Number 'nine' in Chiwere.

[Campbell, Sky]

I wondered if there was a glottal stop in there somewhere.  I see a “k” in Hamilton and Irvin’s books when there would often be a glottal stop.  For example, their list of catechisms which they titled “We-wv-hæ-kju” (Wiwąxesų or Wiwąxe’sų (“(general) questions”)).

What I also find interesting is that Hamilton and Irvin’s publication five years later (1848) (An Ioway Grammar) doesn’t have the “k” with the word for “nine.”

Sky Campbell, B. A.
Language Director
Otoe-Missouria Tribe
580-723-4466 ext. 111
sky at omtribe.org

From: Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] On Behalf Of Rankin, Robert L.
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 4:40 PM
To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
Subject: Re: Number 'nine' in Chiwere.

Sky,

Yes, the initial k- seems to be part of the original term, probably from *ki-.  Down below your comments I have copied the Comparative Dictionary entry for 'nine'.  As you'll see, several of the languages show traces of the ki- or k-.  My Chiwere recordings showed a glottal stop as residue of the k-.  It's interesting that you found citations of the word with the full k-.

Thanks.

Bob

> Ek jdfk (ikshanke) – Wdtwhtl Wdwdklha Tva Eva Wdhonetl (1834) by Merrill

> Merrill’s form follows the ordinal number pattern (IE “ninth” rather than “nine”) but the “k” is still present which is what has me curious.  To date, all other sources I’ve come across only have “sanke/shanke” (or something along those lines) with no “k”.  It has been mentioned here that “sanke” was borrowed from Algonquian.  Does the inclusion of “k” also fit with other Algonquian “nines”?
Thoughts?


GLOSS[ nine



GRAMCAT[ N

SEMCAT[



OTHREC[ {*kšą́kha}  {GHM58}



PMV[ *kšą́hka ¦ (?)



CH[ ʔšą́khe ‘nine’ rlr

CH[ θą́khe ‘nine’ rtc



PDH[ *šą́hka

OP[ šą́kka ¦ nine ¦ rlr

OP[ šǫ́kka ¦ nine ¦ rtc

KS[ šą́kka ¦ nine ¦ rlr

OS[ šą́hka ¦ nine, archaic, card game ¦ rlr

QU[ šąkka ¦ nine ¦ rlr



PSE[ *kišą́•hka ¦ (?)



BI[ †čkané “tckanĕ´” ‘nine’ DS:265 (?)

OF[ †kíštəška “kî´shtAshga” ‘nine’ {JRS09:485}

OF[ “kĭ´ctạcga” ‘nine’ DS:325b



TU[ †kisą́•hkai “tça (N), sā, sāñ, ksañk, ksāhkai, kasankai, ksākai” ‘nine’ HH

TU[ ¦ ksäⁿhk‘ ¦ ‘nine’ Hw.

TU[  ¦ sęk‘ ¦ ‘nine’ Sapir

TU[  ¦ kseⁿk ¦ ‘nine’ Fracht.

TU[ ¦ kiséⁿg, kisén ¦ two ¦ Fracht.



COM[ The recorded CH forms imply different underlying sibilants. PSI *š

often does become [s], but only primary PSI *s > θ}, {i.e.}, CH {š}

and {θ} never vary or alternate regularly. But note also the irregular TU

{s} where {č} is expected. BI {tckanĕ´} {DS:265a} is probably

borrowed from Choctaw-Chickasaw {čakkâ•li} {nine}; {n} is the usual

BI replacement for Western Muskogean {l} This W. Muskogean term lacks

Creek, Hitchiti cognates however, and may be from the same ultimate source

as Siouan {*kišą́•hka} OF seems to show the intrusive {t} that appears

following sibilants in {black}, {q.v.} OF {ạ} often represents

denasalized {*ą}. {Cf.} also Powhatan {*ke•ka•ta•s} {nine}

{FS 1975:309} as well as other, well known Algonquian look-alikes such as

Ojibwa {ša•nk-} Fox {ša•ka}, Shawnee {caakathzwi}, Potawatomi

{šak} {nine} {FS 1975:311, Rhodes, personal communication}. The

distribution of this set (only the more southerly languages represented), the

sibilant, and other phonological irregularities in CH, OF and TU, coupled

with the presence of similar terms in both Algonquian and Muskogean

languages lead us to conclude that this is a loanword. Direction(s) of

borrowing and/or source of the term is unknown.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20131206/0448e68b/attachment.html>