Native Languages in Advance of Social Customs—Characteristic Individuality of American Tongues—Frequent Occurrence of Long Words—Reduplications, Frequentatives, and Duals—Intertribal Languages—Gesture-Language—Slavé and Chinook Jargons—Pacific States Languages—The Tinneh, Aztec, and Maya Tongues—The Larger Families Inland—Language as a Test of Origin—Similarities in Unrelated Languages—Plan of this Investigation.
In nothing, perhaps, do the Native Races of the Pacific States show signs of age, and of progress from absolute primevalism, more than in their languages. Indeed, throughout the length and breadth of the two Americas aboriginal tongues display greater richness, more delicate gradations, and a wider scope, than from the uncultured condition in which the people were found, one would be led to suppose. Until recently, no attention has been given by scholars to these languages; now it is admitted that the more they are studied the more do new beauties appear, and that in their speech these nations are in advance of what their general rudeness in otherrespects would imply. Nor is there that difference in the construction of words and the scope of vocabularies between nations which we call civilized and those called savage, which, from the difference in their customs, industries, and polities we should expect to find; from which it is safe to infer that in progress, after the essential corporeal requirements are satisfied, the necessities of the intellect, of which speech is the very first, are not only met, but are developed and gratified beyond what the actual necessities of the body demand. That is, speech or no speech the body must be fed or the animal dies, but with the absolute necessities of the body supplied, the intellect and its supernumeraries shoot forward beyond their relative primeval state, leaving bodily comforts far behind. Hence, in the very outset of what we call progress, we see the intellect asserting its independence and developing those organs only which in their turn assist its own development. Again, under certain conditions, two nations having advanced materially and intellectually side by side up to a certain point, may from extrinsic or incidental causes become widely separate; one may go forward intellectually while the two remain together substantially; one may go forward materially while mentally there is no apparent difference. The causes which give rise to these strange inequalities we cannot fathom until we can minutely retrace the progress of the people for thousands of ages in their history; we only see, in the many examples round us, that such is the fact. A people well advanced in art and language may, from war or famine, become reduced to primeval penury and yet retain traces of its former culture in its speech, but by no possibility can rude and barbaric speech suddenly assume depth and richness from material prosperity; from all of which it is safe to conclude that language is the surest test of the age of a people, for the mind cannot expand without an improvement in speech, and speech improves only as it is forced slowly to develop under pressure of the mind.
RELATIONSHIP OF AMERICAN LANGUAGES.
The researches of the few philologists who have given American languages their study have brought to light the following facts. First, that a relationship exists among all the tongues of the northern and southern continents; and that while certain characteristics are found in common throughout all the languages of America, these languages are as a whole sufficiently peculiar to be distinguishable from the speech of all the other races of the world. Although some of these characteristics, as a matter of course, are found in some of the languages of the old world—more of them in the Turanian family than in any other—yet nowhere on the globe are uniformities of speech carried over vast areas and through innumerable and diversified races with such persistency, as in America; nowhere are tongues so dissimilar and yet so alike as here. In this general similarity would be a strong ground-work for a theory of common origin, either indigenous or foreign, but for the fact that while the languages of America appear distinct from all other languages of the world, and do indeed in certain respects bear a general resemblance one to another throughout, yet at the same time I may safely assert that on no other continent can there be found such a multitude of distinct languages which definitely approach one another in scarcely a single word or syllable as in America. It is as easy to prove from language that the nations of the New World were originally thrown together from different parts, and that by intermigrations, uniformity in customs and climate, and the lapse of long ages the people have become approximately brethren in speech, while their incessant wars have at the same time held them asunder and prevented a more particular uniformity, as it would be to prove a common origin and subsequent dispersion; without further light both theories are alike insusceptible of proof, as are, indeed, all hypotheses concerning the origin of the native races of this continent. Another fact which naturally becomes more apparent the more we investigate the subject, particularly as regards the nations inhabiting the western half ofNorth America, is, that the innumerable diversities of speech found among these tribes constantly tend to disappear, tend to range themselves under broad divisions, coalescing into groups and families, thereby establishing more intimate relationship between some, and widening the distance between others. The numbers of tongues and dialects, which at the first appeared to be legion, by comparison and classification are constantly being reduced. Could we go back, even for a few thousand years, and follow these peoples through the turnings and twistings of their nomadic existence, we should be surprised at the rapid and complete changes constantly taking place; we should see throughout this broad continent the tide of human life ebbing and flowing like a mighty ocean, surging to and fro in a perpetual unrest, huge billows of humanity rolling over forest, plain, and mountain, nations driving out nations, absorbing, or annihilating, only to be themselves inevitably driven out, absorbed, or annihilated; we should see as a result of this interminable mixture, languages constantly being modified, some wholly or in part disappearing, some changing in a lesser degree, hardly one remaining the same for any considerable length of time. Even within the short period of our own observation, between the time of the first arrival of Europeans and the disappearance of the natives, many changes are apparent; while we are gazing upon them we see their boundaries oscillate, like the play of the threads in network. On the buffalo-hunting inland plains I have seen aggregations of tribes driven out from their old camping-ground, in some instances a thousand miles away, and their places occupied by others; in the narrower limits of the north-western mountains I have seen numerous tribes extirpated by their neighbors, a remnant only being kept as slaves. While such was the normal condition of the aborigines it is not difficult to perceive in some degree at least, the effect upon languages. Yet while American languages are indeed, as Whitney terms them, "the most changeful human forms of speech" there are yet found indestructible characteristic elements, affiliationswhich no circumstances of time or place can wholly obliterate.
LONG WORDS IN AMERICAN LANGUAGES.
One of these characteristic elements is the frequent occurrence of long words. Even the Otomí, the only language in America which can be called monosyllabic, consisting as it does, for the most part, of etymons of one syllable, contains some comparatively long words. This frequency of long words, the method of their construction, and the ease with which they are manufactured constitute a striking feature in the system of unity that pervades all American languages. The native of the New World expresses in a single word, accompanied perhaps by a grunt or a gesture, what a European would employ a whole sentence to elucidate. He crowds the greatest possible number of ideas into the most compact form possible, as though in a multitude of words he found weakness rather than strength—taking their several ideas by their monosyllabic equivalents, and joining them in one single expression. This rule is universal; and so these languages become as Humboldt expresses it "like different substances in analogous forms," in which, as Gallatin observes, there is "an universal tendency to express in the same word, not only all that modifies or relates to the same object or action but both the action and the object, thus concentrating in a single expression a complex idea or several ideas, among which there is a natural connection." This linguistic peculiarity is called by various names. Duponceau terms it the polysynthetic stage or system, Wilhelm von Humboldt the agglutinative, Lieber the holophrastic; others the aggregative, the incorporative, and so on. As an illustration of this peculiarity, take the Aztec word for letter-postage,amatlacuilolitquitcatlaxtlahuilli, which interpreted literally signifies, 'the payment received for carrying a paper on which something is written.' The Cherokees go yet further and express a whole sentence in a single word—a long one it is true, but yet one word—winitawtigeginaliskawlungtanawnelitisestiwhich translated forms the sentence, 'they will by that timehave nearly finished granting favors from a distance to thee and me.' Other peculiarities common to all American languages might be mentioned, such as reduplications, or a repetition of the same syllable to express plurals; the use of frequentatives and duals; the application of gender to the third person of the verb; the direct conversion of nouns, substantive and adjective, into verbs, and their conjugation as such; peculiar generic distinctions arising from a separation of animate from inanimate beings, and the like.
The multiplicity of tongues, even within comparatively narrow areas, rendered the adoption of some sort of universal language absolutely necessary. This international language in America is for the most part confined to gestures, and nowhere has gesture-language attained a higher degree of perfection than here; and what is most remarkable, the same representatives are employed from Alaska to Mexico and even in South America. Thus each tribe has a certain gesture to indicate its name, which is understood by all others. A Flathead will make his tribe known by placing his hand upon his head; a Crow by imitating the flapping of the wings of a bird; a Nez Percé by pointing with his finger through his nose, and so on. Fire is generally indicated by blowing followed by a pretended warming of the hands, water by a pretended scooping up and drinking, trade or exchange by crossing the fore fingers, a certain gesture being fixed for everything necessary to carry on a conversation. Besides this natural gesture-language there is found in various parts an intertribal jargon composed of words chosen to fit emergencies, from the speech of the several neighboring nations; the words being altered, if necessary, in construction or pronunciation to suit all. Thus in the valley of the Yukon we find the Slavé jargon, and in the valley of the Columbia the Chinook jargon, which latter arose originally, not as is generally supposed conventionally between the French-Canadian and English trappers and the natives of the north-west solely for purposes of trade, but which originatedamong the tribes themselves spontaneously and before the advent of Europeans, though greatly modified and extended by subsequent European intercourse. Thus has been laid, no doubt, the foundation of many permanent languages and dialects; and thus we may easily perceive the powerful and continued effect of one language upon another.
As to the number of languages in America much difference of opinion exists. Hervás, before half the country was discovered, felt justified in classifying them all under seven families, while others find, on the Pacific side of the northern continent alone, over six hundred languages which thus far refuse to affiliate. The different dialects are countless; and yet, notwithstanding the formidable array of names which I have gathered at the end of this chapter, probably not one-fourth of their real number are or ever will be known to us.
LANGUAGES OF THE PACIFIC STATES.
Many of the Pacific States' languages bear resemblances to one another, and may therefore be brought more or less under groups and classes. These languages, however, resemble one another too slightly to be called dialects, and in the majority of cases no affiliations of any kind can be traced. But four great languages are found within our territory, or, if we exclude the Eskimo, which is not properly an American language, there remain but three, the Tinneh, the Aztec, and the Maya. Of the lesser tongues there are many more, as will appear further on. The Eskimos skirt the shores of the north polar ocean and belong more to the old world than to the new. The Tinneh, Athabasca, or Chepewyan family covers the northern end of the Rocky Mountain range, sending its branches in every direction, into Alaska, British Columbia, British America, Washington, Oregon, California, New Mexico, Texas, and Mexico. The Aztec language, whose seat is Central Mexico, is found also in Nicaragua and other parts of Central America. Traces moreover appear in some parts of Sonora, Sinaloa, Durango, Chihuahua, Texas, Arizona, California, Utah,Nevada, Idaho, Montana, and Oregon. The Maya is the chief Central American tongue, but traces of it may be found as well in Mexico. Thus we see that while the cradle of the Tinneh tongue appears to be in the centre of British North America, its dialects extend westward and southward, lessening in intensity the further they are removed from the hypothetical original centre, suddenly dying out in some directions, fading gradually away in others, and breaking out at disconnected intervals in others. So with the Aztec language, whose primitive centre, so far as present appearances go, was the valley of Mexico; we find it extending south along the shores of the Pacific as far as Nicaragua, while northward its traces grow fainter and fainter until it disappears. And so it is with the Maya, which, covering as it does a less extent of territory, is more distinctly marked and consequently more easily followed.
In classifying the languages of the Pacific States, the marks of identification vary with different families. Thus the linguistic affiliations of the Tinneh family are founded not so much on certain recurring grammatical rules, as on the number of important words occurring under the same or slightly altered form. In the Aztec language the reverse of this is true; for although to some extent, in the establishing of relationships, we are governed by verbal similarities, yet we also find positive grammatical rules which carry with them much more weight than mere word likenesses.
For example, in the north, wherever Aztec traces are found, the Aztec substantive endingstlandtliare either abbreviated or changed according to a regular system intoti,te,t,de,re,ki,ke,ca,la,ri. Aztec numerals are used by these northern nations, but in greatly modified forms; personal pronouns are there found but little changed, while demonstrative, interrogative, and indefinite pronouns likewise show signs of Aztec origin. The endingame, which, attached to the verb, designates the person acting, can be plainly traced; while among these same northern nations of which I am speaking, is found thatcertain system ofLautverschiebungor sound-shunting, originally discovered by Grimm in the Indo-Germanic family, and by Professor Max Müller called Grimm's law.
In the pursuance of this investigation I noticed a two-fold curiosity which may be worthy of mention. Throughout the great Northwest, as well in most of the many Tinneh vocabularies as elsewhere, is found the Aztec word for stone,tetl, sometimes slightly changed but always recognizable, and to which the same meaning is invariably attached; while on the other hand the Tinneh word for fire,cun, orcoon, appears in like manner in several of the Mexican languages, and I even noticed it in the vocabulary of a Honduras nation. This may be purely accidental, but both being important words I thought best to draw attention to the fact.
INLAND AND COAST LANGUAGES.
The larger linguistic families are for the most part found inland, while along the sea-shore the speech of the people is broken into innumerable fragments. Particularly is this the case along the shores of the Northwest. South of Acapulco, as we have seen, the Aztec tongue holds the seaboard for some distance; but again farther south, as well as on the gulf coast, there is found a great diversity in languages and dialects. In California the confusion becomes interminable; as if Babel-builders from every quarter of the earth had here met to the eternal confounding of all; yet there are linguistic families even in California, principally in the northern part. It is not at all improbable that Malays, Chinese, or Japanese, or all of them, did at some time appear in what is now North America, in such numbers as materially to influence language, but hitherto no Asiatic nor European tongue, excepting always the Eskimo, has been found in America; nor have affinities with any other language of the world been discovered sufficiently marked to warrant the claim of relationship. Theorizers enough there have been and will be; for centuries to come half-fledged scientists, ignorant of what others have done or rather have failed to do, will not cease to bring forwardwonderful conceptions, striking analogies; will not cease to speculate, linguistically, ethnologically, cosmographically and otherwise to their own satisfaction and to the confusion of their readers. The absurdity of these speculations is apparent to all but the speculator. No sooner is a monosyllabic language, the Otomí, discovered in America than up rises a champion, Señor Nájera, claiming the distinction for the Chinese, and with no other result than to establish both as monosyllabic, which was well enough known before. So the Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg, who has given the subject more years of study and more pages of printed matter than any other writer, unless it be the half-crazed Lord Kingsborough, first attempts to prove that the Maya languages are derived from the Latin, Greek, English, German, Scandinavian, or other Aryan tongues; then that all these languages are but offshoots from the Maya itself, which is the only true primeval language. So much for intemperate speculation, which, whether learned or shallow, too often originates in doubt and ends in obscurity. In all these hypotheses, argument assumes the form of analogies drawn between the peoples with whom a relationship is attempted to be established—no difficult matter, truly, when we consider that all mankind are formed on one model, and that innumerable similarities must of necessity exist among all the races of the globe.
ACCIDENTAL WORD-SIMILARITIES.
To show the futility of such attempts, let me give a few words, analogous both in signification and sound, selected from American, European, Asiatic, and other languages, between which it is now well established that no relationship exists. For the Germanjawe have the Shastaya; forkomm, the Comanchekim; forKopf, the Cahitacoba; forweinen, the Coravyeine; forthun, the Tepehuanaduni; fornichts,nein, the Chinooknixt,nix. For the Greekκόραξ, there is the Tarahumaracolatschi; forἔμαθον,μαθεῖν, the Coramuatê; forγυνή, the Cahitacuna. For the Latinhic,vas, we have the Tepehuanahic,vase; formucor, the Coramucuare; forlingua, the Moquilínga; forvallis, the Kalapooyawallâh; fortoga,manus, the Kenaitogaai,man. For the Frenchcasser, we find the Tarahumaracassníaler; fortâtonner, the Tepehuanatatame. For the Spanishhueco, the Tarahumarahoco; fortuétano, the Coratûtana. For the Italiancosi, the Tarahumaracossi; for the Arabicâchar, the Tarahumaraajaré; for the Hawaiianpo, the Sekumnepo(night).
For the Sanscritda, there is the Corata(give); foreké, the Miztecec(one); formâ, the Tepehuanamai(not) and the Mayama(no); formasâ(month), the Pimamahsa(moon); fortschandra(moon), the Kenaitschane(moon); forpada(foot), the Sekumnepodo(leg); forkamâ(love), the Shoshonekamakh(to love); forpâ, the Kizhpaa(to drink). For the Malaytâna, we have the Tepehuanatani(to ask); forhurip,tabah, the Corahuri(to live),tabá(to beat); forhômah, the Shastaóma(house), and so on.
These examples I could increase indefinitely and show striking similarities in some few words between almost any two languages of the world. When there are enough of them similar in sound and signification in any two tongues to constitute a rule rather than exceptions, such languages are said to be related; but where, as in the above-cited instances, these similarities are merely accidental, to prove them related would prove too much, for then all the languages of the earth might be said to be related.
CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGES.
In treating of the languages of the Pacific States, commencing with those of the north and proceeding southward, I make it a rule to follow them wherever they lead, without restricting myself to place or nation. One nation may speak two languages; the same language may be spoken by a dozen nations, and if the evidence is such as to imply the existence of the same language, or traces of it, in Alaska and in Sonora, I can do no less than step from one place to the other in speaking of it. Besides the names and localities of languages and linguistic families, I shall endeavor to give some idea of their several peculiar characteristics, their grammatical construction, with such specimens of each as will enablethe student to make comparisons and draw inferences. In the following table I have attempted a classification of these languages; but in some instances, from the lack of vocabularies taken before the intermixtures that followed the advent of Europeans, any classification can be but approximative.
CLASSIFICATION OF THE ABORIGINAL LANGUAGES OF THE PACIFIC STATES.