The Dakotan Languages, and Their Relations to Other Languages Part 1

The Dakotan Languages, and Their Relations to Other Languages.

by Andrew Woods Williamson.

To the ethnologist and to the philologist the Dakotas and those speaking kindred languages are a very interesting people. There are four princ.i.p.al Dakota dialects, the Santee, Yankton, a.s.sinniboin and t.i.ton.

The allied languages may be divided into three groups:

I. a, Winnebago; b, Osage, Kaw, and 2 Quapaw; c, Iowa, Otoe and Missouri; d, Omaha and Ponka.

II. Mandan.

III. a, Minnetaree (Minitari) or Hidatsa; b, Absauraka, or Crow.

p.a.w.nee and Aricaree seem also to be somewhat related.

In my father's opinion the Dakota dialects differ about as much as the Greek dialects did in the time of Homer, and the a.s.sinniboin is much nearer to the Yankton dialect of which it is an offshoot than is the t.i.ton. Judging by the vocabularies to which I have access chiefly in Hayden's "Indian tribes of the Missouri," I would suppose the first group to differ from the Dakota about as much as the German from the English, and to differ among themselves somewhat as Hollandish, Friesian, and English. The Mandan appears to be separated much more widely from them than they are from each other. The Minnetaree and Crow const.i.tute a distinct group diverging from each other more than the Santee and t.i.ton, the extreme dialects of the Dakota. They show more resemblance to the Mandan than to any other one of the cla.s.s, but diverge very widely from it. But very few words approximate ident.i.ty.

About one half of the words in Matthew's Hidatsa dictionary appear to me to be in part at least composed of material related to the Dakota, and about five per cent to fairly represent Dakota words. Many of these show little similarity except as compared in the light of sound representation.

When first discovered the Dakotas and a.s.sinniboins were nomads, living almost entirely by hunting and fishing. The Dakotas, then probably less than ten thousand, are now more than thirty thousand in number. There are probably about three thousand a.s.sinniboins. The allied tribes, except the Crows, when first found lived chiefly by agriculture. They have during the last hundred years rapidly diminished in numbers, and do not number over twelve thousand including the Crows.

All of the Dakotan tribes and some others formerly made and baked pottery similar to that found in the mounds of the Ohio valley. The Osages and some others lived in earth houses, whose ruins are similar to those of the houses of the mound builders. The Minnetarees, Mandans and Aricarees still live in houses of the same kind, and make and bake pottery. Measurements indicate that the crania of the Dakotas in size of brain and angle decidedly approach the European form. The cheek bones of the Dakotas are much less prominent than those of the Chippewas, and those one-fourth Chippewa and three-fourths white have on an average darker complexions than those half white and half Dakota. Among the Minnetarees and Mandans are many persons of light hair, blue eyes, and tolerably fair complexion, not attributable to an infusion of Caucasian blood since the time of Columbus.

No people take more pains to speak their language accurately than the Dakotas. Their social condition is similar to that of the Arabs, whose language has within historic observation changed more slowly than any other. The a.s.sinniboins have been separated from the Dakotas about three centuries, perhaps a little less, possibly much more. During all this time they have been entirely separated, a.s.sociating wholly with tribes speaking languages entirely different, and yet their dialect remains almost identical with the Yankton. We are then encouraged to believe that their language has not changed so rapidly as to obliterate traces of its origin.

So far as I have been able to ascertain them the most important features characteristic of the Dakotan languages generally are the following:

I. Three p.r.o.nominal prefixes to verbs, i, o and wa. I, this, forms nouns of instrument. O forms nomen actionis, etc. Some Crow and Minnetaree words seem to indicate that its original form was a. Wa, meaning some or something, prefixed to transitive verbs makes them intransitive or general in their application. Wa is in Min. ma (ba, wa), in Crow, ba.

Scantiness of material prevents me from more than inferring the existence of these and other prefixes in the other allied languages, from a few words apparently containing them.

II. A system of verbal prefixes used to form verbs from certain stems, regularly varied in signification, according to the prefix used. The Dakota has seven of these prefixes. The Min. has three of these almost identical in force. I should suppose that I would, with as much material, find greater similarity in the other languages, but the only one I have been able to trace at all generally is Dak yu. This merely converts the stem into a verb without changing its meaning. Dak y is nearly always represented in the allied languages so far as I have observed by r, d, l or n; so that I find it in Min. du (ru, lu, nu), Iowa, Mandan, and Crow ru, Omaha ra.

III. A reflexive p.r.o.noun tawa, Min. tama (tawa, taba), Iowa tawe, Osage tabe, forming from possessive p.r.o.nouns double possessives, related to their primitives somewhat as mine to my. In some features of structure the Dakotan languages present an amazing diversity.

According to Powell (Int. to stud. Am. Lang.) a Ponka in order to say "a man killed a rabbit," would have to say "the man, he, one, animate, standing, in the nominative case, purposely, killed, by shooting an arrow, he, the one animate, sitting, in the objective case." "For the form of the verb to kill would have to be selected, and the verb changes its form by inflection, and by incorporated particles, to denote person, number and gender, as animate or inanimate, as standing, sitting or lying."

On the other hand the Dakota could not vary the form of the verb to denote any of these things except number, with reference to either subject or object. He would probably say: "Wichasta-wan mastincha-wan kte,"--"man-a, rabbit-a, kill,"--in which each word is about synonymous with its English equivalent, and case as in English denoted by position.

If he wished to show that the action was done by shooting, he would probably not vary the form of the verb kill, but would use the verb kute, meaning shoot whether with arrow or bullet. Except that the Dak.

order corresponds to the Icelandic the only difference in structure between the Dak. and English expression is that the Dakota word kte may mean any time, the particular time being indicated whenever desirable in all cases in Dak. as mostly in English by auxiliary verbs and adverbs.

If the word man were represented by a p.r.o.noun the Dak. would be still more a.n.a.lytic, since its p.r.o.noun would indicate any actor, male or female, or inanimate, unless it were desirable to distinguish, in which case the distinction would be made by compounding the p.r.o.noun with a suitable auxiliary word. In this feature, often given as characteristic of American languages, is a variation the greatest possible between two languages closely related. It is also worthy of remark that the Minnetaree, which I should suppose the most a.n.a.lytic of the group next to the Dakota, is one of those that least resembles the Dakota in vocabulary. Some of the features often a.s.signed as peculiarities of American languages were according to Bopp and Schleicher features of the I. E. languages in their earlier stages. Of most other features said to characterize American languages I find in Dak. but faint traces. The Dak. _does have_ verbs nearly synonymous with _go_, _walk_, _eat_, _drink_, _strike_, _etc._ _It is well supplied with purely copulative verbs. It has differentiated_ the various parts of speech even to the _definite_ and _indefinite article_. It is sufficiently supplied with nouns denoting genera and cla.s.ses. This is not a feature of recent development. A much smaller proportion of general than of special names have lost trace of origin.

The Dak _does not_ have inclusive and exclusive plurals, etc. It _does not_ have a multiplicity of verb forms to denote mode and tense, but when necessary does denote them with elegance and precision, by auxiliary verbs and adverbs, very much as we do in English. The Dakota is not made up chiefly of very long words. On the other hand it uses a great many little particles and connectives to express fine shades of meaning, wonderfully reminding one of the Greek. It fully agrees with other American languages in its wonderful facility for forming derivatives. The I. E. languages in their earlier stages possessed equal facility.

As a matter of fact we know scarcely anything concerning the structure of American languages aside from the Algonquin and Iroquois groups, and a very few isolated languages. They have been cla.s.sified, in fact, almost entirely by examination of scanty and not very accurate vocabularies. In investigating the relations of the Dakotan to other American languages we are therefore compelled to base our conclusions chiefly on vocabulary. I once resided a year among the Chippewas, and in various ways have had much better opportunities of comparing the Dakota with the Chippewa than with any other American language. I have not been able to find a word alike in the two; and but very few words even slightly similar in sound and sense. In p.r.o.nouns few languages in any part of the world are so strikingly contrasted. If I were to attempt an argument for original affinity between Dakota and Chippewa my argument would be that so great dissimilarity could not be the result of accident. Aside from the Cheyenne, an Algonkin language which has incorporated some Dakotan words, and the p.a.w.nee group, the similarities east of the Rocky mountains are surprisingly few, though the Huron, Iroquois and Mobilian languages do not seem quite so strongly contrasted as the Algonkin. Among the Eskimo, the tribes of the Pacific Slope, Mexico, Central and South America, we occasionally find identical and not infrequently similar words. In some the resemblances seem remarkable considering the size of the vocabulary. Closer examination shows however that they are not of a kind to indicate a special relationship. They are almost exclusively confined to a few p.r.o.nominal bases of very wide diffusion, and the following: 1. ata, tata. 2. papa, each meaning father; 1. ana, nana; 2. ma, mama, each meaning mother. As an example I take the base ata, tata. Dakota, ate (dialect ata); Minnetaree, ate, tata, tatish; Mandan, tata; Omaha, adi, dadi; Ponka, tade-ha; Aricaree, ate-ah; p.a.w.nee, ate-ish.

Tuscarora ata; Cherokee e-dauda; Eskimo--Greenland ahtata, Aleutian ata, California, San Miguel tata; Mexico Aztec teta; Otomi, ta, te; Yucatan, Cakchequil tata; Central Am. Tarasca tata; Darien tauta; Eastern Peru, Mossa tata; Western Paraguay, Villela tata.

Congo Western Africa, tat, tata.

j.a.pan dialect tete; Chinese dialect tia.

Turko Tartar, Turkish ata; Tatar ata, atha; Kunan atta; Kasanish, Orenburg, Kirgis ata; Samoyedic dialects, Eastern Russia and Western Siberia ata, atai, atja, tatai; Finno Hungarian, Lap attje; Hungarian atja.

Caucasus, Kisti dada. Basque (Pyrenees Mountains) aita.

Indo European: Sanskrit ata, tata; Hindustanee dada; Latin, atta, tatta; Greek atta, tatta; Albanian, Albania, at, atti; Calabria and Sicily tata; Celtic, Welsh tad; Cornish and Bret tat; Irish, daid; Gaelic daidein; English (according to Skeats of Welsh) dad, daddy; Old Slav, tata otici; Moldavian tata; Wallachian tate; Polish tatus; Bohemian, Servian Croatian otsche; Lithuanian teta; Preuss thetis; Gothic ata; Old Fries tate; O. H. G. tato; Old Swed atin; Swed island Runoe dadda.

In fifty-nine of the one hundred and forty-six versions of the Lord's prayer given by Adelung in the Sclavonic, Lithuanian and Teutonic families, the word for father is from this base. Atta is the form used in Ulfillas Gothic version of the fourth century, the oldest Teutonic relic.

Papa and mama in Dak., as in I. E. languages, occupy a subordinate position, having about the same scope as in Latin and Greek. Words apparently related to these are rare in N. A. languages, but frequent in S. A., African, Malay Polynesian and Turanian languages. The Semitic aba, etc., is perhaps related. The base ana, nana (Dak. ina), though not very much used in I E languages appears to be more widely distributed than any of the others.

All the Dakota p.r.o.nouns which show much similarity to other American forms are representative of Fick's I E bases, and appear to be widely disseminated. Adelung and Latham do not however give p.r.o.nominal forms in as many languages as they give words for father and mother, and I cannot so well determine their distribution.

Professor Roehrig, in his able paper on the Dakota, points out some very interesting a.n.a.logies to Turanian languages. Others might be added.

These similarities are chiefly in features common to I. E. and Turanian. On the other hand the Dakota shows on the surface striking contrasts to Turanian languages. The numerals are eminently dissimilar.

The Dakota, like I. E. languages, varies both root and suffix in forming words, and uses both prefixes and suffixes. In Turanian languages the suffix only is varied, and prefixes are scarcely at all used.

It seems to me therefor that it is not unscientific to inquire whether the similarities of the various Dakotan languages to various European languages, modern and ancient, so often remarked are or are not accidental. It is very easy to see that the Dakota resembles the English in vocabulary much more than it resembles the Chippewa. The similarities of the Dakota suffixes, p.r.o.nouns and prepositions to those given by Bopp, and the general resemblance of Dakotan languages to Sanskrit, Gothic, etc., in vocabulary, made me certain of relationship before I ever saw Fick's dictionary. Yet as I turned over his pages I was amazed at the similarity of the I. E. roots to the Dak roots. The Slav Teut bases of Fick seem to me most similar to the Dak. I am certain that neither the Teutonic or Graeco-Italic dictionaries resemble the Dakota as much as do the European, Indo. European and Aryan dictionaries. The I. E. consonants are represented in Dakota, Santee and t.i.ton dialects, and in Minnetaree in accordance with the following table. I omit representatives concerning which I am doubtful. I have too little material on the other languages to justify me in including them.

---+----------------+---------+------------+----+---------+---------+------ I E k g gh p bh m w S k, h, kh, sh[A] k, h[B] gh, kh, zh p m, b, w m w, p T k, h, g[B], khsh k, g[B] gh, kh, zh p b, w m, b[C] w, p ---------+---------+------ M k, h, gh[D], sh k gh[D] p m[F] (b, w) p +------+---------+---------+---+--------+----+-------------------------- I E t d dh n r, l[E] y[E] s S t, n t, d, n d n n, d y, z s, sh, z, zh, t T t, n t, l, n l n n, l y, z s, sh, z, zh, t +---------+---------+---+--------+----+-------------------------- M t, d t d[F] (l, n, r) ts ts, sh, t ---+------+-------------------------------------+--------------------------

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote A: Chiefly, probably not always, for Fick's second k, Lith sz (p.r.o.n sh), Slav s. The k's and g's liable to l.a.b.i.alization in Eu. languages appear to be occasionally l.a.b.i.alized in Dakotan languages.]

[Footnote B: In S. hd, Yankton kd, T. gl; S. hn, Y. kn, T. gn or gl; S. hm, Y. km, T. gm.]

[Footnote C: In S. md, Y. bd, T. bl.]

[Footnote D: In a previous paper I represented this by kh; and do not know whether it is nearest Dak kh German ch, or Dak gh; I E gh.]

[Footnote E: Santee d always becomes l in t.i.ton.]

[Footnote E: Dak y becomes r, d, l or n in the allied languages, except perhaps the Osage, and perhaps in part represents I E r.]

[Footnote F: In Minnetaree m, interchanges so freely with b and w, and d with l, n, and r, that Matthews represents each group by one letter. The same irregularity occurs largely in Crow, and somewhat also in Mandan.]

Ch as in chin very often occurs in Dak as a euphonic modification of k.

Otherwise it stands chiefly for d, r, l, n of the allied languages. On the other hand Win and Iowa ch usually represents Dak, and I E t. R is found in all the allied languages, and in Winnebago is more frequent than even in Icelandic. Iowa aspirate th, represents Dak s, and other sibilants. Hayden does not distinguish the subvocal and aspirate th in Omaha. From a small list gathered by my father I judge that the aspirate is probably similar to the Iowa, and that the subvocal represents Dak and I E dentals. F in Iowa represents some Dak p's.

There is wonderful regularity in the sound changes in pa.s.sing from Santee to t.i.ton Dak, and so far as I can yet discover great irregularity in pa.s.sing to the allied languages. Possibly fuller materials and closer study may reduce the changes to system.

Dak proper has but five vowels; a and e represent I E a; i, i; u, u; and o, either u or a. They are weakened as in I E languages, and suffixes which raise I E vowels raise i and u to a. The allied languages have a larger number of vowels, the Minnetaree ten.

VERB STEMS.