@ariel.ucs.indiana.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.203916.0600.>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Michael Mccafferty wrote:
> Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:
> > I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> > Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> > likely form?

I wasn't quite sure what "this" referred to.  I think Bruce is asking
what language Bob Rankin et al. (CSD group) think might have led to how
much of itazipA.  [Look, Catherine, a double quesiton!]

JEK


From shanwest at uvic.ca  Wed Jul 18 03:05:45 2001
From: shanwest at uvic.ca (Shannon West)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:05:45 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107172036470.19304-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.200545.0700.>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of Koontz John E
> Sent: July 17, 2001 7:39 PM
> To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
>
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Michael Mccafferty wrote:
> > Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:
> > > I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for
> Itazipa 'bow'.
> > > Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> > > likely form?
>
> I wasn't quite sure what "this" referred to.  I think Bruce is asking
> what language Bob Rankin et al. (CSD group) think might have led to how
> much of itazipA.  [Look, Catherine, a double quesiton!]

LOL.  And I read 'form' as 'forum'.  And yes, that I what I thought Bruce
was asking too.

Shannon


From jggoodtracks at juno.com  Fri Jul 20 20:33:33 2001
From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks)
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 15:33:33 -0500
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <FRI.20.JUL.2001.153333.0500.>

John!
I'm just now getting to reply to EM.  My modum was dead.  I suspect it is
the result of an electrical storm, that also wiped out my VCR & answering
machine.  One of the local Ioway families here, who has some expertise
with computers, installed a new, more rapid modem.  He said that
electrical storms can access the PC via the telephone lines, even when
the PC is turned off.  I didn't know that!

Wibtha hon! ...for the information below.  I cannot speak for Louanna (in
Mexico) and Jill (relocating to ??; EM voided), or anyone else, but I
appreciate you pointing out the selection (p.465: Sacred Pipe Dance
Tobacco Filling Song).  I am not surprised as some years ago, I found an
IO Wekan (story) song embedded in an otherwise OP hand written document.
It was interesting as an example of altering (if that's the right term)
of the oral literature being shared at the turn of the century, and
narrated in contemporary times (1970's) upon my request, and gift of
tobacco.

The story was from Turtle Goes On The Warpath.  I recognized the song and
melody immediately, as we (I and LilaW together) recorded it from an
80+yoa OM elder married to an Oklahoma Ioway elder.  I say this as the
only story songs I/ we got, were from Okla Ioways or OM's married to an
Okla-I.  The taped song appears on p.51 (Bk I: IO lang.; 1977) as "Ketan
Xanje" (Big Turtle [Song] or Big Snapping Turtle [song]).  It was written
as sung, as:

Ketan Xanje daduge.   He-e yo, he-yo, hi-ye-e-e (X3)
Ketan Xanje arastawi. He-e yo, he-yo, hi-ye-e-e.

Big Turtle bites off a piece.	[radage = bite off s.t.]
You see the Big Turtle.

The more accurate (recovered) version, which incorporates the story plot
was given as:
(Note:  The words were written in Dorsey orthography).

Ketan Xanye waje gu hi, anye ke.
Isa naNGa hie je guhe.	

Big Turtle is coming back from touching (the foe,  i.e. counting coup).
You said (that) this (one) is coming back.

[As per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards:
[Ketan qanye watce Kuhe (anye ke).  ica - nanya hie tce Ku he]

[OP version as per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards; "T" is
upside down; "$" is a "c" with line thru it].
[KeTanyga wate agi-biama.  ecai $an e teagii ha].

My manuscript page (copy) says the "Tciwere" version was rendered by
Sanssouci.  Further, it says that "Frank LaFlesche reads "wa't^e" for
"wa'te", but doesn't understand use of last clause "e te agii ha"."
The song doubtlessly was rendered from Mary Gale LaF.  My MS must be a
copy of the hand written notes from DOR.  At the top, on left hand column
is written "p.257", followed by the Turtle melody written out onto a
musical scale, followed by the notation = "p.269", then "257.4. words of
song of Iowa origin with Omaha pronunciation."
The page has notations of other referenced pages with other sample
sentences in both IOM & OP, that seem to be in refernce to a story
adventure of the Rabbit.

Perhaps, John or Bob will recognize this manuscript page, that may be
from DOR or even Marsh, although I doubt it.

Meanwhile, "ranyi ka re ke (thani ga the ke)", may be = wagiruthe
(receive s.t. from another).  And usually, " ranyi hinrap^owi = (we are
smoking tobacco)".  So then, that is not quite a match for the 2nd
phrase.  I will have to work on that one.

John, if you come across any other songs/ names, do let me know the
location (pp.) or send it EM.  Unfortunately, I donot have a copy of
DOR's OP texts.
I have a question, namely, how might one take the musical notation in
Fletcher &LaFlesh, to render it into a mellody.  Once, I had a piano
teacher do a rendition on piano of such an Otoe transcription.  It was
better than nothing, but still left much to be desired.

And yes, I am aware of the "good natured" joking by the Poncas in past
times.  They said the OM (language) sounded like they had something in
their mouths while talking, and the Pawnees talked like chickens.
Jimm


On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:39:45 -0600 (MDT) Koontz John E
<John.Koontz at colorado.edu> writes:
> It occurs to me to mention for the benefit of the IO scholars out
> there
> that there are some possible IO song texts embedded in Fletcher &
> LaFlesche.  An example would be p. 465:
>
> WakoN'da thani ga the ke  (repeat three times)
> Eha thani hiNga we tho he thoe
>
> (repeat whole twice)
>
> This is rendered something like:
>
> Wakonda we offer this tobacco.
> Now we are smoking it.
>
> The th (edh) is presumably /r/.  Thani is not the usual word for
> tobacco
> in OP, where it would be nini.  I was particular struck by the final
> k[h]e, which F&LaF interpret as the 'horizontally extended' article,
> though it is also the declarative.  But except for words that are
> more or
> less invariant all across Mississippi Valley Siouan this text gives
> F&LaF
> considerable difficulty.
>
> How about:
>
> WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
> Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.
>
> Now is it IO?
>
> There's an OP verb gadhe 'to donate' (a g-stem), which may figure in
> "ka
> re".
>
> There are also a fair number of IO names in the Dorsey texts, and
> some
> songs explicitly identified as IO.
>
> There is an Omaha-Ponca exclamation hiNda(khe) which occurs
> frequently in
> the Dorsey texts glossed as 'let's see'.  I'm always thought it was
> remarkably close to IO 'we see (DECL)', where the verb form should
> be
> haNda < hiN + a...da.  OP would have aNdaNbE < aN + daNbE, with a
> totally
> different stem for 'to see'.
>
> There is also a point in the story of Haxige (in Dorsey 1890) that
> seems
> to involve some language humor at the expense of IO speakers, though
> it
> could also simply be a left over from an IO telling of the story.  I
> suspect humor, however.  Haxige's brother is killed by the
> Watermonsters.
> He tries to kill the children of the Watermonsters, but only wounds
> them.
> Learning that Buzzard is going to doctor them, he kills Buzzard and
> goes
> himself, disguised as Buzzard.  He shoos everyone out and starts
> cutting
> up the children and boiling them.  The Watermonsters get suspicious
> and
> send the grass-snake to spy on him.  He catches the snake and to gag
> him
> he stuffs boiled watermonster strips down his throat.  The snake
> returns
> to the Watermonsters to report what's happening and can only mutter
> "Haxuka! Haxuka!"  Nobody can figure this out at first, but then
> someone
> exclaims "Wait!  He's got something stuck in his throat!  Pull it
> out!"
> I strongly suspect that Haxuka (Haxuga) is IO for Haxige.
>
> JEK
>


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 02:23:17 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 20:23:17 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <20010720.154838.-508157.4.jggoodtracks@juno.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.202317.0600.>

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Jimm G GoodTracks wrote:
> He said that electrical storms can access the PC via the telephone
> lines, even when the PC is turned off.  I didn't know that!

I learned it from Bob Rankin who learned it the hard way.  And I've also
had a modem zapped, presumably in this way.  I could actually see the
damage.  Fortunately my computer was OK.  It's a good idea to use a surge
protector that lets you run the phone connection through it.  That's also
a good idea with cable connections for TVs.

> The story was from Turtle Goes On The Warpath.  I recognized the song and
> melody immediately, as we (I and LilaW together) recorded it from an
> 80+yoa OM elder married to an Oklahoma Ioway elder.  ...

> Perhaps, John or Bob will recognize this manuscript page, that may be
> from DOR or even Marsh, although I doubt it.

I do!  The ms copy you saw seems to represent exactly the printed version
in the Dorsey texts (1890:257).

===

Ke'-taN QaN'-ye wa'-te ku'-he ca'-nan~-ga' hi'-e tce'-e go',
tce'-e go'.

[I've rendered things a they were, using sequences like n~ for enye or c/
for cent-sign.  I've treated turned letters as underdotted.  JEK]

The notes (p. 269) say:

The words in the text are of Tciwere (Iowa) origin, but are given as
prononed by the Omahas.  The correct Tciwere version, according to
Sanssouci, is:

> [As per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards:
> [Ketan qanye watce Kuhe (anye ke).  ica - nanya hie tce Ku he]
>

K.etaN QaNye watce k.u he (anye ke) ica'-nan~a hi'e tce k.u he

[The printed version has aNy:  a-raised n-y the first time.  JEK]

[The basic changes are:  using dotted letters - unaspirated in this case -
where the previous version uses aspirates.  Restoration of affrication in
wa'-te => wa'-tce.  Restoration of anye ke (>) + the declarative.
Correction of ca-nan~ga to ica'nan~a 'you said' - the source had trouble
with the prefix i of 'to say' and with n~.  Replacement of tce-e go
(repeated) by tce k.u he.  I believe the verb is gu'he and the he was lost
in the OP context.  JEK]

answering to the Dhegiha

> [OP version as per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards;
"T" is
> upside down; "$" is a "c" with line thru it].
> [KeTanyga wate agi-biama.  ecai $an e teagii ha].
>

K.et.an~ga wa'te agi'-biama' ecai' c/aN e te' agi'i ha

"'The Big Turtle is coming back from touching the foe, they say' you say.
'He is coming back from touching.'"

Frank La Fleche reads wa't`e [wa't?e] for wa'te [wa'the] but he does not
understand the use of the last clause, e te agii ha.

===

The OP seems to be:

kkettaNga           wa'the         agi'=bi=ama
big turtle          he struck them he came back QUOTE
(snapping turtle?)


es^a=i=dhaN
you said EVID?

e'  the       agi          ha
him he struck he came back DECL

Ha is the male declarative, which today would be hau.

> My manuscript page (copy) says the "Tciwere" version was rendered by
> Sanssouci.  Further, it says that "Frank LaFlesche reads "wa't^e" for
> "wa'te", but doesn't understand use of last clause "e te agii ha"."

Exactly as in the printed version.

I think the problem may be that LaFlesche didn't recognize the verb /the/
(or /athe/?), or maybe it would be /(a)tte/ or even /(a)te/, which would
seem to correspond to the IO je (or c^he?) and in the context seems to
mean 'to strike, touch' in the sense of a counting a coup.  I don't
recognize it off hand.

The points of view are somewhat puzzling, too, since there's a quotative
in a 'you said' quotation and then a simple declaration to the same effect
(in obviative form).

> The song doubtlessly was rendered from Mary Gale LaF.  My MS must be a
> copy of the hand written notes from DOR.  At the top, on left hand column
> is written "p.257", followed by the Turtle melody written out onto a
> musical scale, followed by the notation = "p.269", then "257.4. words of
> song of Iowa origin with Omaha pronunciation."

This is confirmed, except perhaps as to Mary Gale LaFlesche.  I suspect
there were a lot of IO contacts in the LaFlesche family.  Joseph may have
spoken some IO, too.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 02:53:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 20:53:46 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <20010720.154838.-508157.4.jggoodtracks@juno.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.205346.0600.>

> > WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
> > Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Jimm G GoodTracks wrote:
> Meanwhile, "ranyi ka re ke (thani ga the ke)", may be = wagiruthe
> (receive s.t. from another).  And usually, " ranyi hinrap^owi = (we are
> smoking tobacco)".  So then, that is not quite a match for the 2nd
> phrase.  I will have to work on that one.

The loss of ny in ranyi is to be expected and I understand that ny is
pretty much in complementary distribution with n, ny occurring before
front vowels.

Otherwise, maybe the song is just more or less Omaha-ized, like the Big
Turtle one?  For gadhe see the LaFlesche Osage dictionary, p. 257b
(popular page number!) under 'donate'.  I've looked in your dictionary and
this doesn't seem to have a cognate in IO.

The hiNga might be hiN=nya 'they smoke' from hiN 'to smoke'.  Recall that
ny got converted to Ng in the Big Turtle song after a nasal vowel.  But
the we might also be the =wi plural.  I'm not sure how much of we ro he
roe to take as words and how much as vocables.  This is a point on which
I've been baffled ever since I first tried to make any sense of the songs
in Fletcher & LaFlesche.

> I have a question, namely, how might one take the musical notation in
> Fletcher &LaFlesh, to render it into a mellody.  Once, I had a piano
> teacher do a rendition on piano of such an Otoe transcription.  It was
> better than nothing, but still left much to be desired.

I think we're stuck with it.  It's all there is, and if it doesn't match
what is preserved today, there's not much we can do about it. If there was
anything out of the ordinary in the intervals or timing, I expect it got
lost.  I have the impression that no really serious modern anthroplogical
musicology has been done for Siouan groups.  There's been some song
collecting and some attention to translations of songs, but nothing much
on the musical systems.  On the bright side, there are some old recordings
and I suspect the tunes have been better preserved than the lyrics in some
cases.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 05:12:15 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:12:15 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.231215.0600.>

Almost got caught by Bruce again, but noticed in time that this hadn't
gone to the list!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:59:02 -0600 (MDT)
From: Koontz John E <koontz at spot.colorado.edu>
To: Bruce Ingham <bi1 at soas.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> likely form?

I hope Bob will reply on this, because this is something he and the CSD
editors noticed, but in general, the Algonquian forms we were working
with, replaced with better transcriptions in some cases by Costa and
McCafferty, were:

Algonquian: PA (from Aubin's original list) *me?tekw-a 'wood, an.';
Menominee: (ne)-mee'tek my bow'; Fox: me'yta bow'(raised y); Sh.: mytekw-a
~ meytekwa (raised y in both) 'bow'; Miami: mite'kopa bow'; Chey.:
ma'tahke bow, archaic term', also Kickapoo: mehteeha bow' Voorhis-65.
[Some of the embedded ' may be ?, and I think Aubin may not be considered
a reliable source for the original data at least.]

Ojibwa, Cheyenne and Menomini (presumably moderated by Winnebago and IO)
are the logical possibilities.  If other Siouan languages were involved,
transmission from Miami-Illinois or maybe Fox-Sauk-Kickapoo becomes a
possibility.  Ojibwa isn' given here, and Menominiee looks closest, but is
lacking the final -w-a that explains the final -u in Winnebago, which
makes it somewhat difficult as a proposed source.  Of course, though we
suspect something later than Proto-Algonquian as a source, it's a stretch
to try to explicate the loans entirely in terms of the modern languages on
either side.  Perhaps a generalized Pre-Menominee actually had something
like *mee?tekwa.  But that wouldn't explain the final a of Dakotan
*m)ita(zipA).

> I had thought, purely impressionistically, that it had something to do
> with yajipa 'sting, prick'.

Well, jipa could certainly be related by sound symbolism to the zipA part
of the attested form, which is probably of Dakotan origin. I don't think
anything but the -it(a)- part is supposed to be accounted for by
Algonquian precedents.  One might argue that this is just i-tha-, but, of
course, it's ita- not itha-, and I seem to recall that tha- can be added
further to the front of this.

> What about 'spear' wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from
> something like hu 'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk
> etymology.

It looks straight forward enough to me, except that I wonder if kheza
doesn't just mean 'sharp' here?  Buechel says kheze' is 'the barb of a
fishhook, the sharp point of anything'.  'Barb' may be a specialized
sense.  Buechel also gives ik(h)aNc^ola, which seems to a bow-spear.
This is 'string-less' or 'unstrung'?

The terms for 'spear' in various siouan languages are often transparently
things like 'stabber', which doesn't lead to a special 'spear' set.

> Similarly with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide',
> chaN 'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.

Maybe c^haNka refers to the wooden frame?  In fact, maybe the term
primarily refers to the framework?

> This takes us back to the discussion earlier this year about the
> seeming morphological transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are
> the spear and shield words thought to be borrowings?

I don't think these terms are loans, and I generally agree with the
perception of most Siouan languages as depending heavily on fairly
transparent compounds of shorter stems, along with verbal derivations.
These constituents are generally, but not always, attested elsewhere in
the language.  A case in point would be Mandan, where ko'xaNte 'corn
(kernels)' is not analyzable in Mandan.  There is ko(r) 'squash', but what
is xaNte?  It turns out that this can be elucidated by forms like Dakotan
xaNte' in the non-cedar sense of 'small plant' or OP xa'de 'small leafy
plant' (sometimes rendered 'grass').

Still apart from this tendency, there are at least some exceptions like
'bow' waiting to be noticed.  Sometimes a hint is provided.  The kinds
I've noticed are things like:

- the presence of an unusual cluster (gm in wagmeza or igmu)

- less certainly, perhaps an atypical final vowel (u in a noun as in
maNaNc^gu 'bow' in Winnebago)

- or in a heavy cluster in an atypical location (maNaNc^gu again, which
can't be explained by the typical suffixing of -ke < *ka as a formative)

- more certainly, an atypical length for a root (kku'kkusi 'pig' in OP)

Of course, loans often stand out like a sore thumb when compared across
languages, because they lead to irregular correspondences.  Not all
irregular correspondences are due to loans, and some loans may produce
regular correspondences.  For that matter, many words have no cognates and
can't be compared, but irregular corespondences are still very suggestive
when they occur, and before the recent work of the CSD there's been some
tendency by Siouanists to overlook irregularities in sets like 'tobacco'.

A prevailing problem is the strong tendency of Americanists to stick to a
single family.  There are some exemplary exceptions around, but many of
us, and I'm a good example, are not really familiar with anything but, in
this case, Siouan.  Another problem may be that it is legendary that
American languages are not very prone to borrowing.  As an expectation
this can be quite self-fulfilling.  A loan that isn't expected isn't
noticed, and a loan that isn't noticed apparently hasn't occurred.

By the way, Bruce, has your Lakota dictionary come out?  I have to confess
I haven't ordered a copy yet, and I should rectify that!

JEK


From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu  Mon Jul 23 17:44:14 2001
From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:44:14 -0700
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.104414.0700.>

Hey John, I've missed something...what do you mean by "a simple declaration
(in obviative form".  It's obviously *the obviative form" that I'm curious
about.

best, sara t.


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 23 17:51:44 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:51:44 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.105144.0700.>

Hello all...

As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.

I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
phonemic forms.)

(? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)

P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
'string, cord')

Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
'forest, timber, wood'

Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
mhtekwi 'tree'

Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'

Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'

Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'

Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'

Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'

Arapaho bê:té? 'bow' & be:téyo:k 'bowstring'.

Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
Delaware hatá:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.

Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)

best,

David Costa


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 23:04:24 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:04:24 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <A154FC0C2AC8D111BE4F00805F6FDFF601E361DD@MESQUITE>
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.170424.0600.>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Trechter, Sara wrote:

> Hey John, I've missed something...what do you mean by "a simple declaration
> (in obviative form)".  It's obviously "the obviative form" that I'm
> curious about.

I'm sorry I was obscure.  I was afraid I was droning on about something
that might not be generally interesting, so I hurried.

> kkettaNga           wa'the         agi'=bi=ama
> big turtle          he struck them he came back QUOTE

This is embedded under (or tagged with) a quotative (=ama), but the verb
is agi=bi 'he comes back', which is the third singular proximate form (in
Omaha-Ponca), homophonous with, or better, identical with, the third
plural.  The form should be pretty recognizable as being like a plural to
a Dakotanist, as =bi compares nicely with =pi.  The quotative conditions
the conservative form =bi of the proximate/plural here.  Otherwise it
would be agi=i.


> es^a=i=dhaN
> you said EVID?

Here's the second person quotation form I mentioned.

> e'  the       agi          ha
> him he struck he came back DECL

This is in obviative form, having no =i ~ =bi with the third singular.
And then the ha (=ha?) is the declarative.  So this means something like
'he-obviative struck him' or 'he-offstage struck him' or 'he-(not seen)
struck him', whereas the first clause would mean 'he-proximate ...', etc.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 23:08:40 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:08:40 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <200107231752.KAA14369@scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.170840.0600.>

Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
Iroquoian.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:

> Hello all...
>
> As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
> forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
> dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
> either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
> is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.
>
> I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
> already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
> already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
> phonemic forms.)
>
> (? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)
>
> P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
> 'string, cord')
>
> Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
> mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
> 'forest, timber, wood'
>
> Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
> 'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
> mhtekwi 'tree'
>
> Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'
>
> Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'
>
> Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
> wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'
>
> Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
> means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'
>
> Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'
>
> Arapaho b�:t�? 'bow' & be:t�yo:k 'bowstring'.
>
> Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
> Delaware hat�:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
> 'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
> etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
> haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
> plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
> reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.
>
> Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)
>
> best,
>
> David Costa
>


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 24 00:24:40 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:24:40 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.172440.0700.>

> Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
> second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
> resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
> Iroquoian.

Oh yeah. Good point. Well, this probably has no bearing on Siouan, but for
the Iroquoian enthusiasts among us:

(0 = alpha, ` = grave accent, ' = acute accent; o^ = o-circumflex; $ =
s-hacek)

Unami Delaware /hata':p:i/ 'bow'
Unquachog <atu'mp> 'bow'
Massachusett <ahtomp> 'bow'
Loup B <tampe> 'bow'
W. Abenaki /(a)to^bi/ & Penobscot /tt0`pi/ 'bow'
Maliseet /'tahtapiyil/ 'his bow'
Micmac /api/~/tapi/ 'bow'.

Frank Siebert in his 1975 Powhatan article reconstructed PA */a?ta:pya/ for
this, tho the only language that possibly supports that is Montagnais
/a$ca:piy/. PA */ahta:pya/ might actually be the correct form.

The nasal vowels seen in most of the New England forms are regular from PA
*/a:/.

Also, Munsee Delaware has /mata'ht/ 'bow'. Not sure where that's from.
Plains Cree has /ahca:piy/.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Iroquoian lack /p/? Thus, wouldn't
glottal stop be a plausible subsitute for /p/ if it was borrowed from
Algonquian into Iroquoian? I know, if it's borrowed into Iroquoian, one
would expect the etymon to be irregular in that family and (perhaps) regular
in Eastern Algonquian, but if you say the borrowing went the other way
(Iroq. > Alg.) then you're stuck with the problem of why /?/ should go to
/p/.

David


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Jul 24 13:32:13 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 08:32:13 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107231706250.27143-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.24.JUL.2001.083213.0500.>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:

> Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
> second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
> resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
> Iroquoian.

This could well be a borrowing that could have diffused, according to the
distribution of PA *ahta- ~ *a?ta-  in Algonquian terms for 'bow' you
find it along the East Coast and in the Western Great Lakes (Ojibwe and
Miami-Illinois),


(and it is an **old** morpheme in Miami-Illinois as attested by the Jesuit
sources from around the turn of the 18th century; in other words, it's not
a late borrowing from, say, Unami)


it could have diffused both to the east and to the west from an (several)
Iroquoian population(s) lying between the Algonquians. This notion jibes,
of course, with the general Algonquian-Iroquian population distribution
model for late prehistory. In addition, there is good evidence of positive
Iroquian-Algonquian interaction in the area southwest of the Lake Erie,
where exchange of ideas, technology, and language could/would have
occurred. The archaeologist Bob McCullough has discovered this and written
about it. I'll have to find the sources for those interested. It appears
that present-day central, southeast and northern Indiana was, say, an
"interaction zone," where peoples from various cultural backgrounds and
languages lived cheek to jowl and, lacking any evidence of warfare
thusfar, were pretty much getting along.

Drawing back from this particular focus, it seems wise to consider the
possibility that the bow was invented in more than one place. Time out of
mind people have been attaching cordage to wood.

One question I have, does anyone know the poundage that native bows have?

Best,

Michael McCafferty

>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:
>
> > Hello all...
> >
> > As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
> > forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
> > dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
> > either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
> > is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.
> >
> > I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
> > already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
> > already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
> > phonemic forms.)
> >
> > (? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)
> >
> > P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
> > 'string, cord')
> >
> > Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
> > mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
> > 'forest, timber, wood'
> >
> > Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
> > 'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
> > mhtekwi 'tree'
> >
> > Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'
> >
> > Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'
> >
> > Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
> > wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'
> >
> > Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
> > means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'
> >
> > Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'
> >
> > Arapaho b�:t�? 'bow' & be:t�yo:k 'bowstring'.
> >
> > Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
> > Delaware hat�:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
> > 'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
> > etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
> > haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
> > plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
> > reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.
> >
> > Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)
> >
> > best,
> >
> > David Costa
> >
>
>


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From BARudes at aol.com  Tue Jul 24 14:54:22 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:54:22 EDT
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <TUE.24.JUL.2001.105422.EDT.>

I am not going to hypothesize whether Iroqouoian borrowed from Algonquian
(o.k., I doubt it), or Algonquian borrowed from Iroqouoian (I doubt that too,
but if so, it only borrowed the initial part of its word, and not the final
part containing /p/.  Anyway, glottal stop is not a reasonable Iroquoian
substitute for /p/ in a borrowed word.  In known cases of such borrowing,
Iroquoian languages either substitute /kw/ or /w/.

Blair


From Rgraczyk at aol.com  Fri Jul 27 19:41:15 2001
From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:41:15 EDT
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.154115.EDT.>

I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
direction of borrowing.

Randy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010727/3aa92d3c/attachment.html>

From shanwest at uvic.ca  Fri Jul 27 20:52:14 2001
From: shanwest at uvic.ca (Shannon West)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:52:14 -0700
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <d7.9dba532.28931ddb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.135214.0700.>

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
[mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of Rgraczyk at aol.com
Sent: July 27, 2001 12:41 PM
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Soup


>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
>like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
>Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about
the
>direction of borrowing.
>
>Randy

Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.  I think there's
another word for a thick soup, or stew, but I can neither rememeber nor find
it right now.  Hohpe reminds me of hoxpa 'cough', but that's almost
certainly coincidence.

The Cree word for soup (if I recall correctly) is anapapoy.  Ojibwe for
'soup' is naboob.  Those are the only Algonquian languages I have a sniff
about.

I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

Shannon


From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu  Fri Jul 27 21:25:36 2001
From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:25:36 -0700
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.142536.0700.>

'wozhapi' Lakhota for berry soup made with corn starch or flour nowadays.
I'm also told that it is used pejoratively to refer to 'inbreeding' (cousin
marrying) among white people. sara t. (the 'zh' is a alveopalatal fricative)

>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
>like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
>Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about
the
>direction of borrowing.
>
>Randy

Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.  I think there's
another word for a thick soup, or stew, but I can neither rememeber nor find
it right now.  Hohpe reminds me of hoxpa 'cough', but that's almost
certainly coincidence.

The Cree word for soup (if I recall correctly) is anapapoy.  Ojibwe for
'soup' is naboob.  Those are the only Algonquian languages I have a sniff
about.

I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

Shannon


From rankin at ku.edu  Fri Jul 27 22:10:15 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:10:15 -0500
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.171015.0500.>

>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.

>Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.
I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

No, actually that's right on the money. Mandan has something like /huNp-/,
so the Nakota fits in with both it and the Crow. This still doesn't mean
they're cognates rather than borrowings though, since all the languages that
have the word are in the NW of Siouan territory. I suspect Randy's right and
that the word was borrowed in one direction or the other.

Bob


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 28 03:05:24 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 20:05:24 -0700
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.200524.0700.>

Actually, it's a native Algonquian word. It has an Arapaho cognate /hókok/,
and an Algonquin (Quebec Ojibwe) cognate /aboob(ii)/. This is reshaped in
most Algonquian languages to */napo:pi/ or */nepoopi/ under the influence of
*/nepyi/'water'. I could swear I saw an article somewhere by Goddard or
Pentland where this etymon was reconstructed as */apo:pyi/, tho I'm afraid I
can't find it at the moment. But either way, I guess Crow borrowed it from
Cheyenne?


Dave Costa


----------
From: Rgraczyk at aol.com
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Soup
Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001, 12:41 pm


I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
direction of borrowing.

Randy


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sat Jul 28 02:24:07 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:24:07 -0500
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <d7.9dba532.28931ddb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.212407.0500.>

On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote:

> I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
> like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
> Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
> direction of borrowing.
>
> Randy
>

I don't know Cheyenne. But the term in question sounds like it could be a
reflex of Proto-Algonquian */-aapow-/ 'liquid'. Reflexes of this final are
all over the place in the Algonquian languages, so its being in Cheyenne
would not be a surprise.


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From are2 at acsu.buffalo.edu  Sat Jul 28 06:25:04 2001
From: are2 at acsu.buffalo.edu (Ardis R Eschenberg)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:25:04 -0400
Subject: Virus, Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBA9@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.022504.0400.>

Hi everyone.  I have gotten a virus in my computer from a listserve and
want to warn you to not open anything from me.
(It is fixed now & it is relatively harmless to your computer but it spams
like mad.  I worry that it hit this listserve.)
I am truly sorry if you got a weird email from me.  It is the sircamm32 at mm
virus.
BTW the Omaha word for soup is tani 'meat water' (broth).
Sorry,
Ardis


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 28 07:06:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:06:46 -0600
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBA9@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.010646.0600.>

On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> >I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.
>
> >Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.
>
> No, actually that's right on the money. Mandan has something like /huNp-/,
> so the Nakota fits in with both it and the Crow. This still doesn't mean
> they're cognates rather than borrowings though, since all the languages that
> have the word are in the NW of Siouan territory. I suspect Randy's right and
> that the word was borrowed in one direction or the other.

Teton haNpi' 'broth, soup; gravy; juoce' (Buechel 167a)

Mandan hu'priN(h) (Hollow 80), i.e., hupiNniN, with (h) showing in
hupiNniNhot 'salt' < hupiNniN + ot 'to mix'.

Winnebago has niNiNpaN'naN, which might be niNiN 'water' + paNnaN 'to have
scent', or maybe not.  It could be, say, *hiNiN'praN modified by analogy
with niN 'water' as the Algonquianists say.

What the Mandan term does resemble in an interesting way is:

Teton omni'c^a 'bean' < *(h)obriNka
OP    hiNbdhiN(ge) 'bean'
Osage hoNpriN(ke) 'bean'

etc.


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sat Jul 28 15:45:50 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:45:50 -0500
Subject: bow discussion-- Curious form in Uto-Aztecan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107222311080.13239-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.104550.0500.>

This is from Karen Dakin:

"Campbell and Langacker in their 1978 IJAL article reconstruct *awta for
'atlatl' based on the Hopi form. My feeling is that it comes probably from
*pata-, related to Nahuatl patla:ni 'to fly', since *paC often went to
*haC and then to *ahC, so that *pata > *hata- and by metathesis to ahta.
For 'bow' I'm really not sure without looking at sources. tlahuitolli
would come from the pUA prefix *wi- 'long', and *to-l 'bent, twisted' I
imagine.  I'll check it more carefully later."
===============================================

Michael McCafferty


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From rankin at ku.edu  Sat Jul 28 17:39:53 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:39:53 -0500
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.123953.0500.>

I checked 'soup' in the comparative dict. MS and my memory was right. The
forms cited by Randy and Shannon are restricted geographically to the NW
area within Siouan. The forms are:

CR   hu'ppii
HI   hu'pa
MA   huNpiNniN'he (a compound fide Dick Carter)
LA   haNpi'
     asaN'pi 'milk' < aze' 'breast' + haNpi
DA   haNpi'   Sioux Valley haNpi' also.
NA   haNbi' (from Shannon)

That's it. All the other languages have completely different and unrelated
forms. The commentary points out that this is one of several sets in which
aN and uN correspond irregularly.

I don't think these are at all related to the 'bean' word, since in 'bean'
the (h)o- portion is etymologically distinct from the -m(i)ni- part, and the
latter part is the part borrowed from Uto-Aztecan or Yuman (v. our earlier
correspondence).  Segmentation there is before the labial element and here
it is after the labial element. Algonquian looks like a good source here,
with Cheyenne as suspect number one. Siouan nasality is unexplained however.

Bob


From rankin at ku.edu  Mon Jul 30 16:00:56 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.110056.0500.>

I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
Bob

******************************************

Dictionary wanted
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)

  I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
  I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
  been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!

                                                                   --"Zeph"
                                                       Wagner, South Dakota
                                                       (ishnajin at webtv.net)


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 18:05:56 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:05:56 -0600
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBB8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.120556.0600.>

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:

> I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
> Bob
>
> ******************************************
>
> Dictionary wanted
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
>   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
>   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
>   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!
>
>                                                                    --"Zeph"
>                                                        Wagner, South Dakota
>                                                        (ishnajin at webtv.net)

I don't actually know what to recommend, but I think it would be a Yankton
dictionary, not a Nakota one, at least not Nakota in the sense of
Assiniboine or Stoney.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 20:43:06 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:43:06 -0600
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBAB@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.144306.0600.>

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I don't think these are at all related to the 'bean' word, since in 'bean'
> the (h)o- portion is etymologically distinct from the -m(i)ni- part, and the
> latter part is the part borrowed from Uto-Aztecan or Yuman (v. our earlier
> correspondence).

Note also that Mandan has, per Hollow, o'wriNk 'bean' (i.e., o'miNniNk).


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 20:43:17 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:43:17 -0600
Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.144317.0600.>

>>From a summary sent Bob Rankin in 1996 by Karen Booker.

Chitimacha axt 'bow, arrow'.


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 30 21:25:57 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:25:57 -0700
Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.142557.0700.>

Actually, Chitimacha does not have an /x/. The word in question is really
/akt/, and it's given in Swadesh's unpublished Chitimacha dictionary as:

(1) 'bow'

(2) 'a kind of musical horn about 1 1/2 to 2 feet long, consisting of a
hollow reed bent in a hook and three parallel reeds with fingering holes
connecting the longer and shorter arms of the hook'

According to Swadesh, Swanton gave the word as 'bow, arrow for bow, blowgun
arrow, barrel of gun'.

Given the semantic differences here, I'm inclined to think that the 'musical
horn' meaning is original and that the others are later extensions from when
the weapons in question were first encountered.

I think I already mentioned this, but this is reminiscent of how the 'gun'
words in Arapaho-Atsina and Miami are both descended from the Proto-
Algonquian 'flute' word. In the oldest sources (Kroeber), the Arapaho word
still retains an alternate meaning of 'flute'.

Dave Costa


----------
>From: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
>To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
>Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
>Date: Mon, Jul 30, 2001, 1:43 pm
>

>>>From a summary sent Bob Rankin in 1996 by Karen Booker.
>
> Chitimacha axt 'bow, arrow'.
>
>


From jggoodtracks at juno.com  Tue Jul 31 01:37:38 2001
From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:37:38 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.203738.0500.>

Doug Parks at Indiana University has an Assiniboine language Project, if
indeed it is the appropriate dialect.  They have been working with
Ft.Belknap and Ft.Peck in MT.  He is at:
parksd at indiana.edu
http://www.indiana.edu/%Eaisri/projects/research.htm

Also I recall someone on the Lists that has made contributions on Nakota/
Assiniboin from time to time.  Perhaps, that person has the information.

Meanwhile, I have contacted an Assiniboin friend who has had interest in
the language and may have found materials, dictionary somewhere.
Jimm

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:05:56 -0600 (MDT) Koontz John E
<John.Koontz at colorado.edu> writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
>
> > I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have
> missed it.
> > Bob
> >
> > ******************************************
> >
> > Dictionary wanted
> >   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
> >
> >   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South
> Dakota.
> >   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my
> search has
> >   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?
> Thank You!
> >
> >
> --"Zeph"
> >                                                        Wagner,
> South Dakota
> >
> (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
> I don't actually know what to recommend, but I think it would be a
> Yankton
> dictionary, not a Nakota one, at least not Nakota in the sense of
> Assiniboine or Stoney.
>
>


From bi1 at soas.ac.uk  Tue Jul 31 14:37:45 2001
From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:37:45 GMT
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBB8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.31.JUL.2001.143745.GMT.>

If what is wanted is a Yankton dictionary rather than a Nakota one,
I believe Williamson's English-Dakota dictionary is Yankton rather
than anything else

Bruce

Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
From:           	"Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To:             	"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'" <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Subject:        	Yankton dictionary wanted.

I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
Bob

******************************************

Dictionary wanted
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)

  I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
  I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
  been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!

                                                                   --"Zeph"
                                                       Wagner, South Dakota
                                                       (ishnajin at webtv.net)
Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS


From egooding at iupui.edu  Tue Jul 31 13:54:26 2001
From: egooding at iupui.edu (Erik D Gooding)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:54:26 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <C006095FCD@soas.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <TUE.31.JUL.2001.085426.0500.>

Most Yankton refer to themselves as Nakota. The Yanktonai I worked with
at Standing Rock referred to themselves as Dakota, but used Nakota when
referring to Yanktons. Most anthro's would attribute this is Jim Howard I
believe, his belief that Yankton-Yanktonai was originally a "n" dialect
since he believed that the Assiniboine (and by inference the Stoney) were
an offshoot of the Yanktonai (as many believed and still believe).


Erik

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> If what is wanted is a Yankton dictionary rather than a Nakota one,
> I believe Williamson's English-Dakota dictionary is Yankton rather
> than anything else
>
> Bruce
>
> Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
> Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> From:           	"Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
> To:             	"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'" <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
> Subject:        	Yankton dictionary wanted.
>
> I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
> Bob
>
> ******************************************
>
> Dictionary wanted
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
>   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
>   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
>   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!
>
>                                                                    --"Zeph"
>                                                        Wagner, South Dakota
>                                                        (ishnajin at webtv.net)
> Dr. Bruce Ingham
> Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
> SOAS
>
>


From kdshea at ku.edu  Thu Jul  5 19:07:44 2001
From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea)
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:07:44 -0500
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
Message-ID: <THU.5.JUL.2001.140744.0500.>

I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for 'ribs' in Ponca
is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/ as in /athi/
'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I asked him.)

Kathy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Koontz John E" <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 4:34 PM
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)


> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote:
>
> > Bob just e-mailed me that the Kansa and Quapaw cognates don't contain an
> > aspirated consonant, so I'm probably wrong.
>
> So, presumably it is dhitti (in OP).  Note that Dorsey actually has just
> "edh"  + i + t + i, where edh is written cent-sign as usual.  This is
> consistent with either version (dhitti or dhithi), though actually I
> normally assume the latter in such cases.  Fletcher & LaFlesche's "t" is
> also ambiguous.  I have not heard the word pronounced.
>


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:10:48 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:10:48 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141048.0600.>

Having received permission from the principles, I'm posting this exchange
here on Siouan terms for 'bow'.  This is primarily an issue of
historical/etymological and archaeological interest.  My apologies to the
long suffering syntacticians on the list.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:12:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: Robert L. Rankin <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Cc: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net
Subject: Re: bow

...

I've been looking at the bow and wanted to get your input. I've included
Dave in this message just to keep my linguistics in line.

There are two terms for 'bow' in the Algonquian languages. One, which
means 'wood string' --from /PA *me?tekwa:pyi/-- is found in the Great
Lakes Algonquian languages and in Cheyenne and Arapaho. (Interestingly,
it's also the basis for the term 'mulberry tree' in Miami-Illinois and
Shawnee.)

The other term, PA */ahta:pya/ (this is Ives' reconstruction. I think
others have reconstructed this with a glottal stop rather than /h/). I'm
not sure what the /aht-/ means. Dave?) This term is found in
Miami-Illinois, Ojibwe AND the Eastern Algonquian languages. It is found
in the Old Illinois sources and (apart from one small window of contact
opportunity in the form of the Eastern Algonquian Indians who accompanied
La Salle down into the Illinois Country and thus might have taught the
Ojibwe La Salle met at Green Bay and the Illinois Indians that they hung
with on the upper Illinois River) probably is, given its
farflung distribution, precontact.

What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow was
something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian. Strange, since the bow
did not appear, as far as we know, in Illinois until after 400 A.D.
(Klunck mound, I believe) and doesn't seem to be in the Illinois-Indiana
area generally until around 600 AD, way too late for Proto-Algonquian.
(i'm not implying here that folks in Illinois and Indiana at that time
were necessarily Algonquians).

I asked Munson what he knew about the bow and he sent this:

"I don't know if anyone has tried to trace the spread of the bow into
eastern N. Am.  It was present in SW US by first centuries (or
earlier??), and a good guess, I'd think, is that it came across southern
Plains, and if that is correct, then should be earlier in Caddo area than
in Great Lakes and New England."


Another ingredient in this mix is the fact that terms for 'bow' in Siouan
come from Algonquian, which seems to turn what Munson is saying on its
head, and, at least to my peapicking mental powers, seems to imply that
the spread of the bow was north to south--Algonquians generally north of
Siouans. I wonder if the Eskimos had bows prehistorically.

So, what's my question? Or is this just a rant?

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:12:24 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:12:24 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141224.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:19:19 -0500
From: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To: 'Michael Mccafferty ' <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>,
     'Robert L. Rankin ' <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     'Koontz John E ' <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Cc: "'pankihtamwa at earthlink.net '" <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: bow


>There are two terms for 'bow' in the Algonquian languages. One, which
means 'wood string' --from /PA *me?tekwa:pyi/-- is found in the Great
Lakes Algonquian languages and in Cheyenne and Arapaho. (Interestingly,
it's also the basis for the term 'mulberry tree' in Miami-Illinois and
Shawnee.)

>The other term, PA */ahta:pya/ (this is Ives' reconstruction. I think
others have reconstructed this with a glottal stop rather than /h/). I'm
not sure what the /aht-/ means. Dave?) This term is found in
Miami-Illinois, Ojibwe AND the Eastern Algonquian languages.

But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
term, second name or what?


>What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.

I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
reconstructible to PA and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
string", is a compound. Both 'wood' and 'string' are presumably
reconstructible, but that doesn't mean the compound was. It could have
arisen independently many times, since it is descriptive in nature. This is
essentially the argument given by Hockett and others for "fire-water"; both
terms are primitives but 'whiskey' isn't.

>I asked Munson what he knew about the bow and he sent this:
"I don't know if anyone has tried to trace the spread of the bow into
eastern N. Am.  It was present in SW US by first centuries (or
earlier??), and a good guess, I'd think, is that it came across southern
Plains, and if that is correct, then should be earlier in Caddo area
than in Great Lakes and New England."

>Another ingredient in this mix is the fact that terms for 'bow' in
Siouan come from Algonquian, which seems to turn what Munson is saying on
its head, and, at least to my peapicking mental powers, seems to imply that
the spread of the bow was north to south--Algonquians generally north of
Siouans. I wonder if the Eskimos had bows prehistorically. So, what's my
question? Or is this just a rant?

Dunno about the Eskimos. I'd say the borrowing by Siouan from Algonquian is
well-established, originally by John, with only some additional elaboration
from me. And it was apparently borrowed numerous times from several
different Algonquian languages in different places. I look upon it as
basically East to West, but N to S makes just as much sense as far as it
goes. A roughly spiral movement is possible also. I don't know that anyone
has looked at the Caddoan 'bow' terms. Other intermediate families
(Uto-Aztecan, etc.) should also be looked at. I guess that's the next step.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:14:14 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:14:14 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141414.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 08:41:44 -0700
From: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
To: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     Mike McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

...

> But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
> term, second name or what?

What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

>>What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
>>was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.
>
> I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
> reconstructible to PA and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
> string", is a compound.

True, tho I think PA */ahta:pya/ is left unexplained (the */aht-/ there has
no etymology that I can see). That one is the 'bow' word in Eastern
Algonquian, tho outside Eastern it's usually 'bowstring', when found.
Phonologically a lot of languages screw it up in small ways (like Miami
/neehtiaapa/ 'bow'). The poor phonological matchup across the daughter
languages strongly supports the idea that it entered Algonquian after the
languages were already somewhat differentiated.

...

Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those meant
'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

We'd have to see what other families in North America have to say about
this. For instance, Iroquoian? Muskogean?

Dave


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:15:36 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:15:36 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141536.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:11:36 -0600 (MDT)
From: Koontz John E <koontz at spot.colorado.edu>
To: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     Mike McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:
> Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
> 'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those meant
> 'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

Arrows are essentially light throwing spears launched with the aid of a
taut string.  The usual evidence for a transition from throwing spears to
arrows is a reduction in the size of the points recovered, I think.  As
far as I know the usual Siouan terms for 'arrow' are actually 'arrow
head'.

...


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:19:33 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:19:33 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.141933.0600.>

Costa, originally:

What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

Corrected to:

Oh yeah -- please fix my typo in the Miami 'bow' word -- it should be
/mihte(h)koopa/~/mihte(h)*k*waapa/. (In addition to the /neehtiaapa/
alternate.)


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:23:20 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:23:20 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142320.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:49:46 -0500
From: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To: 'David Costa ' <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>,
     'John Koontz ' <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>,
     'Mike McCafferty ' <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: RE: bow

>What Miami has is /mihte(h)koopa/~/mihtek(h)waapa/, which are basically
regular from PA */me?tekwa:pyi/.

Sorry, Dave, I didn't have your dictionary here at home and was relying on
memory of Dunn/Voegelin's mitaekopa where ae = a-umlaut as usual. Knew it
was something like that.

>Another possible wrinkle on this is that a couple very well supported PA
'arrow' words can be reconstructed. Tho I spose one could say those
meant 'spear' or whatever and that those terms got transferred to 'arrow'.

That's standard. 'Dart' or 'spear' is reconstructible to PSi too, but it
presumably referred to atlatl darts. 'To shoot' still has the Mandan cognate
with the meaning 'throw'.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:20:47 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:20:47 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142047.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:22:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
Cc: 'Robert L. Rankin ' <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     'Koontz John E ' <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>,
     "'pankihtamwa at earthlink.net '" <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: bow


On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
> term, second name or what?

mihtekwaapa (also mihtekoopa is attested). same term. animate ending stead
of inanimate.

> >What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
> was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.
>
> I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
> reconstructible to PA

well, ahta:pya seems almost unitary cause i think the aht- is unknown.
:)


> and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
> string", is a compound. Both 'wood' and 'string' are presumably
> reconstructible, but that doesn't mean the compound was. It could have
> arisen independently many times, since it is descriptive in nature. This is
> essentially the argument given by Hockett and others for "fire-water"; both
> terms are primitives but 'whiskey' isn't.
>

yeah, this was munson's thrust, too. i figured that since it occurred in
Eastern Algon. AND way out there in Ojibweland and Miami-Illinoisland that
the term was ancient.

...

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Fri Jul  6 20:22:38 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:22:38 -0600
Subject: bow (fwd)
Message-ID: <FRI.6.JUL.2001.142238.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:25:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: David Costa <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>, John Koontz <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: bow

> True, tho I think PA */ahta:pya/ is left unexplained (the */aht-/ there
> ...

it would almost seem to mean 'wood' ...

Michael


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 10 04:38:55 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 22:38:55 -0600
Subject: Mississippi Valley Siouan 'bow' Terms
Message-ID: <MON.9.JUL.2001.223855.0600.>

Here are the Mississippi Valley forms.  The Dakotan ones are from Buechel,
and Riggs/Williamson.  The Dhegiha forms are from Dorsey/Swetland, Rankin,
and LaFlesche.  The IO and Winnebago are from Good Tracks and Miner.
Back constructions and analysis are mine except for the suggestion that
Dakotan itazipA is from *mitazipA by renalysis, which is from Rankin (and
Carter?).  The development of the medial cluste rin IO is along general
liens suggested by Rankin.

Teton ita'zipa 'bow', mita'zipa 'my ~'; thitazipe 'his (alienable) bow'
Santee (W) ita'zipe 'bow'; (R) ita'zipa 'bow', mit(h)i'nazipe 'my ~' (t >
n in all persons)

Presumably the present third person is derived by false analogy from an
original form *mitazipA, reanalyzed as a first person possessed form.
Note that the stem does (or did) undergo ablaut, and the e-grade is the
possessed grade, cf. s^uNka ~ thas^uNke.

The t>n shift could be interpreted at suggesting the stem *(m)i(N)t=azipA.
The only gloss for (a)zipA I know is zipe=la 'thin, fine', given in
Buechel.

Omaha-Ponca maN'de 'bow' (cf. also maN'de hi 'spear' < 'bow' + 'stem',
i.e., 'bowstave')
Osage miN'ce 'bow'
Kaw miN'j^e 'bow'
Quapaw maN'tte 'bow'

Note the difference in the root vowel between OP/Quapaw and Osage/Kaw.
The gemination of t is normal in Quapaw for *t in this context.

Ioway-Otoe ma(N)hdu < Pre-IO *maNtku > *maNktu > maNhdu
(cf. also mahdu<th>rudada a game spear with a u-point)

Winnebago maNaNc^gu' < Pre-Wi *maNaN'tku

The forms are supposed all to come from the Algonquian form reconstructed
as *me?tekwaapyi or perhaps only from *me?tekw-a 'wood (animate)' (that
was the form in Aubin, I believe).  In essence, *me?te... alone (with the
final syllable(s) omitted) accounts for the *mi(N)te ~ and *ma(N)te like
forms, while *me?tekw... (with the internal e syncopated) accounts for the
Chiwere and Winnebago *maN(aN)tku version.  Given the variation in
completeness of the form adopted, and the variation in the initial vowel
(aN ~ iN), it's assumed that the borrowing occurred at several different
places, based on different Algonquian souce forms.  The initial m of the
Algonquian forms causes the root vowel to be taken as nasal.

It's not clear why the vowel after kw is omitted, though, if it is the
animate marker it may be handled as a noun-forming affix comparable to the
ablauting/deleting final a ~ e of some Siouan nominal root sets.  (I've
suggested elsewhere that the Siouan suffix may be essentially
demonstrative in origin, based on Greenberg's theory of the origin of
nominalizing and gender marking affixes.)

Loss of the animate suffix is perhaps actually typical of Algonquian loan
in Siouan contexts, cf. MI s^iihs^iikwia 'black rattlesnake' > OP s^e'kki
'rattlesnake'.

JEK


From rankin at ku.edu  Tue Jul 10 19:08:38 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:08:38 -0500
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.140838.0500.>

> I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for
> 'ribs' in Ponca is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/
as in /athi/ 'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I
asked him.)

That's pretty interesting. It would be virtually the only word I know of out
of thousands where the stop correspondences don't seem to match exactly as
expected for the Dheghiha dialects. The only other case I can think of is
'four' which has tt instead of the expected d in Kaw.

Since I can no longer double-check it with another speaker, perhaps you can,
but La Flesche's Osage also signals an aspirate in thitsi.  It's possible I
just transcribed it wrong in Kaw and Quapaw.

bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 10 20:24:22 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:24:22 -0600
Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca)
In-Reply-To: <5823BD992D67D3119F630008C7CF50FC0D462DA8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.142422.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> > I checked this with one of my consultants, and the word for
> > 'ribs' in Ponca is dhethi, with an aspirated "t."  (He said it was /thi/
> as in /athi/ 'he/she arrived (here)' and not as in /tti/ 'house' when I
> asked him.)
>
> That's pretty interesting. It would be virtually the only word I know of out
> of thousands where the stop correspondences don't seem to match exactly as
> expected for the Dheghiha dialects. The only other case I can think of is
> 'four' which has tt instead of the expected d in Kaw.

There was a case where I thought I heard OP kkide 'shoot' with aspiration
(khide), but I think that was bad hearing on my part.  Maybe I have this
reversed.  I think there are some anomalies in this set - do Chiwere or
Winnebago have g?

Then there's the little known infamous case of ppahe (not sure on stress)
'hill' vs. Dakotan pa'ha, which has an irregular initial correspondence.
This, along with the restricted distribution of the term, suggests a loan
is involved, but the source is obscure.

Also, as far as the attestation of the form in LaFlesche and Dorsey, like
Buechel, these authorities are generally more reliable with the marked
case than the unmarked, e.g., for them, if a stop is turned (over) or
there's a dot or x under it, it's explicity unaspirated (tense), but
unmarked cases are probably aspirated but not certainly so.  This is the
picture for Omaha-Ponca.  For Osage Dorsey sometimes has a turned h in
front of a tense (preaspirated) stop, and, as I recall it, both Dorsey and
LaFlesche indicate a following s^ (c for Dorsey, sh for LaFlesche) with an
aspirate preceding (i or e).  These are also pretty reliable clues.  In
general, the marked/unmarked case rule changes in details with the Dhegiha
language and the linguist/orthography.  Bob can probably clarify the
situations for the languages other than OP better than I can.  I do know
of some cases where an explicit encoding by Dorsey or LaFlesche is wrong
...

In this case, of course, we don't have to rely on heuristics, because Bob
and Kathy actually heard/hear the words.


From simpsond at email.arizona.edu  Wed Jul 11 01:52:13 2001
From: simpsond at email.arizona.edu (Erik)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:52:13 -0700
Subject: Bows
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.185213.0700.>

I have not noticed any differences between the self-bow (the east coast
type) and the recurved-sinew backed bow that was so common on the plains.
         The recurved-sinew backed bow is supposed to have come down into
the plains  (by Athabascans ?) before any Siouan peoples and would likely
have been adopted there. Does anyone know of any lexical differences between
the two bow types?

erik


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 03:37:31 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:37:31 -0600
Subject: Bows
In-Reply-To: <3B1F829E00014E45@phobos.email.Arizona.EDU>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.213731.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Erik wrote:
> I have not noticed any differences between the self-bow (the east coast
> type) and the recurved-sinew backed bow that was so common on the plains.
>          The recurved-sinew backed bow is supposed to have come down into
> the plains  (by Athabascans ?) before any Siouan peoples and would likely
> have been adopted there. Does anyone know of any lexical differences between
> the two bow types?

Buechel gives t(h)ak(h)aN ita'zipe and t(h)ak(h)iNtazipa (contracted) for
'sinew-backed bow' in eton.  I've parenthesized the aspiration because I'm
assuming it's there, but Buechel doesn't indicate it definitively.  I
can't explain the variation in ablaut grades.

I suspect the conception that bows or sinew-backed bows are northern in
origin might stem from a supposition that they are derived from Asia.  I
don't know if this is born out by dating or not.  To some extent the date
of introduction of bows in the general sense can be deduced from the
presence of smaller projectile points, but I think there may be some
overlap in sizes of points for arrows and throwing spears.  I haven't
stumbled on any survey of the dating of bow technology and I have the
impression that this may not yet have been attempted in archaeological
terms.  I don't know if there is any indicator for sinew-backed bows as
opposed to bows in general.  There seems to be some ethnographical support
for a late spread of bows in North America, but bows were fairly
widespread by the end of the early contact period and I don't know if
there is any survey literature from this approach either. Anyone know any
archaeologists or ethnographers interested in this area?


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 03:53:33 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:53:33 -0600
Subject: Bows
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107102125180.1863-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.215333.0600.>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:
> Buechel gives t(h)ak(h)aN ita'zipe and t(h)ak(h)iNtazipa (contracted)
> for 'sinew-backed bow' in *T*eton.  ...

Sorry - the Unversity connection is slow and it's affecting my editing.


From ioway at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 11 04:50:34 2001
From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:50:34 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <TUE.10.JUL.2001.225034.0600.>

Two things, a comment and a question..

1. Regarding bows, one thing that Skinner notes (1925) is that there was an Ioway
tradition that the Wolf Clan "spoke a different language" when they met up with
the other clans. This is notable, as the Wolf Clan brought the bow and arrows.
Could the IO Wolf Clan originally have been an Algonquian group? This would
explain a number of things, including some archaeological situations and gray
areas. I would double-check the Skinner reference but all my Ioway stuff is in
storage. I am pretty sure it was in "Traditions of the Iowa Indians" (1925), in
the section on clan stories.

2. Does anyone have a good authoritative reference for Yankton sociology (kinship
and leadership structures)?


--
Lance Michael Foster
Email: ioway at earthlink.net
-------------------------
NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com)
Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org)
Homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway


From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu  Wed Jul 11 13:02:10 2001
From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 08:02:10 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.080210.0500.>

11 July 2001
Aloha All,
I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole. It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.

wibthahoN
uthixide


Mark Awakuni-Swetland, Lecturer
Anthropology/Ethnic Studies-Native American Studies
c/o Department of Anthropology-Geography
University of Nebraska
Bessey Hall 132
Lincoln, NE 68588-0368
Office 402-472-3455
Dept. 402-472-2411
FAX 402-472-9642
mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010711/2e785a74/attachment.htm>

From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 17:56:34 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:56:34 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.125634.0500.>

Mark and others,

I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking
about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more
interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems
that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to
this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of
course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has
apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance
chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the
chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply
milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were
copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago
RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for.

Bob


I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the
topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole.
It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010711/bfaae42e/attachment.htm>

From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 18:11:36 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:11:36 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.131136.0500.>

> 1. Regarding bows, one thing that Skinner notes (1925) is
> that there was an Ioway tradition that the Wolf Clan "spoke a different
language" when they met up with the other clans. This is notable, as the
Wolf Clan brought the bow and arrows. Could the IO Wolf Clan originally have
been an Algonquian group?

Possibly so. The Ioway-Otoe-Missouria and the Winnebago words for 'bow' seem
to be from a different Algonquian language than the Dakotan or (probably)
Dhegihan terms. The most likely extant candidate is Menomini (which has an
[ae] vowel rather than the more common [i]).

I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
stem-formative vowel. So for some of the languages we are faced with more
than one possible direction of spread. The Ioway term, with its [tk]
cluster, is clearly from Algonquian though.

Bob


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 11 19:48:22 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <5823BD992D67D3119F630008C7CF50FC0D462DAF@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.134822.0600.>

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> stem-formative vowel.

Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
the Algonquian sets are.

Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
-a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
*miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
Stoney.

Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.

JEK


From rankin at ku.edu  Wed Jul 11 21:03:46 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:03:46 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
Message-ID: <WED.11.JUL.2001.160346.0500.>

> Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in
> early attempts at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some >
generally resemblant forms?

That's certainly the question to ask. But it's not one I can answer. I don't
think they've gotten a whole lot farther than Wick's "UA Cognate Sets" from
about 1986 in an overall understanding of things. The person to contact
might be John McLaughlin, who is supposedly continuing Wick's comparative
work.

I think Kay Fowler said something about someone having looked at the terms
continent-wide and found look-alikes all over the place. But that doesn't
tell me much, since, the older the source, the more the terms look alike
just because of sloppiness in orthography and wrong assumptions about
phonology.  E.g., using old sources some people have turned wagmu and wathan
(squash) into "cognates".

There is no question in my mind though that the Dakotan, Chiwere-Winnebago
and probably all Dhegiha plus Tutelo 'bow' terms are borrowed from
Algonquian, no matter where bows originated.

Bob


From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu  Thu Jul 12 13:34:57 2001
From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:34:57 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.083457.0500.>

12 July 2001
Bob:
Yes, a common (although not exclusive) theme running through these situations seems to be the role of self-serving outsiders. I have not been able to sort out the exact beginning or catalyst for the example I posted. However, it clearly has one or more non-community/non-Tribal-type folks sitting in the background. 

I posed several questions to the community member "writer" of the draft resolution about such things as unenforcability of the proposed law, academic cooling towards the community, disfranchisement of unenrolled members, the divisive impact it would have on the community, and the potential for extreme political manipulation of the language. The responses given made it clear that the person either 1) just had not thought out much of the details of the possible impact of the resolution, or 2) the "writer" was just fronting something instigated elsewhere. Whatever the case, it will require some more investigation on my part.

best
uthixide
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Rankin, Robert L <rankin at ku.edu>
    To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu' <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
    Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:56 PM
    Subject: RE: language as property, follow-up
    
    
    Mark and others,
     
    I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for. 
     
    Bob
    
        I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole. It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010712/185654bd/attachment.htm>

From rankin at ku.edu  Thu Jul 12 17:44:35 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:44:35 -0500
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.124435.0500.>


Mark,

Yeah, I know of several cases of this sort ot thing. Actually, as you no
doubt know, this is an old story in Americanist linguistics, going back a
century or more.  A lot of the Berkeley linguists especially began to think
of languages as "their" languages.  It was both selfish and paternalistic.
I've always lectured my students against such proprietary thoughts; it takes
a whole team of good linguists to document a language thoroughly. I don't
think that one person working alone could ever do it justice.

There are amusing stories of the infamous John P. Harrington hiding his
notes away in peoples attics so that Franz Boas couldn't get his hands on
them.  If you have never read  the book "Encounter with an Angry God", you
really ought to.  It is about Harrington (a very talented linguist, but
paranoid) written by his ex-wife, Carobeth Laird.

Nowadays, of course, the proprietary notions all come under the guise of
"political correctness", but it sure smells like the same old dead rat to
me. :-)

By the way, maybe I should clarify my position.  I think things like
stories, songs, particular prayers or rituals, etc. can certainly be
intellectual property (although I expect it would be difficult to determine
whose a lot of the time).  There've been many cases where such things have
been ripped off, but I know that among Dhegiha speakers many songs are
property of a particular family or clan.  I certainly have no argument with
that, but I'm glad I don't have to sort it all out!

Sounds to me like you've picked a really interesting and current topic.
I'll look forward to reading it sometime when you've finished.

Best,

Bob



Bob:
Yes, a common (although not exclusive) theme running through these
situations seems to be the role of self-serving outsiders. I have not been
able to sort out the exact beginning or catalyst for the example I posted.
However, it clearly has one or more non-community/non-Tribal-type folks
sitting in the background.

I posed several questions to the community member "writer" of the draft
resolution about such things as unenforcability of the proposed law,
academic cooling towards the community, disfranchisement of unenrolled
members, the divisive impact it would have on the community, and the
potential for extreme political manipulation of the language. The responses
given made it clear that the person either 1) just had not thought out much
of the details of the possible impact of the resolution, or 2) the "writer"
was just fronting something instigated elsewhere. Whatever the case, it will
require some more investigation on my part.

best
uthixide

-----Original Message-----
From: Rankin, Robert L < rankin at ku.edu <mailto:rankin at ku.edu> >
To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu' <mailto:'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'>  <
siouan at lists.colorado.edu <mailto:siouan at lists.colorado.edu> >
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:56 PM
Subject: RE: language as property, follow-up


Mark and others,

I just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking
about this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more
interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems
that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to
this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of
course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It has
apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic ambulance
chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already know what the
chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and are simply
milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were
copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago
RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for.

Bob


I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts you shared on the
topic of language as property. Your comments did not fall into a black hole.
It has given me some more grist for the dissertation mill.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010712/2db080f3/attachment.htm>

From ioway at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 12 18:59:11 2001
From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:59:11 -0600
Subject: language as property, follow-up
Message-ID: <THU.12.JUL.2001.125911.0600.>

"Rankin, Robert L" wrote:

> Yeah, I know of several cases of this sort ot thing. Actually, as you
> no doubt know, this is an old story in Americanist linguistics, going
> back a century or more.  A lot of the Berkeley linguists especially
> began to think of languages as "their" languages.  It was both selfish
> and paternalistic.  I've always lectured my students against such
> proprietary thoughts; it takes a whole team of good linguists to
> document a language thoroughly. I don't think that one person working
> alone could ever do it justice.

I totally agree.... for "secret knowledge" the tribes had their
"shaman's language." Language must live and grow to live and grow... One
person cannot do the work.. plus it is always good to have a difference
in opinion because that is how new directions and corrections of
inaccuracies are made. I am always very happy to have more people
working with Chiwere, as many as possible.... professional and
avocational, tribal and nontribal... I only stress the necessity to
share and compare data/findings and truthfulness in how one protrays
themselves as a linguist, tribal, nontribal whatever.. integrity in
language work is reflected by the integrity of the language worker..
integrity reflects integrity.

I am perhaps most frustrated by the lack of published material that I
can point interested tribal folks to.. Jimm's work is good and I look
forward to his final versions.. I look forward to Louann's work in a
published and accessible form... I would like to see much more
available.. perhaps re-analysis of Marsh's work and other texts...
perhaps CD-ROMs of elders' speaking the language, or songs. There are so
many interested in our membership, and there is not a lot I can point
them to.

I have several times offered to join in such collaborative efforts with
other Chiwere students.. I make the offer again, in a spirit of
collegiality, collaboration and sharing, for the good of the language,
the people, and our ancestors who have passed on. I will continue to
make such offers until I myself have gone from this world.. otherwise
how can I face those who will meet me there, who may say, "Why did you
stop trying?"

I would suggest linguists always remember that accessibility to their
work by tribal members at least should be INTEGRAL to any study. Not
just at some magical future publication date, but an ongoing cycle
DURING work... we all pass on someday, and many have gone on sometimes
before their time, and the people and the language suffer for it. I
would ask all people on this list to consider this request.. to make
ongoing research accessible to the people of the communities.


--
Lance Michael Foster
Email: ioway at earthlink.net
-------------------------
NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com)
Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org)
Homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway


From BARudes at aol.com  Sat Jul 14 17:00:37 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:00:37 EDT
Subject: Iroquoian bows
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.130037.EDT.>

Iroquoian words for bow

(Note: except where noted, accent falls on the second to the last vowel.
Accent placement in Huron, Laurentian and Nottoway is unknown.  Cherokee has
pitch accents on each vowel.)

Set 1

Proto-Lake Iroquoian    *a?eN:na?  pole, stick; bow
Cayuga                            a?eN:na?  pole, stick
Laurentian                       Ahena      bow
Mohawk                          a?vN:na?  bow
Oneida                             a?vNna:    bow (accent on last vowel)
Onondaga                        a?eN:na?  bow
Seneca                          wa?eN:noN?  bow, u?eN:noN? pole, stick (no
accent on either word)
Wyandot                          a?eN:nda?   bow

Set 2

Proto-Iroquoian                  *a?ta?  wood, stick
Cherokee                              ada     wood, stick
Proto-Northern Iroquoian  *a?ta?   bow
Laurentian                            Cacta   bow
Nottoway                             ata       bow
Seneca                            kaeo?ta?   gun (accent on first vowel)
Tuscarora                             a?neh   bow; gun
Wyandot                              a?ta?    bow

Other

Cayuga                           atota:?  bow
Huron                             anda     bow (possibly related to set 1)
Cherokee                       gahlja?di bow

The Catawba word for bow, ic^ika:, is a loan word from a Muskogean language,
compare Creek icca-kotaksi bow (lit. gun-crooked [Creek data from Karen
Booker]).

Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
words for bow submitted previously to the list.

Blair


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 14 22:14:51 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:14:51 -0600
Subject: Siouan & Caddoan Conference (fwd)
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.161451.0600.>

A brief report on the Siouan and Caddoan Conference, 2001, Chicago.

I'd like to thank John Boyle and the CLS for hosting (and overfeeding) us!
Next year in, not Jerusalem, but South Dakota.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:24:13 -0600
From: John P. Boyle <jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Re: Siouan & Caddoan Conference

John P. Boyle
________________
21st Annual Siouan and Caddoan Languages Conference
Ida Noyes Hall
June 15 - 16, 2001

Friday, June 15th

11:30 - Registration and Welcome Lunch

12:30 - John P. Boyle (University of Chicago) Cliticization verses
Inflection: Another look at the Hidatsa Mood Markers

1:00 - Randolph Graczyk (St. Charles Mission) The Crow and Hidatsa
Lexicons: A Comparison  [historical phonology and cognates]

1:30 - Hartwell Francis and Armik Mirzayan (University of Colorado, Boulder
and the Center for the Study of Indigenous Languages) Chiwere Word Classes

2:00 - Coffee

2:30 - Paul Kroeber (Indiana University, Bloomington) Morphological
ordering in Lakhota Adverbials

3:00 - Robert Rankin (University of Kansas) On Dakotan Syllable-Final and
Cluster Phonology

3:30 - Coffee

4:00 - Blair A. Rudes (University of North Carolina at Charlotte) The
Historical Significance of John Buck's "Tutelo" Vocabulary [Catawba forms
recorded in the north]

4:30 - Ted Grimm (Wichita, Kansas) TBA [The n-Phoneme in Siouan
Languages] [unable to attend]

=====

Saturday, June 16th

9:30 - Coffee and bagels

10:00 - Wendy Branwell (Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas) A
Wierzbickan Treatment of Human Emotion Words in the Dhegiha Languages: Some
Preliminary Considerations [typology of emotion terminology]

10:30 - Kathleen Shea (University of Kansas), Alice J. Anderton (Executive
Director, Intertribal Wordpath Society), Henry A. Lieb (Ponca language
teacher at Frontier High School, Red Rock, OK), Parrish Williams (Ponca
Elder and Native American Church leader) "Ponca Culture in Our Own Words":
A Progress Report

11:00 - Ardis Eschenberg (State University of New York, Buffalo) Omaha
Article Mismatches [=> The quotative ama in Omaha narative]

11:30 - John Koontz (University of Colorado, Boulder) Omaha-Ponca Verbs of
Motion [including new form noticed in Shea's handout ...]

12:00 - 1:30 Lunch

1:30 - Andreas Muehldorfer (University of Colorado at Boulder/University of
Cologne) Wichita System of Reference

2:00 - David S. Rood (University of Colorado, Boulder) The Wichita
Dictionary Project

2:30 - John P. Boyle (University of Chicago) The Siouan Languages Bibliography

3:00 - Business and Next Year

5:00 - Siouan and Caddoan Conference Barbecue Party


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 14 23:00:02 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 17:00:02 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.170002.0600.>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 06:56:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:
> It occurs to me to wonder how regular the Algonquian sets are.

They're super regular and super transparent.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 04:53:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:53:46 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12.f7e05b8.2881d4b5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.225346.0600.>

On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:
> Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
> words for bow submitted previously to the list.

I also notice a resemblance to the *wata PUA bow word.  What is the status
of initial labials like w or m in PI?


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 05:10:38 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:10:38 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12.f7e05b8.2881d4b5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.231038.0600.>

On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:
> Iroquoian words for bow
> Set 1
> Proto-Lake Iroquoian    *a?eN:na?  pole, stick; bow
>
> Other
> Huron                             anda     bow (possibly related to set 1)
>
> Iroquoian set two reminds me of the initial ahta- in one of the Algonquian
> words for bow submitted previously to the list.

Actually, the Huron anda form is pretty close to the Algonquian *me?tekw-a
forms, as they come out in Siouan, cf. OP maNde, except, again, for the
missing initial labial.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 05:38:29 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:38:29 -0600
Subject: Bow Dating
Message-ID: <SAT.14.JUL.2001.233829.0600.>

Per Melvin L. Fowler & Robert L. Hall, 1978, 'Late Prehistory of the
Illinois Area' in HBNAI 15, "The bow and arrow was introduced into
Illinois by A.D. 700 and replced the atlatl and throwing spear as a
principle weapon."  (560a) "The earliest radiocarbon evidence in Illinois
for the bow and arrow comes from Klunk Mound 8 in Calhoun County with a
date of A.D. 600 +/- 110 (M-1233; Crane & Griffin 1964:6) and from the
Scovill site with its date of A.D. 450 +/- 120.  Wray & McNeish 1961
suggested that "The use of the bow and arrow may have made available new
sources of food and new methods of warfare which helped break up the old
[Hopewellian] order."  (561a)

Unfortunately, this sort of summary comment can get rapidly out of date.


From BARudes at aol.com  Sun Jul 15 14:26:19 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:26:19 EDT
Subject: Iroquoian bows
Message-ID: <SUN.15.JUL.2001.102619.EDT.>

Initial /m/ exists only in Wyandot, where it is the reflex of a *w before a
nasal vowel.  Initial *w before a noun root is the third person singular
neuter agent prefix (it).  It comes from Proto-Iroquoian *w.  Initial *w is
dropped in Huron and in Wyandot (unless nasalized to /m/), and in Cherokee.
Huron, Wyandot and Cherokee develop new cases of initial /w/ from the
fricativization of the Proto-Iroquoian labiovelar *kw.

Blair


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sun Jul 15 20:55:55 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:55:55 -0600
Subject: Iroquoian bows
In-Reply-To: <12b.16d5a61.2883020b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.15.JUL.2001.145555.0600.>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote:

> Initial /m/ exists only in Wyandot, where it is the reflex of a *w before a
> nasal vowel.  Initial *w before a noun root is the third person singular
> neuter agent prefix (it).  It comes from Proto-Iroquoian *w.  Initial *w is
> dropped in Huron and in Wyandot (unless nasalized to /m/), and in Cherokee.
> Huron, Wyandot and Cherokee develop new cases of initial /w/ from the
> fricativization of the Proto-Iroquoian labiovelar *kw.

Thanks, Blair!

So, *w is interpretable as the 3rd singular neuter agent.  Would
*w-a?ta?(-...)  be 'it is wood, a stick, a bow', etc.?  Or proceding to
implications, would it be possible to suspect *wa?ta? instead of *a?ta?,
especially given the frequency of things like |[wata]| in the sense of
'bow'?

What's puzzling me here is the extent to which |[wata]| shaped things turn
up in the sense 'bow', but the correspondences are regular (Algonquian,
Iroquoian, Uto-Aztecan?, not Siouan) and, where the correspondences are
regular, intepretations like wood, pole, stick are also feasible.  I'm
pretty sure this isn't, say, a Proto-Amerind word in any of these senses.
It could be a series of coincidences, but I also doubt that.  At least it
seems worthwhile proceding on the presumption that it is not.

In regard to the problem of the underlying sense of 'pole, stick', notice
that Omaha-Ponca has maN'dehi 'spear', transparently a compound 'bowstave'
< 'bow' + 'stick, stem, trunk, bone', where clearly the order of
derivation of the terms is the reverse of the historical introduction of
the things named.  (The contradictory orders are an observation from
Michael McCafferty.)  Perhaps the sense of 'pole' > 'stick' is actually a
common secondary derivation from 'bow' instead of the original sense.

The other puzzling thing here is the distribution of |[wata]|-like forms,
currently Uto-Aztecan (not considered a borrowing), Siouan (three or four
forms, all considered borrowings), Algonquian (two forms, both vaguely
resemblant, neither considered borrowings), and Iroquoian (two forms plus
some change, one form and some of the change resemblant, the others not,
none considered borrowings).  The last three families are a
not-unreasonable continuum for a widespread loan, which, quite frankly,
seems not unlikely as the explanation for the resemblances, attested
regularities aside, but the first, UA, seems to require some path of
transmission not as yet noticed, most likely not, say, direct transmission
from Algonquian or Siouan to Numic.

It would definitely be interesting to know any further extent of
|[wata]|-like forms for 'bow' (or 'stick, pole'), and any reflections on
regularities, anomalies, and distributions in the terms in particular
languages or language families.  The north (Athabascan?) and the west
coast would seem profitable places to look.  It would also be interesting
to know of any archaeological surveys on bow technology.

JEK


From ird at blueridge.net  Mon Jul 16 16:18:49 2001
From: ird at blueridge.net (ird)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:18:49 -0400
Subject: Bow Dating Summary
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.121849.0400.IRD@BLUERIDGE.NET>

In the Ohio Archaeologist Vol. 43, No. 2 (Spring, 1993) is a detailed article by Leland Patterson, "Current Data on Early Use of the Bow and Arrow in Southern North America."  It is reprinted from La Tierra, Quarterly Journal of the Southern Texas Archaeological Association.  The date for that isn't given, but Patterson's bibliography covers 1991.  If these journals are hard to get and there's interest, I'll summarize with a quote or two.

Incidentally, I doubt if Catawba speakers received either their first bows or better bows from the Creeks, or had any particular reason to borrow a Creek word at what would have had to be a rather late time period.  Somewhere I found a much closer cognate with a maverick Algonquian language, and will add it to our collection when I re-find my notes on it.

Irene


From BARudes at aol.com  Mon Jul 16 16:40:13 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:40:13 EDT
Subject: Fwd: Bow Dating Summary
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.124013.EDT.>


-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: BARudes at aol.com
Subject: Re: Bow Dating Summary
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:38:48 EDT
Size: 1074
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010716/a3ef0399/attachment.eml>

From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 17 00:00:29 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:00:29 -0600
Subject: Athabascan 'bow'
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.180029.0600.>

Courtesy of Jeff Leer, suggested by Giulia Oliverio.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:17:40 -0800
From: Jeff Leer <jleer at mosquitonet.com>
To: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RE: (none) (fwd)

Hi John,

We don't have a plausible match in AET. PA reconstructs more or less as
follows, with an extremely irregular onset in the first (prefix) consonant:
*k'[superscript y]i[nasal][long][barred l]-t[schwa][engma][superscript
y][glottal]. The second syllable is the stem, meaning "handle", and the
meaning of the prefix is unknown. In place of the onset *k'[superscript y]
we also find *[glottal stop], *ts', and very rarely also *t[s hachek]'.
Tlingit uses saGs 'yew', and Eyak has Xahd-[barred l], lit. 'pull-INSTR.N'.

Best,
Jeff


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Tue Jul 17 05:39:45 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:39:45 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <MON.16.JUL.2001.233945.0600.>

It occurs to me to mention for the benefit of the IO scholars out there
that there are some possible IO song texts embedded in Fletcher &
LaFlesche.  An example would be p. 465:

WakoN'da thani ga the ke  (repeat three times)
Eha thani hiNga we tho he thoe

(repeat whole twice)

This is rendered something like:

Wakonda we offer this tobacco.
Now we are smoking it.

The th (edh) is presumably /r/.  Thani is not the usual word for tobacco
in OP, where it would be nini.  I was particular struck by the final
k[h]e, which F&LaF interpret as the 'horizontally extended' article,
though it is also the declarative.  But except for words that are more or
less invariant all across Mississippi Valley Siouan this text gives F&LaF
considerable difficulty.

How about:

WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.

Now is it IO?

There's an OP verb gadhe 'to donate' (a g-stem), which may figure in "ka
re".

There are also a fair number of IO names in the Dorsey texts, and some
songs explicitly identified as IO.

There is an Omaha-Ponca exclamation hiNda(khe) which occurs frequently in
the Dorsey texts glossed as 'let's see'.  I'm always thought it was
remarkably close to IO 'we see (DECL)', where the verb form should be
haNda < hiN + a...da.  OP would have aNdaNbE < aN + daNbE, with a totally
different stem for 'to see'.

There is also a point in the story of Haxige (in Dorsey 1890) that seems
to involve some language humor at the expense of IO speakers, though it
could also simply be a left over from an IO telling of the story.  I
suspect humor, however.  Haxige's brother is killed by the Watermonsters.
He tries to kill the children of the Watermonsters, but only wounds them.
Learning that Buzzard is going to doctor them, he kills Buzzard and goes
himself, disguised as Buzzard.  He shoos everyone out and starts cutting
up the children and boiling them.  The Watermonsters get suspicious and
send the grass-snake to spy on him.  He catches the snake and to gag him
he stuffs boiled watermonster strips down his throat.  The snake returns
to the Watermonsters to report what's happening and can only mutter
"Haxuka! Haxuka!"  Nobody can figure this out at first, but then someone
exclaims "Wait!  He's got something stuck in his throat!  Pull it out!"
I strongly suspect that Haxuka (Haxuga) is IO for Haxige.

JEK


From bi1 at soas.ac.uk  Tue Jul 17 14:28:48 2001
From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:28:48 GMT
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107111335430.21447-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.142848.GMT.>

I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
likely form?  I had thought, purely impressionistically,  that it had
something to do with yajipa 'sting, prick'.  What about 'spear'
wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from something like hu
'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk etymology.  Similarly
with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide', chaN
'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.  This takes us back
to the discussion earlier this year about the seeming morphological
transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are the spear and
shield words thought to be borrowings?

Bruce at .Date sent:      	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600 (MDT)
Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
From:           	Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To:             	<siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Subject:        	RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> stem-formative vowel.

Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
the Algonquian sets are.

Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
-a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
*miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
Stoney.

Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.

JEK

Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS


From simpsond at email.arizona.edu  Tue Jul 17 17:32:52 2001
From: simpsond at email.arizona.edu (Erik)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:32:52 -0700
Subject: Athabascan 'bow'
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107161758510.14324-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.103252.0700.>

Navajo has 'aLti' and Western Apache has 'iLti'.


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Jul 17 17:32:21 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:32:21 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <148A14B6898@soas.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.123221.0500.>

Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.

Michael McCafferty

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> likely form?  I had thought, purely impressionistically,  that it had
> something to do with yajipa 'sting, prick'.  What about 'spear'
> wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from something like hu
> 'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk etymology.  Similarly
> with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide', chaN
> 'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.  This takes us back
> to the discussion earlier this year about the seeming morphological
> transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are the spear and
> shield words thought to be borrowings?
>
> Bruce at .Date sent:      	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:48:22 -0600 (MDT)
> Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> From:           	Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
> To:             	<siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
> Subject:        	RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
>
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> > I was just talking with Kay Fowler and Jane Hill about this set and they
> > mentioned that the Uto-Aztecan term is *wata. This is not too different from
> > the Siouan terms, differing only by the feature [nasal] and the
> > stem-formative vowel.
>
> Is the UA *wata a regular set, or, as sometimes happened in early attempts
> at Proto-Siouan, a sort of formula covering some generally resemblant
> forms?  I've noticed that Americanists have a slight tendency to disregard
> the possibility of loans.  If forms like this are widely enough spread,
> we'd have to wonder if the Algonquian form was really 'wood', or just
> accidentally homophonous with it.  It occurs to me to wonder how regular
> the Algonquian sets are.
>
> Notice that the stem-formative vowel may vary from e in Siouan.  If the
> -a- in ita in itazipA is part of the stem, then it's a hypothetical
> *miNta.  In that case, however, the t > n shift in Santee is a bit hard to
> understand.  In regard to that n, I wonder about the behavior of the term
> in the less well attested dialects - Yankton-Yanktonais, Assinibone, and
> Stoney.
>
> Clearly it would be worth looking further for North American bow terms.
>
> JEK
>
> Dr. Bruce Ingham
> Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
> SOAS
>
>


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Wed Jul 18 02:39:16 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:39:16 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1010717123135.2890C-100000@ariel.ucs.indiana.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.203916.0600.>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Michael Mccafferty wrote:
> Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:
> > I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> > Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> > likely form?

I wasn't quite sure what "this" referred to.  I think Bruce is asking
what language Bob Rankin et al. (CSD group) think might have led to how
much of itazipA.  [Look, Catherine, a double quesiton!]

JEK


From shanwest at uvic.ca  Wed Jul 18 03:05:45 2001
From: shanwest at uvic.ca (Shannon West)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:05:45 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107172036470.19304-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.17.JUL.2001.200545.0700.>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of Koontz John E
> Sent: July 17, 2001 7:39 PM
> To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology
>
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Michael Mccafferty wrote:
> > Algonquian is not an issue here. This is a Siouan form.
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:
> > > I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for
> Itazipa 'bow'.
> > > Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> > > likely form?
>
> I wasn't quite sure what "this" referred to.  I think Bruce is asking
> what language Bob Rankin et al. (CSD group) think might have led to how
> much of itazipA.  [Look, Catherine, a double quesiton!]

LOL.  And I read 'form' as 'forum'.  And yes, that I what I thought Bruce
was asking too.

Shannon


From jggoodtracks at juno.com  Fri Jul 20 20:33:33 2001
From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks)
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 15:33:33 -0500
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <FRI.20.JUL.2001.153333.0500.>

John!
I'm just now getting to reply to EM.  My modum was dead.  I suspect it is
the result of an electrical storm, that also wiped out my VCR & answering
machine.  One of the local Ioway families here, who has some expertise
with computers, installed a new, more rapid modem.  He said that
electrical storms can access the PC via the telephone lines, even when
the PC is turned off.  I didn't know that!

Wibtha hon! ...for the information below.  I cannot speak for Louanna (in
Mexico) and Jill (relocating to ??; EM voided), or anyone else, but I
appreciate you pointing out the selection (p.465: Sacred Pipe Dance
Tobacco Filling Song).  I am not surprised as some years ago, I found an
IO Wekan (story) song embedded in an otherwise OP hand written document.
It was interesting as an example of altering (if that's the right term)
of the oral literature being shared at the turn of the century, and
narrated in contemporary times (1970's) upon my request, and gift of
tobacco.

The story was from Turtle Goes On The Warpath.  I recognized the song and
melody immediately, as we (I and LilaW together) recorded it from an
80+yoa OM elder married to an Oklahoma Ioway elder.  I say this as the
only story songs I/ we got, were from Okla Ioways or OM's married to an
Okla-I.  The taped song appears on p.51 (Bk I: IO lang.; 1977) as "Ketan
Xanje" (Big Turtle [Song] or Big Snapping Turtle [song]).  It was written
as sung, as:

Ketan Xanje daduge.   He-e yo, he-yo, hi-ye-e-e (X3)
Ketan Xanje arastawi. He-e yo, he-yo, hi-ye-e-e.

Big Turtle bites off a piece.	[radage = bite off s.t.]
You see the Big Turtle.

The more accurate (recovered) version, which incorporates the story plot
was given as:
(Note:  The words were written in Dorsey orthography).

Ketan Xanye waje gu hi, anye ke.
Isa naNGa hie je guhe.	

Big Turtle is coming back from touching (the foe,  i.e. counting coup).
You said (that) this (one) is coming back.

[As per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards:
[Ketan qanye watce Kuhe (anye ke).  ica - nanya hie tce Ku he]

[OP version as per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards; "T" is
upside down; "$" is a "c" with line thru it].
[KeTanyga wate agi-biama.  ecai $an e teagii ha].

My manuscript page (copy) says the "Tciwere" version was rendered by
Sanssouci.  Further, it says that "Frank LaFlesche reads "wa't^e" for
"wa'te", but doesn't understand use of last clause "e te agii ha"."
The song doubtlessly was rendered from Mary Gale LaF.  My MS must be a
copy of the hand written notes from DOR.  At the top, on left hand column
is written "p.257", followed by the Turtle melody written out onto a
musical scale, followed by the notation = "p.269", then "257.4. words of
song of Iowa origin with Omaha pronunciation."
The page has notations of other referenced pages with other sample
sentences in both IOM & OP, that seem to be in refernce to a story
adventure of the Rabbit.

Perhaps, John or Bob will recognize this manuscript page, that may be
from DOR or even Marsh, although I doubt it.

Meanwhile, "ranyi ka re ke (thani ga the ke)", may be = wagiruthe
(receive s.t. from another).  And usually, " ranyi hinrap^owi = (we are
smoking tobacco)".  So then, that is not quite a match for the 2nd
phrase.  I will have to work on that one.

John, if you come across any other songs/ names, do let me know the
location (pp.) or send it EM.  Unfortunately, I donot have a copy of
DOR's OP texts.
I have a question, namely, how might one take the musical notation in
Fletcher &LaFlesh, to render it into a mellody.  Once, I had a piano
teacher do a rendition on piano of such an Otoe transcription.  It was
better than nothing, but still left much to be desired.

And yes, I am aware of the "good natured" joking by the Poncas in past
times.  They said the OM (language) sounded like they had something in
their mouths while talking, and the Pawnees talked like chickens.
Jimm


On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:39:45 -0600 (MDT) Koontz John E
<John.Koontz at colorado.edu> writes:
> It occurs to me to mention for the benefit of the IO scholars out
> there
> that there are some possible IO song texts embedded in Fletcher &
> LaFlesche.  An example would be p. 465:
>
> WakoN'da thani ga the ke  (repeat three times)
> Eha thani hiNga we tho he thoe
>
> (repeat whole twice)
>
> This is rendered something like:
>
> Wakonda we offer this tobacco.
> Now we are smoking it.
>
> The th (edh) is presumably /r/.  Thani is not the usual word for
> tobacco
> in OP, where it would be nini.  I was particular struck by the final
> k[h]e, which F&LaF interpret as the 'horizontally extended' article,
> though it is also the declarative.  But except for words that are
> more or
> less invariant all across Mississippi Valley Siouan this text gives
> F&LaF
> considerable difficulty.
>
> How about:
>
> WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
> Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.
>
> Now is it IO?
>
> There's an OP verb gadhe 'to donate' (a g-stem), which may figure in
> "ka
> re".
>
> There are also a fair number of IO names in the Dorsey texts, and
> some
> songs explicitly identified as IO.
>
> There is an Omaha-Ponca exclamation hiNda(khe) which occurs
> frequently in
> the Dorsey texts glossed as 'let's see'.  I'm always thought it was
> remarkably close to IO 'we see (DECL)', where the verb form should
> be
> haNda < hiN + a...da.  OP would have aNdaNbE < aN + daNbE, with a
> totally
> different stem for 'to see'.
>
> There is also a point in the story of Haxige (in Dorsey 1890) that
> seems
> to involve some language humor at the expense of IO speakers, though
> it
> could also simply be a left over from an IO telling of the story.  I
> suspect humor, however.  Haxige's brother is killed by the
> Watermonsters.
> He tries to kill the children of the Watermonsters, but only wounds
> them.
> Learning that Buzzard is going to doctor them, he kills Buzzard and
> goes
> himself, disguised as Buzzard.  He shoos everyone out and starts
> cutting
> up the children and boiling them.  The Watermonsters get suspicious
> and
> send the grass-snake to spy on him.  He catches the snake and to gag
> him
> he stuffs boiled watermonster strips down his throat.  The snake
> returns
> to the Watermonsters to report what's happening and can only mutter
> "Haxuka! Haxuka!"  Nobody can figure this out at first, but then
> someone
> exclaims "Wait!  He's got something stuck in his throat!  Pull it
> out!"
> I strongly suspect that Haxuka (Haxuga) is IO for Haxige.
>
> JEK
>


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 02:23:17 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 20:23:17 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <20010720.154838.-508157.4.jggoodtracks@juno.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.202317.0600.>

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Jimm G GoodTracks wrote:
> He said that electrical storms can access the PC via the telephone
> lines, even when the PC is turned off.  I didn't know that!

I learned it from Bob Rankin who learned it the hard way.  And I've also
had a modem zapped, presumably in this way.  I could actually see the
damage.  Fortunately my computer was OK.  It's a good idea to use a surge
protector that lets you run the phone connection through it.  That's also
a good idea with cable connections for TVs.

> The story was from Turtle Goes On The Warpath.  I recognized the song and
> melody immediately, as we (I and LilaW together) recorded it from an
> 80+yoa OM elder married to an Oklahoma Ioway elder.  ...

> Perhaps, John or Bob will recognize this manuscript page, that may be
> from DOR or even Marsh, although I doubt it.

I do!  The ms copy you saw seems to represent exactly the printed version
in the Dorsey texts (1890:257).

===

Ke'-taN QaN'-ye wa'-te ku'-he ca'-nan~-ga' hi'-e tce'-e go',
tce'-e go'.

[I've rendered things a they were, using sequences like n~ for enye or c/
for cent-sign.  I've treated turned letters as underdotted.  JEK]

The notes (p. 269) say:

The words in the text are of Tciwere (Iowa) origin, but are given as
prononed by the Omahas.  The correct Tciwere version, according to
Sanssouci, is:

> [As per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards:
> [Ketan qanye watce Kuhe (anye ke).  ica - nanya hie tce Ku he]
>

K.etaN QaNye watce k.u he (anye ke) ica'-nan~a hi'e tce k.u he

[The printed version has aNy:  a-raised n-y the first time.  JEK]

[The basic changes are:  using dotted letters - unaspirated in this case -
where the previous version uses aspirates.  Restoration of affrication in
wa'-te => wa'-tce.  Restoration of anye ke (>) + the declarative.
Correction of ca-nan~ga to ica'nan~a 'you said' - the source had trouble
with the prefix i of 'to say' and with n~.  Replacement of tce-e go
(repeated) by tce k.u he.  I believe the verb is gu'he and the he was lost
in the OP context.  JEK]

answering to the Dhegiha

> [OP version as per DOR= the letter "K" is written backwards;
"T" is
> upside down; "$" is a "c" with line thru it].
> [KeTanyga wate agi-biama.  ecai $an e teagii ha].
>

K.et.an~ga wa'te agi'-biama' ecai' c/aN e te' agi'i ha

"'The Big Turtle is coming back from touching the foe, they say' you say.
'He is coming back from touching.'"

Frank La Fleche reads wa't`e [wa't?e] for wa'te [wa'the] but he does not
understand the use of the last clause, e te agii ha.

===

The OP seems to be:

kkettaNga           wa'the         agi'=bi=ama
big turtle          he struck them he came back QUOTE
(snapping turtle?)


es^a=i=dhaN
you said EVID?

e'  the       agi          ha
him he struck he came back DECL

Ha is the male declarative, which today would be hau.

> My manuscript page (copy) says the "Tciwere" version was rendered by
> Sanssouci.  Further, it says that "Frank LaFlesche reads "wa't^e" for
> "wa'te", but doesn't understand use of last clause "e te agii ha"."

Exactly as in the printed version.

I think the problem may be that LaFlesche didn't recognize the verb /the/
(or /athe/?), or maybe it would be /(a)tte/ or even /(a)te/, which would
seem to correspond to the IO je (or c^he?) and in the context seems to
mean 'to strike, touch' in the sense of a counting a coup.  I don't
recognize it off hand.

The points of view are somewhat puzzling, too, since there's a quotative
in a 'you said' quotation and then a simple declaration to the same effect
(in obviative form).

> The song doubtlessly was rendered from Mary Gale LaF.  My MS must be a
> copy of the hand written notes from DOR.  At the top, on left hand column
> is written "p.257", followed by the Turtle melody written out onto a
> musical scale, followed by the notation = "p.269", then "257.4. words of
> song of Iowa origin with Omaha pronunciation."

This is confirmed, except perhaps as to Mary Gale LaFlesche.  I suspect
there were a lot of IO contacts in the LaFlesche family.  Joseph may have
spoken some IO, too.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 02:53:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 20:53:46 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <20010720.154838.-508157.4.jggoodtracks@juno.com>
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.205346.0600.>

> > WakhaNda, rani ka re khe
> > Eha, rani hiNga we ro he roe.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Jimm G GoodTracks wrote:
> Meanwhile, "ranyi ka re ke (thani ga the ke)", may be = wagiruthe
> (receive s.t. from another).  And usually, " ranyi hinrap^owi = (we are
> smoking tobacco)".  So then, that is not quite a match for the 2nd
> phrase.  I will have to work on that one.

The loss of ny in ranyi is to be expected and I understand that ny is
pretty much in complementary distribution with n, ny occurring before
front vowels.

Otherwise, maybe the song is just more or less Omaha-ized, like the Big
Turtle one?  For gadhe see the LaFlesche Osage dictionary, p. 257b
(popular page number!) under 'donate'.  I've looked in your dictionary and
this doesn't seem to have a cognate in IO.

The hiNga might be hiN=nya 'they smoke' from hiN 'to smoke'.  Recall that
ny got converted to Ng in the Big Turtle song after a nasal vowel.  But
the we might also be the =wi plural.  I'm not sure how much of we ro he
roe to take as words and how much as vocables.  This is a point on which
I've been baffled ever since I first tried to make any sense of the songs
in Fletcher & LaFlesche.

> I have a question, namely, how might one take the musical notation in
> Fletcher &LaFlesh, to render it into a mellody.  Once, I had a piano
> teacher do a rendition on piano of such an Otoe transcription.  It was
> better than nothing, but still left much to be desired.

I think we're stuck with it.  It's all there is, and if it doesn't match
what is preserved today, there's not much we can do about it. If there was
anything out of the ordinary in the intervals or timing, I expect it got
lost.  I have the impression that no really serious modern anthroplogical
musicology has been done for Siouan groups.  There's been some song
collecting and some attention to translations of songs, but nothing much
on the musical systems.  On the bright side, there are some old recordings
and I suspect the tunes have been better preserved than the lyrics in some
cases.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 05:12:15 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:12:15 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <SUN.22.JUL.2001.231215.0600.>

Almost got caught by Bruce again, but noticed in time that this hadn't
gone to the list!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:59:02 -0600 (MDT)
From: Koontz John E <koontz at spot.colorado.edu>
To: Bruce Ingham <bi1 at soas.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> I was inyerested to hear about the Algonquian origin for Itazipa 'bow'.
> Does anyone know what is thought to be the actual Algonquian
> likely form?

I hope Bob will reply on this, because this is something he and the CSD
editors noticed, but in general, the Algonquian forms we were working
with, replaced with better transcriptions in some cases by Costa and
McCafferty, were:

Algonquian: PA (from Aubin's original list) *me?tekw-a 'wood, an.';
Menominee: (ne)-mee'tek my bow'; Fox: me'yta bow'(raised y); Sh.: mytekw-a
~ meytekwa (raised y in both) 'bow'; Miami: mite'kopa bow'; Chey.:
ma'tahke bow, archaic term', also Kickapoo: mehteeha bow' Voorhis-65.
[Some of the embedded ' may be ?, and I think Aubin may not be considered
a reliable source for the original data at least.]

Ojibwa, Cheyenne and Menomini (presumably moderated by Winnebago and IO)
are the logical possibilities.  If other Siouan languages were involved,
transmission from Miami-Illinois or maybe Fox-Sauk-Kickapoo becomes a
possibility.  Ojibwa isn' given here, and Menominiee looks closest, but is
lacking the final -w-a that explains the final -u in Winnebago, which
makes it somewhat difficult as a proposed source.  Of course, though we
suspect something later than Proto-Algonquian as a source, it's a stretch
to try to explicate the loans entirely in terms of the modern languages on
either side.  Perhaps a generalized Pre-Menominee actually had something
like *mee?tekwa.  But that wouldn't explain the final a of Dakotan
*m)ita(zipA).

> I had thought, purely impressionistically, that it had something to do
> with yajipa 'sting, prick'.

Well, jipa could certainly be related by sound symbolism to the zipA part
of the attested form, which is probably of Dakotan origin. I don't think
anything but the -it(a)- part is supposed to be accounted for by
Algonquian precedents.  One might argue that this is just i-tha-, but, of
course, it's ita- not itha-, and I seem to recall that tha- can be added
further to the front of this.

> What about 'spear' wahukheza.  It looks as though it comes from
> something like hu 'stick', kheza 'barbed'.  But it may be just folk
> etymology.

It looks straight forward enough to me, except that I wonder if kheza
doesn't just mean 'sharp' here?  Buechel says kheze' is 'the barb of a
fishhook, the sharp point of anything'.  'Barb' may be a specialized
sense.  Buechel also gives ik(h)aNc^ola, which seems to a bow-spear.
This is 'string-less' or 'unstrung'?

The terms for 'spear' in various siouan languages are often transparently
things like 'stabber', which doesn't lead to a special 'spear' set.

> Similarly with 'shield' wahachaNka which looks like ha 'skin, hide',
> chaN 'wood' ie 'hide hardened to a texture like wood'.

Maybe c^haNka refers to the wooden frame?  In fact, maybe the term
primarily refers to the framework?

> This takes us back to the discussion earlier this year about the
> seeming morphological transparency of a lot of basic Lakota words. Are
> the spear and shield words thought to be borrowings?

I don't think these terms are loans, and I generally agree with the
perception of most Siouan languages as depending heavily on fairly
transparent compounds of shorter stems, along with verbal derivations.
These constituents are generally, but not always, attested elsewhere in
the language.  A case in point would be Mandan, where ko'xaNte 'corn
(kernels)' is not analyzable in Mandan.  There is ko(r) 'squash', but what
is xaNte?  It turns out that this can be elucidated by forms like Dakotan
xaNte' in the non-cedar sense of 'small plant' or OP xa'de 'small leafy
plant' (sometimes rendered 'grass').

Still apart from this tendency, there are at least some exceptions like
'bow' waiting to be noticed.  Sometimes a hint is provided.  The kinds
I've noticed are things like:

- the presence of an unusual cluster (gm in wagmeza or igmu)

- less certainly, perhaps an atypical final vowel (u in a noun as in
maNaNc^gu 'bow' in Winnebago)

- or in a heavy cluster in an atypical location (maNaNc^gu again, which
can't be explained by the typical suffixing of -ke < *ka as a formative)

- more certainly, an atypical length for a root (kku'kkusi 'pig' in OP)

Of course, loans often stand out like a sore thumb when compared across
languages, because they lead to irregular correspondences.  Not all
irregular correspondences are due to loans, and some loans may produce
regular correspondences.  For that matter, many words have no cognates and
can't be compared, but irregular corespondences are still very suggestive
when they occur, and before the recent work of the CSD there's been some
tendency by Siouanists to overlook irregularities in sets like 'tobacco'.

A prevailing problem is the strong tendency of Americanists to stick to a
single family.  There are some exemplary exceptions around, but many of
us, and I'm a good example, are not really familiar with anything but, in
this case, Siouan.  Another problem may be that it is legendary that
American languages are not very prone to borrowing.  As an expectation
this can be quite self-fulfilling.  A loan that isn't expected isn't
noticed, and a loan that isn't noticed apparently hasn't occurred.

By the way, Bruce, has your Lakota dictionary come out?  I have to confess
I haven't ordered a copy yet, and I should rectify that!

JEK


From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu  Mon Jul 23 17:44:14 2001
From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:44:14 -0700
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.104414.0700.>

Hey John, I've missed something...what do you mean by "a simple declaration
(in obviative form".  It's obviously *the obviative form" that I'm curious
about.

best, sara t.


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 23 17:51:44 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:51:44 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.105144.0700.>

Hello all...

As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.

I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
phonemic forms.)

(? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)

P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
'string, cord')

Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
'forest, timber, wood'

Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
mhtekwi 'tree'

Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'

Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'

Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'

Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'

Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'

Arapaho b?:t?? 'bow' & be:t?yo:k 'bowstring'.

Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
Delaware hat?:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.

Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)

best,

David Costa


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 23:04:24 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:04:24 -0600
Subject: Odds & Ends of Ioway-Otoe in Omaha Sources
In-Reply-To: <A154FC0C2AC8D111BE4F00805F6FDFF601E361DD@MESQUITE>
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.170424.0600.>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Trechter, Sara wrote:

> Hey John, I've missed something...what do you mean by "a simple declaration
> (in obviative form)".  It's obviously "the obviative form" that I'm
> curious about.

I'm sorry I was obscure.  I was afraid I was droning on about something
that might not be generally interesting, so I hurried.

> kkettaNga           wa'the         agi'=bi=ama
> big turtle          he struck them he came back QUOTE

This is embedded under (or tagged with) a quotative (=ama), but the verb
is agi=bi 'he comes back', which is the third singular proximate form (in
Omaha-Ponca), homophonous with, or better, identical with, the third
plural.  The form should be pretty recognizable as being like a plural to
a Dakotanist, as =bi compares nicely with =pi.  The quotative conditions
the conservative form =bi of the proximate/plural here.  Otherwise it
would be agi=i.


> es^a=i=dhaN
> you said EVID?

Here's the second person quotation form I mentioned.

> e'  the       agi          ha
> him he struck he came back DECL

This is in obviative form, having no =i ~ =bi with the third singular.
And then the ha (=ha?) is the declarative.  So this means something like
'he-obviative struck him' or 'he-offstage struck him' or 'he-(not seen)
struck him', whereas the first clause would mean 'he-proximate ...', etc.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 23 23:08:40 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:08:40 -0600
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <200107231752.KAA14369@scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.170840.0600.>

Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
Iroquoian.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:

> Hello all...
>
> As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
> forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
> dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
> either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
> is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.
>
> I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
> already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
> already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
> phonemic forms.)
>
> (? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)
>
> P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
> 'string, cord')
>
> Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
> mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
> 'forest, timber, wood'
>
> Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
> 'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
> mhtekwi 'tree'
>
> Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'
>
> Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'
>
> Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
> wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'
>
> Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
> means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'
>
> Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'
>
> Arapaho b?:t?? 'bow' & be:t?yo:k 'bowstring'.
>
> Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
> Delaware hat?:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
> 'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
> etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
> haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
> plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
> reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.
>
> Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)
>
> best,
>
> David Costa
>


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 24 00:24:40 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:24:40 -0700
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <MON.23.JUL.2001.172440.0700.>

> Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
> second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
> resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
> Iroquoian.

Oh yeah. Good point. Well, this probably has no bearing on Siouan, but for
the Iroquoian enthusiasts among us:

(0 = alpha, ` = grave accent, ' = acute accent; o^ = o-circumflex; $ =
s-hacek)

Unami Delaware /hata':p:i/ 'bow'
Unquachog <atu'mp> 'bow'
Massachusett <ahtomp> 'bow'
Loup B <tampe> 'bow'
W. Abenaki /(a)to^bi/ & Penobscot /tt0`pi/ 'bow'
Maliseet /'tahtapiyil/ 'his bow'
Micmac /api/~/tapi/ 'bow'.

Frank Siebert in his 1975 Powhatan article reconstructed PA */a?ta:pya/ for
this, tho the only language that possibly supports that is Montagnais
/a$ca:piy/. PA */ahta:pya/ might actually be the correct form.

The nasal vowels seen in most of the New England forms are regular from PA
*/a:/.

Also, Munsee Delaware has /mata'ht/ 'bow'. Not sure where that's from.
Plains Cree has /ahca:piy/.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Iroquoian lack /p/? Thus, wouldn't
glottal stop be a plausible subsitute for /p/ if it was borrowed from
Algonquian into Iroquoian? I know, if it's borrowed into Iroquoian, one
would expect the etymon to be irregular in that family and (perhaps) regular
in Eastern Algonquian, but if you say the borrowing went the other way
(Iroq. > Alg.) then you're stuck with the problem of why /?/ should go to
/p/.

David


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Jul 24 13:32:13 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 08:32:13 -0500
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107231706250.27143-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.24.JUL.2001.083213.0500.>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Koontz John E wrote:

> Unlurking very much appreciated. The comment on the irregularity of the
> second term *ahta or *a?ta is interesting, as this is the one that
> resembled PI *a?ta? that the Blair Rudes suggested was regular in
> Iroquoian.

This could well be a borrowing that could have diffused, according to the
distribution of PA *ahta- ~ *a?ta-  in Algonquian terms for 'bow' you
find it along the East Coast and in the Western Great Lakes (Ojibwe and
Miami-Illinois),


(and it is an **old** morpheme in Miami-Illinois as attested by the Jesuit
sources from around the turn of the 18th century; in other words, it's not
a late borrowing from, say, Unami)


it could have diffused both to the east and to the west from an (several)
Iroquoian population(s) lying between the Algonquians. This notion jibes,
of course, with the general Algonquian-Iroquian population distribution
model for late prehistory. In addition, there is good evidence of positive
Iroquian-Algonquian interaction in the area southwest of the Lake Erie,
where exchange of ideas, technology, and language could/would have
occurred. The archaeologist Bob McCullough has discovered this and written
about it. I'll have to find the sources for those interested. It appears
that present-day central, southeast and northern Indiana was, say, an
"interaction zone," where peoples from various cultural backgrounds and
languages lived cheek to jowl and, lacking any evidence of warfare
thusfar, were pretty much getting along.

Drawing back from this particular focus, it seems wise to consider the
possibility that the bow was invented in more than one place. Time out of
mind people have been attaching cordage to wood.

One question I have, does anyone know the poundage that native bows have?

Best,

Michael McCafferty

>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, David Costa wrote:
>
> > Hello all...
> >
> > As a Lurking Algonquianist, I felt obliged to correct some of the Algonquian
> > forms given previously. I should warn people that the Proto-Algonquian
> > dictionary is not the most dependable place to get Algonquian data, for
> > either proto-forms or daughter language cognates. The daughter language data
> > is only as good as the original source from which it was taken.
> >
> > I apologize if this is redundant by now, or if the interested parties
> > already have all these forms. I can't recall how much of this data has
> > already been given here, but since I had it at hand... (These are all
> > phonemic forms.)
> >
> > (? = glottal stop, 'E' = front mid lax vowel, @ = schwa)
> >
> > P.A. *me?tekwa:pyi 'bow, bowstring' (*me?tekw- 'tree, wood' + -a:py-
> > 'string, cord')
> >
> > Miami-Illinois mihte(h)ko:pa, mihte(h)kwa:pa 'bow', mihte(h)kwa:pinti,
> > mihte(h)ko:pinti 'bowstring'; also old Illinois mihtekwi & Miami mihtehki
> > 'forest, timber, wood'
> >
> > Shawnee mtekwa, pl. mtekwa:pali 'gun' [very likely the pre-contact word for
> > 'bow', obviously], mtekwa:piti 'bowstring', and hilenahkwi 'bow'; also
> > mhtekwi 'tree'
> >
> > Ojibwe mitigwa:b 'bow', mitig 'tree'
> >
> > Potawatomi mt at gwap 'bow', mt at g 'tree'
> >
> > Fox mehtekwa (archaic) & mehtekwanwi (modern) 'arrow', mehtekwi 'tree,
> > wood'; mehtekwa:pi 'bowstring' & mehte:ha 'bow'; Kickapoo mehte:ha 'bow'
> >
> > Menominee nemE:?tek 'my bow' (animate; as an inanimate noun mE?tek this
> > means 'wood') & mE?tekuap 'bowstring, bow'
> >
> > Cheyenne ma?tahke 'bow'
> >
> > Arapaho b?:t?? 'bow' & be:t?yo:k 'bowstring'.
> >
> > Another cognate set is exemplified by Ojibwe acha:b 'bowstring', Unami
> > Delaware hat?:p:i 'bow ', and the Miami-Illinois alternates ne:htia:pa
> > 'bow' & ne:htia:pinti 'bowstring'. As I think has been mentioned, tho, this
> > etymon is mostly found in Eastern Algonquian, along the Atlantic Coast. I
> > haven't give those forms since I figure Maliseet and Unquachog aren't very
> > plausible candidates for Siouan loans. :-) Incidentally, the etymon doesn't
> > reconstruct cleanly. The consonant clusters line up rather poorly.
> >
> > Thanks for your patience. Anyway, back to my lurking. :-)
> >
> > best,
> >
> > David Costa
> >
>
>


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From BARudes at aol.com  Tue Jul 24 14:54:22 2001
From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:54:22 EDT
Subject: Bows (IO tradition)/Yankton sociology (fwd)
Message-ID: <TUE.24.JUL.2001.105422.EDT.>

I am not going to hypothesize whether Iroqouoian borrowed from Algonquian
(o.k., I doubt it), or Algonquian borrowed from Iroqouoian (I doubt that too,
but if so, it only borrowed the initial part of its word, and not the final
part containing /p/.  Anyway, glottal stop is not a reasonable Iroquoian
substitute for /p/ in a borrowed word.  In known cases of such borrowing,
Iroquoian languages either substitute /kw/ or /w/.

Blair


From Rgraczyk at aol.com  Fri Jul 27 19:41:15 2001
From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:41:15 EDT
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.154115.EDT.>

I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
direction of borrowing.

Randy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20010727/3aa92d3c/attachment.htm>

From shanwest at uvic.ca  Fri Jul 27 20:52:14 2001
From: shanwest at uvic.ca (Shannon West)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:52:14 -0700
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <d7.9dba532.28931ddb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.135214.0700.>

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
[mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of Rgraczyk at aol.com
Sent: July 27, 2001 12:41 PM
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Soup


>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
>like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
>Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about
the
>direction of borrowing.
>
>Randy

Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.  I think there's
another word for a thick soup, or stew, but I can neither rememeber nor find
it right now.  Hohpe reminds me of hoxpa 'cough', but that's almost
certainly coincidence.

The Cree word for soup (if I recall correctly) is anapapoy.  Ojibwe for
'soup' is naboob.  Those are the only Algonquian languages I have a sniff
about.

I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

Shannon


From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu  Fri Jul 27 21:25:36 2001
From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:25:36 -0700
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.142536.0700.>

'wozhapi' Lakhota for berry soup made with corn starch or flour nowadays.
I'm also told that it is used pejoratively to refer to 'inbreeding' (cousin
marrying) among white people. sara t. (the 'zh' is a alveopalatal fricative)

>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
>like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
>Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about
the
>direction of borrowing.
>
>Randy

Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.  I think there's
another word for a thick soup, or stew, but I can neither rememeber nor find
it right now.  Hohpe reminds me of hoxpa 'cough', but that's almost
certainly coincidence.

The Cree word for soup (if I recall correctly) is anapapoy.  Ojibwe for
'soup' is naboob.  Those are the only Algonquian languages I have a sniff
about.

I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

Shannon


From rankin at ku.edu  Fri Jul 27 22:10:15 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:10:15 -0500
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.171015.0500.>

>I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.

>Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.
I've been not much help, I'm afraid.

No, actually that's right on the money. Mandan has something like /huNp-/,
so the Nakota fits in with both it and the Crow. This still doesn't mean
they're cognates rather than borrowings though, since all the languages that
have the word are in the NW of Siouan territory. I suspect Randy's right and
that the word was borrowed in one direction or the other.

Bob


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 28 03:05:24 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 20:05:24 -0700
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.200524.0700.>

Actually, it's a native Algonquian word. It has an Arapaho cognate /h?kok/,
and an Algonquin (Quebec Ojibwe) cognate /aboob(ii)/. This is reshaped in
most Algonquian languages to */napo:pi/ or */nepoopi/ under the influence of
*/nepyi/'water'. I could swear I saw an article somewhere by Goddard or
Pentland where this etymon was reconstructed as */apo:pyi/, tho I'm afraid I
can't find it at the moment. But either way, I guess Crow borrowed it from
Cheyenne?


Dave Costa


----------
From: Rgraczyk at aol.com
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Soup
Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001, 12:41 pm


I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
direction of borrowing.

Randy


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sat Jul 28 02:24:07 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:24:07 -0500
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <d7.9dba532.28931ddb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.27.JUL.2001.212407.0500.>

On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote:

> I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.  This is suspiciously
> like Crow hu'ppii 'soup'.  Does this have a Siouan etymology?  What about
> Algonkian?  It sure looks like a borrowing to me, and I am curious about the
> direction of borrowing.
>
> Randy
>

I don't know Cheyenne. But the term in question sounds like it could be a
reflex of Proto-Algonquian */-aapow-/ 'liquid'. Reflexes of this final are
all over the place in the Algonquian languages, so its being in Cheyenne
would not be a surprise.


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From are2 at acsu.buffalo.edu  Sat Jul 28 06:25:04 2001
From: are2 at acsu.buffalo.edu (Ardis R Eschenberg)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:25:04 -0400
Subject: Virus, Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBA9@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.022504.0400.>

Hi everyone.  I have gotten a virus in my computer from a listserve and
want to warn you to not open anything from me.
(It is fixed now & it is relatively harmless to your computer but it spams
like mad.  I worry that it hit this listserve.)
I am truly sorry if you got a weird email from me.  It is the sircamm32 at mm
virus.
BTW the Omaha word for soup is tani 'meat water' (broth).
Sorry,
Ardis


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Sat Jul 28 07:06:46 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:06:46 -0600
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBA9@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.010646.0600.>

On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> >I recently came across a Cheyenne form hohpe 'soup'.
>
> >Can't say, but I can give you the Nakota for 'soup' haNbi.
>
> No, actually that's right on the money. Mandan has something like /huNp-/,
> so the Nakota fits in with both it and the Crow. This still doesn't mean
> they're cognates rather than borrowings though, since all the languages that
> have the word are in the NW of Siouan territory. I suspect Randy's right and
> that the word was borrowed in one direction or the other.

Teton haNpi' 'broth, soup; gravy; juoce' (Buechel 167a)

Mandan hu'priN(h) (Hollow 80), i.e., hupiNniN, with (h) showing in
hupiNniNhot 'salt' < hupiNniN + ot 'to mix'.

Winnebago has niNiNpaN'naN, which might be niNiN 'water' + paNnaN 'to have
scent', or maybe not.  It could be, say, *hiNiN'praN modified by analogy
with niN 'water' as the Algonquianists say.

What the Mandan term does resemble in an interesting way is:

Teton omni'c^a 'bean' < *(h)obriNka
OP    hiNbdhiN(ge) 'bean'
Osage hoNpriN(ke) 'bean'

etc.


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sat Jul 28 15:45:50 2001
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael Mccafferty)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:45:50 -0500
Subject: bow discussion-- Curious form in Uto-Aztecan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0107222311080.13239-100000@spot.colorado.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.104550.0500.>

This is from Karen Dakin:

"Campbell and Langacker in their 1978 IJAL article reconstruct *awta for
'atlatl' based on the Hopi form. My feeling is that it comes probably from
*pata-, related to Nahuatl patla:ni 'to fly', since *paC often went to
*haC and then to *ahC, so that *pata > *hata- and by metathesis to ahta.
For 'bow' I'm really not sure without looking at sources. tlahuitolli
would come from the pUA prefix *wi- 'long', and *to-l 'bent, twisted' I
imagine.  I'll check it more carefully later."
===============================================

Michael McCafferty


Michael McCafferty
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu


From rankin at ku.edu  Sat Jul 28 17:39:53 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:39:53 -0500
Subject: Soup
Message-ID: <SAT.28.JUL.2001.123953.0500.>

I checked 'soup' in the comparative dict. MS and my memory was right. The
forms cited by Randy and Shannon are restricted geographically to the NW
area within Siouan. The forms are:

CR   hu'ppii
HI   hu'pa
MA   huNpiNniN'he (a compound fide Dick Carter)
LA   haNpi'
     asaN'pi 'milk' < aze' 'breast' + haNpi
DA   haNpi'   Sioux Valley haNpi' also.
NA   haNbi' (from Shannon)

That's it. All the other languages have completely different and unrelated
forms. The commentary points out that this is one of several sets in which
aN and uN correspond irregularly.

I don't think these are at all related to the 'bean' word, since in 'bean'
the (h)o- portion is etymologically distinct from the -m(i)ni- part, and the
latter part is the part borrowed from Uto-Aztecan or Yuman (v. our earlier
correspondence).  Segmentation there is before the labial element and here
it is after the labial element. Algonquian looks like a good source here,
with Cheyenne as suspect number one. Siouan nasality is unexplained however.

Bob


From rankin at ku.edu  Mon Jul 30 16:00:56 2001
From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.110056.0500.>

I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
Bob

******************************************

Dictionary wanted
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)

  I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
  I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
  been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!

                                                                   --"Zeph"
                                                       Wagner, South Dakota
                                                       (ishnajin at webtv.net)


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 18:05:56 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:05:56 -0600
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBB8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.120556.0600.>

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:

> I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
> Bob
>
> ******************************************
>
> Dictionary wanted
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
>   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
>   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
>   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!
>
>                                                                    --"Zeph"
>                                                        Wagner, South Dakota
>                                                        (ishnajin at webtv.net)

I don't actually know what to recommend, but I think it would be a Yankton
dictionary, not a Nakota one, at least not Nakota in the sense of
Assiniboine or Stoney.


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 20:43:06 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:43:06 -0600
Subject: Soup
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBAB@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.144306.0600.>

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> I don't think these are at all related to the 'bean' word, since in 'bean'
> the (h)o- portion is etymologically distinct from the -m(i)ni- part, and the
> latter part is the part borrowed from Uto-Aztecan or Yuman (v. our earlier
> correspondence).

Note also that Mandan has, per Hollow, o'wriNk 'bean' (i.e., o'miNniNk).


From John.Koontz at colorado.edu  Mon Jul 30 20:43:17 2001
From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:43:17 -0600
Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.144317.0600.>

>>From a summary sent Bob Rankin in 1996 by Karen Booker.

Chitimacha axt 'bow, arrow'.


From pankihtamwa at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 30 21:25:57 2001
From: pankihtamwa at earthlink.net (David Costa)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:25:57 -0700
Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.142557.0700.>

Actually, Chitimacha does not have an /x/. The word in question is really
/akt/, and it's given in Swadesh's unpublished Chitimacha dictionary as:

(1) 'bow'

(2) 'a kind of musical horn about 1 1/2 to 2 feet long, consisting of a
hollow reed bent in a hook and three parallel reeds with fingering holes
connecting the longer and shorter arms of the hook'

According to Swadesh, Swanton gave the word as 'bow, arrow for bow, blowgun
arrow, barrel of gun'.

Given the semantic differences here, I'm inclined to think that the 'musical
horn' meaning is original and that the others are later extensions from when
the weapons in question were first encountered.

I think I already mentioned this, but this is reminiscent of how the 'gun'
words in Arapaho-Atsina and Miami are both descended from the Proto-
Algonquian 'flute' word. In the oldest sources (Kroeber), the Arapaho word
still retains an alternate meaning of 'flute'.

Dave Costa


----------
>From: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
>To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
>Subject: Resemblent Southeastern Bow Terms
>Date: Mon, Jul 30, 2001, 1:43 pm
>

>>>From a summary sent Bob Rankin in 1996 by Karen Booker.
>
> Chitimacha axt 'bow, arrow'.
>
>


From jggoodtracks at juno.com  Tue Jul 31 01:37:38 2001
From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:37:38 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
Message-ID: <MON.30.JUL.2001.203738.0500.>

Doug Parks at Indiana University has an Assiniboine language Project, if
indeed it is the appropriate dialect.  They have been working with
Ft.Belknap and Ft.Peck in MT.  He is at:
parksd at indiana.edu
http://www.indiana.edu/%Eaisri/projects/research.htm

Also I recall someone on the Lists that has made contributions on Nakota/
Assiniboin from time to time.  Perhaps, that person has the information.

Meanwhile, I have contacted an Assiniboin friend who has had interest in
the language and may have found materials, dictionary somewhere.
Jimm

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:05:56 -0600 (MDT) Koontz John E
<John.Koontz at colorado.edu> writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
>
> > I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have
> missed it.
> > Bob
> >
> > ******************************************
> >
> > Dictionary wanted
> >   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
> >
> >   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South
> Dakota.
> >   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my
> search has
> >   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?
> Thank You!
> >
> >
> --"Zeph"
> >                                                        Wagner,
> South Dakota
> >
> (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
> I don't actually know what to recommend, but I think it would be a
> Yankton
> dictionary, not a Nakota one, at least not Nakota in the sense of
> Assiniboine or Stoney.
>
>


From bi1 at soas.ac.uk  Tue Jul 31 14:37:45 2001
From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:37:45 GMT
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <F73B91BED37FD5119F970008C7CF50FC94EBB8@skylark.mail.ukans.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.31.JUL.2001.143745.GMT.>

If what is wanted is a Yankton dictionary rather than a Nakota one,
I believe Williamson's English-Dakota dictionary is Yankton rather
than anything else

Bruce

Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
From:           	"Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
To:             	"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'" <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Subject:        	Yankton dictionary wanted.

I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
Bob

******************************************

Dictionary wanted
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)

  I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
  I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
  been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!

                                                                   --"Zeph"
                                                       Wagner, South Dakota
                                                       (ishnajin at webtv.net)
Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS


From egooding at iupui.edu  Tue Jul 31 13:54:26 2001
From: egooding at iupui.edu (Erik D Gooding)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:54:26 -0500
Subject: Yankton dictionary wanted.
In-Reply-To: <C006095FCD@soas.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <TUE.31.JUL.2001.085426.0500.>

Most Yankton refer to themselves as Nakota. The Yanktonai I worked with
at Standing Rock referred to themselves as Dakota, but used Nakota when
referring to Yanktons. Most anthro's would attribute this is Jim Howard I
believe, his belief that Yankton-Yanktonai was originally a "n" dialect
since he believed that the Assiniboine (and by inference the Stoney) were
an offshoot of the Yanktonai (as many believed and still believe).


Erik

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote:

> If what is wanted is a Yankton dictionary rather than a Nakota one,
> I believe Williamson's English-Dakota dictionary is Yankton rather
> than anything else
>
> Bruce
>
> Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:00:56 -0500
> Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> From:           	"Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
> To:             	"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu'" <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
> Subject:        	Yankton dictionary wanted.
>
> I forward this from the SSILA newsletter for anyone who may have missed it.
> Bob
>
> ******************************************
>
> Dictionary wanted
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   J.L.(Zeph) Zephier (ishnajin at webtv.net)
>
>   I am a Nakota Sioux, from the the Ihanktonwan Oyate, in South Dakota.
>   I've been searching for a Nakota dictionary.  As of yet my search has
>   been in vain.  Does anyone have an idea where I can find one?  Thank You!
>
>                                                                    --"Zeph"
>                                                        Wagner, South Dakota
>                                                        (ishnajin at webtv.net)
> Dr. Bruce Ingham
> Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
> SOAS
>
>