A Note on the Status of AmueshaAuthor(s): Douglas TaylorReviewed work(s):Source: International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 20, No. 3 (Jul., 1954), pp. 240-241Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1263349 .Accessed: 09/05/2012 11:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toInternational Journal of American Linguistics.

http://www.jstor.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS

grammar, therefore, should not be based on the dichotomy between the two, but class and construction statements, whether mor-

phological or syntactic, should be introduced in the order of their relative indispensability to the total structure of the language.

SUMMER INSTITUTE OF LINGUISTICS

A NOTE ON THE STATUS OF AMUESHA1

DOUGLAS TAYLOR

The Arawakan affiliation of Amuesha was first suggested in 1913 by Tello, and has been reaffirmed by Izaguirre (1922-29), Tessman (1930), and Loukotka (1935 and 1942); the last of whom classifies it as belonging to his Lorenzo group of Arawak. On the other hand, Chamberlain (1913), Rivet (1924), and Jij6n y Caamafo (1941-43) consider it to be independent, the latter giving it status as a phyllum.2

In its complexity, this language's pho- nemic system, as described by Fast, is certainly most unlike that of Lokono (or 'classical' Arawak) implicit in the data pre- sented by Hickerson in the preceding article of the same issue of IJAL; and if Amuesha should prove to be Arawakan, it probably has assimilated phonetic features from non- Arawak neighbours. Lexical and structural data to be gleaned from Fast's paper obvi- ously are much too slight for valid compari- son; nevertheless, in view of the prevailing uncertainty as to this language's status, it may be of interest to set forth here such resemblances to Lokono and (or) to other Arawak languages as have been noted, and which point either to common origin or to a very intimate type of borrowing.

Out of forty lexical items belonging to the 1 See Peter W. Fast's 'Amuesha (Arawak)

Phonemes' in IJAL 19.191-194. 2 For Loukotka (1942), see Salzmann's review

and rdsum6 of Loukotka's 'Klassifikation der sii- damerikanischen Sprachen' (Zeitschrift fur Eth- nologie 74.1-9), in IJAL 17.259-266. Other ref- erences will be found in Handbook of South American Indians (BAE-B 143, 3.536-37, and 6.217), whence the above information is taken.

grammar, therefore, should not be based on the dichotomy between the two, but class and construction statements, whether mor-

phological or syntactic, should be introduced in the order of their relative indispensability to the total structure of the language.

SUMMER INSTITUTE OF LINGUISTICS

A NOTE ON THE STATUS OF AMUESHA1

DOUGLAS TAYLOR

The Arawakan affiliation of Amuesha was first suggested in 1913 by Tello, and has been reaffirmed by Izaguirre (1922-29), Tessman (1930), and Loukotka (1935 and 1942); the last of whom classifies it as belonging to his Lorenzo group of Arawak. On the other hand, Chamberlain (1913), Rivet (1924), and Jij6n y Caamafo (1941-43) consider it to be independent, the latter giving it status as a phyllum.2

In its complexity, this language's pho- nemic system, as described by Fast, is certainly most unlike that of Lokono (or 'classical' Arawak) implicit in the data pre- sented by Hickerson in the preceding article of the same issue of IJAL; and if Amuesha should prove to be Arawakan, it probably has assimilated phonetic features from non- Arawak neighbours. Lexical and structural data to be gleaned from Fast's paper obvi- ously are much too slight for valid compari- son; nevertheless, in view of the prevailing uncertainty as to this language's status, it may be of interest to set forth here such resemblances to Lokono and (or) to other Arawak languages as have been noted, and which point either to common origin or to a very intimate type of borrowing.

Out of forty lexical items belonging to the 1 See Peter W. Fast's 'Amuesha (Arawak)

Phonemes' in IJAL 19.191-194. 2 For Loukotka (1942), see Salzmann's review

and rdsum6 of Loukotka's 'Klassifikation der sii- damerikanischen Sprachen' (Zeitschrift fur Eth- nologie 74.1-9), in IJAL 17.259-266. Other ref- erences will be found in Handbook of South American Indians (BAE-B 143, 3.536-37, and 6.217), whence the above information is taken.

non-cultural stratum found in Fast's paper are a dozen whose resemblance to corre- sponding items in at least one definitely Arawakan language seems evident, and seven others of a more doubtful character. The Amuesha follows the English, and is followed by presumed cognates in other languages; the latter's names being given in full as they first occur, and subsequently by their initial letters only. The nineteen items are as fol- lows: I na', Lokono dai, Goajiro taya, Island Carib nukfiia; thou pya, L bui, G pia, IC bukuia; he fna', L lira, G nia, IC likia; we ya', L uaiko, G waya, IC uakia; they fie't, L naira, G naya, IC Nakia; bark (or skin) tal, L uda, G tah, IC ura; bird o-6, L kudibiu, G ?ui-, IC ulibiq; dog 66ek, Cauixanas oey, Taino aon, (also T) alco, IC and Achagua aqli, G ere, Kulina ete; earth pa'c, L uaia, G mah, IC mijha; eat -exco--, L eke, G i'ka, IC aika; fire co?, L hikihi, G skih; flower ro'r, L koro(ho); grandfather Co?, L -ku- (grandparent); here a'z, L iaha, G ya*, IC iAka; in -ret, L -loko, G -lu?u, IC -ruku; know ta, L aita, G a'tahai, IC (men's speech) -eta-; meat e'6, L isi(roko), G i?i(ruku), IC 6k(orik); not ama-, L ma-, G ma-, IC ma-; water ofi(pa), L oni(abo), G wai.

As in Lokono and in Island Carib, Amuesha has person-marker prefixes and suffixes that are cognate with the 'personal pronouns', and occur, the former in possessed nouns and as the subject of finite verbs, the latter as the goal of transitive verbs; so: nexc6'm my fire, pexl6? thy grey hair, nefmet.&pY I know thee, pentar thou knowest, peycaxt6n teach me; while the morpheme of negation may also occur (as it does not in Island Carib) as a free form or as a suffix: ama no, ta?m don't know. Also as in Lo- kono and in Island Carib, some Amuesha nouns take a suffix as well as a person- marker prefix in their possessed forms; so, co? fire, nexc6'm my fire; ro'r flower, pro'rer its flower; (cf. Hickerson's Lokono 121. subordinate, -n, -ia, -te, and zero). Amuesha has a morpheme -mYa too, also (pYa thou, pyamya also thou; aw6y let's go, aweymy3

non-cultural stratum found in Fast's paper are a dozen whose resemblance to corre- sponding items in at least one definitely Arawakan language seems evident, and seven others of a more doubtful character. The Amuesha follows the English, and is followed by presumed cognates in other languages; the latter's names being given in full as they first occur, and subsequently by their initial letters only. The nineteen items are as fol- lows: I na', Lokono dai, Goajiro taya, Island Carib nukfiia; thou pya, L bui, G pia, IC bukuia; he fna', L lira, G nia, IC likia; we ya', L uaiko, G waya, IC uakia; they fie't, L naira, G naya, IC Nakia; bark (or skin) tal, L uda, G tah, IC ura; bird o-6, L kudibiu, G ?ui-, IC ulibiq; dog 66ek, Cauixanas oey, Taino aon, (also T) alco, IC and Achagua aqli, G ere, Kulina ete; earth pa'c, L uaia, G mah, IC mijha; eat -exco--, L eke, G i'ka, IC aika; fire co?, L hikihi, G skih; flower ro'r, L koro(ho); grandfather Co?, L -ku- (grandparent); here a'z, L iaha, G ya*, IC iAka; in -ret, L -loko, G -lu?u, IC -ruku; know ta, L aita, G a'tahai, IC (men's speech) -eta-; meat e'6, L isi(roko), G i?i(ruku), IC 6k(orik); not ama-, L ma-, G ma-, IC ma-; water ofi(pa), L oni(abo), G wai.

As in Lokono and in Island Carib, Amuesha has person-marker prefixes and suffixes that are cognate with the 'personal pronouns', and occur, the former in possessed nouns and as the subject of finite verbs, the latter as the goal of transitive verbs; so: nexc6'm my fire, pexl6? thy grey hair, nefmet.&pY I know thee, pentar thou knowest, peycaxt6n teach me; while the morpheme of negation may also occur (as it does not in Island Carib) as a free form or as a suffix: ama no, ta?m don't know. Also as in Lo- kono and in Island Carib, some Amuesha nouns take a suffix as well as a person- marker prefix in their possessed forms; so, co? fire, nexc6'm my fire; ro'r flower, pro'rer its flower; (cf. Hickerson's Lokono 121. subordinate, -n, -ia, -te, and zero). Amuesha has a morpheme -mYa too, also (pYa thou, pyamya also thou; aw6y let's go, aweymy3

240 240 VOL. XX VOL. XX

NOTES AND REVIEWS NOTES AND REVIEWS NOTES AND REVIEWS

let's go too) reminiscent of Island Carib 161.2 repetitive, -ia.

Few as these parallels inevitably are, con- sidering the meagreness of the published data, it would be surprising if further re- search revealed no others. For example, is Amuesha -na, as in meracte'na it's lightning, a verbalizer deriving verbs from nouns as is the case with Lokono -da (Hickerson's suffix 141)? If systematic correspondences between Amuesha and languages of accepted Arawakan affiliation exist, it should not be too hard to discover them.3

DOMINICA, BRITISH WEST INDIES

3 Amuesha forms are cited from Fast's paper (see fn. 1); Lokono forms are from Nancy P. Hickerson (mostly in personal communications); Goajiro forms are taken from N. M. Holmer's

Goajiro (Arawak): I-IV, IJAL 15.45-56, 110-120, 145-157, 232-235. Island Carib forms are taken from Breton's 17th century record of the Domini- can dialect, but the transcription given here is

my own, and is at least quasi phonemic; (the evi- dence in support of such an attempted pho- nemicization is summarized in A Dichronic Note on the Consonantal System of Island Carib, a

paper submitted to Word). Forms from other Arawakan languages are taken from various

sources, and most probably are not phonemic.

A MAP OF THE INDIAN TRIBES

OF SOUTH AMERICA

John Howland Rowe has compiled and drawn a new map of the Indian tribes of South America, completely revised as of January, 1951. The scale is 1:8,000,000; the size 41 x 29 inches. Blueprint or black out- line copies may be ordered in any quantity from the Berkeley Blue Print Co., 1700 University Avenue, Berkeley 5, California. Orders will be sent C. O. D. Black outline copies cost $0.75 a copy or less, depending on the quantity ordered.

The map is designed to accompany the National Geographic Society's map of South America, October, 1950, to which it may be used as an overlay, and no geographical features are shown except a few major rivers and lakes. Tribal territories are outlined as

let's go too) reminiscent of Island Carib 161.2 repetitive, -ia.

Few as these parallels inevitably are, con- sidering the meagreness of the published data, it would be surprising if further re- search revealed no others. For example, is Amuesha -na, as in meracte'na it's lightning, a verbalizer deriving verbs from nouns as is the case with Lokono -da (Hickerson's suffix 141)? If systematic correspondences between Amuesha and languages of accepted Arawakan affiliation exist, it should not be too hard to discover them.3

DOMINICA, BRITISH WEST INDIES

3 Amuesha forms are cited from Fast's paper (see fn. 1); Lokono forms are from Nancy P. Hickerson (mostly in personal communications); Goajiro forms are taken from N. M. Holmer's

Goajiro (Arawak): I-IV, IJAL 15.45-56, 110-120, 145-157, 232-235. Island Carib forms are taken from Breton's 17th century record of the Domini- can dialect, but the transcription given here is

my own, and is at least quasi phonemic; (the evi- dence in support of such an attempted pho- nemicization is summarized in A Dichronic Note on the Consonantal System of Island Carib, a

paper submitted to Word). Forms from other Arawakan languages are taken from various

sources, and most probably are not phonemic.

A MAP OF THE INDIAN TRIBES

OF SOUTH AMERICA

John Howland Rowe has compiled and drawn a new map of the Indian tribes of South America, completely revised as of January, 1951. The scale is 1:8,000,000; the size 41 x 29 inches. Blueprint or black out- line copies may be ordered in any quantity from the Berkeley Blue Print Co., 1700 University Avenue, Berkeley 5, California. Orders will be sent C. O. D. Black outline copies cost $0.75 a copy or less, depending on the quantity ordered.

The map is designed to accompany the National Geographic Society's map of South America, October, 1950, to which it may be used as an overlay, and no geographical features are shown except a few major rivers and lakes. Tribal territories are outlined as

let's go too) reminiscent of Island Carib 161.2 repetitive, -ia.

Few as these parallels inevitably are, con- sidering the meagreness of the published data, it would be surprising if further re- search revealed no others. For example, is Amuesha -na, as in meracte'na it's lightning, a verbalizer deriving verbs from nouns as is the case with Lokono -da (Hickerson's suffix 141)? If systematic correspondences between Amuesha and languages of accepted Arawakan affiliation exist, it should not be too hard to discover them.3

DOMINICA, BRITISH WEST INDIES

3 Amuesha forms are cited from Fast's paper (see fn. 1); Lokono forms are from Nancy P. Hickerson (mostly in personal communications); Goajiro forms are taken from N. M. Holmer's

Goajiro (Arawak): I-IV, IJAL 15.45-56, 110-120, 145-157, 232-235. Island Carib forms are taken from Breton's 17th century record of the Domini- can dialect, but the transcription given here is

my own, and is at least quasi phonemic; (the evi- dence in support of such an attempted pho- nemicization is summarized in A Dichronic Note on the Consonantal System of Island Carib, a

paper submitted to Word). Forms from other Arawakan languages are taken from various

sources, and most probably are not phonemic.

A MAP OF THE INDIAN TRIBES

OF SOUTH AMERICA

John Howland Rowe has compiled and drawn a new map of the Indian tribes of South America, completely revised as of January, 1951. The scale is 1:8,000,000; the size 41 x 29 inches. Blueprint or black out- line copies may be ordered in any quantity from the Berkeley Blue Print Co., 1700 University Avenue, Berkeley 5, California. Orders will be sent C. O. D. Black outline copies cost $0.75 a copy or less, depending on the quantity ordered.

The map is designed to accompany the National Geographic Society's map of South America, October, 1950, to which it may be used as an overlay, and no geographical features are shown except a few major rivers and lakes. Tribal territories are outlined as

accurately as possible as they were at the date of first adequate description. Since this date may be as early as the sixteenth century for areas near the coast and as late as the twentieth for parts of the interior, the effect is even more anachronistic than in compara- ble maps of North America.

For Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, highland Bolivia, and Patagonia, the map is based on first hand research in the primary sources. For Brazil and the Guianas, map- ping follows Koch-Griinberg and Nimuen- dajui as far as possible, supplemented by data from The Handbook of South American Indians. M6traux's work is used for the Chaco and eastern Bolivia, and Cooper's for Chile. The maps of Loukotka and Steward were consulted but not followed.

Where possible, tribes are defined by linguistic criteria so that the map may be used to show linguistic classification. Bound- aries between languages known to be related are shown by broken lines, other tribal boundaries by solid lines. Boxes for a lin- guistic color key are provided. The classifi- cation suggested is a much more conserva- tive one than Mason's.

This map is a revision of an earlier one compiled in 1947-48. Further revisions will be made as new data become available.

FIRST REPORT ON THE ARCHIVES OF

LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD

FLORENCE M. ROBINETT

The Archives of the Languages of the World was started at Indiana University immediately after the Conference on Ar- chiving held during the 1953 Linguistic Institute. The papers read at this Conference are now published in the Archiving Issue of this Journal (IJAL 20.83-122); the prelimi- nary discussions leading to the formation of the Archives of the Languages of the World, its relationship to the Franz Boas Collection in the Library of the American Philosophical Society, and its cooperative arrangements with other archives in other universities await future publication.

accurately as possible as they were at the date of first adequate description. Since this date may be as early as the sixteenth century for areas near the coast and as late as the twentieth for parts of the interior, the effect is even more anachronistic than in compara- ble maps of North America.

For Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, highland Bolivia, and Patagonia, the map is based on first hand research in the primary sources. For Brazil and the Guianas, map- ping follows Koch-Griinberg and Nimuen- dajui as far as possible, supplemented by data from The Handbook of South American Indians. M6traux's work is used for the Chaco and eastern Bolivia, and Cooper's for Chile. The maps of Loukotka and Steward were consulted but not followed.

Where possible, tribes are defined by linguistic criteria so that the map may be used to show linguistic classification. Bound- aries between languages known to be related are shown by broken lines, other tribal boundaries by solid lines. Boxes for a lin- guistic color key are provided. The classifi- cation suggested is a much more conserva- tive one than Mason's.

This map is a revision of an earlier one compiled in 1947-48. Further revisions will be made as new data become available.

FIRST REPORT ON THE ARCHIVES OF

LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD

FLORENCE M. ROBINETT

The Archives of the Languages of the World was started at Indiana University immediately after the Conference on Ar- chiving held during the 1953 Linguistic Institute. The papers read at this Conference are now published in the Archiving Issue of this Journal (IJAL 20.83-122); the prelimi- nary discussions leading to the formation of the Archives of the Languages of the World, its relationship to the Franz Boas Collection in the Library of the American Philosophical Society, and its cooperative arrangements with other archives in other universities await future publication.

accurately as possible as they were at the date of first adequate description. Since this date may be as early as the sixteenth century for areas near the coast and as late as the twentieth for parts of the interior, the effect is even more anachronistic than in compara- ble maps of North America.

For Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, highland Bolivia, and Patagonia, the map is based on first hand research in the primary sources. For Brazil and the Guianas, map- ping follows Koch-Griinberg and Nimuen- dajui as far as possible, supplemented by data from The Handbook of South American Indians. M6traux's work is used for the Chaco and eastern Bolivia, and Cooper's for Chile. The maps of Loukotka and Steward were consulted but not followed.

Where possible, tribes are defined by linguistic criteria so that the map may be used to show linguistic classification. Bound- aries between languages known to be related are shown by broken lines, other tribal boundaries by solid lines. Boxes for a lin- guistic color key are provided. The classifi- cation suggested is a much more conserva- tive one than Mason's.

This map is a revision of an earlier one compiled in 1947-48. Further revisions will be made as new data become available.

FIRST REPORT ON THE ARCHIVES OF

LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD

FLORENCE M. ROBINETT

The Archives of the Languages of the World was started at Indiana University immediately after the Conference on Ar- chiving held during the 1953 Linguistic Institute. The papers read at this Conference are now published in the Archiving Issue of this Journal (IJAL 20.83-122); the prelimi- nary discussions leading to the formation of the Archives of the Languages of the World, its relationship to the Franz Boas Collection in the Library of the American Philosophical Society, and its cooperative arrangements with other archives in other universities await future publication.

NO. 3 NO. 3 NO. 3 241 241 241