The American Race: A Linguistic Classification and Ethnographic Description of the Native Tribes of North and South AmericaBrinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
History
The American Race: A Linguistic Classification and Ethnographic Description of the Native Tribes of North and South America
Brinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Indians; Indians -- Languages
They are alleged to have been jealous about their language, and unwilling
for any stranger to learn it. Their religious exercises were conducted
in Kechua, with which they were all more or less acquainted. The only
specimen of their tongue in modern treatises is the Lord’s Prayer,
printed by Hervas and copied by Adelung.[316] On it Hervas based the
opinion that the Puquina was an independent stock. The editors of the
“Mithridates” seemed to incline to the belief that it was related to the
Aymara, and this opinion was fully adopted by Clement L. Markham, who
pronounced it “a very rude dialect of the Lupaca,”[317] in which he was
followed by the learned Von Tschudi.[318]
None of these authorities had other material than the _Pater Noster_
referred to. Hervas credits it to a work of the missionary Geronimo de
Ore, which it is evident that neither he nor any of the other writers
named had ever seen, as they all speak of the specimen as the only
printed example of the tongue. This work is the _Rituale seu Manuale
Peruanum_, published at Naples in 1607. It contains about thirty pages in
the Puquina tongue, with translations into Aymara, Kechua, Spanish and
Latin, and thus forms a mine of material for the student. Though rare, a
copy of it is in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, and is thus readily
accessible. I have published a number of extracts from its Puquina
renderings in the _Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society_
for 1890. They are sufficient to show that while this language borrowed
many terms, especially those referring to religion and culture, from the
neighboring Kechua and Aymara dialects, these were but additions to a
primitive stock fundamentally different from either of them.
The dissimilarity of the three tongues is well seen in their numerals,
which are as follows:
KECHUA. AYMARA. PUQUINA.
One, _huc_, _mayni_, _pesc_.
Two, _iscay_, _pani_, _so_.
Three, _quimsa_, _quimsa_, _capa_.
Four, _tahua_, _pusi_, _sper_.
Five, _pichka_, _pisca_, _tacpa_.
Six, _soccta_, _chocta_, _chichun_.
Seven, _canchis_, _pa-callco_, _stu_.
Eight, _pusacc_, _quimsa-callco_, _quina_.
Nine, _iscon_, _llalla-tunca_, _checa_.
Ten, _chunca_, _tunca_, _scata_.
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