Mozin~o (Jan 22) WAKASHAN

[Henry Kammler]

Hi there,

in the course of the last two weeks several of my postings and forwarded msgs.
didn't get through to the list somehow. At least I didn't get them. Now I repost
this and the following msgs. to the list, it's mostly Wakashan stuff but it
seems to raise more interest on the CHINOOK list than on the SALISHAN one. I put
WAKASHAN in the header so please simply ignore if you're not into etymology.
My sincere apologies to anybody who might get these postings for the second time
now.
Here I go:

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

Hi, Clark, how are-ya <g>

Dave wrote:

> Here are the words I found in a quick glance through Mozin~o's "Noticias
> de Nutka", excepting proper names that didn't seem like sources for the
> Jargon:
>
> * 'Beans are for them the most delicious dish.  "Taiz-frijoles" they call
> them, that is to say "dish of kings"

On the use of _taayi_ (= tyee):
It is a kinship term that gives some insight into the social constitution of
N. society. It does not mean "chief"! Rather it is the term for the first born
son, i.e. the one among the offspring who was most likely to inherit the
majority of his family's ritual rights and prerogatives (both are called
_tupaati_, plural: _tuutuupaata_). His younger brothers (and sisters) usually
also received some of the tuutuupaata but they were not taayi. In a high
ranking family with many children the youngest ones did not receive any
tuutuupaata and were then considered commoners unless they took over some
tuutuupaata from an older sibling who had died.
Taayi was a prominent term, though, because in a potlatch when handing out
gifts (NB: p'achitl; continuative: p'atlp'ayaa) the host often called out the
name of the accompanying son of a high ranking guest. This fact astonished
early writers like the missionary Brabant (in Hesquiat), who noted that it
were not the visiting chiefs who got the presents but their offspring. The
issue of handing down tuutuupaata through generations was central to N.
thinking, everything was grouped around the youngest component of the society
(_asma_ = "the beloved youngest one"), a very neat idea, I think.

>
> * 'A contrary fate is that of the plebeians or Meschimes...'

The free commoners were the biggest group within N. society. Their name is
_masch'im_ [masc^'im] from:
ma............ to dwell
-sch'im.......together with
This connotes their residence in their lineages' big houses, together with
their chiefs, to whom they were related by blood ties.
"chief" is  _Ha'wilh_  [Haw'il]
"slave" is   quulh  [quul]

> * 'The Engish commander ... [and] the Spanish ... have been examples of
> kindness to [the Indians].  They say Cococoa Quadra, cococoa Vancouver,
> when they wish to ponder the good treatment of any of the Captains that
> commanded the other ships.'

cococoa is probably  _'yuqwaa_  [y'uq°aa]
[y'] is glottalized [y] and may sound to Spanish ears like a platalized [k]
[q°] is a rounded [k] spoken back in the throat (uvular) with a rounding of
the lips. It takes "longer" t pronounce than [k] and may have been for the
Spanish like two [k]. Or the natives imitated the unskilled pronunciation of
the Spaniards and actually said it similar to Mozin~o's renderings.

> Note also the Nuucha'nulth's ready use of the Spanish word 'frijoles'.

That's pretty interesting. I would like to know how "frijoles" sounded.
According to the sound laws in Nuuchaa'nulh it must have been *[niXunis] or,
less likely, *[piXunis].
[f] and [r] are nonexistent in N, they would have become [p] viz.[n]
cf. [naayis] from "rice"
consonant clusters are not "allowed" at the beginning of words: [fr] >
{[p]/[n]}, the first is usually dropped
cf. [tuup] from "stove"
[o] becomes [u]; unstressed [e] becomes [i]
[l] is not rendered as the phonetically closest relative [l~] but as [n]
cf. [eepinis] from "apples"

In a like manner N. words were back-simplified when they travelled with the
traders...

Henry