Cochimi and proto-Yuman: Lexical and syntactic evidence for a new language family in Lower California (University of Utah anthropological papers ; no. 101)

cover

title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publication date: lcc: ddc: subject:

next page >

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman : Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California Anthropological Papers (Salt Lake City, Utah) ; No. 101 Mixco, Mauricio J.; Barco, Miguel del University of Utah Press 0874801508 9780874801507 9780585128481 English Cochimi language--Grammar, Cochimi language--Texts, Cochimi language--Glossaries, vocabularies, etc, ProtoYuman language--Glossaries, vocabularies, etc. 1978 PM3688.M5eb 497/.5 Cochimi language--Grammar, Cochimi language--Texts, Cochimi language--Glossaries, vocabularies, etc, ProtoYuman language--Glossaries, vocabularies, etc.

cover

next page >

< previous page

page_i

next page > Page i

Frontispiece: Map of Lower California languages and missions in the eighteenth century. (Drafted by Donald Songster)

< previous page

page_i

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_iii

next page > Page iii

Number 101 1978

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California by Mauricio J. Mixco Foreword by Ernest J. Burrus, S. J. University Of Utah ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS Jesse D. Jennings, Editor Carol Georgopoulos, Associate Editor

< previous page

page_iii

next page >

< previous page

page_iv

next page > Page iv

Disclaimer: This book contains characters with diacritics. When the characters can be represented using the ISO 8859-1 character set (http://www.w3.org/TR/images/latin1.gif), netLibrary will represent them as they appear in the original text, and most computers will be able to show the full characters correctly. In order to keep the text searchable and readable on most computers, characters with diacritics that are not part of the ISO 8859-1 list will be represented without their diacritical marks. Copyright © 1978 by Mauricio J. Mixco All rights reserved International Standard Book Number 0-87480-150-8 Printed in the United States of America

< previous page

page_iv

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_v

Page v Contents Illustrations

vii

Foreword by Ernest A. Burrus, S. J.

ix

Preface and Acknowledgments

xiii

Cochimí Ethnohistory

3

Grammatical Sketch of Cochimí

13 13

Philological Phonology 14 Abbreviations 15 Vowels 16 Spirants

and 17

Orthographic Voiced Obstruents 18 Nasals Cochimí Syntax

21 21

Higher Predicates and the Simple Sentence 29 The Lower Predication 41 Subordination Cochimí Texts

47

Comparative Cochimí-Yuman Lexicon

69

Appendix I: Translation of Del Barco's Grammatical Notes

103

Appendix II: Reproduction of Del Barco's Lower California Texts 106 References

< previous page

119

page_v

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_vii

Page vii Illustrations Frontispiece: Map of Lower California languages and missions in the eighteenth century. (Drafted by Donald Songster) 1. Voiced vs. voiceless obstruents: examples

17

2. Voiced vs. voiceless obstruents: gross totals

18 18

3. Voiced vs. voiceless obstruents: phonological environments 4. Final velar nasal: examples

19

5. Sounds used in the regularized orthography

19

6. Independent subject pronouns

30

7. Conjugation of verb

34

, 'to arise'

8. Conjugation of verb

, 'to love'

35

9. Conjugation of verb

, 'to love'

36

10. Informal schema of the proposed Cochimí-Yuman family

< previous page

page_vii

77

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_ix

next page > Page ix

Foreword The long, narrow, mostly sterile peninsula of Lower California was one of the most difficult regions in all of Spanish America to conquer and settle. Cortés, who overcame in a short time the defenses of Mexico City and central Mexico, was less successful in gaining a foothold on the tip of the forbidding land. The only results he could show of his 1535 attempt to colonize Lower California were a rough map of the area explored and a few pearls. Within him rankled bitter memories of defeat, dissension and disaster. During the next century and a half, visions of pearls and precious metals lured one admiral or captain after another to the barren land across the stormy gulf. The 1683-1685 expedition, headed by Admiral Isidro de Atondo y Antillón and Father Eusebio Francisco Kino, and supported by royal ships and soldiers, seemed to promise certain success. The vast region was again claimed for the King of Spain. The expeditionaries were the first non-Indians to traverse the entire Peninsula and, like other Balboas, gaze on the vast Pacific. They brought back a few small pearls, some excellent maps drawn by Kino, and accurate reports on the people and the land. But real success meant the establishment of at least one permanent settlement and that they failed to do. Father Kino never forgot the natives around La Paz and San Bruno. "I will come again" was not an empty boast or promise. His efforts to return constitute a story unique in mission history. For more than a quarter of a century, he importuned viceroys, bishops and superiors in Mexico, kings and royal officials in Madrid, Fathers General in Rome, and benefactors everywhere to come to the aid of his abandoned brothers and sisters across the Gulf of California. The expedition revealed to him the key to ultimate success: provision the unproductive region from the fertile fields of the Sinaloan and Sonoran missions. He inspired and helped his own countrymen and fellow Jesuits, Juan María Salvatierra and Francisco María Piccolo, to establish in 1697 California's first permanent centertown, mission, and presidioat Loreto on the east coast. Other Jesuits gradually joined the two pioneers. Missions and towns were established to the west, south and north of Loreto. Since small and unreliable maize patches could not support these centers, horses, mules, cattle, sheep, goats, grain, vegetables, and clothing were ferried from the continent. The Jesuit efforts for the next seventy years did not add up to an unbroken series of successes. Violent death at the hands of disgruntled or

< previous page

page_ix

next page >

< previous page

page_x

next page > Page x

uncomprehending Indians was the fate of two missionaries. Several centers were destroyed or abandoned. Epidemics periodically decimated the congregated native flocks. But before their expulsion in 1768, the Jesuits had founded eighteen principal centers, each with its own church and several dependent chapels, where the missionaries came when they could. They established schools in the larger missions, and the most important learning center for boys and girls at Loreto. From 1687 to his death in 1711, Kino carried out some two score expeditions on the Mexican mainland, most of them in order to find a land route to the Peninsula. He won over many tribes; he wrote numerous and detailed reports on the lands and the peoples he visited; he drew accurate maps which not only recorded the northern fringe of colonial New Spain but correctly depicted Lower California as a peninsula. He did not convince everyone, nor did he succeed in establishing a land route to the Californias; he was forced to continue to ship cattle and produce across the treacherous gulf. Subsequent missionaries carried on numerous expeditions throughout the Peninsula in the hope of finding safe ports of call for the Manila Galleon, more productive lands and new tribes to missionize. Outstanding in such efforts were Juan de Ugarte, Fernando Consag and Wenceslaus Linck. The true significance of the Jesuit enterprise can be best appreciated when we recall that the peninsular missions served as the spring-board for the exploration and settlement of Upper California. Without the more than seventy years of pioneer efforts in the Peninsula, the northern enterprise would not have been possible for many more years. When the first expeditionary force set out in 1769 to settle San Diego and to explore other sites farther to the north, it was the ex-Jesuits' military commander Fernando de Rivera y Moncada who guided Portolá and Serra. Food supplies, horses, mules, cattle, even the Indian carriers and foot soldiers, came from those in the Cochimíspeaking region since it was closest to Upper California. The linguistic difficulties the missionaries encountered in the peninsular apostolate were enormous. The missionaries on the 1683-1685 expeditionKino, Goñi and Copartwrote down lists of words as they heard them from the Indians. These pioneer documents are not known to exist. Other Padres tried to reduce to grammatical schemes the languages they used in their dealings with the natives. A strange medley of languages and tribes appear in the missionaries' letters and reports. The three main groups mentioned by them will be pointed out here. Pericú, the native language of the southern region, seems to have disappeared before the close of the eighteenth century, about the time when the exiled Jesuit historian Francisco Clavigero wrote his Storia della California (Venice, 1789) inasmuch as he refers to it as virtually extinct. Guaycura, found to the north of the Pericú-speaking area, was spoken by the Guaycura proper, the Coras, Conchos, Uchites and Aripas. The Jesuit missionaries often referred to the Conchos as Lauretanos because they lived in and around Loreto. The Conchos proper were often at war with a tribe closely allied to them: the Monquíes or Laimones. Cochimí, in various forms (including Edu and Didu or Didiu) was the Language spoken throughout the northern part of the Peninsula, beginning slightly south of Santa Gertrudis. The Jesuit missionary Wencelaus Linck, in his epochal 1766 trip to northeastern Lower California, came across Indians in the San Mártir Mountains who could not understand Cochimí; they are usually identified as the Kiliwa. Professor Mauricio J. Mixco, of the University of Utah, has devoted many years to a scientific and enthusiastic study of the languages of northern Lower California and southern Upper California. His Ph.D. dissertation presented in 1971 a Kiliwa grammar. Many scholarly articles since then not.

< previous page

page_x

next page >

< previous page

page_xi

next page > Page xi

only took up further analyses in this field but studied other languages in the same area: Paipai, Ñakipa, Yakakwal, Mojave, and Cochimí. Thus he comes eminently prepared to offer scholars a truly unique monograph, Cochimí and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California. Professor Mixco is most fortunate in being able to use the texts furnished by the Jesuit missionary Miguel Del Barco who worked thirty years in Lower California (1738-1768) among the natives. An exact photographic reproduction of Miguel Del Barco's texts has furnished a reliable source for the present study. As a scientific linguist, Professor Mixco is aware of the missionaries' exceptional competency and opportunity: a good linguistic background (Spanish, Latin, Greek, etc.) and constant daily contact with the natives. ERNEST J. BURRUS, S.J. JESUIT HISTORICAL INSTITUTE ROME - TUCSON

< previous page

page_xi

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_xiii

next page > Page xiii

Preface and Acknowledgments This study contains two contributions to North American linguistics: the first in-depth study of Cochimí (an extinct language of Lower California, Mexico), whose syntax has been an almost complete mystery for nearly 200 years; and the demonstration of an especially close genetic affiliation between two alleged members (Cochimí and Yuman) of the putative Hokan stock (Sapir 1929), notorious for its resistance to past hypotheses of affiliation (Langdon 1974). The following families and isolates of the North American Pacific Coastal regions are traditionally included in the Hokan stock. From Northern California to MesoAmerica, they are: Karok, Palaihnihan, Shastan, Yanan, Pomoan, Washo, Esselen, Salinan, Chumashan, Yuman, Cochimi (an), Seri, Tequistlatecan, Suppanecan (i.e., Subtiaba-Tlappanecan), and, most recently, Jicaque (Greenberg and Swadesh 1953). The rediscovery of the long-unexploited Cochimí data contained here was first reported by Prof. Rudolph Troike at the First Conference on Hokan Languages in 1970 (UCSD, La Jolla; see Troike in Langdon and Silver 1976, 159-65). Troike attributed the find to Dr. Giorgio R. Cardona, who came across the manuscript (henceforth mss. 1413/1414) in the Fondo Gesuítico of the Biblioteca Nazionale Vittorio Emmanuele II in Rome. The data formed part of a work on the natural and human history of the peninsula by an eighteenth-century Jesuit, Miguel Del Barco (León-Portilla 1973). Troike correctly assessed the value of these materials to Americanists in stating that "we are now . . . in a better position to assess the relationship between Cochimí and Yuman." He supported this contention with remarks on a few of the more striking morphological parallels between the languages, and a comparison of well-known Cochimí vocabularies from the nineteenth century (Gatschet 1887, 387-407) with modern Yuman data. I did not see the data contained in mss. 1413/1414 until five years later, through the kindness (here gratefully acknowledged) of Dr. Miguel León-Portilla, who forwarded me his edition of Fr. Del Barco's Historia Natural y Crónica de la Antigua California (León-Portilla 1973). At first the texts were quite intractable, even though they were the Cochimí version of some of the standard Roman Catholic devotions (Our Father, Hail Mary, Credo). Del Barco had refused to provide a literal translation, much less a word-by-word gloss (Batllori 1951, 105). A rough lexical analysis became necessary in order to assess the comparative value of the texts. Del Barco's grammatical notes (translated in Appendix I), while brief, are extremely useful; they identify the

< previous page

page_xiii

next page >

< previous page

page_xiv

next page > Page xiv

the aspectual suffixes, the position of conjunctions and adverbials, and so on. All other grammatical analyses beyond these notes are my own responsibility and can be assessed on the basis of the textual materials, reproduced in their entirety at the end of this study. Facsimiles of Del Barco's manuscript will be found in Appendix II. Using the familiar prayers as a Rosetta Stone, the typical structures underlying the phonology and syntax of the texts became apparent. Even in the early stages, it became clear that while Cochimí was in no way a Yuman language as this term is traditionally used (Massey's term ''Peninsular Yuman" is therefore a misnomer for Cochimí; see Massey 1949), there was sufficient evidence to forge the long-suspected link between the two languages. In order to check some scribal inconsistencies in the published version, it became necessary to study the original manuscript. I therefore asked the advice of Fr. Ernest J. Burrus, S.J. (foremost authority on the Jesuit historiography of Mexico) on contacting the Biblioteca Nazionale in Rome. Fr. Burrus obviated a long and costly process when he kindly placed a microfilm copy of mss. 1413/1414 at my disposal. Fr. Burrus heads the list of those whose help has advanced this study; in addition to the priceless microfilm, he gave generously of his time and knowledge during a week (in January, 1978) in which I enjoyed the hospitality of the Jesuits' Kino House in Tucson, Arizona. Any value this monograph may have is in large part due to Fr. Burrus' timely collaboration. I remain, of course, entirely responsible for any possible misinterpretation of the historical record he made available to me. Fr, Heizer, librarian of the Vatican Repository at St. Louis University, deserves special thanks for his opportune suggestion that I contact Fr. Burrus. Many linguists have contributed their criticisms of this work. Foremost is Prof. Margaret Langdon (UCSD, La Jolla), who helped me to realize the importance of presenting the results of my research in the present form, rather than in a series of shorter articles. Professor Langdon and anthropologist and historian Florence Shipek (also of San Diego) have my thanks for their meticulous reading of the manuscript version of this study. I thank my colleagues in the University of Utah Linguistics Program who have provided valuable comments. They are, in alphabetical order, Professors Ray Freeze, David E. Iannucci, Wick R. Miller, and Tom Toon. Professor Jesse D. Jennings (professor of anthropology and chief editor of the Utah Anthropological Papers) and Norma Mikkelsen (director of the University of Utah Press) also deserve special thanks for their patient collaboration. The first linguist to read the manuscript in one of its many versions was Professor Douglas R. Parks, long-time friend and colleague, who spent many hours editing my earliest handwritten draft. I thank him for his many keen insights. I also thank Donald Songster for his design and execution of the mission map of Lower California along with Ms. Pam Hunt for typing the final draft. Behind every completed project is one's family. My wife, Teresa, my children Renée, Joaquín, and Javier, and my sister, Gladys Mixco (who typed the first drafts) made it easier for me to see this work through to its conclusion. For their love, patience, and steadfast support I am truly thankful.

< previous page

page_xiv

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_3

next page > Page 3

Cochimi Ethnohistory The human drama of Lower California in the eighteenth century has three protagonists: the land, the indigenous people, and the Jesuit missionaries. The first and most enduring of the three actors is the peninsula itself. Few places on earth can match the barren desolation of Lower California. Separated by the narrow Gulf of California from mainland Mexico, this bony appendage of land, seven hundred miles long, is a chain of infernal deserts and heat-scarred mountains. The latter serve to collect the meager precipitation, which later seeps through the sand in tiny springs in the wilderness. The Cochimí-speaking people once wandered from water hole to water hole in their ceaseless struggle to wrest a subsistence from the land. The northernmost quarter of Lower California is of peripheral interest to us here, as its peoples did not speak Cochimí and it was settled by Europeans only after the departure of the Jesuits. With the exception of the Cocopa, who occupied the Colorado Delta, the other Yuman-speaking peoples of Lower California (the Diegueño, the Paipai, and the Kiliwa; see Hinton and Owen 1957; Meigs 1935) lived in this relatively upland desert that rises to the forest-clad peaks of the Sierra Juárez and Sierra San Pedro Mártir. The latter reaches 10,000-foot elevations around the famous Picacho del Diablo (or de la Encantada; see Robinson 1972). Immediately to the east the land plunges to the Gulf Coast deserts at sea level, the beginning of the vast Central Desert. The Cochimí regions begin directly south of the northern massifs and deserts. This is the other-worldly emptiness of the Central Desert, part of the vast Sonoran Desert system of the mainland. In these wastes the summer heat rarely falls below 105°F by day. By night the super-heated boulders and the warm waters of the Gulf of California keep the air temperatures at a muggy 95° (Aschmann 1959; 2, 7). The bottom third of the peninsula, an area of occasional large oases, was shared by the Cochimí with the peoples of three other unrelated language families. The contiguous Guaicura (Baegert 1956) occupied the so-called Southern Uplands of the Sierra de la Giganta, looming 6,000 ft. above the Gulf of California, and the Magdalena plains facing the Pacific. The Huchití, to the South of the Guaicura, occupied the shores of the large Bay of La Paz and the area south almost to Cape San Lucas. The cape itself, with the islands off the Bay of La Paz, were the territories of the Pericú, the most warlike people of the peninsula, who disappeared early from the historical record (Massey 1949; Map). In the Cochimí-speaking area, there

< previous page

page_3

next page >

< previous page

page_4

next page > Page 4

were marked regional variations in the phonological, lexical, and even syntactic structure of the dialects. Mutual intelligibility among these dialects was comparable to that obtaining within such European speech areas as the Germanic, the Slavic, or the Romance. Fr. Del Barco claims that, had fixed political boundaries existed in Lower California as they did in Europe, the Cochimí "dialects" could easily have been considered separate languages: "Si hubiera límites fijos en que acabara un dialecto y comenzara otro, pudieran llamarse diversas lenguas, como se llaman diversas la italiana, francesa y española o pot lo menos la castellana, portuguesa, o gallega" (León-Portilla 1973, 223). Del Barco concludes that due to the mobility of nomadic life, these distinct "languages" are best dealt with as a single entity: ''Mas como dichas variaciones se van haciendo poco a poco y casi insensiblemente todas quedan con el nombre de una misma lengua" (León-Por-tilla 1973, 223). (Spanish quotes will not be translated, in the interest of space.) The line of greatest dialect differentiation lay east-west across the Central Desert at approximately 28° north (the latitude of the Mission San Francisco Borja Adac; see Map). In this study, dialects of the area north of this line (San Francisco Borja, Santa Gertrudis, Santa María, San Fernando Velicatá, Nuestra Señora del Rosario) shall be referred to as "Northern Cochimí", while those to the south shall be called "Southern Cochimí". Refinements in dialect classification must await further research. The Central Desert was roughly coterminous with the northernmost limits of Cochimí speech. Beyond this point, early Jesuit explorers (Consag in 1753 and Linck in 1766; Burrus 1966; Mixco 1977a) found speakers of an unrelated language family, the Yuman peoples mentioned earlier. At a point some forty miles south of the modern fishing resort of San Felipe, an erstwhile Kiliwa fishing camp on the Gulf coast (Meigs 1939), Fr. Consag reports an encounter with the last speakers of an almost incomprehensible variety of Cochimí: "fueron los últimos gentiles con quienes se habló aunque con dificultad por la gran diferencia con que hablaban el idioma Cochimí' tanto que casi lo extraen de si mismo, conservando solamente algunas palabras de clara expresión del dicho idioma Cochimí" (Venegas 1944; 111-112). In the interior, among the desert canyons at the southern base of the towering Sierra San Pedro Mártir, Linck reports a similar encounter, concluding, "It seems that this place marks the outermost limits of the Cochimí language" (Burrus 1966; 75). Rather than attempt an extensive ethnographic description of the Cochimí (available, in part, in Aschmann 1959), only some of the most idiosyncratic cultural traits of these desert nomads, as reported in the eighteenth-century sources, shall be treated here. Most significant are the strategies of ecological adaptation imposed by the limited resources of their arid homeland. Needless to say, food resources were meager among the xerophytic scrub forests of the desert plains and mountains. The aborigines nonetheless harvested a variety of seasonal seeds (Amaranthus), berries (Antigonon leptopus, Ephedra, etc.), nuts (Pinus muricata), the products of succulent cacti (prickly pears, Opuntia), barrel cactus (Echinocactus), pitahaya (Lemaireocereus and Machaerocereus), roots, and palm fruits (Ficus palmeri). Agave and mesquite beans (Prosopis) were another fairly reliable resource. Much of the desert vegetation was inedible however; a notable example is the famous 'boojum tree' (in Spanish cirio; Idria columnaris) which looks like a twenty-foot tall, upside-down, green carrot bristling with thorns. That food was never abundant in Lower California is clear from the notorious Cochimí practice of the "second harvest" of pitahaya seeds lodged in dried human feces. This practice is reported to have been universal throughout the Jesuit mission territory, though there is no documentation for it in the relatively better-off Yuman-speaking

< previous page

page_4

next page >

< previous page

page_5

next page > Page 5

territory to the north (León-Portilla 1973, 205). Animal protein was equally scarce, limited mostly to the small game typical of North American desert regions' lizards, toads, tortoises, and rodents, as well as the usual assortment of desert pests (tarantulas, scorpions, spiders, beetles, grubs). Larger game, such as antelope and mountain sheep, was scarce and difficult to track through the jagged mountains that were shared with such taboo mammals as the badger, skunk, coyote, and mountain lion (i.e., cougar or puma) (León-Portilla 1973). Along the coast there was fishing; and an occasional whale carcass provided a feast for whatever fortunate band discovered its putrid remains (Aschmann 1959, 98). That meat was scarce is apparent (in the northern Central Desert especially) from reports of the practice of la maroma, 'the trick'. This consisted of eating a piece of meat tied to a string by which the morsel was pulled out after having allayed the hunger pangs but before full digestion had commenced. The meat would then be passed around a circle of people until it was entirely consumed. Del Barco describes the northerners' defense of this practice as rational and human in contrast to the animal-like manners of the southerners, whom they likened to coyotes, wolfing their food at once rather than prolonging the pleasure in a more civilized manner' "mas ellos se defendían con decir que comían como hombres racionales que saben aprovecharse del buen bocado, saboreándose con cada uno por buen rato, y teniendo el gusto de comerlo no una sino muchas veces, pero los de San Ignacio y los demas, comen como coyotes . . . que a toda prisa engullen la comida sin que vuelva a aparecer mas" (León-Portilla 1973, 207). Del Barco limits this practice to the desert regions between the 29th and 31st parallels, pleading ignorance as to its incidence farther north, "De allí en adelante no tenemos noticia si aún prosigue o no" (León-Portilla 1973, 208). However, in Kiliwa there is a term (lip lip) for this practice, evidence that, on occasion, certain Yuman speakers resorted to similar accommodations with a harsh environment (Mixco, Kiliwa field notes). Despite an extremely rudimentary material culture (likened to that of the Great Basin peoples, or of the Australian Aborigines), there was a rich spiritual culture among the Cochimí. Frequently mentioned in various sources in reference to different ceremonial contexts is the ritual use of such power items as the hair-cape, sacred feather wands, and tablets covered with pictographic or abstract symbols (Aschmann 1959; Burrus 1967b; fn. 9, 178; Meigs 1939). Venegas, quoting Fr. Sigismund Taraval, describes these items: "Los instrumentos que usaban en estas supersticiones, eran primeramente una cabellera tan grande como una capa de coro, que la formaban de los cabellos que ofrecían los enfermos como por voto . . . En la mano traían un abanico de varias plumas o en vez del abanico un canuto . . . " (Venegas 1944, 100-101). Piccolo (Burrus 1962) tells of the great honor that accrued to a band whose shamans possessed more than one such hair-cape. These were frequently the motive for armed raids and pitched battles between members of neighboring bands' "y como algunas rancherías tienen muchas y otras pocas, suelen entre sí hurtarse estas vestiduras de cabellos . . . entonces se arman unos contra otros y tienen sus peleas . . . ". For a discussion of hair-capes outside of Lower California, see Meigs (1970). The capes, wands, and tablets were a special peninsular feature of ceremonials such as the adolescent rites of passage practiced widely in North America (for the California region alone, see Kroeber 1953; Strong 1972). The ritual involved the piercing of the nose and/or ears: "Among their most solemn days of celebration is that one on which they pierce the extremities of their children's ears and noses. After having their sons and daughters prepare themselves for this event through three

< previous page

page_5

next page >

< previous page

page_6

next page > Page 6

days of fasting, on the fourth they all gather, especially their conjurers, who convene in large numbers all attired in clothes woven from human hair. They carry in their hands the aforementioned wands, also some small tablets into which they have scratched some rude figures with a sharpened stone . . . " (Burrus 1967b, 179). In the Yuman area to the north, the material elements of this rite were shared by the Kiliwa. A brief Kiliwa text (Mixco 1976b) tells of the mourning ceremony: "Human hair capes were made from shorn hair, patched together; . . . they cut reeds and made whistles. They made bull-roarers. Out of acacia wood they made a wooden idol, 'ñpmho·s, the wooden idol', it was called . . . . Having gotten the hair capes, they would come whistling and dodging [the] stars [that] were falling. The bull-roarer whistled [through the air]. The women on either side formed two rows, screaming loudly. The stars kept falling. They came, they approached. They entered the [ceremonial] house. Inside they [danced] to and fro, once, twice. Someone would follow [to pick up the hairs from the hair capes]. They would bring them [the capes] back and hang them up . . . in a corner of the house. [ñpmho·s was brought and stuck] in the ground. Human-hair capes, acacia wood bull-roarers they made . . . " (Mixco 1976b, 9596). Meigs (1939) explains that the bull-roarers (and presumably the screaming) were to frighten away demons and that wands were stuck in the ground to hold the head-tufts of feathers: "the leathered wands, held in high respect, are called t?i tesa? [i.e. t-?iy t-sa? (thing-head objstick); my field notes give the meaning 'head band', 'feather head dress'. ] The dead who are later assembled by the shaman sit on the pachugos [i.e. ?ipa· (person-cape) (Mixco, unpublished field notes)] under the . . . plumes: they seek the shade . . . " (Meigs 1939, 55). Upon becoming Christianized, the natives abandoned these cult objects along with the rites they represented. The cult objects were frequently turned over to the missionaries as a gesture of sincere repudiation of aboriginal beliefs' "A la noche, dos de los capitanes de las rancherías traxeron los que tenían y, con otros instrumentos de superstición, los pusieron debajo del altar" (Piccolo in Burrus 1962, 403); "They adorn themselves in the finery mentioned, but which as Christians they completely put aside and also throw away without reluctance their wands and tablets" (Burrus 1967, 179). Despite the similarities with the Yuman-speaking Kiliwa in matters of food and religious paraphernalia, there was a relatively sharp boundary in matters of warfare. Aside from the occasional raid mentioned above, the Cochimí were rather peaceful compared to the more ritualistically warlike Yuman-speakers to the north (especially in the region of the Colorado River). Only in the northernmost rancherías of the Cochimí was there exotic weaponry typical of the bone-crushing Yuman armament. Captured war-clubs and wooden daggers from the extreme north were regarded as great curiosities by the Jesuit fathers and circulated from mission to mission (León-Portilla 1973, 301-309; Kroeber 1953, 95). It is one of the great ironies of history that the nomadic Cochimí-speaking bands of Lower California were confronted, however briefly, with one of the most courtly and intellectually sophisticated elites of Europe, the Society of Jesus. The Society's founder was Iñigo de Loyola (1491-1556), who began in 1522, a year after the excommunication of Martin Luther, to forge the spiritual principles of the Society out of his own experience as a Soldier. (Societas referred to the sixteenth-century military "company"Compañia, Compagnie, etc., in Romancethat took the name of its leader, in this case, Jesus). He aimed to rectify, by example, some of the abuses of the clergy, high and low, that had created the conditions that spawned the challenge of Protestantism. Loyola was born in 1491 to aristo-

< previous page

page_6

next page >

< previous page

page_7

next page > Page 7

cratic parents in the Basque Province of Spain. It was the eve of the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and of the discovery of America. These two events, each in its own way, would come to symbolize the role the Spanish crown and peoples would play as the self-appointed champions of imperial Catholicism. Iñigo de Loyola's early manhood was spent in the career of a knightly warrior in the service of the viceroy of Navarra, the Duque de Nájera, Don Antonio Manrique de Lara. In those years there were no signs that the soldierly Iñigo would become the saintly Ignacio (Ignatius was the name Loyola later took to honor the martyr Ignatius of Antioch; see Harney 1962, 26). However, in 1521 (while another Spanish warrior, Cortés, was trampling the Aztec hegemony underfoot), Loyola was wounded in the defense of Pamplona against the French siege led by André de Foix. This event was a turning point in his life. Captured after leading a heroic resistance, Loyola lay convalescing and, when the pain of his wounded leg permitted, reading. Only two books were available: the Spanish translations of the Life of Christ by Ludolph of Saxony and the Flos Sanctorum of Jacopo de Voragine, a medieval collection of legends and lives of the saints (Harney 1962, 28). These readings were to have a profound effect on Iñigo, the soldier. Upon his recovery, Loyola vowed to dedicate himself to a life no less knightly than the former, but now he would be a warrior of the spirit and not a pawn in the struggle for earthly power. On August 14, 1522, he prayed a vigil the night through. Thus began one of the most extraordinary careers in European history. Despite his mature years, he decided upon a course of study that would lead to the life of a religious. His greatest moment came early, in the Dominican monastery at Manresa, Spain, where contemplation led him to the insight from which he would derive his famous manual of spiritual discipline, the Spiritual Exercises. By 1534 others who wished to follow his rule had begun to cluster about him. These were years of trial; Loyola was misunderstood by laymen and clergy alikeeven to the point of being branded a "crypto-Lutheran" and tried by the Inquisition. His "company" constantly had to defend its right to work among the urban poor. In time, however, the small troop became an army of great intellect and spiritloved by some, hated by others, but held in awe by all (Harney 1962, 37-46). Half a century later, the Jesuits were seasoned veterans (and martyrs) in Asia and America. No less controversial than in their first years, they continued to work under the principles of their founder's Spiritual Exercises. Such religious orders as the Franciscans, the Dominicans, and the Augustinians had arrived with the first conquerors even before the Society was founded. Nevertheless, Philip II of Spain had requested the Society's presence in Mexico so that they might teach and convert the Indians (Burrus 1956, 575). However, unlike the earlier orders, the Jesuits came (in 1572) in a period of consolidation rather than conquest. Contrary to the king's expectations, the Jesuits did not immediately have contact with the native Mexicans; rather they devoted themselves to filling the pressing need for institutions of higher learning in the colony. One of these, the Colegio de San Pedro, commenced operations long before the establishment of Harvard University in New England (Dunne 1952; Burrus 1956). In addition to their role as educators, the Jesuits were destined to become some of the greatest explorers and frontiersmen of New Spain. They were men of Renaissance learning, unafraid to pit their prayers and skills against the wilderness. Theirs was to be the wild northwest quarter of Mexico, with its vast deserts, its impregnable mountains, and warlike tribes. Bolton (1960, 10-11) describes the Jesuits as having had the highest qualities:

< previous page

page_7

next page >

< previous page

page_8

next page > Page 8

"character, intelligence, courage, resourcefulness, health and endurance." He goes on to say that "the missionaries were required to face physical dangers and hardships almost beyond belief. . . . They went without escorts into places where soldiers dared not tread . . . when martyrdom stared them in the face they met it with transcendent heroism." With this same courage, the Jesuits came to wild Lower California to initiate its spiritual conquest. In 1697, they founded the Mission of Nuestra Señora de Loreto at Conchó, a Cochimí-speaking village. In the period between 1697 and 1768, when the Society was finally expelled from all the Bourbon kingdoms, the new mission system emanated in concentric rings, northward and southward from Loreto. San Javier Viggé was the second mission to be built, in 1699. It lay a day's march into the interior, southwest of Loreto. (For exact distances and locations of mission sites, see Gerhard and Gulick 1967, and Map.) In 1705 two missions were built on the coast, San Juan Malibat some twenty miles south of Loreto, and Santa Rosa-lía, next to the stream at Mulegé about seventy-five miles to the north. The next penetration of the interior led to the building of well-watered San José Comondú in 1708 (some twenty miles northwest of Loreto). There followed a lull of over a decade until 1720, when La Paz was founded on the southern shore of the Bay of La Paz, well over one hundred miles south of the mother mission. In the same year, La Purísima was built twenty miles north of San José Comondú, and Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe fifty miles inland to the northwest of Santa Rosalía on the Gulf Coast. The following year saw the establishment of Nuestra Señora de Los Dolores (also referred to as La Pasión, or Dolores del Sur) and in the extreme south, Santiago, a mere seventy-five miles north of the tip of the peninsula. In 1728, the mission of San Ignacio was built in its beautiful oasis twenty miles north of Guadalupe. Two years later, the southernmost mission, San José del Cabo, was built (it is named after the nearby cape of San Lucas, the very tip of Baja California). In 1733, Santa Rosa (or Todos Santos) was built on the Pacific coast a few miles north of the Tropic of Cancer. San Luis (on the far side of the 6,000-foot range of La Giganta from Dolores del Sur on the Gulf) was established in 1737. Santa Gertrudis (1752), San Francisco Borja (1762), Santa María Cabujacamang (1767), all in the Central Desert, were the last three missions founded by the Jesuits before their expulsion, as if pointing a prophetic finger to the north, where the Dominicans in Lower (Meigs 1935) and the Franciscans in Upper California (Leon-Portilla 1970a) would become the custodians of the mission tradition in this northernmost frontier of New Spain (Dunne 1952). The map includes missions founded by these orders in Lower California. The expansion of Spain into the Californias was not motivated exclusively by the Christian zeal of the Jesuit fathers. Permission was granted, in large part, because of the very real need of the viceroyalty to provide harbors and watering stations for the floating treasure houses of the Manila galleons. In 1565, these had begun transporting the riches of the Orient to America and thence to Spain. Every year, until 1815 when the last one put into port, the galleons climbed the currents from Manila northward, crossed the Pacific roughly at the latitude of southern Oregon, and descended the coast to Acapulco. From Acapulco, the trade winds took them, via the Marshalls and Marianas, back across the South Seas to the Philippine Archipelago (Schurz 1959). Linck describes the importance of the peninsula to the galleons in one of his letters: "First of all, the Manila Galleon, which sails every year to Acapulco, would never reach the Mexican mainland, did it not direct its course towards California . . . to the Cabo San Lucas, where it can put ashore its

< previous page

page_8

next page >

< previous page

page_9

next page > Page 9

wretched scurvy victims . . . . Secondly, the position of the peninsula is so advantageous to the enemies of Spain that they have often lurked in the region's harbors to pounce on the galleons . . . . Thirdly, the peninsula is important because of the nearby regions which are so highly praised but may well be the source of concern later on . . . " (Burrus 1967b, 61-62). In spite of the geopolitical requirements of the government in Mexico, the Jesuits, in order to better protect their charges against the depraved chaos of the frontier life of this times, managed virtually to seal off the peninsula from such undesirable elements as miners, pearl fishers, and large numbers of soldiers. This they were permitted to do by guaranteeing the Crown that they would never be a charge on the royal coffers. The Jesuits spent sums donated by philanthropists as well as the profits of such self-supporting regions under their control as the Pimería Alta (i.e., Sinaloa-Sonora-Arizona) to provide revenues for the expansion of the Church in the barren peninsula of Lower California. Always suspect, the Jesuits were, ironically, accused of possessing fabulous sources of hidden wealth in California, which in fact could not even feed itself. It was rumors such as these, along with political intrigues too subtle for these pages, that eventually led to the expulsion of the Society from New Spain (Burrus, personal communication; Mörner 1967). Of greater interest for a linguistic study is the interaction of the missionaries and the native Californians. Burrus (1956) describes the long-standing Jesuit policy, in Europe and elsewhere, of communicating with the populace in the vernacular as a means of facilitating the propagation of the faith. In keeping with this principle (already enunciated by Ignatius himself in the Society's Constitution), all Jesuits in New Spain were obliged to learn Nahuatl as a means of introducing them to a typical American language and culture. For the many fathers who would spend their lives in the colleges of Mexico, there was much to protest in this policy; nonetheless, the Father General in Rome stood firm: No exception was ever made (Burrus, personal communication). Those Jesuits who later found themselves awash among the myriad languages of Northwest Mexico (those of the Pimería Alta coincidentally related to Nahuatl, unbeknownst to the Jesuit superiors) must have been grateful for the head start their earlier language training represented. It is clear from the record, furthermore, that the rank and file of the Society strongly supported proselytization in the vernacular. This frequently led to conflicts with the Diocesan clergy in the settled parts of Mexico, whose attitude towards the aboriginal languages was frequently at variance with the policies of the Jesuits. We read of Alonso de la Vera Cruz' polemics equating ignorance of the native vernaculars with negligence in priestly duty. De la Vera Cruz would have demanded of the ecclesiastical hierarchy that, wherever possible, only the clergy who spoke an aboriginal language should be appointed to indigenous parishes and that, "priests ignorant of the native languages who deprive those conversant with them are obliged to make restitution for the harm done . . . those who do not know the native languages must yield to those who do . . . " (Burrus 1976, 57-58). In contrast to these advanced views, we read of the benighted reaction of the Archbishop of Mexico who, upon learning that some Cochimí children accompanying Fr. Piccolo (one of the foremost Baja California Jesuits) knew their doctrine in Cochimí but not in Spanish, commanded (unsuccessfully, one would hope) that henceforth all instruction be carried on in Spanish (Burrus 1962, 102-103). In Lower California, all the missionaries were expected to have achieved a satisfactory fluency in the indigenous language before they were allowed to preach without supervision.

< previous page

page_9

next page >

< previous page

page_10

next page > Page 10

To this end, they gave their first sermon in the presence of the visitador (visitor; an experienced traveling overseer of the missions with considerable fluency in the language). A report by one of the mission administrators describes the smooth language progress of some of the great names in mission history' "Todos los Padres saben lengua. En Loreto ya no es necesario; quien mas quien menos. Los padres Guillén, Sistiaga, Hostel y Cónsag sobresalen. Los otros se esfuerzan que no es poco; porque la lengua es dificil, varia, sin libros, sin arte" (Burrus and Zubillaga, in press). The Cochimí themselves appear in Jesuit Writings as active and intelligent teachers long after the missionaries' early training. Piccolo eulogizes the Cochimí's keen sense of humor in the process of perfecting their priests' control of the language by correcting grammatical errors after the sermon' "Su genio es muy vivo y despierto, y lo muestran entre otras cosas, en molar mucho cualquiera barbarismo en su lengua, como al principio lo hizieron con nosotros al predicarles. . . . se llegan á corregirnos, despues de predicar qualquier desliz en su lengua" (Burrus 1962, 65). The missionary himself was expected to pave the way for his successors in the matter of language by providing a grammatical description along with translations of some of the basic prayers. One manuscript conveys the impatience of one of the fathers, somewhat despairing of the task's completion by Fathers Sistiaga and Druet. The former had hesitated because of scholarly scruples, the latter had been kept from his writing by rampaging epidemics: "Aunque el P. Andrés García encargó al P. Sistiaga la hiziese; pero por sus escrúpulos ni la hizo ni es para el passo. A quien hallo algo mas culpado es el P. Druet, por ser ya años que está; aunque da por razón de haver tenido repetidas epidemias que no ha podido aplicarse tanto como pide el caso. Y como assegura que, en adelante, lo hará y saldrá con el lo, el P. Visitador Sebastian y yo havemos hecho mucho encargo en ésto" (Burrus and Zubillaga, in press). This concern with language reflected the Jesuit policy of rational persuasion rather than coercive proselytization; as Burrus tells us, "Ignation principles are also the inspiration for certain apostolic methods used in the conversion and Christian formation of the Indians: emphasis upon instruction through catechism . . . " (Burrus 1956, 576). Piccolo describes this process in the give and take of rational argument between the Cochimí neophytes and the Jesuit Piccolo after the latter's sermon on some points contrary to the former's aboriginal beliefs' "En predicando algunos mysterios contrarias à sus antiguos errores, acabado el Sermon, se llegan a el Padre, le reconvienen de lo que dixo, y le arguyen y discurren en favor de su error con bastante aparencia." The argument is settled not by force or superior authority, but by reasoned persuasion: ". . . a la fuerça de la razón, se sossiegan con toda docilidad" (Burrus 1962, 65-66). These methods bore fruit in the voluntary proselytization of the aborigines by their already Christianized fellows. Piccolo tells another anecdote about a mission lad who had converted his family while enjoying a harvest of wild foods at home. When Piccolo visited the yet unbaptized community, he found to his surprise that the children knew the answers to all his questions on doctrine. Inquiring as to the source of their knowledge, he discovered it had been none other than his seventeen-year-old convert. He tells us that the parents requested baptism for their children: "fue a dar buenos tlatoles â sus parientes, enseñando â los niños y hiñas la Doctrina Christiana todos los días, de suerte que me pidieron los Irdios baptizasse à sus hijos . . . " (Burrus 1962, 141). Tlatole is a Nahuatlism from tlatolli: 'speech, advice' (Simeon 1885). And so we come to Miguel De l Barco and his Historia. This was written in Bologna, Italy (after the expulsion),

< previous page

page_10

next page >

< previous page

page_11

next page > Page 11

when the author was seventy-seven. Its composition was prompted in large part as a response to anti-Jesuit propaganda and to correct errors prevalent in such official histories as Venegas-Burriel (Venegas 1944; also see León-Portilla 1973, XLIII). By this time, the Society, to which Del Barco had belonged, had been disbanded under the official supression of the Papacy. Completely divested of all official standing and income, the members of the old Societas were obliged to make their living as best they could (by writing and teaching especially; Burrus, personal communication). Del Barco (unlike most of the writers on Lower California) had actually witnessed much of which he spoke and is, consequently, an especially rich source of information on the eighteenth-century peninsula. Since he had spoken the Cochimí language for thirty years on a daily basis as a missionary at San Javier Viggé (and also as a visitador), his discussion of Cochimí structure and his renditions of the basic prayers, along with a sermon, are particularly credible sources of data on the language. In spite of the fact that as a youth Miguel Del Barco had been considered a brilliant student of jurisprudence, he maintained a humble attitude towards his own intellectual accomplishments. In regard to his knowledge of Cochimí, he wrote to Fr. Lorenzo Hervás y Panduro in 1784, in his typically self-effacing manner, that only after much insistence (Batllori 1951) had he decided to tax his wavering memory and enfeebled health with the task of even a brief description for Hervás's encyclopedia Catalogo delle lingue (Hervás 1785): "Yo creía haber satisfecho plenamente a sus deseos; y he aquí que usted . . . me pone de nuevo en el empeño de violentar mi cansada memoria para acordarme de una lengua diez y seis años ha abandonada y olvidada como inútil y que no aprendí por reglas gramaticales . . . " (León-Portilla 1973, 440). The original manuscript versions found in mss. 1413/1414 appear to contain the handwriting of several people. Either the aged Del Barco dictated his memoirs to younger scribes, or his notes were written at different times, when his own hand had changed; it may also be that language notes come from other, undisclosed, sources. This last is the least likely, as it was Del Barco's custom to give credit to others for information to which he himself could not bear personal witness. My own feeling is that Del Barco controlled the data correctly and that he is to be considered the main source for these materials, which are the most remarkable linguistic documents to have survived on a language of Lower California from the eighteenth century. The materials from Ducrue (Burrus 1976), Clavijero (León-Portilla 1970b) and Piccolo (Burrus 1962) are meager by comparison, though Ducrue is the only source which provides a word-by-word gloss for his handful of sentences. Cochimí (or what has been reported to be Cochimí) has been transcribed on at least two occasions in the nineteenth century. William M. Gabb collected a Cochimí vocabulary in the vicinity of Santa Gertrudis (Aschmann 1959, 55) or San Francisco Borja (Troike, in Langdon and Silver 1976). In either case, Gabb's list (Gatschet 1887, 387-407) represents the last vestiges of a variety of "Northern" Cochimí which differs markedly from the "Southern" dialect recorded in Del Barco. Another nineteenth-century source referred to as "Cochimí" was collected by John Russell Bartlett (Gatschet 1887); Aschmann (1959) tells us this is from "published mission literature," while Troike (1976) quotes an unspecified source (presumably the original manuscript) to the effect that the Bartlett list was "obtained through Mr. Robinia of Guaymas, Sonora," but goes on to say that "the actual provenience of the list is unknown, though it may have come from somewhere between latitudes 27 degrees and 28 degrees in the peninsula considerably south of San Borja." Both lists were used in

< previous page

page_11

next page >

< previous page

page_12

next page > Page 12

compiling the lexicon. Only a tiny fraction of the Bartlett list is even remotely comparable to the better established Cochimí materials in our possession. One suspects that, aside from a few genuine Cochimí items, the remainder of the Bartlett vocabulary represents yet another language, perhaps Guaicura or Huchití. Finally, J.P. Harrington must be mentioned, as the only modern linguist ever to have direct contact with any Cochimí data. In 1925 this ubiquitous scholar traveled into the northern peninsula as far south as the territory of the erstwhile Dominican mission of Santo Domingo, some 100 miles south of the international border and well within Yuman territory. Here he collected some ostensibly Cochimí forms in the dialects once spoken at the defunct missions of Nuestra Señora del Rosario, San Fernando Velicatá, and even from the region of San Francisco Borja. These forms are also included in our lexicon (see also Mixco 1977a).

< previous page

page_12

next page >

< previous page

page_13

next page > Page 13

Grammatical Sketch of Cochimi Philological Phonology There is a need, when dealing with nonphonetic documents in an extinct language, to determine precisely what phonetic (and, if possible, phonemic) value the writing has. It is indeed fortunate that the texts in Cochimí are written in a predominantly Spanish orthography which, unlike English or French, is close to the phonetics of the language. However, in spite of the proverbial transparency of the Spanish spelling system, it has its redundancies and ambiguities. These flaws can be eliminated or "regularized" by using two unambiguous symbols where one ambiguous one served before, or by using a single phonetic symbol where several redundantly synonymous spellings existed previously. In her article on Rumsen (an extinct California Costanoan language in the Penutian family), Silvia Broadbent (1957, 278) uses the term "reconstitution" for the hypothetical transcription set up on the basis of the comparison of documents written by several scribes. The reconstituted form represents an abstraction from several orthographies that more closely reflects the phonetic (or phonemic) representation of a given morpheme. The materials available to us in the Cochimí texts are almost exclusively from a single individual, Del Barco (Leon-Portilla * 1973, 225).While his spellings sometimes vary from dialect to dialect, they are virtually identical throughout. The process of reconstitution is weakened when limited, as we are here, to a single scribe, for the abstract orthography reflects an individual writer's inconsistency (or the variation from dialect to dialect) rather than regular, independent (usually orthographically distinctive) attempts to write the same morpheme. A rough analogy is the difference between the reconstruction of an earlier representation on the basis of internal comparison within a single language as opposed to the more powerful comparative method applied across several related languages. There are word lists in Cochimí from several scribes; however, due to dialect differentiation, most of the vocabulary is not lexically comparable. The result of the philological situation described here is that reconstitution in the sense implied by Broadbent is virtually impossible. Therefore, the term "regularization," introduced above, will be used simultaneously for both the reduction of inconsistent Spanish spelling conventions to consistency, and a weakened type of philological reconstitution based on the single source. This will avoid the overly subtle distinction between regularization on the one hand, and reconstitution on the other. The process of regularization has been conservative without being timid.

< previous page

page_13

next page >

< previous page

page_14

next page > Page 14

Phonemic abstraction is avoided wherever it cannot be rigorously justified from the textual data. In most instances, facile orthographic uniformity (or phonemicization) will not be placed above fidelity to the original texts. While this approach implies a certain inconsistency, the overwhelming advantage is that the texts remain open to future modification (should this become possible through the discovery of further data). In concrete terms, the preceding statement means that redundant Spanish spellings such as gu ~ hu ~ u for [w] (before back vowels) will be regularized to w, whereas gu before front vowels (ambiguously-[g] and [w]) will be w only if it is seen to vary with hu or u which can be read unambiguously as [w]. On the other hand, if other evidence points in the direction of [g], as will occur below, it will be written as g. Furthermore, nonredundant spellings such as ch will be preserved due to the possible ambiguity between [c *] and [s*] (see star in the lexicon). In addition to orthographic conventions, we must contend with regional dialect variations. According to Del Barco, the linguistic divergence from north to south in Cochimí was as great as that in the Romance family' ''En esta extensión había a lo menos cuatro dialectos tan diferentes que el dialecto que yo usaba en mi misión de San Javier . . . se diferenciaba tanto del dialecto de la de San Borja . . . como el español del francés; y mucho masse diferenciaba del dialecto de la nueva misión de Santa María" (León-Portilla 1973, 44). This assertion can be verified to some extent by comparing the fragmentary northern data in Clavijero (León-Portilla 1970b, 241) with the southern texts in Del Barco (see texts). With regard to dialect differentiation, the regularized orthography will attempt a level of abstraction which can be viewed synchronically as a diasystem (Weinreich 1954) accounting for all cognate dialect forms in Cochimí. If viewed diachronically, the abstract representation can be read as a statement of pre-Cochimí phonology. Again in specific terms, the above remarks imply that while the predominant southern form for 'sun, day' is ibo, its abstract regularization will be given as on the basis of the single southern ibung (Ducrue in Burrus 1967b, 139), and the northern forms ibang ~ iban (Clavijero in León-Portilla 1970), epang (Gabb in Gatschet 1887, 365418). This particular regularization can be further supported by comparison outside of Cochimí with Proto-Yuman, which has *?-pal ~ *?-pan 'hot, warm' (Mixco, unpublished ms). It should be mentioned, however, that in most cases this level of abstraction is precluded by the paucity of lexical cognates from text to text, and especially from one dialect region to another. Abbreviations The following is a list of grammatical abbreviations used in the following pages: adj = adjectival be loc = to be located caus = causative dur = durative emph = emphatic exist = existential predicate fut = future aspect/tense imp = imperative inal = inalienable interr = interrogative loc = locative obj = object opt = optative/imperative pat = patient [pl] = plural, suppletive root poss = possessive 1,2,3 = pronominal person concordance pret = preterite aspect/tense ref - reflexive rel = relative pronoun [sg] = singular, suppletive root

sub = subordinator subj = subject super = superlative Equals signs (=) are used to join probably segmentable portions of complex lexical items that have not been fully analyzed. The single hyphen (-) is used between all other morphemes

< previous page

page_14

next page >

< previous page

page_15

next page > Page 15

which can be analyzed. A question mark (?) signifies that no gloss can be provided; a gloss followed by (?) signifies the tentative nature of the gloss. Authors (primary sources) are identified as follows: B

Bartlett

CL

Clavijero

DB

Del Barco

Du

Ducrue

G

Gabb

H

Harrington

P

Piccolo

Sentences are identified by author, e.g., DB, and by text' D = Disertación, PN = Pater Noster, HM = Hail Mary, C = Credo. These are followed by the line number. A complete citation will read, e.g., (DB-PN-6) meaning "Del Barco's Pater Noster, line 6." Vowels The spelling in all Cochimí texts (and word lists) recognizes a five-vowel system' i, e, a, u, o. These distinctions will be maintained in the regularized orthography for lack of sufficient data for a reduction to a simpler system. For while o sometimes varies with u, no pattern emerges for any other vowel alternation. Among the orthographic vowels in Del Barco (León-Portilla 1973) we find the digraph æ (sometimes ae). Almost certainly this usage is inspired by Latin orthography which, after classical times, represented a mid-front vowel [e] or [e]. Since the letter e also occurs with some frequency, it is not clear why, in certain dialects, the author preferred the Latin spelling to the modern Italian or Spanish vowel. We can only speculate that a real phonetic distinction might have been involved. The frequent use of identical vowel clusters in both stressed and unstressed syllables is an intriguing practice. However, contrary to modern phonetic usage, the eighteenth-century writer did not necessarily imply vocalic length with these vowels. What seems to be involved, however, is the presence of a glottal stop between the two identical vowels, at least in unstressed environments. The glottal stop, ?, is particularly apparent in the pronominal verbal prefixes which include: ?- first person, msecond person, and zero-morpheme, f, third person. The presence of an initial glottal stop is detectable by virtue of the vocalic epenthesis to which it gives rise in certain stems such as ahuayip, which can be written ?-wayip, 'I arise from a prone position'; compare this form with muhuayip, regularized to m-wayip, 'you arise', and huayip, which is f-wayip, 'he arises' Note that the quality of the epenthetic vowel can be determined by the quality of the surrounding consonants (much as in Yuman). Unregularized citations will always be identified as to source in the text or by parenthetic abbreviations, e.g., (DB) meaning "from Del Barco" (author abbreviations are given here above. All other underlined Cochimí forms are to be considered as regularized forms. Turning once more to pre-tonic vowel clusters, we find the same glottal-stop prefix in the verb 'to love', written variably as nogoso ~ nogooso ~ nogosso in Del Barco (the regularized form is the more abstract , described below). The initial n-prefix seems to serve for an unspecified animate object. Object and subject prefixes precede the root in the order given, thus 'I love' is noogoso, regularized to . This form is comparable to 'you love' nomogooso, which becomes in the regularized form. In the Disertación by Del Barco (see Appendix I; León-Portilla 1973, 225-226), we find the following example' yaa ba adetemba 'what I am about to tell you' The pause appears to serve the function of the glottal stop in the regularized b-?-detema (2-1-tell). Unfortunately, no comparable morphological evidence exists which would allow us to account for the identical vowel clusters in root-internal syllables. Thus, while it is very likely that some kind of glottal stop occurred

< previous page

page_15

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_16

Page 16 in these roots, the regularized orthography will not reflect this. We write

for 'love' not

or

.

Vocalic epenthesis is discussed for post-tonic environments by Del Barco in the following terms' En el pretérito se intercala una e [on occasion î is used as an epenthetic vowel ] entre la p y la partícula ta que el verbo no lleva de suyo, para hacer mas suave (o menos dura) la pronunciación lo cual es frecuentósimo en esta lengua" (LeónPortilla 1973, 224; see Appendix I for translation of Del Barco's grammatical notes). Other examples of post-tonic epenthesis in the texts are the following dialect variants from the Credo: amet eno ~ amet e hno ~ amet e nno regularized to , 'earth loc'. It will be noted that one version shows an h accompanying the epenthesis. There are numerous examples of the apparent insertion of a phonetic [h] subsequent to vocalic epenthesis as in the above example. The following examples from the Credo show the h in similar environments(daythat-loc): ibo yanno ~ ibo yahno ~ iboyanno; ?mayuxup-mo (heaven-loc)-ambayujupmo ~ ambayujubmo ambayu(ju)bhmo; Poncio Pilato-mo (Pontius Pilate-subj): Poncio Pilatomou ~ Poncio Pilatohmu; gina-mo (the living-obj): ghinnamo ~ ghinnahmu In some instances, insertion of [h] occurs after a stressed final vowel and is followed by post-h epenthesis as in the following examples (for insertion of [h] in Kiliwa, see Mixco 1977b): (1) uyipil nagaalataja (DB) 'He made him so that . . .' ?uy-pil-nagaal-ta (make-purpose-pret) (2) nuhuaja (DB) 'I am located' n-wa (I-sit) (See also uaha and huaha for wa 'he sits' in (DB-C-17) below. These examples show Del Barco's use of both Spanish h and j to render an [h] or [x]) Spirants and In addition to the phonetically inserted [h], Cochimó seems to have had two phonemic velar spirants' x and xw. For simplicity, no effort will be made to distinguish between a spirant-plus-labial cluster and the labio-velar segment postulated here. This decision to use a single segment is supported nicely by the correspondence of Proto-Yuman *(?)xwat 'blood, red' to Cochimí juet (Burrus 1967b) and hwat (Gabb in Gatschet 1887). Other examples of the velar spirants are daxa 'I', buxu 'you,' luxu 'more', kaxal 'water',-xwa 'patient case suffix' yixwal 'must, be necessary', buxwet ' rather', texweg 'one'. Cochimi As mentioned above, the Spanish grapheme gu- can have two possible phonetic readings' [w] or [g] in the environment of front vowels (that is, in the absence of the dieretic marks over the u). The data in the texts is written in an Italian orthography as well as a Spanish one. This is fortunate in that Italian uses gh unambiguously for [g] and gu for [w] before front vowels. Thus, for those lexical items occurring in the Italian version, we can easily determine the correct pronunciation. This is the case with the ambiguous aguina 'live' (Burrus 1967b), guinna 'living' (Del Barco in León-Portilla 1973) disambiguated by ghinna 'living' (DB). Likewise. guit 'to see' (DB) (cf gir 'sehen' Gatschet 1887) is clarified by ghi??h 'to see' (DB) Forms from Del Barco like gui 'very', seen to vary with hui and ui or guihi 'and' (with -huihi), or ~guissa 'son' (in guiguissa 'his son' with ~huissa and ~uissa in muissa 'your son'), can all be written with w: wi 'very'. wixi ' and', and wisa ' son' respectively The verb huigya 'die (pl)' (sometimes uia) is also best written as wigya. The verb guilugui, guiluguigui 'go,

< previous page

page_16

next page >

< previous page

page_17

next page > Page 17

move' (Lord's Prayer, DB) corresponds to the northern dialect versions (lu)vihi(m) ~ (lu)wahi(m) (Clavijero in León Portilla 1970b). Thus we can opt for w for the last syllable. This receives further support from guiligua 'zu Fuss reisen' (Bartlett; Gatschet 1887), but, for unknown reasons, not from guligi 'gehen' (Gabb; see Gatschet 1887). The first syllable gui- remains ambiguous, and if we do not discount the Gabb version above, it might well be [g]. In a case like this, it has been decided to reflect the ambiguity in the regularized orthography by writing gi/wi. Orthographic Voiced Obstruents In this section, all lexical data used, unless otherwise attributed, come from Del Barco (León-Portilla 1973). Though comparative evidence would suggest that Cochimí, like Yuman, had a voiceless obstruent series only (e.g., Proto-Yuman *?-ta(·)t 'thorn', Cochimí adet 'thorn'), the fact remains that the texts show frequent use of voiced obstruents in all phonological environments. Only the few items listed below (Fig. 1) show an alternation in voiced and voiceless obstruent spellings. However, these are sufficient data to support a hypothesis of lenition (see lexicon). Particularly interesting is the use of gc and gk (not k or c) to write the imperative prefix listed below as varying with g. The digraphs gk and gc appear to be orthographic innovations to render an acoustically intermediate sound somewhere between a fortis/tense [k] and a lenis/lax [g]. The same phenomenon can be observed for word-final t in the dialect versions nembadh ~ nambatd 'body'. A possibly related practice is the doubling of d to dd in uddemi 'if', and udaahi ~ uddaahi 'when' to render a sound more tense than a mere [d]. This was perhaps felt more keenly by a Spanish speaker whose normal spirantal pronunciation of an intervocalic /d/ would seem too lenis. In addition to the above, there is p/b

t/d

k/g

epi (G)/ibi (DB) 'to die'

iktat (H)/ethat (G)/etad-(G) 'dog, coyote'

yupi (G)/yabi (B) 'face'

tamma (DB)/delma (Du)/degma (Du) gkahuaba/gauaba 'man' 'to hang'

-pa/-ba/-mba '1st possessive'

kata/kada/cade 'reed'

gk-/g'imperative prefix'

-mapa/-maba '2nd possessive'

temba (DB)/delma (Du) 'to speak'

cade/gade/ 'reed'

epang (G)/ibang (CL) 'sun, day'

teegyi/deegyi 'thing'

kombio/gombio 'three'

hapara (G)/mabel (Du) 'tongue'

gkahuit/gaguit to ascend'

kuak (G)/gowac (Du) 'two'

Fig. 1. Voiced vs. voiceless obstruents: examples.

< previous page

page_17

next page >

< previous page

page_18

next page > Page 18

clear evidence of a voicing rule in the following items: ambayujupmo ~ ambayu-jubmo 'in heaven' (i.e., ?mayuxup-mo 'heaven-in'). Unfortunately, the voiced obstruents are not frequently enough accompanied by voiceless alternants, and when they are, they do not occur in mutually exclusive phonological environments. In the absence of regular phonological alternation, the best we can hope for is a statistical trend, a measure of relative frequency of voiced to voiceless obstruents (see Fig. 2). SUBTOTAL

TOTAL

p

61

166

b

105

t

79

d

93

k

65

g

131

172 196

Fig. 2. Voiced voiceless obstruents: gross totals. These figures reveal a heavy margin in favor of voiced as opposed to voiceless obstruents. While these gross totals reveal only relative frequency, we can now use them to refine the measure in a more linguistically significant way; that is, with respect to phonological environment. For if we can find that the voiced obstruents show the same preponderance in voicing environments, such as intervocalically, we might reasonably suspect that a voicing (or lenition) rule underlies the statistical tendency (see Fig. 3). While the statistical data below show a comfortable margin of voiced over voiceless consonants in inter-vocalic position, the closeness of the figures in initial position (as well as the skewed data in final position) weakens the case for a lenition rule. Therefore, in keeping with the conservative principle stated earlier, both voiced and voiceless obstruents will be preserved as they are found in the original data. In the comparative discussion this distinction will be suspended. #__

V_V

__# SUBTOTALS

p

20

28

13

61

b

12

93

0

105

t

25

38

16

79

d

40

50

3

93

k

50

14

1

65

g

38

78

15

131

TOTALS 166 172 196

Fig. 3. Voiced vs. voiceless obstruents: phonlogical environments. Finally, there is evidence for the palatalization of t to ch before a tense epenthetic vowel, [i] or [e] in such forms as git 'to see' (

< previous page

page_19

next page > Page 19

~ -delma (B) 'speak'; gombio ~ gkambio (DB) ~ kamioec (Du) ~ kabiak (G) ~ combio (B) 'three'. Note that 'three' is regularized as kamyok; the final k is based on (Du) and (G) (see lexicon). The form for 'body' also has an alternation between m ~ mb and b: nembadh ~ nembatd (DB), ~ -bat' '(G), ~ -val (B). In the southern dialects the alternation seems to be a synchronic variation between b ~ m in initial position and between m ~ mb in intervocalic environments; in other dialects the rule may have been a historical process stabilizing the above variations into a b. The historical persistence of this m to b process may underlie an etymological relation between the m- 'second person subject prefix' and the b-'second person object prefix' as well as buxu 'you'. The archaic status of m over mb is substantiated by comparison with Proto-Yuman P-Yu *-ma·t, Co mat 'body"; P-Yu *-mi(?), Co chimbi 'cat" P-Yu *(?)ma(?)y, Co -may- 'heaven'; P-Yu , Co -ma 'to sleep" P-Yu *x-muk, Co kamyo(k) 'three'. It would appear from Del Barco's remarks that word-final stress was predictable in Cochimí' "Dejé los acentos porque al que ignora la pronunciación, basta decirle que el acento siempre está en última sílaba . . . " (León-Portilla 1973, 228; see Appendix I). With this in mind, I shall not mark stress in the regularized orthography. Figure 5 contains the inventory of sounds to be used in the regularized orthography. The sounds in parenthesis are probably only phonetic. LOCATIVE

LOVE/BELIEVE

NAME

SUN

-no (DB)

nogooso (DB)

-mo (DB)

ibo (DB)

-nang (CL)

nangassang (Du)

-mbo (DB)

ibung (Du)

yangkasnag (G)

-mbang (CL)

ibang (CL)

-mang (CL)

epang (G)

Fig. 4. Final velar nasal: examples. CONSONANTS p

t

(b)

(d)

m

ch

k

VOWELS kw

(g)

s

s *(?)

n

ñ

x

?

i

u

(e)

(o)

xw

a

l w

y

Fig. 5. Sounds used in the regularized orthography.

< previous page

page_19

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Cochimi and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syntactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Lower California

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_21

next page > Page 21

Cochimi Syntax Higher Predicates and the Simple Sentence The simple sentence in Cochimí is predicate-final, as displayed in Diagram 1. It is at the end of the sentence that we find what are normally characterized as higher predicates, semantically determining the illocutionary force, the aspect (or tense), or modality for a given sentence.

Diagram 1 The first simple sentence structure that can be discussed in connection with the above tree is one involving the existential predicate wi 'be' (cf. Proto-Yuman *wi 'do' ~ *yu 'be' both occurring as existential predicates), (3) tama wi-ta udaaxi (man be-pret when) (DB-C-4,5) 'When he became man' While this predicate is perhaps etymologically at the root of such possibly complex items as: widewewena 'reason' muwixi 'and' omwi 'emphatic' and wi 'very', there are at least two instances where it appears to function as the predicate in what would seem to be passive constructions, to judge from the translations. For the theoretical implications of the 'be' existential predicate and the passive, see Langacker and Munro (1975). For a historical view of the Yuman 'be' predicates, see Munro (1977b).

< previous page

page_21

next page >

< previous page

page_22

next page > Page 22

(4) Santa Cruz-mo, gila, kawaba-wi-ta (Holy Cross-loc, alive[?], hang[?]-be-pret) (DB-C-6) 'He was hanged on the Holy Cross (while still) alive(?)' (5) Jesu Cristo mogododo-wi-ta (Jesus Christ bury [?]-be-pret) (DB-C-11) 'Jesus Christ was buried' (6) ?mayuxup-mo kawit-ta wi-ta (heaven-loc ascend-pret be-pret) (DB-C-13) 'He was ascended into Heaven' There is only one interrogative sentence in the data available to us. The interrogative morpheme occurs in final position, as predicated by the OV pattern of Cochimí. Compare examples (7) and (8): (7) Dios-la tama uy = pil-nagaal-ta . . . (God-subj man create-purpose-pret) (DB-D-2) 'God created man because . . .' (8) temya ayimbyo Dios-la tama ?uy = pil-ta-wan (what [?] purpose God-subj man make-pret-interr) (DB-D-1) 'Why did God create man?' There is some syntactic motivation for treating some adverbials as higher predicates, namely the subject-copying transformation, as well as -m-subordination, discussed in greater detail below with the imperative predicate. Adverbials sometimes occur as phonological satellites (i.e., postclitics) of the verb phrase; nonetheless, they frequently occupy the expected post-verb position. (9) xi gyo Dios-mo git-ami . . . (and there God-obj see-well . . .) (DB-D-5) 'And there they see God clearly' (10) Santa Maria k-?uy-ibaxa-m (Holy Mary imp-happy-much-sub) (DB-HM-1) 'Rejoice, Holy Mary' In addition to the single-particle adverbials seen above, there is a discontinuous adverbial idiom described in part by Del Barco (see Appendix I for translation): "tiene superlativos . . . Éstos se forman con la palabra manibaha, pospuesta al positivo, verbigracia para decir que una cosa es buena [i.e., 'good'] se dice amí o huí amí, y para decir muy buena [i.e., 'very good'], huí amí ibaha, y para darle mas realce anteponen tambien al positivo [i.e., 'superlatively good'] esta silaba kal (sic), asi: kal amí ibaha; o asi kal huí amí ibaha (sic)" (León-Portilla 1973, 225). The highest superlative degree is one involving the full complex bracketing of the predicate in the following examples (note the avoidance of philological regularization for the superlative idiom). (11) ke-?uy-ibaxa-ibal-kandugua guinyi (greatly-happy-much-much-superlative idiom) (DB-D-5) 'They rejoice greatly'

< previous page

page_22

next page >

< previous page

page_23

next page > Page 23

(12) ke-?uy-ibaxa-ibal-kænduguaguinyi (greatly-happy-much-much-superlative idiom) (DB-D-9) 'They rejoice greatly' (13) ke-menaba-wi-ibal-kanduguagunyi (greatly-beautiful-very-much-superlative idiom) (DB-D-10) 'They are extremely beautiful' (14) Dios-wawa-papa ke-ka-ibaxi-wi-wi (God-lord-poss, 1 greatly-great-much-great-very) (DB-D-12) 'God is infinitely great' In his Specimina Linguae Californicae (Burrus 1967b, 136-39), Ducrue mentions a particle, mang (written here as ), which he transcribes as certe', i.e., 'certainly, indeed'. The following are examples of this emphatic predicate in his data (note in (17) below that Ducrue, the source for this version of the numeral 'one', writes no final g). (15) wami-butel nut (man-this mute-emph) (Du-15) 'This man is mute indeed' (16) wakana-xwa (babies-pat all strong-emph) (Du-16) 'All the babies are well' (17) texwe(g) kanopa taxip (one sing well-emph) (Du-17) 'One (of them) sings well, indeed' (18) maka wayley(belly full-emph) (Du-27) 'The stomach is really full' While the Del Barco texts do not show

, the particle omwi seems to serve the same emphatic function.

(19) ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba buxwet ke-?met = t-kwi-ñi omwi (greatly-happy-much-much rather great-place-obj-hear-not emph) (DB-D-7) '(Which) happiness will never end' (20) ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba-kenduguaguinyi-yixwal teegyi-omwi (greatly-happy-much-much-superlative idiom-must emph-emph) (DB-D-9) 'It is necessary that we rejoice' (21) yaa ?mayuxup-mo udaxi Dios-mo git-xwa ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba-yixwal teegyi-omwi (rel heaven-loc when God-obj see-pat great-happy-much-much-must emph-emph) (DB-D-10) 'He who sees God in heaven cannot but rejoice in the extreme' The particle teegyi 'thing' seen in the examples above frequently accompanies omwi as an emphatic. There is, in fact, an emphatic idiom (henceforth to be glossed as such) consisting maximally of duuñip-teegyi-omwi. There is a striking Yuman parallel to the emphatic use of teegyi 'thing', for the same function is

< previous page

page_23

next page >

< previous page

page_24

next page > Page 24

found for ?kwit 'thing' in the Kiliwa idiom, ?kwit-?-m-ra·y ('thing-good') which also occurs in sentence-final position serving as a superlative adverbial. The following sentences exemplify the maximal string of emphatics in Cochimí. (22) Dios gi/wi-yibixo-xwa ke-te-ñi duuñip-omwi (God 3-beside-pat greatly-large-not emph idiom) (DB-D-22) 'Next to God (they) are not very great indeed' (23) gyo ?uy=axal=ku naxwa duuñip-omwi (There happy-not-adj not be emph idiom) (DB-D-10) 'There, sadness cannot exist' (24) Dios-mo . . . ke-menaba-wi-iba kaeldugua guinyi teegyi-duuñip-omwi (God-subj . . . greatly-beautiful-very-much superlative idiom emph idiom) (DB-D-23) 'God (alone) . . . is extremely beautiful' (25) Dios yaa-xwa gi/wi-wisa texweg duuñip-omwi (God rel creator [?] 3-son one emph idiom) (DB-C-2) 'God the creator's only son' While these idioms (emphatic and superlative) resist further lexical analysis due to the paucity of data, the following example contains what would seem to be the duu- in duuñip above; perhaps it is a subordinate clause variant. (26) yaa b-?-detema duu-xwa k-komenda k-ami-m (rel 2-1-tell emph[?]-pat imp-know imp-well-sub) (DB-D-20) 'Understand well what I am going to tell you' The preceding sentence serves as a good example of another higher predicate the imperative. In this case, the predicate is phonologically unrealized, though its presence in the underlying proposition is marked by the imperative prefix, k-, on the rightmost surface predicate, and may account for the -m subordinating suffix which always occurs on the same predicate of the imperative sentence, as depicted in Diagram 2.

Diagram 2 The affixes k- . . . -m appear to be cognate with the similar *k and *m in Proto-Yuman (see Munro 1976a). It is doubtlessly one of the many -k/-m suffixes in Yuman discussed in, for example, Kendall (1975) and Munro (1976a). Cocopa, for example, has a *k- . . . -k affixation pattern for the imperative (Langdon, personal communication). The Pai group of languages uses m-, the usual second person prefix, in imperatives rather than the k- found in most of the other Yuman groups. Further examples of imperative sentences in Cochimí are given below.

< previous page

page_24

next page >

< previous page

page_25

next page > Page 25

(27) Santa Maria k-?uy-ibaxa-m (Holy Mary imp-happy-much-sub) (DB-HM-1) 'Holy Mary, rejoice!' (28) Dios-mo penayu n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa pa-k-?udugu k-?i-m (God-obj we 1-very-good-not-pat obj pl -imp-forgive imp-tell-sub) (DB-HM-6) 'Pray for us sinners' (lit. 'tell God to forgive our sins') (29) yaa b-?-detema-duu-xwa k-komenda k-ami-m (rel 2-1-tell-emph[?]-pat imp-know imp-well-sub) (DB-D-20) 'Understand well what I am going to tell you' The sentences above reveal at least three surface versions of the imperative; in example (27), the imperative prefix k- is prefixed directly to the main verb with the adverbial in the postclitic position. We can contrast this structure with that seen in example (29), in which the prefix k- occurs on both the lower main verb komenda 'know' and the higher adverbial predicate ami 'well'. Note that it is only the final predicate to which the -m subordinating complementizer is attached. Example (28) contains an imperative clause subordinate to another imperative clause, thus the prefix occurs on pa. . . -?udugu 'to forgive, deliver', as well as on the higher ?i 'to tell', as shown in Diagram 3.

Diagram 3 A very similar structure can be posited for what would seem to be an optative or weak imperative periphrastic idiom involving the non-lexical use of an existential predicate ?i 'to say', to which the imperative/optative k- is prefixed, cf. Proto-Yuman *?i 'to say', 'existential predicate' (see Langdon 1977b). (30) buxu m-xwa tama-la komenda xi n-Æ-godoño-demwegxweg k-?i-m (you 2-name-pat man-subj know and obj-3-love[pl] all opt-exist-sub) (DB-PN-2) 'Man should know and love your name' (31) penayu-la b-?-godoño k-?i-m (we-subj 2-1-love[pl] opt-exist-sub) (DB-PN-3) 'We should love you' Negation is frequently considered a higher predicate and is accomplished by the postclitic particle -ñi. In example (36) below, it appears that Ducrue's glosses amayben 'annos' and metañ 'multos' are incorrect (Burrus 1967b, 136). It

< previous page

page_25

next page >

< previous page

page_26

next page > Page 26

is the latter that shows ?met 'earth, season'; see Lexicon. (32) gyo yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa naxwa duuñip (There rel very-good-not-pat obj-3-love[sg] not be emph) (DB-D-14) 'Indeed, there they cannot love evil' (33) yaa buxwet yixwal-teegyi-omwi (rel rather great-obj-3-love[sg]-not-much must-emph idiom) (DB-D-15) 'Rather they must hate (it)' (lit. 'not love') (34) Dios-wawa-papa gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa wi-ami-iba-ñi (God-lord-poss, 1 3-beside-pat very-good-much-not xi menaba wi-ke-ñi omwi and beautiful very-great-not emph) (DB-D-22) 'Compared to God they are not very good, not beautiful nor great indeed' (35) yaa tagamweg-la wi-ami-ñi-xwa doomo . . . (rel all-subj very-good-not-pat and although) (DB-PN-7) 'Though they have all been very evil' (36) tama amayben ?met=añ agina-ñi (man many years live-not) (Du-7) 'Man does not live many years' (37) Dios-xwa ibi-ñi (God-pat die[sg]-not) (Du-6) 'God does not die' In addition to the simple negative predicate -ñi above, there is the semantically complex negative existential (pseudo-modal) naxwa '(can) not be', which is again to be found in the higher predicate position. (38) wixi gyo ?uy=axal=ku naxwa duuñip-omwi (and there happy-not-adj not-be emph idiom) (DB-D-11) 'And sadness cannot exist there' (39) ami-ñi-xwa naxwa duuñip (good-not-pat obj-3-love[sg] cannot emph) (DB-D-14) 'They cannot love evil' Note furthermore that the word ?uy=axal=ku 'sadness' is best translated as 'unhappiness', as it contains the root ? uy= 'be happy' followed by what must serve as a negator, =axal=, and finally by the adjectival =ku, to be discussed further below. The following examples show another modal yixwal 'must'. (40) yaa ?mayuxup-mo . . . Dies-me git-xwa ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba (rel heaven-lee . . . God-obj see-pat greatly-happy-much-much yixwal teegyi-omwi must emph idiom) (DB-D-9) 'He who is in heaven seeing God must be extremely happy'

< previous page

page_26

next page >

< previous page

page_27

next page > Page 27

(41) wixi Dios-wawa-papa ke-ka-ibaxi ke-wi-ami-ibaxi (and God-lord-poss, 1 greatly-great-much greatly-very-good-much ke-menaba-wi-iba git xi komnon ke-?uy-ibaxa yixwal teegyi-omwi greatly-beautiful-very-much see and know greatly-happy-much must emph id) (DB-D-11) 'And seeing and knowing God (to be) infinitely great, infinitely good, and infinitely beautiful they must rejoice in the extreme' (42) ?uy=pun-xwa Dios-mo teegyi yixwal (happy = heart-pat God-obj greatly-obj-3-love[sg]-much emph must) (DB-D-12) 'He must love God sincerely' (43) yaa buxwet yixwal (rel rather greatly-obj-3-love[sg]-not-much must) (DB-D-13) 'Rather he must abhor (it) in the extreme' (44) Dios-la . . . ke-n-Æ-godoño-iba yixwal teegyi-omwi (God-subj 3-3-love[sg]-pat . . . greatly-obj-3-love[pl]-much must emph id) (DB-D-16) 'They must love what God loves' From the following examples, it may be possible to segment a causative suffix -xi which seems to attach directly to the verb root; the first example given below is a non-causative for contrast. Note the possible cognation of Cochimí -xi 'causative' with Proto-Yuman *x- 'causative' (see Langdon 1966). (45) Æ-egeg-ta (3-go-pret) (DB-C-11) 'He went' (46) ibi udaaxi ?mayuxup-mo egeg-xi ayimbyo (die when heaven-loc go-caus[?] purpose) (DB-D-4) ' . . . so that when (he) dies (He) will send him to heaven' (47) tama yaa wi-ami-xwa ?mayuxup-mo usa-xi-daka (men rel very-good-pat heaven-loc be loc [pl]-caus[?]-fut) (DB-C-20) 'He will cause very good men to be in heaven' (48) Espíritu Santo-la yagawa-xi-p udaaxi . . . (Holy-Spirit-subj engendered-caus-[?] when . . .) (DB-C-3) ' . . . engendered of the Holy Spirit' (49) wadeg-demwegxweg-xi-daka (arise[pl] all-caus-fut) (DB-C-17) 'They will all be raised' (50) yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa usi=maxel ke-?met=t-kwi-ñi-mo iteg-xi (rel very-good-not-pat fire=[?] greatly-placed-obj-hear-not-loc go-caus[?]) (DB-C-19) 'Sinners he sends to Hell' Many of the preceding examples contain the aspectual suffixes -ta 'preterite' and -daka 'future'. It is most likely that the 'future' is at least historically a complex structure consisting of the same -ta as in the preterite above and a -ka

< previous page

page_27

next page >

< previous page

page_28

next page > Page 28

'irrealis'. The -ta could be glossed as 'non-present'; see Baker (1970, 33) for the possibly cognate t- 'non-present' in Diegueño. See also Donald Crook (1976) on Proto-Yuman *t. The particle will be left unanalyzed, however, and will be written with an initial voiced obstruent. The historical analysis just presented will be referred to again in connection with the Proto-Yuman *-xa 'irrealis' Examples of the aspectuals follow. (51) ?-wayip-ta (1-arise[sg]-pret) (DB-notes) 'I arose' (52) ?-wayip-daka (1-arise[sg]-fut) (DB-notes) 'I shall arise' (53) tama yaa wigya-ta-xwa (men rel die[pl]-pret-pat . . .) (DB-D-18) 'men who have died' Another phenomenon in the data is the frequency with which the aspectual suffixes are displaced from a position closer to the verb root by what would seem to be semantically higher predicates such as -xi 'causative', -nagaal 'purpose', and even an adverbial such as demwegxweg 'all, together' This may reflect a recent clitic origin for the aspectuals tolerating considerable freedom in their placement in the verb stem. An alternative explanation would consider the Cochimí aspectuals as the rightmost predicates by virtue of being the highest semantic predicates (suggested by Langdon, personal communication). Examples of aspectual displacement follow. (54) yaa wi-ami-xwa git-luxu-demwegxweg-daka (rel very-good-pat see-dur-together-fut) (DB-C-18) 'The righteous he will judge all together' (55) tama ?uy=pil-nagaal-ta . . . (man make-purpose-pret) (DB-D-3) 'He made Man so that . . . ' (56) pwedede(sic)=pil-nagaal-ta ([?]=make-purpose-pret) (DB-C-8) 'He made (him) so that . . . ' (57) wedede=pil-demwegxweg-ta ([?]=make-all-pret) (DB-C-1) 'He made them all' (58) upep-luxu-ta (finish-dur-pret) (DB-C-8) 'He died (completely)' (59) usa-xi-daka (be loc[pl]-caus-fut) (DB-C-20) 'They will be placed'

< previous page

page_28

next page >

< previous page

page_29

next page > Page 29

(60) wigya-ñi-daka (die[pl]-not-fut) (DB-C-20) 'They will not die' The durative particle luxu is more frequently found as the comparative 'more', but doubtless the semantic boundaries of physical extension can become figurative temporal extension in the aspectual 'durative' sense, as in the following examples. (61) Æ-uybetel-luxu (3-sick-dur) (Du-11) 'He is still sick' (62) Æ-upep-luxu-ta (3-finish-dur-pret) (DB-C-8) 'He was completely dead' The Lower Predication It is most convenient to deal with the lower predication of the simple sentence in terms of the traditional dichotomy between noun phrase and verb phrase (Chomsky 1965), beginning with the noun phrase, since much of the surface morphology of the verb is the transformational consequence of the structure in the noun phrase. In this section, we shall deal with only those aspects of the noun phrase which have a specific relevance to the simple sentence. Such topics as nominalization, nominal compounds, and possession will be left for more detailed discussion with the relative clause in the latter half of this sketch. The possessive is treated with subordination due to its superficial resemblance to the relative clause. The noun phrase can be expanded into either a pronoun (henceforth pron.) or a nominal (nom.). The nominal consists of a noun (most frequently unmarked for number) and a postposed determiner (det.) which, in turn, consists of demonstratives (dem.) or numerals (num.) and other modifiers (mod.). The suffixal possessive, which could be considered one of the constituents of the determiner, will be left for the discussion on possession below. The following rules describe the constituency of the noun phrase.

In these rules, the (S) denotes optionally embedded sentences, in (R1) for complementation and in (R2) for relativization. The data upon which this characterization is based is somewhat redundant but nonetheless consistent.

< previous page

page_29

next page >

< previous page

page_30

next page > Page 30

(63) wami-butel (man-this) (Du-8,15) 'this man' (64) wako-butel (woman- this) (Du-9) 'this woman' (65) tama-butel (man-this) (Du-1) 'this man' (66) (day-one) (DB-PN-6) 'each day' (67) (day-three) (DB-C-13) 'the third day' (68) ch-mi-ka (thing-cat-large) (CL-54) 'antelope' (69) ?-mo=kokyo (sheep-[?]) (CL-46) 'antelope' (70) wakana-xwa (babies-pat all) (Du-16) 'all the babies' Langdon has suggested (personal communication) that 'all' in example (70) might not be a modifier but an ordinary predicate. Compare, however, Yuman predicates of this sort in Kendall (1975). The independent subject pronouns are most easily presented in Figure 6 (see also Appendix I). SINGULAR

PLURAL

1

daxa

penayu

2

buxu

buxu-mayeg

3

yabya

Fig. 6. Independent subject pronouns. Note that while the first person is suppletive for number, the second is analyzable into buxu and mayeg; the latter element is perhaps related to mayben 'many' (which it seems Ducrue, in Burrus 1967b, mistranslated as 'years'). The third person is reminiscent of the yaa relative pronoun, and the -ya 'that' demonstrative suffix. Many languages have complementizers or subordinators which are etymologically related to the demonstratives. The only curious fact here (with Proto-Yuman in mind) is that Cochimí should have a relative pronoun at all, but more on this topic shortly. Nouns in Cochimí are marked for syntactic case with the following set of suffixes: -la 'subject', -xwa 'patient', -mo 'objective' -mo 'locative', (is well as a rare -mo ~ -mou 'subject'). There is also a 'locative'. Del Barco says, ''Tienen sus partículas para distinguir la persona que hace, a la que padece: a la primera añaden la, o a veces mo y a la 2a Jua: como Pedrola Franciso Jua" (León-Portilla 1973, 225; see Appendix I). Examples of case suffixation show it to be optional (if frequently marked) in both main and subordinate clauses. Case as often marks the syntactic role of a simple nominal as that of a subordinate clause; the first examples show the use of -la 'subject'.

< previous page

page_30

next page >

< previous page

page_31

next page > Page 31

(71) Dios-la pwedede=pil-nagaal . . . (God-subj [?] make-purpose . . .) (DB-D-8) 'That is the reason God created (man)' (72) tama-la komenda . . . (man-subj know . . .) (DB-PN-2) 'man (should) know . . . ' (73) yaa buxu-la m-xwa . . . (rel you-subj 2-command[?] . . .) (DB-PN-5) 'what you command . . . ' (74) yaa tagamweg-la wi-ami-ñi-xwa . . . (rel all-subj very-good-not-pat . . .) (DB-PN-7) 'all sinners (lit. 'all who are very ungood') As suggested by Del Barco's use of the verb padecer 'to suffer' above, the -xwa is best characterized as the marker of semantic patient rather than syntactic object. For, while it marks the accusative role in transitive predications, it also serves to mark the surface subject of intransitive sentences (Del Barco does not state this explicitly). Note the following usage. (75) gi-/wi-chi Santa María-wawa-papa-xwa . . . (3-mother Holy Mary-lady-poss, 1-pat . . .) (DB-D-18) '(Seeing) Our lady, Holy Mary . . .' (76) yaa b-?-detema-duu-xwa . . . (rel 2-1-tell-emph-pat . . .) (DB-D-20) 'what I am (about to) tell you . . .' (77) waxanu-wami-xwa wanga-ta (baby-male-pat born-pret) (Du-10) 'She bore a baby boy' (78) gi-/wi-wuktu-xwa t-kwi-ñi (3-wife-pat obj-hear-not) (Du-14) 'His wife does not hear' (79) wakana-xwa (babies-pat all well-emph) (Du-16) 'All the babies are well' (80) mabela-xwa dalama may (tongue-pat speak evil, badly) (Du-21) 'The tongue speaks evil' (81) kota-xwa (stone-pat large-emph) (Du-26) 'The stone is large' While Del Barco states that -mo may, on occasion, mark the subject case "para dintinguir la persona que hace", this function is rare in the texts; it should be

< previous page

page_31

next page >

< previous page

page_32

next page > Page 32

recalled that -mo is found most frequently as -mou when it is the subject. (82) Dios-mo . . . ke-wi-ami-ibaxi . . . (God-subj . . . greatly-every-good-much . . .) (DB-D-24) 'God (alone) is extremely good' (83) . . .Poncio Pilato-mo wawa wi . . . (. . . Pontius Pilate-subj ruler be . . .) (DB-C-5) 'Pontius Pilate was governor' More frequent are the uses of -mo as a marker of syntactic objects: (84) Dios-wawa-pa-mo (God-lord-poss, 1-obj . . .) (DB-D-9) '(seeing) . . . Our Lord, God . . .' (85) gyo Dios-mo git-ami (There God-obj see-well) (DB-D-6) 'There (they) see God clearly' (86) Dios-mo ... (God-obj greatly-obj-3-love[sg] . . .) (DB-D-13) 'he loves God . . .' Perhaps the most frequent use of -mo is as a locative which appears to be synonymous with , the other locative, even as to their use as directionals with verbs of motion. A locative possibly cognate with -mo is found in some dialects, implying an earlier ; but though this matches nicely our reconstruction of , the evidence is insufficient to justify its use. Examples of the locative/directionals follow; note that the last example shows the optional absence of case. Langdon (personal communication) has proposed that is a concatenation of affixes ending in a -k 'locative' (cognate with *-k 'locative' in Yuman). She reports a similar pattern in Yuma: ny-ny-c (dem+dem+subject case). (87) ?met-mo gina udaaxi (earth-loc alive when) (DB-D-2) 'while alive on earth' (88) ibi udaaxi ?mayuxup-mo egeg-xi (die[sg] when heaven-loc go-caus) (DB-D-5) 'When (he) dies, to take (him) to Heaven' (89) yaa ?mayuxup-mo usa (rel heaven-loc be loc[pl]) (DB-D-17) 'Those who are in Heaven' (90) tama ?mayuxup-Æ usa (man heaven-[loc] be loc[pl]) (DB-D-18) 'The people in Heaven' The locative suffix -mo (like the -ta aspectual suffix discussed earlier) appears to suffer some syntactic displacement; this is one possible explanation for its position in the first sentence of the Lord's Prayer.

< previous page

page_32

next page >

< previous page

page_33

next page > Page 33

(91) penayu nekena-pa yaa ?mayuxup m-ya-mo (we father-poss, 1 rel heaven 2-be[?] loc) (DB-PN-1) 'Our Father who art in heaven' On the other hand, we may be dealing with another morpheme. What is curious is the virtual identity across dialects of these forms, given in the original below. (92) miya mo miya mo miya mo mia (sic) miamu A further complication is the isolated use of what would seem to be a locative verb 'lie' ya, as in the Yuman *yak 'lie'. Compare the loss of the final k in Cochimí k-wa(k) 'two' and k-myo (k) 'three' with Proto-Yuman *x-wak 'two', *x-muk 'three' (Crawford 1976). Compare the Kiliwa word for God ?ma?y kw-yaq '(He who) lies in heaven' (Mixco, unpublished manuscript). The remaining examples will demonstrate the synonymy (in these texts) of the locatives -mo and

.

(93) yaa ?mayuxup-mo usa (rel heaven-loc be loc[pl]) (DB-D-20) 'They who are in heaven' (94) yaa usa (rel heaven-loc be loc[pl]) (DB-D-20) 'They who are in heaven' (95) ?met-mo gina udaaxi (earth-loc alive when) (DB-D-2) 'while he is alive on earth' (96)

wa udaaxi (earth-loc sits when) (DB-C-17) 'when He is on earth'

(97)

n-wa udaaxi (earth-loc 1-sit when) (DB-D-8) 'when we are on earth'

The directional use of -mo is seen in the following: (98) usi=maxel ke-?met-t-tkwi-ñi-mo . . . (fire=[?] greatly-place-obj-hear-not-loc . . .) (DB-PN-8) '(Deliver us) . . . from hell' (99) ?mayuxup-mo kawit-ta (heaven-loc ascend-pret) (DB-C-14) 'He ascended into heaven' Much of what is traditionally considered to be verbal inflection (e.g., modality, aspect, etc.) has been accounted for in the discussion of higher predicates

< previous page

page_33

next page >

< previous page

page_34

next page > Page 34

above. There remain, however, the inflections that relate to concordance for person and number between the verb phrase and the noun phrase. Cochimñ distinguishes between transitive and intransitive pronominal prefixes, at least in part. Figure 7 contains the data from a paradigm in Del Barco (León-Portilla 1973, 224; see Appendix I) for the conjugation of the verb wayip 'to arise from a prone position'. Cochimí, like Yuman, has suppletion of the verb root for the number of the noun phrase, which is not otherwise marked (typical of Yuman suppletion are the following singular and plural roots in Kiliwa: 'to kill', wa/yuw 'to be located' auxiliary verb). The imperative second person prefix k- will be discussed separately. SINGULAR

PLURAL

1

?-wayip

?-wadeg

2

m-wayip

m-wadeg

3

Æ-wayip

Æ-wadeg

Fig. 7. Conjugation of verb wayip, 'to arise.' Inflection for object includes prefixes for unspecified objects, possibly both n- 'animate' and t- 'inanimate' ( ). Examples of the latter are suggestive of Proto-Yuman inanimate unspecified object prefix ( '(some)thing'; see Munro 1976a, 228). The Cochimí forms for 'cat' and 'mountain lion' chimi and chimi-ka (cat-large), seem to avoid the putative evolution of . However, compare with ethad- 'dog' (Gatschet 1887). The Rosareno form iktat 'dog' (J. P. Harrington 1925; see Mixco 1977a, 45) has the k absent in the more southerly Cochimí dialects, which regularly corresponds to the Proto-Yuman *x. For the form 'food', the original forms in the northern dialects have the-yap, te-gua, the southern, tamada. (See The Lord's Prayer in the texts.) This suggests a verb root ma (~-wa) 'to eat' (cf. hua 'to eat' (G), guaba (B) with the prefix t- making it 'that which is eaten'; (the -p in the northern forms is reminiscent of the Yuman passive suffix *-p; see Langdon, 1966). Compare 'food' in Proto-Yuman with the forms above. Other examples are: t-tema 'to speak' (<detemba), t-si, l-si 'to drink' (cf. tasi 'water' (G), desi 'to drink' (G), lizi (Du), calisi 'to drink' (B)); t-kwi (cf. decui 'to hear' (Du)). The alternation t ~ l in this prefix is of some relevance to the possible cognation of the Cochimí subject case -la with the Proto-Yuman subject suffix . Venegas (1739a, 557) discusses the Cochimí word for 'devil': "Esta palabra tewiun significa en su lengua el demonio y tewisut a los demonios quiere decir cosa que miente: porque el te es cosa y el wiun es miente o mentiroso . . . " In other words t- is 'thing' which is to say an unspecified object In the same work in a later section is another example, involving a folk etymology connecting wa of tuwa 'evil thing' (possibly from wa 'pain'; see lexicon) to wama 'shaman', making the point that shamans are evil even in a grammatical sense, "daban el hombre tuva (sic) . . . significa cosa mala . . . se les oye decir tuwa para decir que algo es malo . . . los hechiceros llaman estos wama que es lo mismo que essos malos . . . " (Venegas 1739a, 558). The animate unspecified object prefix n- is admittedly rare, synchronically found in only one verb, 'to love'. However, a few noun stems which are likely candidates as archaic (albeit frozen) predicates are n-mat 'body', n-sa 'sibling' (cf. kenassa 'sister' (Du)), naza 'Schwester' 'sister' (B), n-pan

< previous page

page_34

next page >

< previous page

page_35

next page > Page 35

'sibling' (cf. Kiliwa ñ-p-pan 'younger sibling' n-p-ca * 'elder sibling" Mixco unpublished manuscript, field notes), keneda 'father' (Du) (*k-n-ta); compare nekena 'father' (DB). In this connection, see nada 'mother' (B), katai 'mother' (G). The two latter forms suggest an old predicate root *ta 'to be a parent'. Proto-Yuman also has a *nprefix serving as an object of transitive verbs, as a possessive prefix, and as a prefix on kinship terms, as seen in the Kiliwa forms above. Del Barco discusses pronominal concordance for transitive object in terms of a relation between the independent pronouns (Fig. 6 above) and the object prefixes: "Los pronombres son yo daha; tu buhu; aquel yabia; nos pennayu; vos buhumayeg; aquellos yabia. De estos usan active y tambien passive en cuanto a la letra inicial" (León-Portilla 1973, 225). The relation, while not synchronic, is clearly etymologically plausible when we compare daxa 'I' to the first person prefix d-, and buxu 'you' to the second person prefix b-. It will be recalled that the etymological relation of b- (and, by implication, buxu 'you') to m- 'second person subject' has already been suggested. The paradigms for the verb 'to love' (Fig. 8) have been abstracted from Del Barco's grammatical commentary (see Appendix I). Note again the verb root's suppletion for number, as well as the n- 'unspecified animate object' (Fig. 8) and its substitution by the appropriate specified object prefixes (Fig. 9). Compare the cognate order of ProtoYuman pronominal prefixes in Hinton and Langdon (1976). The data do not show special case forms for the independent pronouns aside from the usual suffixes. Hymes (1955, 1956) discusses the use of positional categories in historical comparison and reconstruction. SINGULAR

PLURAL

n-?-godoño 1'I love somebody' 'we love somebody 'you love 2 somebody'

n-m-godoño 'you (p1) love somebody'

'he loves 3 somebody'

n-Æ-godoño 'they love somebody'

Fig. 8. Conjugation of verb

, 'to love.'

Note in Figure 9 the use of m- for the obviative third person object of a third person subject. It is possible that this is a fossilized general reflexive prefix as found in at least one verb, m-wa 'to be seated' (see texts, DB-C-15, HM3). There may be an etymological connection between the m- prefix and *mat 'body'. There is a similar reflexive particle *ma(·)t in Proto-Yuman, which is etymologically related to 'body'. The stative predicates (including possessives) take a different set of subject prefixes These are n- 'first person' m'second person' gi-/wi 'third person' Examples (100) through (103) exemplify non-possessives only (the verbal inflection of demwegxweg 'all' in (102) will be taken up later).

< previous page

page_35

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_36

Page 36

Fig. 9. Conjugation of verb

, 'to love.'

(100) n-wigya . . . udaaxi (1-die[pl] . . . when) (DB-HM-7) 'When we die' (101) ke-m-ami m-ami (greatly-2-good 2-good, well) (DB-HM-3) 'You are very very good' (i.e., 'full of grace') (102) Dios gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa . . . (God 3-beside-pat . . . ) (DB-C-18) '(they) compared to God . . .' (103) tama ?mayuxup usa-xwa gi-/wi-demwegxweg wi-ke-ami-ibaxi . . . (man heaven be loc[sg]-pat 3-all very-greatly-good-much . . .) (DB-D-18) 'the people who are in heaven are all extremely good . . . ' Given the ambiguous philological status of gi-/wi- 'third person prefix' discussed earlier, we cannot assert a historical cognation with the Yuman *w- 'third person prefix'; however, the possibility cannot be discounted. For a possibly cognate Cocopa third person prefix u(·)-, see Crawford (1966, 67). Langdon, however, suggests the reconstruction of a *u 'demonstrative' prefix instead of the form above (personal communication). Though infrequent in our data, one of the most significant syntactic parallels between Cochimí and Yuman is that involving pronominal concordance for subject on the next highest predicate, in addition to the prefixes on the main verb. In example (104), for instance, the k- 'second person, imperative prefix' occurs not only on komenda 'to know' as in 'to know, imperative', but on the following adverbial ami 'well'. Since the prefix is semantically appropriate only on the Former, its occurence on the latter must be a non-semantic surface copy. This phenomenon has been most thoroughly discussed in Yuman for Mohave by Munro (1976a, 1976b). Munro's diachronic solution is the one used here for Cochimí: the transformational copying of the subject of a subject complement (NPX in Diagram 4) into the position of the subject of the next highest predicate.

< previous page

page_36

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page > Page 37

Diagram 4 (104) yaa b-?-detema-duu-xwa k-komenda k-ami-m (rel 2-1-tell-emph[?]-pat imp-know imp-well-sub) (DB-D-20) 'Understand well what I am about to tell you' (105) ke-m-ami m-ami (greatly-2-good 2-well) (DB-HM-3) 'You are extremely good' (i.e., 'full of grace') The greatest significance of the texts in Del Barco for our understanding of Cochimí syntax is in the relatively extensive examples of complex sentences. The following discussion will take up the topic of coordinating, conjunctive, and disjunctive particles which are best analyzed as complex predicates semantically dominating more than one proposition and thereby joining one to the other, as in Diagram 5. The predicate is placed in sentence-final position since most predicates occur in this position. Coordinators do not, but some conjunctions do (see Appendix I).

Diagram 5 The first of these higher predicates, 'and', is variously written as muwixi wixi and xi in the texts, all of which are apparently synonymous in the following examples. Where Del Barco gives ich for git 'to see', the parenthesized (g) shall be used. (106) ke-menaba-wi-iba muwixi . . . n-Æ-godoñondo-ami-iba (greatly-beautiful-very-much and . . . obj-3-love[p1]-well-much muwixi yaa buxwet (g)it xi komenda-ami udaaxi ke-?uy-ibaxa . . . and dem[?] rather/moreover see and know-well when greatly-happy-much . . .) (DB-D-18, 19) '(They) are very beautiful and (they) love each other dearly and furthermore when they (those) see and know (him) well, (they) rejoice mightily'

< previous page

page_37

next page >

< previous page

page_38

next page > Page 38

(107) Dios-la uxupuxuy (sic) dewewi wixi gyo n-usa xi Dios wawa-pa-mo . . . (God-subj do[?] reason and there 1-be loc[pl] and God-lord-poss,1-obj . . .) (DB-D-8,9) 'That is the reason that God did (it) and (when we see) God, Our Lord . . .' (108) Dios yaa i-xwa m-wa wixi gyo egeg-daka (God rel living[?]-pat sit and there go-fut) (DB-C-15,16) 'He sits (with) God the living (?) and (from) there He shall come' Thus in a coordinate sentence such as (109), the sentences "They see that God is . . ." and "They know that God is . . . " are reduced to "They see and know that God is . . . ". The same applies to example (106) above. (109) Dios wawa-papa ke-ka-ibaxi ke-wi-ami-ibaxi (God-lord-poss,1 greatly-great-much greatly-very-good-much ke-menaba-wi-iba git xi komnon . . . greatly-beautiful-very-much see and know . . .) (DB-D-12) 'And (they) seeing and knowing that God is infinitely great, infinitely good, and infinitely beautiful . . .' Identical verb deletion (i.e., gapping) yields the simple and complex coordinate noun phrases seen below in both subject and object roles. That is, in a coordinate sentence like (110) the original Cochimí sentence was 'That which is very good they must love and that which God loves they must love'; deletion of the first-clause verb 'to love' yields 'That which is very good and that which God loves they must love'. (110) yaa wi-ami-xwa wixi yaa Dios-la (rel very-good-pat and rel God-subj ref-3-love[sg]-pat . . . ke-n-Æ-godoño-iba yixwal teegyi-omwi . . . greatly-obj-3-love[pl]-much must emph idiom) (DB-D-15,16) 'That which is very good and that which God loves they must love very much' (111) angeles xi santos xi tama gambweg yaa (angels and saints and people-all rel heaven-loc usa-xwa ke-ami-ibaxi . . . be loc[pl] greatly-good-much . . .) (DB-D-20) 'All the angels, saints and people who are in heaven are extremely good' (112) anaxwa-mo wixi n-wigya-degxweg udaaxi. Amen (now-loc and 1-die[pl]-all when. Amen) (DB-HM-6) 'now and when we die' (i.e., now and at the hour of our death) Turning from coordinate structures to the semantically more complex concessive doomo 'although', we can note that, like other predicates, it can be found in sentence-final position (see Appendix I for Del Barco's discussion of doomo).

< previous page

page_38

next page >

< previous page

page_39

next page > Page 39

(113) . . . ke menaba-wi-iba-demwegxweg duuñip doomo ( . . . greatly-beautiful-very-much all emph though) (DB-D-20) 'Though they are indeed extremely beautiful . . . ' (114) . . . ke-ami-iba doomo (greatly-good-much though) (DB-D-22) 'Though (they) are very good . . .' In the following example, we find the combination of xi 'and' with doomo 'though' in a rather intractable structure for which no explanation can now be proposed. (115) yaa tagamweg-la wi-ami-ñi-xwa xidoomo puxweg-xwa xidoomo . . . (rel all-subj very-good-not-pat though[?] [?]-pat though[?] . . .) (DB-PN-7) 'All those who are very sinful . . .(?)' A less frequent disjunctive is buxwet, most frequently functioning as 'rather', but on occasion having a meaning closer to 'moreover, furthermore'. (116) . . . ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba buxwet ke-?met-t-kwi-ñi omwi ( . . . greatly-happy-much-much moreover great-place-obj-hear-not emph) (DB-D-7) ' . . . Extremely happy and furthermore for eternity' (117) yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa naxwa duuñip yaa (rel very good-not-pat obj-3-love not be emph dem buxwet yixwal teegyi-omwi rather greatly-obj-3-love[sg]-not-much must emph idiom) (DB-D-14) 'That which is evil they cannot love moreover they must abhor it' (118) yaa ?mayuxup-mo usa xi ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba . . . buxwet . . . luxu (rel heaven-loc be loc[pl] and great-happy-much-much . . . rather . . . more) (DB-D-17) 'In addition those in heaven are extremely happy . . . ' (119) n-Æ-godoño-ami-iba muwixi yaa buxwet (g)it xi komenda . . . (obj-3-love[pl]-well-much and dem furthermore see and know . . . ) (DB-D-19) '(They) love each other dearly and furthermore (they) see and understand (each other) clearly' Ducrue's Specimina (Burrus 1967b, 136) contain two forms for 'but', guimib and iguimil, probably pronounced something like wimib and iwimil respectively (note the wi 'existential predicate' again), as well as for 'and' (120) kenada-papa urap 1-si wimib texunoy (father-poss,1 eat and obj-drink but little) (Du-20) 'My father eats and drinks but (it is) little' (121) kata-wa gadey iwimil t-kwi-ñi (reed-sit see but obj-hear-not) (Du-22) 'The fish sees but does not hear' Del Barco describes the function of udemi 'if' as a discontinuous morpheme with

< previous page

page_39

next page >

< previous page

page_40

next page > Page 40

a following kaxí: '' . . . tienen su modo de decir proposiciones hipotéticas, añadiendo a la primera parte de la hipótesis la palabra uddemi, y a la segunda parte de ella, gkaji . . . " (León-Portilla 1973, 224; see Appendix I). However, in the texts we find udemi 'if' alone. The one instance of kaxí in the texts (DB-D-3) does not seem to be related to 'if'. Again, note that 'if' is in clause-final position. (122)

o n-wa udaaxi n-wi-ami udemi . . . (earth-loc 1-sit when 1-very-good if . . .) (DB-D-8) 'If we are very good while we are on earth . . .'

The comparative construction, usually considered a semantically complex proposition, can be found in two different forms, perhaps reflecting a dialect difference; the following is from Ducrue (note also (DB-HM-5); texts). (123)

ganexmaxen ka-luxu (sun-pat moon big-more) (Du-30) 'The sun is greater than the moon'

Del Barco has a predicate of comparison, yibixo, which may be nominal in origin. Here it is given a meaning something like 'beside, next to'. While the gi-/wi-stative subject prefix might be the possessive third person prefix discussed earlier, the possibility that it marks agreement with the subject of the sentence and not the standard cannot be discounted. (124) Dios-wawa-papa gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa wi-ami-iba-ñi (God-lord-poss,1 3-beside-pat very-good-much-not) (DB-D-21) 'Compared to God (they) are not very good' (125) Dios gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa ke-te-ñi duuñip-omwi (God 3-beside-pat greatly-great-not emph idiom) (DB-D-22) 'Compared to God (they) are not very great' Next in order are the morphemes, which can be placed under the rubric of 'purpose' predicates, that is, those involving a semantic 'reason', 'purpose', 'motive' or 'explanation'. The following examples demonstrate that these items are syntactically as well as semantically conjunctive. The first sentences highlight the use of nagaal 'purpose'; due to its interaction with the aspectual suffixes described earlier, this morpheme is analyzed as a verbal clitic, rather than as an independent particle. (126) Dios-la tama ?uy=pil-nagaal-ta (God-subj man make purpose-pret) (DB-D-2) 'God created man so that . . .' (127) Dios-la pwedede=pil-nagaal-ta (God-subj [?]=make-purpose-pret) (DB-D-8) 'God created (man) so that . . .' (128) . . . ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba-nagaal . . . ?mayuxup usa-xwa . . . ke-ami-ibaxi ( . . . greatly-happy-much-much-purpose . . . heaven be loc[pl]-pat . . . greatly good much) (DB-D-18) '(They) are very happy because . . . those who are in heaven . . . (are) extremely beautiful'

< previous page

page_40

next page >

< previous page

page_41

next page > Page 41

The form ayimbyo 'so that' seems to fit here as a 'purpose' predicate in the question (129) as well as in the answer (130). (129) temya ayimbyo Dios-la tama ?uy=pil-ta-wan (what[?] purpose God-subj man make-pret-interr) (DB-D-1) 'Why did God create man?' (130) ibi udaaxi ?mayuxup-mo egeg-xi-ayimbyo (die when heaven-loc go-caus-purpose) (DB-D-5) '(He did it) so that when he dies he (will) take him to heaven' Finally, there is the complex form (rather, group of forms) represented by (wi)dewe(we)na which, in one of its variants, seems to be a focused version of the purpose predicate, as evidenced by its salient sentence-initial position in contrast to the OV pattern exhibited by the other predicates; the English gloss given here is correspondingly focused. (131) widewewena Dios . . . ke-wi-ami-ibaxi . . . (the reason being God . . . greatly-very-good-much . . . ) (DB-D-9) 'The reason being (that) God is infinitely good . . . ' (132) widewena Cristo-wawa-papa mat ke-ami-iba-xwa . . . (g)it . . . (the reason being Christ-lord-poss,1 body great-good-much-pat . . . see . . . ) (DB-D-17) 'The reason being (that) (they) see Christ's sacred humanity' (i.e., 'Christ's body, glorified body') (133) widewena angeles xi tama ?mayuxup-Æ (the reason being angels and men heaven-(loc) wa-xwa . . . ke-ami-ibaxi sit-pat . . . greatly-good-much) (DB-D-18) 'The reason being (that) the angels and people in heaven are extremely good ' (134) widewena Dios-mo . . . ke-wi-ami-ibaxi (the reason being God-subj . . . great-very-good-much) (DB-D-23) 'The reason being (that) God is infinitely good' Subordination In surface structure, the Cochimí relative clause takes several variant forms, the most basic of which is introduced by the yaa 'relative pronoun' (cf. Proto-Yuman *ya 'near demonstrative'; see Langdon 1968) following the clauseexternal modified noun. Variants can be derived from this basic structure by the deletion of the head noun or the following relative pronoun. Diagram 6 captures the relation of these surface forms. This structure contrasts strongly with the Yuman relative clause which can be interpreted as preposed to an abstract head noun and lacks a relative pronoun per se. The idiom ke-?met=t-kwi-ñi, a relative clause which literally means 'great-place=obj-perceive (hear)-not' in (138) and elsewhere, may have been created by the missionary fathers to render the Judeo-Christian concept of "Eternity" as an invisible, intangible state outside of space and time.

< previous page

page_41

next page >

< previous page

page_42

next page > Page 42

Diagram 6 (135) ?met yaa tama wi-ami usa . . . (place rel men very-good be loc[pl] . . .) (DB-C-10) 'The place where good men are' (136) tama yaa wigya-ta-xwa . . . (men rel die[pl]-pret-pat . . . ) (DB-C-17) 'men who (have) died' (137) penayu nekena-pa yaa ?mayuxup m-ya mo (we father-poss,1 rel heaven 2-live loc[?]) (DB-PN-1) 'Our father who art in heaven' (138) ?mayuxup-mapa yaa ke-?met=t-kwi-ñi-mo (heaven-poss, 2 rel greatly-place=obj-hear-not loc) (DB-PN-4) 'Your heaven which is an eternal kingdom' (139) t-mata yaa gi-/wi-l=wiwi pemixit (food rel day-one 3-come we need[?]) (DB-PN-6) '(Give us [?]) the food we need each day' (140) Æ yaa wi-ami-xwa . . . (men rel very-good-pat . . .) (DB-C-18) 'those who are very good . . .' (141) Æ yaa ?mayuxup-mo usa . . . (men rel heaven-loc be loc[pl] . . .) (DB-D-17) 'Those who are in heaven . . .' (142) Æ yaa Dios-la ... (something rel God-subj 3-3-love[sg]-pat . . . ) (DB-D-15) 'That which God loves . . . ' (143) Æ yaa b-?-detema-duu-xwa . . . (something rel 2-1-tell emph[?]-pat . . .) (DB-D-20) 'What I am (about to) tell you . . . ' (144) tama Æ gina-mo . . . (men rel alive-obj) (DB-D-17) 'men (who) are alive . . . ' Note the syntactic parallels of the possessive structures and the relative structures just discussed. In (145) for example, penayu 'we' stands in the position

< previous page

page_42

next page >

< previous page

page_43

next page > Page 43

of t-mata 'food' in (139). The possessive clause, like the relative clause, follows a noun; like the relative pronoun, the possessive prefix on the possessed noun marks the relationship between the noun and the following structures. The possessive construction in Cochimí in its fully expanded surface form is represented by the following phrases. (145) penayu nekena-pa . . . (we father-poss,1 . . .) (DB-PN-1) 'Our Father' (146) buxu ... (you poss, 2-name-pat . . .) (DB-PN-2, HM-4) 'your name' (147) Dios gi-/wi-wisa-texweg (God poss, 3-son-one) (DB-C-2) 'God's only Son' (148) penayu n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa . . . (we poss, 1-very-good-not-pat . . .) (DB-C-23, HM-6) 'our sins' Though the above structures bear a striking surface resemblance to the relative clause just described, the underlying structures diverge considerably. The external syntactic "head" does not correspond to the semantic head. In possession it is the thing possessed which is being modified, not the possessor. Nor do the superficial parallels stop here; it has been noted that pronominalization by relative yaa could be claimed to be analogous to the possessive affixation on the possessed noun. The affixes, of course, agree with the possessor which would have to be deleted from the lower clause to account for its absence in the surface sentence. An alternate solution is to think of possession as a type of simple predication which contains a predicate nominal, the possessed noun, which can be marked for possessive concordance with its 'subject', the possessor. (A similar structure is described as an embedded complement XYNP for Mohave predicate nominals in Munro (1976a, 228). Diagram 7 expresses this graphically for Cochimí; here X stands for the possessor, and Y for the noun possessed. The second tree represents the result of possessive affixation. Langdon suggests that Cochimí possession could be treated as a nominalized sentence: 'God has him for a son' or 'God's son', for example (personal communication).

Diagram 7 A further transformation deletes the possessor, X, subsequent to possessive affixation. Such a transformation would account for the following structures lacking

< previous page

page_43

next page >

< previous page

page_44

next page > Page 44

an overt possessor (here marked by zero Æ). Note that (149) is an example of both overt and deleted possessor. In (154) and (155), the n- prefix recurring in 'sister' and 'father' can be glossed as 'unspecified animate object' on kinship terms. In the form 'body', n-mat, it might easily be considered an inalienable possessive prefix. (149) Æ Dios-wawa-pa ([we] God-lord-poss,1) (DB-D-9) 'Our Lord, God' (150) Æ Cristo-wawa-papa mat ([we] Christ-lord poss, 1 body) (DB-D-17) 'Christ, Our Lord's body' (151) Æ gi-/wi-chi, Santa María-wawa-papa ([Christ] poss, 3-mother, [we] Santa María-lady-poss,1) (DB-D-18) '(Christ) his mother (we) Our Lady Holy Mary' (152) Æ m-wisa, Jesus ([you] poss, 2-son, Jesus) (DB-HM-5) 'Your Son, Jesus' (153) Æ gi-/wi-wuktu ([he] poss, 3-wife) (Du-8, 14) 'his wife' (154) Æ kenasa-mapa ([you] sister-poss, 2) (Du-19) 'your sister' (155) Æ keneda-papa ([I] father-poss,1) (Du-20) 'my father' There are two other apparently nominal predicates which can be described with the same basic structure: the comparative yibixo 'besides' and the group of forms represented by (de)mwegxweg~((ta)gam)wegxweg 'all, together'. These seem to be ultimately tied to the numeral texweg 'one'. Compare this use to Kiliwa x-?-msir 'to gather, bring together' from msir 'one' In both these structures, the second nominal element following the 'head' noun takes gi-/wi- 'poss, 3', signifying agreement with the preceding noun, similar to the possessive concordance already described. By way of transition to a treatment of nominal compounding in general, we note that the texts show at least one example of a possessive compound, implying an alternate transformational derivation lacking a surface possessive affix. (156) Dios-chi (God-mother) (DB-HM-6) 'God's mother, Mother of God' The modifying element precedes the head noun in some non-possessive compounds as well: ya-mi (mouth-hair) 'beard'; (reed-arroyo); (boulder-arroyo); kate-dexi (de?i[?]) (reed-head); kate-se (reedjuice); cha-wan (bird-feather); wachetiba-cha (wilderness[?]-deer) (cf. edad watchitibawaha

< previous page

page_44

next page >

< previous page

page_45

next page > Page 45

'coyote', lit. 'dog dwelling in wilds[?]'); giñak-yuki 'finger' (cf. giñak 'hand'); giñak-pak 'arm'; giñak-ka 'nail' (cf. ka 'large') A second type of compound places the head noun in initial position and is probably transformationally related to the relative clause: kate-upep-t(a) (reed [that] finish-pret); ?mo-kokyo (sheep[?]) 'antelope' (cf. ?mo 'mountain sheep'); ?-tat-wachitiba-wa (dog [that] wilds-dwell) 'coyote'; chimi-ka (cat-large) 'mountain lion, cougar'; wech-ka (houses[?]-large) 'village'; wandshu-ku (child-female) (cf. wandshu 'child'); usi=maxel (fire[?]) 'Hell'; ?mat-skwa 'Spring' (cf. Yuman *?mat 'earth, season, year'); 'summer' (cf. Cochimí 'sun'; *?pal 'hot' in ProtoYuman); mess-bo ( 'summer'); ?mat-spa 'winter' (cf. Yuman *spa 'extinguish'); ?mat-chera 'autumn' (cf. Yuman 'cold'). (See lexicon for provenance of these forms.) The compounds in the preceding paragraph, in which the head noun followed the modifier, are doubtless derivable from the latter type discussed here. It is not possible from these data to determine which is the more archaic pattern. Before turning from relativization to other types of subordination, we must discuss the temporal subordinator udaaxi 'when', which could be viewed as a type of relative clause structure, at least semantically (see Cressey 1968). Note that the last syllable is reminiscent of xi 'and'. A few examples will suffice to demonstrate clause-final position. (157) ?uy=pun-xwa ibi udaaxi . . . (happy=heart-pat die when . . .) (DB-D-4) 'When he dies with a happy heart . . .' (158) Dios-mo git-ami udaaxi (God-obj see-well when . . .) (DB-D-6) 'When he sees God clearly . . .' (159) tama wi-ta udaaxi (man be-pret when . . .) (DB-C-4) 'When He became man . . .' (160) n-wigya-texweg udaaxi (1-die[pl]-one when . . .) (DB-HM-7) 'When we die' (i.e., 'at the hour of our death') Subject complementation has been discussed implicitly in the earlier discussion of higher predication. Object complementation is the result of the expansion of an object noun phrase node directly into an embedded sentence. These clauses, like the simple nominal object, are frequently marked with -xwa, the patient case suffix; there are no examples of -mo 'object' marking a complement nor are subject complements marked with -la or mo 'subject'. The Credo is a mine of object complement clauses dominated by the reiterated 'I believe' While is normally taken as 'to love', its use obviously extends to belief, trust, and like notions. Note the preposing of the predicate, perhaps under the influence of the European models, in (161), (162). The remaining examples are in the more usual OV pattern and will conclude the syntax section. (161)

. . . teegyi-gambweg-xwa wedede=pil-demwegxweg-ta (obj-1-believe[sg] . . . thing-all-pat [?]=make-all-pret) (DB-C-1) 'I believe God created all things'

< previous page

page_45

next page >

< previous page

page_46

next page > Page 46

(162)

Jesu Cristo-xwa yaa i-xwa (obj-l-believe Jesus Christ-pat rel living[?] gi-/wi-wisa-texweg duuñip-omwi poss, 3-son-one emph idiom) (DB-C-2) 'I believe (in) Jesus Christ who (is) the Creator's only son'

(163) penayu n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa pa-d-Æ-?udugu-xwa (we poss, 1-very-good-not-pat pl obj-l-3-forgive-pat obj-l-believe) (DB-C-23) 'I believe that He will forgive us our sins' (164) n-mat wadeg-daka-xwa (obj-bodies arise-rut-pat obj-l-believe) (DB-C-24) 'I believe that corpses will arise' (i.e., the Resurrection of the dead) (165) wadeg-udaaxi w-wa, wigya-ñi-daka-xwa (arise[pl]-when 3-sit die[pl]-not-fut-pat obj-l-believe) (DB-C-25) 'I believe that when they (have) arisen, they (will) live, (and) shall not die' (166) Santa María, Dios-chi, Dios-mo penayu (Holy Mary, God-mother, God-obj we n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa pa-k-?udugu k-?i-m poss, 1-very-good-not-pat pl obj-imp-forgive imp-say-sub) (DB-HM-6) 'Holy Mary, Mother of God, tell God, forgive our sins' (i.e., 'pray for us sinners')

< previous page

page_46

next page >

< previous page

page_47

next page > Page 47

Cochimi Texts Breve Disertación en Cochimí Text 1 The text is organized by line, as follows: first, in the Southern Cochimí dialect (SC); second, when available, in Northern Cochimí (NC); third, in its regularized version; and finally in terms of the grammatical glosses. A free translation of the text begins on page 51. The dialects of San Javier and San José Comondú are the sources for Southern Cochimí; sources for Northern Cochimí are the San Francisco Borja, Santa María, and Santa Gertrudis dialects. Abbreviations used in the grammatical glosses are found on page 14. (1) temia ayimbio Dios la taemma uyipiltahuan (1) Dios il tama uehenac iduviduvec (1) temya ayimbio Dios-la tama ?uy=pil-ta-wan (1) (What) purpose God-subj man (happy)=make-pret-interr (2) Dios-la taemma uyipil nagaal-taja amete mo guinna udaahi (2) tamal ameteguang (2) Dios-la tama ?uy=pil-nagaal-ta ?met-mo gina udaaxi (2) God-subj man (happy)=make-purpose-pret earth-loc alive when (3) Diosmo uyipunjo kaenogooso iba hi kaehuimaha iba hi, (3) Dios-mo ?uy=pun-xwa ibaxi ke-wi-maxa-ibaxi (3) God-obj (happy)=heart-pat greatly-obj-3-love much greatly-very-much-much yaa Dios la kgaji guijua jil (sic) deegyi hi yaa bujuet hi uddemi yaa Dios-la kaxi gi-/wi-xwa (?) teegyi xi yaa buxwet xi udemi rel God-subj (?) 3-word (?) thing and rel moreover and if (4) ibi udaahi (4) (4) ibi udaaxi (4) die when

< previous page

page_47

next page >

< previous page

page_48

next page > Page 48

(5) ambayu jupmo egheji ayimbio (5) ambeing unc duec uchuang hu (5) ?mayuxup-mo egeg-xi ayimbio (5) heaven-loc go-caus purpose (6) hi ghio Dios mo ghich ami udaahi kaeuyibaha ibal kandugua gunyi: guihi (6) xi gyo Dios-mo git-ami udaaxi ke-?uy-ibaxa-ibal-kandugua guiñi wixi (6) and there God-obj see-well when greatly-happy-much-much-superlative (7) kaeuyibaha iba bujuen (sic) kae ammet e decuinyi omui (7) ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba buxwet ke-?met=t-kwi-ñi omwi (7) greatly-happy-much-much rather greatly-place=obj-perceive-not emph Hiet (sic) (?)guimuguihi (?) wimuwixi (?) and (8) Dios la puededepil nagaal-lata: amet e no (8) Dios-la pwedede=pil-nagaal-ta: n-wa (8) God-subj (?)=make-purpose-pret: earth-loc

nuhuaja udaahi nuhuiambi udaaxi n-wi-ami 1-sit when 1-very-good

udemmi, ambayujup mo Diosla uju pujuy dehuehui udemi ?mayuxup-mo Dios-la uxu=puxuy dewewi if heaven-loc God-subj (?)=do purpose (9) guihighio nuusa hi Dios guaguapamo (9) wixi gyo n-usa xi Dios-wawa-pa-mo (9) and there 1-be loc and God-lord-poss,1-obj

at (sic) uddaahi (?) udaaxi (?) when

kae uyibaja ibal kaenduguaguinyi yijual deegyi omui ke-?uy-ibaxa-ibal kaenduguaguinyi yixwal teegyi-omwi greatly-happy-much-much superlative must emph idiom (10) Huidehuena Dios-hmo kaehui ami iba hi kaemenaba hui ibal (10) widewena Dios-mo ke-wi-ami-ibaxi ke-menaba-wi-ibal(10) reason God-obj greatly-very-good-much greatly-beautiful-very-much kanduguagunyi muguihi, yaa ambayujupmo ayahi Dios mu guichjua kanduguaguñi muwixi yaa ?mayuxup-mo (?) Dios-mo git-xwa superlative and rel heaven-loc God-obj see-pat kaeuyibaja iba yijual deegyi omui: ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba yixwal teegyi omwi greatly-happy-much-much must emph idiom (11) guihi ghio uyiajalcu najua duuñip omui (11) wixi gyo ?uy=axal=ku naxwa duuñip omwi (11) and there happy=neg=adj (can) not be emph idiom (12) guihi Dios guaguapapa kaekka iba hi kaehui ami iba hi (12) wixi Dios-wawa-papa ke-ka-ibaxi ke-wi-ami-ibaxi (12) and God-lord-poss,1 greatly-great-much greatly-very-good-much

< previous page

page_48

next page >

< previous page

page_49

next page > Page 49

kaemenaba hui iba muguihi yaa Dios kae ami iba bujuet ich ke-menaba-wi-iba muwixi yaa Dios ke-ami-iba buxwet (g)it greatly-beautiful-very-much and rel God greatly-good-much more(over) see ahi cgomenda ami guichahi kgomnon ami udaahi kaeuyibaja axi komenda-ami git xi komnon ami udaaxi ke-?uy-baxa and know well see and know well when greatly-happy-much yijualo (sic) degyi (sic) omui yixwal teegyi omwi must emph idiom (13) uyipunjuo (sic) Dios mo kaenogooso ibal degyi yijual (13) ?uy=pun-xwa Dios-mo teegyi yixwal (13) happy=heart-pat God-obj greatly-obj-3-love(sg)-much emph (?) must deegyi omui teegyi-omwi emph idiom (14) guihi ghio yaa hui ambinyi jua nogooso najua duuñip (14) wixi gyo yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa naxwa duuñip (14) and there rel very-good-not-pat obj-3-love (can) not be emph (15) yaa bujuet kaenogoosonyi iba yijual deeyi omui (15) yaa buxwet yixwal teegyi omwi (15) rel rather great-obj-3-love(sg)-not-much must emph idiom (16) yao (sic) hui ambijua guihi yaa Dios la nogoosojua guimma (sic) (16) yaa wi-ami-xwa wixi yaa Dios-la (16) rel very-good-pat and rel God-subj obj-3-love(sg)-pat (only)? kaenogoodoño yijual deeyi (sic) omui ke-n-Æ-goodoño-iba yixwal teegyi-omwi greatly-obj-3-love(pl)-much must emph idiom (17) yaa ambayujup mo usa hi kaeuyibaja iba (17) yaa ?mayuxup-mo usa xi ke-?uy-ibaxa-iba (17) rel heaven-loc be loc (pl) and greatly-happy-much-much

ita (sic) (?) (?)

bujuet chinanyi (sic) luju: huidehuena Xpto-guaguapapa bat buxwet (?) luxu: widewena kristo-wawa-papa mat rather (?) more reason Christ-lord-poss,1 body kae ami ibajua: ke-ami-iba-xwa greatly-good-much-pat (18) guihi Guichi Santa Maria guaguapapa jua: guihi angeles hi santos (18) wixi gi-/wi-chi Santa Maria-wawa-papa-xwa: wixi angeles xi santos(18) and poss, 3-mother Holy Mary-lady-poss,1-pat: and angels and saints-

< previous page

page_49

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_50

Page 50 gambuegjua ich ami uddaahi kaeuyibaja iba nagaala luju (sic) gamweg-x wa (g)it ami udaaxi ke-?uy-ibaxa iba nagaal luxu all-pat see-well when greatly-happy-much-much purpose more muguihi huidehuena angeles hi taemmia (sic) muwixi widewena angeles xi tama and reason angels and men

ambayujup usajua ?mayuxup usa-xwa heaven be loc(pl)-pat

guidemuejueghi kae ambi iba hi kaemenabahui iba gi-/wi-demwegxweg ke-ami-ibaxi ke-menaba-wi-iba 3-all very-great-good-much great-beautiful-much (19) hikdo (sic) nogodoñondo ami iba muguihi (19) (?) n-Æ-godoño-ndo-ami-iba muwixi (19) (?) obj-3-love(pl)-?-well-much and ich ahi (sic) cgomenda ami (g)it(?) komen=da-ami see know=(?)-well

uddaahi udaaxi when

yaa bujuet yaa buxwet rather

kae uyi baja ke-?uy-baxa great-happy-much

nagaal-la iba luju nagaal-iba-luxu purpose-much-more

(20) guimbuet (sic) (yaa ba adetemba duujua kgacgomenda kgambim) (20) (?) (yaa b-?-detema-duu-xwa k-komen=da k-ami-m) (20) (?) (rel 2-1-tell-emph[?]-pat imp-know=[?] imp-well-sub) angeles yhi (sic) santos hi taemma gambueg yaa ambayupano (sic) angeles xi santos xi tama-gamweg yaa angels and saints and men-all rel heaven-loc usajua kae ambi iba hi kaemenabahui iba duuñip demuejueg doomo* usa-xwa ke-ami-ibaxi ke-menaba-wi-iba-duuñip demwegxweg doomo be loc(pl) great-good-much great-beautiful-very-much-emph all although (21) Dios guaguapapa gui yibijojuo hui ambi ibanyi (21) Dios-wawa-papa gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa wi-ami-iba-ñi (21) God-lord-poss,1 3-beside-pat very-good-much-not

hi menaba xi menabaand beautiful-

hui kaenyi omui wi-ke-ñi omwi very-great-not emph (22) tegyi (sic) yaa (22) teegyi yaa (22) things rel

Dios la huededepita jua (sic) guide muejueghi Dios-la wedewe=pil-ta-xwa gi-/wi-demwegxweg xi God-subj (?)=make-pret-pat 3-all and

kae ambi iba doomo huihuina do o mo Dios guiyibijo j??o ke-ami-iba doomo wiwina doomo Dios gi-/wi-yibixo-xwa great-good-much although reason(?) although God 3-beside-pat *The microfilm ms. reverses this from demuejueg duuñip by inserting the numerals 1, 2 above the words.

< previous page

page_50

next page >

< previous page

page_51

next page > Page 51

kae ttenyi duuñip omui ke-te-ñi duuñip-omwi greatly-large-not emph idiom (23) hui dehuena Dios mou guimma ped (sic) kaehui ami iba hi (23) widewena Dios-mo gima (?) ke-wi-ami-ibaxi (23) reason God-subj only(?) (?) greatly-very-good-much menabahui ibal, kaendugua gunyil degyi (sic) duuñip omui muguihi menaba-wi-ibal kaendugua guinyi teegyi-duuñip-omwi muwixi beautiful-very-much super idiom emph idiom and Breve Disertación, Text 1 Free Translation of Cochimí Text (1) Why did God create man? (2) God created man so that, while alive on earth, (3) he love God wholeheartedly in the extreme and if he obeys God's word, the things He (commands?) (4) when he dies with a happy heart (5) to take him to heaven (6) and there seeing God clearly he rejoices in the extreme (7) and moreover they [sic] rejoice eternally. (8) God made (him), God did it for that reason, so that if we are good while on earth (He can take) him [sic] to heaven (9) and being there and when he (sees) Our Lord God he must rejoice infinitely indeed. (10) The reason being God is extremely good, extremely beautiful and those in heaven who see God must rejoice greatly indeed (11) and there, sadness cannot exist indeed (12) and they must rejoice indeed when (they) see and know God, Our Lord to be extremely great and extremely good and extremely beautiful. (13) They must love God extremely wholeheartedly (14) and there, they can love no evil. (15) Moreover, they must hate (evil) (16) That which is very good and that which God loves they must love in the extreme indeed. (17) Those who are in heaven furthermore rejoice in the extreme, the reason being that [they see] Christ's sacred humanity (18) and when they see clearly His mother Our Lady Holy Mary and the angels and all the saints, they rejoice greatly, the reason being they see and know the angels and people (who) are in heaven to all be very very good and very beautiful (19) and furthermore they love (each other) dearly. (20) (Understand well what I tell you) Although the angels and saints and all the people who are in heaven are very good and are all very beautiful indeed (21) Next to God they are very good and very beautiful not very much indeed. (22) Although the things which God has made are all very good, next to God they are not very great. (23) The reason being (that) God (alone) is extremely good and extremely beautiful indeed. Free Translation Del Barco's Spanish Version [Due to the requirements of syntactic analysis, the sentences are numbered differently in the European translation. The following is a concordance of line numbers between the two versions. The number(s) to the right of the equals sign refer to the European translation' 1=1; 2,3=2; 2-6=3; 8=4,5; 9=6; 10=7; 11=8; 12,13=9-11; 14,15=12; 16=13; 17-21=14,15; 22,23=16.] (1) Para qué Dios creó al hombre? (2) Dios creó al hombre para que mientras viva en este mundo, le ame de corazon, le reverencie, guarde sus santos mandamientos (3) y haciéndolo así para llevarle, cuando muera al cielo, en donde viendo claramente a Dios, este alegrándose siempre con una alegría indecible, la cual alegría nunca jamás se acabará (4) así es, para este fin nos ha creado. (5) Dios, (sic)

< previous page

page_51

next page >

< previous page

page_52

next page > Page 52

para que siendo buenos en esta vida, vayamos despues a gozarle en el cielo, (6) en donde estando nosotros y viendo a Dios nuestro señor, es necesario que nos alegremos indeciblemente. (7) La razón es, porque siendo Dios como es, infinitamente bueno, y hermoso infinitamente, el que está viendo a Dios en el cielo no puede dejar de alegrarse muchísimo, (8) allí no puede haber tristeza ninguna. (9) Demás de ésto viendo allí y conociendo bien a Dios infinitamente grande, bueno y hermoso, es necesario amarle con todo el corazón (10) y amándole con todo el corazón, se alegran siempre, (11) y alegrándose le aman sin cesar. (12) Allí no pueden quedar las cosas malas, antes bien necesariamente aborrecen estas cosas de corazón. (13) Las cosas buenas y todo lo que Dios ama, eso es lo que todos allí aman. (14) Demás de este gozo, que acabo de decir, que tienen los buenaventurados, se alegran también mucho viendo la sagrada humanidad de Nuestro Señor Jesu Cristo, viendo a su madre santísima, Santa María Nuestra Señora, viendo a los ángeles, a los santos, y a todos los que están en el cielo, viéndolos a todos claramente se alegran también mucho con esta vista [Here León-Portilla has a line not found in 1413/1414, which I have excluded, see Appendix II.] todos y cada uno de ellos estan muy buenos y hermosos, y seaman mucho todos mutuamente. (15) Viendo y conociendo bien todo esto, se alegran con esto muchísimo y esta alegría nunca se ha de acabar. Con todo eso (entended bien lo que os voy a decir) aunque los angeles, los santos y todos los demás que están en el cielo, son verdaderamente muy buenos y muy hermosos, mas éstos, respecto a Dios, o comparados con Dios, son buenos y hermosos, no mucho. (16) Todas las cosas que Dios ha creado, aunque sean verdaderamente muy buenas, pero si se comparan con Dios Nuestro Señor, todas son poca cosa. La razón es: porque solamente Dios es grandísimo infinitamente, bonísimo infinitamente y hermosísimo infinitamente. English Translation of Del Barco's Spanish Version (1) Why did God create Man? (2) God created Man so that, while he is alive on this earth, he love Him wholeheartedly, do Him reverence, keep His commandments (3) and (Man) doing so, to take him, when he dies, to heaven where (Man), seeing God clearly, (Man) be rejoicing always with an untold joy, which (joy) shall never end. (4) So it is, for this end has He created us. (6) God, so that being good in this life, we should go afterwards to enjoy Him in heaven (6) where (we) being there and seeing Our Lord God, it is necessary that we should rejoice to an untold degree (7) The reason being, because seeing God as He is, infinitely good, and infinitely beautiful, he who is seeing God in heaven cannot help but to rejoice very much. (8) There, there can be no sadness whatsoever. (9) Furthermore seeing there and understanding well God to be infinitely great, good and beautiful, it is necessary (for them) to love Him with their whole heart (10) and loving Him with (their) whole heart, to rejoice always, (11) and rejoicing they (those in heaven) love Him without end. (12) There there can be no evil things, moreover they must abhor these things wholeheartedly. (13) Good things, all that God loves, that is what (they) all love there. (14) In addition to this joy, which I have just told about, that the blessed have, they also rejoice greatly seeing the sacred humanity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, seeing his most holy mother Our Lady Holy Mary, seeing the angels, the saints, and all those who are in heaven, each and every one of whom is very good and beautiful and who love each other greatly. (15) Seeing and knowing all of this well, they rejoice greatly of this sight and this joy shall never end. Even so (Understand well what I am about to tell you) though the angels, the saints and all of the rest who are in heaven, are truly very good and beautiful, yet these, (when) with regard to God, or compared to God, are good and beautiful, not much. (16) All the things that God has created, though they may be truly very

< previous page

page_52

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_53

Page 53 good, yet if they are compared to God, Our Lord, all amount to little. The reason for this is: because God is infinitely great, infinitely good and infinitely beautiful. Pater Noster Text 2 [Each line of text will be marked (SJ), for San Javier and San Joss Comondú dialects (the first and second version taken from (DB), the third from (CL)), (SF) for San Francisco de Borja, Santa Gertrudis, and Santa María dialects (fourth version), or (SI), for San Ignacio dialect (fifth version) (from (CL)). There follows, for each line, the regularized version and the morpheme-by-morpheme glosses. SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(1) pennayu nekaenamba (1) pennayu nakaenamba (1) pennayu nakaenamba (1) cahai apa (1) ua-bappa (1) penayu nekena-pa (1) we father-poss,1

ya ambayujup miya yaa ambayujup miya yaa ambayujup miya ambeing mia aroma-bang miamu ?-mayuxup m-ya rel heaven 2-lie(?)

mo! mo, mo (sic) mo loc(?)

SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(2) buhu mobojua tammala gomenda hi nogodeño demuejuae gagim (2) buhu mombojua tammala gkomenda hi nogodoño demuejueg gkajim (2) buhu mombojua taemmala gkomenda nogodoño demuejueg gkajim (2) mimbang-ajua (2) ma-mang-a-jua (2) buxu tama-la komen=da xi n-Æ-godoño-demwegxweg k-?i-m (2) you 2-word/name-pat man-subj know=(?) and obj-3-love(pl)-all imp-cop-sub

SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(3) pennayula bogodeño gagim (3) pennayula bogodoño gkajim (3) pennayula bogodoño gkajim (3) (3) (3) penayu-la b-?-godoño k-?i-m (3) we-subj 2-1-love(pl) imp-exist-sub

SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(4) guihi ambayujup maba, ya kaammed e decuinyi hmo puegiñ (4) guihi ambayujup maba, yaa kaeammet e decuinyi mo puegiñ (4) guihi ambayujup maba, yaa kaeammet e decuinyi mo puegiñ (4) amet midicuvaijua cucuem (4) amat mathadabajua ucuem (4) wixi ?-mayuxup-mapa, yaa ke-?-met=t-kwi-ñi-mo pwexiñ (4) and heaven-your, rel great-place=obj-perceive-not-loc bring us (?)

SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(5) ya buhul (sic) mujua ambayujubmo dedahijua, amet e hno (5) yaa m buhula mujua ambayujup mo dedahijua, amet e nno (5) yaa m buhula mujua ambayujup mo dedahijua amete no (5) jemmujua amabang vihi mieng ame tenang (5) kem-mu-jua amma-bang vahi-mang amat-a-nang (5) yaa buxu-la ?-mayuxup-mo dedaxi-xwa (5) rel you-subj word-pat heaven-loc (same) ?-pat earth-loc

< previous page

page_53

next page >

< previous page

page_54

next page > Page 54

guilugui hi pagagim guilugui hi pagkajim guilugui pagkajim luvihim lu-uahim gi-/wi-1=wi pa-k-?i-m 3-go/come pl obj-imp-cop-sub SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(6) Tamada, ya (6) Tamada yaa (6) Tamada yaa (6) The-vap yicue (6) Teguap (6) t=ma=ta yaa (6) food rel

ibo ibo ibo

tejuae guiluguigui pemigitimo* tejueg guiluguigui pamijich e mmo tejueg guiluguigui paemijich e mou temiei digua ibang gual guieng-a-vit-a-jua gi-/wi-1=wi pemixit-mo day-one 3-go/come (we need[?])

ibo yahno puegiñ ibo yanno puegiñ ibo yanno puegiñ ibang-anang gna cahittevichip iban-a-nang packagit pwexiñ day-that-loc brings (us?) SJ (7) Guihi tamma ya gambuaejula kaepuhui ambinyijua pennayula SJ (7) Guihi tamma yaa gambuegjula kaepuhui ambinyijua pennayula SJ (7) Guihi tamma yaa gambuegjula kaepujui ambinyijua pennayula (7) wixi tama yaa gamwegxweg-la ke-puxuy ami-ñi-xwa penayu-la (7) and men rel all-subj great-do (us)(?) good-not-pat we-subj dedau dugujua, guilugui pagagim dedaudugujua guilugui pagkajim dedaudugujua, guilugui pagkajim deda=?udugu-xwa gi-/wi-1-wi pa-k-?i-m (?) = forgive-pat 3-go obj-imp-cop-sub SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(8) Guihi ya tagamuela ui ambinyijua hi doomopuhaejua, hi doomo (8) Guihi yaa tagamuegla hui ambinyjua hi doomo puhuegjua hi doomo (8) Guihi yaa tagamuegla hui ambinyijua hi doomo puhuegjua, hi doomo (8) nuhigua aviuveham (8) muht pagijua abadakegem machi uayecg-jua pao kabaya-guem (8) wixi yaa tagamweg-la wi-ami-ñi-xwa xi doomo puweg-xwa xi doomo (8) and rel all-subj very-good-not-pat and though (?)-pat and though pogoun yim, tagamuaejua, pogounyim, tagamuegjua pogounyim tagamueg vi chip iyegua gnacaciuven: cassetasuang mamenit-gna-kum : kazet-a-juanga muegnit-pa-cum pogouñim tagamweg-xwa (?) all-pat *Note that in the two other dialects the t is palatalized to ch; see also DB-C-14,17,18 for further versions of git 'to see'.

< previous page

page_54

next page >

< previous page

page_55

next page > Page 55

SJ SJ SJ SF SI

(9) guihi ussi muaehael kaamet e decuinyihmu guihi ya ui ambinyi (9) guihi ussi (sic) mahel kae ammet e decuinyi mo guihi yaa hui ambinyi (9) guihi usi mahel kaeammet e decuiny: mo, huihi yaa hui ambinyi (9) guang tevisiee (9) guang mayi-ack (9) wixi usi=(maxel) ke-?-met=t-kwi-ñi-mo wixi yaa wi-ami-ñi (9) and fire=(?) great-place=obj-hear-not-loc and rel very-good-not ya gamguegjua pagaudugum. yaa gambuegjua pagkaudugum. yaa gambuegjua pagkaudugum. gna cavignaha packabanajam yaa gambweg-xwa pa-k-?udugu-m. rel all-pat pl obj-imp-forgive-sub.

Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.

Pater Noster Text 2, Free Translation of Cochimí Version (1) Our Father who are in heaven (2) All men should know and love your name/word (3) We should love you (4) (And) bring (?) us to your heaven which is eternal. (5) That which is your word should come to earth (as it is) in heaven. (6) The food that we need (?) each day that comes, bring us (?) on that day. (7) And we should forgive all men who do (?) evil (to us?). (8) And (from them) though they are evil (to us?), and even though they are (?). (9) And (from) Eternal Hell and (from) all that is very bad, free us. Amen. Standard Pater Noster (Latin Version, Edelvives 1953)* Pater noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum; adveniat regnum tuum; fiat voluntas tua sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie; et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris; et ne nos inducas in tentationem; sed libera nos a mal. Amen. English Translation of Latin Version Our Father Who art in heaven Hallowed be thy name Thy kingdom come And Thy will be done on earth as in heaven. *Latin versions for the prayers given here were in use in the eighteenth century (Burrus, personal communication).

< previous page

page_55

next page >

< previous page

page_56

next page > Page 56

Our daily bread give us today And forgive us our debts As we forgive our debtors And do not lead us into temptation Rather free us from all evil. Amen. The Hail Mary Text 3 (1) Santa Maria gouyibaham; (1) Santa Maria gkouyibajam (1) Santa Maria k-?uy-ibaxa-m (1) Holy Mary imp-happy-much-sub (2) Diosla kaembogoosso ibaha muguihi (2) Diosla kaembogooso ibaha muguihi (2) Dios-la muwixi: (2) God-subj greatly-2-3-love-much and (3) Dios la bemoguo deaeyi. (3) Dios bomoguolo (sic) deegyi (3) Dios-la b-m-wa teegyi (3) God-subj 2-sit thing (4) uahiñijua (4) huaegiñ ejua (4) waxiñ-xwa (4) women-(?)-pat (5) guigi Muissa (5) guihi muisa (5) wixi m-wisa (5) and poss, 2-son

guidemuaejuae hi buhuhmu mo kaemimbi(sic) mami ibaha, guidemuejueg hi buhu mo mo kaemimbi mami ibaha; gi-/wi-demwegxweg xi buxu ke-m-ami m-ami-ibaxa 3-all and you 2-name great-2-good 2-well-much Jesusjua kaeami ibaha luhu. Jesusjua kaeami ibaha luju. Jesus-xwa ke-ami-ibaxa luxu Jesus-pat great-good-much more

(6) Sta. Maria Dios chi, (6) Santa Maria Dios chi, (6) Santa Maria Dios-chi, (6) Holy Mary God-mother, pagaudugu pagkaudugu pa-k-?udugu pl obj-imp-forgive * (7) annahuahmu, guihi (7) anajuamo, guihi (7) anawa-mo wixi (7) now-loc and

< previous page

Dios hmu pennayu nuiambinyinjua Dios mou pennayu nuhuiambinyijua Dios-mo penayu n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa God-obj we poss, 1-very-good-not-pat gaim, gkaim k-?i-m imp-say-sub

nuihia dehuae udaahi. nuhuigya dehueg udaahi. n-wigya texweg udaaxi. l-die one(whole) when.

Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.

page_56

next page >

< previous page

page_57

next page > Page 57

Hail Mary Text 3, Free Translation of Cochimí Version (1) Rejoice Holy Mary (2) God loves you very much. (3) God sits with you indeed. (4) (Among) all women your name is very much better indeed. (5) And Jesus, your son, is better (also). (6) Holy Mary, God's Mother, ask God (to) forgive our sins (7) Now and when we die. Amen. Hail Mary Text 3, Latin Version (Edelvives 1953) Ave, Maria, gratia plena, Dominus tecum, Benedicta tu in mulieribus, et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Jesus. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus nunc et in hora mostit (sic) nostrae. Amen. English Translation of Latin Version Hail Mary, full of grace The Lord is with you Blessed are you among women And blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, Pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen. Credo Text 4 (1) Noogosso D'ya Ijuo* thaeyijua hi yehua demuaejuae, (1) Noogosso Dios yaa Ijuo ttegyijua(sic) ji yihua demuejueg, (1) Dios yaa i-xwa teegyi-xwa xi yi-xwa demwegxweg (1) obj-l-believe(in) God rel be-pat things-pat and beings-pat all yaa ambayujuphmo guihi amet e hmu guihi thaeyi ya gambuaejua yaa Ambayu jupmou guihi amet e mou guihi ttegyi aja gamguegjua guilla yaa ?-mayuxup-mo wixi ?-met-mo wixi teegyi yaa gamweg-xwa rel heaven-loc and earth-loc and things rel all-pat *The I 'to be' in this name for God may be phonologically related to yi 'to be(?)' in Cochimí 'beings' (i.e., living things) in this line. The Spanisih name for an aboriginal supreme being was 'the living one' (i.e., 'el que vive'; see Venegas 1739, 91).

< previous page

page_57

next page >

< previous page

page_58

next page > Page 58

uededeppil demuae juaeta huededepil demueg juegta (wedede) = pil-demwegxweg-ta (?)=make-all-pret (2) Noogosso Jesu Xptojuo, (2) Noogoso Jesu Christo Juo, (2) Jesus Cristo-xwa, (2) obj-l-believe(in) Jesus Christ-pat

ya Dios ya I Dios yaa Ijuo Dios yaa i-xwa rel God rel be(?)-pat

guiguissa tejuae-duñip omui uaguapapajua gui huisa tejueg-duuñip omui uagua papajua gi-/wi-wisa-texweg-duuñip omwi wawa-papa-xwa 3- son-one-emph idiom lord-poss-pat (3) ya Dios Espiritu Santola yagauahip udaahi (3) Yaa Dios Espiritu Santola yagahuajip udaahi (3) yaa Dios Espiritu Santo-la yagawa-xi-p udaaxi (3) rel God Holy Spirit-subj engendered(?) when (4) Santa Maria Virgen kalepen e mo temmuita udaahi, ungata (4) Santa Maria Virgen kalepen e mo taemma huita udaahi, unghara (4) Santa Maria Virgen kal=pen-mo tama wi-ta udaaxi wang-ta (4) Holy Mary Virgin womb(?)-loc man be-pret when born-pret (5) Temmuita udaahi Poncio Pilatohmu Uagua guihi (5) Taemma huita udaahi Poncio Pilato mou Guagua hui hi (5) tama wi-ta udaaxi Poncio Pilato-mo wawa wi xi (5) man be-pret when Pontius Pilate-subj lord be and (6) Santa Cruzmo guil (6) Santa Cruz mo guil la (6) Santa Cruz-mo, gila, (6) Holy Cross-loc alive(?)

guauaba guita gkahuaba guita, kawaba-wi-ta hung(?)-be-pret

(7) guihi Santa Cruzmo ibita (7) guihi Santa Cruz mo ibita (7) wixi Santa Cruz-too ibi-ta (7) and Holy Cross-loc die-pret (8) Uppaepluhuta (8) upep lujuta (8) upep-luxu-ta (8) finish-dur-pret (9) (vel Ametyo) (sic)*uagambita (9) amet e yo huagambita (9) ?-met-ya wagambi-ta (9) earth-that(?) descend/enter-pret *amet e ño scratched out in ms.

< previous page

page_58

next page >

< previous page

page_59

next page > Page 59

(10) amet ya tamma ui ambi ussa, hi (10) amet yaa taemma hui ambi usa hi (10) ?-met yaa tama wi-ami usa xi (10) place rel men very-good be-loc(pl) and (11) Jesu Xpto magadado juita juo (sic) (11) Jesu Christo mogododojuita juo (sic) (11) Jesus Cristo mogododo-wi-ta-xwa (11) Jesus Christ bury(?)-be-pret-pat (12) ghio (12) ghio (pronunciación italiana) egheg e (12) gyo (12) there

eguaeta egeg-ta go-pret

(13) ibogombio uayib e ta guimma (13) Ibo gkambio huayip e ta: guimma (13) Æ-wayip-ta gimaâ (?) (13) day-three 3-arise-pret alive (14) Ambayujubmo gaguit i ta (vel gahuit e ta) gui hi (14) Ambayujup mo gkahuich* eta; guihi (14) ?-mayuxup-mo kawit-ta wixi (14) heaven-loc ascend-pret and (15) ghio aya Dios ya Ijuo moguo, (15) ghio aya Dios yaa Ijuo moguo, (15) gyo yaa Dios yaa i-xwa m-wa, (15) there rel God rel be-pat ref-sit (16) guihi ghio eguaedaka (sic) (16) guihi ghio egueg daka (16) wixi gyo egeg-daka (16) and there come-fut (17) Ametehno uaha udaahi, tamma ya uihiatajua guila uadae(17) Amet e no huaha udaahi taemma ya huig yatajua guil la huadeg (17) wa udaaxi tama yaa wigya-ta-xwa gina wadeg (17) earth-loc sit when men rel die(pl)-pret-pat alive arise(pl)demuaejuae hidaka ui udaahi tamma ghinna hmu guihi ya demuejuegji daka Hui udaahi taemma yaa ghinnamo guihi demwegxweg-xi-daka wi udaaxi tama yaa gina-mo wixi all-caus-fut very when men rel alive-obj and rel uihiatajua ghit i* huigyatajua ghich a wigya-ta-xwa git die(pl)-pret-pat see *Note palatalization of t to ch, cf. DB-PN-6, DB-C-14,17. Also note epenthesis.

< previous page

page_59

next page >

< previous page

page_60

next page > Page 60

(18) ahi, ya ui ambinyijua guihi ui ambijua ghiti (18) hi, yaa hui ambinyijua guihi yaa hui ambijua ghich luju (18) xi yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa wixi yaa wi-ami-xwa git luxu(18) and rel very-good-not-pat and rel very-good-pat see durdaka demuejueg daka demwegxweg-daka all-rut (19) Yahmu uita udaahi, tamma ya ui ambinyijua ussi muaehael (19) yammou huita udaahi taemma yaa hui ambinyijua ussi mahel (19) yaa-mo wi-ta udaaxi tama yaa wi-ami-ñi-xwa usi=(maxel) (19) rel-loc be-pret when men rel very-good-not-pat fire=(?) kaammet e decuinyimo itae hi kae ammit e decuinyimo iteg hi ke-?met=t-kwi-ñi-mo iteg-xi great-place=obj-hear-not-loc go caus (20) guihi aroma ya (sic)* ui ambijua guihmu ambayujubmo uhu (sic) hidaka (20) yaa hui ambijua ambayujupmo uju (sic) ji daka (20) wixi tama yaa wi-ami-xwa wi-mo ?-mayuxup-mo wa** xi-daka (20) and men rel very-good-pat -obj heaven-loc be(sg) caus-fut (21) Espiritu Santojuo noogosso Tamma leyo dakajua (21) Espiritu Santojuo noogoso Taemma leyo dakajua (21) Espiritu Santo-xwa tama=leyo-daka-xwa (21) Holy Spirit-pat obj-l-believe(in) man=prophesy(?)-fut-pat noogosso: noogoso obj-1-believe(in) (22) ya ui ambi ya tamma leyol hijua temmaleyo la (22) yaa hui ambi yaa taemma leyo-hijua taemma leyo la (22) yaa wi-ami yaa tama=leyo-xi-xwa tama=leyo-la (22) rel very-good rel men=prophesy(?)-caus-pat men=prophesy(?)-subj kluut demuaejuaejua noogooso kaeluut demuejuegjua noogoso ke-luut demwegxweg-xwa great-church(?) together-pat obj-1-believe(in) *A spot covers initial t on tamma 'man', in ms. **uhu= uhua= wa(?).

< previous page

page_60

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_61

Page 61 (23) Pennayu nui ambinyijua pedaudugujua noogosso (23) Pennayu nuhuiam binyijua pedaudugujua noogoso (23) penayu n-wi-ami-ñi-xwa pa-d-Æ-?udugu-xwa (23) we 1-very-good-not obj(pl)-l-3-forgive-pat obj-l-believe (in) (24) Nembadh uadaedakajua noogosso (24) Nambatd huadeg dakajua noogosso (24) n-mat Æ-wadeg-daka-xwa (24) bodies 3-arise(pl)-fut-pat obj-l-love (25) uadae udaahi goguo uihianyijakajua noogosso. (25) huadeg udaahi goguo huigyanyi dakajua noogosso. (25) Æ-wadeg udaaxi w-wa Æ-wigya-ñi-daka-xwa (25) 3-arise when sit 3-die(pl)-not-fut-pat obj-l-believe.

Amen Amen Amen Amen

Credo Text 4, Free Translation of Cochimí Version (1) I believe (that) God, who is living (?), made all things and creatures which (are) in heaven and on earth, (He) made all things. (2) I believe in Jesus Christ who (is) God's only son (indeed), Our Lord. (3) Who when the Holy Spirit engendered(?), Him (4) In Holy Mary (the) Virgin's womb(?), then(?) He became human, He was born. (5) When He became a man, Pontius Pilate was (the) ruler and (6) He was hung up(?), alive(?), on the Holy Cross (7) And on the Holy Cross He died. (8) He was finished (died completely) (9) He entered/descended into(?) this earth. (10) (To) the place (in) which very good men are (11) Jesus Christ was buried (?) (12) He went there (into the earth). (13) On the third day He arose, alive (?) (14) He ascended into heaven and (15) there He sits with God, the creator (?) (16) and (from) there He will come (17) when He is on earth, and when all men who (having) died will (have) arisen quite alive, He will look at (i.e., judge) the men who are alive and dead. (18) And He will look at (i.e., judge) all the very good (people). (19) And when (He does so) all men who are very evil He (will) send to eternal hellfire (20) and the men who are very good He will place in heaven. (21) I believe in the Holy Spirit, I believe men who will prophesy(?). (22) I believe that He (the Holy Spirit) caused men to prophesy(?) (I believe) in men (being) together in a great (church?). (23) I believe that (God) forgives our sins. (24) I believe bodies will rise. (25) I believe when they rise and are about they shall not die. Amen. Credo Text 4, Short Latin Version (Edelvives 1953) Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, creatorem caeli et terrae; et in Jesum Christum, Filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum;

< previous page

page_62

next page > Page 62

qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine; passus sub Pontio Pilato; crucifixus, mortuus et sepultus; descendit ad infernos tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ascendit ad caelos; sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis; inde venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. Credo in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem, vitam aeternam. Amen. Credo English Translation of Short Version I believe in God the Father Almighty Creator of Heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord; Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary: Suffered under Pontius Pilate; crucified, died and was buried, He descended into Hell; On the third day He came back to like from among the dead; ascended into heaven; He sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from there He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the remission of sins, the resurrection of the flesh, eternal life. Amen. Credo Text 4, Long Latin Version (Missale Romanum 1956) Credo in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium, et invisibilium. Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum. Et ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum de Deo, Lumen de lumine, Deum vorum de Deo vero. Genitum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri: per quem omnia facta sunt. Qui propter nos homines, et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine: Et homo factus est. Crucifixus etiam pro nobis: sub Pontio Pilato passus, et sepultus est. Et resurrexit tertia die, secundum Scripturas. Et ascendit in caelum: sedet ad dexteram Patris. Et iterum venturus est cure gloria judicare vivos, et mortuos: cujus regni non erit finis. Et in Spititum Sanctum, Dominum, et vivificantem: que ex Patre, Fi??oque procedit. Qui cum Patre, et Filio simul adoratur, et conglorificatur: qui locutus est per Prophetas. Et unam sanctam catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam. Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Et exspecto resurrectionem mortuo??m. Et vitam venturi saeculi. Amen. Credo English Translation of Long Version I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all visible and invisible (things). And in one Lord Jesus Christ, Only begotten Son of God.

< previous page

page_62

next page >

< previous page

page_63

next page > Page 63

(And) born of the Father before all time, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God. Begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father: through whom all things were made. Who because of us men, and for our salvation came down from heaven. And because incarnate of the Holy Spirit from the Virgin Mary: And was made man. He was (then) crucified for us: (He) suffered under Pontius Pilate, and was buried. (And) He rose again on the third day, according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven: He sits at the right hand of the Father. And He shall come in glory to judge the living and the dead: His kingdom shall have no end. (And) in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, (and) Life-Giver: who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Who is worshipped and glorified with the Father and the Son: who has spoken through the prophets. (And) (in) the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the remission of sins. And I look for the resurrection of the dead. And the future life. Amen. Ducrue's Cochimí Words and Phrases These data are taken verbatim from Ducrue, Specimina Linguae Californicae as found in Burrus (1967b, 136-139). Burrus' annotation will be included parenthetically wherever feasible.

< previous page

page_63

next page >

< previous page

page_64

next page > Page 64

< previous page

page_64

next page >

< previous page

page_65

next page > Page 65

< previous page

page_65

next page >

< previous page

page_66

next page > Page 66

Analysis of Ducrue Specimina Linguae Californicae (1) texwe(g) (one) (2) kwak (two) (3) kamyok or kamyo?k (three) (4) Nahuatl word (5) Nahuatl word (6) Dios-xwa ibi ñi (God-pat die not) (7) tama amayben ?met-añ agina-ñi (man many year live-not) (8) wami butel gi-/wi-wuktu-xwa (cf. (man-this poss, 3-wife-pat obj-3-love)

< previous page

in DB)

page_66

next page >

< previous page

page_67

next page > Page 67

(9) wako-butel wakam-ta (woman-this pregnant-pret) (10) waxanu wami-xwa wanga-ta (baby male-pat born-pret) (11) Æ-uybetel - luxu (3-sick-dur) (12) waxanu (baby cry) (13) tama-butel gade-ki (cf. git- 'to see' (DB)) (man-this see-not) (14) gi-/wi-wuktu-xwa t-Æ-kwi-ñi (poss, 3-wife-pat obj-3-hear-not) (15) wami-butel (man-this mute-emph) (16) wakana-xwa (babies-pat all

well-emph)

(17) texwe(g) Æ-kanopa (one 3-sing well-emph) (18) kamweg dalama (other speak) (19) kenasa-mapa gima (sister-poss, 2 sleep) (20) keneda-papa urap, 1-Æ-si wimib texunoy (father-poss, 1 eat and obj-3-drink but little) (21) mabel-xwa dalama may (tongue-pat speak evil) (22) kata-wa gadey iwimil t-Æ-kwi-ñi (reed-dwell see but obj-3-hear-not) (23) kaxal-ka (water-large) (24) nupi wa (chest pain) (25) xwet-pa-xwa taxip-ñi (blood-poss, 1-pat good-not) (26) kota-xwa , k-xwa (stone-pat large-emph rel-hard[?])

< previous page

page_67

next page >

< previous page

page_68

next page > Page 68

(27) maka (stomach full-emph) (28) usi man-ku (Note -ku 'adjectival suffix' here and in (29)) (fire hot-adj) (29) kalal bemal-ku (water sweet-adj) (30)

ganexmaxen ka-luxu (sun-pat moon large-more)

(31) ?met andema-xwa galama-ta ([?] time[?]-pat rain-pret)

< previous page

page_68

next page >

< previous page

page_69

next page > Page 69

Comparative Cochimi-Yuman Lexicon Troike (1976) reports that a connection between Cochimí and Yuman has been suggested at least three times in print: ''Robert Latham first proposed the inclusion of Cochimí in the Yuman stock, along with Waikuri, in a talk before the Philological Society in 1856. Albert S. Gatschet accepted this classification . . . noting that, 'Cochimí word-lists are full of roots, stems, and suffixes which are also found in the Colorado dialects' . . . Alfred L. Kroeber . . . on Seri described Cochimí as 'the most remote member of the family geographically, as well as most diverse intrinsically . . . Cochimí and Yuman somewhat the nearest to each other, but Seri equidistant from both'." These early claims seem a bit farfetched when the data upon which they were based are examined. It is little wonder that the unlikely "Waikuri" (i.e. Guaicura) and Seri are included with Cochimí and Yuman in the same breath. Nevertheless, these early writers were prophetic of the relationship we are examining here. This lexicon is an attempt at an exhaustive listing of all the Cochimí lexical items found in the several sources known to us at this writing. These include casually mentioned native terms in the Jesuit histories, Clavijero (CL; León-Portilla 1970b) and Del Barco (DB; León-Portilla 1973), and Piccolo (P; Burrus 1962) as well as specifically grammatical material from Clavijero, Ducrue (Du; Burrus 1967b), and Del Barco. More recent word lists and sentences by Gabb (G), Bartlett (B; both in Gatschet 1887), and Harrington (H; in Mixco 1977a) have also been culled for data. Many Cochimí items are left unregularized through insufficient data (forms with unambiguous orthography are an exception). Bartlett's "Cochimó" seems to fit very seldom; it may be an unrelated language under a misnomer. Out of the several hundred lexical items collected, about one third can be considered cognate. (If we eliminate the more tenuous pairs, the number shrinks somewhat.) However, the strength of a hypothesis of genetic affiliation rests less on numbers than on the naturalness and regularity of the sound correspondences involved. Viewed in this light, the possibility for a Cochimí-Yuman relationship seems quite sound. The principal examples for each correspondence are discussed in the order of the phonological inventory of Proto-Yuman, commencing with the obstruents. The distinction between voiced and voiceless obstruents will be suspended in this comparison; we shall assume only a voiceless series for Cochimí, though the examples will continue to be written as before, for the sake of consistency. Each of the sets for the correspondence of Proto-Yuman *p with Cochimí p (henceforth all correspondences will follow this order and shall be written

< previous page

page_69

next page >

< previous page

page_70

next page > Page 70

*p:p) is easily defensible on semantic as well as phonological grounds. The verb 'to die' for example is nearly identical: P-Yu *pi, Co ibi (