Questions about words

[hzenk at PDX.EDU]

> Regarding the word t'LuX, I suspected that in the old dictionaries it should
> appear like kluh, klugh, kluk, tluh, tluk or something similar, but what I
> found had different meaning:
>
> Gibbs: Klugh or Klugh-klugh (from Chinook klukh) = to tear; mamook klugh = to
> plough (literally, to tear the ground);
>
> Shaw (Supplemental Vocabulary): Kluh or Klugh (from Chinook) = to tear; to
> plow;
>
> Hale (1890): Kluh (from Chinook) = to tear;
>

aha, masi pus ma munk-dret nayka.  So maybe t'LuX isn't in the old dictionaries.
 The "klugh" etc. that Franscisc cites is in fact for t'LEX 'tear' (>
t'LEX-t'LEX 'all torn up', munk-t'LEX(-t'LEX) 'to tear (something)'; we also
have the duplicated form as 'raggedy', e.g. t'LEX-t'LEX kapo 'raggedy coat').
t'LuX and t'LEX are both derived from Chinookan particles.  More of these have
been recorded from Grand Ronde than from elsewhere, but I'm not sure whether
that is just because Grand Ronde happens to be the best recorded Indian
variety, or whether local Chinookans were adding back more Chinookan along with
influencing the local variety in other ways (e.g. the Chinookan short form
pronoun set, including ma above:  not the same as may, which is just a
truncated version of mayka).  The uneven record is relevant also to the
discussion of short-form pronouns.  Yes, for all we know they were in more
widespread use than Grand Ronde.  But except for that short text from Siletz,
there's almost no evidence of which I'm aware.  Boas claimed (in his critical
notice in Language commenting on Jacobs's 1932 Structural Sketch published
there, based largely on his Victoria Howard CW texts) that in years of using CW
all up and down the NW coast he never encountered Howard's regionally unusual
forms.  On the other hand, there is an interesting entry in Boas's diary from
Siletz when he was there ca. 1890, to the effect that the "Chinook" there was
very different from that in BC, and he was having trouble communicating.  He
evidently had forgotten that by 1932.  (I'm repeating all this stuff from
memory; the diary I believe was edited by Rohner).  Henry

To respond to the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'.  To respond privately to the sender of a message, click 'REPLY'.  Hayu masi!