From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Mon Jun 4 13:44:31 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 07:44:31 -0600 Subject: Fwd: Re: JUNE 15 CONFERENCE Message-ID: Dear all, I'm Passing this along from Wendy. > >Hi John--- > >Could you pass this email on to those on the Siouan list? I'm curious if >anyone is staying at the Ramada Inn Lake Shore during the conference? If so, >I'd be grateful if I could catch a ride with them to the conference, or to >Midway airport on Saturday night. Or... we could buddy-up on taxi fare. >Oodles of gratitude, and look forward to meeting everyone. > > >Wendy Branwell >Wichita State University >316-687-3805 >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 01:30:57 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 19:30:57 -0600 Subject: Reduplication Message-ID: Dear All, I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. What is it used for? In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. Is this the case for the other languages? Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the languages? Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? Any information will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks, John Boyle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 631 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 04:27:01 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:27:01 -0600 Subject: SACL Conference schedule Message-ID: Dear List Members, Here is the tentative conference schedule. I'm looking forward to seeing everyone and hearing the paper. Best wishes, 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 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 4:30 - Ted Grimm (Wichita, Kansas) TBA ===== 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 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 11:30 - John Koontz (University of Colorado, Boulder) Omaha-Ponca Verbs of Motion 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2397 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mosind at yahoo.com Wed Jun 6 03:52:40 2001 From: mosind at yahoo.com (Wablenica) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 07:52:40 +0400 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear John Boyle. I could post the chapter from Patricia Shaws "Theoretical Issues of Dakota phonology and morphology", dealing with redup in Dakotan - if authorities permit me. Connie. -----Original Message----- From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of John P. Boyle Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 5:31 AM To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu Subject: Reduplication Dear All, I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. What is it used for? In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. Is this the case for the other languages? Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the languages? Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? Any information will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks, John Boyle From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 14:54:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 08:54:26 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Wablenica wrote: > I could post the chapter from Patricia Shaws "Theoretical Issues of Dakota > phonology and morphology", dealing with redup in Dakotan - if authorities > permit me. > > Connie. Shaw's discussion would be one reference I would recommend myself. It's probably best not to read the text of it into the list for several reasons, primarily copyright issues and bulk. Posting the text on the Web and posting the URL here would be between you and Pat Shaw ("Patricia A. Shaw" ) (not a list subscriber). Her approval would help resolve the copyright issue. I don't know what say Garland Press might have. Sadly, I believe the Garland edition of her dissertation is out of print, so copyright issues aside, having the text available on the Web would be a service. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 15:16:43 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 09:16:43 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, John P. Boyle wrote: > I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell > me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? I think we had a past thread on this, so it might help to check the archives at the LinguistList. I think reduplication occurs in all the Siouan languages, though I'm not positive about Southeastern or Catawban without looking. It certainly occurs throughout Mississippi Valley. The particular scheme of reduplication does differ somewhat from language to language, however. It might be worth looking at other languages in the area(s) for this one. I doubt this is a Siouan feature per se. > Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. In MV, yes. > What is it used for? In Dakotan it forms the plural for inanimate subject verbs and has a distributive sense 'here and there, repeated instances, etc.' In Omaha-Ponca it isn't used for the plural, but it is more or less distributive. I seem to recall that it means 'by Xs' with numerals in Dakotan. It occurs with the motion verb stems in Dakotan - the starting out stems? I really should know that by heart! In OP it occurs with s^aN 'completely', which I think of as an adverb. It also occurs with 'to say' as in es^es^e 'you keep saying' (vs. es^e 'you say'), including the pronominal in the reduplication. The positionals are reduplicated in the iterative auxiliaries. > In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, > intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. > Is this the case for the other languages? Intensives are indicated with enclitics in Omaha-Ponca, e.g., =xti 'very, truely', =(s^)na 'exclusively, habitually, usually, only', =att(a)=s^aN 'right up to, extremely, very'. See the 'suddenly' threads in the archives of the list. > Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the > languages? Carter and Shaw's Dakota dissertations. Boas and Swanton have something of a mini-survey for MV (without details) in their Dakota sketch. > Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? I'd say it was mostly pretty productive as a lexical process (grammatical maybe in Dakotan), though less common in some of the languages. There are some interactions with stem shape and with ablaut. It does occur with numerals in some cases. JEK From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 6 16:21:08 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:21:08 EDT Subject: Reduplication Message-ID: Dear John, Yes, Catawba has reduplication, both in verbs and (more rarely) in nouns. In verbs, reduplication is used to signal increased frequency or intensity of the activity. I can send you a list of unreduplicated:reduplicated verb pairs if you would like. In nouns, reduplication is used to create distributives. Blair From rood at spot.Colorado.EDU Wed Jun 6 18:27:17 2001 From: rood at spot.Colorado.EDU (ROOD DAVID S) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:27:17 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: <6f.16534ee5.284fb274@aol.com> Message-ID: Pat Shaw's dissertation is a good start at describing Lak. reduplication,but a more recent version is Trudi Patterson's work. Jack Chambers was putting together a description of this for a seminar a couple of months ago; I suspect he's not on the list, so maybe an email to him would be in order. In Lak. redup. not only means repetitive/distributive, but is also the only way to mark plural for inanimate arguments for stative verbs; given that useage, it's pretty high frequency. David David S. Rood Dept. of Linguistics Univ. of Colorado Campus Box 295 Boulder, CO 80309-0295 USA rood at colorado.edu From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 19:28:23 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:28:23 -0600 Subject: Fetch Message-ID: Here's a question you might ask yourself. It comes from one posted on LinguistList, but it's always an interesting one in a Siouan language: how do the Siouan languages you are familiar with handle 'to fetch'? In Omaha-Ponca this involves a family of serial verbs agi + verb of motion. The result is a transitive verb and can be dativized as egi + verb of motion, with e < a + gi. The stem gi is a verb of motion itself, and both gi and the embedded verb are inflected to agree with the subject. JEK From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 23:15:13 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:15:13 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Jay, Here come the Siouan answers. My orginal question is shown with the >> and john Koontz's answer is the single >. OP is Omaha-Ponca one of the Southern Mississippi languages. Do you have a tree for Siouan so you know where teh languages fit? John has a really nice one on his web site at . Let me know if you have any questions, John >On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, John P. Boyle wrote: >> I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell >> me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? > >I think we had a past thread on this, so it might help to check the >archives at the LinguistList. I think reduplication occurs in all the >Siouan languages, though I'm not positive about Southeastern or Catawban >without looking. It certainly occurs throughout Mississippi Valley. The >particular scheme of reduplication does differ somewhat from language to >language, however. It might be worth looking at other languages in the >area(s) for this one. I doubt this is a Siouan feature per se. > >> Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. > >In MV, yes. > >> What is it used for? > >In Dakotan it forms the plural for inanimate subject verbs and has a >distributive sense 'here and there, repeated instances, etc.' In >Omaha-Ponca it isn't used for the plural, but it is more or less >distributive. I seem to recall that it means 'by Xs' with numerals in >Dakotan. It occurs with the motion verb stems in Dakotan - the starting >out stems? I really should know that by heart! > >In OP it occurs with s^aN 'completely', which I think of as an adverb. It >also occurs with 'to say' as in es^es^e 'you keep saying' (vs. es^e 'you >say'), including the pronominal in the reduplication. The positionals are >reduplicated in the iterative auxiliaries. > >> In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, >> intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. >> Is this the case for the other languages? > >Intensives are indicated with enclitics in Omaha-Ponca, e.g., =xti 'very, >truely', =(s^)na 'exclusively, habitually, usually, only', =att(a)=s^aN >'right up to, extremely, very'. See the 'suddenly' threads in the >archives of the list. > >> Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the >> languages? > >Carter and Shaw's Dakota dissertations. Boas and Swanton have something >of a mini-survey for MV (without details) in their Dakota sketch. > >> Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? > >I'd say it was mostly pretty productive as a lexical process (grammatical >maybe in Dakotan), though less common in some of the languages. There are >some interactions with stem shape and with ablaut. It does occur with >numerals in some cases. > >JEK From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 23:50:01 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:50:01 -0600 Subject: Siouan Bibliography Message-ID: Dear Everyone, Please ignore my last post - I hit send before I'd changed the address. As some of you know, I have been working on compiling a master Siouan-Catawban bibliography. It is still in process but the first version of it is up and I'd like to solicit comments. I'm still adding material. Currently, I'm adding much of the older sources that are found the Parks & Rankin "Siouan Languages" Bibliography (so there is no need to bring that to my attention). Also, you'll notice that I'm missing a lot of material that was presented/published between 1995 and now. If all of you could send me any reference that you'd like to be included I'd appreciate it. The site can be found at: . Please let me know if there is anything that I'm missing. I was also considering adding the material done on Plains-Sign. Does anyone have an opinion about this? Thanks, John Boyle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 951 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Thu Jun 7 13:41:49 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:41:49 GMT Subject: artifacts enquiry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like Iroquois than anything else to me. Has anyone any ideas. I doubt whether it is Siouan, but I know many of you know other languages. Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From rankin at ku.edu Thu Jun 7 16:25:33 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:25:33 -0500 Subject: artifacts enquiry Message-ID: Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like Iroquois than anything else to me. The Delawares were deported from their homes in the East during the Andrew Jackson presidency (1830's), first to N.E. Kansas, then N.E. Oklahoma. My present home is build on acreage from the old Delaware Reservation in Kansas. Hardly "western plains" by any definition. I agree it looks more Iroquoian with the -nron- cluster, etc. If it is, then Blair Rudes can probably place it for you. For the Delaware language, the person to ask would be Ives Goddard at the Smithsonian Institution . Bob From rankin at ku.edu Thu Jun 7 16:36:25 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:36:25 -0500 Subject: FW: Reduplication Message-ID: Do you think they meant Western Oklahoma, because there is a separate group of Delaware located around Anadarko, as well as the group in Eastern Oklahoma around Bartlesville. The Eastern [Ok.] Delaware have a lot of genealogical information on both groups. You might contact Jim Rementer jimrem at aol.com - Jim is the language specialist for the Eastern Delaware. Also, Linda Poolaw in Anadarko {sorry I don't have contact information, but the tribal office will.} ----- Original Message ----- From: Rankin, Robert L To: 'Bruce Ingham ' ; <"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu '"@hooch.colorado.edu> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:25 AM Subject: RE: artifacts enquiry > > > Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade > showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western > Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but > anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like > Iroquois than anything else to me. > > The Delawares were deported from their homes in the East during the Andrew > Jackson presidency (1830's), first to N.E. Kansas, then N.E. Oklahoma. My > present home is build on acreage from the old Delaware Reservation in > Kansas. Hardly "western plains" by any definition. I agree it looks more > Iroquoian with the -nron- cluster, etc. If it is, then Blair Rudes can > probably place it for you. For the Delaware language, the person to ask > would be Ives Goddard at the Smithsonian Institution > . > > Bob From Rgraczyk at aol.com Fri Jun 8 13:02:52 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 09:02:52 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: In Crow, 'fetch' is also a serial verb. The first part is ku'nnaa, which combines with de'e 'go' and hu'u 'come, yielding ku'nnaahuu 'come after, fetch' and ku'nnaalee 'go after, fetch'. Both parts are inflected for person. I have no idea where ku'nnaa comes from! Randy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Fri Jun 8 14:38:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 08:38:26 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote: > In Crow, 'fetch' is also a serial verb. The first part is ku'nnaa, which > combines with de'e 'go' and hu'u 'come, yielding ku'nnaahuu 'come after, > fetch' and ku'nnaalee 'go after, fetch'. Both parts are inflected for > person. I have no idea where ku'nnaa comes from! Thanks, Randy! That's pretty interesting. It looks like things are somewhat parallel in overall structure. I think the analogous structures in Dakotan use a sort of preverb, hiyo-, but contrary to the situation in OP, the hiyo- is only inflected for object. It does have a suus gliyo. I assume that the Crow forms inflect ku'nnaa for subject and object, but the hu'u and de'e only for subject? As far as ku'naa, I can't explain the -nnaa, but it may be significant that the Omaha-Ponca agi- would be from PS *a-ku-, with the initial a- being at least homophonous with locative a-, perhaps the a- that occurs with plural(/proximate) motion verbs in Dakotan and Dhegiha. The changing of that a to e in the stem/third person dative is usual. I seem to recall that there are some reflexes of that in Dakotan, too. Anyway, the gi < *ku part inflects like, and probably is the vertitive of *(h)u 'come': ppi/s^ki/gi. Of course, even if the Crow and OP elements do match and the -nnaa has some other reasonable explanation - say a subordinating morpheme or that plus prefixal a- on the next verb? - it wouldn't necessarily show more than two parallel structures of post Proto-Siouan origin. It's reasonable enough to see the agi + go forms as 'having come for something, to go (back)', but it's odd to find 'having come for something, to come (back)'. You'd expect, 'having gone for something, to come (back)'. It looks like the first part orients on the object and the second part orients on the context of the action, instead of both orienting on the context of the action. This is different from the 'pass by' serials, in which both forms do orient on the context, as in 'having come here to go on'. It may be interesting that the Crow and OP forms both seem to have this orientation peculiarity. The question would be whether this was typologically unusual. I forgot to mention that the OP 'fetch' forms can use just plain unoriented 'walk' as the motion verb after agi, too: agimaNdhiN. JEK From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Fri Jun 8 17:44:41 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 17:44:41 GMT Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It is also possible in lakota to use the verb yuha 'have' or gluha 'have one's own' with a verb of motion, as in mayuha iyayapi 'they went off possessing me, ie they took me away' wicagluha unglipi 'we came home having them, we brought them home'. I imagine this is also used in other Siouan languages Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From Rgraczyk at aol.com Sat Jun 9 14:53:13 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 10:53:13 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: It's possible that the aa in kunnaa is the 'portative', as in aale'e 'take', o'o (< aahu'u) 'bring', etc. That would leave just nn to worry about. Nn occurs in Crow only at a morpheme boundary (n-n) or as a result of vowel deletion (nVn). Maybe if I think about it some more, I'll come up with something. Randy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Zylogy at aol.com Sat Jun 9 19:25:22 2001 From: Zylogy at aol.com (Jess Tauber) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 15:25:22 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: Hi. Chiming in on serialization- "bipartite" languages seem to have an affinity for arising out of serialized bits and pieces- witness the crazy-looking stems in Klamath, for instance- even accounting for the bodypart/instrument and pathway terms, the roots are decidedly unusual-looking. In Siouan roots have always bothered me in terms of their makeup and semantics- from the above perspective everything now makes sense. Serializing languages seem to be, crosslinguistically, for the most part verb medial, isolating, analytical, when in full bloom- skews from this in terms of constituent order type, morphological type, etc., start to change the nature of the system. The instrument/bodypart set in Siouan is very old, and degenerate- in such stages bipartite languages seem to allow the importation of, from without the stem, fresh blood in terms of iconically transparent forms (this is true in Pomo for instance, which has a similarly degenerate instrument/path complex- the more robust the system is the fewer such terms there seem to be- as in Klamath, Nez Perce, etc.)- and Siouan does indeed have its share of such transparent forms. The sound symbolic shifts may be party to this. This is all very new to me, and while such putative historical developmental pathways won't apply to every language in the Americas, they might apply to enough to make looking a profitable enterprise. Very interesting stuff. Jess Tauber zylogy at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 11 00:45:10 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 18:45:10 -0600 Subject: Fetch (fwd) Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote: > It is also possible in lakota to use the verb yuha 'have' or gluha > 'have one's own' with a verb of motion, as in mayuha iyayapi 'they > went off possessing me, ie they took me away' wicagluha unglipi 'we > came home having them, we brought them home'. I imagine this is also > used in other Siouan languages Yes, there are comparable constructions also in OP, with various transitivizing verbs like agdhiN 'to have' or dhize 'to pursue'. JEK From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 13 07:04:56 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 01:04:56 -0600 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: The verb ?iN 'to carry on the back' is fairly familiar, but there is a family of others based on gdhaN: ttu'=gdhaN 'to transport, e.g., stones' (dative ttu'=gigdhaN) itti'=gdhaN 'to carry in the belt, to place in the robe above the belt' mi'=gdhaN 'to wear or carry in the belt' a'tta=gdhaN 'to carry on top of a pile' It appears that gdhaN as the root here refers to rounded or compact objects, what Dorsey calls 'curvilinear', because (a) he uses curvilinear in defining a'tta=gdhaN, and (b) itti'=aNhe refers to putting a long object in the belt. itti'=aNhe 'to carry (a long object) in the belt' There is also another alternative stem z^i 'insert': itti'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) (long objects) in the belt' mi'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) in one's belt' The sense of long here probably comes from the concept 'insert'. It is difficult to insert a round object under the belt. The verb uzhi can certainly refer to putting round objects into a bag - u- here being the locative. The initial components of these verbs are largely obscure, but itti' is 'abdomen', cf. also dhi'tti 'ribs'. I notice that mi resembles the initial element of Dakotan mi'=la 'sword'. OP 'sun' is miN. Also relevant: wadhahe gi 'to come carrying it (a dog) in the mouth' a'=igadha adhe 'to go carrying it on the arm' These are obviously based on motion verbs. JEK From kdshea at ku.edu Wed Jun 13 10:06:27 2001 From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 05:06:27 -0500 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For Ribs." Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Koontz John E" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:04 AM Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca > The verb ?iN 'to carry on the back' is fairly familiar, but there is a > family of others based on gdhaN: > > ttu'=gdhaN 'to transport, e.g., stones' (dative ttu'=gigdhaN) > itti'=gdhaN 'to carry in the belt, to place in the robe above the belt' > mi'=gdhaN 'to wear or carry in the belt' > a'tta=gdhaN 'to carry on top of a pile' > > It appears that gdhaN as the root here refers to rounded or compact > objects, what Dorsey calls 'curvilinear', because (a) he uses curvilinear > in defining a'tta=gdhaN, and (b) itti'=aNhe refers to putting a long > object in the belt. > > itti'=aNhe 'to carry (a long object) in the belt' > > There is also another alternative stem z^i 'insert': > > itti'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) (long objects) in the belt' > mi'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) in one's belt' > > The sense of long here probably comes from the concept 'insert'. It is > difficult to insert a round object under the belt. The verb uzhi can > certainly refer to putting round objects into a bag - u- here being the > locative. > > The initial components of these verbs are largely obscure, but itti' is > 'abdomen', cf. also dhi'tti 'ribs'. I notice that mi resembles the > initial element of Dakotan mi'=la 'sword'. OP 'sun' is miN. > > Also relevant: > > wadhahe gi 'to come carrying it (a dog) in the mouth' > a'=igadha adhe 'to go carrying it on the arm' > > These are obviously based on motion verbs. > > JEK From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Wed Jun 13 12:24:12 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 12:24:12 GMT Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: <009901c0f3f0$83d74e00$0509ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: As David says in Lakota verbs regularly reduplicate for inanimate plural agreement, but nouns reduplicate more rarely. It occurs to me also that reduplication is very common in adverbs and also in some postpositions, usually with distributive meaning . Ekta 'to' can be made into ektakta 'to (of different places)' and I think mahel or mahetu 'in' becomes mahehetu in some examples meaning 'in many places'. Of adverbs, we have ocikpakpaniyaN 'in various degrees', hecekcekel 'thus here and there', waNcag 'once' gives also waNcakcala 'seldom, occasionally'. Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 13 15:25:13 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:25:13 -0600 Subject: Siouan Bibliography Message-ID: Dear All, Two things, first I just wanted to let people know that a new version of the Siouan Bibliography has been posted. There are about 75 new references, mostly Crow material but also some Lakota and Biloxi stuff as well. Any comments are welcome. It can be found at: Next, I just wanted to let everyone out there who I haven't spoken with that the 21st Siouan and Caddoan Languages Conference will take place in The East Lounge (Rm. 312) at Ida Noyes Hall on the University of Chicago campus. It will begin on Friday the 15th of June at 11:30. Thanks, John From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 13 15:22:10 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:22:10 -0600 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca In-Reply-To: <009901c0f3f0$83d74e00$0509ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote: > Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. > An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants > (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For > Ribs." Thanks for the correction, Kathy! The dhi- initial is definitely with i in Fletcher & LaFlesche, but that source doesn't show aspiration and I guessed wrong. Itti 'abdomen' definitely is marked for tt in the Dorsey texts, though Dorsey is not infallible. This is a hapax legomenon in the texts as a body part, though the incorporand occurs in the 'transport' or 'haul' verb several times. It looks like maybe they're not related to the ribs term. JEK From kdshea at ku.edu Thu Jun 14 03:39:11 2001 From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 22:39:11 -0500 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: Bob just e-mailed me that the Kansa and Quapaw cognates don't contain an aspirated consonant, so I'm probably wrong. I'll check it again with my speakers. I sometimes have trouble hearing the difference between an aspirated and unaspirated voiceless stop before high vowels. It's always good to recheck these things. I do know that Dorsey sometimes makes mistakes in recording stops. His mistakes could be due to printing errors, I suppose, but, if so, they're consistent printing errors. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Koontz John E" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:22 AM Subject: Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote: > > > Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. > > An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants > > (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For > > Ribs." > > Thanks for the correction, Kathy! The dhi- initial is definitely with i > in Fletcher & LaFlesche, but that source doesn't show aspiration and I > guessed wrong. Itti 'abdomen' definitely is marked for tt in the Dorsey > texts, though Dorsey is not infallible. This is a hapax legomenon in the > texts as a body part, though the incorporand occurs in the 'transport' or > 'haul' verb several times. It looks like maybe they're not related to the > ribs term. > > JEK From claudiap at ccppcrafts.com Thu Jun 14 08:46:00 2001 From: claudiap at ccppcrafts.com (claudiap at ccppcrafts.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:46:00 +0100 Subject: Fetch Message-ID: This is some of what we have for Catawba "motion/fetch verbs" da:- action by foot da:dehude' bring it back, go fetch kurada:'kanide: go (by foot and) look at it da:dure:kuNde: go (by foot) give it to me hiida:dehude go fetch it da:huu?- to fetch, go get da:ka:ni?- to go by foot and see da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand du- action by hand du bring dugiina'heN'?, duk'ha:'rare bring back dukhu'wa:de: bring it back here dukha:'dukhu're: back came back brought duhu're : brought dugdu'gra:re: home back bring duhuhne'h I bring iyuruu?ire: they bring ima:ru'u?ire: they bring hither wiya: demaN tepeN duhunide thread me one bring duhuu? carry in the hand duc^uu? to chop by hand, arm da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand duhaNna:?- to hold under the arm ------------------- - From claudiap at ccppcrafts.com Mon Jun 18 07:01:00 2001 From: claudiap at ccppcrafts.com (claudiap at ccppcrafts.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 08:01:00 +0100 Subject: Conference Message-ID: Just a general message asking about the conference. How was it? I was not able to attend. Will there be a posting about it? Thanks, Claudia Y. Heinemann-Priest Catawba Cultural Preservation Project ------------------- - From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu Mon Jun 18 16:33:30 2001 From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: 18 June 2001 Aloha all: My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous people who have claimed rights similar to: "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st century, and Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and future words of the [_] people, and Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] language" Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" Many thanks 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: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 17:18:16 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:18:16 -0600 Subject: Finger Flicking (fwd) Message-ID: At Louis Garcia's request: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 08:24:35 -0500 From: Louis Garcia To: 'Koontz John E' Subject: Re: Finger Flicking Hau Koda: I found another cite for finger flicking. Perhaps you could enter this on you discussion board for me. Page 100, last paragraph Chippewa Child Life and Its Cultural Background. by Sister M. Inez Hilger Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul 1992 (originally published BAE Bulletin 146, in 1951) The Ojibway say 'Ga' in a loud voice and flick their fingers in annoyance. The description of the flick matches the description I gave you earlier for the term Oglala. Toksta, Louie Garcia Ft. Totten, ND From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 21:02:24 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:02:24 -0600 Subject: Resource Site for Endangered Languages Message-ID: On behalf of Erik Rauch , who is having some difficulty posting to the list: ================================================== ER would like to announce a web site called Resources for Endangered Languages (http://nativelanguages.org). It has pointers to organizations that offer grants for Native American language revitalization projects originated from within the communities themselves, as well as links to the full text of books giving the best methods for revitalizing languages and reversing language shift. It presents an account of successful Native American and other language revitalization projects, including the Maori language nests. If you find it worthy, I would appreciate it if you could let webmasters of endangered language or indigenous people sites know about it. Sincerely, Erik Rauch Editor From ahartley at d.umn.edu Mon Jun 18 21:34:29 2001 From: ahartley at d.umn.edu (Alan H. Hartley) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:34:29 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: > native language as property That's an unpleasant thought. Maybe those responsible for drafting such "ordinances" should be asked if they're licensed to use the English terminology in which they drafted the proposals. Alan From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 21:34:44 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:34:44 -0600 Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca) In-Reply-To: <002c01c0f483$94263940$5709ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: 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 Mon Jun 18 21:48:14 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:48:14 -0600 Subject: Fetch Verbs Message-ID: Kathy Shea's paper at the SACC in Chicago concerned preparation of a videotaped version of the telling of the story of Rabbit and the Devouring Hill. In the course of presenting this she drew our attention to a puzzling verb form which turned out to be a pattern of fetching verb that I had not previously noticed. So, to a-gi-MV, where MV is a motion verb or maN...dhiN 'to walk', add a-gdhe-MV, where MV is at least thi 'to arrive here'. The verb in question was aa'gdhe athi or 'I arrived here to get it; I came to fetch it'. The a-gdhe-MV forms (whichever may exist) are more or less the opposite of the first pattern in a-gi-MV. The a-gi- forms involve gi 'to head back' while the a-gdhe- forms involve gdhe 'to go back'. In both cases I think a is a transitivizing particle, essentially a locative, though it is not clear whether its is superessive a- 'on', or commitative a- 'with, accompanying' or something else. The aagdhe athi case was interpreted by Dorsey as a suus ('get one's own') form, but so far I think this is incorrect. I believe that the g- marks vertitive, not suus. On the other hand ... JEK From rood at spot.Colorado.EDU Mon Jun 18 22:55:02 2001 From: rood at spot.Colorado.EDU (ROOD DAVID S) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:55:02 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: <000a01c0f814$68a5bae0$79345d81@mark.unl.edu> Message-ID: When we first began to work on Lakxota 30 years ago, and had in mind among other things the possible preparation of a dictionary, we checked on the then-current copyright laws and were informed in absolute terms that "no one can copyright words". I don't know whether that has changed in the meantime or not, but it should be relevant. To copyright documents, or the contents of something composed of words, is of course a different matter, and the ethics of intellectual property rights are probably even more complex than the legalities. In my Wichita experience, what I learned is that traditionally stories were owned and could be sold by story-tellers (I think songs are simiilar), but as soon as you paid a story-teller for a story, you, too, had the right to make further use of it -- in other words, it became yours to tell further. But that's a story, not a language -- I do not think that any resolution such as the one Mark describes would ever be enforceable legally. There are cases, however, where a tribe asks or orders a linguist not to publicize information about the language (though those attitudes seem to vary as tribal council membership changes); at that point, the issue of "ownership" is not legal, but moral, it seems to me. You might be interested in the preliminary stages of some attempts to wrestle with this problem on a world-wide basis from a German perspective (German law tries to be a lot more precise that English/American does). Look at www.mpi.nl/DOBES/applicants/legal-ethics-issues.html David David S. Rood Dept. of Linguistics Univ. of Colorado Campus Box 295 Boulder, CO 80309-0295 USA rood at colorado.edu From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 23:11:43 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:11:43 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: <3B2E73E5.8170F008@d.umn.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Alan H. Hartley wrote: > > native language as property > > That's an unpleasant thought. Maybe those responsible for drafting such > "ordinances" should be asked if they're licensed to use the English > terminology in which they drafted the proposals. Are any of us, in the US or Canada? (I apologize if I seem to overlook the various subscribers who are not US or Canadian citizens.) Many of my ancestors appear to have been German speaking (the - the "evidently" evidential) and neither country is part of Great Britain, which presumably controls anything actually called 'English'. Still, in some sense I clearly have a better case for using English than Spanish or Omaha-Ponca. As far as I know all living Omaha and Ponca people are bilingual in Omaha-Ponca and English and have as much title to English as I do. On the other hand, I believe copyright law is designed to protect particular fixed sequences of words and images, not the use of particular languages or isolated words in them. I don't think, for example, that Okrand's Klingon or Tolkien's various invented languages are copyright, only the publications about them. I've never heard of any language, including natural languages, invented languages, computer programming languages (high level or low level; open, proprietary or otherwise) being copyright. In fact, I'm not sure that it is even accepted practice to copyright encoding systems like ASCII or XML. Languages are the original "non-proprietary software," though hardly "open source." I have the impression that Native American (or other) ethnic groups have not even been able to enforce anything like trademark rights to their own names. It might be possible for states or Congress to create and invest statutory rights to languages. That would be a great way to ensure that the controlled languages disappeared without further discussion or attention, one suspects. I'm not clear on whether such a law could regulate existing published materials without being an ex post facto law, something the US Constitution precludes. Linguists working on Native American languages have (in recent years, anyway) tended to respect the wishes of the relevant groups as to what languages were published on, what materials in them were published, and, up to a point, as to what the languages are called (though not always). I believe this has been primarily motivated by a polite wish (moral obligation? ethical inclination?) to respect the sense of privacy of a few particular groups with respect to social matters in general, and of all groups with respect to personal or socially restricted information. However, I think that most linguists in the US would not sympathize with general attempts to control all publication in and on all languages. Frankly, I fall into that category. Clearly almost everyone in the US would respect a Federally-enforced rights of control within the US. Copyright control might just possibly be enforcible under treaty obligations elsewhere, if it proved valid, but copyright law is fairly international and involves a fair amount of voluntary cooperation. I'm not sure an extension of the bounds of copyright in the US would be observed abroad. Statutory rights probably wouldn't be enforcible elsewhere, especially if of state origin. Depending on details of the situation, a lot of publication might simply move to another state or abroad. In a situation where the rights were merely asserted without any recognized legal enforcibility, I can't say what particular individuals might do out of a sense of personal debt, personal necessity, etc. It would certainly be a very uncomforable situation, especially since one suspects that most cases many of the members of the native communities in question would also be out of sympathy with the asserted rights. It might be appropriate for Native Amercan groups to provide statements regarding the respect with which they would wish their languages to be considered, to regulate internal use of the language in public contexts where that was feasible, and to the extent that this might be consistent with Federal and state laws, and so on. One could probably regulate, for example, the orthographies to be used in purchase of published materials or preparation of tribally funded materials, and, up to a point, the content of the materials. It would probably be wise to be very retrained in doing this, to avoid creating situations in which no satisfactory materials were ever available for acquisition. JEK From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 23:28:36 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:28:36 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, ROOD DAVID S wrote: > To copyright documents, or the contents of something composed of > words, is of course a different matter, and the ethics of intellectual > property rights are probably even more complex than the legalities. There is a general notion that rights to song texts as perceived by Native American communitites should be observed. I would never publish a song text that had not been either both (a) previous published and (b) clearly characterized as public or belonging to a defunct organization, or, alternatively, (a) explicitly released to me for this use and (b) determined as well I could to be endowable by the individuals in question. In regard to stories or other non-song texts, I would not release a "recent" personal account due to a particular individual without the permission of that individual or his or her principal heir(s), if deceased. As far as stories already published or prepared by those "long" deceased are concerned, it might be a somewhat different case. Historical texts are subject to some degree of open disclosure as reportage, and myths are often more widely distributed across groups than members of the particular groups may realize. Additional contraints might very well be imposed by a publisher, and a certain amount of judgement is always called for, in any event. JEK From jggoodtracks at juno.com Tue Jun 19 00:36:51 2001 From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:36:51 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: Personally, I think the enclosed example of a tribal legislation on the use of any language may be good for an ultimate test case to the US Supreme Court against Freedom of Speech. That is purely my own thought. On the other hand, some years ago, while working with a number of tribal elders, I received a letter from the chairman (at the time) of one of the IOM communities. He declared the right and possession of the tribal language shared by the elders and my language project/ study/ research was to be sanctioned by a percentage of the "profits" to be made off any publications, etc. to the tribal office. Now then, the individuals of this list well know, that there is little if indeed any profits made from the publication of tribal grammars, stories, etc. from work with informants (elders). But beyond the joke and laugh over said "profits", I shared the question of "ownership" of a language and information received from elders with the Cherokee Bilingual Program Director, near Tahlequah, Okla. I lived and worked in that area from 1975-85, and the Cherokee Program was the only full time, fully staffed tribal language program that existed at the time, that had achedemic credential(ed) staff. Mrs. Agnes McCowan said (and she was a fluent speaker of Cherokee), the language and knowledge known and spoken by any person belongs exclusively to that person. If it is freely given and shared with another person, as indeed, there being no other way to receive it, than it is the individual's prerogative to do so. The shared (recorded/ written) language, narrative, story is now co-owned by the person it is shared/ given to, and may be ultilized as seen fit, precluding any proscribed restrictions presented by the informant elder. She was emphatic that the tribal political community was not a partner/ co-owner of tribal language/ teachings/ spirituality/ knowledge. In other words, the Keeper of a language & knowledge is with the one who has it, and not the community of which he is a member. If you think on it, should a tribe claim ownership & declare itself the usage regulatory agent, than it necessarily should hold true for any language, including English, Espa�ol, Deutsch, etc. Germany could regulate the use of German language in the U.S., would seem the amusing outcome. While some elders have freely given away their language & cultural knowledge, most of us know that the majority of elders have norms, expectations that ultilize rules & forms of sanctions, that go along in a prescribed form of traditional ways to transferr knowledge. I will not recite these traditional M.O.A.'s which are employed towards tribal members/ non-members, Natives/ non-Natives. For the uninformed, See Jill Davidson's "Song To Our Elder Brother" or Laurie Stanley's "The Indian Path of Life". And if you look at this discussion from within the tribal culture, the tribe has no authority over a knowledgable elder to pass on his wisdom to younger tribal members. It remains the elders' prerogative. There is no way they, the tribal political entity, can "make him." And in tribal programs, where the elders are an active part of cultural/ language programs, they do so upon their own desire. And many have chosen to take it with them. JimmGT On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 "Mark Awakuni-Swetland" writes: > 18 June 2001 > Aloha all: > > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue > about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and > the like. > > I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the > following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: > > a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature > about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or > b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous > people who have claimed rights similar to: > > "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following > decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and > authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st > century, and > > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the > __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system > and future words of the [_] people, and > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a > copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] > language" > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any > non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved > application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any > part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] > language for any purpose" > > Many thanks > 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 From ioway at earthlink.net Tue Jun 19 13:18:06 2001 From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 05:18:06 -0800 Subject: language as property Message-ID: Hi all- I am now in Alaska working for the National Parks here. Hope to keep involved as much as possible... This is an interesting topic I would like to add to. I think many NA people think somehow you are going to make lots of money (like Jimm said) off the language. And everyone wants money. This is only the extension of the general perception that writers make lots of money. I know that I myself, and from what I know of Jimm's efforts and the others here, that you SPEND WAY more money and time on keeping the language study going than you ever make on any of it. Hey, just "write a grant" and you'll be rolling in dough! Now to be honest, though you don't generally make money off language study directly, some (linguists among you) do make money indirectly by having a career based on the language study (thus the fact sscholars ome are threatened by these kinds of tribal movements to "own" languages)..and "curators" like Jimm and me do get payback by varying (emphasis on varying) amounts of regard from the people (some anyway, depending on the variant allegiances and inevitable/misplaced jealousies involved). But when it comes to money, cash money, wa! and I add buh! As far as using copyright law to a language, it won't wash under US copyright law, which even in art only protects the exact expression of something.. so you (or a tribe) could copyright a story only so far as the particular expression of that story, not the idea or a variant expression of the story. Plus there is the fact that most ofa these stories have been in public domain for a long long time. I think the real concern seems to be a bit complex. For some, usually the more business committee types (or greedy individuals) it seems to be, hey I want a cut of the pie. Like there is any pie, right. But there is a concern on at least two other levels. 1. For example, language is a living thing. It has its own life. It was a gift from the Creator and words themselves have life and power to create or destroy. Words, the native languages, have a sacredness to them, and can be misused. I am not talking about the "sacred bundle-ness" of a language, as an object. I am talking about the creative power and destructive ability inherent in a language formed by the breath carried down from the first times, about the life and death force in it. I myself have experienced this, when I was going to be attacked by a mother bear with cubs. I talked to her in English and she kept coming. When I talked to her in Ioway, she stopped and let me go on my way. This kind of power IN THE WORDS I have personally experienced. 2. This concern also reflects in the current abuse of Lakota by new agey types trying to "be Indian." Somehow they use the mantra Mitakuye Oyasin almost like magic words, and many tribes see what has happened to Lakota popularization, and the appropriation of Native identity and spirituality through the learning of just enough of the language to appear to be a spiritual leader.. throw in a "canunpa" and a "inipi" here and there and PRESTO you are a pipe carrier. So it's not just money, it's about the spirituality of language, and the misappropriation of that spirituality, by both nonIndian (and sadly) Indians to get power over others in a guru sense as well as money (look at the Sun Bear and Seven Arrows phenomena, let alone the nagual tonal bit of Castaneda). Language is not only identity, it is spirituality, something from the time of creation. No one race of people have a monopoly on spirituality. But native religions (and language is integral to the religion) are usually thought to be a specific "contract" between the group and its ancestors/creator/spiritual environment, and language is an integral part of that. That's why the Meskwaki don't want others to know their language. That's a part of the Hochunk traditionalist concern with retaining control over their language, a way in which copyright may not be appropriate, but you may now better understand the concern with manipulating language which has the power of creation in its very sounds. This may be why many choose not to pass it on, but take it with them when they pass on. Lance Jimm G GoodTracks wrote: > Personally, I think the enclosed example of a tribal legislation on the > use of any language may be good for an ultimate test case to the US > Supreme Court against Freedom of Speech. That is purely my own thought. > > On the other hand, some years ago, while working with a number of tribal > elders, I received a letter from the chairman (at the time) of one of the > IOM communities. He declared the right and possession of the tribal > language shared by the elders and my language project/ study/ research > was to be sanctioned by a percentage of the "profits" to be made off any > publications, etc. to the tribal office. > > Now then, the individuals of this list well know, that there is little if > indeed any profits made from the publication of tribal grammars, stories, > etc. from work with informants (elders). > > But beyond the joke and laugh over said "profits", I shared the question > of "ownership" of a language and information received from elders with > the Cherokee Bilingual Program Director, near Tahlequah, Okla. I lived > and worked in that area from 1975-85, and the Cherokee Program was the > only full time, fully staffed tribal language program that existed at the > time, that had achedemic credential(ed) staff. > > Mrs. Agnes McCowan said (and she was a fluent speaker of Cherokee), the > language and knowledge known and spoken by any person belongs exclusively > to that person. If it is freely given and shared with another person, as > indeed, there being no other way to receive it, than it is the > individual's prerogative to do so. The shared (recorded/ written) > language, narrative, story is now co-owned by the person it is shared/ > given to, and may be ultilized as seen fit, precluding any proscribed > restrictions presented by the informant elder. > > She was emphatic that the tribal political community was not a partner/ > co-owner of tribal language/ teachings/ spirituality/ knowledge. In > other words, the Keeper of a language & knowledge is with the one who has > it, and not the community of which he is a member. > > If you think on it, should a tribe claim ownership & declare itself the > usage regulatory agent, than it necessarily should hold true for any > language, including English, Español, Deutsch, etc. Germany could > regulate the use of German language in the U.S., would seem the amusing > outcome. > > While some elders have freely given away their language & cultural > knowledge, most of us know that the majority of elders have norms, > expectations that ultilize rules & forms of sanctions, that go along in a > prescribed form of traditional ways to transferr knowledge. I will not > recite these traditional M.O.A.'s which are employed towards tribal > members/ non-members, Natives/ non-Natives. For the uninformed, See Jill > Davidson's "Song To Our Elder Brother" or Laurie Stanley's "The Indian > Path of Life". > > And if you look at this discussion from within the tribal culture, the > tribe has no authority over a knowledgable elder to pass on his wisdom to > younger tribal members. It remains the elders' prerogative. There is no > way they, the tribal political entity, can "make him." > > And in tribal programs, where the elders are an active part of cultural/ > language programs, they do so upon their own desire. And many have > chosen to take it with them. > > JimmGT > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 "Mark Awakuni-Swetland" > writes: > > 18 June 2001 > > Aloha all: > > > > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue > > about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and > > the like. > > > > I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the > > following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: > > > > a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature > > about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or > > b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous > > people who have claimed rights similar to: > > > > "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following > > decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and > > authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st > > century, and > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the > > __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system > > and future words of the [_] people, and > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a > > copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] > > language" > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any > > non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved > > application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any > > part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] > > language for any purpose" > > > > Many thanks > > 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 -- Lance Michael Foster Email: ioway at earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway ------------------------- Native Nations Press, 1542 Calle Angelina, Santa Fe, NM 87501 Phone: 505-438-2945 info at nativenations.com ------------------------- NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com) Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org) From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Tue Jun 19 17:06:15 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:06:15 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <200106141646.JAA02856@ns5.dnssys.com> Message-ID: I guess my first question would be, what parts are inflected? As a comparativist I'm aware in a general way that a number of the Siouan branch's instrumental prefixes are full fledged verbs in Catawba, and hence that these particular instrumentals originate in serial verbs, whereas others seem to originate in incorporated nouns, but I'm rather vague on the use of such things in Catawba specifically. The da:- and du- elements certainly look like familiar instrumental elements in, e.g., Omaha-Ponca, cf. OP naN- 'by foot' and dhi- (< dhu-) 'by hand'. And I believe I can recognize at least some of the motion verb roots as cognate, too, e.g., de and hu, plus there seem to be vertitive k's as well. What is the (k)ha: element? (I'm pretty sure I've benefitted, however, temporarily, in the past from a discussions of the motion verbs per se from Blair and/or Paul. There may be something in the list archives, in fact.) On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 claudiap at ccppcrafts.com wrote: > This is some of what we have for Catawba "motion/fetch verbs" > da:- action by foot > da:dehude' bring it back, go fetch > kurada:'kanide: go (by foot and) look at it > da:dure:kuNde: go (by foot) give it to me > hiida:dehude go fetch it > da:huu?- to fetch, go get > da:ka:ni?- to go by foot and see > da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand > du- action by hand > du bring > dugiina'heN'?, > duk'ha:'rare bring back > dukhu'wa:de: bring it back here > dukha:'dukhu're: back came back brought > duhu're : brought > dugdu'gra:re: home back bring > duhuhne'h I bring > iyuruu?ire: they bring > ima:ru'u?ire: they bring hither > wiya: demaN > tepeN duhunide thread me one bring > duhuu? carry in the hand > duc^uu? to chop by hand, arm > da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand > duhaNna:?- to hold under the arm > > ------------------- > - > From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 20 16:22:13 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:22:13 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: The Catawba verbs for fetch consist of a mixed group of stems. They include mutating roots and suffixing roots. They also include mutating instrumentals and non-mutating proclitics. Incidentally, Catawba does not show any trace of noun incorporation. Also, Catawba has no vertitive. Claudia has cited forms from various sources in the original transcriptions (typically phonetic, but phonemic from Siebert). I provide here phonemicizations for the phonetic forms. Although the instrumental prefixes in Catawba mutate their initial consonant for person and number, they are not full-fledged verbs. They are always affixed to another verb root, and cannot occur as the sole root in a predicate. For the full inflection of the mutating instrumentals, you should look at Siebert's 1945 IJAL article. The analysis of the stems is as follows. /da:-/ action by foot (mutating instrumental prefix, requires that a verb root follow; see below. It is distinct form the verb da:?- go, go on foot) da:dehude? (/da:duhu:de:/) bring it back, go fetch (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating root], -de: imperative mode /kurada:kanide:/ go (by foot and) look at it (kura- go in a direction [suffixing root], da:- action foot [mutating instrumental], kan- see [mutating root], -i- epenthetic vowel, -de: imperative mode. da:dure:kuNde: (/da:da:re:/ /kuNde:/)go (by foot) give it to me (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], da:- go by foot [mutating root], -re: indiciative mode; kuN- give [mutating root], -de: imperative mode hi:da:dehude: (/da:duhu:de:/) go fetch it (I am not sure what the hi: in this form is. It may be a left over demonstrative (hi: this) with the preceding noun omitted) (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating verb], -de: imperative mode /da:hu:?-/ to fetch, go get (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], hu:?- come [mutating root]) /da:kani?-/ to go by foot and see da:- action foot [mutating instrumental], kan- see [mutating root], -i- epenthetic vowel, -? momentous aspect /da:duhu:?-/ to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:?- come [mutating root] /du-/ action by hand [mutating instrumental] /du-/ bring (same as preceding) dugina'heN?, /dukha:rare:/ bring back (duk- back [proclitic], ha:ra- go, walk, step [suffixing root], -re: indicative mode dukhuwa:de: (/dukkuwa:de:/) bring it back here (duk- back [proclitic], kuwa:- come, come along, proceed [suffixing root], -de: imperative mode dukha:dukhure: (/dukha:?/ /dukhu:re:/) back came back brought (duk- back [proclitic], ha:- come, arrive [suffixing root], -? participial mode; duk- back [proclitic], hu:- come [mutating verb], -re: indicative mode /duhu:re:/ brought (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, -re: indicative mode dugdugra:re: (/dukdukra:re:/) home back bring (duk- back [proclitic], duk- Ibid., ra:- go by foot, -re: indicative mode duhuhne'h I bring (error for /duhu:ne/ does he bring?) (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, -ne [interrogative mode] /iyuru:?ire:/ they bring (i- third person plural prefix, yu- action by hand [mutated for third person plural], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode /ima:ru:?ire:/ they bring hither (i- third person plural prefix, ma:- there [proclitic], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode wiya: demaN tepeN duhunide (/wiya:/ /demu/ /depeN/ /duhanide:/) thread me one bring (wiya: string [noun], demu I myself [independent pronoun], depeN one [numeral], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hani- give, -de: imperative mode /duhu:?/ carry in the hand (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating root], -? participial mode /duc^u:?/ to chop by hand, arm (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], c^u:- chop [suffixing root], -? participial mode /da:duhu:?-/ to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand (da:- action by foot, du- action by hand, hu:- come, -? participial mode) /duhaNna:?-/ to hold under the arm (du- action by hand, haNna:- hold [suffixing root], -? participial mode. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 20 18:01:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:01:26 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <4c.16f3b228.286227b5@aol.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > The Catawba verbs for fetch consist of a mixed group of stems. They include > mutating roots and suffixing roots. They also include mutating instrumentals > and non-mutating proclitics. Incidentally, Catawba does not show any trace > of noun incorporation. Also, Catawba has no vertitive. I see that I was misled by the sequences of duk + verb. But, it occurs to me, suppose that the Siouan vertitive is a reduction of (something like) duk? The /du/ part would be missing, but the k intact. I'm not sure why the /du/ would have gone missing, but worse things happen at sea and in historical morphology. None of the vertitives have a fuller form *ki-, but the natural tendency is to assume that vertitive *k- must be reduced from *ki- since various *ki- morphemes reduce to *k- with stems that have initial *r or *th or *h or *?, and all the motion verbs have one or the other of these. However, perhaps Siouanists have been on the wrong track here? We are also struggling to explain how the *ka strike morpheme (as attested in Mississippi Valley and Mandan) should correspond to *rak(a)- in the other branches. So, eliminating duplicates and some supplementary forms and reordering somewhat, I get: ==== > /duhu:re:/ brought (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, > -re: indicative mode [m]du-[m]hu:(?) HAND+come 'to bring' > /da:hu:?-/ to fetch, go get (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], > hu:?- come [mutating root]) [m]da:-[m]hu:? FOOT+come 'to fetch, go get' > /ima:ru:?ire:/ they bring hither (i- third person plural prefix, ma:- there > [proclitic], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous > aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode ma:=[m]hu: THERE+come 'to bring hither' > da:dehude? (/da:duhu:de:/) bring it back, go fetch (da:- action by foot > [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- > come [mutating root], -de: imperative mode [m]da:-[m]du-[m]hu:(?) FOOT+HAND+come 'bring back, go fetch' > da:dure:kuNde: (/da:da:re:/ /kuNde:/)go (by foot) give it to me (da:- action > by foot [mutating instrumental], da:- go by foot [mutating root], -re: > indiciative mode; kuN- give [mutating root], -de: imperative mode [m]da:-[m]da:(?) [m]kuN FOOT+go give 'to go and give it' > dugina'heN?, > > /dukha:rare:/ bring back (duk- back [proclitic], ha:ra- go, walk, step > [suffixing root], -re: indicative mode duk=ha:ra[s] BACK+walk 'to bring back' > dukhuwa:de: (/dukkuwa:de:/) bring it back here (duk- back [proclitic], > kuwa:- come, come along, proceed [suffixing root], -de: imperative mode duk=kuwa:[s] BACK+come_along 'to bring back here' > dukha:dukhure: (/dukha:?/ /dukhu:re:/) back came back brought (duk- back > [proclitic], ha:- come, arrive [suffixing root], -? participial mode; duk- > back [proclitic], hu:- come [mutating verb], -re: indicative mode duk=ha:[s]-? duk=[m]hu:? BACK+arrive-PART BACK-come 'to come back bringing' > dugdugra:re: (/dukdukra:re:/) home back bring (duk- back [proclitic], duk- > Ibid., ra:- go by foot, -re: indicative mode duk=duk=[m]ra:(?) BACK-BACK-go'to bring back home' (Is ra: the same as da:(?)?) ==== I added some (?) in final position where I wasn't sure if a glottal stop was missing from usage elsewhere. These are probably spurious on my part. It looks the first several forms are basically 'to come' preceded by none (?) or one or both of FOOT and HAND and, I presume, used transitively. There's no object inflection, right? Then there is a form with FOOT prefixed to 'to go', perhaps a subset of a the preceding pattern. Then there are several duk-prefixed forms of suffixally inflecting verbs, with meanings that seem to involve either non-arrival or explicit arrival. Finally there is duk-prefixed ra: 'to go'. It looks like the used of FOOT and/or HAND is important, but perhaps the transitivity comes from the context and the instrumental is only relevant if the use of foot or hand is focussed in some way? Use of FOOT and HAND seems to occur only with hu:(?) and da:(?), while use of duk= seems to occur mainly with the suffixing verbs, but perhaps some of this apparently patterning is a chance of the forms attested? The repetition of duk= in the last case is interesting. (I wonder if there is a verb gus that is eligible for this treatment ...) (OK, it's summer.) JEK From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 20 20:18:56 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 16:18:56 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: It is of course possible that the k of the Catawba proclitic duk# is cognate with the vertitive in Siouan, but I am not sure how you would prove it. The du part could come from *ru or *nu, but there is no internal evidence in Catawba to suggest that duk# was ever bimorphemic. Duk# is one of a long list of locative and directional proclitics that occur before the verb root in Catawba. Others include hap# up, ma# there, c^apa# away, c^ik# forward, huk# below, su# in. I call them proclitics because the following stem undergoes the same sound changes it would if it were word initial (e.g., r becomes /d/ before an oral vowel and /n/ before a nasal vowel). Your analyses of the stem are correct. The root stem glottal stop is either the participial mode (if it is word-final) or the momentous aspect (if it is word-medial). The underlying forms of the instrumental prefixes and the verb go by foot are: ra:-, ru- and -ra:-, respectively. The initial r becomes /d/ or /n/ in word-initial position, as noted above. Yes, there is no object inflection. Objects are marked by proclitics. The instrumentals da:- and du- are prefixes, and occur with roots other than -hu:- and -ra:- outside the fetch set. Duk# is a proclitic, and can occur on just about any verb of motion. It can occur with the mutating verbs, as well as the suffixing verbs. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 20 23:14:24 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 17:14:24 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <9c.fad9f2d.28625f30@aol.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > It is of course possible that the k of the Catawba proclitic duk# is cognate > with the vertitive in Siouan, but I am not sure how you would prove it. The > du part could come from *ru or *nu, but there is no internal evidence in > Catawba to suggest that duk# was ever bimorphemic. Duk# is one of a long > list of locative and directional proclitics that occur before the verb root > in Catawba. Others include hap# up, ma# there, c^apa# away, c^ik# forward, > huk# below, su# in. I call them proclitics because the following stem > undergoes the same sound changes it would if it were word initial (e.g., r > becomes /d/ before an oral vowel and /n/ before a nasal vowel). If there's anything in the Ca duk= 'back' : PSi *k- vertive comparison, it wouldn't be necessary for duk= to be bimorphemic. I don't know that any case has been made for *raka- being bimorphemic. This is the form for the 'by striking' instrumental supported in, I think, Crow-Hidatsa and Southeastern, whereas Mississippi Valley supports *ka-, but with an odd *ra- allomorph when various *ki- morphemes are prefixed. The situation is completely obscured by an odd shift of meanings in Chiwere and Winnebago, but that's another matter. Basically, initial *ra, not known to be a separate morpheme from trailing *ka, disappears. There may have been some confusion with a homophonous *ka 'by wind/current', though the existence of this latter instrumental is somewhat notional. It does seem to exist in Hidatsa, and the meanings covered seem to fall under *ka in Mississippi Valley languages where I've checked. There's also a loss of initial *hi or final *(r)a in the causative in a number of languages. At least it seems clear that the original was something like *=hi=...(r)a, but usually only half of this survives in the simplest form of attested causative, e.g., Dakotan =yA or Winnebago =hii, but cf. Dakotan =khiyA for the longer form. I don't think this is quite an apt comparison, since it is probably bimorphemic, and the mechanisms for reduction are fairly clear, but it does show that derivational morphology can be eroded fairly severely. Most of the proclitics you cite are pretty much in line with the semantic domain of the Siouan locative prefixes, also prefixed to the stem. The locatives are covered by *i, *a, or *o and sequences like *i-r-o or *i-r-a, though there may be several distinct morphemes (or meanings, anyway) associated with each vowel. The shapes are certainly different here, though, between Catawban and Siouan. Like the locatives the vertitive is primarily directional or locational in sense. I think the usual supposition is that the suus or reflexive possessive *k(i)- is somehow related to the *k- vertitive ('homeward/back') via the concept of '(own) place'. If something like duk is involved in the origin of the vertitive, one way to account for the loss of initial du is through absorption into pronominals. The closest equivalent to Catawban initial mutation inflection that I can think of in Siouan is Stoney 1st/2nd/3rd mu/nu/yu (from Proto-Dakotan mnu/s^nu/yu) for the inflection of the 'by hand' instrumental. Some other developments in syncopating inflection come close. > The underlying forms of the instrumental prefixes and the verb go by foot > are: ra:-, ru- and -ra:-, respectively. The initial r becomes /d/ or /n/ in > word-initial position, as noted above. Just out of curiosity, how do we know that the foot instumental ra:- and the verb 'go by foot' -ra:- are not connected? 'Foot' is essentially *naN- (with a short vowel, I believe) in Siouan. I wonder how old the connection between long vowels and nasal vowels is in Catawban? I seem to recall similar explanations for nasal vowels in Eastern Algonquian. JEK From BARudes at aol.com Thu Jun 21 17:24:16 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:24:16 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: The problem with an assumption that duk# lost du- through absorption into pronominals is the fact that duk# always precedes pronominals. As for ra:# by foot and ra:- go by foot, I assume they come from the same source historically. However, in the modern language they are separate morphemes with distinct inflections. (I believe it was Siebert 1945 who first pointed this out.) The Catawba situation is very different from the Eastern Algonquian situation. In the New England Eastern Algonquian languages, Proto-Eastern Algonquian *e: became /a:/ and *a: became /aN/ (except in Penobscot, where it became a tense /a/ (versus lax /a/ from *e:) which Siebert wrote with an alpha. In Catawba, the alternation of long vowels with nasal vowels is dialectal, with Esaw, Saraw and Woccon showing different distributions. It is hard to say how old the phenomenon is. Since there are differences between Proto-Siouan and Catawban on the distribution of nasal and oral vowels, it is going to take some time and careful reconstruction to determine what the original vowels in Proto-Siouan-Catawban forms were. Blair From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Thu Jun 21 22:01:01 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:01:01 -0600 Subject: Fetch (Vertitive) In-Reply-To: <95.c4cc73b.286387c0@aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > The problem with an assumption that duk# lost du- through absorption into > pronominals is the fact that duk# always precedes pronominals. The location of prepronominal morphemes tends to become postpronominal over time in Siouan, so, in itself, prepronominal location is not a problem. Of course, the potential evanescence of proclitic locative particles might be an issue. Some of the marginalia of the Siouan verb are restricted to particular languages or subgroups and are probably relatively recent innovations. On the other hand, a small set of widely distributed forms provide a lot of the character of Siouan as a whole. And a number of proclitic elements seem to have been fairly stable in Siouan or Mississippi Valley Siouan over a relatively shorter time, even when lexically restricted. Quite a number of bipartite verbs with individual or seldom repeated preverbs are attested, *maN=..riN 'to walk' being a classical example. (And now I wonder about *maN= here and the ma:= 'there' proclitic in Catawba.) JEK From rankin at ku.edu Mon Jun 25 16:27:40 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:27:40 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about > native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ > language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and > future words of the [_] people,... Our colleagues on the list have already expressed views that pretty much coincide with my own about this issue. However, there are one or two other matters related to it that usually only get hinted at and gossiped about in public discussions. They deserve an airing. Views expressed in the proclamation are being promulgated primarily by a small group of White linguists and anthropologists. They are the same ones who tried to get Native scholars *not* to join or participate in SSILA at its inception 20 years ago. From the low level of scholarship evinced by some of this bunch, I am forced to conclude that they hope to gain exclusive access to various languages while shutting out more qualified people. They also apparently seek to cover their own analytical errors and render their work free from meaningful peer review. I'm sorry to have to say this sort of thing, but I can cite specific examples. There are additional ethical questions that I have about this small clique. Several years ago they were running an instructional center with the Kickapoo tribe at Harrah, Oklahoma. It is reliably reported to me (and others including John Koontz and David Rood) by a respected scholar from the U. of Colorado that the group at Harrah suffered the theft of $80,000.00 worth of computers and other office equipment but for some reason known only to them covered up the disappearance and declined to report it to the FBI as required by law. I don't know if it was ever reported, but the event caused me to have serious doubts about the honesty of the participants in the cover-up (and I'm talking about non-Indians here). It was this incident that caused me to have Victor Golla incorporate SSILA when I was president of that organization in 1997 (individual members or officers of non-incorporated organizations can sometimes be held liable for actions of dishonest members). Personally, I don't believe that this movement to try to copyright entire languages originates with Indian people; it is a product of the same group of non-Indian apparachiks. In the past 3 or 4 years they have been working through an Indian lawyer from near Tulsa whom they've coopted, but the idea that verb conjugations or noun declensions are "intellectual property" originates with the non-Indians, not with the lawyer. He's just the mouthpiece. Like the rest of you, I don't see the courts granting copyright to pronouns and conjunctions. This doesn't mean the movement won't have plenty of nuisance value for the radicals though. Nor, unfortunately, does it mean that endangered Indian languages won't simply perish even sooner from "benign neglect." Qualified linguists, after all, won't go where they are not wanted and cannot function normally, and there are plenty of languages in the Pacific, Africa, Asia and South America that cry out for attention. So the danger is not that whole languages will become copyrighted. The danger is that the movement to do so will place the future of endangered languages in the hands of inferior scholars and will cause their earlier demise. Bob >"Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following >decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic,... This is the chief problem. The languages are, for the most part, *not* alive and dynamic. >Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian >or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form >permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before >they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" I've always respected the rights of the tribe to negotiate this sort of agreement when I was actually working for the tribe itself for pay. That mostly applies to the Osages, for whom I did some work back about 1980. But if I am working with an individual who has agreed to teach me, then no such agreement is in place. That individual is simply practicing his/her freedom of expression. From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu Mon Jun 25 21:32:07 2001 From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 14:32:07 -0700 Subject: language as property Message-ID: For the most part, I see Bob's point, and because language is by definition something that is shared, the legal mechanisms of U.S. copyright law do not seem to work to well for it. But, I would like to speak to something linguists don't often talk about--the real selling of bits and pieces of language that might be the impetus behind the copyright attempts. Although linguists and academics in general do not make much money from Native American languages,there are folks out there who do make some. Some of these people, regrettably, happen to be linguists although I cannot think of a single one of these people who actually works on a Native American language. Have none of you ever been contacted by folks who work at "product naming" Consulting Companies trying to get you to give them good-sounding Lakhota, etc. words? It's much like the folks who contact John Koontz for Omaha-Ponca words for naming their baby, dog, etc. One of these companies (Lexicon)presented at the LSA in San Diego to show that there were alternative careers for linguists. I doubt this would have been possible if the Lexicon representative weren't a well-respected linguist from a research institution. (I'm avoiding naming names.) According to the folks (often graduate students from Stanford and Berkeley) I have met who work for these consulting groups, the consulting group gets paid anywhere from $30,000-$50,000 for a naming project. Sometimes the name is just something catchy-sounding in English. They don't only specialize in Native American sounding names, any language will do, but there are a lot of words in Native American languages the global market hasn't heard of. For instance, the bottled water for Coca Cola is DASANI, not a Sioux word, but taken from an Athabaskan language. Maybe we should try to make it clearer that we realize that such language-farming goes on, but that we don't support it(which is why I like John K's website about Native American Names), rather than maintaining that no one is going to make any money off of language at all. sara trechter -----Original Message----- From: Rankin, Robert L To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu ' Sent: 6/25/01 9:27 AM Subject: RE: language as property > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about > native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ > language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and > future words of the [_] people,... Our colleagues on the list have already expressed views that pretty much coincide with my own about this issue. However, there are one or two other matters related to it that usually only get hinted at and gossiped about in public discussions. They deserve an airing. Views expressed in the proclamation are being promulgated primarily by a small group of White linguists and anthropologists. They are the same ones who tried to get Native scholars *not* to join or participate in SSILA at its inception 20 years ago. From the low level of scholarship evinced by some of this bunch, I am forced to conclude that they hope to gain exclusive access to various languages while shutting out more qualified people. They also apparently seek to cover their own analytical errors and render their work free from meaningful peer review. I'm sorry to have to say this sort of thing, but I can cite specific examples. There are additional ethical questions that I have about this small clique. Several years ago they were running an instructional center with the Kickapoo tribe at Harrah, Oklahoma. It is reliably reported to me (and others including John Koontz and David Rood) by a respected scholar from the U. of Colorado that the group at Harrah suffered the theft of $80,000.00 worth of computers and other office equipment but for some reason known only to them covered up the disappearance and declined to report it to the FBI as required by law. I don't know if it was ever reported, but the event caused me to have serious doubts about the honesty of the participants in the cover-up (and I'm talking about non-Indians here). It was this incident that caused me to have Victor Golla incorporate SSILA when I was president of that organization in 1997 (individual members or officers of non-incorporated organizations can sometimes be held liable for actions of dishonest members). Personally, I don't believe that this movement to try to copyright entire languages originates with Indian people; it is a product of the same group of non-Indian apparachiks. In the past 3 or 4 years they have been working through an Indian lawyer from near Tulsa whom they've coopted, but the idea that verb conjugations or noun declensions are "intellectual property" originates with the non-Indians, not with the lawyer. He's just the mouthpiece. Like the rest of you, I don't see the courts granting copyright to pronouns and conjunctions. This doesn't mean the movement won't have plenty of nuisance value for the radicals though. Nor, unfortunately, does it mean that endangered Indian languages won't simply perish even sooner from "benign neglect." Qualified linguists, after all, won't go where they are not wanted and cannot function normally, and there are plenty of languages in the Pacific, Africa, Asia and South America that cry out for attention. So the danger is not that whole languages will become copyrighted. The danger is that the movement to do so will place the future of endangered languages in the hands of inferior scholars and will cause their earlier demise. Bob >"Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following >decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic,... This is the chief problem. The languages are, for the most part, *not* alive and dynamic. >Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian >or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form >permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before >they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" I've always respected the rights of the tribe to negotiate this sort of agreement when I was actually working for the tribe itself for pay. That mostly applies to the Osages, for whom I did some work back about 1980. But if I am working with an individual who has agreed to teach me, then no such agreement is in place. That individual is simply practicing his/her freedom of expression. From rankin at ku.edu Mon Jun 25 22:42:25 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:42:25 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: >I would like to speak to something linguists don't often talk about--the real selling of bits and pieces of language that might be the impetus behind the copyright attempts. >Although linguists and academics in general do not make much money from Native American languages,there are folks out there who do make some. Sara makes an interesting point, and one I tend to agree with in principle (except that I don't think the particular group I was damning is responding to Sara's concerns). But I tend to think that what is involved is good taste and common courtesy rather than the law. I haven't been approached by commercial outfits looking for sexy product names (but, hey, my shingle is out), but they would certainly be a gray area that some might be concerned about. The Sioux would certainly be entitled to be incensed if Phillips came out with a new laxative called Uslee-Tonka (although a sci-fi show on TV once involved a "miracle drug" called "Creve-u-lax" and no French speakers complained). These problems do not fall under the topic of copyright law though, because they are not proper names. They fall under the topic of good taste. Companies don't like bad publicity and seek to avoid it. This is true even for "dead" languages. Lexus, for example, is not a Latin word. Luxus is, and lexis is, but not lexus. Nor Elantra, nor Sephia, nor Sentra, etc. They've been pretty careful about this sort of thing. But even if they weren't, I think you'd want to be pretty careful about any precedent that would allow copyright of words other than bonafide proper names. Do the French own the rights to Chevrolet (little goat)? Or the English to Excel (or does the fact that excel is a loanword make it copyrightable by the French instead)? This is not a road we want to go down. Proper names are indeed another matter (but they are ALREADY covered under US copyright law). The Bell helicopter corp. has for years used tribal names for their various products (the Cheyenne, the Kiowa, etc.), but as far as I know, they not only consulted the tribes in question, they held their roll-out and christening at the reservation or otherwise involved the tribe. I don't know if there were also monetary arrangements. Here are a couple for people to chew on though. Several years ago I was approached by the Kansas Air National Guard who wanted to name one of their airborne tankers "Kansa Warrior". They wanted to write it on the nose of the aircraft in the Kaw language. Should I have just translated it or should I have referred them to the Kaw Nation? (I did both, and the airplane now bears that name and a staid likeness of a Kaw warrior.) How horrible, how militaristic, how honored the Kaw Nation was! Here's another. A researcher at the Univ. Medical Center wanted to name new organisms he discovered in the Kaw language to honor the aboriginal inhabitants of the state instead of naming them in the usual classical Latin or Greek. We never got around to it, and I suspect new names have to pass muster with some UNESCO or WHO committee in Geneva made up of classical scholars. But is it a good idea? Do we consult the tribal council every time a new viral organism is found or created to do a certain job? Do we consult the Greek government (or the Catholic Church) when we use the Greek or Latin terms for these critters? I don't have answers, but I don't think it involves copyright. Just common courtesy. Bob From wbgrail at hotmail.com Tue Jun 26 00:20:01 2001 From: wbgrail at hotmail.com (WENDY BRANWELL) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 19:20:01 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: "Language-farming?" I love it. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From Rgraczyk at aol.com Wed Jun 27 15:46:49 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:46:49 EDT Subject: Comparative Siouan Syntax Workshop Message-ID: In a message dated 06/25/2001 8:37:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu writes: > 1) Would you prefer a two day workshop (Friday & Saturday) or a three day > workshop (Thursday - Saturday)? I would prefer three days--if we're going to travel, we might as well use an extra day. > > 2) What date(s) would be best for you? (Please rank with 1 being best) > > Sept. 13-15 > Sept. 20-12 > Sept. 27-29 > Sept. 20-22 or 27-29 would be my preference. > 3) What would be the best location: (Please rank with 1 being best) - Keep > in mind that although Boulder and Chicago are both accessible by major > airports we we won't be able to stay in dorms in Boulder and the Chicago > I-House is up in the air as to what will happen to it. So although you > might save on airfare, this savings might be more than offset by hotel > rates. Wayne is more remote and doesn't have as many nice restaurants but > motel fare is cheap. We might also be able to set up car pools from St. > Louis. Also, please indicate if any location would make it impossible for > you to participate. > > Boulder, CO. > Chicago, IL. > Wayne, NEB. > Actually, Boulder or Chicago would be better for me, as I would have a place to stay in both locations. But I can work with whatever you decide. > other site suggestions: > > 4) What topics would you like to cover at this workshop? (Please list > topics even if you won't be able to participate in this years workshop). > Also please feel free to make the list as long as you want, we might not > get to everything but we should have a good idea as to what the questions > are. > > Along with the topics that have been mentioned so far, I would add 1) > serial verb constructions, 2) switch reference and 3) deictic/demonstrative > systems. Randy > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From munro at ucla.edu Wed Jun 27 16:11:36 2001 From: munro at ucla.edu (Pamela Munro) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:11:36 -0700 Subject: Comparative Siouan Syntax Workshop Message-ID: I seem to have missed John's message that Randy is replying to below (I will only quote the first few lines of his reply...). If this proposed workshop is open to all, can you resend it, John or someone else? (If not, Randy shouldn't have whetted our appetites like this! Just kidding. I probably wouldn't be able to come but I'd sure like to think about it....) Thanks, Pam Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 06/25/2001 8:37:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu writes: > > > >> 1) Would you prefer a two day workshop (Friday & Saturday) or a >> three day >> workshop (Thursday - Saturday)? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Mon Jun 4 13:44:31 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 07:44:31 -0600 Subject: Fwd: Re: JUNE 15 CONFERENCE Message-ID: Dear all, I'm Passing this along from Wendy. > >Hi John--- > >Could you pass this email on to those on the Siouan list? I'm curious if >anyone is staying at the Ramada Inn Lake Shore during the conference? If so, >I'd be grateful if I could catch a ride with them to the conference, or to >Midway airport on Saturday night. Or... we could buddy-up on taxi fare. >Oodles of gratitude, and look forward to meeting everyone. > > >Wendy Branwell >Wichita State University >316-687-3805 >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 01:30:57 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 19:30:57 -0600 Subject: Reduplication Message-ID: Dear All, I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. What is it used for? In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. Is this the case for the other languages? Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the languages? Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? Any information will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks, John Boyle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 631 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 04:27:01 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:27:01 -0600 Subject: SACL Conference schedule Message-ID: Dear List Members, Here is the tentative conference schedule. I'm looking forward to seeing everyone and hearing the paper. Best wishes, 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 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 4:30 - Ted Grimm (Wichita, Kansas) TBA ===== 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 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 11:30 - John Koontz (University of Colorado, Boulder) Omaha-Ponca Verbs of Motion 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2397 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mosind at yahoo.com Wed Jun 6 03:52:40 2001 From: mosind at yahoo.com (Wablenica) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 07:52:40 +0400 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear John Boyle. I could post the chapter from Patricia Shaws "Theoretical Issues of Dakota phonology and morphology", dealing with redup in Dakotan - if authorities permit me. Connie. -----Original Message----- From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of John P. Boyle Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 5:31 AM To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu Subject: Reduplication Dear All, I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. What is it used for? In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. Is this the case for the other languages? Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the languages? Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? Any information will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks, John Boyle From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 14:54:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 08:54:26 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Wablenica wrote: > I could post the chapter from Patricia Shaws "Theoretical Issues of Dakota > phonology and morphology", dealing with redup in Dakotan - if authorities > permit me. > > Connie. Shaw's discussion would be one reference I would recommend myself. It's probably best not to read the text of it into the list for several reasons, primarily copyright issues and bulk. Posting the text on the Web and posting the URL here would be between you and Pat Shaw ("Patricia A. Shaw" ) (not a list subscriber). Her approval would help resolve the copyright issue. I don't know what say Garland Press might have. Sadly, I believe the Garland edition of her dissertation is out of print, so copyright issues aside, having the text available on the Web would be a service. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 15:16:43 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 09:16:43 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, John P. Boyle wrote: > I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell > me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? I think we had a past thread on this, so it might help to check the archives at the LinguistList. I think reduplication occurs in all the Siouan languages, though I'm not positive about Southeastern or Catawban without looking. It certainly occurs throughout Mississippi Valley. The particular scheme of reduplication does differ somewhat from language to language, however. It might be worth looking at other languages in the area(s) for this one. I doubt this is a Siouan feature per se. > Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. In MV, yes. > What is it used for? In Dakotan it forms the plural for inanimate subject verbs and has a distributive sense 'here and there, repeated instances, etc.' In Omaha-Ponca it isn't used for the plural, but it is more or less distributive. I seem to recall that it means 'by Xs' with numerals in Dakotan. It occurs with the motion verb stems in Dakotan - the starting out stems? I really should know that by heart! In OP it occurs with s^aN 'completely', which I think of as an adverb. It also occurs with 'to say' as in es^es^e 'you keep saying' (vs. es^e 'you say'), including the pronominal in the reduplication. The positionals are reduplicated in the iterative auxiliaries. > In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, > intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. > Is this the case for the other languages? Intensives are indicated with enclitics in Omaha-Ponca, e.g., =xti 'very, truely', =(s^)na 'exclusively, habitually, usually, only', =att(a)=s^aN 'right up to, extremely, very'. See the 'suddenly' threads in the archives of the list. > Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the > languages? Carter and Shaw's Dakota dissertations. Boas and Swanton have something of a mini-survey for MV (without details) in their Dakota sketch. > Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? I'd say it was mostly pretty productive as a lexical process (grammatical maybe in Dakotan), though less common in some of the languages. There are some interactions with stem shape and with ablaut. It does occur with numerals in some cases. JEK From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 6 16:21:08 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:21:08 EDT Subject: Reduplication Message-ID: Dear John, Yes, Catawba has reduplication, both in verbs and (more rarely) in nouns. In verbs, reduplication is used to signal increased frequency or intensity of the activity. I can send you a list of unreduplicated:reduplicated verb pairs if you would like. In nouns, reduplication is used to create distributives. Blair From rood at spot.Colorado.EDU Wed Jun 6 18:27:17 2001 From: rood at spot.Colorado.EDU (ROOD DAVID S) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:27:17 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: <6f.16534ee5.284fb274@aol.com> Message-ID: Pat Shaw's dissertation is a good start at describing Lak. reduplication,but a more recent version is Trudi Patterson's work. Jack Chambers was putting together a description of this for a seminar a couple of months ago; I suspect he's not on the list, so maybe an email to him would be in order. In Lak. redup. not only means repetitive/distributive, but is also the only way to mark plural for inanimate arguments for stative verbs; given that useage, it's pretty high frequency. David David S. Rood Dept. of Linguistics Univ. of Colorado Campus Box 295 Boulder, CO 80309-0295 USA rood at colorado.edu From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 6 19:28:23 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:28:23 -0600 Subject: Fetch Message-ID: Here's a question you might ask yourself. It comes from one posted on LinguistList, but it's always an interesting one in a Siouan language: how do the Siouan languages you are familiar with handle 'to fetch'? In Omaha-Ponca this involves a family of serial verbs agi + verb of motion. The result is a transitive verb and can be dativized as egi + verb of motion, with e < a + gi. The stem gi is a verb of motion itself, and both gi and the embedded verb are inflected to agree with the subject. JEK From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 23:15:13 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:15:13 -0600 Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Jay, Here come the Siouan answers. My orginal question is shown with the >> and john Koontz's answer is the single >. OP is Omaha-Ponca one of the Southern Mississippi languages. Do you have a tree for Siouan so you know where teh languages fit? John has a really nice one on his web site at . Let me know if you have any questions, John >On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, John P. Boyle wrote: >> I was wondering about reduplication and what everyone might be able to tell >> me about it. Does it exist in all the Siouan languages? How about Catawba? > >I think we had a past thread on this, so it might help to check the >archives at the LinguistList. I think reduplication occurs in all the >Siouan languages, though I'm not positive about Southeastern or Catawban >without looking. It certainly occurs throughout Mississippi Valley. The >particular scheme of reduplication does differ somewhat from language to >language, however. It might be worth looking at other languages in the >area(s) for this one. I doubt this is a Siouan feature per se. > >> Can both active and stative verbs undergo this process. > >In MV, yes. > >> What is it used for? > >In Dakotan it forms the plural for inanimate subject verbs and has a >distributive sense 'here and there, repeated instances, etc.' In >Omaha-Ponca it isn't used for the plural, but it is more or less >distributive. I seem to recall that it means 'by Xs' with numerals in >Dakotan. It occurs with the motion verb stems in Dakotan - the starting >out stems? I really should know that by heart! > >In OP it occurs with s^aN 'completely', which I think of as an adverb. It >also occurs with 'to say' as in es^es^e 'you keep saying' (vs. es^e 'you >say'), including the pronominal in the reduplication. The positionals are >reduplicated in the iterative auxiliaries. > >> In Crow reduplication generally adds the meaning of 'thoroughly, >> intensely, to a high degree' to the semantics of the unreduplicated stem. >> Is this the case for the other languages? > >Intensives are indicated with enclitics in Omaha-Ponca, e.g., =xti 'very, >truely', =(s^)na 'exclusively, habitually, usually, only', =att(a)=s^aN >'right up to, extremely, very'. See the 'suddenly' threads in the >archives of the list. > >> Has anyone ever done anything on reduplication in any of the >> languages? > >Carter and Shaw's Dakota dissertations. Boas and Swanton have something >of a mini-survey for MV (without details) in their Dakota sketch. > >> Anything comparative as to what stems undergo reduplication? > >I'd say it was mostly pretty productive as a lexical process (grammatical >maybe in Dakotan), though less common in some of the languages. There are >some interactions with stem shape and with ablaut. It does occur with >numerals in some cases. > >JEK From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 6 23:50:01 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:50:01 -0600 Subject: Siouan Bibliography Message-ID: Dear Everyone, Please ignore my last post - I hit send before I'd changed the address. As some of you know, I have been working on compiling a master Siouan-Catawban bibliography. It is still in process but the first version of it is up and I'd like to solicit comments. I'm still adding material. Currently, I'm adding much of the older sources that are found the Parks & Rankin "Siouan Languages" Bibliography (so there is no need to bring that to my attention). Also, you'll notice that I'm missing a lot of material that was presented/published between 1995 and now. If all of you could send me any reference that you'd like to be included I'd appreciate it. The site can be found at: . Please let me know if there is anything that I'm missing. I was also considering adding the material done on Plains-Sign. Does anyone have an opinion about this? Thanks, John Boyle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 951 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Thu Jun 7 13:41:49 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:41:49 GMT Subject: artifacts enquiry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like Iroquois than anything else to me. Has anyone any ideas. I doubt whether it is Siouan, but I know many of you know other languages. Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From rankin at ku.edu Thu Jun 7 16:25:33 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:25:33 -0500 Subject: artifacts enquiry Message-ID: Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like Iroquois than anything else to me. The Delawares were deported from their homes in the East during the Andrew Jackson presidency (1830's), first to N.E. Kansas, then N.E. Oklahoma. My present home is build on acreage from the old Delaware Reservation in Kansas. Hardly "western plains" by any definition. I agree it looks more Iroquoian with the -nron- cluster, etc. If it is, then Blair Rudes can probably place it for you. For the Delaware language, the person to ask would be Ives Goddard at the Smithsonian Institution . Bob From rankin at ku.edu Thu Jun 7 16:36:25 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:36:25 -0500 Subject: FW: Reduplication Message-ID: Do you think they meant Western Oklahoma, because there is a separate group of Delaware located around Anadarko, as well as the group in Eastern Oklahoma around Bartlesville. The Eastern [Ok.] Delaware have a lot of genealogical information on both groups. You might contact Jim Rementer jimrem at aol.com - Jim is the language specialist for the Eastern Delaware. Also, Linda Poolaw in Anadarko {sorry I don't have contact information, but the tribal office will.} ----- Original Message ----- From: Rankin, Robert L To: 'Bruce Ingham ' ; <"'siouan at lists.colorado.edu '"@hooch.colorado.edu> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:25 AM Subject: RE: artifacts enquiry > > > Recently a friend of mine in the antique arms and armour trade > showed me a war club which was said to be a "Delaware Battle Axe. Western > Plains". I didn't know there were any Delawares in the Western Plains, but > anyway it had on it the inscription ONESHONRONEAH. This looked more like > Iroquois than anything else to me. > > The Delawares were deported from their homes in the East during the Andrew > Jackson presidency (1830's), first to N.E. Kansas, then N.E. Oklahoma. My > present home is build on acreage from the old Delaware Reservation in > Kansas. Hardly "western plains" by any definition. I agree it looks more > Iroquoian with the -nron- cluster, etc. If it is, then Blair Rudes can > probably place it for you. For the Delaware language, the person to ask > would be Ives Goddard at the Smithsonian Institution > . > > Bob From Rgraczyk at aol.com Fri Jun 8 13:02:52 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 09:02:52 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: In Crow, 'fetch' is also a serial verb. The first part is ku'nnaa, which combines with de'e 'go' and hu'u 'come, yielding ku'nnaahuu 'come after, fetch' and ku'nnaalee 'go after, fetch'. Both parts are inflected for person. I have no idea where ku'nnaa comes from! Randy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Fri Jun 8 14:38:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 08:38:26 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote: > In Crow, 'fetch' is also a serial verb. The first part is ku'nnaa, which > combines with de'e 'go' and hu'u 'come, yielding ku'nnaahuu 'come after, > fetch' and ku'nnaalee 'go after, fetch'. Both parts are inflected for > person. I have no idea where ku'nnaa comes from! Thanks, Randy! That's pretty interesting. It looks like things are somewhat parallel in overall structure. I think the analogous structures in Dakotan use a sort of preverb, hiyo-, but contrary to the situation in OP, the hiyo- is only inflected for object. It does have a suus gliyo. I assume that the Crow forms inflect ku'nnaa for subject and object, but the hu'u and de'e only for subject? As far as ku'naa, I can't explain the -nnaa, but it may be significant that the Omaha-Ponca agi- would be from PS *a-ku-, with the initial a- being at least homophonous with locative a-, perhaps the a- that occurs with plural(/proximate) motion verbs in Dakotan and Dhegiha. The changing of that a to e in the stem/third person dative is usual. I seem to recall that there are some reflexes of that in Dakotan, too. Anyway, the gi < *ku part inflects like, and probably is the vertitive of *(h)u 'come': ppi/s^ki/gi. Of course, even if the Crow and OP elements do match and the -nnaa has some other reasonable explanation - say a subordinating morpheme or that plus prefixal a- on the next verb? - it wouldn't necessarily show more than two parallel structures of post Proto-Siouan origin. It's reasonable enough to see the agi + go forms as 'having come for something, to go (back)', but it's odd to find 'having come for something, to come (back)'. You'd expect, 'having gone for something, to come (back)'. It looks like the first part orients on the object and the second part orients on the context of the action, instead of both orienting on the context of the action. This is different from the 'pass by' serials, in which both forms do orient on the context, as in 'having come here to go on'. It may be interesting that the Crow and OP forms both seem to have this orientation peculiarity. The question would be whether this was typologically unusual. I forgot to mention that the OP 'fetch' forms can use just plain unoriented 'walk' as the motion verb after agi, too: agimaNdhiN. JEK From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Fri Jun 8 17:44:41 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 17:44:41 GMT Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It is also possible in lakota to use the verb yuha 'have' or gluha 'have one's own' with a verb of motion, as in mayuha iyayapi 'they went off possessing me, ie they took me away' wicagluha unglipi 'we came home having them, we brought them home'. I imagine this is also used in other Siouan languages Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From Rgraczyk at aol.com Sat Jun 9 14:53:13 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 10:53:13 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: It's possible that the aa in kunnaa is the 'portative', as in aale'e 'take', o'o (< aahu'u) 'bring', etc. That would leave just nn to worry about. Nn occurs in Crow only at a morpheme boundary (n-n) or as a result of vowel deletion (nVn). Maybe if I think about it some more, I'll come up with something. Randy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Zylogy at aol.com Sat Jun 9 19:25:22 2001 From: Zylogy at aol.com (Jess Tauber) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 15:25:22 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: Hi. Chiming in on serialization- "bipartite" languages seem to have an affinity for arising out of serialized bits and pieces- witness the crazy-looking stems in Klamath, for instance- even accounting for the bodypart/instrument and pathway terms, the roots are decidedly unusual-looking. In Siouan roots have always bothered me in terms of their makeup and semantics- from the above perspective everything now makes sense. Serializing languages seem to be, crosslinguistically, for the most part verb medial, isolating, analytical, when in full bloom- skews from this in terms of constituent order type, morphological type, etc., start to change the nature of the system. The instrument/bodypart set in Siouan is very old, and degenerate- in such stages bipartite languages seem to allow the importation of, from without the stem, fresh blood in terms of iconically transparent forms (this is true in Pomo for instance, which has a similarly degenerate instrument/path complex- the more robust the system is the fewer such terms there seem to be- as in Klamath, Nez Perce, etc.)- and Siouan does indeed have its share of such transparent forms. The sound symbolic shifts may be party to this. This is all very new to me, and while such putative historical developmental pathways won't apply to every language in the Americas, they might apply to enough to make looking a profitable enterprise. Very interesting stuff. Jess Tauber zylogy at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 11 00:45:10 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 18:45:10 -0600 Subject: Fetch (fwd) Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Bruce Ingham wrote: > It is also possible in lakota to use the verb yuha 'have' or gluha > 'have one's own' with a verb of motion, as in mayuha iyayapi 'they > went off possessing me, ie they took me away' wicagluha unglipi 'we > came home having them, we brought them home'. I imagine this is also > used in other Siouan languages Yes, there are comparable constructions also in OP, with various transitivizing verbs like agdhiN 'to have' or dhize 'to pursue'. JEK From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 13 07:04:56 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 01:04:56 -0600 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: The verb ?iN 'to carry on the back' is fairly familiar, but there is a family of others based on gdhaN: ttu'=gdhaN 'to transport, e.g., stones' (dative ttu'=gigdhaN) itti'=gdhaN 'to carry in the belt, to place in the robe above the belt' mi'=gdhaN 'to wear or carry in the belt' a'tta=gdhaN 'to carry on top of a pile' It appears that gdhaN as the root here refers to rounded or compact objects, what Dorsey calls 'curvilinear', because (a) he uses curvilinear in defining a'tta=gdhaN, and (b) itti'=aNhe refers to putting a long object in the belt. itti'=aNhe 'to carry (a long object) in the belt' There is also another alternative stem z^i 'insert': itti'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) (long objects) in the belt' mi'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) in one's belt' The sense of long here probably comes from the concept 'insert'. It is difficult to insert a round object under the belt. The verb uzhi can certainly refer to putting round objects into a bag - u- here being the locative. The initial components of these verbs are largely obscure, but itti' is 'abdomen', cf. also dhi'tti 'ribs'. I notice that mi resembles the initial element of Dakotan mi'=la 'sword'. OP 'sun' is miN. Also relevant: wadhahe gi 'to come carrying it (a dog) in the mouth' a'=igadha adhe 'to go carrying it on the arm' These are obviously based on motion verbs. JEK From kdshea at ku.edu Wed Jun 13 10:06:27 2001 From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 05:06:27 -0500 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For Ribs." Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Koontz John E" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:04 AM Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca > The verb ?iN 'to carry on the back' is fairly familiar, but there is a > family of others based on gdhaN: > > ttu'=gdhaN 'to transport, e.g., stones' (dative ttu'=gigdhaN) > itti'=gdhaN 'to carry in the belt, to place in the robe above the belt' > mi'=gdhaN 'to wear or carry in the belt' > a'tta=gdhaN 'to carry on top of a pile' > > It appears that gdhaN as the root here refers to rounded or compact > objects, what Dorsey calls 'curvilinear', because (a) he uses curvilinear > in defining a'tta=gdhaN, and (b) itti'=aNhe refers to putting a long > object in the belt. > > itti'=aNhe 'to carry (a long object) in the belt' > > There is also another alternative stem z^i 'insert': > > itti'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) (long objects) in the belt' > mi'=(wa)z^i 'to put them (the wa-) in one's belt' > > The sense of long here probably comes from the concept 'insert'. It is > difficult to insert a round object under the belt. The verb uzhi can > certainly refer to putting round objects into a bag - u- here being the > locative. > > The initial components of these verbs are largely obscure, but itti' is > 'abdomen', cf. also dhi'tti 'ribs'. I notice that mi resembles the > initial element of Dakotan mi'=la 'sword'. OP 'sun' is miN. > > Also relevant: > > wadhahe gi 'to come carrying it (a dog) in the mouth' > a'=igadha adhe 'to go carrying it on the arm' > > These are obviously based on motion verbs. > > JEK From bi1 at soas.ac.uk Wed Jun 13 12:24:12 2001 From: bi1 at soas.ac.uk (Bruce Ingham) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 12:24:12 GMT Subject: Reduplication In-Reply-To: <009901c0f3f0$83d74e00$0509ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: As David says in Lakota verbs regularly reduplicate for inanimate plural agreement, but nouns reduplicate more rarely. It occurs to me also that reduplication is very common in adverbs and also in some postpositions, usually with distributive meaning . Ekta 'to' can be made into ektakta 'to (of different places)' and I think mahel or mahetu 'in' becomes mahehetu in some examples meaning 'in many places'. Of adverbs, we have ocikpakpaniyaN 'in various degrees', hecekcekel 'thus here and there', waNcag 'once' gives also waNcakcala 'seldom, occasionally'. Bruce Dr. Bruce Ingham Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies SOAS From jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu Wed Jun 13 15:25:13 2001 From: jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu (John P. Boyle) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:25:13 -0600 Subject: Siouan Bibliography Message-ID: Dear All, Two things, first I just wanted to let people know that a new version of the Siouan Bibliography has been posted. There are about 75 new references, mostly Crow material but also some Lakota and Biloxi stuff as well. Any comments are welcome. It can be found at: Next, I just wanted to let everyone out there who I haven't spoken with that the 21st Siouan and Caddoan Languages Conference will take place in The East Lounge (Rm. 312) at Ida Noyes Hall on the University of Chicago campus. It will begin on Friday the 15th of June at 11:30. Thanks, John From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 13 15:22:10 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:22:10 -0600 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca In-Reply-To: <009901c0f3f0$83d74e00$0509ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote: > Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. > An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants > (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For > Ribs." Thanks for the correction, Kathy! The dhi- initial is definitely with i in Fletcher & LaFlesche, but that source doesn't show aspiration and I guessed wrong. Itti 'abdomen' definitely is marked for tt in the Dorsey texts, though Dorsey is not infallible. This is a hapax legomenon in the texts as a body part, though the incorporand occurs in the 'transport' or 'haul' verb several times. It looks like maybe they're not related to the ribs term. JEK From kdshea at ku.edu Thu Jun 14 03:39:11 2001 From: kdshea at ku.edu (Kathleen Shea) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 22:39:11 -0500 Subject: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca Message-ID: Bob just e-mailed me that the Kansa and Quapaw cognates don't contain an aspirated consonant, so I'm probably wrong. I'll check it again with my speakers. I sometimes have trouble hearing the difference between an aspirated and unaspirated voiceless stop before high vowels. It's always good to recheck these things. I do know that Dorsey sometimes makes mistakes in recording stops. His mistakes could be due to printing errors, I suppose, but, if so, they're consistent printing errors. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Koontz John E" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:22 AM Subject: Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Kathleen Shea wrote: > > > Just a comment. I think the word for "ribs" has an aspirated "t": dhetHi. > > An example can be found in the family name of one of my Ponca consultants > > (and in the personal name of one of her ancestors), DhetHi Aag^a, "Cries For > > Ribs." > > Thanks for the correction, Kathy! The dhi- initial is definitely with i > in Fletcher & LaFlesche, but that source doesn't show aspiration and I > guessed wrong. Itti 'abdomen' definitely is marked for tt in the Dorsey > texts, though Dorsey is not infallible. This is a hapax legomenon in the > texts as a body part, though the incorporand occurs in the 'transport' or > 'haul' verb several times. It looks like maybe they're not related to the > ribs term. > > JEK From claudiap at ccppcrafts.com Thu Jun 14 08:46:00 2001 From: claudiap at ccppcrafts.com (claudiap at ccppcrafts.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:46:00 +0100 Subject: Fetch Message-ID: This is some of what we have for Catawba "motion/fetch verbs" da:- action by foot da:dehude' bring it back, go fetch kurada:'kanide: go (by foot and) look at it da:dure:kuNde: go (by foot) give it to me hiida:dehude go fetch it da:huu?- to fetch, go get da:ka:ni?- to go by foot and see da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand du- action by hand du bring dugiina'heN'?, duk'ha:'rare bring back dukhu'wa:de: bring it back here dukha:'dukhu're: back came back brought duhu're : brought dugdu'gra:re: home back bring duhuhne'h I bring iyuruu?ire: they bring ima:ru'u?ire: they bring hither wiya: demaN tepeN duhunide thread me one bring duhuu? carry in the hand duc^uu? to chop by hand, arm da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand duhaNna:?- to hold under the arm ------------------- - From claudiap at ccppcrafts.com Mon Jun 18 07:01:00 2001 From: claudiap at ccppcrafts.com (claudiap at ccppcrafts.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 08:01:00 +0100 Subject: Conference Message-ID: Just a general message asking about the conference. How was it? I was not able to attend. Will there be a posting about it? Thanks, Claudia Y. Heinemann-Priest Catawba Cultural Preservation Project ------------------- - From mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu Mon Jun 18 16:33:30 2001 From: mawakuni-swetland2 at unl.edu (Mark Awakuni-Swetland) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: 18 June 2001 Aloha all: My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous people who have claimed rights similar to: "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st century, and Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and future words of the [_] people, and Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] language" Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" Many thanks 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: From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 17:18:16 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:18:16 -0600 Subject: Finger Flicking (fwd) Message-ID: At Louis Garcia's request: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 08:24:35 -0500 From: Louis Garcia To: 'Koontz John E' Subject: Re: Finger Flicking Hau Koda: I found another cite for finger flicking. Perhaps you could enter this on you discussion board for me. Page 100, last paragraph Chippewa Child Life and Its Cultural Background. by Sister M. Inez Hilger Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul 1992 (originally published BAE Bulletin 146, in 1951) The Ojibway say 'Ga' in a loud voice and flick their fingers in annoyance. The description of the flick matches the description I gave you earlier for the term Oglala. Toksta, Louie Garcia Ft. Totten, ND From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 21:02:24 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:02:24 -0600 Subject: Resource Site for Endangered Languages Message-ID: On behalf of Erik Rauch , who is having some difficulty posting to the list: ================================================== ER would like to announce a web site called Resources for Endangered Languages (http://nativelanguages.org). It has pointers to organizations that offer grants for Native American language revitalization projects originated from within the communities themselves, as well as links to the full text of books giving the best methods for revitalizing languages and reversing language shift. It presents an account of successful Native American and other language revitalization projects, including the Maori language nests. If you find it worthy, I would appreciate it if you could let webmasters of endangered language or indigenous people sites know about it. Sincerely, Erik Rauch Editor From ahartley at d.umn.edu Mon Jun 18 21:34:29 2001 From: ahartley at d.umn.edu (Alan H. Hartley) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:34:29 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: > native language as property That's an unpleasant thought. Maybe those responsible for drafting such "ordinances" should be asked if they're licensed to use the English terminology in which they drafted the proposals. Alan From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 21:34:44 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:34:44 -0600 Subject: Rib (was Re: Portatives in Omaha-Ponca) In-Reply-To: <002c01c0f483$94263940$5709ed81@9afl3> Message-ID: 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 Mon Jun 18 21:48:14 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:48:14 -0600 Subject: Fetch Verbs Message-ID: Kathy Shea's paper at the SACC in Chicago concerned preparation of a videotaped version of the telling of the story of Rabbit and the Devouring Hill. In the course of presenting this she drew our attention to a puzzling verb form which turned out to be a pattern of fetching verb that I had not previously noticed. So, to a-gi-MV, where MV is a motion verb or maN...dhiN 'to walk', add a-gdhe-MV, where MV is at least thi 'to arrive here'. The verb in question was aa'gdhe athi or 'I arrived here to get it; I came to fetch it'. The a-gdhe-MV forms (whichever may exist) are more or less the opposite of the first pattern in a-gi-MV. The a-gi- forms involve gi 'to head back' while the a-gdhe- forms involve gdhe 'to go back'. In both cases I think a is a transitivizing particle, essentially a locative, though it is not clear whether its is superessive a- 'on', or commitative a- 'with, accompanying' or something else. The aagdhe athi case was interpreted by Dorsey as a suus ('get one's own') form, but so far I think this is incorrect. I believe that the g- marks vertitive, not suus. On the other hand ... JEK From rood at spot.Colorado.EDU Mon Jun 18 22:55:02 2001 From: rood at spot.Colorado.EDU (ROOD DAVID S) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:55:02 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: <000a01c0f814$68a5bae0$79345d81@mark.unl.edu> Message-ID: When we first began to work on Lakxota 30 years ago, and had in mind among other things the possible preparation of a dictionary, we checked on the then-current copyright laws and were informed in absolute terms that "no one can copyright words". I don't know whether that has changed in the meantime or not, but it should be relevant. To copyright documents, or the contents of something composed of words, is of course a different matter, and the ethics of intellectual property rights are probably even more complex than the legalities. In my Wichita experience, what I learned is that traditionally stories were owned and could be sold by story-tellers (I think songs are simiilar), but as soon as you paid a story-teller for a story, you, too, had the right to make further use of it -- in other words, it became yours to tell further. But that's a story, not a language -- I do not think that any resolution such as the one Mark describes would ever be enforceable legally. There are cases, however, where a tribe asks or orders a linguist not to publicize information about the language (though those attitudes seem to vary as tribal council membership changes); at that point, the issue of "ownership" is not legal, but moral, it seems to me. You might be interested in the preliminary stages of some attempts to wrestle with this problem on a world-wide basis from a German perspective (German law tries to be a lot more precise that English/American does). Look at www.mpi.nl/DOBES/applicants/legal-ethics-issues.html David David S. Rood Dept. of Linguistics Univ. of Colorado Campus Box 295 Boulder, CO 80309-0295 USA rood at colorado.edu From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 23:11:43 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:11:43 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: <3B2E73E5.8170F008@d.umn.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Alan H. Hartley wrote: > > native language as property > > That's an unpleasant thought. Maybe those responsible for drafting such > "ordinances" should be asked if they're licensed to use the English > terminology in which they drafted the proposals. Are any of us, in the US or Canada? (I apologize if I seem to overlook the various subscribers who are not US or Canadian citizens.) Many of my ancestors appear to have been German speaking (the - the "evidently" evidential) and neither country is part of Great Britain, which presumably controls anything actually called 'English'. Still, in some sense I clearly have a better case for using English than Spanish or Omaha-Ponca. As far as I know all living Omaha and Ponca people are bilingual in Omaha-Ponca and English and have as much title to English as I do. On the other hand, I believe copyright law is designed to protect particular fixed sequences of words and images, not the use of particular languages or isolated words in them. I don't think, for example, that Okrand's Klingon or Tolkien's various invented languages are copyright, only the publications about them. I've never heard of any language, including natural languages, invented languages, computer programming languages (high level or low level; open, proprietary or otherwise) being copyright. In fact, I'm not sure that it is even accepted practice to copyright encoding systems like ASCII or XML. Languages are the original "non-proprietary software," though hardly "open source." I have the impression that Native American (or other) ethnic groups have not even been able to enforce anything like trademark rights to their own names. It might be possible for states or Congress to create and invest statutory rights to languages. That would be a great way to ensure that the controlled languages disappeared without further discussion or attention, one suspects. I'm not clear on whether such a law could regulate existing published materials without being an ex post facto law, something the US Constitution precludes. Linguists working on Native American languages have (in recent years, anyway) tended to respect the wishes of the relevant groups as to what languages were published on, what materials in them were published, and, up to a point, as to what the languages are called (though not always). I believe this has been primarily motivated by a polite wish (moral obligation? ethical inclination?) to respect the sense of privacy of a few particular groups with respect to social matters in general, and of all groups with respect to personal or socially restricted information. However, I think that most linguists in the US would not sympathize with general attempts to control all publication in and on all languages. Frankly, I fall into that category. Clearly almost everyone in the US would respect a Federally-enforced rights of control within the US. Copyright control might just possibly be enforcible under treaty obligations elsewhere, if it proved valid, but copyright law is fairly international and involves a fair amount of voluntary cooperation. I'm not sure an extension of the bounds of copyright in the US would be observed abroad. Statutory rights probably wouldn't be enforcible elsewhere, especially if of state origin. Depending on details of the situation, a lot of publication might simply move to another state or abroad. In a situation where the rights were merely asserted without any recognized legal enforcibility, I can't say what particular individuals might do out of a sense of personal debt, personal necessity, etc. It would certainly be a very uncomforable situation, especially since one suspects that most cases many of the members of the native communities in question would also be out of sympathy with the asserted rights. It might be appropriate for Native Amercan groups to provide statements regarding the respect with which they would wish their languages to be considered, to regulate internal use of the language in public contexts where that was feasible, and to the extent that this might be consistent with Federal and state laws, and so on. One could probably regulate, for example, the orthographies to be used in purchase of published materials or preparation of tribally funded materials, and, up to a point, the content of the materials. It would probably be wise to be very retrained in doing this, to avoid creating situations in which no satisfactory materials were ever available for acquisition. JEK From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Mon Jun 18 23:28:36 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:28:36 -0600 Subject: language as property In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, ROOD DAVID S wrote: > To copyright documents, or the contents of something composed of > words, is of course a different matter, and the ethics of intellectual > property rights are probably even more complex than the legalities. There is a general notion that rights to song texts as perceived by Native American communitites should be observed. I would never publish a song text that had not been either both (a) previous published and (b) clearly characterized as public or belonging to a defunct organization, or, alternatively, (a) explicitly released to me for this use and (b) determined as well I could to be endowable by the individuals in question. In regard to stories or other non-song texts, I would not release a "recent" personal account due to a particular individual without the permission of that individual or his or her principal heir(s), if deceased. As far as stories already published or prepared by those "long" deceased are concerned, it might be a somewhat different case. Historical texts are subject to some degree of open disclosure as reportage, and myths are often more widely distributed across groups than members of the particular groups may realize. Additional contraints might very well be imposed by a publisher, and a certain amount of judgement is always called for, in any event. JEK From jggoodtracks at juno.com Tue Jun 19 00:36:51 2001 From: jggoodtracks at juno.com (Jimm G GoodTracks) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:36:51 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: Personally, I think the enclosed example of a tribal legislation on the use of any language may be good for an ultimate test case to the US Supreme Court against Freedom of Speech. That is purely my own thought. On the other hand, some years ago, while working with a number of tribal elders, I received a letter from the chairman (at the time) of one of the IOM communities. He declared the right and possession of the tribal language shared by the elders and my language project/ study/ research was to be sanctioned by a percentage of the "profits" to be made off any publications, etc. to the tribal office. Now then, the individuals of this list well know, that there is little if indeed any profits made from the publication of tribal grammars, stories, etc. from work with informants (elders). But beyond the joke and laugh over said "profits", I shared the question of "ownership" of a language and information received from elders with the Cherokee Bilingual Program Director, near Tahlequah, Okla. I lived and worked in that area from 1975-85, and the Cherokee Program was the only full time, fully staffed tribal language program that existed at the time, that had achedemic credential(ed) staff. Mrs. Agnes McCowan said (and she was a fluent speaker of Cherokee), the language and knowledge known and spoken by any person belongs exclusively to that person. If it is freely given and shared with another person, as indeed, there being no other way to receive it, than it is the individual's prerogative to do so. The shared (recorded/ written) language, narrative, story is now co-owned by the person it is shared/ given to, and may be ultilized as seen fit, precluding any proscribed restrictions presented by the informant elder. She was emphatic that the tribal political community was not a partner/ co-owner of tribal language/ teachings/ spirituality/ knowledge. In other words, the Keeper of a language & knowledge is with the one who has it, and not the community of which he is a member. If you think on it, should a tribe claim ownership & declare itself the usage regulatory agent, than it necessarily should hold true for any language, including English, Espa?ol, Deutsch, etc. Germany could regulate the use of German language in the U.S., would seem the amusing outcome. While some elders have freely given away their language & cultural knowledge, most of us know that the majority of elders have norms, expectations that ultilize rules & forms of sanctions, that go along in a prescribed form of traditional ways to transferr knowledge. I will not recite these traditional M.O.A.'s which are employed towards tribal members/ non-members, Natives/ non-Natives. For the uninformed, See Jill Davidson's "Song To Our Elder Brother" or Laurie Stanley's "The Indian Path of Life". And if you look at this discussion from within the tribal culture, the tribe has no authority over a knowledgable elder to pass on his wisdom to younger tribal members. It remains the elders' prerogative. There is no way they, the tribal political entity, can "make him." And in tribal programs, where the elders are an active part of cultural/ language programs, they do so upon their own desire. And many have chosen to take it with them. JimmGT On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 "Mark Awakuni-Swetland" writes: > 18 June 2001 > Aloha all: > > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue > about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and > the like. > > I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the > following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: > > a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature > about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or > b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous > people who have claimed rights similar to: > > "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following > decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and > authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st > century, and > > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the > __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system > and future words of the [_] people, and > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a > copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] > language" > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any > non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved > application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any > part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] > language for any purpose" > > Many thanks > 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 From ioway at earthlink.net Tue Jun 19 13:18:06 2001 From: ioway at earthlink.net (Lance Foster) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 05:18:06 -0800 Subject: language as property Message-ID: Hi all- I am now in Alaska working for the National Parks here. Hope to keep involved as much as possible... This is an interesting topic I would like to add to. I think many NA people think somehow you are going to make lots of money (like Jimm said) off the language. And everyone wants money. This is only the extension of the general perception that writers make lots of money. I know that I myself, and from what I know of Jimm's efforts and the others here, that you SPEND WAY more money and time on keeping the language study going than you ever make on any of it. Hey, just "write a grant" and you'll be rolling in dough! Now to be honest, though you don't generally make money off language study directly, some (linguists among you) do make money indirectly by having a career based on the language study (thus the fact sscholars ome are threatened by these kinds of tribal movements to "own" languages)..and "curators" like Jimm and me do get payback by varying (emphasis on varying) amounts of regard from the people (some anyway, depending on the variant allegiances and inevitable/misplaced jealousies involved). But when it comes to money, cash money, wa! and I add buh! As far as using copyright law to a language, it won't wash under US copyright law, which even in art only protects the exact expression of something.. so you (or a tribe) could copyright a story only so far as the particular expression of that story, not the idea or a variant expression of the story. Plus there is the fact that most ofa these stories have been in public domain for a long long time. I think the real concern seems to be a bit complex. For some, usually the more business committee types (or greedy individuals) it seems to be, hey I want a cut of the pie. Like there is any pie, right. But there is a concern on at least two other levels. 1. For example, language is a living thing. It has its own life. It was a gift from the Creator and words themselves have life and power to create or destroy. Words, the native languages, have a sacredness to them, and can be misused. I am not talking about the "sacred bundle-ness" of a language, as an object. I am talking about the creative power and destructive ability inherent in a language formed by the breath carried down from the first times, about the life and death force in it. I myself have experienced this, when I was going to be attacked by a mother bear with cubs. I talked to her in English and she kept coming. When I talked to her in Ioway, she stopped and let me go on my way. This kind of power IN THE WORDS I have personally experienced. 2. This concern also reflects in the current abuse of Lakota by new agey types trying to "be Indian." Somehow they use the mantra Mitakuye Oyasin almost like magic words, and many tribes see what has happened to Lakota popularization, and the appropriation of Native identity and spirituality through the learning of just enough of the language to appear to be a spiritual leader.. throw in a "canunpa" and a "inipi" here and there and PRESTO you are a pipe carrier. So it's not just money, it's about the spirituality of language, and the misappropriation of that spirituality, by both nonIndian (and sadly) Indians to get power over others in a guru sense as well as money (look at the Sun Bear and Seven Arrows phenomena, let alone the nagual tonal bit of Castaneda). Language is not only identity, it is spirituality, something from the time of creation. No one race of people have a monopoly on spirituality. But native religions (and language is integral to the religion) are usually thought to be a specific "contract" between the group and its ancestors/creator/spiritual environment, and language is an integral part of that. That's why the Meskwaki don't want others to know their language. That's a part of the Hochunk traditionalist concern with retaining control over their language, a way in which copyright may not be appropriate, but you may now better understand the concern with manipulating language which has the power of creation in its very sounds. This may be why many choose not to pass it on, but take it with them when they pass on. Lance Jimm G GoodTracks wrote: > Personally, I think the enclosed example of a tribal legislation on the > use of any language may be good for an ultimate test case to the US > Supreme Court against Freedom of Speech. That is purely my own thought. > > On the other hand, some years ago, while working with a number of tribal > elders, I received a letter from the chairman (at the time) of one of the > IOM communities. He declared the right and possession of the tribal > language shared by the elders and my language project/ study/ research > was to be sanctioned by a percentage of the "profits" to be made off any > publications, etc. to the tribal office. > > Now then, the individuals of this list well know, that there is little if > indeed any profits made from the publication of tribal grammars, stories, > etc. from work with informants (elders). > > But beyond the joke and laugh over said "profits", I shared the question > of "ownership" of a language and information received from elders with > the Cherokee Bilingual Program Director, near Tahlequah, Okla. I lived > and worked in that area from 1975-85, and the Cherokee Program was the > only full time, fully staffed tribal language program that existed at the > time, that had achedemic credential(ed) staff. > > Mrs. Agnes McCowan said (and she was a fluent speaker of Cherokee), the > language and knowledge known and spoken by any person belongs exclusively > to that person. If it is freely given and shared with another person, as > indeed, there being no other way to receive it, than it is the > individual's prerogative to do so. The shared (recorded/ written) > language, narrative, story is now co-owned by the person it is shared/ > given to, and may be ultilized as seen fit, precluding any proscribed > restrictions presented by the informant elder. > > She was emphatic that the tribal political community was not a partner/ > co-owner of tribal language/ teachings/ spirituality/ knowledge. In > other words, the Keeper of a language & knowledge is with the one who has > it, and not the community of which he is a member. > > If you think on it, should a tribe claim ownership & declare itself the > usage regulatory agent, than it necessarily should hold true for any > language, including English, Espa?ol, Deutsch, etc. Germany could > regulate the use of German language in the U.S., would seem the amusing > outcome. > > While some elders have freely given away their language & cultural > knowledge, most of us know that the majority of elders have norms, > expectations that ultilize rules & forms of sanctions, that go along in a > prescribed form of traditional ways to transferr knowledge. I will not > recite these traditional M.O.A.'s which are employed towards tribal > members/ non-members, Natives/ non-Natives. For the uninformed, See Jill > Davidson's "Song To Our Elder Brother" or Laurie Stanley's "The Indian > Path of Life". > > And if you look at this discussion from within the tribal culture, the > tribe has no authority over a knowledgable elder to pass on his wisdom to > younger tribal members. It remains the elders' prerogative. There is no > way they, the tribal political entity, can "make him." > > And in tribal programs, where the elders are an active part of cultural/ > language programs, they do so upon their own desire. And many have > chosen to take it with them. > > JimmGT > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:33:30 -0500 "Mark Awakuni-Swetland" > writes: > > 18 June 2001 > > Aloha all: > > > > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue > > about native language as property, intellectual property rights, and > > the like. > > > > I will conduct a literature review, but also wish to post the > > following inquiry to the LIST and see if others: > > > > a) have encountered similiar conditions not yet in the literature > > about attempts to legislate the following by tribal ordinance, or > > b) citations/directions to relevant articles concerning indigenous > > people who have claimed rights similar to: > > > > "Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following > > decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic, its use and > > authenticity must be protected as a language system in the 21st > > century, and > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the > > __ language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system > > and future words of the [_] people, and > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law a > > copyright symbol of [_] after any use or practice of the [_] > > language" > > > > Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any > > non-Indian or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved > > application form permission to use the [_] language in part or any > > part thereof, before they use any portion or part of the [_] > > language for any purpose" > > > > Many thanks > > 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 -- Lance Michael Foster Email: ioway at earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~ioway ------------------------- Native Nations Press, 1542 Calle Angelina, Santa Fe, NM 87501 Phone: 505-438-2945 info at nativenations.com ------------------------- NativeNations.Com - Native Nations Press (http://www.nativenations.com) Baxoje Ukich'e: The Ioway Nation (http://www.ioway.org) From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Tue Jun 19 17:06:15 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:06:15 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <200106141646.JAA02856@ns5.dnssys.com> Message-ID: I guess my first question would be, what parts are inflected? As a comparativist I'm aware in a general way that a number of the Siouan branch's instrumental prefixes are full fledged verbs in Catawba, and hence that these particular instrumentals originate in serial verbs, whereas others seem to originate in incorporated nouns, but I'm rather vague on the use of such things in Catawba specifically. The da:- and du- elements certainly look like familiar instrumental elements in, e.g., Omaha-Ponca, cf. OP naN- 'by foot' and dhi- (< dhu-) 'by hand'. And I believe I can recognize at least some of the motion verb roots as cognate, too, e.g., de and hu, plus there seem to be vertitive k's as well. What is the (k)ha: element? (I'm pretty sure I've benefitted, however, temporarily, in the past from a discussions of the motion verbs per se from Blair and/or Paul. There may be something in the list archives, in fact.) On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 claudiap at ccppcrafts.com wrote: > This is some of what we have for Catawba "motion/fetch verbs" > da:- action by foot > da:dehude' bring it back, go fetch > kurada:'kanide: go (by foot and) look at it > da:dure:kuNde: go (by foot) give it to me > hiida:dehude go fetch it > da:huu?- to fetch, go get > da:ka:ni?- to go by foot and see > da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand > du- action by hand > du bring > dugiina'heN'?, > duk'ha:'rare bring back > dukhu'wa:de: bring it back here > dukha:'dukhu're: back came back brought > duhu're : brought > dugdu'gra:re: home back bring > duhuhne'h I bring > iyuruu?ire: they bring > ima:ru'u?ire: they bring hither > wiya: demaN > tepeN duhunide thread me one bring > duhuu? carry in the hand > duc^uu? to chop by hand, arm > da:duhuu?- to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand > duhaNna:?- to hold under the arm > > ------------------- > - > From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 20 16:22:13 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:22:13 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: The Catawba verbs for fetch consist of a mixed group of stems. They include mutating roots and suffixing roots. They also include mutating instrumentals and non-mutating proclitics. Incidentally, Catawba does not show any trace of noun incorporation. Also, Catawba has no vertitive. Claudia has cited forms from various sources in the original transcriptions (typically phonetic, but phonemic from Siebert). I provide here phonemicizations for the phonetic forms. Although the instrumental prefixes in Catawba mutate their initial consonant for person and number, they are not full-fledged verbs. They are always affixed to another verb root, and cannot occur as the sole root in a predicate. For the full inflection of the mutating instrumentals, you should look at Siebert's 1945 IJAL article. The analysis of the stems is as follows. /da:-/ action by foot (mutating instrumental prefix, requires that a verb root follow; see below. It is distinct form the verb da:?- go, go on foot) da:dehude? (/da:duhu:de:/) bring it back, go fetch (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating root], -de: imperative mode /kurada:kanide:/ go (by foot and) look at it (kura- go in a direction [suffixing root], da:- action foot [mutating instrumental], kan- see [mutating root], -i- epenthetic vowel, -de: imperative mode. da:dure:kuNde: (/da:da:re:/ /kuNde:/)go (by foot) give it to me (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], da:- go by foot [mutating root], -re: indiciative mode; kuN- give [mutating root], -de: imperative mode hi:da:dehude: (/da:duhu:de:/) go fetch it (I am not sure what the hi: in this form is. It may be a left over demonstrative (hi: this) with the preceding noun omitted) (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating verb], -de: imperative mode /da:hu:?-/ to fetch, go get (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], hu:?- come [mutating root]) /da:kani?-/ to go by foot and see da:- action foot [mutating instrumental], kan- see [mutating root], -i- epenthetic vowel, -? momentous aspect /da:duhu:?-/ to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:?- come [mutating root] /du-/ action by hand [mutating instrumental] /du-/ bring (same as preceding) dugina'heN?, /dukha:rare:/ bring back (duk- back [proclitic], ha:ra- go, walk, step [suffixing root], -re: indicative mode dukhuwa:de: (/dukkuwa:de:/) bring it back here (duk- back [proclitic], kuwa:- come, come along, proceed [suffixing root], -de: imperative mode dukha:dukhure: (/dukha:?/ /dukhu:re:/) back came back brought (duk- back [proclitic], ha:- come, arrive [suffixing root], -? participial mode; duk- back [proclitic], hu:- come [mutating verb], -re: indicative mode /duhu:re:/ brought (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, -re: indicative mode dugdugra:re: (/dukdukra:re:/) home back bring (duk- back [proclitic], duk- Ibid., ra:- go by foot, -re: indicative mode duhuhne'h I bring (error for /duhu:ne/ does he bring?) (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, -ne [interrogative mode] /iyuru:?ire:/ they bring (i- third person plural prefix, yu- action by hand [mutated for third person plural], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode /ima:ru:?ire:/ they bring hither (i- third person plural prefix, ma:- there [proclitic], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode wiya: demaN tepeN duhunide (/wiya:/ /demu/ /depeN/ /duhanide:/) thread me one bring (wiya: string [noun], demu I myself [independent pronoun], depeN one [numeral], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hani- give, -de: imperative mode /duhu:?/ carry in the hand (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come [mutating root], -? participial mode /duc^u:?/ to chop by hand, arm (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], c^u:- chop [suffixing root], -? participial mode /da:duhu:?-/ to go get, proceed on foot and fetch by hand (da:- action by foot, du- action by hand, hu:- come, -? participial mode) /duhaNna:?-/ to hold under the arm (du- action by hand, haNna:- hold [suffixing root], -? participial mode. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 20 18:01:26 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:01:26 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <4c.16f3b228.286227b5@aol.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > The Catawba verbs for fetch consist of a mixed group of stems. They include > mutating roots and suffixing roots. They also include mutating instrumentals > and non-mutating proclitics. Incidentally, Catawba does not show any trace > of noun incorporation. Also, Catawba has no vertitive. I see that I was misled by the sequences of duk + verb. But, it occurs to me, suppose that the Siouan vertitive is a reduction of (something like) duk? The /du/ part would be missing, but the k intact. I'm not sure why the /du/ would have gone missing, but worse things happen at sea and in historical morphology. None of the vertitives have a fuller form *ki-, but the natural tendency is to assume that vertitive *k- must be reduced from *ki- since various *ki- morphemes reduce to *k- with stems that have initial *r or *th or *h or *?, and all the motion verbs have one or the other of these. However, perhaps Siouanists have been on the wrong track here? We are also struggling to explain how the *ka strike morpheme (as attested in Mississippi Valley and Mandan) should correspond to *rak(a)- in the other branches. So, eliminating duplicates and some supplementary forms and reordering somewhat, I get: ==== > /duhu:re:/ brought (du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- come, > -re: indicative mode [m]du-[m]hu:(?) HAND+come 'to bring' > /da:hu:?-/ to fetch, go get (da:- action by foot [mutating instrumental], > hu:?- come [mutating root]) [m]da:-[m]hu:? FOOT+come 'to fetch, go get' > /ima:ru:?ire:/ they bring hither (i- third person plural prefix, ma:- there > [proclitic], ru:- come [mutated for third person plural], -? momentous > aspect, -i- third person plural suffix, -re: indicative mode ma:=[m]hu: THERE+come 'to bring hither' > da:dehude? (/da:duhu:de:/) bring it back, go fetch (da:- action by foot > [mutating instrumental], du- action by hand [mutating instrumental], hu:- > come [mutating root], -de: imperative mode [m]da:-[m]du-[m]hu:(?) FOOT+HAND+come 'bring back, go fetch' > da:dure:kuNde: (/da:da:re:/ /kuNde:/)go (by foot) give it to me (da:- action > by foot [mutating instrumental], da:- go by foot [mutating root], -re: > indiciative mode; kuN- give [mutating root], -de: imperative mode [m]da:-[m]da:(?) [m]kuN FOOT+go give 'to go and give it' > dugina'heN?, > > /dukha:rare:/ bring back (duk- back [proclitic], ha:ra- go, walk, step > [suffixing root], -re: indicative mode duk=ha:ra[s] BACK+walk 'to bring back' > dukhuwa:de: (/dukkuwa:de:/) bring it back here (duk- back [proclitic], > kuwa:- come, come along, proceed [suffixing root], -de: imperative mode duk=kuwa:[s] BACK+come_along 'to bring back here' > dukha:dukhure: (/dukha:?/ /dukhu:re:/) back came back brought (duk- back > [proclitic], ha:- come, arrive [suffixing root], -? participial mode; duk- > back [proclitic], hu:- come [mutating verb], -re: indicative mode duk=ha:[s]-? duk=[m]hu:? BACK+arrive-PART BACK-come 'to come back bringing' > dugdugra:re: (/dukdukra:re:/) home back bring (duk- back [proclitic], duk- > Ibid., ra:- go by foot, -re: indicative mode duk=duk=[m]ra:(?) BACK-BACK-go'to bring back home' (Is ra: the same as da:(?)?) ==== I added some (?) in final position where I wasn't sure if a glottal stop was missing from usage elsewhere. These are probably spurious on my part. It looks the first several forms are basically 'to come' preceded by none (?) or one or both of FOOT and HAND and, I presume, used transitively. There's no object inflection, right? Then there is a form with FOOT prefixed to 'to go', perhaps a subset of a the preceding pattern. Then there are several duk-prefixed forms of suffixally inflecting verbs, with meanings that seem to involve either non-arrival or explicit arrival. Finally there is duk-prefixed ra: 'to go'. It looks like the used of FOOT and/or HAND is important, but perhaps the transitivity comes from the context and the instrumental is only relevant if the use of foot or hand is focussed in some way? Use of FOOT and HAND seems to occur only with hu:(?) and da:(?), while use of duk= seems to occur mainly with the suffixing verbs, but perhaps some of this apparently patterning is a chance of the forms attested? The repetition of duk= in the last case is interesting. (I wonder if there is a verb gus that is eligible for this treatment ...) (OK, it's summer.) JEK From BARudes at aol.com Wed Jun 20 20:18:56 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 16:18:56 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: It is of course possible that the k of the Catawba proclitic duk# is cognate with the vertitive in Siouan, but I am not sure how you would prove it. The du part could come from *ru or *nu, but there is no internal evidence in Catawba to suggest that duk# was ever bimorphemic. Duk# is one of a long list of locative and directional proclitics that occur before the verb root in Catawba. Others include hap# up, ma# there, c^apa# away, c^ik# forward, huk# below, su# in. I call them proclitics because the following stem undergoes the same sound changes it would if it were word initial (e.g., r becomes /d/ before an oral vowel and /n/ before a nasal vowel). Your analyses of the stem are correct. The root stem glottal stop is either the participial mode (if it is word-final) or the momentous aspect (if it is word-medial). The underlying forms of the instrumental prefixes and the verb go by foot are: ra:-, ru- and -ra:-, respectively. The initial r becomes /d/ or /n/ in word-initial position, as noted above. Yes, there is no object inflection. Objects are marked by proclitics. The instrumentals da:- and du- are prefixes, and occur with roots other than -hu:- and -ra:- outside the fetch set. Duk# is a proclitic, and can occur on just about any verb of motion. It can occur with the mutating verbs, as well as the suffixing verbs. From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Wed Jun 20 23:14:24 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 17:14:24 -0600 Subject: Fetch In-Reply-To: <9c.fad9f2d.28625f30@aol.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > It is of course possible that the k of the Catawba proclitic duk# is cognate > with the vertitive in Siouan, but I am not sure how you would prove it. The > du part could come from *ru or *nu, but there is no internal evidence in > Catawba to suggest that duk# was ever bimorphemic. Duk# is one of a long > list of locative and directional proclitics that occur before the verb root > in Catawba. Others include hap# up, ma# there, c^apa# away, c^ik# forward, > huk# below, su# in. I call them proclitics because the following stem > undergoes the same sound changes it would if it were word initial (e.g., r > becomes /d/ before an oral vowel and /n/ before a nasal vowel). If there's anything in the Ca duk= 'back' : PSi *k- vertive comparison, it wouldn't be necessary for duk= to be bimorphemic. I don't know that any case has been made for *raka- being bimorphemic. This is the form for the 'by striking' instrumental supported in, I think, Crow-Hidatsa and Southeastern, whereas Mississippi Valley supports *ka-, but with an odd *ra- allomorph when various *ki- morphemes are prefixed. The situation is completely obscured by an odd shift of meanings in Chiwere and Winnebago, but that's another matter. Basically, initial *ra, not known to be a separate morpheme from trailing *ka, disappears. There may have been some confusion with a homophonous *ka 'by wind/current', though the existence of this latter instrumental is somewhat notional. It does seem to exist in Hidatsa, and the meanings covered seem to fall under *ka in Mississippi Valley languages where I've checked. There's also a loss of initial *hi or final *(r)a in the causative in a number of languages. At least it seems clear that the original was something like *=hi=...(r)a, but usually only half of this survives in the simplest form of attested causative, e.g., Dakotan =yA or Winnebago =hii, but cf. Dakotan =khiyA for the longer form. I don't think this is quite an apt comparison, since it is probably bimorphemic, and the mechanisms for reduction are fairly clear, but it does show that derivational morphology can be eroded fairly severely. Most of the proclitics you cite are pretty much in line with the semantic domain of the Siouan locative prefixes, also prefixed to the stem. The locatives are covered by *i, *a, or *o and sequences like *i-r-o or *i-r-a, though there may be several distinct morphemes (or meanings, anyway) associated with each vowel. The shapes are certainly different here, though, between Catawban and Siouan. Like the locatives the vertitive is primarily directional or locational in sense. I think the usual supposition is that the suus or reflexive possessive *k(i)- is somehow related to the *k- vertitive ('homeward/back') via the concept of '(own) place'. If something like duk is involved in the origin of the vertitive, one way to account for the loss of initial du is through absorption into pronominals. The closest equivalent to Catawban initial mutation inflection that I can think of in Siouan is Stoney 1st/2nd/3rd mu/nu/yu (from Proto-Dakotan mnu/s^nu/yu) for the inflection of the 'by hand' instrumental. Some other developments in syncopating inflection come close. > The underlying forms of the instrumental prefixes and the verb go by foot > are: ra:-, ru- and -ra:-, respectively. The initial r becomes /d/ or /n/ in > word-initial position, as noted above. Just out of curiosity, how do we know that the foot instumental ra:- and the verb 'go by foot' -ra:- are not connected? 'Foot' is essentially *naN- (with a short vowel, I believe) in Siouan. I wonder how old the connection between long vowels and nasal vowels is in Catawban? I seem to recall similar explanations for nasal vowels in Eastern Algonquian. JEK From BARudes at aol.com Thu Jun 21 17:24:16 2001 From: BARudes at aol.com (BARudes at aol.com) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:24:16 EDT Subject: Fetch Message-ID: The problem with an assumption that duk# lost du- through absorption into pronominals is the fact that duk# always precedes pronominals. As for ra:# by foot and ra:- go by foot, I assume they come from the same source historically. However, in the modern language they are separate morphemes with distinct inflections. (I believe it was Siebert 1945 who first pointed this out.) The Catawba situation is very different from the Eastern Algonquian situation. In the New England Eastern Algonquian languages, Proto-Eastern Algonquian *e: became /a:/ and *a: became /aN/ (except in Penobscot, where it became a tense /a/ (versus lax /a/ from *e:) which Siebert wrote with an alpha. In Catawba, the alternation of long vowels with nasal vowels is dialectal, with Esaw, Saraw and Woccon showing different distributions. It is hard to say how old the phenomenon is. Since there are differences between Proto-Siouan and Catawban on the distribution of nasal and oral vowels, it is going to take some time and careful reconstruction to determine what the original vowels in Proto-Siouan-Catawban forms were. Blair From John.Koontz at colorado.edu Thu Jun 21 22:01:01 2001 From: John.Koontz at colorado.edu (Koontz John E) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:01:01 -0600 Subject: Fetch (Vertitive) In-Reply-To: <95.c4cc73b.286387c0@aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 BARudes at aol.com wrote: > The problem with an assumption that duk# lost du- through absorption into > pronominals is the fact that duk# always precedes pronominals. The location of prepronominal morphemes tends to become postpronominal over time in Siouan, so, in itself, prepronominal location is not a problem. Of course, the potential evanescence of proclitic locative particles might be an issue. Some of the marginalia of the Siouan verb are restricted to particular languages or subgroups and are probably relatively recent innovations. On the other hand, a small set of widely distributed forms provide a lot of the character of Siouan as a whole. And a number of proclitic elements seem to have been fairly stable in Siouan or Mississippi Valley Siouan over a relatively shorter time, even when lexically restricted. Quite a number of bipartite verbs with individual or seldom repeated preverbs are attested, *maN=..riN 'to walk' being a classical example. (And now I wonder about *maN= here and the ma:= 'there' proclitic in Catawba.) JEK From rankin at ku.edu Mon Jun 25 16:27:40 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:27:40 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about > native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ > language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and > future words of the [_] people,... Our colleagues on the list have already expressed views that pretty much coincide with my own about this issue. However, there are one or two other matters related to it that usually only get hinted at and gossiped about in public discussions. They deserve an airing. Views expressed in the proclamation are being promulgated primarily by a small group of White linguists and anthropologists. They are the same ones who tried to get Native scholars *not* to join or participate in SSILA at its inception 20 years ago. From the low level of scholarship evinced by some of this bunch, I am forced to conclude that they hope to gain exclusive access to various languages while shutting out more qualified people. They also apparently seek to cover their own analytical errors and render their work free from meaningful peer review. I'm sorry to have to say this sort of thing, but I can cite specific examples. There are additional ethical questions that I have about this small clique. Several years ago they were running an instructional center with the Kickapoo tribe at Harrah, Oklahoma. It is reliably reported to me (and others including John Koontz and David Rood) by a respected scholar from the U. of Colorado that the group at Harrah suffered the theft of $80,000.00 worth of computers and other office equipment but for some reason known only to them covered up the disappearance and declined to report it to the FBI as required by law. I don't know if it was ever reported, but the event caused me to have serious doubts about the honesty of the participants in the cover-up (and I'm talking about non-Indians here). It was this incident that caused me to have Victor Golla incorporate SSILA when I was president of that organization in 1997 (individual members or officers of non-incorporated organizations can sometimes be held liable for actions of dishonest members). Personally, I don't believe that this movement to try to copyright entire languages originates with Indian people; it is a product of the same group of non-Indian apparachiks. In the past 3 or 4 years they have been working through an Indian lawyer from near Tulsa whom they've coopted, but the idea that verb conjugations or noun declensions are "intellectual property" originates with the non-Indians, not with the lawyer. He's just the mouthpiece. Like the rest of you, I don't see the courts granting copyright to pronouns and conjunctions. This doesn't mean the movement won't have plenty of nuisance value for the radicals though. Nor, unfortunately, does it mean that endangered Indian languages won't simply perish even sooner from "benign neglect." Qualified linguists, after all, won't go where they are not wanted and cannot function normally, and there are plenty of languages in the Pacific, Africa, Asia and South America that cry out for attention. So the danger is not that whole languages will become copyrighted. The danger is that the movement to do so will place the future of endangered languages in the hands of inferior scholars and will cause their earlier demise. Bob >"Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following >decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic,... This is the chief problem. The languages are, for the most part, *not* alive and dynamic. >Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian >or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form >permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before >they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" I've always respected the rights of the tribe to negotiate this sort of agreement when I was actually working for the tribe itself for pay. That mostly applies to the Osages, for whom I did some work back about 1980. But if I am working with an individual who has agreed to teach me, then no such agreement is in place. That individual is simply practicing his/her freedom of expression. From STRECHTER at csuchico.edu Mon Jun 25 21:32:07 2001 From: STRECHTER at csuchico.edu (Trechter, Sara) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 14:32:07 -0700 Subject: language as property Message-ID: For the most part, I see Bob's point, and because language is by definition something that is shared, the legal mechanisms of U.S. copyright law do not seem to work to well for it. But, I would like to speak to something linguists don't often talk about--the real selling of bits and pieces of language that might be the impetus behind the copyright attempts. Although linguists and academics in general do not make much money from Native American languages,there are folks out there who do make some. Some of these people, regrettably, happen to be linguists although I cannot think of a single one of these people who actually works on a Native American language. Have none of you ever been contacted by folks who work at "product naming" Consulting Companies trying to get you to give them good-sounding Lakhota, etc. words? It's much like the folks who contact John Koontz for Omaha-Ponca words for naming their baby, dog, etc. One of these companies (Lexicon)presented at the LSA in San Diego to show that there were alternative careers for linguists. I doubt this would have been possible if the Lexicon representative weren't a well-respected linguist from a research institution. (I'm avoiding naming names.) According to the folks (often graduate students from Stanford and Berkeley) I have met who work for these consulting groups, the consulting group gets paid anywhere from $30,000-$50,000 for a naming project. Sometimes the name is just something catchy-sounding in English. They don't only specialize in Native American sounding names, any language will do, but there are a lot of words in Native American languages the global market hasn't heard of. For instance, the bottled water for Coca Cola is DASANI, not a Sioux word, but taken from an Athabaskan language. Maybe we should try to make it clearer that we realize that such language-farming goes on, but that we don't support it(which is why I like John K's website about Native American Names), rather than maintaining that no one is going to make any money off of language at all. sara trechter -----Original Message----- From: Rankin, Robert L To: 'siouan at lists.colorado.edu ' Sent: 6/25/01 9:27 AM Subject: RE: language as property > My current dissertation research has raised an interesting issue about > native language as property, intellectual property rights, and the like. > Whereas: The [_] tribe claims full and complete ownership of [the __ > language] and its compliments of words, phrases, language system and > future words of the [_] people,... Our colleagues on the list have already expressed views that pretty much coincide with my own about this issue. However, there are one or two other matters related to it that usually only get hinted at and gossiped about in public discussions. They deserve an airing. Views expressed in the proclamation are being promulgated primarily by a small group of White linguists and anthropologists. They are the same ones who tried to get Native scholars *not* to join or participate in SSILA at its inception 20 years ago. From the low level of scholarship evinced by some of this bunch, I am forced to conclude that they hope to gain exclusive access to various languages while shutting out more qualified people. They also apparently seek to cover their own analytical errors and render their work free from meaningful peer review. I'm sorry to have to say this sort of thing, but I can cite specific examples. There are additional ethical questions that I have about this small clique. Several years ago they were running an instructional center with the Kickapoo tribe at Harrah, Oklahoma. It is reliably reported to me (and others including John Koontz and David Rood) by a respected scholar from the U. of Colorado that the group at Harrah suffered the theft of $80,000.00 worth of computers and other office equipment but for some reason known only to them covered up the disappearance and declined to report it to the FBI as required by law. I don't know if it was ever reported, but the event caused me to have serious doubts about the honesty of the participants in the cover-up (and I'm talking about non-Indians here). It was this incident that caused me to have Victor Golla incorporate SSILA when I was president of that organization in 1997 (individual members or officers of non-incorporated organizations can sometimes be held liable for actions of dishonest members). Personally, I don't believe that this movement to try to copyright entire languages originates with Indian people; it is a product of the same group of non-Indian apparachiks. In the past 3 or 4 years they have been working through an Indian lawyer from near Tulsa whom they've coopted, but the idea that verb conjugations or noun declensions are "intellectual property" originates with the non-Indians, not with the lawyer. He's just the mouthpiece. Like the rest of you, I don't see the courts granting copyright to pronouns and conjunctions. This doesn't mean the movement won't have plenty of nuisance value for the radicals though. Nor, unfortunately, does it mean that endangered Indian languages won't simply perish even sooner from "benign neglect." Qualified linguists, after all, won't go where they are not wanted and cannot function normally, and there are plenty of languages in the Pacific, Africa, Asia and South America that cry out for attention. So the danger is not that whole languages will become copyrighted. The danger is that the movement to do so will place the future of endangered languages in the hands of inferior scholars and will cause their earlier demise. Bob >"Whereas: the [_] tribe incorporates under tribal law the following >decree: the [_] language is alive and dynamic,... This is the chief problem. The languages are, for the most part, *not* alive and dynamic. >Whereas: The [_] tribe shall require under this tribal law any non-Indian >or non-enrolled indian member to submit in an approved application form >permission to use the [_] language in part or any part thereof, before >they use any portion or part of the [_] language for any purpose" I've always respected the rights of the tribe to negotiate this sort of agreement when I was actually working for the tribe itself for pay. That mostly applies to the Osages, for whom I did some work back about 1980. But if I am working with an individual who has agreed to teach me, then no such agreement is in place. That individual is simply practicing his/her freedom of expression. From rankin at ku.edu Mon Jun 25 22:42:25 2001 From: rankin at ku.edu (Rankin, Robert L) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:42:25 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: >I would like to speak to something linguists don't often talk about--the real selling of bits and pieces of language that might be the impetus behind the copyright attempts. >Although linguists and academics in general do not make much money from Native American languages,there are folks out there who do make some. Sara makes an interesting point, and one I tend to agree with in principle (except that I don't think the particular group I was damning is responding to Sara's concerns). But I tend to think that what is involved is good taste and common courtesy rather than the law. I haven't been approached by commercial outfits looking for sexy product names (but, hey, my shingle is out), but they would certainly be a gray area that some might be concerned about. The Sioux would certainly be entitled to be incensed if Phillips came out with a new laxative called Uslee-Tonka (although a sci-fi show on TV once involved a "miracle drug" called "Creve-u-lax" and no French speakers complained). These problems do not fall under the topic of copyright law though, because they are not proper names. They fall under the topic of good taste. Companies don't like bad publicity and seek to avoid it. This is true even for "dead" languages. Lexus, for example, is not a Latin word. Luxus is, and lexis is, but not lexus. Nor Elantra, nor Sephia, nor Sentra, etc. They've been pretty careful about this sort of thing. But even if they weren't, I think you'd want to be pretty careful about any precedent that would allow copyright of words other than bonafide proper names. Do the French own the rights to Chevrolet (little goat)? Or the English to Excel (or does the fact that excel is a loanword make it copyrightable by the French instead)? This is not a road we want to go down. Proper names are indeed another matter (but they are ALREADY covered under US copyright law). The Bell helicopter corp. has for years used tribal names for their various products (the Cheyenne, the Kiowa, etc.), but as far as I know, they not only consulted the tribes in question, they held their roll-out and christening at the reservation or otherwise involved the tribe. I don't know if there were also monetary arrangements. Here are a couple for people to chew on though. Several years ago I was approached by the Kansas Air National Guard who wanted to name one of their airborne tankers "Kansa Warrior". They wanted to write it on the nose of the aircraft in the Kaw language. Should I have just translated it or should I have referred them to the Kaw Nation? (I did both, and the airplane now bears that name and a staid likeness of a Kaw warrior.) How horrible, how militaristic, how honored the Kaw Nation was! Here's another. A researcher at the Univ. Medical Center wanted to name new organisms he discovered in the Kaw language to honor the aboriginal inhabitants of the state instead of naming them in the usual classical Latin or Greek. We never got around to it, and I suspect new names have to pass muster with some UNESCO or WHO committee in Geneva made up of classical scholars. But is it a good idea? Do we consult the tribal council every time a new viral organism is found or created to do a certain job? Do we consult the Greek government (or the Catholic Church) when we use the Greek or Latin terms for these critters? I don't have answers, but I don't think it involves copyright. Just common courtesy. Bob From wbgrail at hotmail.com Tue Jun 26 00:20:01 2001 From: wbgrail at hotmail.com (WENDY BRANWELL) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 19:20:01 -0500 Subject: language as property Message-ID: "Language-farming?" I love it. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From Rgraczyk at aol.com Wed Jun 27 15:46:49 2001 From: Rgraczyk at aol.com (Rgraczyk at aol.com) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:46:49 EDT Subject: Comparative Siouan Syntax Workshop Message-ID: In a message dated 06/25/2001 8:37:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu writes: > 1) Would you prefer a two day workshop (Friday & Saturday) or a three day > workshop (Thursday - Saturday)? I would prefer three days--if we're going to travel, we might as well use an extra day. > > 2) What date(s) would be best for you? (Please rank with 1 being best) > > Sept. 13-15 > Sept. 20-12 > Sept. 27-29 > Sept. 20-22 or 27-29 would be my preference. > 3) What would be the best location: (Please rank with 1 being best) - Keep > in mind that although Boulder and Chicago are both accessible by major > airports we we won't be able to stay in dorms in Boulder and the Chicago > I-House is up in the air as to what will happen to it. So although you > might save on airfare, this savings might be more than offset by hotel > rates. Wayne is more remote and doesn't have as many nice restaurants but > motel fare is cheap. We might also be able to set up car pools from St. > Louis. Also, please indicate if any location would make it impossible for > you to participate. > > Boulder, CO. > Chicago, IL. > Wayne, NEB. > Actually, Boulder or Chicago would be better for me, as I would have a place to stay in both locations. But I can work with whatever you decide. > other site suggestions: > > 4) What topics would you like to cover at this workshop? (Please list > topics even if you won't be able to participate in this years workshop). > Also please feel free to make the list as long as you want, we might not > get to everything but we should have a good idea as to what the questions > are. > > Along with the topics that have been mentioned so far, I would add 1) > serial verb constructions, 2) switch reference and 3) deictic/demonstrative > systems. Randy > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From munro at ucla.edu Wed Jun 27 16:11:36 2001 From: munro at ucla.edu (Pamela Munro) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:11:36 -0700 Subject: Comparative Siouan Syntax Workshop Message-ID: I seem to have missed John's message that Randy is replying to below (I will only quote the first few lines of his reply...). If this proposed workshop is open to all, can you resend it, John or someone else? (If not, Randy shouldn't have whetted our appetites like this! Just kidding. I probably wouldn't be able to come but I'd sure like to think about it....) Thanks, Pam Rgraczyk at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 06/25/2001 8:37:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > jpboyle at midway.uchicago.edu writes: > > > >> 1) Would you prefer a two day workshop (Friday & Saturday) or a >> three day >> workshop (Thursday - Saturday)? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: