Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 23:07:54 -0800
From: Birrell Walsh birrell[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]WELL.SF.CA.US
Subject: Re: ADS
My friend Dan Alford is a linguist of the Cheyenne language. He's
subscribing, but asked that I pass this on to you.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 09:01:13 -0800
From: Dan Alford dalford[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]s1.csuhayward.edu
To: birrell[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]well.com
Subject: re: ADS (sent also to your bitnet address, so resending)
Interesting fwd. I remember what Sakej said once about this topic -- "I
don't like the word 'Indian'. Too many 'i's (eyes)."
Of course, "Anishinabe" (for sure) and "Assiniboine" (probably) both mean
simply 'The People'. In fact, it's an almost sure bet all through North
America, and even generally true throughout the world, that whenever you
unpack an indigenous people's name for themselves, it means things like:
the people, the ones whose are like us, etc.
I know Anishinabe is Algonquian, and Assiniboine is either Algonquian or
Siouxan (Xkhotan?) -- it's really hard to tell sometimes because although
these are seen to be two major language families, the Cheyennes used to
tell me that there is a deep relationship between the Cheyennes and Lakhotas
that doesn't show up in the whiteman categories. This perhaps had to do with
the Cheyennes already being on the Plains when the Xkhotas arrived, and the
Cheyennes taught them the "Sundance" and other spiritual ways of the Plains,
and there was early intermarriage.
Of course that's only one of many mysteries lurking beneath the surface
of Invader categories of The People. For instance, the way I hear it from
those who live in Nova Scotia, the *Pre-Proto-Algonquian crowd scooted
south during the last ice-age (or the last gasp of the mini-ice-age 8K
years ago or so? -- they're not real good at linear time!) and vacationed
in Mexico while they waited it out; then headed back north and had to
sing the trees back into existence where the glaciers had bulldozed them).
Now I don't particularly care whether you believe all the details or not,
but what is being said here is very important to anthropological linguists:
there is an unsuspected Algonquian influence on the languages of Mexico
(but the Algonquians were *always* way up north, weren't they?). It's just
a matter of what kind of time depth you're willing to look at. If I were
looking into a claim like this, I'd start with the startling similarities
between Mayan and Mikmaq (aka Micmac) glyphs.
Well, more later. I thought I'd saved your message with *subscribe* info,
but it is lost in the electronic haze. Pls send me it again. You may want
to fwd my above to the list, a shadow of my coming!!
-- Moonhawk (%- )
"The fool on the hill sees the sun going down and
the eyes in his head see the world spinning round"
-- John Lennon