Boas, Franz. 1911. Introduction. Handbook of American Indian
Languages, Vol. 1, p. 1-83. Bureau of American Ethnology,
Bulletin 40. Washington: Government Print Office(Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology).

INTRODFCTIOI^BY

FRANZ BOAS

44877— Bull. 40, pt 1—10

1

Extraído de volume digitalizado pelo Internet Archive.
Disponível na Biblioteca Digital Curt Nimuendaju:
http://biblio.etnolinguistica.org/boas_1911_introduction

...

COT^TENTS
I.

Race and language

5-.

Early attempts to determine the position of the American race
Classifications based on physical type, language, and customs
Relations between physical type, language, and customs
Permanence of physical type changes in language and cultiu"ePermanence of language changes of physical type
Changes of language and type
Permanence of type and language change of culture
Hypothesis of original correlation of type, language, and culture
;

5
6
7
.

;

;

Artificial character of all classifications of mankind
II.

9

10
10
11

14

The characteristics of language

15

Definition of language

15

Character of phonetics

15

Number of sounds unlimited

15

Each language vises a limited number of sounds

16

Alleged lack of differentiation of sounds in primitive languages.

16

Brief description of phonetics
Unconsciousness of phonetic elements

18
23

Grammatical categories

24

Differences in categories of different languages

24

Limitation of the number of phonetic groups expressing ideas

24

Grammatical processes

27

Word and sentence

27

Stem and afiix

33

Discussion of grammatical categories

35

Nominal categories
Gender36
36

Plural

37
38

Case

Tense
Personal pronouns
Demonstrative pronouns

39
39

40

Verbal categories

41

Interpretation of grammatical categories

III

8

Classification of languages

43
44

Origin of dialects

44

Comparison of distinct languages
Mutual influences of languages
Phonetic influences
Grammatical influences
Lexicographic influences

45
47
47
48
49
50

Origin of similarities;

by dissemination or by parallel development.
3

4

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY.

—Continued.

III. Classification of languages

Influenre of environment on language
Influcnce_of common psychic traits
Uncertainty of definition of linguistic families
IV. Linguistics and ethnology

Page
53

56

58
59

Practical need of linguistic studies for ethnological purposes

59

Theoretical importance of linguistic studies

63

Language a part of ethnological phenomena in general
Language and thought
Unconscious character of linguistic phenomena
V. Characteristics of American languages

63
64
67

74

INTRODUCTION
By Franz BoasI.

RACE AND LANGUAGE

Early Attempts to Determine the Position of the Am.erican

Race

When Columbus started on his journey to reach the Indies, sailingwestward, and discovered the shores of America, he beheld a newrace of man, different, in type, different in culture, different in lan-

guage, from any
neither the

known

beforethat time.

This race resembled

European types, nor the negroes, nor the better-known

races of southern Asia.

As the Spanish conquest of America pro-

gressed, other peoples of oui' continent became l-mown to the invaders,and all showed a certain degree of outer resemblance, which ledthem by the term "Indios" (Indians),

the Spaniards to designate

the inhabitants of the country which was believed to be part ofThus the mistaken geographical term came to be applied toand owing to the contrast of
the inhabitants of the New World
their appearance to that of other races, and the peculiarities of their

India.

;

cultures and their languages, they came to be in tune considered asa racial unit.

The same point of view still prevailed when the discoveries included
more extended parts of the New World. The people with whom
the Spaniards and Portuguese

came into contact in South America,

as well as the inhabitants of the northern parts ofallseemed to partake so muchof thesame

they were readily classed with the natives

North America,

characteristics,

that

discovered,

and

first

were considered as a single race of mankind.
5

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

6
It[bull. 40

was only when our knowledge of the Indian tribes increased,that differences between the various types ofcontinent became known.

man inhabiting ourDifferences in degree of culture, as wellas ilifferences in language, were recognized at an early time.

Muchcame a recognition of the fact that the Indians of our contidiffer
in type as much among themselves as do the members of
nent

later

other races.

As soon as investigators began to concern themselves with thesequestions, the problem of the position of the natives of America

among the races of mankind came to be of considerable interest,
antl speculations in regard

to their origin

and relationships occur

even in the early descriptions of the New World.

Among the earlier attempts we find particularly endeavors toprove that certain parts of thebeliefs

agree with those of the Old World.

and customs of the Indians

Such agreements were consid-

ered proof that the Indians belong to one of the races enumerated
inbiblicalhistory;

tribes of Israel
for a long time.

and the theory that they represent thelost

was propounded frequently, and has held its own
In a similar

the languages of theway were traced analogies between

New World and those of the Old World, andmany investigators believe even now that they have establishedsuch relationships. Attempts were also made to prove similarities
in

appearance between the American races and other races, andthus to determine their position among the races of the Old World.

Classifications basedon Physical Type, Language, andCustoms
The problems involved in tlie determination of the relations of
the various races have been approached from two different pointsof view—either the attempt has been made to assign adefinite posi-tion to a race in a classificatory system of the races of man, or thehistory of the race has been traced as far back as available data

may permit.
The attempts to classify mankind are numerous.

Setting aside theclassifications based on biblical tradition, and considering only thosethat are based on scientific discussion, we find a number of attempts

based on comparisons of the anatomical characteristics of mankind,combined with geographical considerations; others are based on thediscussion of a combination of anatomical

and cultural character-

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

isticsof—

7

traits which are considered as characteristic of certain groups

mankind; while still others are based primarily on the study ofthe languages spoken

by people representing a certain anatomical

type.

The attempts that have thus been made have led to entirely differBlumenbach, one of the first scientists who attempted
ent results.

—

mankind, first distingmshed five races the Caucasian,
Mongolian, Ethiopian, American, and Mala}'. It is fairly clear thatto classify

this classification is based as much on geographical as on anatomical

considerations, although the description of each race is primarily ananatomical one.

Cuvier distinguished three races

Huxley proceeds more

and black.

strictly— the white, yellow,

on abiological basis.

He combines part of the Mongolian and American races of Blumenbach into one, assigns part of the South Asiatic peoples to the Australian type, and subdivides the European races into a dark

and a light

The numerical preponderance of the European types has
evidently led him to make finer distinctions in this race, which
division.

hedividesintothexanthochroicandmelanochroicraces.

It

would' be easy to make subdivisions of equal value in other races.
Stillclearer

tions

like

is

the influence of cultural points of view in classifica-

those of Gobineau andKlemm(who distinguishes theactive and passive races), according to the cultural achievements ofthe various types of man.

The most typical attempt

to classify

mankind from a consider-ation of both anatomical and linguistic points of viewisthat ofFriederich Miiller, who takes as the basis of his primary divisions theformof hair, while all theminor divisions are based on linguistic

considerations.

Relations between Physical Type, Language, and Customs

An attempt to correlate the numerous classifications that havebeen proposed shows clearly a condition of utter confusion and contradiction.

If it were true thatanatomical form, language, and cul-mankindis characterized by a certain bodily form, a certain culture, and a certain language, which can never become separated, we might expectthat the results of the various investigations would show better
agreement. If, on the other hand, the various phenomena which
ture are all closely associated, and that each subdivision ofwere made the leading points in the attempt at classification are notBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

8closely associated, then[bull. 40

we may naturally expect such contradic-

tions and lack of agreement as are actually found.
It is therefore necessaiy, first of all, tobe clear in regard to thesignificance of anatomical characteristics, language, and culture, as

characteristic of any subdivision of mankind.

seems desirable to consider the actual development of theseItvarious traits among the existing races.

Pernianence of Pht/sical Type; Changes in Lanf/uage€tnd Cult If re

At the present period we may observe many cases in which a complete change of language

and culture takes place without a corre-

sponding change in physical type.

This is true, for instance,

among

the North American negroes, a people by descent largely African; incultureand language, however,true that certain survivalsofessentiallyEuropean.

While it isAfrican culture and language arefound among our American negroes, their culture is essentially thatof the uneducated classes of the people among whom the}- live, andtheir language isbors

on the whole identical with thatof their neigh-—English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese, according to theprevalent language in various parts of the continent.

Itmight beobjected that the transportation of the African race to America wasan artificial one, and that in earher times extended migrations andtransplantations of tliis kind have not taken place.

Thehistory of medieval

Europe, however, shows clearly that

extended changes in language and culture have taken place manytimes without corresponding changes in blood.

Recent investigations of the physical types of Europe have shownwith great clearness that the distribution of types has remained theWithout considering details, it may be said
that an Alpine type can easily be distinguished from a northEuropean type on the one hand, and a south-European type on thesame for a long period.

other.

The Alpine t3^pe appears fairly uniform over a large territory,

no matter what language may be spoken and what national culture

may prevail in the particular district.

The central-European Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, and Slavs are so nearly of the same type
that

we ma}^ safely assume a considerable degree of blood relation-

ship, notwithstanding their linguistic difterences.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

9

Instances of similar kind, in wliich we find permanence of blood

with far-reacliing modifications of language and culture, are foundAs an example may be mentioned thein other parts of the world.

Veddah of Ceylon, a people fundamentally different in type fromthewhose language they seemneighboring Singhalese,

adopted, and fromwhom they havenumber of cultural

traits.

Still

also

to

have

evidently borrowedaother examples are the Japaneseof the northern part of Japan, who are undoubtedly, to a consider-able

extent,Ainu

inblood;and the YukaghirofSiberia,

who,

while retaining to a great extent the old blood, have been assimilated
in culture

and language by the neighboring Tungus.

J^ernianence of Language; Changes of Physical Type
While it is therefore evident that in many cases a people, without
undergoing a considerable change in type by mixture, have changed
completely their language and culture, still other cases maybe adduced
in which it can be shown that a people

have retained their language

while undergoing material changes in blood and culture, or in both.

As an example of this may be mentioned the Magyar of Europe, whohave retained their old language, but have become mixed with people
speaking Indo-European languages, and who have, to all intents andpurposes, adopted European culture.
Similar conditions must have prevailed among the Athapascans,one of the great linguistic families of North America.

The great

body of people speaking languages belonging to this linguistic stock
livein the northwestern part of America, while other dialects are

spoken b}^ small tribes in California, and still others by a large bodyof people in Arizona andNew Mexico.

The relationship between allthese dialects is so close that they must be considered as branchesof one large group,

and it must be assumed that all of them havesprung from a language once spoken over a continuous area.

At

the present time the people speaking these languages differ funda-

mentally in type, the inhabitants of the Mackenzie river region
being quite difterent from the tribes of California, and these, again,
differingfrom the tribes of New Mexico.

The forms of culture inthese different regions are also quite distinct; the culture of the California Athapascans resembles that of other Californian tribes, while

the culture of the Athapascans ofinfluenced

New Mexico and Arizona isby that of other peoples of that area.

It

seems most—
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

10[bull. 40

plausible to assume in this case that branches of this stock migrated

from one jiart of this large area to another, where they intermingledwith the neighboring people, and thus changed their physical characteristics, while at the same time they retained their speech.

With-

out historical evidence this process can not, of course, be proved.

I

shall refer to this example later on.

Changes of La^Hjuage and Type
These two phenomena— a retention

language, and a retentionofofapparently opposed to each other, areand in many cases go hand in hand.
instance, the distribution of theAfrica.

type with a change oflanguage with a change of
still

t^^pe

very closely related,

An example of this is, forArabs along the north coastof

On tlie whole, the Arab element has retained its language;

but at the same time intermarriages with the native races werecommon, so that the descendants of the Arabs have often retained
the old language and have changed their tj^pe.

On the other hand,the natives have to a certain extent given up their own languages,

but have continued to intermarry among themselves and have thus
preserved their type.

So far as any change of tliis kind is connectedwith intermixture, both t3'pes of changes must always occur at thesame time, and will be classed as a change of type or a change oflanguage, as our attention is directed to the one people or the other,or, in some cases, as the one or the other change is more pronounced.

Cases of complete assimilation without any mixture of the people

involved seem to be rare, if not entirely absent.

Peritianence of Type and Lajiguage; Change of CaJture
Cases of permanence -of type and language and of change of culture
are much more numerous.

development
series ofof

As a matter of fact, the whole historical

Europe, from prehistoric times on,isone endlessexamples of this process, which seems to be much easier,since assimilation of cultures occurs everywhere without actual blood

mixture, as an effect of imitation.

Proof of diffusion of culturalelements ma}' be found in every single cultural area wliich covers a
district in wliich

many languages are spoken.

California offers a

In North America,

good example of tliis kind; for here many lan-

guages are spoken, and there is a certain degree of differentiation oftype, but at the same time a considerable uniformity of culture pre-

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

vails.

Another case in point is the coastof11

New Guinea, where,

notwithstanding strong local differentiations, a certain fairly characteristic

type of culture prevails, wliich goes hand in hand with aAmong more liighly civihzed

strong differentiation of languages.

peoples, the whole area which is under the influence of Chinese cul-

ture might be given as an example.

These considerations make it fairly clear that, at least at the present
time, anatomical type, language, and culture have not necessarily thesame fates; that a people may remain constant in type and language
and change in culture; that they may remain constant in type, butchange in language; or that they may remain constant in language

and change in type and culture.

this is true,

If

then

it is

obviousthat attempts to classify mankind, based on the present distributionof type, language,

and culture, must lead to different results, accord-

ing to the point of view taken; that a classification based primarily

on type alone \nll lead to a system wliich represents, more or lessaccurately, the blood relationships of the people, which do not needto coincide ^ith their cultural relationships;

and that, in the sameway, classifications based on language and culture do not need at
all to coincide with a biological classification.

If tliisbe true, then a problem like the nuich discussed Aryan

problem really does not exist, because the problem is primarily alinguistic one, relating to the history of the Aryan languages;

the assumption that a certain definite people whoseandmembers havealways been related by blood must have been the carriers oftliis

language throughout history; and the other assumption, that a certain cultural typemust have always belonged to tliis people— arepurely arbitrary ones and not in accord wdtli the observed facts.

Hypothesis of Original Correlation of Type, Language, andCulture•Nevertheless, it must be granted, that in a theoretical consideration of the history of the

tj'^pesofmankind,of languages,

and ofcultures, we are 1-ed back to the assumption of early conditions during

which each type was much more isolated from the rest of mankind
than it is at the present time.

For this reason, the culture and thelanguage belonging to a single type must have beenmuch more

sharply separated from those of other types than we ^nd them to beat the present period.

It is true thatsuch a condition has nowhereBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

12[hull. 40

been observed: but the knowledge of historical developments almost
compels us to assume its existence at a very early period in the devel-

opmentofmankind.

If

this

is

true,

the question would

arise,

whether an isolated group, at an earl}^ period, was necessaril}' characterized by a single type, a single language, and a single culture, orwhetherinsuch a group different types, different languages, anddifferent cultures may have been represented.

The liistorical development of mankind would afford a simpler and
if we were justified in assuming that in primitive
communities the three phenomena had been intimately associated.
clearer picture,

No proof, however, of such an assumption can be given.

On thecontrary, the present distribution of languages, as compared with the
distribution of types,

makes it plausible that even at the earliest

times the biological units may have been wider than the linguistic
units,and presumably also wider than the cultural units.

I believethat it may be safely said that all over the world the biological unitismuch larger than the linguistic unit:

in other words, that groupsof men who are so closely related in bodily appearance that we mustthem as representatives of the same variety of mankind,embrace a much larger number of individuals than the number ofmen speaking languages which we know to be genetically related.

considerExamples of this kind may l)e given from many parts of the world.
Thus, the European race—including under

thisterm roughly

allthose indivitluals who are without hesitation classed b}?^ us as members of the white race

— would include peoples speaking Indo-Euro-pean, Basque, and Ural-i^ltaic

languages.

West African negroes

would represent individuals of a certain negro type, but speaking themost diverse languages; and the same would be true, among Asiatic
types, of Siberians;among American types, of part of the Calif ornian

Indians.

So far as our histoiical evidence goes, there is no reason to believethat the number of distinct languages has at any time been less than
it is

now.

On the contrary, all our evidence goes to show that the

number of apparently unrelated languages has been much greater inOn the other hand, the number of
earlier times than at present.
types that have presumably become extinct seems to be rather
small, so that there is no reason to suppose that at an early period

there should have been a nearer correspondence between the numberof distinct linguistic

and anatomical types; and we are thus led toBOAS]HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

13

the conclusion that presumably, at an early time, each human typemay have existed in a number of small isolated groups, each of which
may have possessed a language and culture of its own.
However tliis may be, the probabilities are decidedly in favor of
the assumption that there is no necessity to assume that originallyeach language and culture were confined to a single type, or that eachtype and culture were confined to one language: in short, that there

has been at any time a close correlation between these three phe-nomena.

The assumption that type, language, and culture were originallywouldentail the further

assumption that thesethree traits developed approximately at thesame period, and thatclosely correlated

they developed conjointly for a considerable length of time.

assumption does not seem by any means plausible.
tal types ofThis

The fundamen-

man which are represented in the negroid race and in

the mongoloid race must have been differentiated long before theformation of those forms of speech that are now recognized in the
linguistic families of the world.

I

think that even the differentia-

tion of the more important subdivisions of the great races antedates

the formation oftheexisting linguistic families.

At anyrate,

the biological differentiation and the formation of speech were, at
this early period, subject to thesame causes that are acting uponthem now, and our whole experience shows that these causes act.much more rapidly on language than on the human body.

In thisconsideration lies the principal reason for the theory of lack of correlation of type and language, even during the period of formation oftypes and of linguistic families.

What is true of language is obviously even more true of culture.
In other words, if a certain type of man migrated over a considerable
area before its language assumed the form which can now be traced
in related linguistic groups, and before its" culture assumed the definite

type the further development of which can now be recognized, there

would be no

possibility of ever discovering a correlation of type,language, and culture, even if it had ever existed; but it is quitepossible that such correlation has really never occurred.
It is c[uite conceivable that a certain racial

type

may have scat-

tered over a considerable area during a formative period of speech,

and that the languages which developed among the various groups

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

14

now impossible
In the same way, newof this racial type came to be so different thatto provethem to be genetically related.

[bull. 40

it isdevelopments of culture may have taken place which are so entirely
disconnected with older types that the older genetic relationships,
even if they existed, can no longer be discovered.
If we adopt this point of view, and thus eliminate the hypotheticalassumption of correlation between primitive type, primitive language,
and primitive culture, we recognize that any attempt at classification
wliich includes more than one of these traits can not be consistent.

may be added that the general term "culture" which has beenused here may be subdivided from a considerable number of pointsItof view,

different results again

andmight be expected when we

consider the inventions, the tj^pes of social organization, or beliefs, as

leading points of view in our classification.

Character of All Classifications of Mankind

Artificial

We recognize thus that every classification of mankind must be
more or less artificial, according to the point of xiew selected, andhere, even more than in the domain of biology, we find that classification can only be a substitute for the genesis and history of the now
existing types.

Thus we recognize that the essential object in comparing diiferent
tvpes of man must be the reconstruction of the history of the develop-

ment of their types, their languages, and their cultures.

The historyof each of these various traits is subject to a distinct set of modifying

causes, and the investigation of each may be expected to contributedata toward the solution of our problem.

The biological investiga-

tion may reveal the blood-relationships of types and their modifications

underinvestigationsocialand geographical environment.

Thelinguistic

may disclose the history of languages, the contact ofthe people speaking them with other people, and the causes that led
to linguistic differentiation and integration; while the histor}^ of civili-

zation deals with the contact of a people with neighboring peoples,
as well as with the liistory of its own achievements.

HANDBOOK OF AMEEICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

15

n. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF LANGUAGE
Definition of Language

The discussions of the preceding chapter have shown that a consideration of the human languages alone must not be understood toyield a history of the blood-relationsliips of races and of their com-ponent elements, but that all that we can hope to obtain is a clear
understanding of the relationship of the languages, no matter bywhom they may be spoken.
Before discussing the extent to which

we may reconstruct thehistory of languages, it seems necessary to describe briefly the essentialtraits of human speech.

In our present discussion we do not deal with gesture-language
or musicalmeans of communication, but confine ourselves to thediscussion of articulate speech; that is, to communication by means.

of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs— the larynx,

oral cavity, tongue, lips, and nose.

Character of Phonetics
Speech consists of groups of sounds produced by the articulatingorgans, partly noises

made by opening and closing certain placesin the larynx,

pharynx, mouth, or nose, or by restricting certain

parts of thepassage of the breath; partly resonant sounds pro-

duced by the vocal chords.

Niiniher of Sounds Unlifiiited
The number of sounds that may be produced in this manner isunlimited.

In our own language we selectof all possible sounds; for instance,onl}" a limited

some sounds,

like p,numberare pro-duced by the closing and a sudden opening of the lips; others, likeby bringing the tip of the tongue into contact with the anterior
portion of the palate, by producing a closure at this point, and byt,suddenly expelling the air.

On the other hand, a sound might beproduced by placing the tip of the tongue between the lips, making
a closure in this manner, and by expelling the air suddenly.

Thissound would to our ear partake of the character of both our t andour 2), while it would correspond to neither of these.
of the sounds of thewell-known European languages

A comparison—

like English,

French, and German; or even of the different dialects of the same

—
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

16[bull. 40

languages, like those of Scotch and of the various English dialects
reveals the fact that considerable variation occurs in the manner of

producing sounds, and that each dialect has its own characteristic
phonetic system, in which each sound is nearly fixed, although subject to slight modifications which are due to accident or to the effectsof surrounding sounds.

Each La^iffiiaffe Uses a Li united Ninnhev of Sounds
One of the most important facts relating to the phonetics ofhuman speech is, that every single language has a definite andlimited group of sounds, and that the number of those used in any
particular dialect is never excessively large.
Itwould seem that this limitation in the use of sounds is neces-sary in order to make possible rapid communication.

If thenum-

ber of sounds that are used in any particular language were unlimited,the accuracy with which the

movements of the complicatedmechanism required for producing the sounds are performed would
presumably be lacking, and consequently rapidity and accuracy ofpronunciation, and withthem the possibility of accurate interpre-

tation of the sounds heard,

would be difficult, or even impossible.

On the other hand, limitation of the number of sounds brings it aboutthat themovements requiredin theproduction of each become

automatic, that the association between the sound heard and themuscular movements, and that between the auditory impression andthe muscular sensation of the articulation,

become firmly

fixed.

Thus it would seem that limited phonetic resources are necessaryfor easy

communication.

Alleged Lack of Differentiation of Sounds in I*ritnitive

Languages
been maintained that this is not a characteristic found in
more primitive types of languages, and particularly, examples of
It hasAmerican languages have often been brought forward to show thatthe accuracy of their pronunciation is much less than that found in
the languages of the civilized world.
It would seem that this view is based largely on the fact that cer-tain sounds that occur in

American languages are interpreted byobservers sometimes as one European sound, sometimes as another.

Thus the Pawnee language contains a sound which may be heard

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

17

more or less distinctly sometimes as an I, sometimes an r, sometimes
as n, and again as d, which, however, without afiy doubt, is through-out the same sound, although modified to a certain extent by its
position in theword and by surrounding sounds.

Itisan exceed-

ingly weak r, made by trilling with the tip of the tongue at a point a
little behind the roots of the incisors, and in which the tongue hardly

leaves the palate, the trill being produced by the lateral part of the

As soon as the trill is heard more strongly,
we receive the impression of an r. When the lateral movement
tongue adjoining the tip.

prevails and the tip of the tongue does not seem to leave the palate,the impression of anIisstrongest, while

when the trill is almost

suppressed and a sudden release of the tongue from the palate takes
place, the impression of the d is given.

produced because the soundbreathing through the nose.

is

The impression of an n isby an audible

often accompaniedThis peculiar sound

is,

of

course,entirely foreign to our phonetic sj'stem; but its variations are notgreater than those of the English r in various combinations, as inhroth, mother, where.

by thefact thatThe

different

impression

the sound, according to

its

is

brought about

prevailing character,associates itself either with our I, or our r, n, or d.

Other examples are quite common.

Thus, the lower Chinook has asound which is readily perceived as a h, m, or w.
it is

As a matter of fact,a & sound, produced by a very weak closure of the lips and with

open nose, the breath passing weakly both through the mouth andthrough the nose, and accompanied by a faint intonation of the vocal
chords.

This sound associates itself with our h, which is produced

by a moderately weak release of the lips; with our m, which is a freebreath through the nose with closed lips; and with our w, which isa breath through thelips,which are almost closed, all accompanied

by a faint intonation of the vocal chords.

The association of thissound with w, is particularl}' marked when it appears in combination with a u vowel, which imitates the characteristic u tinge of our

w.

Still

another example

is

the

h

sound, which is produced withhalf-closed noseby the Indians of the Strait of Fuca, in the Stateof Washington.

In this case the characteristic trait of the sound isa semiclosure of the nose, similar to the effect produced by a coldin the head.

our vowels.

Not less common are sounds intermediate between
Thus we seem to find in a number of Indian languages

44877— Bull. 40, pt 1—10

2

18

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

a vowel whichis[bull. 40

sometimes perceived as o, sometimes as u (con-tinental pronunciation), and which is in reality pronounced in a posi-tion intermediate between these

two sounds.

The correctness of this interpretation of Indian phonetics is perhaps best proved by the fact that observers belonging to different
nationalities readily perceive the sounds in accordance with the sys-

tem of sounds with which they are familiar.
cult

to recognize the nationalityof

Often it is not diffi-

a recorder from the systemselected by him for the rendering of sounds.
Stillanother proof of the correctness of this view of Indian pho-

netics is given by the fact that, wherever there is a greater numberof Indian sounds of a class represented by a single sound in English,

ourown sounds are misinterpreted in similar manner.

instance, the Indians ofZ

theThus, forNorth Pacific coast have a series of

may be roughly compared to our sounds tl, cl, gl.

sounds, which

Consequently, a word like close is heard by the Indians sometimes
one way, sometimes another; our cl is for them an intermediatesound, in the same way as some Indian sounds are intermediatesounds to oureffect ofears.

The alternation of the sounds isperception through theclearlyanmedium of a foreign system ofphonetics, not that of a greater variability of pronunciation thanthe one that is characteristic of our own sounds.
Wliile the phonetic system of each language is limited and fixed,

the sounds selected in different types of languages show great differences, andseems necessary to compare groups of languages fromitthe point of view of their constituent phonetic elements.

Srief Description of Phonetics

A complete discussion of this subject can not be given at thisplace; but

a brief statementofthe characteristics

ofarticulate

sounds, and the manner of rendering them by means of symbols,

seems necessary.
All articulate sounds are produced by the vibrations of the articulating organs,which are set in motion by breathing.

In the vast

majority of cases it is the outgoing breath which causes the vibrations; while in a

few languages, as in those of South Africa, thebreath, while being drawn in, is used for producing the sound.

One group of sounds is produced by the vibration of the vocal
chords, andischaracterized by the form given to the cavities of

BOAS]HANDBOOK OF AMEEICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

19

mouth and nose. These are the vowels. When the nose is closed,
we have pure vowels; when the posterior part of the nose is more
The character of theor less open, more or less nasalized vowels.
vowel depends upon the form given to the oral cavity. The timbreof the vowels changes according to the degree to which the larynx israised; theepiglottisbrought forward andlowered or raised; the tongue retracted oritsback rounded or flattened; and the lips

rounded and brought forward, or an elongated opening of the mouth
produced by retracting the corners of the mouth.

and the tongue and pharynx at

rest,

With open lips

but the soft palate (velum)

we have the pure vowel a, similar to the a in father. From
this sound the vowels vary in two principal directions.
The oneextreme is u (like oo in English fool) with small round opening ofraised,,the protruding lips, tongue retracted, and round opening between

tongue and palate, and large opening between larynx and pharynx,
the larynx still being almost at

The transitional sounds passrest.

through a {aw in English law) ando(as in most),of intermediate positions is continuous.

but the range

In another direction thevowels pass from a through e (a in English mane) toi{ee

in fleet).

The i is pronounced with extreme retraction of the corners of themouth and elongated opening of the lips, mth very narrow fiat opening between tongue and palate, and the posterior part of the tongue

brought forward, so that there is a wide opening in the back part ofthe mouth, the larynx being raised at the same time.

Variations of vowels may be produced by a different grouping of

the movements of the articulating organs.
in i position, the tongue and pharynx

Thus, when the lips are

and larynx in u position, we

have the sound u, which is connected with the a by a series passing
through 0.

These sounds are similar to the German umlaut.

Other combinations of positions of the tongue and of the Hps
occur, although the ones here described

quent vowel-sounds.

seem to be the most fre-All vowels may become very much weakened

in strength of articulation,and dwindle down to a slight intona-

vocal chords,

although retaining the peculiar vowel

tion of thetimbre, which depends upon the position of mouth, nose, and lips.

When this articulation becomes very weak, all the vowels tend
to become quite similar in character, or may be influenced in theirtimbre by neighboring consonants, as will be described later.

:

BUREAU OF AMEEICAN ETHNOLOGY

20

All sounds produced[bull. 40

by vibrations in any part of the articulating
These vibra-

organs other than the vocal chords are consonants.

may

tions

be produced either by closing the air-passages com-and then suddenly opening thepletely

closure,or by producing'a narrowing or stricture at any point.

The former series of sounds

are called "stops" (like our p, t, Ic).

In all of these there is a com-

The latter are called "spi-plete closure before the air is expelled.

rants " or " continued " (like our s and/), in which there is a continu-

ous escape of breath.

When a stop is made and is followed l)y a

breathing through a stricture at the same place, sounds develop like

These are called " affricatives."

our ts.

pletely stopped,called a "nasal consonant" (like ourism and n).

There may also be

and nasal opening.

A rapidly repeated series of stops, a

represented by our r.

The character of the sound depends

stricture
trill,

When the mouth is com-and the air escapes through the nose, the sound islargely upon the parts of the articulating organs that produce theclosure or stricture, and upon the place where these occur.

may be made by the lips, lips and tongue, lips andor stricture
teeth,

Closuretongue and teeth, tongue and hard palate, tongue and soft

palate (velum), by the vocal chords, and in the nose.

In the following table, only the principal groups of consonants aredescribed.

According to what has been

Rare sounds are omitted.

said before, it will be recognized that here also the total

number of

possible sounds is infinitely large.

Bilabial stopp

Linguo-palatal stops:
Apical (dental, alveolar, post-alveolar)

.

t

.

.

Cerebral (produced \\'ith the tip of the tongue

turned backward)
DorsalAnterior palatal
Medial

t

.

.

k*

:

k

Velar

q

Glottal (a stop produced with the vocal chords)

"^
.

.

X

Nasal

Almost all these stops ma}' be modified by giving to the closurea different degree of stress.

In English we have two principal de-grees of stress, represented, for instance, by our h and p or d and t.

In many languages,

as, for instance, inSioux and in the languagesof the Pacific coast, there are three degrees of stress that

may beHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

21

The strongest of these we call the ''fortis,"and indicate it b}^ following the consonant by an (p/, t!).
When these stops are not accompanied by any kind of vibra-

readily differentiated.

!

tion of the vocal chords, they are called "surds."
It is, of course, also possible that more than one stop may be madeThus it might be possible to close at the same timeat one time.

the hps and the posterior part of the mouth with the tongue.
tj'pe ofThis

combination is, however, rare; but we find very frequently

articulation of the vocal chords withvoiced consonants, or sonants.

This results in thestops.

In English we find that almost

always the stress of articulation of the voiced sound is less than theunvoiced sound, or surd; but tliis cor-stress of articulation of therelation

not necessary.

isfind very

In American languages particularly, we

commonly the same degreeof stress

used with voicing

and without voicing, which brings it about that to the European ear
the surd and sonant are difficult to distinguish.

A third modification of the consonants is brought about by thestrength of breathing accompanying the release of the closure.

sound like t,

for instance, theIn asound may be simply produced bymouth, by laying the tip of the tongue firmly against

closing thethe palate, producing a slightly increased
beliind the tongue,

hand, the soundamount of air-pressure

and then releasing the closure.

On the othermay be produced by bringing about the closureand combining the release with the expirationof a full breath.

Sounds which are accompanied by tliis full breathing may be called"aspirates,"ofand we ^\dll designate the aspiration by

the Greek spiritus asper.

This

full

breatliing',

the symbol

may follow thestop, or may begin even before the completion of the closure.

the increased stress of closure of the fortis

is

With

connected a closure of

the glottis or of the posterior part of the tongue, so that only the airthat has been poured into the vocal cavity is expelled.

In the case of voiced consonants, the voicing may either be entirely s3"nchronous with the consonant, or it

may slightly precede or

In both of these cases we may get the impression of afollow it.

preceding or following exceedingl}^ weak vowel, the timbre of wliich
walldepend essentially upon the accompanying consonant.

When

the timbre is ver^^ indefinite, we WTite this vowel E; when it is moredefinite,

A,

I,

0,

U,

etc.

In other cases, where the release at theBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

22

I

bull. 40

closure is made without a full breath going out, and simply by com-pressing the air slightly in the space behind the closure, a break isvery liable to originate between the stop and the following sound of
the word.

Such a hiatus

trophe

It

(').

in

the word is indicatedby an apos-

seems likely that, where such a hiatus occurs fol-lowing a vowel, it is generally due to a closing of the glottis.

Most of the phenomena here described may also occur with theseem to differ so muchspirants and nasals, which, however, do not

in regard to strength; wliile the character of the outgoing breath,the voicing and the breaking-ofl, show traits similar to those observed

among the stops.
All the stops may be changed into nasals by letting the air escapethrough the nose

originate our n and m.

and the stricture

In this manner

wliile the closure is continued.

The nasal opening may also differ in width,of theupper nares

may produce semi-nasalized

consonants.

In the spirant sounds before described, the escape of the air is along
the middle line of the palate.

which theair

There are a number of other sounds inescapes laterally.

These are represented by our I.

They also may vary considerably, according to the place and formof the opening through which the air escapes and the form of closureof themouth.

It seems that the peculiar timbre of some of the consonants depends

also

upon the resonanceof the oral

opening.

This seems to beparticularly the case in regard to the t and Z: sounds.

In pronouncing

the t sounds, one of the essential characteristics seems to be that theposterior part of the mouth is open, while the anterior portion of theseries, on the other hand,mouth is filled by the tongue. In thethe posterior portion of the mouth is iilled by the tongue, whileTc

the anterior portion remains open.
posteriorSounds produced with both theand anterior portion of the mouth open partake of thecharacter of both the Tc and t series.^

Two of the vowels show a close affiliation to consonants of thecontinuant series.

These are i and u, owing largely to the fact thatin i the position of the tongue is very nearly a stricture in the anterior

portion of the mouth, while in u the position of the lips is quite nearto a stricture.

Thus originate the semi-vowels y and w.

The last

sound that must be mentioned is the free breathing li, which, in its
i See p.

W. Schmidt, Anthropos, II, 834.

boas]HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

23

most characteristic form, is produced by the expiration of the breathwith all the articulating organs at rest.

In tabular form we obtain thus the following series of the mostimportant consonantic sounds:

—
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

24
hills,[bull. 40

the tenmnal s does not enter our consciousness as a separate

element with separate significance, expressing the idea of phirality,
except, perhaps, in so far as our grammatical training has taught us

the fact that plurals may be formed by the use of a terminal s,
the word forms a firm unit,

The variety of uses of the terminal

a whole.
sessive,— butwhich conveys a meaning only assas a plural, pos-and third ])erson singular of the verb, and the strong effort

required to recognize the phonetic identity of these terminal elements,

may be adduced asafurther proofofthe fact that the single

phonetic elements become conscious to us only as a result of analysis.

A comparison of words that differ only in a single sound, like mail
and

nail,

snake and stake, makesitalso clear that the isolation ofsounds is a result of secondary analysis.

Grammatical Categories
Differences in Categories of Different Lanr/uages
In all articulate speech the groupsofsounds which are utteredserve to convey ideas, and each group of sounds has a fixed meaning.

Languages

differnot only in the character of their constituent

phonetic elements and sound-clusters, but also in the groups of ideasthat find expression in fixed phonetic groups.

JAmitation of the H^uniber of Phonetic G^^oujjs JSocpressing Ideas
The total number of possible combinations of phonetic elements is
also unlimited; but only a limited number are used to express ideas.
This implies that the total number of ideas that are expressed by
distinct phonetic groups is limited in number.

Since the total range of personal experience which language serves
to express is infinitely varied, and its whole scope must be expressedby a limited number of phonetic groups, it is obvious that an extended
classification of experiences must underlie all articulate speech.
This coincides with a fundamental trait of human thought.

In ouractual experience no two sense-impressions or emotional states are
identical.
larities,

Neverthelessin A^der or

we classif}^ them, according to their simi-

narrower groups the limits of which

determined from a variety of points of view.

may beNotwithstanding theirindividual differences, we recognize in our experiences common ele-ments, and consider them as related or even as the same, provided a

HANDBOOK OF AMEKICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

25

sufficient number of characteristic traits belong to them in common.

Thus the hmitation of the number of phonetic groups expressing
distinct ideas
different

isan expression of the psychological fact that many

mdividual experiences appear to us as representatives ofthe same category of thought.

This trait of human thought and speech may be compared in amanner to the limitation of the whole series of possible
articulating movements by selection of a limited number of habitual
movements. If the whole mass of concepts, with all their variants,

certainw^ere expressed in language by entirely heterogeneousand unrelated

sound-complexes, a condition would arise in which closely related
ideas

would not show their relationship by the corresponding rela-tionship of their phonetic symbols, and an infinitely large number ofdistinct phonetic groups

would be required for expression.

If thiswere the case, the association between an idea and its representative

sound-complex would not become sufficientlj" stable to be reproduced
automatically without reflection at any given moment.

As theautomatic and rajDid use of articulations has brought it about that alimited number of articulations only, each with limited variability,

and a limited number of sound-clusters, have been selected from theinfinitely large range of possible articulations

and clusters of articu-

lations, so the infinitely large number of ideas have been reduced byclassification to a lesser number, whichby constant use have estab-lished firm associations, and which can be used automatically.
It seems important at this point of our considerations to emphasize

the fact that the groups of ideas expressedbyspecificphonetic

groups show very material differences in different languages, and do
not conform by any means to the same principles of classification.

To take again the example of English, we find that the idea of waterisexpressed in a great variety of forms: one term serves to express

water as a liquid(lake);

another one, water in the form of a large expanse;

others, water as running in a large body or in a small bod}'(river and brook);still other terms express water in the

DEW, WAVE, and foam.

Itisform of rain,

perfectly conceivable that this variety

of ideas, each of which is expressed by a single independent termmEnglish, might be expressed in other languages by derivations fromthe same term.

Another example of the same kind, the words for snow in Eskimo,

may be given.

Here we find one word, aput, expressing snow on

BUREATT OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

26[bull. 40

THE ground; another one, qana, falling snow; a third one, piqsirpoq, drifting snow; and a fourth one, qimuqsuq, a snowdrift.
In the same language the seal in different con(Utions is expressedby a varietyofterms.

One word is the general term for seal;

another one signifies the seal basking in the sun; a third one, a

SEAL floating ON A PIECE OF ICE;

not to mention the many names

for the seals of different ages and for male and female.

As an example of the manner in which terms that we express byindependent words are grouped together under one concept, theDakota language may be selected.

The terms naxta'ha to kick,
ic'a'xtaka to be

to bind in bundles, yaxta'ka to bite,

paxta'lca

NEAR TO, hoxta'lca TO pound, are all derived from the common element xtaka to grip, which holds them together, while we use distinct
words for expressing the various ideas.
It seems fairly evident that the selection of such simple terms must

to a certain extent depend upon the chief interests of a people;

andwhere it is necessary to distinguish a certain phenomenon in many
aspects,

which in the life of the people play each an entirely inde-

pendent role, many independent words may develop, while in othercases modifications of a single term may suffice.

Thus it happens that each language, from the point of view of

may be arbitrary in its classifications that what
appears as a single simple idea in one language may be characterized
another language,;by a series of distinct phonetic groups in another.
The tendency of a language to express a complex idea by a single
term has been styled "holophrasis," and it appears therefore that every
language

may be holophrastic from the point of view of anotherlanguage.

Holophrasis can hardly be taken as a fundamental char-acteristic of primitive languages.

We have seen before that some kind of classification of expression
must be found in every language.

This classification of ideas into

groups, each of which is expressed by an independent phonetic group,

makes it necessary that concepts which are not readily rendered by asingle one

among

the

available sound - complexes should

be ex-

pressed by combinations or by modifications of what might be called

the elementary phonetic groups, in accordance with the elementaryideas to which the particular idea is reduced.

This classification, and the necessity of expressing certain experiences by means of other related ones, which by limiting one anotherHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

27

define the special idea to be expressed, entail the presence of certain

formal elements which determine the relations of the single phonetic
groups.

If each idea could be expressed by a single phonetic group,

languages without form would be possible.

Since, however, ideas

must be expressed by being reduced to a number of related ideas, thekinds of relation become important elements in articulate speech;
and it follows that all languages must contain formal elements, andthat their

number must be the greater, the fewer the elementaryphonetic groups that define special ideas.

In a language which com-mands a very large, fixed vocabulary, the number of formal elements
may become quite small.
Grafnttiatical Processes
It is important to note that, in the languages of the world, the num-

ber of processes which are utilized to express the relations of terms islimited.

Presumably

articulate speech.

this isdue to the general characteristicsof

The only methods that are available for express-

ing the relations between definite phonetic groups are their composition in definite order, which may be combined with a mutual phonetic

influence of thecomponent elements upon one another, and innermodification of the phonetic groups themselves.

ods are found in a great

Both these meth-many languages, but sometimes only themethod of composition occurs.

Word and Sentence
In order to understand the significance of the ideas expressed byindependent phonetic groups and of the elements expressing theirmutual relations, we have to discuss here the question. What forms
the unit of speech?

It has been pointed out before that the phonetic

elements as such can be isolated only by analysis, and that theyoccur in speech only in combinations which are the equivalents ofdefinite concepts.

Since all speech is intended to serve for the communication of ideas,

the natural unit of expression is the sentence; that is to say, a groupof articulate sounds whichconvey a complete idea.

It might seemthat speech can readily be further subdivided, and that the wordalso

forms a natural unit from which the sentence is built up.

In

most cases, however, it is easy to show that such is not the case, andthat the word as such is known only by analysis.

This is particularly

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

28[bill. 40

clear in the case of words like prepositions, conjunctions, or verbal

Thus it would be ex-forms which belong to subordinate clauses.

ceedingly difficult to imagine the use of words like and, for, to, were,expressed in such a way that they would convey a clear idea, except

perhaps in forms like the Laconic
sentence//,in which all the rest of theimplied, and sufficiently indicatedisby the if.

In thesame way, however, we who are grammatically trained may use a
simple ending to correct an idea previously expressed. Thus thestatement

He

sings

heautifulhj

might

elicita reply, sang; or alaconically inclined pei'son might even remark, in reply to the state-ment He 'plays well, -ed, which by his friends might be well underclear that in all these cases the single elements arestood.

It

isolatedby a secondary process from the complete unit

isof thesentence.

Less clear appears the artificiality of the word as a unit in thosecases in which the word seems to designate a concept^that stands out
clearly from others.

Such is the case, for instance, mth nouns; anditmight seem that a word like stone is a natural unit.

it

will

Neverthelessbe recognized that the word stone alone conveys at most an

objective picture, not a complete idea.

Thus we are led to the important question of the relation of theword to the sentence.

Basing our considerations on languages differ-

ing fundamentall}" in fomi,

word

it

would seem that we iri&j define theas a 'phonetic group which, oiinng toitspermanence of form,

clearness of significance, and phonetic independence, is readil'y sepo/-

rated from the whole sentence.

considerable

This definition obviously contains a

number of arbitraiy elements, which may induce us,

according to the general point of view taken, sometimes to designatea certain unit as a word, sometimes to Aenj its independent existence.

We shall see later on, in the discussion of American languages,that this practical difficulty confronts us man}" times, and that it is

not possible to decide with objective certainty whether it is justifiable
to consider a certain phonetic group as an independent word or as asubordinate part of a word.
Nevertheless there are certain elements contained in our definition

which seem to be essential for the interpretation of a sound-complex
as an independent word.

From the point of view of grammaticalform, the least important; from the point of view of phonetics, how-

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

29

ever, the most fundamental, is the phonetic independence of the ele-ment in question.

It has been pointed out before how difficult it is

to conceive the independence of the English s,

which expresses theplural, the possessive, and the third person singular of the verb.

This

is largely due to the phonetic weakness of this grammatical element.

If the idea of plurality were expressed by an element as strong pho-

netically as the word many; the possessive part of the word,by anelement as strong as the preposition of: and the third person singular,

by an element like he—we might, perhaps, be much more readyto recognize the character of these elements as independent words,

and we actually do so.
words

;

For example, stones, John's, loves, are single

while many sheep, of stone, he went, are each considered as twowords.

Difficulties of this kind are met with constantly in American

languages.

Thus we find in a language like the Chinook that modifj^-

ing elements are expressed by single sounds which phonetically enter
into clusters which are pronounced without any break.

To give an

The word anid'lot i give him to her may be analyzed into
the following elements: a (tense), n i, i him, a her, I to, o (directionaway), t to give. Here, again, the weakness of the component elements and their close phonetic association forbid us to consider themexample:independent words; while the whole expression appears to us as a
firm unit.

Whenever we are guided by this principle alone, the limitation of
the word unit appears naturally exceedingly uncertain, on accountof the difference in impression of the phonetic strength of thecom-ponent elements.
It also happens that certain elements appear sometimes with suchphonetic weakness that they can not possibly be considered as inde-

pendent units of the sentence, while closely related forms, or even thesame forms in other combinations, may gain the strength which they arelacking in other cases.

As an example of this kind ma}' be given the

Kwakiutl, in which many of the pronominal forms appear as exceedingly weak phonetic elements.

with itisThus the expression He strikes him

rendered by m^ix'H'dsqs, in which the two terminal ele-ments mean:

g him, s with it.

"WTien,however, substantives are

introduced in this expression for object and instrument, the g assumes
the fuller form xa, and the s the fuller form sa, which we might quite
readily write as independent words analogous to our articles.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY30
I[bull. 40

doubt very much whether an investigator who would record

French in the same way as we do the unwritten American languages

would be inclined to write the pronominal elements which enter into
the transitive verb as independent words, at least not when record-

He might be induced

ing the indicative forms of a positive verb.
to do so on

discovering theirfreedom of position which appears in

the negative and in some interrogative forms.

The determining influence of the freedom of position of a phonetically fixed part of the sentence makes it necessary to include it in our
definition of the word.

Whenever a certain phonetic group appears in a variety of positions in a sentence, and always in the same form, without any, or atleast

without material, modifications, we readily recognize its indi-viduality, and in an analysis of the language we are inclined to consider it as a separate word.

These conditions are fully realized only

in cases in which the sound-complex in question shows no modifica-

tions at all.
Itmay, however, happen that minor modifications occur, parand at the end, which we may be readyticularly at the begimiing

to disregard on account of their slight significance as

the permanence of the whole word.

compared toSuch is the case, for instance,in the Dakota language, in which the terminal sound of a permanent

word -complex which has a clearly defined significance will automatically modif}^ the first sound of the following word-complex which

The reverse may also
Strictly speaking, the line of demarcation between what we
occur.
should commonly call two words is lost in this case; but the mutual

has the same characteristics of permanence.

two words

influence of thein connectionis,comparatively speak-ing, so slight that the concept of the individuality of the word out-

weighs their organic connection.
In other cases, where the organic connection becomes so firmthat either both or one of the component elements may never occur

without signs marking their close coupHng, they will appear to us

As an example of this condition may be mentioned

as a single unit.

theEskimo.

Thislanguage contains awhich are quite clear

in their significancecharacter, but which

in

their

position

are

great

many

elements

and strong in phoneticsolimitedthat they

always foUow other definite parts of the sentence, that they cannever form

thebeginningof

a complete

phonetic

group,

andHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

31

that the preceding phonetic group loses its more permanent phonetic

To give an example:
means he begins to see.

form whenever they appear added to
takuvoqmeans he sees; takulevpog

it.

In the second form the idea of seeing is contained in the elementtahu-j which by itself is incomplete.

The following element, -ler, cannever begin a sentence, and attains the significance of beginning
only in connection with a preceding phonetic group, the terminalsound of which is to a certain extent determined by it.

In its turn,it requires an ending, which expresses, in the example here selected,

the third person singular, -pog; while theofword expressing the idea

SEEING requires the ending -voq^ for the same person.

These also

can not possibly begin a sentence, and their initial sounds, v and p,

by the terminal sounds of the preceding ele-are determined solely

ments.

Thus itwill

be seen that this group of sound-complexes

forms a firm unit, held together by the formal incompleteness of eachpart and their far-reaching phonetic influences upon one another.

Itwould seem that, in a language in which the elements are so firmly
knit

togetherasinEskimo, therp

could notbetheslightest

doubt as to what constitutes the word in our ordinary sense of theterm.

The same is true in many cases in Iroquois, a language in
Herewhich conditions quite similar to those in the Eskimo prevail.
an example may be given from the Oneida dialect.

Watgajijanegale

the flower BREAKS OPEN cousists of the formal elements wa-, -t-,aitd-g-, which are temporal, modal, and pronominal in character; thevowel -a-, which is the character of the stera-jija flower, which neveroccurs alone; and the stem -negate to break open, which also has no

independent existence.
In all these cases the elements possess great clearness of significance, but the lack ofpermanence of form compels us to consider

them as parts of a longer word.
AVhile in some languages this gives us the impression of an adequate
criterion for the separation of words, there are other cases in which

certain parts of the sentence may be thus isolated, while the others
retain their independent form.
ticularly the casewhen nouns

In American languages this is parenter the verbal complex without

any modification of their component elements.

This is the case, for

Pawnee: td'tuk^t i have cut it for thee, and rlJcs
arrow, combine into tatu'riksTcH i cut thy arrow. The closeness of

instance, inconnection of these forms is even clearer in cases in which far-reach-BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

32

ing phonetic modifications occur.

Thus the elements ta-t-ru^n combine

into ta'hu^n i make (because tr in a word changes to Ti) ;ru^nand ta-t-r~iks-

make an arrow (because r after s
At the same time rlhs arrow occiu's as an independ-

becomes tahikstu^nchanges to /).

[bull. 40

ient word.
If

we follow the principle laid down in the preceding remarks,
that the same element may appear at one time

it will readily be seen

as an independent noim, then again as a part of a word, the rest ofwhich hasallthis reason

we are not inclined to consider as a complex of independ-

the characteristics before

described, and

which

for

ent elements.

Ambiguity in regard to the independence of parts of the sentence

may also arise either when in their significance they become dependent upon other parts of the sentence, or when their meanmg is sovague and weak as compared to the other parts of the sentence thatwethem as subordinate parts. Words of thiswhen phonetically strong, will generally be considered as inde-

are led to regardkind,pendent particles; .when, on the other hand, they are phoneticallyweak, they will generally be considered as modifying parts of otherwords.

A good example of this kind is contained in the Ponca

texts by the Rev. James Owen Dorsey,^ in which the same elements

are often treated as independent particles, while in other cases they

appear as subordinate parts of words.

Thus we find ^eajna these(p. 23, line 17), but jdhe amd the beaver (p. 553, line 7).

The same is true in regard to the treatment of the grammar of theSioux by the Rev. S. R. Riggs.

We find in this case, for instance,

the element pi alwa3^s treated as the ending of a word, probably

owing to the fact that it represents the plural, which in the Indo-

European languages is almost always expressed by a modificationof the word to which it applies.

On the other hand, elements like Jctaand sni, signifymg the future and negation respectively, are treatedas independent words, although they appear in exactly the same
form as the pi mentioned before.
Other examples of this kind are the modifying elements in Tsimshian, alanguage in which innumerable adverbial elements are

expressed by fairly
position.

Here,weak phonetic groups which have a

also,

it

definite

seems entirely arbitrary whether thesephonetic groups are considered as separate words, or whether theyJ

Contributions to North American Ethnology, vi.

BOAS]HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

33

are

combined with the verbal expressions into a single word.

In

these cases the independent existence of theword to which suchany modification will generally deter-

particles are joined without

mine us to consider these elements as independent particles, provided they are phonetically strong enough while whenever the;verbal expression to which they are joined is modified either by theinsertion of these elements between its component parts, or in someother way, we are inclined to consider them as parts of the word.
It seemed important to discuss somewhat fully the concept of theword in its relation to the whole sentence, because in the morphologicaltreatment of American languages this question plays animportant rdle.

Stem afid Affix
The analytic treatment of languages results in the separation of anumber of different groups of the elements of speech. When we
appears that certain

arrange these according to their functions,itelements recur in every single sentence.

These

are, for instance,

the forms indicating subject and predicate, or, in modern European

number,languages, forms indicating
liketense,and person.

Others,terms expressing demonstrative ideas, may or may not occur ina sentence.

These andmany others are treated in our grammars.

According to the character of these elements, they seem to modifyth^ material contents of the sentence: as, for instance, in the

Eng-

lish

sentences lie strikes Mm, and I struck thee, where the idea of strik-ingsomebody appears as the content of the communication;

wliilethe ideas he, present, Mm, and 1, past, tJiee, appear as modifications.
It is of fundamental importance to note that this separation of theideas contained in a sentence into material contents

and formal

modifications is an arbitrary one, brought about, presumably, first ofof all, by the great variety of ideas which may be expressed in thesame formal manner by the same pronominal and tense elements.
In other words, the material contents of the sentence may be represented by subjects and 2:)redicates expressing an unlimited number

tenseswhile the modifying elements —here the pronouns and—comprise, comparatively speaking, a very small number ofideas.

In the discussion of a language, the parts expressing the mate-

of

rial

ideas,

contents of sentences appear to us as the subject-matter of lexi44877— Bull. 40, pt 1—10

3

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOUY

34[bull. 40

cography; parts expressing the modifying relations, as the subject-matter of grammar.

In modern Indo-European languages the num-

ber of ideas Avliich are expressed by subordinate elements is, on thewhole, limited, and for this reason the dividing-line between grammar

and dictionary appears perfectly clear and well drawn.
sense, however,all

In a wider

etymological processes and word compositions

must be considered as parts of the grammar; and, if we include those,
we find that, even in. Indo-European languages, the number of classifying ideas is quite large.

grammar andIn American languages the distinction between

lexicography often becomes c[uite obscure, owing to the fact that the

number of elements which enter into formal compositions becomesvery large. It seems necessary to explain this somewhat more fully
by examples. In the Tsimshian language we find a very great numberof adverbial elements which

can not be considered as entirely inde-

pendent, and which, without doubt, must be considered as elements

modifying verbal ideas.

On account of the very large number of theseelements, the total number of verbs of motion seems to be somewhat
restricted,

although the total number of verbs that

may be com-bined with these adverbial ideas is much larger than the total numberof the adverbial ideas themselves.

Thus, the number of adverbs

appears to be fixed, while the number of verbs appears unlimited;and consequently we have the impression that the former are modifjnng elements, and that their discussion belongs to thegrammarof the language, while the latter are words,

andbelongs to the lexicography of the language.

The number of suchtheir discussion

modifying elements in Eskimo is even larger; and here the impression that the discussion of these elements belongs to the grammar of

the language

isinitial position,

increasedby the fact that the}' can never take an

and that they are not placed following a complete

word, but are added to an element which, if pronounced by itself,

would not give any sense.

Now, it is important to note that, in a number of languages, thenumber of the modifying elements may increase so much that it
may become doubtful which element represents a series of ideas
limited in number, and which represents an almost unlimited series
of words belonging to the vocabulary.

Algonquian, where in almost

allThis is true, for instance, inverbs several elements appear in

conjunction, each in a definite position, but each group so numerous

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

that

it

35

would be entirely arbitrary to designate the one group as

words modified by the other group, or vice versa.

The importance of this consideration for our purposes lies in thefact thatanditaffix.

illustrates the lack of

Accordingtothedefiniteness of the terms steTn

ordinary

terminology,

affixes

elements attached to stems or words, and modifying them.

are

This

definition is perfectly acceptable as long as the number of modifying

When, however, the number of modifying elements
becomes exceedingly large, we may well doubt which of the two is
ideas is limited.

the modifier and which the modified, and the determination finallybecomes entirely arbitrary.

In the following discussions the attempt

has been made to confine the terms prefix, suffix, and affix entirely tothose cases where the number of ideas expressedisstrictly limited.

becomesso

large

Wherever the numberofby these elements

combined elementsthat they can not be properly classified, theseterms have not been used, but the elements have been treated. as
co-ordinate.

Discussion of Grammatical Categories

From what has been said it appears that, in an objective discussion of languages, three points have to be considered:first,

the con-stituent phonetic elements of the language; second, the groups ofideas expressed by phonetic groups; third, the methods of combining

and modifying phonetic groups.
It seems desirable to discuss the second of these points somewhat

more fully before taking up the description of the characteristics ofAmerican languages.
Grammarians who havestudied, thelanguages of Europe andwestern Asia have developed a system of categories which we are
inclined to look for in every language.

Itseems desirable to show

here in how far the system with which we are familiar is characteristic only of certain groups of languages, and in

may be substituted for it.

It

how far other systems

seems easiest to illustrate this matterby discussing first some of the characteristics of the Indo-Europeannoun, pronoun, and verb, and then by taking up the wider aspects ofthis subject.

BUEEAU OF AMEEICAN ETHNOLOGY

36[bull. 40

Nominal Catef/ories
In the treatment of our noun we are accustomed to look for anumber of fundamental

In most Indo-European lan-

categories.

guages, nouns are classified according to gender, they are modified

by forms expressing singular and plural, and they also appear inNone of these apparently fundasyntactic combinations as cases.
mental aspects of the noun are necessary elements of articulate
speech.

GENDER

The history of the English language shows clearly that the genderof a noun may practically be suppressed without interfering with theclearness of expression.

While westillfind traces of gender ininanimate objects have come to belong toEnglish, practicallyall

one single gender.

It is interesting to note that, in the languagesof the world,

gender is not by any means a fundamental category,

and that nouns may not be divided into classes at all, or the pointof view of classification may be an entirely different one.

Thus theBantu languages of Africa classify words into a great many distinctgroups the significance of most of which is not by any means clear.

The AlgonquianofNorth America classify nouns as animate andinanimate, without, however, adhering strictly to the natural classification implied in these terms.

Thus the small animals may beclassified as inanimate, while certain plants

may appear as animate.

Some of the Siouan languages classify nouns by means of articles,
and strict distinctions are made between animate moving and animate at rest, inanimate long, inanimate round, inanimate high, andinanimate collective objects. The Iroquois distinguish strictly between nouns designating men and other nouns.

Theagain be subdivided into a definite and indefinite group.
distinguish between members of the tribe

lattermay

The Ucheeand other human beings.

In America, true gender is on the whole rare; it is found, perhaps,

among a few of the languages of the lower Mississippi; it occurs inthe same way as in most Indo-European languages in the Chinook
of Columbia river, and to a more limited extent among some of thelanguages of the state of Washington and of British Columbia.

Among North American languages,

Eskimo and Athapascan
have no trace of a classification of nouns. The examples here giventheHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES.

BOAS]

37

show clearly that the sex principle, which underlies the classificationof nouns in European languages, is merely one of a great many possible classifications of this kind.

PLURALOf a somewhat difl^erent character is the plural of Indo-European
Because, for the purpose of clear expression, each nounmust be expressed either as a singular or as a plural, it might seemnouns.

that this classification is almost indispensable; but it is not difficult
to show, by means of sentences, that, even in English, the distinctionisnot always made.

devoured the sheep, it

isFor instance, in the sentence The wolf has
not clear whether a single sheep is meant,or a plurality of sheep are referred to.

Nevertheless, this would not,on the whole, be felt as an inconvenience, since either the context

would show whether singular or plural is meant, or an added adjective would give the desired information.

While, according to the structure of our European languages, wealways tend to look for the expression of singularity or plurality forthe sake of clearness of expression, there are other languages thatare entirely indifl^erent towards this distinction.
of

this

kind

is

the Kwakiutl.

It

is

A good example

entirely immaterial

to theKwakiutl whether he says. There is a house or There are houses.

The same form is used for expressing both ideas, and the idea of
singularity and plurality must be understood either by the context
or by the addition of a special adjective.

Similar conditions prevail

Athapascan languages and in Haida.

In Siouan, also, a dis-tinction between singularity and plurality ismade only in the casein theofanimate objects.

Itwould seem that, on the whole, American

languages are rather indifferent in regard to the clear expression ofplurality,

but that they tend to express much more rigidly the ideas

of collectivity or distribution.

Thus the Kwakiutl, who are rather

indiflerent to the expression of plurality, are very particular indenoting whether the objects spoken of are distributed here or
there.

When this is the case, the distribution is carefully expressed.

In the same way, when speaking of fish, they express by the same

term a single fish and a quantity of fish.

Wlien, however, they

desire to say that these fish belong to different species, a distributive

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

38

form expressino; this idea is made use of.

[bull. 40

A similar indiflereiice tothe idea of singular and plural may be observed in the pronouns ofseveral languages, and will be noted later on.

On the other hand, the idea of number may be much more strongly
emphasized than it is in the modern languages of Europe.

The dual,

as in Greek, is of common occurrence the world over; but it happens
also that a trialis and paucalis—expressions— arefor three and a few

distinguished.

CASE

What is true of number is no less true of case.

Psychologically,

the substitution of prepositional expressions for cases woidd hardly

represent a complete absence of the concept of cases.

This is rather

found in those languages in which the whole group of relations of theWhen, for instance, inChinook, we find expressions like lie her it with cut, man, woman,knife, meaning The man cut the woman with the knife, we may safely
say that the nouns themselves appear without any trace of caserelationship, merely as appositions to a number of pronouns.
It istrue that in this case a distinction is made in the pronoun between
nouns of a sentence is expressed in the verb.

subject and object, and that, in this sense, cases are found, although

not as nomuial cases, but
relation,

however,

is

still

confined

as pronominal

to thetwo forms ofobject, since the oblique cases are expressed

while

the

characteristic

of

each

expressed by adverbial elements.
relation is
like,cases.

The

case-

subject andby pronominal objects,

particular

obliquerelationis

In the same language, the genitiveeUminated by substituting for it possessive expressions,for instance, theman, his

house, instead of the

man's house.

While, therefore, case-expressions are not entirel)^ eliminated, their

number, which in some European languages is considerable, may belargely reduced.

Thus we find that some of our nominal categories either do notoccur at all, or occur only in verj much reduced forms.

On the other

hand, we must recognize that other new categories may occur which
are entirely foreign to our European languages.

those referred to before

Classifications like—such as animate and inanimate, orof nouns

designating men, and other nouns; and, further, of nouns according
to form— are rather foreign tous, although, in the connection of verb

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

and noun, form-classifications occur.

39

Thus we do not say, a tree issomewhere, but atree stands; not, the river isriver jlows throughNew YorJc.

in

New

York, but the

TENSE
Tense classes of nouns are not rare in American languages.

As we

may speak of a future husband or of our late friend, thus many Indian
languages express in every noun

its

existence in presence, past, or

future, which they require as much for clearness of expression as we

require the distinction of singular and plural.

Personal Pronouns
The same lack of conformity in the principles of classification may
be found in the pronouns.

We are accustomed to speak of three

persons of the pronoun, which occur both in the singular and in theplural.

Although we make a distinction of gender for the tliird per-son of the pronoun, we do not carry out this principle of classificationconsistently in the other persons.

The first and second persons andthe third person plural have the same form for masculine, feminine,

and neuter.

A more rigid application of the sex system is made, forinstance, in the language of the Hottentots of South Africa, in which

sex is distinguished, not only in the third person, but also in the firstand second persons.
Logically, our three persons of the pronoun are based on the twoconcepts of

self

and

not-self,

the second of whichissubdivided,

according to the needs of speech, into the two concepts of person

When, therefore, we speak of aof.
either self and person addressed,mean
logicallyfirst person plural, we
addressed and person spoken

or self and person or persons spoken of, or, finally, self, person or per-sons addressed, and person or persons spoken of.

A true first person

plural is impossible, because there can never be more than one self.

This logical laxity is avoided by many languages, in which a sharp
distinction is made between the two combinations self and person or

persons spoken

not knowto,or self

and person or persons spoken of.

I

doof any language expressing in a separate form the com-bination of the three persons, probably because this idea readily
coalesces with the idea of self

and persons spoken to.

These two

forms are generally designated by the rather inaccurate term ofBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

40"inclusive" and "exclusive first person plural,"[bull. 40

by which is meant

the first person plural, mcluding or excluding the person addressed.

The second and third persons form true plurals.
of division of theThus the principle

pronouns is carried through in many languages

more rigidl}* than we find it in the European group.

On the other hand, the lack of clear distinction between singularand plural may be observed also in the pronomiual forms of a number of languages.
tinctiononl}^

Thus the Sioux do not know any pronominal dis-

between the singular and plural of the second person, anda very imperfect distinction between the tliird person singularand plural; while the first person singular and plural, according to
the fundamental difference in their significance, are sharply distin-

guished.

In some Siouan dialects we may well say that the pro-nominal object has only a first person singular, first person plural,and a second person, and that no other pronoun for the object occurs.
Thus the system of pronouns may be reduced to a mere fragmentofwhat we are accustomed to find.

Demonstrati ve Pronouns
In many cases, the analogy of the personal pronouns and of thedemonstrative pronouns is rigid, the demonstrative pronoun having
three persons in the same way as the personal pronoun.

Thus theKwakiutl will say, the Jiouse near me (this h'v:se), the house near thee(that house), the house near him (that hourj.

But other points of view are added to the principle of division
corresponding to the personal pronoun.

Thus, the Kwakiutl, andmany other American languages, add to the pronominal concept justdiscussed that of visibility and invisibility, while the Chinook add

the concepts of present and past.

Perhaps the most exuberant

development of the demonstrative idea is found among the Eskimo,
where not only the ideas corresponding to the three personal pronouns occur, but also those of position in space in relation to the
speaker,—which are specified in seven directions; center, above,— and expressing points of the comas,

below, in front, beliind, right, left,

pass in relation to the position of the speaker.
It

must be borne in mind that the divisions wliich are mentioned

here are all necessary parts of clear expression in the languages mentioned.

For instance, in Kwakiutl it would be inconceivable to use

an expression like our tliat house, which means in English the single

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

Ihouse away from the speaJcer.

41

The Kwakiutl must express this idea

in one of the fohowing six forms:

The (singular or flural) house visible near meinvisible near me
visible near theeinvisible near theevisible near him

invisible near him

while the Eskimo would express a term like this man as

This man near menear theenear him
behind me

in front of me
to the right ofmeto the left of me

above mebelow me, etc.

Verbal Categories

We can follow out similar differences in the verb.

In our Indo-

European languages we have expressions signifying persons, tenses,
moods, and voices.

The ideas represented by these groups are quite

uiievenly developed in various languages.

In a great

many cases

the forms expressing the persons are expressed simply by a combination of the personal pronoun and the verb; while in other cases thephonetic complexes expressing personal relations are developed in

an astonishing manner.
specialThus the Algonquian and the Eskimo possess

phonetic groups expressing defmite relations between thesubject and object which occur in transitive verbs.

For example, insentences like / strike thee, or They strike me, the combination of the

pronouns I
equivalents.

—

thee,

and they— me, are expressed by special phonetic

There are even cases in which the indirect objects (as in

the sentence, I send him to you) may be expressed by a single form.

The characteristic trait of the forms here referred to is, that the
combined pronoun can not be reduced to its constituent elements,
although historically it
separate forms.

may have originated from combinations of

It is obvious that in cases in which the development

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

42[bull. 40of the pronoun is as weak as in the Siouan languages, to which I havereferred before, the definiteness of the pronominal forms of the verb,
to which we are accustomed,isentirely lost.

Thus it happens thatin the Sioux the verb alone may be used as well for the more or lessabstract idea of verbal action as for the third person of the indicative.

Much more fundamental are the existing differences in regard to
the occurrence of tenses and modes.

We are accustomed to verbal

forms in which the tense is always expressed with perfect definiteIn the sentence The

ness.

man is sick we really express the idea,

The single definite man is sick at the present time.
sion of the time relation of

languages.
will

the occurrenceThis strict expres-ismissinginmany

The Eskimo, for instance, in expressing the same idea,

simply say, single man

sick, leaving thequestion entirely open

whether the man was sick at a previous time, is sick at the present
time, orisgoing to be sick in the future.

The condition here issimilar to the one described before in relation to plurality.

The

Eskimo can, of course, express whether the man is sick at the present
time, was sick, or is going to be sick, but the grammatical form of
his sentences does

not require the expression of the tense relation.

In other cases the temporal ideas may be expressed with much greater
nicety than v/e find in our familiar grammars.
in which a multiplicity of tenses are

Generally, languages

found include in their form of

expression certain modifications of the tense concept which might becalled ''semi-temporal," like inchoatives, which express the beginningof an action; duratives, which express the extent of time during which

the action lasts; transitionals, which express the change of one stateof being into another; etc.

There is very little agreement in regard

to the occurrence of such tenses,

and the characteristics of many

languages show that tenses are not by any means required for clear
expression.

What is true of tenses is also true of modes.

The number oflanguages which get along with a single mode, or at most with theindicative and imperative, is considerable; although, in tliis case also,

the idea of subordination may be expressed if it seems desirable to

do so.

The few examples that I have given here illustrate that many of
the categories which we are inclined to consider as essential may beabsent in foreign languages, and that other categories may occur as
substitutes.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

43

Interpretation of Grammatical Categories
Wlien we consider for a moment what this imphes, it will be recognized that in each language only a part of the complete concept that

we have in mind is expressed, and that each language has a peculiar
tendency to select this or that aspect of the mental image which isconveyed by the expression of the thought. To use again the example

man is sick.

We express by thissentence, in English, the idea, a definite single

man at present sick.

which

I

mentioned before,

Tlie

In Kwakiutl this sentence would have to be rendered by an expression which would mean, in the vaguest possible form that could begiven to it, definite man near him invisible sicJc near

Mm invisible.

Visibility and nearness to the first or second person might, of course,

have been selected in our example in place of invisibility and nearness
to the third person.
thisrequire anman

An idiomatic expression of

language would, however, be

lies

expression
sicJc

on hissomewhat like the
bacTc

on

the sentence inmuch more definite, and would

the fioor

folloA\dng,Thatinvisibleof the ahsent house.

In

Eskimo, on the other hand, the same idea would be expressed by aform like (single) inah sick, leaving place and time entirely indefinite.

In Ponca, one of the Siouan dialects, the same idea would

require a decision of the question whether the man is at rest or mov-and we might have a form like the inoving single man sick.
we take into consideration further traits of idiomatic expression,
this example might be further expanded by adding modalities of the

ing,
If

verb; thus the Kwakiutl, whose language I have used several times
as an example, would require a form indicating whether this is a new

subject introduced in conversation or not; and, in case the speaker

had not seen the sick person himself, he would have to express whether
he knows by hearsay or by evidence that the person

is

sick,

or

however, better not to com-whether he has dreamed it.

It seems,

plicate our present discussion

by taking into consideration the pos-sibilities of exact expression thatof speech,

may be required in idiomatic forms

but rather to consider only those parts of the sentence

which, according to the morphology of the language, mi/s^ be expressed.

We conclude from the examples here given that in a discussion of
the characteristics of various languages different fundamental categories will be found, and that in a comparison of different languages
it willbe necessary to compare as well the phonetic characteristics

as the characteristics of the vocabulary and those of the grammaticalconcepts in order to give each language its proper place.

BUEEAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

44[bull. 40

m. CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGES
Origin of DialectsIn

many cases the determination of the genetic relationship ofperfectly simple.

Wherever we find close similaritiesin j)honetics, in vocabularies,

and in details of grammar, there canlanguages

isnot be the slightest doubt that the languages that are being studied
are varieties of the same ancestral form.

To a certain extent the differentiation of a single language into a
number of dialects is spontaneous. When communication between
peoples speaking the same tongue ceases, peculiarities of pronunciation will readily manifest themselves in one region or the other andmay become permanent. In some cases these modifications of pronunciation may gradually increase and may become so radical thatseveral quite different forms of the original language develop.

At

the same time words readily assume a new significance, and if theseparation of the people should be accompanied by a differentiationof culture, these changes may proceed at a very rapid rate.

In cases of such phonetic changes and of modifications in the significance of words, a certain degree of regularity

observed, and fortliis

may always bereason the historical relationship between

the new dialects and the older forms can always be readily established and may be compared to the modifications that take place ina series of generations of living beings.

Another form of modification may occur that is also analogous tobiological transformations.

We must recognize that the origin of

language must not be looked for in human faculties that have once

been active, but which have disappeared.

As a matter of fact, newadditions to linguistic devices and to linguistic material are constantly being made.

Such spontaneous additions to a language may

occur in one of the new dialects, while they do not occur in the other.
These, although related to the structure of the older language, will

be so entirely new in their character that they can not be directly
related to the ancestral language.
It must also be considered that each of these dialects may incor-

porate new material.
rial constitutes

Nevertheless in all cases where the older mate-

the bulk of the material of the language,its

relationship to the ancestral tongue will readily be recognized.

close

In

—
HANDBOOK OF AMEEICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

all

these cases,

phonetics, detailsof45

grammatical structure, andvocabulary will show far-reaching similarities.

Comparison of Distinct Languages
The problem becomes much more cUfficult when the similarities inWith the extension of

any of these traits become less pronounced.

our knowledge of primitive languages, it has been found that cases
are not rare in wliich languages spoken in certain continuous areas

show

radical differences in vocabulaiy

and

in

grammatical form,

but close similarity in their phonetic elements.

In other cases the

may be less pronounced, but there
may exist a close similarity in structural details. Again, many
similarity of phonetic elements

investigators have pointed out peculiar analogies in certain words

without being able to show that grammatical form and generalphonetic character coincide.

be given.

Many examples of such conditions may

In America, for instance, the phonetic similarity of thelanguages spoken between the coast of Oregon and Mount St. Eliasis quitestriking.

All these languages are characterized

by the occur-

rence of a great many peculiar Ic sounds and peculiar I sounds, andby their tendency towards great stress of articulation, and, in mostcases,

towards a clustering of consonants.

Consequently to our ear

and harsh.

Notwithstanding these

these languages sound roughsimilarities,

the grammatical forms and the vocabularies are soutterly distinct that a common origin of the languages of this area

seems entirely out of the question.

A similar example may be given

from South Africa, where the Bantu negroes, Buslimen, and Hottentots utilize some peculiar sounds which are produced by inspiration

by drawing in the breath, not by expelling it
narily called "clicks."— and which are ordi-

Notwithstanding this very peculiar common

trait in their languages, there is no similarity in grammar and hardly

any in vocabulary.

We might also give the example of the Siouan and the Iroquois
languages of North America, two stocks that have been in proximity,

and which are characterized by the occurrence of numerous nasalized vowels; or the phonetic characteristics of Calif ornian languages,

which sound to our ear euphonious, and are in strong contrast to thelanguages of the North Pacific coast.
It must be said that,on the whole, such phonetic characteristics

of a limited area appear in theirmost pronounced form when weBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

46[bull. 40

Theyform a unit rather by contrast with foreign phonetics than whencompared among themselves, each language having its own peculiar

compare the whole region with the noighborino;

characteristics in a group of this kind.

districts.

Thus, the Tlingit of theNorth Pacific coast differs veiy much from the Chinook of Columbia
Nevertheless, when both languages are compared to a lanriver.
guage of southern California, the Sioux or the Algonquian, traits
that are common to both of them appear to quite a marked degree.

What is true of phonetics is also true of grammatical form, andthis is evidently a characteristic trait of thelanguages of the whole

In North America particularly such groups of languages

world.

can be readily recognized.

A more detailed discussion of this prob-

lem will be given in another place, and it will be sufficient to state
here,that languages

and Haida

—

like,

for instance,

the Athapascan, Tlingit,— which are spoken in one continuous area on the north-west coast of our continent show certain

common characteristics

wdien compared with neighboring languages like the Eskimo, Algonquian, and Tsimshian.

In a similar way, a number of Californian

languages, or languages of southern British Columbia, and languages
like thePawnee and Iroquois, each form a group characterized bycertain traits wliich are not found in other languages.

In cases where such morphological similarities occur without acorresponding similarit}'^ of vocabulary, it becomes exceedingly difficult to determine

whether these languages

may be considered as

descendants of one parent language; and there are numerous cases
in which our judgment must be suspended, because, on the one hand,these similarities are far-reaching, while, on the other hand, such
radical differences are found that we can not account for them with-out assuming the introduction of an entirely foreign element.
Similar phenomena have recently induced P. W. Schmidt to consider the languages of Farther India and of Malaysia as related;

andthe same problem has been discussed b}^ Lepsius, and again by Meinhoff, in reference to the relation of the

to alanguages of the Hottentot

number of east African languages and to the languages of the

Hamitic peoples of North Africa.
Difficulties also

arise in cases.similar words are found without

matical forms, so that wewhere a considerable numberofa corresponding similarity of gram-may be reluctant to combine two suchlanguages, notwithstanding their similarities of vocabulary.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

liOAs]

47

The comparison of vocabularies offers peculiar difRculties in
American languages. Unfortunately, our knowledge of American
languages is very limited, and in many cases we are confined to collections of a few hundred words, without

Owing

grammatical forms.

toto

any information in regard

the strong tendency of

many

American languages to form compound words or derivatives of various
kinds, it is very difficult in vocabularies of this kind to recognize thecomponent elements of words, and often accidental similarities may
obtrude themselves which a thorough knowledge of the languages
would prove to be of no significance whatever.
Setting aside this practical difficulty,

it

may happen quite oftenthat in neighboring languages the same term is used to designate thesame object, owing, not to the relationship of the languages, but tothe fact that the word may be a loan word in several of them. Since
the vocabularies which are ordinarily collected embrace terms forobjects found in most common use, it seems most likely that among

these a number of loan words may occur.

Even when the available material is fuller and more thoroughly
analyzed, doubt may arise regarding the significance of the apparent
similarities of vocabulary.

Mutual Influences of Languages
In all these cases the final decision will depend upon the answer tothe questions in how far distinct languages may influence one another,

and

in

how far a language without being subject to foreign influ-

ences may deviate from the parental type.

Wliile it seems that thetime has hardly come when it is possible to answer these questions
in a definite manner, the evidence seems to be in favor of the existenceof far-reaching influences of this kind.

Phonetic Influences
This is perhaps most clearly evident in the case of phonetics.
isIt

hardly conceivable why languages spoken in continuous areas, andentirely distinct in vocabulary and in grammatical structure, should

partake of the same phonetic characteristics, unless, by imitation,certain phonetic traits
stock.

may be carried beyond a single linguistic

While I do not know that historical evidence of such occur-

rences has been definitely given, thephenomenonitoccurs inSouth Africa, among the Bantu and Hottentot, admitsof hardlyasBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY48

am^ other explanation.

[bull. 40

And the same is true, to a more or lesspronounced extent, among other tlistinct but neighboring languages.

The possibility of such a transfer of sounds can not be denied.
Among the American Indians, for instance where intermarriages—

between individuals belonging to different tribes are frequent; whereslave women raise their own and their masters' children; and where,

owing to the small number of individuals constituting the tribe, individuals

who have mastered several distinct languages are not by

any means rare

— ample opportunity

isgiven for one language to

Whether this explanationis adequate, is a question that remains to be decided by further hisexert its phonetic influence over another.

torical studies.^

Grcmunatical Influences
Influence of the syntax of one language upon another, and even,to a certain extent, of the morphology of one language upon another,

The study of the languages of Europe has provedby Latin upon the syntax of all
the modern European languages. We can also recognize how certainisalso probable.

clearly the deep influence exerted

syntactic forms of expression occur in neighboring languages on our

To give an instance of this kind, we find that,in the most diverse languages of the North Pacific coast, commands
American continent.

are given in the periphrastic form.

It

would he good if you did so

and so; and in many cases this periphrastic form has been substituted entirel}^ for the ordinary imperative. Thus it may well bethat groups of psj^chological concepts which are expressed by meansofgrammatical forms have developed in one language under theand it is difficult to say, if we once admit suchinfluence of another;influence,

where the limit may be to the modifications caused bysuch processes.

On the other hand, it seems exceedingly difficult to understand
why the most fundamental morphological traits of a language should
disappear under the influence of another form of thought as exhibitedin another language.

This would mean that the greater number ofgrammatical forms would disappear, and entirely new categories
develop.

It certainly

can not be denied that far-reaching modifica-

tions of this kind are possible, but it \\'ill require the most cautious

proof in every single case before their existence can be accepted.
1

See also p. 53.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

49

Cases of the introduction of new suffixes in European languages
are not by any means rare.

Thus, the ending -able of French words

has been adopted so frequently into English that the ending
has attained a certain independence, andeatable, or

itselfwe can form words likeeven get-at-ahle, in which the ending, which was originally
In a similar way the French

French, is added to an English word.

verbal ending -ir, combined mth the German infinitive ending in-eii, isused in a large number of German words as though it were apurely German ending.

I do not know, however, of any observations

which would point to a radical modification of the morphologicaltraits of alanguage through the influence of another language.

Lexicograph ie Influences
Wliilephonetic influence of distinct languages upon one

theanother and the modification of morphological traits in different
languages are still obscure, the borrowing of words is very common,and sometimes reaches

toan enormous extent.

The vocabulary

an excellent example of such extensive amalgamationof English isof the vocabularies

distinct languages,

quite

of

by which it has been attained is instructive.
Anglo - Saxon adopted

Norman conquerors,
Celtic language,

large

that

it

parts

and the manner

It is not only thatthe vocabulary

of

of

the

took over a few terms of the older

and adopted some words from the Norse invaders;

but we find also, later, introductions from Latin and Greek, whichwere introduced through the progress of the arts and sciences, andwhich filtered down from the educatedto theuneducated classes.

Furthermore, numerous terms were adopted from the less civilized
peoples with whom the English-speaking people came into contactindifferent

parts

of

Thus,

the world.

Indian-English have each adoptedathe Australian

and themany

terms,

great

nativequite a number of which have found their way into colloquial andwritten

This phenomenon is so common, andby which new words enter into a language are so

modern English.

the processes

obvious, that a

full

discussionis

not required.

Another example

that maj" be mentioned here is that of the Turkish language, which

has adopted a very large number of Arab words.

In such a transfer of the vx)cabulary of one language into another,words undergo, of course, far-reaching changes.
44877— Bull. 40, pt 1—10

4

These

may

be

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

50[bill. 40

partly due to phonetic difficulties, and consist in the adaptationof an unfamiliargroup of sounds to the familiar similar sounds
There mayby which the word has been adopted.

of the language

be assimilations by wliich the grammatical form of a word is mademore familiar forms. Furthermore, changes in the sigword are common, and new derivations may besimilar tonificance of theformed from the word after it has once become entirely familiar,
like other native words.

In this respect a number of American languages seem tohave curiously when compared with European languages.
rowing of words in Europe
object

is

first

is

particular!}'

In almostintroduced.

allcommon when

l)e-

Bor-

new

a

these cases the foreignistaken over with more or less fundamental phonetic

modifications.

Examples of this kind are the words tobacco, canoe,maize,— to take as illustration a few words borrowed

designationchocolate

American natives, on the other hand,from American languages.

much more

do not commonly adopt words in this manner, but

frequently invent descriptive words by wliich the new object is des-Thus the Tsimshian of British Columbia designate rice
ignated.
by a term meaning Jool'ing like maggots. The Kwakiutl call asteamboat jire on its hack moving on the water. The Eskimo
call

cut tobacco being blown

upon.

Words

of

this

type are inwide use; nevertheless, loan words taken from English are nothj

The terms biscuit, dollar, coffee, tea, are found in
The probable reason why descriptive words are more common in American languages than in Euroany means rare.

a great many Indian languages.

pean languages lies in the frequent occurrence of descriptive nouns.

We find, therefore, that there are two sets of phenomena whichmust be considered in the classification of languages:(1)differences

wliich can easil}" be proved to be derivetl from modifications of asingleancestral language; and(2)similarities

wliich can not bethus explained, and some of which may be due to the effects of
mixture.

Origin of

by Dissemination or by Parallel

Similarities;

Development
Beforewe proceed with

thisconsideration,

the two logical possibilities for such similarities.

we havetodiscuss

Either theymay

be due to dissemination from a common source, so that they origi-

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

51

nated only a single time, and were diffused by the influence of

one people upon another; or it

may be that they are due to anindependent origin in many parts of the world.
This alternative is present in the explanation ofall

ethnic phe-nomena, and is one of the fundamental questions in regard to which
the ethnologist, as well as the investigator of languages, must be
In the older considerations of the position of the American

clear.

race among the races of man, for instance, it has always been assiimed

phenomena among the peoples

that occurrence of similar

Old World and

the

of

New

obviousthat this method of

whereversimilarities occur,

proved geneticof therelationship.

Itproving relationship assumes

they must have been

is

that,

carried by thesame people over different parts of the world, and that therefore
they may be considered as proof of common descent. The methodthus applied does not take into consideration the possibility of a gradual diffusion of cultural elements from one people to another, andthe othermore fundamental oneofparallelabut independent

development of similar phenomena among different races in remote
Since such development

parts of the world.
ity,

proofs of genetic relationshipisa logical possibil-

must not be based on the occur-

rence of sporadic resemblances alone.

A final decision of this vexed problem can be given only by historicalevidence, whichishardly ever available, and for this reason

thesystematic treatment of the question must always proceed with thegreatest caution.

The cases in which isolated similarities of ethnic phenomena in remote parts of the world have been recorded are numerous, and manyof these are of such a character that transmission cannot be proved at
all.

If,

for instance,theIndians of South America use

musical instruments, which must notsacredbe seen by women, andifapparently the same custom prevails among the Australian aborigines,
itisinadmissible to assume the occurrence of what seems tobethe same custom in these two remote districts as due to transmission.

may have developed indeOn the other hand, there are many cases

It is perfectly intelligible that the custom

pendently in each continent.

in which certain peculiar and complex

customs are distributed overlarge continuous areas, and where transmission over large portions of
this areaisplausible.

In this case, even if independent origin hadtaken place in different parts of the district in question, the present

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

52[bdll. 40

distribution is fully explained 1)}' the assumption of extended dissemination.
It is true, for instance, in the case of similar traditions which arefound distributed over large

districts.

An example of this is thestory of two girls who noticed two stars, a bright one and a small one,and wished these stars for their husbands.

The following morningthey found themselves in the sky, married to the stars,
tried to return to the earthhole in the sky.

and later onby letting themselves down through aThis rather complex tale is found distributed over

the American continent in an area extending from Nova Scotia to themouth of the Mississippi river and westward to the Rocky m'ountains,and in places even on the Pacific ocean, for instance, in Alaska and in
It would seem difficult to assume, in a casethe state of Washington.
of this kind, the possibility of an independent invention of the tale ata number of distinct points; but it must be assumed that, after the

had once attained its present form, it spread by dissemination
over that part of the continent where it is now found.
tale

In extreme cases the conclusions drawn from these two types of explanation seem quite unassailable; but there are naturally a verylarge number of others in which the phenomenon in question is neither
sufficiently complex, nor distributed

over a sufficiently large contin-uous area, to lead with certainty to the conclusion of an origin by dissemination; and there are others where the sporadic distributions seemcuriously arranged, and where vague possibilities of contact occur.

Thus

it

happens often that a satisfactory conclusion cannot bereached.

We must also bear in mind that in many cases a continuous distribution may once have existed, but may have become discontinuous,

owing to the disappearance of the phenomena in question in intermediate regions. If, however, we want to follow a safe method, wemust not adrnit such causes for sporadic distribution, unless they canbe definitely proved by other evidence; otherwise, the way is open toattempts to bring into contact practically every part of the world withall others.

The general occurrence of similar ethnic phenomenainremoteparts of the world admits also of the explanation of the existence

number of customs and habits that were common tolarge parts of mankind at a very early period, and which have mainIt cantained themselves here and there up to the present time.
of a certain

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

53

not be denied that this point of view has certain elements in its favor;

but in the present state of our knowledge we can hardly say that it

would be possible to prove or to disprove it.

We meet the same fundamental problem in connection with similarities of languages which are

too vague to be considered as proofs

That these exist is obvious.

of genetic relationship.

Here we have

not only the common characteristics of all human language, whichhave been discussed in the preceding chapter, but also certain othersimilarities whichmust here be considered.

Influence of Environment on LanguageIt

has often been suggested that similarities of neighboring lan-

guages and customs may be explained by the influence of environ-

The leading thought in this theory is, that the human mind,

ment.

under the stress of similar conditions, will produce the same results;
that consequently, if the members of the same race live in the same

surroundings, they will produce, for instance, in their articulate speech,
the same kind of phonetics, differing perhaps in detail according to
the variations of environment, but the same in their essential traits.

Thus it has been claimed that the moist and stormy climate of theNorth Pacific coast caused a chronic catarrhal condition among the
inhabitants, and that to this condition is due the guttural pronunciation, and harshness of their languages;

while, on the other hand, themildness of the California climate has been made responsible for the

euphonious character of the languages of that district.
I

do not believe that detailed investigations in any part of theworld would sustain this theory.

We might demand proof that thesame language, when distributed over different climates, should produce the same kind of modifications as those here exemplified; andwe might further demand that, wherever similar climates are found,at least a certain approach to similarity in the phonetics of the lan-

guages should occur.
case,

It

would be difficult to prove that this is theeven if we should admit the excuse that modifying influences

have obscured the original similarity of phonetic character.
for instance, the arctic people of the Old

Taking,and New Worlds as a unit,

we find fundamentally different traits in the phonetics of the Eskimo,of theChukchee of eastern Siberia, and of other arctic Asiatic andEuropean peoples.

The phonetics of the deserts of Asia and SouthBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

54[bull. 40

Africa and of southwestern North America are not by any means the

The prairie tribes of North America, although hving innearly the same climate, over a considerable area, show remarkable
same.

on the other

differences in the phonetics of their languages; and,hand, the tribes belonging to the Salish family who live east of the

Rocky mountains, in the interior of British Columbia, speak a language that is not less harsh than that of their congeners on the northern coast of the state of Washington.

In any attempt at arranging

phonetics in accordance with climate, the discrepancies would be so

numerous, that an attempt to carry out the theory would lead to thenecessity of explaining exceptions rather than examples corroborat-

ing its correctness.

What is true in regard to phonetics is no less true in regard to morphology and vocabulary.

I

do not think thatit

has ever })een

claimed that similar words must necessarily originate under the stress

we admit the correctness of theprinciple, there is no reason for making an exception in regard to theof the same conditions, although,ifvocabulary.
I think this theory can be sustained
guistics than in the field of ethnology.

even less in the field oflin-

It is certainly true that eachpeople accommodates itself to a certain extent to its surroundings,

and that it even may make the best possible use of its surroundingsin accordance with the fundamental traits of its culture, but I do notbelieve that in any single case it will be possible to explain the cultureof a people as due to the influence of its surroundings.

dent that the Eskimoof

It is self-evi-

northern arctic America do notmakeextended use of wood, a substance which is very rare in those partsof the world, and that the Indians of the woodlands of Brazil are notfamiliar with the uses to which snow may be put.
further,

We may even go

and acknowledge that, after the usefulness of certain sub-stances, plants, and animals—

like bamboo in the tropics, or the cedaron the North Pacific coast of America, or ivory in the arctic regions, orthe buffalo on the plains of North America—has once been recognized,

they will find the most extended use, and that numerous inventions
will be made to expand their usefulness.

We may also recognize thatthe distribution of the produce of a country, the difficulties and easeof travel, the necessity of reaching certain points,

may deeply influ-

But with all this, to geographicalconditions cannot be ascribed more than a modifying influence uponence the habits of the people.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

the fundamental traits of culture.

If this were not true, the55
peculiarfacts of distribution of inventions, of beliefs, of habits, and of otherethnological phenomena, would be unintelligible.

For instance, the use of the underground house is distributed, in

America and Asia, over the northern parts of the plateaus to parts of
the Great Plains, northward into the arctic region; and crossing

Bering strait we finditin use along the Pacific coast of Asia andas far south as northern Japan, not tospeak of the subterranean

dwellings of Europe and North Africa.

The climate of this district

shows very considerable

differences,and the climatic necessity forunderground habitations does not exist by any means in many partsof the area where they occur.

In a similar area we find the custom of increasing the elasticity ofthebow by overlaying it with sinew.

Wliile this procedure may bequite necessary in the arctic regions, where no elastic wood is availit is certainly not necessary in the more southern parts of the
Rocky mountains, or along the east coast of Asia, w^here a great manyvarieties of strong elastic wood are available.
Nevertheless the use-able,

fulness of the invention seems to have led to its general application

over an extended district.

We might also give numerous examples which would illustratethat the adaptation of a people to their surroundings is not by anymeans perfect.

How, for instance, can we explain the fact that theEskimo, notwithstanding their inventiveness, have never thoughtof domesticating the

caribou, while the

Chukchee have acquired

Why, on the other hand, should the Chukchee,
who are compelled to travel about with their reindeer-herds, use alarge reindeer-herds?

tent which is so cumbersome that a train of many sledges is required
to move it, while the Eskimo have reduced the frame of their tents
to such a degree that a single sledge

can be used for conveying

itfrom place to place?
Other examples of a similar kind are the difference in the habitations of the arctic Athapascan tribes and those of the Eskimo.

Not-withstanding the rigor of the climate, the former live in light skintents, while theEskimo have succeeded in protecting themselves

efficiently against the gales and the snows of winter.

What actually seems to take place in the movements of peoples
is,that a people

who settle in a new environment will first of all
and only modify them as much as is abso-cling to their old habits

BUREAU OF AMERICAiSr ETHNOLOGY

66[bull. 40

lutely necessary in order to live fairly comfortably, the comfort ofbeing generally of secondary importance to

life

tlie

inertia or con-servatism which prevents a people from changing their settled habits,that have become customary to sucli an extent that they are moreor less automatic, andthat a change would be

felt

as

somethingdecidedly unusual.

Even when a people remain located in the same place, it would
seem that historical influences are much stronger than geographical
I am inclined, for instance, to explain in this manner the
influences.
differences

between the cultures of the tribes of arctic Asia and ofarctic America, and the difference in the habits of the tribes of thesouthern plateaus of North America when compared with those of
the northern plateaus of North America.

the influence of the Pueblos has

In the southern regions

made itself felt, while farther tothe north the simpler culture of the Mackenzie basin gives theessential tone to the culture of the people.

While fully acknowledging the importanceof geographical con-ditions upon life, I do not believe that they can be given a placeat all comparable to that of culture as handed down, and to thatof the historical influence exerted by the cultures of surrounding
tribes;anditseems likely that the less direct the influence of thesurroundings is, the less also can it be used for accounting for peculiar
ethnological traits.

So far as language is concerned, the influence of geographical surroundings and of climate seems to be exceedingly remote; and aslong as we are not even able to prove that tlie whole organism ofman, and withitthe articulating organs, are directly influenced

by geographical environment, I do not think we are justified in considering this element as an essential trait in the formation or modification of human speech, much less as a cause which can be used
to account for the similarities of human speech in neighboring areas.

Influence of Common Psychic Traits
Equally uncertain seems to be the resort to the assumption of peculiar

psychic traits that are common to geographical divisions of thesame race.

It may be claimed, for instance, that the languages of

the Athapascin, Tlingit, and Haida, which were referred to before
as similar in certain fundamental morphological traits, are alike,HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

57

for the reason that these three peoples have certain psychical traits

in common which are not shared in by other American tribes.

seems certainly admissible to assume slight differences in theIt

psychical make-up among groups of a race which are different in re-gard to their physical type.
ical

If we can prove by means ofinvestigations that the bodily form,

anatom-and with it the nervous

system and the brain of one part of a race show differences fromthe analogous traits of another part of the race, it seems justifiable
to conclude that the physical differentiation

by psychic differences.

It

must, however, be borne in mind thatthe extent of physical difference
that, witliin

may be accompaniedisalways exceedingly slight, andthe limits of each geographical type, variations

arefound which are great as compared to the total differences between
the averages of the types.

To use a diagram:

I

c'

(t'

If a represents the middle point of
a'

I

I

b'

one type and h and c its extremes,

the average of another type and

V and c' its extremes, and if

these types are so placed, one over the other, that types in the second
seriescorrespond to those in the first series vertically over them,then

it willbe seen that the bulk of the population of the two

types will very well coincide, while only the extremes will be more

frequent in the one group than in the other.
physical differenceisThat is to say, thenot a difference in kind, but a difference

more or less in degree, and a considerable overlapping of the types
necessarily takes place.
If this is true inregard to the physical type, and if, furthermore,

the difference in psychical types is inferred only from the observed
differences of the physical types, then we must assume that the samekind of overlapping will take place in the psycliical types.
differences withslight, and it

The

which we are dealing can, therefore, be only very

seems hardly likely that theseslight differences could

lead to radically diverse results.

As a matter of fact, the proof which has been given before,* thatthe same languages may be spoken by entirely distinct types, shows
clearly how slight the effect of difference in anatomical type1

See p. 9.

upon

BUREAU OP AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

58[bull. 40

language is at the present time, and there is no reason to presume
that

has ever been greater.

itMewing the matter from this stand-point, the hereditary mental differences of various groups ofman-kind, particularly within the same race, seem to be so slight that it

would be very difficult to believe thatthe}" account in any way forthe fundamental differences in the traits of distinct languages.

Uncertainty of Definition of Linguistic Families

The problem thus remains unsolved how to intcrj)ret the similarities of distinct languages in cases where the similarities are no longer

sufficient to prove genetic relationship.

From what has been said we

may conclude that, even in languages wliich can easily be provetl tobe genetically related, independent elements ma}^ be found in various divisions.

Such independent elements may be due partly to newtendencies which develop in one or the other of the dialects, or toforeign influence.

It is quite conceivable thatsuch new tendencies

and foreign influences may attain such importance that the new
language ma)^ still be considered as historically related to the ancestral family, but that its deviations, due to elements that are not foundin the ancestral language,

have become so important that it can nolonger be considered as a branch of the older famil}^.

Thus it will be seen that the concept of a linguistic family can notthat evenbe sharply defuied;among the dialects of one linguistic

family, more or less foreign material may be present, and that in thissense the languages, as has been pointed out by Paul,' are not, in thestrict sense of the term,

descendants of a single ancestral family.

Thus the whole problem of the final classification of languages inlinguistic families that are without doubt related, seems destined toremain open until our knowledge of the processes by which distinct
languages are developed shall have become much more thoroughthan it is at the present time.

Under these circumstances we must

confine ourselves to classifying American languages in those linguistic
families for which we can give a proof of relationship that can notpossibly be challenged.

Beyond this point we can do no more thangive certain definite classifications in which the traits

common tocertain groups of languages are pointed out, while the decision as tothe significance of these common traits must be
1

Paul, Principien der Sprachgeschlchte.

left to later times.

handbook of AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

boas]

IV.

59

LINGUISTICS AND ETHNOLOGY

It seems desirable to say a few words on the function of linguistic

researches in the study of the ethnography of the Indians.

Practical

Need of Linguistic Studies

for Ethnological

Purposes
First ofconsidered.
is notall,the purely practical aspect of

tliis

question may be

Ordinarily, the investigator who visits an Indian tribe

able to converse with the natives themselves and to obtain his

information first-hand, but he is obliged to rely more or less on datatransmitted by interpreters, or at least by the help of interpreters.

He may ask liis question through an interpreter, and receive again
through his mouth theanswer

given

by

the

Indians.

Itisobvious that this is an unsatisfactory method, even when the interpreters are good; but, as a rule, the available

men are either not

sufficiently familiar with the English language, or they are so entirelyout of sympathy with the Indian point of view, and understand theneed of accuracy on the part of the investigator so little, that infor-

mation furnished by them can be used only with a considerable
degree of caution.

At the present time it is possible to get along inmany parts of America without interpreters, by means of the tradejargons that have developed everywhere in the intercourse between
the wliites and the Indians.

These, however, are also a very unsatis-

factoiy means of inquiring into the customs of the natives, because,insome cases, the vocabulary" of the trade-languages is extremely

limited,and it is almost impossible to convey information relating

to the religious

and philosopliic ideas or to the higher aspects ofnative art,of wliicli play soallimportant a part in Indianlife.

Another difficulty which often develops whenever the investigator
works with a particularly intelligent interpreter is, that the interpreter imbibes too reacUl}^ the views of the investigator, and that his

information, for this reason, is strongly biased, because he is not sowell able to withstand the influence of formative theories as thetrained investigator ought to be.

xVn^^one who has carried on workwith intelligent Indians will recall instances of tliis kind, where theinterpreter

may have formulated a theoiy based on the questions

that have been put through liim,

and has interpreted his answers

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY60[bcll. 40

under the guidance of his preconceived notions.

All this is so ob-vious that it hardly requires a full discussion.

Our needs become

particularly apparent when we compare the methods that we expectfrom any investigator of cultures of the Old World with those of the
Nobody would expect
ethnologist who is studying primitive tribes.
authoritative accounts of the civilization of China or of Japan from aman who does not speak the languages rea(hly, and who has notmastered their literatures.

The student of antiquity is expected tohave a thorough mastery of the ancient languages.

A student ofMohammedan life in Arabia or Turkey would hardly be considereda serious investigator if all liis knowledge had to be derived fromThe ethnologist, on the other hand, under-

second-hand accounts.

takes in the majority of cases to elucidate the innermost thoughts

and feelings of a people without so much as a smattering of knowledgeof their language.

It is true that the American ethnologist is confronted with a serious

practical difficulty, for, in the present state ofAmericansociety,

by far the greater number of customs and practices have gone outof existence, and the investigator is compelled to reh' upon accountsof customs of former times recorded from the mouths of the old gen-

when young,eration who,

stilltook part in these performances.

Added to tliis he is confronted with the difficulty that the number oftrained investigators

isvery small, and the number of American

languages that are mutually unintelligible exceedingly large, probably
exceeding three hundred in number.

Our investigating etlmologists

are also denied opportunity to spend long continuous periods withany particular tribe, so that the practical difficulties in the way ofacquiring languages are almost insuperable.
insist that a

Nevertheless, we must

command of the language is an indispensable means ofobtaining accurate and thorough knowledge, because much information can be gained by listening to conversations of the natives andby taking part in their daily life, which, to the observer w^ho has nocommand of the language, will remain entirely inaccessible.
It must be admitted thattions, entirely

tliis

beyond our reach.

ideal

aim is, under present condi-Ithowever, quite possible foris,the ethnographer to obtain a theoretical knowledge of native lan-

guages that will enable liim to collect at least part of the informationthat could be best obtained by a practical knowledge of the language.

Fortunately, the Indian is easily misled, by the ability of the observer

HANDBOOK OF AMEEICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

61

to read his language, into thinking that he is also able to understandwhat he reads.

Thus, in taking down tales or other records in thenative language, and reading them to the Indians, the Indian always
believes that the reader also understands what he pronounces, because
it is quite inconceivable tohim that a person can freely utter the sen-tences in his language without clearly grasping their meaning.

Thisfact facilitates the initial stages of ethnographic information in thenative languages, because, on the whole, the northern Indians are

eager to be put on record in regard to questions that are of supremeinterest to them.

If the observer is capable of grasping by a rapid

analysis the significance of what is dictated to liim, even without being

able to express himself freely in the native language, he is in a position
to obtain much information that otherwise would be entirely unobtainable.

Although

thiswholl}'^

isa makeshift,

still

it

puts theobserver in an infinitely better position than that in which he would

be without any knowledge whatever of the language.
all,First ofhe can get the information from the Indians first-hand, without

employing an interpreter, who may mislead him.

Furthermore, therange of subjects on which he can get information is considerablyincreased, because the limitations of the linguistic knowledge of theinterpreter,or

those ofthetrade -language, are eliminated.

Itwould seem, therefore, that under present conditions we are more or
lesscompelled to rely upon an extended series of texts as the safest

means of obtaining information from the Indians.

A general review

of our ethnograpliic literature shows clearly how much better is theinformation obtained by observers who have command of the language, and who are on terms of intimate friendship with the natives,

than that obtained through the medium of interpreters.

The best material we possess is perhaps contained in the naifve outpourings of the Eskimo, which they \vrite and print themselves, anddistribute as a newspaper, intended to inform the people of all theevents that are of interest.
ical

These used to contain much mytholog-

matter and much that related to the mode of life of the people.

Other material of similar character is furnished by the large text
collections of the Ponca, pubhshed by the late James Owen Dorsey;

althoughmany of these are influenced by the changed

under which the people now live.

conditions

Some older records on the Iroquois, ^vritten b}- prominent members of the tribe, also deserve attention; and among the most recent literature the descriptions of theBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

02[bull. 40

Sauk and Fox by Dr. William Jones arc remarkable cm account of thethorougli understanding that the author lias reached, oAnng to hismastery of the language.

Similar in character, although renderedentirely in English, are the observations of ^fr.

James Teit on theThompson Indians.
In some cases it has been possible to interest educated natives inthe study of their own tribes and to induce
their own language their observations.

them to Amte down in

These, also, are much superior

to English records, in wliicli the natives are generally hampered by

the lack of mastery of the foreign language.
"WTiile in allthese cases a collector thoroughly familiar with theIndian language and with English might give us the results of liis
studies without using the native language in his publications, this isquite indispensable when we try to investigate the deeper problemsof ethnology.

A few examples A^ill show clearly what is meant.

When the question arises, for instance, of investigating the poetry of
the Indians, no translation can possi])ly be considered as an adequate
substitute for the original.

language,

The form of rhythm, the treatment of thethe adjustment of text to music, the imagery, the useof metaphors, and all the numerous problems involved in any thoroughinvestigation of the style of poetr}^, can be interpreted only by theinvestigator who has ec^ual command of the etlmograpliical traits ofthe tribe and of their language.

The same is true in the investigationof rituals, A\4th their set, more or less poetic phrases, or in the investiga-

tion of praj^ers and incantations.
ject thathas received

The orator)^ of the Indians, a sub-much attention by ethnologists, is not ade-c^uately known, because onl}^ a very few speeches have been handed

down in the original.

Here, also, an accurate investigation of themethod of composition and of the devices used to reach oratoricaleffect, requires the preservation of speeches as rendered in the original

language.

There are also numerous other features of the life of the Indians

which can not be adecjuately presented without hnguistic investigation.

To these belong, for instance, the discussion of personal, tribal, andlocal names.
The translations of Indian names which are popularly
known like Sitting-Bull, Afraid-Of-His-Horse, etc. indicate thatnames possess a deeper significance. The translations, however, are——

BO difficult that a thorough linguistic knowledge is required in order
to explain the significance adequately.

HANDBOOK OF AMEKICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

63

In all the subjects mentioned heretofore, a knowledge of Indian
languages serves as an important adjunct to a full understanding of
the customs and beliefs of the people whom we are studying.
in all these cases the service which

practical one

But

language lends us is first of all a— a means to a clearer understanding of ethnologicalphenomena which in themselves have nothing to do with linguistic
problems.

Theoretical Importance of Linguistic Studies

Language a Part of Etlinological I^Jtenomena in Gerieral
It seems, however, that a theoretical study of Indian languages is

not less important than a practical knowledge of them that the purely;

part and parcel of athorough investigationof the ps3T'hology of the peoples of the world.

If ethnology is under-

linguistic

inquiryisstood as the science dealing with the mental phenomena of the hfe of
the peoples of the world, human language, one of the most important

manifestations of mental life, would seem to belong naturally to thefield of work of ethnology, unless special reasons can beit should not be so considered.

adduced why

It is true that a practical reason of tliis

kind exists, namely, the specialization which has taken place in themethods of philological research, which has progressed to such an
extent that pliilology and comparative linguistics are sciences which
require the utmost attention, and do not allow the student to devote

much of his time to other fields that require different methods ofstudy.

This, however, is no reason for believing that the results oflinguistic inquiry are unimportant to the ethnologist.
fields of ethnological investigation
lessspecialized,

and which require

peculiar specialization.

This

is

There are otherwhich have come to be more orfor their successful

true, for instance, of thetreatment

study ofprimitive music, of primitive art, and, to a certain extent, of primitivelaw.

Nevertheless, these subjects continue to form an importantpart of ethnological science.
If

the phenomena of human speech seem to form in a way a sub-ject by itself, thisisperhaps largely due to the fact that the laws oflanguage remain entirely unknown to the speakers, that linguistic

phenomena never rise into the consciousness of primitive man, whileallother ethnological phenomena are more or less clearly subjects ofconscious thought.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY64[blll. 40

The question of the relation of hnguistic phenomena to ethnologicalphenomena,

in

the

narrower sense of the term, deserves,

therefore, special discussion.

Lau(fua<fe and Thomfht
First of all, it may be well to discuss the relation between language

and thought.

It has been claimed that the conciseness and clearnessof thought of a people depend to a great extent upon their language.

The ease with which in our modern European languages we express
wide abstract ideas by a single term, and the facility with which
wide generalizations are cast into the frame of a simple sentence, havebeen claimed to be one of the fundamental conditions of the clearnessof our concepts, the logical force of our thought, and the precision withwhich we eliminate in our thoughts irrelevant details.

Apparently thisview has much in its favor.

Wlien we compare modern English withsome of those Indian languages which are most concrete in their formacontrast

tive expression, theis the organ of sight, the Indian

may have tosion the eye, but

striking.
When we say TJie eye
may not be able to form the expres-isdefine that the eyeof aperson or

Neither may the IncUau be able to generalizeof an animal is meant.

readily the abstract idea of an eye as the representative of the wholeclass of objects,
this eye here.

but

may have to specialize by an expression like

Neither may he be able to express by a single term

the idea of organ, but
likemay haveto specify

itby an expression

instrument of seeing, so that the whole sentence might assume

a form like An indefinite person^ s eye is his means of seeing.
will

Still, it

be recognized that in this more specific form the general idea

may be well expressed.

It

seems very questionable in how far the

restriction of the use of certain grammatical forms can really be con-ceived as a hindrance in the formulation of generalized ideas.

It

seems much more likely that the lack of these forms is due to thelack of their need.

Primitive man, when conversing with his fellow-man, is not in the habit of discussing abstract ideas.
center around the occupations of his daily

life;

His interests

and where

philo-

sophic problems are touched upon, they appear either in relation todefinite individuals or in the more or less anthropomorphic forms of

religious beliefs.

Discourses on qualities without connection withthe object to which the qualities belong, or of activities or states

disconnected from the idea of the actor or the subject being in a

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

65

Thus the Indiancertain state, will hardly occur in primitive speech.

although he may very well speak
He will not speak of a state of bliss
apart from the person who is in such a state. He will not refer towill not speak of goodness as such,of the goodness of a person.

the power of seeing without designating an individual who has such

Thus it happens that in languages in which the idea of possession is expressed by elements subordinated to nouns, all abstract
power.

terms appear always with possessive elements.
fectly conceivablethatan Indian trained

It

is,

how^ever, per-in philosophic

thought

would proceed to free the underlying nominal forms from the possessive elements,

and thus reach abstract forms strictly correspond-

ing to the abstract forms of ourmodern languages.

I

have madewith the Kwakiutl language of Van-

this experiment, for instance,

couver Island, in which no abstract term ever occurs without
possessive elements.

its

After some discussion, I found it perfectly easy

to develop the idea of the abstract

term in the mind of the Indian,

who will state that the word without a possessive pronoun gives asense, although it is not used idiomatically.

in this manner, in isolating the terms

I succeeded, for instance,

for love and pity, which ordi-

narily occur only in possessive forms, like his love for him or 7ny pityThat this view is correct may also be observed in languages

for you.

in which possessive elements appear as independent forms, as, forinstance, in the Siouan languages.

In these, pure abstract terms

are 'quite common.

There is also evidence that other specializing elements, which are

may be dispensed withso characteristic of many Indian languages,

when, for one reason or another, it seems desirable to generalize aterm.

To use the example of the Kwakiutl language, the idea tohe seatedisalmost always expressed

expressing the place in which a person
floor of the

or

an

with
is

inseparable

suffixseated, as seated on thehouse, on the ground, on the heach, on a pile of things,

on a round thing,etc.

dea of the state of sittingused which expresses

some reason, thebe emphasized, a form may be

When, however,istosimply being in aforsittingcase, also, the device for generalized expressionisposture.

In thispresent, but theopportunity for its application arises seldom, or perhaps never.

I

think what is true in these cases is true of the structure of every single language.

The fact that generalized forms of expression are not44877—Bull. 40, pt 1—10

5

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

66

used does not proveinal)ility to[bull. 40

form them, but it merely provesthat the mode of Hfe of the people is such that they are not required;that they would, however, develop just as soon as needed.

This point of view is also corroborated by a study of the numeral

systems of primitive languages.
exist in

As is well known, many languages

which the numerals do not exceed two or

been inferred fromthis that the people

has

It

three.

speaking these languages

are not capable of forming the concept of higher numbers.

I

think

this interpretation of the existing conditions is quite erroneous.

Peo-

ple like theSouth American Indians (among whom these defective

numeral systems are found), or like the Eskimo (whoso old system of
numbers probably did not exceed ten), are presumably not in need ofmany objects
On the other hand, just as soon as thesehigher numerical expressions, because there arc notthat they have to count.

same people find themselves in contact with civilization, and when
they acquire standards of value that have to be counted, they adopt
with perfect ease higher numerals from other languages and develop
a more or less perfect system of counting.

This does not mean thatever}' individual who in the course of his life

has never made use ofhigher numerals would acquire more complex systems readily, but
the tribe as a whole seems always to be capable of adjusting itself tothe needs of counting.

It must be borne in mind that counting does

not become necessary until objects are considered in such generalized

form that their individualities are entirely lost sight of.

For thisreason it is possible that even a person who has a flock of domesticated animals may know them by name and by their characteristics

without ever desiring to count them.

Members of a war expedition

may be known by name and may not be counted.
is no proof that the lack of the use of numerals is in

In short, there

any wa}' con-nected with the inability to form the concepts of higher numbers.

we want to form a correct judgment of the influence that language exerts over thought, we ought to bear in mind that our EuroIfpean languages as found at the present time have been moulded to agreat extent by the abstract thought of philosophers.
essence and existence, many ofTerms likewhich are now commonly used, areby origin artificial devices for expressing the results of abstract
thought. In this they would resemble the artificial, unidiomatic
abstract terms that may be formed in primitive languages.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

67

Thus it would seem that the obstacles to generalized thought inherent in the form of a language are of minor importance only, and that
presumably the language alone v.^ould not prevent a people fromadvancing to more generalized forms of thinking if the general stateof their culture should require expression of such thought; that underthese conditions the language would be moulded rather by the culturalstate.

tion

It does not seem likely, therefore, that there is any direct rela-

between the culture of a tribe and the language they speak,

except in so far as the form of the language will be moulded by thestate of culture, but not in so far as a certain state of cultureisconditioned by morphological traits of the language.

Unconscious Character of Linguist Ic Phenomena
Of. greater positive importance is the question of the relation of theunconscious character of linguistic phenomena to the more conscious
ethnological phenomena.

It seems to

my mind that this contrast is

only apparent, and that the very fact of the unconsciousness of linguistic processes helps us to gain a clearer understanding of the ethnological phenomena, a point the importance of which can not be under-

rated.

It

has been mentioned before that in all languages certainclassifications of concepts occur.

To mention only a few: we findobjects classified according to sex, or as animate and inanimate, or

according to form.

and place, etc.

We find actions determined according to time

The behavior of primitive man makes it perfectly clearthat all these concepts, although they are in constant use, have neverrisen into consciousness,and that consequently their origin must besought, not in rational, but in entirely unconscious, we may perhaps

say instinctive, processes of the mind.

They must be due to a group-

ing of sense-impressions and of concepts which is not in any sense of

the term voluntary, but which develops from quite different psychological causes.

It wouldseem that the essential difference between lin-

guistic phenomena and other ethnological phenomena is, that the linguistic classifications never rise into consciousness, while in otherethnologicalphenomena, although the same unconscious origin pre-vails, these often rise into consciousness, and thus give rise to secondary

reasoning and to re-interpretations.

Itwould, for instance, seemvery plausible that the fundamental religious notions— like the idea ofthe voluntary power of inanimate objects, or of the anthropomorphic

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

68[bull. 40

character of animals, or of the existence of powers that are superior tothe mental and phj'sical powers ofman — are in their origin just as

little conscious as are the fundamental ideas of language.

Wliile, how-ever, the use of language is so automatic that the opportunity neverarisesthisforthe fundamental notions to emerge into consciousness,happens very frequently in all phenomena relating to religion.

It would seem that there is no tribe in the world in which the religious

activities have not come togious activities

While the reli-

be a subject of thought.

may have been performed before the reason for per-forming them had become a subject of thought, they attained at an
early time such importance that man asked himself the reason why

he performed these actions.

With this moment speculation in regard

to religous activities arose, and the whole series of secondary explanations which form so vast a field of ethnological phenomena came into

existence.
It is difficult to give a definite proof of theunconscious origin ofethnic phenomena, because so many of them are, or have come to be,

The best evidence that can be given for theirunconscious origin must be taken from our own experience, and I think
it is not difficult to show that certain groups of our activities, whatsubjects of thought.

ever the history of their earlier development may have been, develop
at present in each individual and in the whole people entirely sub-consciously, and nevertheless are most potent in the formation of our opin-

ions and actions.

Simple examples of this kind are actions which we

consider as proper and improper, and which may be found in great

numbers in what we call good manners.

Thus table manners, whichon the whole are impressed vigorously upon the child while it
still young,have a very fixed form.

isSmacking of the lips and bringing

the plate up to the mouth would not be tolerated, although no esthetic
or other reason could be given for their rigid exclusion; andinsti-uctive to know that among a tribe like theitisOmaha it is considered

as bad taste, when invited to eat, not to smack one's lips, because
this is a sign of appreciation of the meal.

I thinkit

vnW readily berecognized that the simple fact that these habits are customary, whileothers are not, is sufficient reason for eliminating those acts that are

not customary, and that the idea of propriety simply arises from thecontinuity and automatic repetition ofthese acts, whichbringsabout the notion that manners contrary to custom are unusual, andHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

therefore not the proper manners.

It69

may be observed in thisconnection that bad manners are always accompanied by rather
intense feehngs of displeasure, the psychological reason for which canbe fovmd only in the fact that the actions in question are contrary to
those which have become habitual.
table

mannersItisfairly evident that inourstrong feeling of propriety is associated withthis

the familiar modes of eating.
the proper

Wlien a new kind of food is presented,
manner of eating which is not known, practically any

habit that is not in absolute conflict with the common habits may
readily establish itself.

The example of table manners gives also a fairly good instanceof secondary explanation.

Itisnot customary to bring the knife

to the mouth, and very readily the feeling arises, that the knife is not

used in this manner because in eating thus one would easily cut the
lips.

in

The lateness of the invention of the fork, and the fact thatmany countries dull knives are used and that a similar danger

exists of pricking the tongue or the lips with the sharp-pointed steel

fork which is commonly used in Europe, show readily that this expla-

nation is only a secondary rationalistic attempt to explain a custom
that otherwise would remain unexplained.
If we are toitdraw a parallel to linguistic phenomena in this case,would appear that the grouping of a number of unrelated actionsin

one group, for the reason that they cause a feeling of disgust,isbrought about without any reasoning, and

still

sets

off

these

actions clearly and definitely in a group by themselves.

On account of the importance of this question, it seems desirable
to give another example,

and one that seems

seated than the one given before.
the group of acts whichverylittletobe more deeply

A case of this kind is presented in

we characterize

as modest.

It requires

thought to see that, while the feelings of modesty are

fundamental, the particular acts which are considered modest or

immodest show immense variation, and are determined entirely
by habits that develop unconsciously so far as their relation tomodesty is concerned, and which

may have their ultimate origin

in causes of an entirely difi^erent character.
ofA study of the history

costume proves at once that at different times and in different

parts of the worldparts of the body.

ithas been considered immodest to bare certain

What parts of the body these are, is to a great

BUREAU OP AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY70

extent a matter of accident.

(bill. 40

Even at the present time, and withina rather narrow range, great variations in this resj)ect may l)e found.

Examples are the use of the veil in Turkey, the more or less rigid
use of the glove in our own society, and the difference between street
costume and evening dress.

A lady in full evening dress in a street-car, during the daytime, would hardly appear in place.

We all are at once conscious of the intensity of these feelings ofmodesty, and of the extreme repugnance of the individual to any act
that goes counter to the customary concepts of modesty.

In anumber of cases the origin of a costume can readily be traced, andin its development no considerations of modesty exert an}' influence.
Jt is therefore

evident

that in this respectthegrouping-togetherof certain customs again develops entirely unconsciously, but that,nevertheless, they stand out as a group set apart from others withgreat clearness as soon as our attention is directed toward the feelings of modesty.

To draw a parallel again between this ethnological phenomenon
and linguistic phenomena, it would seem that the common featureof both is the grouping-together of a considerable number of activities

under the form of a single idea, without the necessity of thisThe difference, again, would

idea itself entering into consciousness.
lie

in the fact that the idea of modestyiseasily isolated

from otherconcepts, and that then secondary explanations are given ofisconsidered modest and what not.

I believe

whatthat the unconscious

formation oi these categories is one of the fundamental traits of ethnic
life,

and that it even manifests itself in many of its more complex

aspects; that many of our religious views and activities, of our ethical concepts,

and even our scientific views, which are apparently

based entirely on conscious reasoning, are affected by this tendency
of distinct activities to associate themselves

strong emotions.

It

under the influence ofhas been recognized before that this is one of

the fundamental causes of error and of the diversity of opinion.
It

seems necessary to dwell upon the analogy of ethnology andlanguage in this respect, because,

if

we adopt this point of view,

language seems to be one of the most instructive fields of inquiry in

an investigation of the formation of the fundamental ethnic ideas.

The great advantage that linguistics offer in this respect is the fact
that,on the whole, the categories which are formed always remain

HANDBOOK OP AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

71

unconscious, and that for this reason the processes which lead totheir formation

can be followed without the misleading andturbing factors of secondary explanations, which are so
ethnology, so

dis-common inmuch so that they generally obscure the real history

development of ideas entirely.

of theCases are rare in which a people have begun to speculate about

and these speculations are almost always soby the faulty reasoning that has led to secondary

linguistic categories,

clearly affected

explanations, that they are readily recognized as such, and can notdisturb the clear view of the history of linguistic processes.

In

America we find this tendency, for instance, among the Pawnee, who

seem to have been led to several of their religious opinions by linIncidentally

similarities.

guisticsuch cases occur also in otherlanguages, as, for instance, in Chinook mythology, where the Culture

Hero discovers a man in a canoe who obtains fish by dancing, andtells him that he must not do so, but must catch fish with the net,a tale which is entirely based on the identity of the two words for
These are cases which sliow thatdancing, and catching with a net.

Max Miiller's theory of the influence of etymology upon religious
some of theconcepts explains

religious

phenomena, although,ofcourse, it can be held to account for only a very small portion.

Judging the importance of linguistic studies from
view,

it

this

point ofseems well worth while to subject the whole range of lin-

guistic concepts to a searching analysis, and to seek in the peculiaritiesof thegrouping of ideas in different languages an importantcharacteristic in the history of the mental development of the various

From this point of view, the occurrence ofbranches of mankind.

the most fundamental grammatical concepts in

be considered as proof of the unity ofTheprocesses.

can languages
singlecharacteristic

willlinguistic

alllanguages must

fundamental psychologicalgroupings ofconcepts

inAmeri-

be treated more fully in the discussion of theThestocks.

ethnologicalsignificanceof thesestudies lies in the clear definition of the groupings of ideas which arebrought out by the objective study of language.

There

is

attention.

still

another

When wewhole, in words; andtheoreticalaspectthat deserves special

we think, on the
known that, even in the advance-

try to think at all clearly,
it

is

well

ment of science, inaccuracy of vocabulary has often been a stumbling-BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY72[bull. 40

block which has made it diilicult to reach accurate conchisions.

The

same words may be used \vith different significance, and by assuming the word to have the same significance always, erroneous conIt may also be that the word expresses
clusions may be reached.
only part of an idea, so that owing to its use the full range of thesubject-matter discussed may not be recognized.
ner the wortls

In the same man-may be too wide in their significance, including a

number of distinct ideas the differences of which in the course of thedevelopment of the language were not recognized. Furthermore, wefind that, among more primitive tribes, similarities of sound aremisunderstood, and that ideas expressed by similar words are considered as similar or identical, and that descriptive terms are mis-

understood as expressing an identity, or at least close relationship,

between the object described and the group of ideas contained in
the description.
All these traits of human thought, which are knowTi to influence

the history of science and which play a more or less important rolein the general history of civilization, occur \vith equal frequency inthe thoughts of primitive man.

It willbe sufficient to give a few

examples of these cases.

One of the most common cases of a group of views due to failure
to notice that the same word may signify divers objects, is thatbased on the belief of the identity of persons bearing the same name.
Generally the interpretation is given that a child receives the nameofan ancestor because he is believed to be a re-incarnation of theindividuality of the ancestor.

It seems,

however, much more likelythat this is not the real reason for the views connected with

this

is

made

between the name and the personality known under the name.

The

custom, which seems due to the fact that no distinction

association established between name and individual is so close thatthe two seem almost inseparable; and when a name is mentioned, notonly the name itself, but also the personality of its bearer, appears
before the mind of the speaker.

Inferences based on peculiar forms of classification of ideas, anddue to the fact that a whole group of distinct ideas are expressed

by a
of

single term,

occur

various languages;means the two

as,distinctcommonly inthe terms

for instance, inclassesof father'sofrelationshipour term uncle, which
brother and mother'sBOAS]

brother.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES
Here, also,

itiscommonly assumed

73

that the linguistic

expression is a secondary reflex of the customs of the people; but
the questionisquite open in

how far the one phenomenon is theprimary one and the other the secondary one, and whether thecustoms of the people have not rather developed from the imconsciously developed terminology.

Cases in which the similarity of sound of words is reflected in theviews of the people are not rare, and examples of these have been
given before in referring to

Max Miiller's theory of the origin of

religions.

Finally, a few

examples may be given of cases in which the useof descriptive terms for certain concepts, or the metaphorical useof terms, has led to peculiar views or customs.
toIt

seems plausible

my mind, for instance, that the terms of relationship by whichsome of the eastern Indian tribes designate one another were originally nothing but a metaphorical use of these terms,

and that thefurther elaboration of the social relations of the tribes

may havebeen largely determined by transferring the ideas accompanying theseterms into practice.

More convincing are examples taken from the use of metaphoricalterms in poetry, which, in rituals, are taken literally, and are madethe basis of certain rites.

I

am inclined to believe, for instance, thatthe frequently occurring image of the devouring of loeaWi
close relation to the detailed

has aform of the winter ritual among theIndians of the North Pacific coast, and that the poetical simile inwdiich the chief is called the support of the shy has to a certain extent

been taken literally in the elaboration of mythological ideas.

Thus it appears that from practical, as well as from theoretical,
points of view, the study of language must be considered as one of
the most important branches of ethnological study, because, on the

one hand, a thorough insight into ethnology can not be gained without practical knowledge of language, and, on the other hand, thefundamental concepts illustrated by human languages are not distinct in kindfrom ethnological phenomena; and because, further-more, the jjeculiar characteristics of languages are clearly reflected in
the views and customs of the peoples of the world.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY74
V.

[bi'LL. 40

CHARACTERISTICS OF AMERICAN LANGUAGESIn older treatises of the languages of the world, languages haveoften been classified as isolating, agglutinating, polysynthetic, andinflecting languages.

Chinese is generally given as an example of an

isolating language.

The agglutinating languages are represented by

the Ural-Altaic languages of northern Asia; polysynthetic languages,

by the languages of America; and inflecting languages, by the IndoEuropean and Semitic languages. The essential traits of these fourgroups are: That in the first, sentences are expressed solely by thejuxtaposition of unchangeable elements; in the agglutinating languages, a single stem

ismodifiedl)ythe attachment of numerous

formative elements which modify the fundamental idea of the stem;in polysynthetic

languages, a large

number of distinct ideas

areamalgamated by grammatical processes and form a single word, without any morphological distinction between the formal elements inthe sentence and the contents of the sentence; and in the inflecting
languages, on the other hand, a sharp distinction is made between

formal elements and the material contents of the sentence, and stems
are modified solely according to the logical forms in which they appear
in the. sentence.

An example of what is meant by polysynthesis is given, for instance,in the following Eskimo word: taJcusariartorumagalvximerpdP do you
THINK HE REALLY INTENDS TO GO TO LOOK AFTER IT? {faTcUSar[pd] he

looks

after

-{(/]aluar[poq]it;-iartor[poq]he does so

he goes to; -uma[voq] he intends to;— but; -ner[poq] do you think he —interrogation, third person.)is

It will;-a,be recognized here, that there

no correspondence between the suffixed elements of the funda-

mental stem and the formal elements that appear in the Indo-

European languages, but that a great variety of ideas are expressedby the long series of suffixes. Another example of similar kind is
the Tsimshian word

t-yuk-ligi-lo-d' Ep-ddLEt

he began to put it

DOWN somewhere INSIDE (t, he; yule to begin; ligi somewhere; lo in;d'Ep down; ddz to put down;-t it).

American languages have also been designatedas incorporating

languages, by which is meant a tendency to incorporate the object of

the sentence, either nominal or pronominal, in the verbal expression.

Examples of this tendency are the Mexican ni-petla-tsiwa i make
MATS {peUa-U mat) or the Pawnee tA-t-i'tka^wit i dig dirt (JLa- indie;

HANDBOOK OP AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

ative;t-

I; i'tJcar^ dirt; -pit to dig [rp in contact,

75

form 'w]); or the

Oneida g-nagla'-sl-i-zalc-s i search for a village {g- I; -nagla' to
live;

-si-

abstract noun;-i-verbal character;

-zalc

to

search; -s

continuative).

A more thorough knowledge of the structure of many American
languages shows that the general designation of all these languages as

We have in Amernumber of cases of languages in which thepolysynthetic and incorporating is not tenable.
ica a sufficiently large

pronouns are not incorporated, but joined loosely to the verb, and

we also have numerous languages in wdiich the incorporation of many
elements into a single word hardly occurs at

all.

Among the lan-

guages treated here, the Chinook may be given as an example oflack of polysynthesis.

There are very few, if any, cases in which asingle Chinook word expresses an extended complex of ideas, and wenotice particularly that there are no large classes of ideas which are

expressed in such form that they may be considered as subordinate.
An examination of the structure of the Chinook grammar will showthat each verbal stem appears modified only by pronominal and a few

show hardly any tendency toincorporate new ideas such as are expressed by our adjectives.
Onadverbial elements, and that nouns

the other hand, the Athapascan and the Haida and Tlingit ma}^ betaken as examples of languages which, though polysynthetic in thesense here described, do not readily incorporate the object, but treat

both pronominal subject and pronominal object as independent elements.

Among the languages of northern North America, the Iroquoisalone has so strong a tendency to incorporate the nominal object into
the verb, and at the same time to modify so much its independent

form, that it can be considered as one of the characteristic languages
that incorporate the object.
to the Tsimshian, Kutenai,in theCaddoan languages.

To a lesser extent this trait belongs also
and Shoshone.

It is strongly developed

All the other incorporating languages

treated here, like the Eskimo, Algonquian, andKw akiutl, confine them-selves to a more or less close incorporation of the pronominal object.

In Shoshone, the incorporation of the pronominal object and of thenominal object

issoweak that it is almost arbitrary wdiether weconsider these forms as incorporated or not.

If we extend our view

over other parts of America, the same facts appear clearty, and it is
not possible to consider these two traits as characteristics ofAmerican languages.

allBUREAU OP AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY76[bill. 40

On the other hand, there are certain traits that, although not common to all American languages, are at least frequent, and which are
not less characteristic than the tendency to objective incorporation

The most important of these is the tendency
to divide the verb sharply into an active and a neutral class, one ofand to poh'synthesis.

which is closely related to the possessive forms of the noun, while theother is treated as a true verb. We might perhaps say that American
languages have a strong tendency to draw the dividing line between

denominating terms and predicative terms, not in the same way that
we are accustomed to do. In American languages many of our predicative terms are closely related to nominal terms, most frequently

the neutral verbs expressing a state, like to sit, to stand.
often include a considerable number of adjectives.

terms expressing activities
true predicative terms.

—

These, also,

On the other hand,

like to sing, to eat, to TciU

—are treated as

The differentiation of these two classes isgenerally expressed by the occurrence of an entirely or partially sep-arated set of pronouns for the predicative terms.

Beyond these extremely vague points, there are hardly any charA number
acteristics that are common to many American languages.
of traits, however, may be enumerated which occur with considerable

frequency in many parts of America.

The phonetic systems of American languages differ very considerably, but we find with remarkable frequency a peculiar differentiationof voiced and unvoiced stops,— corresponding to ourh, p;d, t; g, Ic,—

which differ in principle from the classification of the corresponding
sounds in most of the European languages. An examination ofAmerican vocabularies and texts shows very clearly that all observers
have had more or less difficulty in differentiating these sounds.

Al-

though there is not the slightest doubt that they differ in character, it

would seem that there is almost everywhere a tendency to pronounce
the voiced and unvoiced sounds with very nearly equal stress of articulation, not as inEuropean languages, where the unvoiced sound isgenerally pronounced with greater stress.

.

This equality of stress ofthe two sounds brings it about that their differences appear rather
slight.

On the other hand, there are frequently sounds, particularlyin the languages of the Pacific coast, in which a stress of articulationisused which is considerably greater than an}^ stresses occurring in

the languages with which we are familiar.

These sounds are generally

unvoiced; but a high air-pressure in the oral cavity is secured by

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LA.NGUAGES

BOAS]

closing the glottis

77

and nares, or by closing the posterior part of themouth with the base of

The release at the point ofamount of strongly compressed air,

the tongue.

articulation lets out the small

and the subsequent opening of glottis and nares or base of tongue
produces a break in the continuity of sound.

We find also with particular frequency the occurrence of a numberof lingual stops corresponding

more or less strictly to our Ic sounds

which, however, are more finely differentiated than our k sounds.

Thus the velar Jc, which is so characteristic of Semitic languages,
occurs with great frequency in America.
labio-dental / seems to be rather rare,

On the other hand, theand where a similar soundoccurs it is often the bilabial sound.

The same may be said of the r, which on the whole is a rare soundin American languages, and the trill of which is almost always soweak that it merges into the d, n, I, or y, as the case may be.
On the whole, the system of consonants of American languages iswell developed, particularly

owing to the occurrence

stresses to which I referred before, instead of the

we are more familiar.

of the three

two with which

In some groups of languages we have also aquite distinct set of stops accompanied by full breathing, which cor-

respond to the English surds.

Furthermore, a peculiar break, pro-

duced by closing the vocal chords, occurs quite commonly, not onlyin connection with sonants, but also following or preceding vowels or
affricative

consonants.

This intonation is sometimes quite audible,

and sometimes merely a break or hiatus in the continuity of pronunSometimes it seems related to the pronunciation of a voiced
ciation.
consonant in which the voicing is preceded by a closure of the vocal
chords.

In other cases

itseems related totheproduction of thegreat stress of articulation to which I referred before.
in a strongt

For instance,

the tongue may be pressed so firmly against the palatethat all the articulating organs, including the vocal chords, take partin the tension,and that the sudden expulsion of the air is accom-

panied also by a sudden relaxation of the vocal chords, so that forthis reason the strong, exploded soundappears to be accompanied

by an intonation of the vocal chords.

As stated before, these traits are not by any means common to all
American languages, but they are sufficiently frequentmention in a generalized discussion of the subject.

to deserve

On the other hand, there are languages which are exceedingly deficient in their phonetic system.
Among these may be mentioned, forBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY78[bull. 40

instance, the Iroquois, which possesses not a single true labial conso-

nant;Ilaida, inor thewhich thelabials are confined

to a

few

sounds, which are rather rare.

The

seem peculiarly
The cases are very numerous in which obscure vowels

vocalic systems of the northern languages

uncertain.

occur, which are evidently related to fuller vowels, hut whose affiliations often can not be determined.

It

would seem that in the south-

We also findern languages these weak vowels are not so prominent.

very frequently a lack of clear distinction between o and u on the

one hand, ande

and % on theother.

Although the variabilitj' ofvowels in some of the languages seems beyond doubt, there are othersin which the vocalic system is very definite

and in which distinctions

are expressed, not only by the timbre of the vowel, but also

and the Takelma.

by itsAmong these may be mentioned the Pawnee

rising or falling tone.

The Pawnee seems to have at least two tones, asinking tone and a rising tone, while in Takelma there seem to be
three tones.

Nasalized vowels are very common in some languages,

and entirely absent in others.
open lips and with closed lips.

This nasalization occurs both withAn example of the latter is the Iro-quois u'^.
It is not possible to give any general characterization of American

languages with regard to the grouping of sounds.

While in somelanguages consonantic clusters of incredible complexity are formed,
others avoid such clusters altogether.

There is, however, a habit ofpronunciation which deserves attention, and which

widely distributed.
is

isfound very

This is the slurring of the ends of words, whichsometimes so pronounced, that, in an attempt to write the words,

the terminations, grammatical or other, may become entirely inaudible.

The simplest form in which this tendency expresses itself is in

the suppression of terminal consonants, which are only articulated,

In the Xass river dialect of the Tsimshian, forbut not pronounced.

n of the word gan tree is indicated by the
position of the tongue, but is entirely inaudible, unless the word isinstance, the terminal

followed by other words belonging to the same sentence.

language the same

is

true

of

the sounds I and m.

In thatVowels aresuppressed in a similar manner by being only indicated by the position of themouth, without being articulated.

quently to the u following a A:,

This happens

or with an i in thefre-same position.

HANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

Thus, the Kwakiutl pronounce wd'dEk^.

79

however, another vowelIf,follows, the u which is not articulated appears as a w, as in the form

wa'dskwa.

The slurring, however, extends over whole syllables, which in thesecases may appear highly modified.

Thus, in the Oneida dialect of

the Iroquois, a peculiar I sound is heard, which presumably occursonl}^ insuch slurred syllables.

ans ofall

It isvery remarkable that the Indi-

tribes are perfectly conscious of the phonetic elements

which have thus been suppressed, and can, when pressedtodo so,

pronounce the words with their full endings.

Another trait that is characteristic of many American languages,

and that deserves mention, is the tendency of various parts
population to modify the pronunciation of sounds.

of theThus we findthat among some Eskimo tribes the men pronounce the terminal p, t,
Ic,

and g distinctly, while the women always transform these sounds

In some dialects the men have also adopted thismanner of pronouncing, so that the pronunciation has become uniform again. Such mannerisms, that are peculiar to certain social
into m, n, h, and n.

groups, are of course not entirely foreign to us, but they are seldom

developed

in so strikingamanner as

ina

few of the Indian

languages.

Inmany American languages we find highly developed laws of

euphony,—laws by which, automatically, one sound in a sentence

requires certain other sounds either to precede or to follow it.

In themajority of cases these laws of euphony seem to act forward in a manner that may be compared to the laws of vowel harmony in the UralAltaic languages.

Particularly remarkable

among these laws is theinfluence of the o upon following vowels, which occurs in a few lan-

guages of the Pacific coast.

In these, the vowels following an o in

the same w^ord must, under certain conditions, be transformed into ovowels, or at least be modified by the addition of a w.

Quite differ-ent in character are the numerous influences of contact of sounds,

which are very pronounced in the Siouan languages, and occur again
in a quite different form in the Pawnee.

example of these also.
followedis

may be well to give an

by a word beginning with a Tc transform the former into e,

the latter intoirIt

Thus, in Dakota, words ending with an a andc.

In Pawnee, on the other hand, the combination

always transformed into an h; h following aniisgenerallyBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

80changed into a w; rp becomes hw, etc.

AVhile in[bill. 40

some languages

these phonetic changes do not occupy a prominent place, they areexceedingly important in others.

They correspond in a way to thelaws of euphony of Sanskrit.
Just as much variety as is shown in phonetic systems is found in
the use of grammatical devices.

In discussing the definition of theword, it has been pointed out that in some American languages theword-unit seems to be perfectly clear and consistent, while in others
the structure of the sentence would seem to justify us in considering

composed of a number of independent elements combined byThus, languages which have a polysynthetic charjuxtaposition.
itasacter have the tendency to form firmly knit word-units, which maybe

predicative sentences, but may also be used for denominative purposes.

For example, the Chinook may say, He runs into the water,and may designate by this term the mink; or the Hupa may say
They have been laid together, meaning by this term a fire. On theother hand, there are innumerable languages in America in which
expressions of this kind are entirely impossible.

In forming words and sentences, affixes are used extensively, andwe find prefixes, as well as suffixes and infixes.

It is not absolutely

certain that cases occur in America where true infixing into a stemtakes place, and where it might not be better explained as an insertionof the apparently infixed element into a compound stem, or as due tosecondary phonetic phenomena, like those of metathesis; but in the

Siouan languages at least, iniixion in bisyllabic stems that are apparently simple in their origin occurs.

Otherwise, suffixing is, on thewhole, more extensively used than prefixing; and in some languages

only one of these two methods is used, in others both.

probably no languages in

There arewhich prefixing alone occurs.

Change of stem is also a device that is used Avith great frequency.

We find particularly that methods of reduplication are used extenModifications of single sounds of the stem occur also, andsively.

sometimes in peculiar form.

Thus we have cases, as in Tsimshian,where the lengthening of a vowel indicates plurality;

or,

as

in

Algonquian, where modality is expressed by vocalic modification;
and,

as

in

Chinook, where

diminutive

andaugmentative

expressed by increasing the stress of consonants.

areSometimes an

exuberance of reduplicated forms is found, the reduplicated stem
being reduplicated a second and even a third time.

On the otherHANDBOOK OF AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

hand, we find numerous languages in which the stem
unchangeable, excepting so far as

it

81
is

entirely

may be subject to phonetic

contact phenomena.

Thefollowinggrammatical sketches have been contributed byinvestigators, each of whom has made a special study of the linguistic

The attempt has been made to adopt, so

stock of which he treats.
far as feasible, a

uniform method of treatment, without, however,sacrificing the individual conception of each investigator.

In accordance with the general view^s expressed in the introductory
chapters, the method of treatment has been throughout an analyticalone.

No attempt has been made to compare the forms of the Indianof English, Latin, or even among

grammars with the gram^nars

themselves; but in each case the psychological groupings wliich are
given depend entirely upon the inner form of each language.

Inother words, the grammar has been treated as though an intelligent

Indian was going to develop the forms of his o^\ai thoughts by ananalysis of his own form of speech.
It willbe understood that the results of this analysis can not be

claimed to represent the fundamental categories from which the present form of each language has developed.

There is not the slightest

doubt that, in all Indian languages, processes have occurred analogous
to those processes

which are historically known andtowhich themodern forms of Indo-European languages owe their present forms.
Grammatical categories have been lost, and new ones have developed.

Even a hasty comparison of the dialects of various American linguistic families gives

place here.

ample proof that similar processes have taken

To give an example, we find that, in the Ponca dialectof the Siouan languages, nouns are classified according to form,

andthat there is a clear formal distinction between the subject and theobject of the sentence.
entirely in the

These important features have disappeared

Dakota dialect of the same group of languages.

Togive another example, we fuid a pronominal sex gender in all the dialects of the Salishan stock that are spoken west of the Coast range inthe states of

Washington and in British Columbia, while in the dia-

lects of the interior there is no trace of gender.

On the other hand,

we find in one of the Salish dialects of the interior the occurrence of an
exclusive and inclusive form of the pronoun, which is absent in all theother dialects of the same stock.
44877— Bull. 40, pt 1—10

6

We have no information on the:

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY82[bill. 40

history of American languages, and the study of dialects has notadvancedfarenoughto permit us toin regard to this subject.

draw far-reaching inferences

It is therefore impossible, in the few cases

here mentioned, to state whether the occurrence and non-occurrenceof these categories are due to a loss of old forms in the one dialect or
to a later differentiation in the other.

Although, therefore, an analytical grammar can not lay any claim
to present a history of the development of grammatical categories, itisvaluable as a presentation of the present state of grammatical de-

The results of our investigationmust be supplemented at a later time by a thorough analysis and com-velopment in each linguistic group.

parison of all the dialects of each linguistic stock.

Owing to the fundamental differences between different linguistic
families,it

has seemed advisable to develop the terminology of eachindependently of the others, and to seek for uniformity only in cases

where it can be obtained without artificially stretching the definitionof terms.

Itisplanned to give a comparative discussion of thelanguages at the close of these volumes, when reference can be madeto the published sketches.

So far as our present knowledge goes, the following linguistic families

may be distinguished in North America north of ^lexico
1.

Eskimo (arctic coast).

2.

Athapascan(northwesterninterior,

Oregon,California,

Southwest).
3.

Tlingit (coast of southern Alaska).

4.

Haida (Queen Charlotte islands, British Columbia).

5.

Salishan (southern British Columbia and northern
ington)

6.

Wash-

.

Chemakum (west coast of Washington).

8.

Wakashan (Vancouver island).
Algonquian (region south of Hudson Bay and eastern Wood-

9.

Beothuk (Newfoundland).

7.

lands).

10.
11.

Tsimshian (northern coast of British Columbia).
Siouan (northern plains west of Mississippi and North Carolina)

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

.

Iroquoian (lower Great Lakes and North Carolina).
Caddoan (southern part of plains west of Mississippi).
Muskhogean (southeastern United States).
Kiowa (middle Western plains).
Shoshonean (western plateaus of United States).

HANDBOOK OF AMEEICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES

BOAS]

17.

Kutenai (southeastern interior of British Columbia).

18.

Pima (Arizona and Sonora).

19.

Yuma (Arizona and lower California).

21.

Chinook (lower Columbia river).
Yakona (Yaquina bay).

22.

Kus (coast of central Oregon).

20.

83

Takelma (Rogue river, Oregon).
24. Kalapuya (Willamette valley, Oregon).
23.

25.

Waiilaptuan (Cascade range east of Willamette, Ore.).

26.

Klamath (southeastern interior of Oregon).

27.
28.

Sahaptin (interior of Oregon).
Quoratean (Klamath river).

29.

Weitspekan (lower Klamath river).

30.

Shasta (northeast interior of California).

31.

Wishok (north coast of California).

32.

Yana (eastern tributaries of upper Sacramento river, California).

Chimarico (head waters of Sacramento river, California).
(valley of Sacramento river).
Wintun34.
33.

Maidu (east of Sacramento river).
Yuki (north of Bay of San Francisco).
37. Pomo (coast north of Bay of San Francisco).
35.

36.

38.
39.
40.
41.

Washo (Lake Washoe, Nevada, and California).
Moquelumnan (east of lower Tulare river, California).
Yokuts (southern Tulare river, California).
Costanoan (south of Bay of San Francisco, California).

42. Esselenian (coast of southern California).
43. Salinan (coast of southern California).

Chumashan (coast of southern California).
Tanoan46. Zuiii(Pueblos of New Mexico and Arizona).
44.
45.

^

i

47.

Keres

48.

Pakawan (from Cibolo creek, Texas, into the state of Coa-J

huila, Mexico).

Karankawa (coast of Gulf of Mexico west of Atakapa).
50. Tonkawa (inland from preceding).
49.

51.

Atakapa (coast of Gulf of Mexico west of Chitimacha),

Chitimacha (coast of Gulf of Mexico west of Mississippi).
Tunica (coast of Gulf of Mexico west of Mississippi).
54. Yuchi (east Georgia).

52.
53.

55.

Timuqua (Florida).

Of these, the present volume contains sketches of a number oflanguages of the northern group, the Athapascan, Tlingit, Haida,

Tsimshian, Kwakiutl, Chinook, Maidu, Algonquian, Siouan, Eskimo.