Terms for "white man"

[Rory M Larson]

Alfred wrote:
> One very often reads of wasicun <- wa-sicun [wa-s^i'c^uN] <- sicun (i.e.
> in the sense given by Riggs).
> Yet, in today's Native literature, there's commonly(?) referred to a
> different etymology:
> was^iN' (fat not dried out, fat meat; pork) +
> ic^u' (to take, take up anything; accept, receive) -> 'fat-taker'
> (stealer of fat).
>
> What do you think about it? Is it (maybe biased) 'folk etymology'?
> (phonologically, this derivation doesn't seem to fit too well.)

I heard this explanation too, in the Lakhota class I took about
ten years ago.  The instructor didn't seem to take it too
seriously.  I would agree with him and John that it is a biased
folk etymology that post-dates the original meaning.  Assuming
that it is a jibe against whites for taking the Indians' land and
resources, that complaint wouldn't have had any particular salience
from the Dakotan point of view until well into the 19th century.
They would have been aware of whites as mysterious foreign beings
with remarkable equipment that they might obtain through trade
all through the 18th century if not earlier.  I think it's most
likely that the term was established from the time that they
first became aware of the existence of whites, I suppose late in
the 17th century.

Perhaps the Dakotanists could comment on this.

Rory