Linguistic term needed

[Koontz John E]

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> In OP, the word for lead is moNze tu, 'blue metal'.  But in Dakota, lead
> is maNza su, which also means 'bullet'. Apparently the Dakota word was
> influenced by the Omaha term phonologically, but since the Omaha word
> for 'blue', tu, had shifted so far from the Dakota word tho, the Dakota
> reinterpreted the Omaha tu into Dakota su, meaning 'seed' or 'pellet'.
> Thus, it came out as 'metal pellet', which served them both as the
> substance 'lead', and for the bullets that are made of that substance.

I'm not sure I see how this influence would work.  It would be easier if
it was within in a single language, but then the vowels aren't right, as
you indicate.  It's not clear that the sound change in question were so
scheduled as to be useful.  They could easily have been pre-bullet.  OP
vowel shifting is so transparent it's very hard to date.  If you could do
it with bullets, that would certainly be nice.

Anoher problem:  how would the Dakotas know what the Omahas were doing in
this line and why would it influence them?  In fact, given the size and
complexity of the Dakota community I'd even expect some regional variation
in forms like this within it.

On the whole it seems simpler to assume completely independent development
with coincidental vowels.

I think OP has maNze-maN 'metal arrows', which also doesn't refer to lead.
However, I've seen archaeological references to metal arrowheads being cut
out of old kettles, and such, so perhaps a development from actual arrow
heads to bullets is reflected in the OP term.