E 51 .U6X MSRLSI SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 68 A STRUCTURAL AND LEXICAL COMPARISON OF THE TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES BY JOHN R. SWANTON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1919 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, BuREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY, Washington, D. C., June 11, 1918. Sir: I have the honor to transmit the accompanying manuscript, entitled “A Structural and Lexical Comparison of the Tunica, Chitimacha, and Atakapa Languages,’ by John R. Swanton, with the recommendation that it be published, subject to your approval, as Bulletin 68 of this Bureau. Very respectfully, ; J. WaLTER FEWKEs, Chief. Dr. CHartes D. WaALcort, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. SMITHSON], N “ SEP 16 2009 me. ke LIBRARIES ve M ty es Pie oy view hel hb aye $id) aed ley As crn ees be bak, be PA + CONTENTS Page (0 YORE Ge SAS Fea SE i Se age eh ee Ee eee ee ee eee 7 SRNR rare Seg i). eaten Vs Ss ee Sn oat Rae Ss Rs Cawleln weed 11 Seeaipommiom Ol um iAterial. 2.22. 2002 fio 5 oo. eo. awn en een slop wees fees Soi 12 RaaaaenOnroL we pHonetied.< 52) NEAh. Miss) Poe Sieh er Ia 12 Seieeranimntacal: categonips jos. 198.22 0. feo Ue at 13 BAe ers? rates Dee th. Ack . 8 art te .' oes 3 eke fetid 45. 17 Comparison of the structural elements. ..-.....--....--------.---2-<-.--- 20 MRNMTIEE ete oe oat ok ote vase nua Decee en cinl Gua es pec eecss = capt 2-5 56 BY A STRUCTURAL AND LEXICAL COMPARISON OF THE TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES By Joun R. Swanton INTRODUCTION HE languages to be discussed in this paper were spoken within historic times in territory now incorporated into the States of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. The prin- cipal facts preserved to us regarding their history and ethnology have been made the subject of a special paper by the writer,! to which the reader is referred for detailed information on those matters, the main poimts of which will here be dismissed in a few words. Tunica seems to have been spoken by five historic tribes—the Tunica, Yazoo, Koroa, Tiou, and Grigra. All of our linguistic material comes from the first of these, and it is known in some degree at the present day by perhaps half a dozen individuals living on a small reservation just south of Marksville, La. Yazoo and Koroa are classed with these on the grounds of historical association and a few statements of early writers, especially Du Pratz’s affirmation that Yazoo and Koroa shared with Tunica the peculiarity of employ- ing a true r which the surrounding peoples could not even pronounce.? The same writer includes Tiou and Grigra in this statement, and it is practically the only evidence upon which Grigra is placed in the Tunica group. In the case of Tiou, however, we have, besides, a direct declaration of the French officer, d’Artaguette, who affirms that in both customs and language the Tiou were identical with the Tunica.$ When we first hear of them the Grigra had taken refuge with the powerful Natchez nation, where they formed one town, and in Du Pratz’s time the Tiou had done the same thing. Nevertheless we have good evidence, partly from Du Pratz himself, that the migra- tion of the Tiou had happened at a very late period, and indeed one or two cartographers place them in their ancient territory upon the Yazoo River. The remaining tribes also lived upon, or at least spent most of their time upon, the Yazoo within historic times, 1 Bull. 43, Bur. Amer. Ethn., pp. 26-27, Washington, 1911. 2 Du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. ii, pp. 222-226, 1758. 3Mereness, Newton D., ed. Travelsin the American Colonies, p. 46, New York, 1916. 7 8 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL, 68 their towns being close to its mouth. Tonti says that the Yazoo were ‘‘masters of the soil,’ by which we are probably to understand that they were the original occupants of that country.!. The Koroa were more inclined to wander to the banks of the Mississippi and the regions westward of it as far as the Ouachita, where their more ancient seat appears to have been. Finally the name ‘‘Tunica old fields’? clung to a terrain near the Mississippi River in the southern part of the county which still preserves the name of the Tunica tribe, so that there is reason to believe that their former home was farther north than that of any of the others. Indeed there is some slight evidence preserved in the De Soto chronicles that, if not the Tunica, at least peoples of Tunica speech, extended up to and even beyond the Arkansas, and that the Pacaha tribe which plays - such a prominent part in the accounts of his expedition was in reality of Tunican stock. The part played by Tunican peoples in the ab- original history of the lower Mississippi Valley would thus appear to have been very great and to render a knowledge of their position and affinities of unusual importance. So far as we know with any degree of certamty there were but three tribes belonging to the Chitimachan group—the Chitimacha, Washa, and Chawasha. The first of these lived about Grand Lake and on the lower parts of Bayou Teche and the Atchafalaya, and from their name for the last of these, Sheti, they probably received their own. The Washa and Chawasha, who always lived near each other and remained on terms of intimacy from the first we hear of them until their disappearance, were upon Bayou La Fourche and hunted about in all of the territory between that bayou and the Mississippi, the mouth of which was in their lands. On very slight evidence I classified these in an earlier bulletin as of Muskhogean affinities,” but a manuscript sketch of the Louisiana tribes by Bien- ville which has smce been brought to my attention states that they spoke the same language as the Chitimacha.* Not a word of the speech of either has, however, been preserved, all of our linguistic material being derived from the principal tribe. The Atakapan group had a wider historic range than either of the others. It consisted of a great number of small bands occupying the coast of the Gulf of Mexico from Vermillion Bay to Galveston Bay, the whole of which latter it included, and extendimg up the Trinity River on both sides to a point beyond Bidai Creek. The principal bands of Atakapa properly so called were on Vermillion Bayou, Mermentou River, Calcasieu River, and the lower Sabine and Neches. In the extreme northeast were the Opelousa, not far from 1 French, Hist. Colls. La., Pt. I, pp. 82-83, 1846. 2 Bull. 43, Bur. Amer. Ethn., pp. 26-27, Washington, 1911. 3Int. Journ. Amer. Linguistics, vol. i, no. 1, p. 49, 1917. SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 9 the modern town of that name. Their position is not beyond doubt, but an Atakapan connection is the most probable. The same might have been said until recently for the bands about Galveston Bay and along Trinity River, who were usually called Akokisa by the Spaniards. However, a newly discovered vocabulary in an old French manuscript has placed their position beyond doubt.’ To these the researches of Prof. H. E. Bolton among Spanish documents have enabled us to add the Bidai of the middle Trinity and the territory immediately to the westward of that river, and two tribes less well known, the Deadose and Patiri, which probably lived entirely west of the Trinity.’ In the main the culture of all of these peoples did not differ materially, but that of the Tunica and Chitimacha partook of the higher or at any rate more complicated civilization of the lower Mississippi, while the Atakapa were on a much lower level, measured by our ordinary standards. The Tunica peoples had special religious houses or temples set on mounds like the other lower Mississippi tribes, and they were probably organized into exogamous clans, although of that there is no proof other than indications embodied in the terms of relationship recorded at a late date. The Chitimacha also had special religious houses and a cult which seems to have resembled in general that of the Choctaw. If the testimony of the survivors may be relied upon they also had totemic clans with matrilineal descent. The Atakapan peoples, however, seem to have been divided into a great number of small bands having little coherence, either inside or with one another. There is not the slightest evidence that they had clans or gentes and the terms of relationship preserved are such as are encountered among loosely organized peoples without artificial exogamous groups. Like the Chitimacha, their principal reliance for food was upon fish and shell- fish. While they seem to have raised some corn, they cultivated the ground far less than either the Tunica or the Chitimacha. Their cultural allies were the Karankawa, Tonkawa, and other peoples of central and southern Texas lying west of them. For our knowledge of the languages of these three groups of tribes we are almost entirely indebted to the indefatigable labors of Dr. A. 8. Gatschet, of the Bureau of American Ethnology, guided by Maj. J. W. Powell, Director of that Bureau. This is particularly true of Tunica, of which scarcely a word remains outside of the material collected by Doctor Gatschet in 1886 from an Indian of the Marksville band of Tunica. While the writer has gone over this with two or three native informants he has found it impossible to improve upon it except in 1 See Int. Journ. Amer. Linguistics, vol. i, no. 1, p. 49, 1917. 2 Article San Ildefonso, Handbook Amer. Inds., Bull. 30, Bur. Amer. Ethn., pt. 2, 1910. 10 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 details. Gatschet’s Atakapa material, collected in 1885 at Lake Charles, La., is even more important, since his principal informant, Louison, according to the testimony of the Atakapa still living, was the last of the tribe who understood the language as it was spoken by the old-time Indians. While the writer has been able to make some emendations it is practically impossible to add anything new. The few individuals still acquainted with Atakapa are scattered about the State of Louisiana, and even beyond its bounds, and do not use it at all in their everyday life. Besides Gatschet’s material we have a short vocabulary—the one already mentioned—collected by a French sea captain named Berenger from Indians of the Galveston Bay region, the so-called Akokisa, and a somewhat longer list of words obtained, if not collected, by Martin Duralde, Spanish com- mandant at the Atakapa post (now Franklin, La.), April 23, 1802. It is important mainly from the fact that it shows that the language of the eastern Atakapa from whom it was secured differed con- siderably from the language spoken about Lake Charles. Akokisa, on the other hand, to judge by the Berenger vocabulary, differed but slightly from the dialect of Lake Charles, except that it is apparent that in Gatschet’s time Atakapa phonetics were considerably broken down. Gatschet’s Chitimacha material was collected at Charenton, La., in December, 1881, and January, 1882. It was secured mainly from an old Negro who had lived so long with the Chitimacha as to speak their language fluently. He is admitted by all to have been better versed in Chitimacha tribal lore than the Indians themselves, but the philological value of the record seems to have suffered some- what. Neither phonetically nor from any other point of view is it on a par with Gatschet’s Tunica and Atakapa work. However, the writer has been able to go over this with considerable care with the help of Benjamin Paul, chief of the Chitimacha remnant, make many corrections, and add some texts and other material of con- siderable importance. This is the only one of the three languages under discussion to which the writer can claim to have contributed greatly. The only other record of Chitimacha consists of a vocabu- - lary obtained by Martin Duralde at the time he secured the Atakapa vocabulary already referred to. Gatschet states that this was originally recorded by aman named Murray. Like the corresponding Atakapa vocabulary, it has been extensively copied, notably in the comparative vocabularies in the Transactions of the American Antiquarian Society, volume un, pages 307-367, and in the Trans- actions of the American Ethnological Society, volume 11, pages 95-97. As it was also obtained from the Charenton Chitimacha no dialectic difference is exhibited in it and it is of comparatively slight value. SWANTON] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 11 PHONETICS In this discussion the phonetics must be regarded merely as a means to an end. Of course nothing was to have been expected in the line of phonetic exactness from any writer earlier than Gatschet, and Gatschet’s system was by no means adequate to express the sounds which American languages contain. There is reason to believe, however, that even in his time the phonetics of the three varieties of speech under consideration had broken down very considerably, and a further lapse of 30 years has not improved them. Atakapa and Tunica are particularly disorganized; Chitimacha is preserved somewhat better, but it is not possible to furnish a satisfactory detailed table of phonetics. We have here only certain approxima- tions. The system adopted is based, so far as possible, on the simpler system for the “phonetic transcription of Indian languages’ con- tained in the report of the committee of the American Anthropological Association—which had the duty of attempting some unification in the work of American philologists—which was published as volume 66, No. 6, of the Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections. The second method of recording vowels has been adopted: @ as in English father, @ as in fare, @ as in final, @ as in hat, @ as a in fate, e as in met, 7 as In pique, 7 as in pin, O as in note, o almost as in not, @ as inrule, wu asin put. In the few cases where nasalization of vowels occurs it is indicated by a hook placed beneath, .. The consonants are so poorly distinguished that most of thesigns willbesufliciently described by say- ing that they are to be pronounced nearly like the hard English sounds represented by the same letters. In Chitimacha, however, we have a series of intermediate stops, for which I have employed the common surd signs p, t, and k, and a series of surd aspirates which I have written p‘, ¢‘, and k‘. There appear to have been two corresponding affricatives, tc and tc‘, but they are now difficult to distinguish. In addition to these we have s, the dental sibilant, c, the prepalatal sibi- lant, and z, the palatal spirant. #—like ng in smg—is not found in Tunica but occurs in both Atakapa and Chitimacha. It seems to vary between the nasal sound accompanying a vowel and the sound of m. Tunica alone contains a velar r, and Atakapa alone a bilabial f, of rare occurrence, which Gatschet sometimes writes v. In Atakapa we also find an initial ¢/, which probably stands for an original surd J, the one generally written ¢. In the same language ts takes the place of tc, but in Tunica we find exactly the reverse condition, while Chitimacha contains both. Chitimacha and Tunica employ both s and c, which appear at present to be somewhat confounded. Ata- kapa employs only c. Besides its use in Chitimacha in the cases already mentioned we sometimes have occasion to use ‘ to indicate 12 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 7 aspirated sounds in the other languages, and in all three ’ is occasion- ally employed after a glottalized sound. Parentheses separate parts of a stem which there is reason to think are not essential. In copying Duralde’s vocabulary of eastern Atakapa ¢ has been substituted for sh and te for ch or tch, and where a vowel has been doubled to indicate quantity the proper form has been used instead, but some devices, although evidently wrong, it has been impossible to correct intelligently and they are allowed to stand. These include in particular combinations of k and g, such as kk, kg, gg, probably intended for the spirant 2. COMPARISON OF THE MATERIAL In comparing this material it must be remembered that we are dealing with fragments, albeit with large fragments. The frag- mentary nature of Atakapa is particularly evident. While the great- est body of material has been preserved from Chitimacha that is also the most complicated language; probably, taking into consideration the relative complexity of the three tongues, that preserved from Tunica is the most nearly adequate. COMPARISON OF THE PHONETICS In my description of the phonetics this ground has practically been covered already. The unsatisfactory state im which we find them prevents anything like a detailed comparison. The differences, however, though striking, are by no means fundamental. The most important of these are the presence of a velar r and the absence of % in Tunica, the absence of an 7 in Chitimacha, and apparent vestiges of Zt and f in Atakapa, both of which are wanting in the other two. It is also interesting to observe that in the employment of s and the affricatives Chitimacha occupies an intermediate position with reference to the others. In Atakapa we find ¢, ts, and dz, and in Tunica c, tc, and dj, ts and dz being wanting and s much less employed than c. In Chitimacha we have all of these, though there is some uncertainty regarding the exact number and quality of the sounds represented. Chitimacha is much more consonantic than either Tunica or Atakapa, being marked, indeed, for its strong tendency to conso- nantic clusters. On the other hand, Tunica is distinguished for the great number of disyllabic stems. On close examination, however, we find that the typical phonetic combination in the principal stems is the consonant-vowel-consonant pattern, the highest proportion being found in Atakapa, the next in Chitimacha, and the lowest in Tunica. Affixes consisting of single sounds are more common in Chitimacha and Atakapa than in Tunica. Swanton] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 13 Phonetic changes in obedience to harmonic laws appear to be entirely wanting in Chitimacha and Atakapa, and they are inconspic- uous in Tunica, the only case of the kind which the writer has dis- covered so far being a shift from a to 6 or & when the preceding vowel is 6 or @; as: sama, ripe; samaha, not ripe; lapu, good; lapuhi, not good. THE GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES Simple duplication of the verb stem, oftenest the stems of those verbs which may be used as adjectives, occurs in all three languages. Usually the entire syllable is repeated, but in Tunica, where the stems are often disyllabic, the repetition is sometimes confined to the first. Examples: (Tunica) kéra, to drink; kékora, to drink repeatedly or habitually; koma, roof-shaped; komikdmi, roof-shaped objects; satku, one; saxksarku, one here and one there; (Chitimacha) suk, to shake; suksuk, to shake habitually; pak‘, flat; pak‘pak‘, flat objects; (Atakapa) ak, green; akak, very green, or green things; its, to wake, wi cakitsitso, I wake someone repeatedly; kits, red; kitskits, red things. In all three languages there are a few verbs with distinct stems ix singular and plural, but in Tunica most of these are auxiliaries, while in the other languages the greater number are principal stems. Examples: (Tunica) a, ci, to go; a, 6n, to be; ta, in, to cause; (Chitimacha) teu, tut‘, to go; ket‘, tem, to fight; (Atakapa) 2t6l, awil, to arrange, to put in order; kat, pix, to die. All three languages make use of both independent personal pro- nouns and pronominal affixes, but there are differences in each case. In Atakapa and Tunica there are distinct sets of pronominal sub- jective and objective affixes, and in Atakapa distinct independent pronouns in the first person singular and first person plural, though the independent forms for the second and third persons of both numbers are closely related to the objective forms. In Tunica there are also distinct independent forms, but they are all clearly derived from the objective forms. In Chitimacha there are no objective affixes properly considered, but the independent pronouns take their place and perform their function. As between Chitimacha and Tunica this difference is largely negatived by the fact that the latter language may take an independent pronoun as object and at the same time omit the regular objective affix. In Tunica the objective affixes are used as possessives; in Chitimacha and Atakapa the independent pronouns perform the same function. Any distinction between the three languages which might appear from this is ren- dered of small value by the very evident relation between the objec- tive affixes and independent pronouns. In each language the concept “‘self’’ in myself, yourself, etc., is represented by a separate word after the appropriate independent pronoun; but Chitimacha and Atakapa also employ reflexive affixes, in the former language almost to the exclusion of the independent 14 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 word. Tunica and Atakapa have special affixes indicating reci- procity, but in Chitimacha this function is combined with the reflexive. In Chitimacha and Atakapa the word for ‘‘thing’’ is employed very frequently in such close connection with the verb as to assume the appearance of an affix. This condition is approached in Tunica, but only in a distant manner. Tunica is also marked off from the other two languages by the occurrence of a dual number, and it is almost equally unique in that the pronouns and pronominal affixes indicate sex gender, not merely in the third person but in the second also. So far grammatical gender has not been detected in Atakapa but it occurs in Chitimacha, though I have been unable to identify it in the plural. In Chitimacha the absence of a well-defined group of objec- tive pronominal affixes is in some measure made good by the use of a general objective affix. This seems to occur in Atakapa as well. In Chitimacha we find two suffixes for the third person plural. One of these is an indefinite with passive significance employed in the forma- tion of many nouns. In Tunica the masculine pronominal suffix of the third person plural is used similarly, and it is to be noted that its regular functions appear to be usurped to some extent by its feminine counterpart. There are indications of something of the same kind in Atakapa, particularly in the eastern dialect, where a considerable | number of nouns appear to end in the pronominal suffix of the third person, plural. Chitimacha employs a small number of affixes to particularize the state of the action, whether it is directed toward or from some person or object, back toward the place from which it started, is completed, or directed downward. Corresponding in part to this, Tunica uses four locatives, which also occur in independent postpositions, and define whether the motion is in, out, up, or down. Motion toward and away from are denoted by two independent stems, but it is quite possible that these contain prefixes which have become permanently attached by continuous usage. Atakapa has no regular dependent affixes of this character, but uses in the same manner as Tunica some inde- pendent postpositions and one prefix taken from a locative nominal suffix to indicate motion upward, motion above but high up, ‘‘ with,” ahead, and perhaps outward. In Tunica there are half a dozen auxiliaries, employed very much like suffixes, and forming a distinct class. In Chitimacha and Atakapa we do not have such a class but we do find a number of auxiliaries occurring in a similar position with respect to the principal verb, though in these languages, particularly Atakapa, the difference between the use of principal stem plus auxiliary and two stems together in verb composition is not as well marked as the condition we find in Tunica. In Chitimacha and Atakapa the negative suffixis — used as an auxiliary; in Tunica it is always a suffix but may be em- ployed with a peculiar negative stem as an independent verb. Tunica — = ” a at SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 1s differs from the others in employing the cardinal numerals, the dis- tributive particle, and the adjective ‘‘all’’ as verbal suffixes. All three languages have continuative, perfect, and noun-forming affixes. Usitative and volitional suffixes are found in Chitimacha and Atakapa. They are wanting in Tunica but it seems possible to detect vestiges of both. All three languages indicate future time in approximately the same manner; Atakapa is peculiar, however, in having two future suffixes instead of one. Chitimacha and Atakapa are furthermore associated by employing a kind of infinitive suffix giving the effect of English ‘‘being.” While the position of this suffix in the verb complex varies considerably, its functional identity is beyond question. It is largely syntactic in character, being used to subordinate one verb or clause to another. In Atakapa it is placed after the independent pronouns to add emphasis, but in most Chitimacha pronouns it has become combined as an essential element. It is found also in Tunica but its use there is purely syntactic. Chitimacha is notable for two suffixes, auxiliary in character, covering the concepts ‘‘to do” and ‘“‘to cause.”” In Tunica the former belongs to the class of auxiliaries above mentioned, while the latter is an independent verb, and in Atakapa both are independent or at least semi-independent verbs. Nevertheless, there is a clear vestige in Tunica of the causal auxiliary employed in precisely the same position. In Tunica we find a verbal suffix of interrogative and imperative force, and this is paralleled in Chitimacha by a particle employed in the same position, though it is rather interrogative than imperative. There is a corresponding particle in Atakapa which is purely interroga- tive. Atakapa is more careful in distinguishing imperatives than either of the other languages. No affix whatever appears in the second person singular, but separate suffixes are used for the first person plural and the second person plural. Chitimacha has a dis- tinct suffix for the first person plural, and employs one also tor the second person singular which appears to be used in the second person plural also. Tunica imperatives are sometimes accompanied by the suffix above mentioned; sometimes they appear without any suffix whatsoever other than the appropriate subjective pronominal sign. Past time is clearly marked off from present in Atakapa, distinguished, though not so clearly, in Chitimacha, and still less clearly in Tunica. Two, and occasionally three, principal verb stems may be put in one complex in Tunica by a simple process of juxtaposition. This takes place in the other two languages also, but in a limited number of cases; more often one verb is subordinated to another by means of certain suffixes. Atakapa is peculiar in making frequent use, as first elements of a verb complex, of stems indicating certain general concepts such as to sit, to go, to come, to stand, accompanied by a single suffix. In Tunica and Chitimacha the concept “to be”’ is expressed in part by an independent stem; in Atakapa it is always 16 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL 6s an affix. Cases of nominal incorporation occur in all three languages. but verbalization of nouns seems to be peculiar to Atakapa. In fact verbalization of all kinds of elements is accomplished with excep- tional freedom in that language. In Chitimacha certain nouns and demonstratives have a plural suffix, but when an adjective follows the noun and is closely asso- ciated with it the suffix is placed after the adjective. In Tunica the independent personal pronouns of the third person are placed directly after a noun to indicate plurality, and the feminine form seems to have been slowly evolving into a plural suffix independent of sex. The distributive particle is sometimes employed instead in the same situation. In Atakapa either hew, many, is placed directly after the noun or plurality is indicated by the context, frequently by an accompanying adjective with duplicated stem or the plural suffix employed in verbs and adjectives. Tunica makes use of certain nominal suffixes to mark gender, but they are not essential. Chitimacha and Atakapa, where such distinctions are desired or are not clear from the context, merely place the words for male and female after the noun to be defined. Each of the three languages also employs a small number of locative suffixes with the noun and the significance of these very nearly corresponds. They may be placed after locative adverbs, adjectives, demonstratives, and, in Chitimacha, after verbs. There are about three corresponding demonstratives in each lan- guage, but in Chitimacha the demonstrative system was much more developed, distinguishing plurality and gender, and apparently marking the position of an object as to whether it was erect, recumbent, etc. When employed with nouns adjectively they usually precede; other- wise they follow. In Tunica, however, only one precedes the noun and this has been developed into an article. In Tunica nearly all of the interrogative and indefinite pronouns and pronominal adverbs are formed by adding certain affixes to a syllable which is clearly to be classed with the demonstratives. In Chitimacha and Atakapa, however, there are several pronouns of this kind which must evidently be placed by themselves. In none of these languages is there a sharp distinction between verb and adjective, but in Atakapa we see the beginning of such a distinc- tion in the fact that the adjective is sometimes before the noun instead of after it. Unfortunately, the broken-down state of the language does not enable us to tell whether this was a truly aboriginal feature. In Chitimacha almost all adjectives take, or retain, certain verbal suffixes, particularly the noun-forming suffix —n or —ni; but in Tunica most adjectives are stripped of all affixes, and nm Atakapa this is frequently the case. All three numeral systems are decimal. There is more evidence of recent compounding to form these in Tunica than in Chitimacha, and more still in Atakapa, where, in fact, some of the terms are readily interpretable. Atakapa and Tunica SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES Iie employ suffixes to form numeral adverbs from which ordinals are not clearly marked off. In Tunica numeral adverbs are formed by ’ placing an independent word after the cardinal, but ordinals seem to be given sometimes as identical with cardinals, while sometimes they appear accompanied by the distributive particle. Distributive nu- merals are formed either by means of this same particle or by dupli- cation of the cardinal. In Chitimacha and Atakapa I find no instances of duplication innumerals. The English numeral adverb series, two- fold, threefold, etc., finds its counterpart only in Atakapa, at least if we may rely upon the present material. All three languages agree closely in their use of adverbs, and in all the most characteristic adverbs are locatives which verge on adjec- tives and postpositions. Chitimacha is the only one of these lan- guages from which a quotative has been recorded. Subordination of one clause to another is brought about in Tunica and Chitimacha by means of certain of the verbal suffixes already mentioned, by some of the locative suffixes, and by the use of inde- pendent particles. The concepts expressed in English by ‘‘when’’ and ‘‘while” are indicated in both by means of a particle placed after the subordinate clause. In the Atakapa material available subordina- tion is usually brought about by a single suffix —n or -in. In all three languages there are only two or three principal coordinate con- junctions used to connect clauses, but while Tunica employs one of them to unite substantives, Chitimacha and Atakapa make use of entirely distinct connectives for that purpose. Tunica and Chiti- macha make a considerable use of introductory connectives adverbial in character, compounded from demonstratives. In the material recorded there are more interjections and exclamatory particles in Tunica than in the other two languages, but this is probably accidental. SYNTAX In the verb complexes of all of these languages suffixes are more numerous than prefixes. In all of them, however, excepting the pronominal and locative affixes, few affixes occur in series. On the contrary, there is a considerable number of single affixes which may occur with any number of the others. The accompanying table gives an idea of the order of elements in the verb complex so that they may be mutually compared. Of course no single verb contains so many affixes, and their relative positions have to be pieced together from the examples available. Some of them, too, suffer displacement at times. For instance, in Tunica the continuative and future suffixes may be placed after instead of before the subjective pronominal suffixes, and in the same language most of the subjectives come before the auxiliaries and not after them, as is usual with principal stems. The placement of some of these depends upon so few examples that it is not beyond ‘question, but the story told is, as a whole, sufficiently accurate. 100306°—19——2 [BULL. 68 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 18 X@IdHOD) duaA NI SENAWATY AO bic (oes (@) xyjus *BOIIO} -UI pue | soxujns aAT}B}IsN soxyeid 9sud) Sul ‘fqns yeuol] | eATyen pus ule}s “O0] pus “(qo “Ulva ‘sou = | ‘mmouOJd | Jooyr0d -TTOA -urjm09 | (ainyny) “uyUt Teanyd =| yedtwurad | -f[qo ‘ues | ‘wiouord | | | VdVAVLV (xo3) saxygns (oy) sseyo Ssvlo 9748 ‘[qo gpoty red asue} sur; “fqns aATyen part yeuor} | poses Sse[o JSIg u194S ‘olput | ‘mouoid *S01J0}Ul; “Ugur | -UleWel | ‘urouoi1d | -umu0d | Jo*xne ‘sou aim4yny -T[OA Jo°xne | qoojiod jaatyeqIsn} jo *xne jemmjd | edtourd| -fqo°ued | xyoid *deput VHOVWILIHO “yas « TBs, xyjns surjeu | saxyyns ‘OIPUL | dATJe}ISN *s01J0}UT | -Ipioqns | 9sue} sur] ‘fqns solver | oAlen |-sfpe pue|pue'sneo| ulejs “fqo xgoid pue‘duit| Jo*‘uygul | -ureulel |-utouoid | “sou eingny | yooysod | -[Ixne | -urjuoo |‘syeroummu} Jo vova} | edioutid | ‘wrouoid *d0T VOINAL SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 19 Comparing the three verb plans we find in the main a striking agreement. The principal stem is placed in practically the same posi- tion in all. The relative position of the locative and pronominal pre- fixes differs, it is true, but this is explained by the fact that in Chiti- macha the independent pronouns take the place of the pronominal pre- fixes and naturally come before all, and also by the apparently recent adoption of the Tunica locatives. Still this does not explain why the locative prefixes in Atakapa are placed between the stem and the pro- nominal prefixes. The loose attachment to the stem exhibited by all of the prefixes prevents us from giving any great weight to this point of divergence. This loose attachment enters to a considerable extent into the question of order among suffixes, and probably accounts for certain anomalies. Thus the negative suffixes in Chitimacha and Atakapa and several of the auxiliaries may be used apart from any principal stem, thus being in effect independent stems themselves. There are also reasons for thinking that the future suffixes in the same languages may have been derived from the verb “‘to go,”’ with which they are identical in each case, the native idea being similar to that in such English expressions as ‘‘I am going to see him.” At any rate, all but one of the irregularities which occur hang upon the position of the negative and future suffixes and the auxiliaries in the complex. It is true that the suffix which usually performs the function of a continuative in Chitimacha is much nearer the end of the complex than the suffixes of corresponding meaning in Tunica and Atakapa, but it is practically certain that it represents a late development. ‘There is another suffix genetically connected with the Tunica and Atakapa continuatives. In Atakapa the perfect suffix agrees neither in form nor position with the Tunica and Chitimacha perfects, but there is some doubt regarding its exact significance, and some reason to think that it may be a broken-down auxiliary, related, perhaps, to the Tunica auxiliary “to do.”” What appears to be the most remarkable displacement oc- curs in the case of the so-called infinitive suffix. In Chitimacha it is always at the very end of the verb complex, the interrogative particle not being actually a part of the verb, while in Atakapa it is invariably close to the stem, being preceded by the plural and usitative suffixes only. At the same time the formal identity and identity in meaning and in use in a great many situations place the relationship of the two practically beyond question; that is, of course, if there is any rela- tionship between the two languages to which they belong. Otherwise we must suppose the resemblance to be the result of a most unusual accident. Finally there must be left out of consideration certain suffixes which are not represented in all three languages. Thus Tunica is the only one of them in which the verb takes the numerals and one or two other adjectives as suffixes. On the other hand, it contains, so 20 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 far as can be discovered, not a trace of the plural and volitional ! which are so characteristic of Chitimacha and Tunica, and neither Tunica nor Atakapa has as many series of auxiliaries as Chitimacha. In the other parts of speech there are, as we have seen, few affixes. The possessive adjectives and demonstrative adjectives go before the noun except in Tunica, where only one demonstrative appears in that position. The plural suffix in Chitimacha and the plural signs in the other two tongues are suffixed, and so are the locative affixes, and the affixes in Tunica which indicate sex gender. _ In all three languages the constituents of compound nouns pre- serve the same order as in English, but adjectives follow the nouns upon which they depend, except occasionally in Atakapa. Locative adverbs or postpositions are, as the latter name implies, placed after the noun. Possessive pronouns are employed in making one noun dependent on another. In Atakapa, however, the possessive pronoun was oftener understood than expressed. Adverbs were placed after the adjectives upon which they depended but before the verbs. As might have been expected, Chitimacha nouns and demonstratives may take the place of the independent pronouns when the latter are used as objects, but it is interesting to note that an identical use of nouns, demonstratives, and pronouns occurs in Tunica and Atakapa, - the regular pronominal prefixes being then omitted. No clear dis- tinction is made in Tunica and Chitimacha between the object and indirect object in these situations. Other nouns are brought into subordination to the verb by means of the locative suffixes. These languages also agree in placing the verb normally at the end of the sentence or clause, and in the further fact that all may place a noun with a locative suffix or postposition after it. This happens less often in Tunica than in Chitimacha and Atakapa. The subordina- tion of one clause to another has already been touched upon. In Tunica and Chitimacha verbal suffixes and independent particles are used to effect this, but in Atakapa only verbal suffixes, and particu- larly a suffix —n or-in. On the other hand, Tunica depends less upon suffixes and more upon separate particles. Coordinate clauses are joined in practically the same manner in all. COMPARISON OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS We now turn to a direct investigation of the phonetic similarities between the stems of the three languages, beginning with the affixes and other dependent elements upon which their grammar depends. Following is a comparative table of the personal pronouns and personal pronominal affixes. 1 There may, however, be a trace of the volitional in Tunica. See p. 30. SWANTON ] COMPARISON OF THE PRONOMINAL SYSTEMS TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 9) aK SINGULAR Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa Inde- Person and gender} 1,4 oe pendent Inde- Sub pend awh Objective |Subjective| forms | Subjective | pend- | Objective | ; be Bs forms | Prefixes | suffixes |(usedas| suffixes ent prefixes pg la & objective forms 2 prefixes) First person........ ima ik-, i-..... =ni, —n ics AA -ki, -k wi Hiatt eee -6. Second _ per- mas. | ma..... wik-, wi- .} -wi, -i.... soe te pu Pepe a MN Sie as alec cae seis cial teoeeae ay prgaeaae si Yeseer aay ils aes oo him Veneto rae MQ. = ral Mas Mee oles hee fem. | hima. .} hik-, hi-..} -hi, -a....)......--- SGA Soe BREEORES| RACER nee rre lamer ae ae 5 mas. | Oi, Gwi.| Ok-, G- Slee Shela as ccna = Keema eae che es leaececwa tons lace see ette See setae L Lee es occu Sil sce Sade 3 hus aibiese hae poe |) aes aeeses tae eect Third person (same as pl.) fem. | tixte tik-, ti- =the =thiece|odase sce Cn eRe re Poee se sorallltees Sacer ani Psens eee inmdaunite (sinpular|-22t6.0.<|52he0...0- 52 =tites cee cilieben ae SEE eee eee) | eee i= (Bt sesles lective or plural). i DUAL First person....... inima. .| in-, j-..... Se ance Ser Sot see Bosco SASnAdo Ree SeSea mop eEeCS sac Hades ace Second per-|mas. | winima| win-, wj- .| -wina....|.....----|------------|-------+|--- 22222 e ee [ee ee eee ee son. fem. | hinima.} hin-, hj-.. NAR Flac eres cal coco cca cle ssercral ae meanetes “ela ees create Third person seal esol - ae Best ere Saale Mar Pike Sul cd eae cea ew | Cok NE ay eR os | OPED E ferageiStnimMa .ISiM—)Si—-.4||—SIMAy —SINo eck cl soem melanin ae aee see amieree PLURAL First person........| inima..} in-j-.....| -iti....... Canoes —naka,-nuk]| yakit .} ice-..-...... -tse(1) SAGE SWEAT Wilt Wiete! Willson) siaaece sens |-ceceeHcaes a |e etna can aca n aca aa = ciel =f Second _ per- a lg é SEES BEBE be Sonne rs Bona be see was -—nana.....} nakit .| nak—-......| -tem son. ; d ae on fem. | hinima.| hin-, hi- ..) —hiti.....|........-|------------|--------|---+--------|--------- mas. | sima...| sik—,si-...} -ta.......|..-------|-------+----|----22--[ee-- 2202-22 -|- eee eee Piste! qoyevgsvab ay" NTS AS SPS e | SSpemosecno’| Heecaeeenee hus -—na (pas- | hakit .| eak-(some-) -Ul, -ti fem. | sinima .| sin-, sj-..-| -siti..-... (same sive) -i. times (with as sing.) used in | intran- singular | sitives) in an in- definite sense) The first point to be noticed in this table is the close relationship which the independent pronouns bear to the objective prefixes. In Chitimacha there is no distinction between them. In Tunica all but three of the independent forms consist of the corresponding objective prefix plus a syllable —ma, which there is reason to believe is identical with the coordinate conjunction ma or m@, meaning “‘and,” a con- junction often placed just before a quotation, where it has the sense of ‘“‘as follows.” The exceptions are the second person singular masculine in which the combination formerly occurred, it is evident, but the objective prefix has become lost, leaving ma to represent DS) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 this form by itself; and the third person singular, the masculine of which is identical with the subjective suffix, while the feminine con- sists'‘of the corresponding objective prefix and the feminine suffix —-te used with nouns and evidently connected with the word nuatet, woman. In Atakapa the independent forms of the second and third persons are directly taken from the corresponding objective prefixes, and those in the first person singular and plural are more closely related to the objective forms than to the subjective forms. It is to be added that the Chitimacha forms show clear indications of having been compounded, probably out of the old objective prefixes. All of these, except the form for the second person singular, end in —¢ or —s. Taken in conjunction with the affinities of the remainder of the word we have almost certain evidence that these sibilants are derived from the -c sufhix employed with Atakapa independent forms, as wic, nac, hac, yukitic, etc., which has in course of time become permanently united with the pronominal stem." It is plain that the independent plural forms in Atakapa are compounded of pronominal signs plus a suffix, or suffixes, -kit. Fimal—c is probably identical with the infinitive suffix —c to which reference has already been made. We must also separate from Tunica affixes, as evidently constituting no true part of the pronominal sign proper, k— in the Tunica singular objectives and the masculine plural, —n and —na in the Tunica dual and nearly all of the plural objectives, -t2 in the plural subjectives. We are now in a position to make a comparative study of the elements which enter into the composition of these forms. Reference has already been made to the origin of final —c¢ and —s in the Chitimacha independent pronouns. Comparing the first persons throughout we find evidence of two roots, 7 and 0 (or u), possibly formerly combined into one. The @ root is illustrated by the following forms: Tunica ima, ik-, inima, in, -ina, —iti, Chiti- macha ic, Atakapa hi-, ic, and possibly Tunica —ni, Chitimacha —hi, and Atakapa wi and yikit. The o root is wanting in Tunica but illustrated by Chitimacha wc, Atakapa —d, and perhaps Atakapa wi — and yikit, although it is possible that Chitimacha we and Atakapa tc— may be directly related to each other through a vowel shift. The stems of the Tunica second person are wi in the masculine and hi in the feminine. With these must be compared the independent Chitimacha forms him and was and the masculine suffix —. It is tempting to suppose Chitimacha him directly related to Tunica hdma, which would mean that Chitimacha formerly had the same suffix —na that appears with so many independent Tunica forms, but this can not be proved. Except for the subjective plural the Atakapa stem in this person is na. Possibly it is connected with hi since there is some evidence of an h—n sound shift, but at least it agrees with —nana, the 1 Final -c and -s are either phonetic variants of one suffix or two suffixes closely related in meaning. SWANTON] TUNICA, CITITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES Zo subjective sign of the second person plural in Chitimacha. In the third person we encounter the following correspondences: Tunica masculine singular and dual w, Chitimacha independent huc, Atakapa —ul in the third person plural subjective, and Atakapa ha in all other cases. ‘The feminine sign in the Tunica singular is #2 or ta. This does not occur in any other pronominal form, but may be compared with the Chitimacha demonstrative ta which designates feminine objects. Incidentally it may be observed that the prefix is almost identical with the Choctaw word for woman. In the third person dual and plural feminine, and the objective of the third person plural masculine, we find a syllable st. There is some question whether this ought to be regarded as a plural or a feminine sign, but since there are, besides, clearly marked signs for the dual and plural the theory that it is a feminine sign employed in the dual and plural has most to recom- mend it. In that case we must suppose that its employment in the masculine objective plural and masculine independent is later, and this idea is supported by the anomalous appearance of the —* suffix ordinarily found only with singular objectives. If the feminine origin of this syllable be admitted it furnishes us with an explanation of the Chitimacha feminine suffixes —ci and —c, employed in the second and third persons, although, indeed, in so far as our information extends, the latter are used only in the singular. The Atakapa objective sign for the third person plural is cak—, the employment of which shows clearly that it is only a shortened form of icak, person, and hence comparable with Tunica cz, a male human being, and Chitimacha asi, a male person or animal. A fact of considerable importance in establishing the relationship between these languages on the basis of their pronominal forms is the weakness of all of the signs employed to indicate the second and third persons of the singular. In Tunica the complete signs are —wi and —hi in the second person and —a and —ti in the third. The former are, however, usually reduced to mere single vowels. In Chitimacha, at least in late times, the masculine and feminine signs were not ordina- rily employed, a simple — suffix appearing in both persons, and finally Atakapa appears to lack any corresponding signs whatsoever. It can not be said that there is any inherent relationship between these two persons that would account for such similarities. To emphasize this point I reproduce the signs under discussion in the following table: Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa me —i (mas.) - - | is Second person singular. . - . . : ad ade hi, -a (fem.). . Third ale dy ie (MES eee ! ¢ digs a5 Cele Scr coo colle qe aocsc 5 56 ird person singular digihegleptyet 3 94 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 We now turn to the signs indicating number. In Tunica, as I have said, k appears in the singular, m in the dual and with most of the plural objectives, and -¢ with the plural subjectives. On turning to Chitimacha we find a syllable na employed with every subjective sufix in the plural, the only distinction in use between it and the Tunica signs being that it is placed before the pronominal sign proper instead of after it. In the third person the passive form consists of this sign by itself, the ordinary active form being identical with that employed in the third person singular which we have already discussed. At first sight there might appear to be some question whether this sign were related to the Tunica plural sign or the Tunica dual, since shifts between ¢ and n are common, but other evidence tells against this. In the following table the plural forms are brought into juxta- position: Tunica plural subjective | Chitimacha plural subjective suffixes ix = het Spetie A eed ie —naka. =Witleciie eon eee | ne —nNana. za OW Cer eRe apie OTN ak a i dee te nec e ee | d ae —na (passive). SGU oi etert es tene ete | | It will be noticed that all of the Tunica forms but one end in 2 and all of the Chitimacha forms in a. Now when we tabulate the Tunica duals instead we find the following: Tunica dual subjective | Chitimacha pluralsubjective suffixes suffixes SUID): hes eee A -naka. WAM aes: ee tere | d nana. SHAT aes fas Pe ce ple { [ERG 22) ce gate | 4 ; —na (passive). = 100: aes Seon ee | While it is true that the Chitimacha forms occasionally drop the final vowel the appearance of final a in both along with the n and the constant presence of final 4 in Tunica plurals appears to prove that it is the Tunica dual sign with which the Chitimacha sign is related. It may be supposed that Chitimacha anciently possessed a dual as — well as Tunica and that when the numbers broke down the dual suffixes were retained in preference to the former plurals. The prob- ability of this having taken place is increased by the fact that, as we have seen, even in Tunica, dual forms are employed as objectives in both dual and plural. SWANTON | TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 25 But while there is now no trace of the Tunica plural sign —t: in Chitimacha it is in evidence in Atakapa. It appears as the intransi- tive suffix -ti in the third person and traces are perhaps preserved in the first and second persons —tse(/) and —tem. It may be per- petuated also in the final consonant of the independent forms yukit, nakit, and hakit. Finally, this leaves the singular sign k to be accounted for. As noted above, it also appears in the masculine objective of the third person plural. While it can not be identified with certainty in the other languages it is worth while to observe that, with the exception of the Atakapa subjective suffixes in the first and second persons plural, which seem as a whole to be unrelated to each other or to anything else, all of the remaining unexplained forms in those languages contain a k. These are —ki or —k, the Chitimacha subjective suffix of the first per- son singular, together with the last syllable in the corresponding suffix of the plural which is clearly related to it, —naka, —k, the mascu- line suffix in the second person singular in the same language, and the k of the Atakapa independent and objective forms, yukit, nakit, hakit, and nak-. To account for the Chitimacha cases it may be suggested that the & sign which now appears only with Tunica objectives anciently entered into the subjective suffixes also, as is true of the corresponding dual and plural signs. In course of time these may have dropped off and disappeared, a vestige remaining in the first person and the third person singular masculine. If the Atakapa indefinite hi— is correctly characterized there can be little doubt of its relationship with Chitimacha ni— but its actual position as a prefix is somewhat uncertain. . We now have left as unique forms only the Tunica subjective suffix of the first person singular, —ni or —n, and the Atakapa subjective suffixes of the first and second persons plural, —tse(l), and —tem. Let us now summarize our analysis of the pronominal forms in the three languages: COMPARISON OF THE Roots ENTERING INTO THE PRONOMINAL ELEMENTS Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa i (sign of first person in all’) i (stem of independent | 1, hi (objective prefix, first numbers except possibly pronoun, first person person singular and plu- the first person singular singular). ral, and possibly corre- subjective). sponding . independent forms). hi (sign of second person | —hi (masculine subjective | (See na; marked by ab- feminine in all numbers), suffix, second person sence of suffix in sec- hima (independent femi- singular), him (inde- ond person subjective nine pronoun in singular). pendent pronoun, sec- singular). ond person singular). 26 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 COMPARISON oF THE Roots ENTERING INTO THE PRONOMINAL ELEMENTS—Con,. Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa wi (sign of second person masculine in all numbers). u (sign of third person mas- culine in singular and dual). ti, ta (sign of third person feminine in singular) (also cf. Tunica article ta). si (sign of feminine dual and plural and masculine plu- ral, third person). i (final sound in subjective suffix of second and third persons singular). ci (a male human being).. - - n (sign of dual and used also in all objective forms in plural, except third per- son masculine; in suffixes always appears as —na). was (independent pronoun ofsecond person plural), —1 (suffix, second person singular). —(na) na (subjective suffix, second person plural). (Marked by absence in sub- jective singular). na (stem of all independent pronouns and objective suffixes in second per- son). uc (independent pronoun, | —0 (subjective suffix, first first person plural). hus (independent pro- noun, third person sin- gular and plural). ta (feminine demonstra- tive). -ci (feminine subjective suffix, second person singular), —c (feminine subjective suffix, third person singular). —i (subjective suffix of sec- ond and third persons singular and third per- son plural, active). asi (a male person or ani- mal), na (sign of plural in all subjective suffixes, —naka, —nana, —na). person singular), wi (in- dependent pronoun, first person singular), yukit (independent pronoun, first person plural). ha (sign of third person in singular and in inde- pendent form of plural), -ul (sign of third person plural). (Subjective suffix of second and third persons singu- lar wanting). ca, icak (a human being), cak-— (prefix for third per- son plural, objective). SWANTON | TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 27 COMPARISON OF THE Roots ENTERING INTO THE PRONOMINAL ELEMENTS—Con. Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa -ti, -ta (sign of plural in all subjective suflixes). -te (infinitive suffix)........ -tc, —xtc (feminine suflix in Teka Cee OMA MER iG, woman). —c (infinitive suffix), ic, I; hus, he, they; uc, we; was, you (plural) (prob- ably contain same suflix =) Kite, WOMANS Skee; —ti (subjective suffix used withintransitivesin third person plural), also occurs perhaps in suflixes-—tse(1) (first person plural) and —tem (second person plu- ral), and as final sound in independent forms, yukit, nakit, hakit. —c (infinitive suflix used with pendent pronouns). frequently inde- kic, woman. The following may be added, but are more in doubt: Tunica ma (suffix used in forming most independent pro- nouns), probably from ma, and) k (used with objective pre- fixes in singular and with masculine prefixes in third person plural). 1 in -iti (indefinite suffix in singular and plural). Chitimacha Atakapa m in him (independent pronoun of the second person singular). —ki, -k (subjective pro- nominal suflix in first person singular), —-Kk (subjective pronominal suffix in third person sin- gular, masculine), k in -naka (subjective pro- nominal suffix in first person plural). ni- (indefinite objective prefix in singular and plural). k in nak (objective prefix in second person plural), the pronouns, yukit, nakit, hakit. and independent hi- (seems to be an indefi- nite prefix in singular and plural). In Atakapa there are a reciprocal prefix, a reflexive prefix, and also a reflexive particle placed after the independent pronoun. In 28 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY “[BULL. 68 Chitimacha one prefix is employed for both reciprocal and reflexive and there are independent reflexives employed after independent pronouns, but they are not much used. In Tunica we find a reciprocal prefix and a reflexive particle, but no reflexive prefix. The Atakapa and Chitimacha independent forms are nik in the former and néh in the latter, the stems of which appear to be related. The Tunica independent particle t¢ may be connected with these, but there is no certainty. The Chitimacha reciprocal and reflexive prefix is ap‘e which seems to be compounded of the locative prefix ap‘—, indicating ‘‘motion toward,’ and a phonetic ¢ which apparently conveys the reflexive idea. Possibly this prefix may have been derived from the locative suffix to nouns, demonstratives, and locative adverbs, —wp, with the infinitive added. At any rate there is some evidence in Tunica, and even a little in Atakapa, of the former existence of a reflexive prefix c-. In the former language we have a number of names of parts of the body beginning either with ¢ or s followed immediately by another consonant—an abnormal arrangement in Tunica. Another instance appears to occur in the use of the verb niya. Thus niyiikant means I think, but ieniyukani, I reflect. Another case is pité, to lose, and cpitu, to forget. Here and there we find additional indications pointing in the same direction, and it should be mentioned that c— is the reflexive prefix in Natchez. The Tunica reciprocal may be accounted for as a simple contraction of Chitimacha ap‘— or ap‘c-. The Atakapa reciprocal hok— or huk- clearly has had a different origin—perhaps, since it means “‘ together” as well as ‘‘each other,’ from some form of the adjective meaning all, which in Tunica has the form Adtu.! The Atakapa reflexive prefix hat— finds its counterpart in the Tunica hatdna, again, yet, still, which is contracted to hat and employed as a verbal prefix or an adverb placed just before the verb. This, in turn, may be con- nected with a Chitimacha prefix kas-, ‘‘ back,” to the place or toward the place from which the motion had started, the s in this prefix being identical with the reflexive ¢ already mentioned. Chiti- macha hi-, to arrive going, the opposite of ap‘, can not be identified with certainty in either of the other languages, though it may be compared with ti, the Atakapa stem of the verb to go, which fre- quently appears as an initial stem in Atakapa verb complexes. It may also be represented by the initial y of Tunica yuka, to arrive going, and yaka, to arrive coming. The Chitimacha prefix kap— which denotes completed action is probably derived from the independent verb kap, to stop, and both find their counterparts in Tunica hapa and Atakapa pé, which occur independently but more often as the second stem of a verb compound; as in sak’hdpant, I finish eating; cokyaxpeo, I finish eating. The Chitimacha prefix ne-, downward, 170 is probably a suffix, SWANTON | TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 29 is connected with the verb stem nei or ndéz, motion downward, and finds its cognates in Atakapa ni, to lie down; né, low; and Tunica na, to lie down. The Tunica locative prefixes are all derived from or closely con- nected with locative adverbs or postpositions. Ha-, up, may be compared with Chitimacha p‘e or p‘dz, up, and hd-, motion outward, with Atakapa pic, outside, and Chitimacha nuk‘, out, outside. Ki- from kiteu, both meaning in, into, is found in Atakapa kimati, inside, and perhaps in Chitimacha sekis, inside, Li-, motion downward, is contracted from hali, under, at the base of, with which we may compare Atakapa hal, back of, behind, last, and hai, under, and Chitimacha his, under. The few locative prefixes in Atakapa need not be considered, since one of them is identical with a nominal suffix and will be considered along with other suffixes of the same class, and the rest with certain adverbs or postpositions to be treated in connection with other independent stems. A plural suffix —m is found in both Chitimacha and Atakapa. The Chitimacha usitative suffix —w or —wi is paralleled by an Atakapa suffix —w, which generally has the force of a plural but is occasionally a usitative. In Tunica this is wanting, but the former presence of a suffix similar in form and in the same relative position in the verb is indicated by the constant appearance of final —w in disyllabic stems and the following specific examples: laki, it is night; la—u, at night; Ta-aie mili yarakati, Red River is falling; Ta-iaie mili yarati, Red River is low; drdtkata, I am nailing something; yuxki ta rotini, a nail; méra, me’ra, cylindrical, a roller; yunka merku, a spool of thread; tarku merkuniku, a wooden barrel; sapi, a wave; sapiku, there are waves; hintd wdran, let us go walking to hunt; ai arkalai ta hinu, “the walking thing that produces fire,’ a locomotive; hinazk ikyakati, I think like that; hinazku, it is like that; hinarkoho, it is not like that. Possibly this suffix has some connection with the initial vowel of uki, to sit, to remain. We find a somewhat similar state of affairs when we consider the Chitimacha causative suffix —pi, which is very prominent in that lan- guage. It may be compared with a terminal suffix —p in Atakapa, the function of which is now mainly syntactic, but which has an analogous significance, ‘‘because,’’ ‘fon account of.” While it is not clearly developed in Tunica, traces of it are abundant, showing that it is only just in process of disappearing from the language as a distinct suffix, In the first place, a quantitative comparison of the last consonant in disyllabic stems shows not merely that it occurs in more than one- seventh of all verb stems, but that it appears nearly five times as often in such stem’ as in the corresponding nominal stems. But we have more specific evidence. Thus the stem razki signifies to be closed, something tight; rarpa, to enclose, to catch by enclosing; raxpu, a 30 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY ’ [BULL 68 covering, a coat. We also find kéxpa, to surround, to enclose, and kaxpa, to collect, to gather, as if the element pa were essential to the thought in each. Lahi and laxpa both mean to burn, and the latter seems to consist of lahi plus a syllable pa, but the difference in use between the two is not apparent. Again, taka means to run after, to pursue; tapd, to catch, to grasp; and téxpa,totouch. Kantik utetkant means I am sucking something; tctixpakani, I am sucking out. This last refers to a doctor sucking blood from a wound, and the word may signify in reality ““I am causing blood to be drawn out.’’ Per- haps the syllables pi and pw in the following examples may belong in this class: tcoha ptnikaxtca, I shall be chief; tedha pi, be chief!; winima icoha prwiti, be chiefs!; lixpi, to enclose, to shut in; lixpu, a button, a blister (cf. léxki, to pour); kdxpu, to nip, to cut (with scissors), also the stem of the word meaning tongs (cf. kdzxtc, to bite); sopu, to wither or dry up (cf. sthi, dry) ; cizpu, to prick, to point (cf. cikur, knife; civkal, rock, flint). Paralleling the use of —pi in many ways Chitimacha has an auxiliary suffix -ti, signifying ‘‘to do,” and with this may be compared the Tunica causative auxiliary —ta or -ti. In Atakapa it may be repre- sented by the perfect suffix -t, which is used in such a way as to sug- gest at times the possibility that it was originally an auxilary. The Tunica perfect is —ki, which appears to be identical in significance and function with the Chitimacha perfect -—k2. The Tunica continu- ative is —ka, which finds its exact counterpart in Chitimacha —ka and agrees in position in the verb and in meaning with Atakapa —hv. The more common Chitimacha continuative, however, is —ci, which is placed much nearer the end of the verb complex and may probably be referred for its origin to the infinitive suffix —c. On the other hand, as we have seen, the Atakapa perfect must also be referred to a differ- ent origin. These facts point back, I believe, to a differentiation of one stem in Tunica and Chitimacha into a continuative —ka and per- fect —ki, the first of which, in form —/i, has been retained in Atakapa, while the perfect has been supplied from another source. The Chiti- macha volitional suffix —mi is closely paralleled in Atakapa by the volitional suffix —ni or —ne, and while m—n shifts are not common we seem to have here an assured case. It is to-day wanting in Tunica, but there is reason to think that in the noun-forming suffix —ni or —ne we have the vestige of this suffix combined with the noun- forming suffix —n employed in the other two languages. Thus, many nouns eee from verbs end in Chitimacha in mon, moa, or m@, in Atakapa in —nen or —ndn, and in Tunica in ~ne or —ni. In the first of these they are not often names of Basie aka but in the others such names are common. In Tunica the future suffix is -te, —xtc, or —xtca; in Chitimacha it is -tcu; and in Atakapa -fi or -ta. The first two may very well be Swanton] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 31 related, nor is a connection between them and the Atakapa form impossible. It is, however, a curious fact that both the Chitimacha and the Atakapa affixes correspond exactly with the similar stems of the verb “to go”’ in the respective languages, and it is also curious that their position in the verb complex shows considerable irregularity. The possibility may therefore be suggested that they originated in the employment of the verb to go as an auxiliary much as we in English say, ‘‘I am going to do so and so.” In that case we should have to assume that the Tunica suffix was unrelated or else that it had evolved after the incorporation of the stem -tcw had become complete. In Atakapa there is a second future suffix —he or -ehe not identified in the other two languages. The possibility of an evolution like that just suggested is reenforced by the position of the negative suffix in the three varieties of speech. These agree closely in form, in Tunica and Atakapa -ha and in Chitimacha —ka, but the Chitimacha and Atakapa forms also appear as auxiliary verb stems, while the Tunica suffix never does. In Tunica we do, however, find a verb stem pa to which -ha may be suffixed, the resulting form having the significance of ‘it is nothing.” Possibly pa may be the true equivalent of the other negative suffixes, but this can not be determined. As intimated in the foregoing discussion, all three languages have a suffix —n or —ni which I have sometimes called a noun-forming suffix, but it frequently has a perfect or passive significance, and in Atakapa is cften employed to bring one verb or clause into subordi- nation to another. The suffix —c, which I call the infinitive suffix, is present or contin- uing in connotation instead of perfect and complete like —n. It has - about the force of the English ending —ing or the present participle of the auxiliary to be—being. Although placed close to the verb stem in Atakapa and at the very end of the complex in Chitimacha it is used in both in such similar ways, notably in the subordination of one verb to another, that there can be little doubt regarding its essential identity in the two. In Tunica its place is taken in part by a parti- cipial suffix -te, which has about the same significance but is almost entirely syntactic in function. As -c is placed after personal and demonstrative pronouns in the two former languages to give emphasis it is possible that the nominal locative suffix —c in Tunica may be con- nected with it, and that either one suffix has been differentiated into two in that language or two have been reduced to one in the others. The past suffix in Atakapa is —at or -et and is extremely well devel- oped. In Chitimacha a similar differentiation between past and present, or rather past and aorist, has taken place and traces exist in Tunica, but nothing clear enough to rest an argument upon. 3) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 The Tunica interrogative and imperative —ki is apparently wanting in Chitimacha and Atakapa, and between those two languages the devices for indicating the moods are considerably different. How- ever, in view of the tendency observed in Tunica to employ one device for both, it is perhaps not mere accident that the interrogative in Atakapa and the imperative of the second person in Chitimacha are. alike indicated by a terminal particle or suffix a. In Atakapa the imperative of the second person singular takes no affix. Nothing either in Tunica or Chitimacha corresponds to the Atakapa imperative in the first person plural —16 or the imperative sign in the second person plural —-t0, although there may be some connection between the final vowel and the final vowel of the Chitimacha imperative suffix —mit employed in the first person plural. In Atakapa a final syllable -ta occurs which appears oftenest in future expressions in the first person singular, and this may have some connection with the Chitimacha particle té, although the latter generally appears to be interrogative in its nature. Thus we find in Atakapa: wi yilen akéta, I am going to stay to-morrow; nakit teko tia-lumlimicta, go ye and roll this barrel!; yakit dita, we will sleep; na ictsimta, you are going to pinch us; na caktsimta, you pinch them; it’ han ticta, where do you go? wi ticta, I go away; yiikit titita, we go away. While this appears to be only a form of the future ¢ (or —t/) it might readily have developed into the particle that we find in Chitimacha. Some of the auxiliaries have been touched upon. The Chitimacha auxiliary ka or kex, to want, to desire, shows no relationship to the Tunica equivalent, wana—which is not, however, employed as an auxiliary—but is somewhat closer to the Atakapa ko. The exact equivalent for the Chitimacha auxiliary —ho, signifying to be able, is not found in my Atakapa material, but wats, to know how, is sometimes used in the same sense. The Tunica word is cttéi(ka). Some of the Tunica auxiliaries have already been mentioned. The verb to go has the stem a in the singular and ci in the plural. The first of these is not very near anything found in the other languages, but it 1s possi- ble that the plural stem is connected with the Chitimacha singular stem tci. The stems of the verb to be, a and 6n, are also unlike any- thing in Chitimacha or Atakapa, unless the first may be related to Chitimacha hi, to be (sitting). However, some connection seems indubitable between azsa, to come, and Chitimacha ahi or dz, and haca, haci, to approach. If ana, to sit, is related to na, to lie, it may be compared with Chitimacha nate and Atakapa né, nat, to lay, to put. Up to the present time I have discovered no probable equivalent in either Chitimacha or Atakapa for the Tunica auxiliary ara, to remain. The Chitimacha plural suffix employed with nouns, —ka, seems at first sight entirely wanting in the other languages, but there are per- haps traces of it in the last consonant of the Tunica distributive Swanton] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 33 taxk, and in the k found with the following Atakapa pronouns and pronominal prefixes, yikit, we; nakit, nak—-, you; hakit, they. Of the principal locative suffixes -c seems to occur in both of these lan- guages, though its functions in the two are not identical. In Tunica this has the force of ‘‘to”’ with motion; in Chitimacha its employ- ment is more varied and it may be said to come nearer the English preposition ‘“‘of,’’ pertaining to something or to some place, and so verging also on a possessive. It is possible that this is connected with the infinitive suffix, which, as stated above, is used with pro- nouns as well as verbs, and, if so, it can be traced throughout all of the languages under discussion. An equivalent of the Tunica locative -ta, ‘‘at,’’ seems to occur in a vestigial form with Chitimacha demon- stratives, as hat, here, at this place; wet, there, at that place. There is less trace of it in Atakapa. Tunica —tik, toward, is parallel in meaning but not in form with Chitimacha -up. The ¢ in -tik (or —-ta) is possibly the same as the final consonant of the Atakapa post- position dt, toward, especially if Gatschet is right in identifying the vowel in -of with the stem of the verb to come, 6. We may also refer to tiwé, with, together with. On the other hand, Chitimacha -up probably finds its cognate in Atakapa —p, “at.” The com- monest Chitimacha locative, however, is —nki, or —ki, the latter form being used after consonants, and this covers the functions of both to and at. It is to be compared with the Atakapa —kin and —ki, which signify in or into. Some connection also exists in all proba- bility between Chitimacha —kin, with, and -ik, the Atakapa suffix having the same meaning. Tunica tg, with, is probably not con- nected with these. This occurs after clauses as well as nouns and in such situations has the sense of ‘‘while,’’ which aligns it with the Chitimacha subordinate conjunction té or td, when, after, while- Chitimacha tciin, for, on account of, is approached in function by a little-used Atakapa postposition, co. It is entirely wanting in Tunica. Nearly all of the Tunica indefinites and interrogatives are based upon a stem ka, demonstrative in character. With this may be compared Atakapa kai, then, at that time or place, and eastern Atakapa kut or kat, this. In Chitimacha there is a single case of the use of a final ka in the sense of where? Chitimacha am, what, some- thing, thing, may be compared with Tunica ma, which occurs in mahoni, nothing. Atakapa cdk, which corresponds to it in function, can not be identified in either of the other tongues. The demonstrative signifying an object close to the speaker and roughly agreeing with English “‘this” is almost the same in every one of these types of speech: Tunica hd or he, Chitimacha ha, Atakapa ha ora. The next degree of distance is indicated by words agreeing much less in form: Tunica hi, Chitimacha wé, Atakapa 100306°—19——3 34 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 ya. A still more distant position is denoted by Tunica mz or ma, Chitimacha ma, Atakapa ma. Chitimacha makes several other dis- tinctions by the use of its demonstratives. There is a feminine ta already mentioned, and compared with the feminine personal pro- nominal affixes in the third person singular. It may also be related to the Tunica article ta, the only demonstrative which retains its position before the noun. The Chitimacha plural forms of the demonstratives ha and ta, hd and t6, are wanting in Tunica, although the open vowel suggests some connection with the stem of the word for all, 6 or hd. My Atakapa material contains only the first three demonstratives. In the following table I have placed all of the comparisons insti- tuted in the foregoing pages in compact form: TABULAR COMPARISON OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa nahi, reflexive particle....) nuk, reflexive particle. a-, reciprocal; hatina, hat, | ap‘-, to arrive coming; | hat-, reflexive hék-, re- ‘tyet. Sapain,?? “stall” ap‘c-, reflexive and re- ciprocal, ‘‘each other,” (placed before verbs); ciprocal; kas-, ‘‘back,’’ |» ‘‘together.’’ trace of reflexive prefix ‘‘motion to place left;” | c-; ho(tu), all. 6, stem meaning “all;” | -up, toward. a, to go (singular); ci, to go | hi-, toarrive going; tcu, to | ti-, to go (singular) (fre- (plural); yuka, to arrive go (singular); tut‘, to go quently prefixed to other going; yaka, to arrive com- (plural). verb stems); tuk, to ing. bring. hapa, to finish, to end.....-. kap-, completed action; | pé, to finish. kap, to stop. ns, to-lte downs: 62.252 <-255.2 ne-, downward; nei, nax, | né, down; ni, to lie down. to descend. Ha MOlGn p-.s2ecny ee pe, pax, up, to ascend ..-.. ho-, motion outward, out...) nuk‘, out, outside......... puc, outside. ki-, motion into; kitcu, into.| sekis, inside............--- kimati, inside. la-, motion down; halu, un- | his, under.......-....---- hal, back of, last, behind; der, at the base of. . hui, under. -m, plural suffix.......-.. —m, plural suffix. -u, vestigial usitative or | —U, —Ui, usitative.......... —u, plural and usitative. continuative. —p, causative in process of | —pi, causative...........-- —p, connective suffix mean- disappearing. ing ‘‘on account of,” ““because.’’ SWANTON | TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 30 TABULAR COMPARISON OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—Continued Tunica --ta, -ti, causative auxiliary . -ka, continuative; ki, per- fect. te, infinitive suffix; -—ic, lo- cative suffix, with nouns, etc., signifying ‘‘to.”’ (Cemext) es 22s. MSS ak -—ne, —ni, noun-forming or passive suffix (probably contracted from nen and containing a vestige of the volitional). -te, —xtc, —xtca, future suffix -ha, negative suffix......... a (singular), to be........... axa LOLCOMG. sex sss n= - 0c ss taxk, distributive particle .. -c, locative ‘‘to” with mo- tion (see above). Chitimacha —ti, auxiliary suffix ‘‘ to do.”’ —ka, continuative;-—ki, per- fect. —c, infinitive suffix; —ic, lo- cative suffix after nouns, signifying ‘‘of.”’ —m, volitional suffix.....-. —n, —ni, noun-forming or perfect participial suffix. -tct, future; tci is also singular stem of verb to go (see above), -ka, negative suffix and stem. a, imperative of second person. -mil, imperative of first person plural. ti, particle of interrogative character. ka, kex, to want (auxiliary) hi, to. be (sitting)......-.- ihi, 4x, to come; haca, haci, to approach. ~ka, plural suffix with nouns, demonstratives and adjuncts. = ,locatine Ob? x sje: 3 . ..252s2c8 —tctn, on account of, for -- ma, still more remote.... - - ta, feminine demonstra- tive. 6 in ho and to (plurals of ha and ta). ka, where? (one case of this occurs). what, thing. am, something, Atakapa ot, particle, ‘‘toward;”’’ tiwe, ‘“‘with,’’ ‘‘together WodeG need? “near,” ‘‘close to,” -p, locative ‘‘at.”’ Cun ”? -kin, -ki, locative ‘‘in, -ik, ‘‘with.’’ c6, postposition sometimes meaning ‘‘for.’’ ha, a, this. ya, that. ma, still more remote. te, a particle used before certain nouns with the force of an article. mon, kuc, all; —-u, plural and usitative suffix (see above). kai, then, at that time or place; kut, kat, this (E). This leaves as entirely unaccounted for the Tunica imperative and interrogative suffix -ki, the auxiliaries ana, to sit, ara, to remain, the plurals 6n, to be, in, to cause, and auxiliary ho, to be able, and the Atakapa future in —he or -ehe, the past suffix —-at, the imperative suffix of the second person plural -td, and the indefinite cok, thing, something. The above investigation has involved the use of a certain number of independent stems to the examination of all of which we are now brought. The results of this examination are contained in the table which follows. Parts of words in parentheses are either affixes or sections of the word which there are strong reasons for considering to be affixes. Atakapa examples from the eastern dialect are followed by a capital (E) in parentheses; for clarity (W), ‘‘ western dia- lect,” is used occasionally; examples from the Akokisa dialect by (Ak) in parentheses. It is possible to adduce a number of other SWANTON] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 37 plausible examples, but their inclusion would increase the length of the paper without appreciably increasing the strength of the argument. No. Tunica il LoS S33eA see. aoe BE HOKG, SAD a5 \5.n2065- = + ane = Ooi | eoeeae Be diefasatcieress opisss\e< Aatik. river, bayoll:..:5.:. SE BSALCTs LORAIN = 5-250) 8 22 5) 6 | léti, green, unripe....... MmntCIKA OIA an = 5. ssc- & =e S$), urna, bullfrog: ........- OU rtetetcha = eictste icy vsyeteid winis-Siers*< 10 | muna, torun (asaliquid); tota, to run (asa horse, etc.). Ale Sporn. to tloat.-...--.=.--- Penge COMMS 22% ican ss.’ sm Mle wtO OSes soho. 2 foe's 2 14 | pitu, to lose one’s self... - 15 | itca, flesh; tixcuma, meat. ape stayd: DOD... 2% -2222- << 17 | laka, frost; nalu, to hail. . ile Gh Thee Sa es a HOB Samay to COOK. 24...)2 -2- 22 7A)! || Sete Gs SOS Goer re pe eee min wuk. to cook... ....- Ze Sed Shag Ma eel COMPARATIVE VOCABULARY Chitimacha Atakapa ki, water; kuin, river--- niki, gum, resin, pitch, sap. teat, river, bayou. .---.-- itciti, bile, gall;itcitem, yellow. tant, tree toad or frog; tina atin, bullfrog, “big tant.” GUCTU IOP eee aes st nux, to run, to flow; note, to float. peks, to float... .....% =- teaki, cold; hipc, winter. tuk, to lose (as a bird its feathers); tt, to finish, to end. nakt, ice, snow, tofreeze, cold, frost. cook. kakat, river, water, to rain; kako (Ak); akonst, river (E). hikt, soup, broth. nike, gum; niks (E). tai, river. il, green, fresh, new; kalla, new (E). hatsil, rusty, yellow; tat, yellow. anenul, bullfrog. akitéc, toad; kettoctt, frog (E). akna, to run (as a liquid) (ak— perhaps — ak, “liq- uid’’). pol, to float. aktsau, cold. axli(c), to lose. uc, body. hathe, body (E). alc, ice, snow, to freeze; adlect, snow (E); adlec- taggn, ice (E). am, to cook. tl6, to boil. wak, to broil, to roast. ai, a, house. 38 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 COMPARATIVE VOCABULARY—Continued 29 30 31 46 Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa romana, "heavy 262222.) 2 nahum, thick (as a fog).| kome, heavy and _ thick (man, smoke, etc.). oe ee Loe ee tobe os natse(kip), heavy; kési- | yack, heavy, full of; acebb, (ki), filled. heavy (E). haxcita, light (in weight).| hax, light (in weight). - - halu, under, at the base of.| his(kis), under.....-..-. hal, back of, behind, last; hai, under; holli, to lie down (EF). tamu, te pound... ..8 tx, to pound. 29 see. em, to pound. maka, fat, grease, oil..... niki, néki, fat, oil, | efi, fat, grease, oil. grease; cuc nema, soap, “wood fat.’’ waha} to weep, tolery; toi |e.i.- Jato ie iteee tee hai, to weep, tocry. crow, etc. SARUM see er, 5 téki, song, tune; téki- | nak, to play on an instru- yaxtpa, to play on an ment. instrument. See come Aina years, este 78 ee yak(t), to weep, cry, | yok, to sing. mew, and to play on . an instrument. SRE OS IO e oeaa kan, like, almost like ...| han, almost, to come near : doing, etc. WANA DOISLOP de oo Melsi See oll Serae seek ee ee haf, to stop. saxku, one; haixku, other,) unku,one,other, another | hannik, one (E). another. mak, foun sty. Ahecer Ge meca tours 2 okt ees imatol, four. PAC: PEN eee ee HEItEE steno Riel es ee polin, one hundred...... pup‘, one hundred .....| hiyen pdn, one hundred (hiyen, hog or opossum). EN TOMAS oo ee eee ae eee ete Een hayu, to laugh. amax, to make fun of; | wek, tolaugh;tolaughat| iwéu, to mock. mare, saucy. wixsa, to play, to joke. ..| watci(kikc), plaything. . yi, pain (cause invisible) .|} ni, sickness......-.-..-.. hé, pain, sickness. Seton Se te neers tek’; pain. -..-.....1..)-(e)tiu, Bick (Ee yaxci, to besick and to be| teks(t), to hate......... yakst, to hate (E); iuc, angry. angry. tes ti, Digs 2 oa ces eee ate, ata igs: ose oe hets, big; witci, big (E). huri, wind, to blow (see | hé, to blow; poku, wind | hi, wind, to blow. below). (see below). occ baveseauee Meee ee ee pox, to blow with the | pins, to blow with the mouth. mouth. SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 39 COMPARATIVE VOCABULARY—Continued sree ia ee bolo | atv adda oicos 4 ek Ss ae Mabe HOP) 8k lace - siete a cena 2 Sys Sale = =e DUssEGISEO Sanh a pallens creer eee ee Sebi es ore ie No Tunica EH | Pertate aleioraiers claisictatater ioe AGwitOka. f[OOtss2scces cows = OM levaevaniaial are) ayaicye < sisiarsyeists's. to-dig; ‘to: holldw 24 2t- soet ee cease ee moc, to dig, to bury. to plow. 167 | yaka, to arrive coming; | Shi, to come..........-- 6, to come; mok (sing.), yuka, to arrive going nau (pl.), to arrive. (cf. Axsa, to come). 685 "ma;s ‘ande eee a eee ne, and (between nouns).| n, and (between nouns). 169 | niyt, to think, to be- | kimi, to think, to be- | hinai, to think (cf. nak, to hear). SWANTON] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 45 COMPARATIVE VOCABULARY—Continued No. Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa 170 | wi, to hear, to listen, to | wop‘, to hear, to listen..| wif, to believe. understand. Wale) naxk, lake: near: 3222 ...\-.- nakc, near, close to;also | nak, about, near, like, small. very, so. Norm steals Wail rs scysh cess 2 == < nakc, war,warfare,fight, | nats, battle, to fight. | battle. Mian) wate, te fight <= 2) 2.2: wate, toattack- 2542.5. Te eS SR ee ef Tee Eee © See eee uikes ipmake:. 22 S22 eee 2 - Otse, snake. Medan Garner eRe etsy | nt .2 | 2S Ree SE ss 2 natkoi, snake (E). Baer ryae to Make. . es aoUsiraxtcl, axtea, tobe... -- tci, to be (standing ob- ject). gol | haxku, cypress-...------ akcuc, cypress (cuc = | tree). 332 | yaka, heron, crane....--. kake, heron, crane ...--- 333 | nara(ni), spirit, ghost (cf. | neka, spirit, ghost .....- nar, to fly). aa4 | kumac, stone........----- PE, BUODE Gs 55 advent re a35 | hixctika, dew....-.--...- [or Ts ei he So 336 | (cf. kayina, goose)... ..-. BAG AOORe os. -< = - - .~- enetst, goose (E). 337 | yari, to be ashamed...... néci, to be ashamed ...- Soo) |, Wits, to/COunt.--.--2.- 2 kes tONComn tae ses soon snaruxid..Mortar. soo: «=< hokuymontaticn- so. seer. When we examine this material to see what phonetic laws may be discovered governing changes between these languages, we find that many sounds do not change at all or change but slightly and that although sound-shifts certainly occur the number of examples illus- trating each is limited, while there are many indubitable sound- shifts of which only one or two cases are to be found. Between Atakapa and Tunica the following shifts appear to exist and are illustrated by more than one example: ATAKAPA L—TUNICA R ATAKAPA Y—TUNICA R Atakapa Tunica Atakapa Tunica pol, to float..... Las poru, to float. hayu, to laugh. .-.-.-.} eru, to laugh. Takegnard es oi Ge ra, hard. iyé, to rise, to grow.| éri, to raise, to lift. pal, flat, level... .. pira, flat, level. Wak LO Beales wniecet, rax, to close. ATAKAPA K AND X—TUNICA R ATAKAPA T—TUNICA R kof, kome, heavy. .| romana, heavy. ték, spotted. ......| rixsa, spotted. kak, forest sy. 2422 rixku, tree. ceTU EO DAGCO LL etsh) 2. era, tobacco. mak, a mound, a} mura, a mound. GlleGANGE a= = =. <= héri, canoe. knot. ta ppCiore... .. =<: - > tiri(c), before. CME DACK Soc. .32e%ee cira(ta), back. TblatbOrexeele sre, peri, to excel. MOR POM. ee ees onir, horn. 52 ATAKAPA K—TUNICA H BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY ATAKAPA N—TUNICA T Atakapa Tunica isa ko tOvGnVas see siha, to dry. kets} Taties:'s22- 22 hoxtci, to limp. ATAKAPA TS—TUNICA S ots, grain, seed..... uxsu, seed.! teak: to Cryst oe oe sihu, to dry. ATAKAPA TS—TUNICA C Keta(ti), lelitee..:.....2 okec(ta), left. tatlam.quailesee-.- | cilawaya, quail. tsic, satisfied....... capa, satisfied. .| rici, nose. WES NORE ssc eee ATAKAPA C—TUNICA § icth, totore 224 Pee saka, to ford. Atakapa Tunica nam-to- begs «2.52! | tama, to beg. nok, arm (including | tuka, shoulder. shoulder). ATAKAPA TS—TUNICA T hets, big; witci (E) | té, big. tsam, to join........ | tepi(n), joint. ATAKAPA T—TUNICA L iti, dark; tegg (E), night. la, night. tai, straight.....--. leyu, straight. ATAKAPA M—TUNICA P mma. to) kill see tsam, to join........ .tépi(n), joint. rapa, to kill. [BULL. 68 Coseediise 22a ek uxsu, seed.! sa, dog. mak, to plunge... . pata, to fall. enlitdog 4 ier . ATAKAPA N—TUNICA M ATAKAPA C—TUNICA TC efi, grease........--. maka, grease. MC SOOULY vet see itca, flesh. Hin, lowse.-. =. Sa aae nami, louse. kic, woman......... nuxtci, woman. cick salt Seen _haxtca, salt. ATAKAPA N—TUNICA M con, to rattle......- tcasa, to rattle (?). woc, to whistle. .... | wiutci, to whistle. an, $0 Hunts. * ose sae mé, to hunt. -c, infinitive suffix. -tc, subordinating | n, and (between ma, and. nouns). | suffix. 1T believe both of these comparisons are correct, uxsi being the parent form, or near the parent form. The following shifts are illustrated by but one example, but in each case the example is a strong one: n-r; w-r; y—h; p-h; tlt; tn; h-y;\l-y5'h=p; yp; pa. Between Atakapa and Chitimacha we find the following shifts llustrated by more than one example: SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES ATAKAPA K—CHITIMACHA H Atakapa Chitimacha 53 ATAKAPA N—CHITIMACHA T Atakapa Chitimacha kak, forest. ..-..-.-- heéka, log. eomnest hte Kees 2 Mos nahum, thick. ATAKAPA TS—CHITIMACHA C AND § keta(ti), left. 2:2. Otay peedis soles eae: tsop, spotted.......- ketal, liver. ..:...-- matsiwa, fly... ...-. tsan, to hide.......- tséiwan, to forget. . | kisak(tic), on the left hand. teasa, seed, grain. cap, spotted. cic, nose. kési, liver. macku, fly. cix, to hide; se, in- side. cik, to forget. ATAKAPA C—CHITIMACHA § MSRM DL Gene eter ora 5 a Oci, on the edge of.. né-cil, to sweep . . -- cit, tree moss... .-- asi, male. si, border, rim. nas, to sweep. sits, tree moss. ATAKAPA C—CHITIMACHA TC (OR TS) yack, heavy......-- kic, woman........ Ut), otD Sew... .- S1Cie Balt. = - TYel ROM 0) ee ee ee kancinkc, oak....... cec, mulberry; tsi- cibb (EB). COMMON erot asks oe (n)atse(kip), heavy. kitca, woman. tcuc, to sew. tsaxtsa, salt. _ utci, to rot. | kaxtcintc, oak. sixtsup, mulberry. teun, for. nak, to play on an | téki, to play on an instrument. tem, to kill (pl.). instrument. nima, to, kall:--..--- ATAKAPA N—CHITIMACHA M | nik, female breast. .| mi, female breast. MOK, WOT ee) ste nc € imps, horn.' —ne, volitional suffix] —mi,volitional suffix ATAKAPA H—CHITIMACHA K kan, like, almost : like. —ha, negative suffix.| —ka, negative suffix han, almost. 22... -- ATAKAPA L—CHITIMACHA T tek, to wet. (aki)lik, to wet....-. | | pitik(nic), smooth. pal, flat, level....... ATAKAPA N—CHITIMACHA N an, house. see aeeee hana, house. efi, grease.........-. | niki, grease. ATAKAPA M—CHITIMACHA W makéts, lizard....-- wakic, lizard. mak, to plunge....-. watu, to fall. 1 See footnote, p. 45. The following shifts appear in one example each: y—h; p-h; k-t; ts-t'; k-y; l-y; w-tc; n-s; k-c; y-t; h-n; ts—n; c-y. 54 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (BULL. 68 Chitimacha and Tunica show the following apparent shifts illus- trated by more than one example each: CHITIMACHA K—TUNICA H (OR X) Chitimacha CHITIMACHA T—TUNICA R Tunica —ka, negative suffix. | tuk, to throw, as to throw out earth in digging. pak‘(ti), to scratch, to smooth. kap(te), to finish. ..| asec eWavass- een muku, back..2.--=-- | ukctcu, oyster. ...-- kate, to shove, to push. CHITIMACHA Hupp iitordie-. 23.22. nim, nim, to land... TUR UO MEU ate nakt, frost, ice, cold. née, ground, land !.. Pini Ted. tec ost _ pehu, to dress wood. —ha, negative suffix. toho, to throw. | | hapa, to finish. hixctka, dew. naha, back. uxcik, shell. hict, to shove, to push. N—TUNICA L lapi, to die. Japa, to land. luta, to run. laka, frost. | hali, ground, land.! | mili, red. CHITIMACHA T—TUNICA L tap!; darkisad opie. | teks to ween: tre tsat(papa), a fork... sit, thorn tree.-..... tcext, blackbird. ..- IROL: Istollewe Soe 8 la, night. lixte, to wet. teali,‘a fork. salak, thorn tree. cilxka, blackbird. loha, hole. CHITIMACHA N—TUNICA Y ni, to be sick yi, pain. néci, to be ashamed.| yari, to beashamed. nipi, to cook NOCtIN, Nallsses seas yuki, to cook. yuxki, nail. Chitimacha waiti, to surpass. .... hutta, boat, canoe - - . keti, side ofa diuk: 3. Nee tOpaAceor. assent: | pitik, smooth....2.- Tunica | tem, to kill (pl.)....| rapa, to kill. peri, to surpass. héri, boat, canoe. kara, side of. era, tobacco. pira, flat, level. CHITIMACHA K, X, AND H—TUNICA R kaku, to know | peks, to float........ uk, to count...2. koks, globular. ....- hoku, mortar....... | neka, spirit, ghost. . - pok‘ta, cloud, sky. . kéka, log? . 222-2222! eru(sa), to know. port, to float. wira, to count. kora, round. naruxki, mortar. nira(ni), spirit, ghost. apart, cloud, sky. | teex, curly, kinky..| tciru, curly, kinky. rixku, tree. CHITIMACHA C AND TC—TUNICA R hetc, to watch, to look. kate(ti), to drink.... néci, to be ashamed. hara, to watch, to look. kora, to drink. yari, to be ashamed. telesbediec se oceceer 2 racki, leaf. Cie; Nose tae eee eee rici, nose, kee -Clamen sense kirka, bivalve. CHITIMACHA M—TUNICA P Cem, «Oph eae er mic, trail, road rapa, to kill. pita, to walk; pi, to go out. 1 There is some reason to think that these words may be connected with the words meaning down, low, on the ground, in the respective languages, ne, nei, to descend, nekup, downward, halu, down, in which case the above would not necessarily be comparable. swanton] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 5d CHITIMACHA M—TUNICA N CHITIMACHA TC—TUNICA C Chitimacha Tunica Chitimacha Tunica mate, to lead....... naxca, to lead. teim, nest..........| cé, nest. mi, breast (female)..| nic, breast (female). | tet, to go (singular).| ci, to go (plural). imps, horn’*.......- Onir, horn. feu, tO EW ss... 2 cuxtci, to sew. teaix, happy. =. 522s. cipa, satisfied, CHITIMACHA N—TUNICA M happy. teiic, caterpillar, | cila, caterpillar, ini, to pursue....... mé, to hunt. worm. | small creature. neki, niki, grease, | maka, grease, fat, fat, oil. oil. CHITIMACHA C—TUNICA TC nuc, Bone. ..-------| kumac, stone. as Honerieve Acie, Bell ne, and (with nouns)| ma, and (employed | _ ‘ : 5 eOviadrip:...-.-.--| teolu,to.drip: enerally). ere : Sanit ‘ y) -c, infinitive suffix. .| -tci, subordinating suffix. CHITIMACHA TC—TUNICA §S CHITIMACHA TC—TUNICA T peaks} cold: ).J..+i2-- sapa, cold. antch, ‘iathers:..'2 2. si, father. utci, rotten. ......-| ydta, rotten. teap, dried up......| sdpt, dried up. teat, river, bayou...) titik, river, bayou. 1 See footnote, p. 53. Illustrated by one strong example in each case are the following shifts: k-p; p-k; y-r; p-m; h-y; k-y; y-k; ts—h; n-t. On comparing the similar forms in all three languages we find very few cases in which the same change occurs in all more than once. The following are, in fact, the only ones: TUNICA R—CHITIMACHA AND ATAKAPA T Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa peri, to surpass..........-- waiti, to surpass.......--- | Iti, to surpass. Hesels CATOG: 2. ~ ehipisie cl ins NUtA CaMOe? ow -s 6 yee | tu, canoe. | Clap CODBCCOm = se ayac stein 3 -\= = Net tOWACCOs --.-ss ss = 4 tsit, tobacco. TUNICA L—ATAKAPA AND CHITIMACHA T [2 1d eben ee a tap Cathe. hs. an a iti, dark; tegg (E), night. silax, honey locust ...-..-- sit, honey locust. .--.------ nit, honey locust. TUNICA AND ATAKAPA N—CHITIMACHA M nic, female breast. .....-.--. mi, female breast. ..-- -- -- | nik, female breast. PURE MGMT cy = oe sinh imps, horn...------------ / nox, horn. | | 56 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 68 TUNICA M—CHITIMACHA AND ATAKAPA N (AND N) Tunica Chitimacha Atakapa maka, grease, oil, fat... ..-| niki, neki, grease, oil, fat..| efi, grease, oil, fat. WGGLO MUN trea a eee ini, to pursue 2s ss ane in, to hunt. MoO Gap ce. 5 eee etc ne, and (between nouns)-..| n, and (between nouns). TUNICA AND CHITIMACHA TC OR TS—ATAKAPA C WUXtCky WOMEN 2255 So yor kites, WOMaHL. 2s ose. ce kic, woman. a xtenysal tes see, ete as tease calf eee eee cick, salt. Of 63 correspondences between consonants in all three languages 13 are between t,1,n, r, and y; 11 between s, c, ts, and tc; 4 between n, fi, and m; and 3 between p, m, and w. CONCLUSION From the above data I conclude that we have in the so-called Tunican, Chitimachan, and Atakapan stocks merely widely divergent dialects of one stock. All three agree closely in structure, there being no grammatical category, and no feature of composition of any con- sequence in one not represented in at least one of the other two. Of 17 phonetic features exhibited by the pronouns and pronominal affixes of the three languages 14 are found to be shared in common by at least two. Of the remaining affixes more than two-thirds possessed by each language are present in at least one of the others. Of the independent stems in any way comparable we find resemblances in between one-fourth and one-third of the cases. It is not likely that all of the correspondences entered in my list would be found valid, granted more extensive information, but I believe that the number of resemblances found in such comparatively fragmentary material tells in favor of the relationship rather than against it. If the relationship is admitted, and I think it must be, we find that we now have one linguistic group formerly occupying a long, narrow ter- rain extending from the Gulf coast with but slight interruption as far up the Mississippi River as the northwestern counties of the State of Mississippi, and with a westerly arm almost at right angles, running along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico from the mouth of the Mississippi to Galveston Bay and inland still farther toward the west. The impression created is of a body of Indians from the west pushed east and south by the expansion of the Caddoan peoples. It remains to be seen whether the connection ends here, or whether the newly identified group is affiliated with the Muskhogean stock to the east or the smaller stocks of central and southern Texas. In order not to complicate our nomenclature I suggest that the term Tunican, the oldest of the three in point of usage, be extended over the new stock, the three sections being known by their simple names, Tunica, Chitimacha, and Atakapa. O » oa a le ta re de “os : Inv 21 MN |