orignal < Souriquois / Basque-Indian pidgin?

[Mike Cleven]

David Robertson wrote:
>
> Lhush qwInEm-san ukuk san!
>
> (That could translate as "Thank God it's Friday", maybe...)
>
> Yann, Mike, and khanawi-lhaksta,
>
> Dret lhush-tEmtEm nayka, pus mEsayka wawa hayu khapa xluwima Shawash
> "phIjIn" wawa.
>
> Not that I know much about the Basque-Indian pidgin, but if (North
> American) French "orignal" for "moose" is at least a loan from Algonquian
> or Iroquoian, I would find it a wonderful to consider that it might
> ultimately have come from Basque.
>
> Imagine the worldly indigenous person, circa 1600, referring to the moose
> meat being served to a European guest as "orignal", since that was clearly
> a European word.  And imagine the cosmopolitan European referring to that
> animal as "orignal" because that was clearly the current Indian term.
>
> I constate (to mimic my native German speaking college professor) that a
> hayash mawich by any other name is a hayash mawIch, or an "ulchey", and
> that very little semantic confusion likely resulted from these seemingly
> crossed cultural signals.  They both aimed at the same object, after all.

Hyas moolack, wake nah?  "Hyas mowitch" klonas skookum mamook kumtux
"moose", pe naika tumtum "hyas moolack" pe "moolack" mamook skookum.