Iskousogos (Re: Siouan etymology?) (fwd)

[R. Rankin]

I think -k, -ok, -ak and sundry variants spelled
with -g are the Algonquian animate proximate plural --
not Iroquoian.  The inanimate plural is -a and is
homophonous with the obviative singular.

I'm afraid I have no more to contribute on this name.
If the Escansaques and Iskou/nsogos were
contemporaneously in both the Ohio Valley and central
KS and environs, then equating the two is probably
unrealistic, but JEK already pointed that out.

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Mccafferty" <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Iskousogos (Re: Siouan etymology?) (fwd)


>
> I received this from an archaeologist on this matter
> of "Iskousogos".
> Any comments? Thank you.
>
> ==============================
>
> Couple things here of possible relevance.  First is
> that I think that
> there is a very good chance that what most have read
> as IskoUsogos in the
> original (handwritten, of course) document (Gallinee)
> is in fact
> IskoNsogos (have you every seen the original?  I
> haven't).  And if it is
> actually Iskonsogos then the resemblance to
> Escansaques is even more
> striking.  But a fly in the ointment is that I've
> always assumed that the
> -g- in I(s)konsogos was the Iroqouis plural (and
> the -s- of course French
> plural), and if the -g- was added by the Iroquois,
> then what is it doing
> showing up (as -q- in Escansaques) out in the
> southern Plains?
>
>
>
>
>