Companion Terms for 7 and 8.

[R. Rankin]

> > I also wonder about the *s^aak- element that is so common in Siouan
> higher digits.  Could it be *s^aak < **kyaak?

Just *$aake 'hand' is good and sufficient.  And the cognate sets show this WAS
the original 'hand' term.  NaNpe is just the MVS replacement.  I have a paper on
these higher numerals from some years back too.  Actually most of the quinary
counting systems in eastern north america are only partially quinary.  7 and 8
are the most common, 6, 7, and 8 are next.  "Nine" seldom participates and is
often "one missing".  My paper hypothesized that the system in MVS makes the
best sense when understood as part of the Plains Sign Language hand signals for
the numbers.  It too was pre-computer so I'll have to retype it someday.

The Kaw for 8 is kkiyadoba or kkiadoba.  I suspect this is from that Wichita
form.

Bob

>
> I've wondered about that too.  It seems that most of the
> "higher digit" formants in series that count up must
> effectively mean 'five+', however they may actually be
> derived.
>
> When I first started looking at Siouan languages around
> 1990, I tried comparing vocabulary lists from six languages
> for which I was then able to get some material: Omaha, Osage,
> Lakhota, IO, Biloxi and Hidatsa.  I found that the first four
> were fairly close, with Biloxi more distant and Hidatsa
> hardly recognizable as being related.  One thing that struck
> me at the time was that the word for 'hand' had been replaced
> in the (MVS) group: in Hidatsa and Biloxi, and presumably PS,
> 'hand' had been something like *s^aki or *s^ake.  In MVS,
> however, 'hand' was *naNpe, while the *s^aki/*s^ake term
> had moved on to mean 'nail', 'claw', 'hoof' or 'talon'.
> Am I remembering this right?
>
> Anyway, if 'hand' was originally *s^aki/*s^ake, might that
> not be the derivation of the *s^aak- we find in some of the
> higher order numbers?  It would be an obvious choice for
> the 'five+' requirement.  The problem is that this is
> also the only "higher digit" formant that pairs with things
> that don't look anything like Siouan 'one', 'two' or 'three'.
> We would seem to need a "lower digit" counting system
> something like:
>
>   1 = *pe
>   2 = *owiN/*owaN
>   3 = *rog^aN/*yog^aN
>
> I don't suppose anybody knows of any numerical system
> comparable to that, either inside or outside of Siouan?
> Given how widespread the *s^aak- terms are, the original
> formation of these should be pretty old.
>
> Rory
>
>