Another question on the KW text containing SAIN

[Bruce, Colin]

I have a question about the use of "pus" of this scentence: "naika SAIN iaka
pus chako pi iaka chako."  Is it right that I've seen pus used as a
conditional/subjunctive marker?  Is it used this way here or is it used as
an infinitive marker.  What I mean is:  can we translate that phrase these
ways?

I signalled him to come...
I signalled would he come...
I signalled him [to see] if he would come...

Now that I see what I've written it looks like overkill (asking too detailed
a question) but jargon seems to have a lot more  subtle nuances than just
simple paraphrases.




 -----Original Message-----
From: 	David D. Robertson [mailto:ddr11 at COLUMBIA.EDU]
Sent:	Wednesday, December 10, 2003 10:15 AM
To:	CHINOOK at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
Subject:	Re: Sign component in Jargon

Tlus son, kanawi tilikom,

I'm reminded of a verb I recently found for the first time in "Kamloops
Wawa" Jargon, /sain/.  This would be pronounced the same as
English "sign."  Its meaning is clear from the context of the following
longish anecdote from Medicine Hat, Alberta*, Canada:

/Drit aias ukuk kan [ship],
wik kata nsaika makmak sitkom;
naika kwash pus chako masachi;
pi trin stop kopa iht stishon,
pi nsaika nanich iawa tanas saia,
iht Sawash man,
ayu pint iaka siahush:
naika SAIN iaka pus chako pi iaka chako,
pi nsaika patlach ukuk kan ship kopa iaka.
Nsaika wawa kopa iaka,
pi wik iaka komtaks,
wik iaka komtaks Chinuk,
wik iaka komtaks Inglish,
pi wik kata nsaika komtaks iaka wawa,
klunas Blakfut ukuk Sawash./

"This can of ?chips was really big,
and there was no way we could eat even half of it;
I was afraid it would go bad;
but the train stopped at some station,
and we saw there a short way off,
an Indian man,
with his face all painted:
I TOLD HIM IN SIGN LANGUAGE to come and he came,
and we gave that can of ?chips to him.
We spoke to him,
but he didn't understand,
he didn't know Chinook,
he didn't know English,
and we couldn't understand his speech,
maybe this Indian was a Blackfoot."

It's interesting to see this word used in a Jargon-only setting.  The
writer expects his audience (which was largely First Nations people whose
familiarity with English at the time of writing wasn't necessarily great)
to understand the word.  It isn't clear whether the writer (a French
priest) and his companions (a Shuswap and an Okanagan, both chiefs) were
using an existing sign language or just making fairly obvious gestures;
the question of the role of sign language in the Kamloops Jargon
environment deserves more investigation.

Incidentally the above passage tends to confirm that the Rocky Mountains
were approximately the eastern limit of Jargon use.

*Was Alberta still the Northwest Territory in August 1904?

Cheers,

--Dave R.

(Thanks to Keith Carlson & SSHRC for supporting research on the above.)