(Kulanapan), Costanoan, Esselenian, Yokuts (Mariposan), Shoshonian,
Shastan, Moquelumnan and possibly Washoan; (4) Yanan; (5) Yuman.
Suggestions of even larger groups than any of these have also been
made. It may be that, judged by certain criteria, the Kootenay,
Shoshonian, Iroquoian and Siouan may belong together, but this is
merely tentative. It is also possible, from the consideration of
morphological peculiarities, that some if not all of the languages of
the so-called "Palaeo-Asiatic" peoples of Siberia, as Boas has
suggested (_Science_, vol. xxiii., n.s., 1906, p. 644), may be
included within the American group of linguistic stocks. Indeed
Sternberg (_Intern. Amer.-Kongr._ xiv., Stuttgart, 1904, pp. 137-140)
has undertaken to show the relationship morphologically of one of
these languages, the Giliak (of the island of Saghalin and the region
about the mouth of the Amur), to the American tongues, and its
divergence from the "Ural-Altaic" family of speech. Here, however,
more detailed investigations are needed to settle the question.
General character of Indian languages.
At one time the opinion was widely prevalent that primitive languages
changed very rapidly, sometimes even within a generation, and the
American Indian tongues were rather freely used as typical examples of
such extreme variation. The error of this view is now admitted
everywhere, and for the speech of the New World aborigines Dr Franz Boas
states (_Hndb. Amer. Ind._ pt. i., 1907, p. 759): "There is, however, no
historical proof of the change of any Indian language since the time of
the discovery comparable with that of the language of England between
the 10th and 13th centuries." Another statement that has obtained
currency, appearing even in otherwise reputable quarters sometimes, is
to the effect that some of the vocabularies of American Indian languages
consist of but a few hundred words, one being indeed so scanty that its
speakers could not converse by night, since darkness prevented resort to
the use of gesture. This is absolutely contrary to fact, for the
vocabularies of the languages of the American Indians are rich, and,
according to the best authority on the subject, "it is certain that in
every one there are a couple of thousand of stem words and many thousand
words, as that term is defined in English dictionaries" (Boas). The
number of words in the vocabulary of the individual Indian is also much
greater than is generally thought to be the case. It was long customary,
even in "scientific" circles, to deny to American Indian tongues the
possession of abstract terms, but here again the authority of the best
recent investigators is conclusive, for "the power to form abstract
ideas is, nevertheless, not lacking, and the development of abstract
thought would find in every one of the languages a ready means of
expression" (Boas). In this connexion, however, it should be remembered
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account