Whiskey jack, the bird, and high muck

[Jeffrey Kopp]

Well, I'm not sure if David meant the word was "lost" somehow to the Natives if it came into common use, in the way that Kleenex, Xerox and Frigidaire have to continually defend and protect the copyright of their names as they paradoxically became so popular they threaten to become generic (as did happen to "Aspirin" in the U.S., once the trademark of Bayer).  But it is a kind of loss if people take to using the terms without realizing (or worse, ignoring) their origin.

(That's why we have Web sites!)

P.S. I do find the little "(TM)" that seems to be required next to every single mention of the "Academy Awards" these days a bit annoying.  (Once per article should be enough, for heaven's sake.)

Regards,

Jeff



On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:53:43 -0700, David Lewis <coyotez at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU> wrote:

>>From Dave R.
>> A final association:  Though the word "potlatch" is fairly widely known
>> still in NW English, probably less so in Oregon and Washington than in BC
>> and Alaska, it too has become ever less recognizably Jargon, if not
>> less "Indian".
>
>In Reply:
>If a word comes into regular English usage, does it become less Indian?
>Maybe, if the general public is not educated in the true histories of the
>lands they live on. However in indian communities it is not less indian,
>because we continue to pass on our histories to our children. This is an
>interesting question and maybe a subject that deserves some action on the
>part of this listserve, those people who are most interested in finding the
>origins of Indian words and restoring CJ to a survivable status. Indeed, I
>have found professors here at UO questioning my use of terms like potlatch,
>giveaway, gifting, and the like. they do not see these words and ideas as
>legitimate in academic writing.
>David