More on Borrowing of Verbs vs. Nouns

[phil cash cash]

Klahowya,

I have briefly looked into the idea of lexical sources for CJ, that is,
verbs and nouns, and found a set of interesting patterns (Cash Cash
2001).

Taylor (1996) gives a summary of lexical entry sources on four
dictionaries, herein tabulated:

1841	Indigenous=177	
	Non-Indigenous=75		
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=0

1863	Indigenous=276
	Non-Indigenous=164
	Onomatopoeia=6
	Unknown=54

1894 	Indigenous=339
	Non-Indigenous=723
	Onomatopoeia=17
	Unknown=320

1924	Indigenous=206
	Non-Indigenous=337
	Onomatopoeia=2
	Unknown=2

The data given by Taylor suggest that Chinook Jargon peaked by the
1890's.  However, after examining this more carefully, I came up with
some numbers that seem to challenge this claim.

Using Johnson's 1978 data, I came up with the following numbers for new
lexical entries received into CJ (that is, based upon published
sources).

1792	Indigenous=20
	Non-Indigenous=0
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=0

1820 	Indigenous=9
	Non-Indigenous=0
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=1

1840 	Indigenous=66
	Non-Indigenous=2
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=3

1860 	Indigenous=257
	Non-Indigenous=160
	Onomatopoeia=1
	Unknown=63

1900 	Indigenous=47
	Non-Indigenous=104
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=11

1920 	Indigenous=59
	Non-Indigenous=11
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=38

1940	Indigenous=1
	Non-Indigenous=205
	Onomatopoeia=0
	Unknown=12

Up until the 1840's, it seems that Chinook Jargon was in a state of
equilibrium.  After this period, CJ went into a state of flux.
Indigenous sources for verbs dramatically increased during the period
1840-1860, however, very few verbs from non-Indigenous have yet entered
into the lexicon.  Likewise, this time period saw a dramatic increase in
nouns from Indigenous sources, including a dramatic increase in French
and English nouns.

Thus, it seems that CJ peaked much earlier than Taylor claims, that is,
1860 rather than 1890.  Following the 1860 time period, fewer new
entries from Indigenous sources were received into CJ than
non-Indigenous sources.  The impression I got from the post-1860 time
period was that Lejeune' 1924 dictionary was among the largest sources
for non-Indigenous English lexical entries into CJ.  French sources for
nouns were Hale or Scouler (1846), Palmer (1847), Blanchet or Lionnet
(1853), and Gibbs or Winthrop (1863).  [note: sorry, I only counted by
year and not be dictionary.]

As for adjectives, particles, and adverbs, the majority are from
Indigenous sources with very little in-put from non-Indigenous sources.


Thus, my proposed cause for the early decline of CJ in the post-1860's
era is the removal of Indigenous speakers from traditional homelands
onto reservations in the Pacific NW.  This removal resulted in the
weakening of traditional areal networks of communication.

A further inquiry would be to assess the development of CJ in Canada as
compared to US sources to verify the projected dates of development
overall.  Also, other potential causes for the decline of CJ in the
post-1860's is the demise of otter and trade which needs to be carefully
examined.  I may consider a revision if it seems that I am on to
something here.  Let me know.

Wext,
Phil Cash Cash (cayuse/nez perce)
Ph.d student in Anthropology and Linguistics (ANLI)
University of Arizona

References

Cash Cash, P.
2001	A Quantitative Summary of Sources for Chinook Jargon, A Pacific
Northwest Pidgin.  2001 Linguistic Institute, University of
	California, Santa Barbara.
Johnson, S.
1978	Chinook Jargon: A Computer Assisted Analysis of Variation in an
American Indian Pidgin.
Taylor, A.
1996	Chinook Jargon and its distribution in the Pacific Northwest and
beyond.  In Wurm, Stephen, Peter Mulhaser and Darrel T. Tyron (eds.)
"Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific,
Asia, and the Americas."  Vol. II, 2 Texts.  Trends in Linguistics
Documentation 13, Mouton De Gruyter, New York.