bow (fwd)

[Koontz John E]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:22:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Mccafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: "Rankin, Robert L" <rankin at ku.edu>
Cc: 'Robert L. Rankin ' <rankin at lark.cc.ukans.edu>,
     'Koontz John E ' <John.Koontz at Colorado.EDU>,
     "'pankihtamwa at earthlink.net '" <pankihtamwa at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: bow


On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> But M-I also has mitaekopa 'bow' in the literature; is that a replacement
> term, second name or what?

mihtekwaapa (also mihtekoopa is attested). same term. animate ending stead
of inanimate.

> >What I find strange about this is that it seems to imply that the bow
> was something known to speakers of Proto-Algonquian.
>
> I guess I wouldn't say so since, (a) there is no single, unitary term
> reconstructible to PA

well, ahta:pya seems almost unitary cause i think the aht- is unknown.
:)


> and (b) at least one of the terms you do get, "wood
> string", is a compound. Both 'wood' and 'string' are presumably
> reconstructible, but that doesn't mean the compound was. It could have
> arisen independently many times, since it is descriptive in nature. This is
> essentially the argument given by Hockett and others for "fire-water"; both
> terms are primitives but 'whiskey' isn't.
>

yeah, this was munson's thrust, too. i figured that since it occurred in
Eastern Algon. AND way out there in Ojibweland and Miami-Illinoisland that
the term was ancient.

...

Michael