Language Preservation with the Help of Written Language: The Sauk Language of the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma
KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT University of Tucson
Ta ka we na nu ta ma. Ke ne no ta we?1
The chances of coming across a tribal member who can understand these phrases are small, because the tribe's main spoken language today is English. The Sac and Fox of Oklahoma2 have not been spared by history and share the fate of native language loss along with the majority of Indian communities across North America. Writing about the Mohawk language, Mithun and Chafe (1979:8) see the value of native languages as "the clearest symbols of their Indianness", and they ask: "Is such a loss inevitable, or, given the desire, can a community do something to retard or reverse it?" In this paper, I focus on Sauk orthography. Brandt (1988:328), who shows how linguists have served as consultants for North American tribes in various contexts, notes that "A central [context] is in orthography development and in teaching people to read and write their own languages."3 Within the contemporary context of literacy, Sauk needs to be visible as well as audible. Unfortunately, there has never been any agreement about the orthography to be used. While linguistic transcriptions vary from very detailed phonetic ones to more simplified phonemic representa tions, the Sac and Fox themselves have adopted what they call a "syllabic spelling" for their language.
1 "I speak a little Sauk. Do you understand?" The spelling is adopted from the Sac and Fox Primer Book (1977). 2 The Sac and Fox belong to the Central Algonquian tribes that originated east of the Great Plains in the upper Great Lakes area. Their native language is referred to as "Sauk", and sometimes the tribe itself is called "Sauk" instead of "Sac and Fox". 3 The work of linguists can be a small, initial step towards the actual process of language preservation. In principle, I strongly feel that linguists should co-operate with the particular language community. This paper, however, is only based on written material and previous fieldwork experience. 414 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT
I will place the Sauk language and its orthography into the historical context of linguistic endeavors, and show its relationship to other Algonquian languages. I will then outline the decline of Sauk and its contemporary use among Sac and Fox tribal members in Oklahoma. Several linguistic analyses of the Sauk sound system, the linguistic notations and the "Sauk syllabary" will be compared, and a revised sylla bary based on Sauk phonemes will be suggested. In conclusion, I will assess the role of written language for the survival of spoken Sauk.
SAUK — AN ALGONQUIAN LANGUAGE Linguistic studies of Algonquian languages show a chronological depth which is unusual for Native American languages. The first studies are accredited to 17th-century colonial missionaries. These historical documents usually consist of Bible translations, however, they also include grammatical explanations, dictionaries, vocabulary and phrase studies. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, comparative studies of Algonquian languages began (Hoijer 1973, Teeter 1973; see also Pilling 1891). Sauk is the least known dialect belonging to the so-called Sauk-Fox- Kickapoo "conglomerate":
The Sauk, Fox and Kickapoo are three dialects of a single language, for which there is no name in use either in English or in the language itself, it is usually referred to simply by hyphenating the names of the three tribes: Sauk-Fox-Kickapoo. Each dialect has archaisms and innova tions that set it off from each of the other two, but in general Sauk and Fox seem to be more similar to each other than either is to Kickapoo... Of the three dialects, Sauk is the least known... (Goddard 1978:584)
Scanning the literature, one indeed finds that material on Algonquian languages in general, and Mesquakie and Kickapoo in particular, is abundant, but Sauk is practically undocumented.4 Since linguists and other scholars have not differentiated among the Sac and Fox, Mesquakie and Kickapoo tribes and their dialects, I will work mainly with the material written on the Mesquakie language. Joe E. Pierce, who attemp ted to determine the "intelligibility among dialects of natural languages",
4 For an overview on written material available on the Sac-Fox-Kickapoo language, see Pentland and Wolfart (1982). SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 415 conducted several field trips to Algonquian tribes (Shawnee, Kickapoo, and Sac and Fox) in Oklahoma and concluded that
The average adjusted percentage of information transfer that Kickapoo informants scored on Sauk-and-Fox was 76%; the average that Sauk- and-Fox informants scored on Kickapoo was 82%. To compute the percentage of mutual intelligibility, for the Sauk-and-Fox and Kickapoo, ... [their sum was divided] giving 79%. (Pierce 1952:207)
The inter-relatedness of Sauk, Mesquakie and Kickapoo may be of importance for a Sauk language project. Native Mesquakie or Kickapoo speakers might be asked for their expertise, because today they tend to be more fluent in their native languages than the Sac and Fox are. In his paper "Observations of the last stage of a vanishing Algonquian language" (1991), Michael Reinschmidt describes the history of language loss among the Oklahoma Sac and Fox.5 Sauk language loss needs to be understood in the context of American history, and 20th century sociocultural, political and economic ramifications must also be taken into account. During the early 20th century, ancestral language use was actively discouraged and even punished in Indian boarding schools. Use of Sauk as the official tribal language in everyday communication declined rapidly between 1935 and 1945. Reinschmidt (1991:296) summarizes: "the retention of the ancestral language... had to be sacrificed for economic success, i.e., fluency in English." Today, Sauk remains a symbol of the old values. Speaking Sauk today reflects a commitment toward the tribal past and embodies a link to the spiritual world, but also functions as a means of expressing "who's the better Indian" (Reinschmidt 1991:296-7). Occasions where one can witness Sauk as a spoken language are rare, because "the language symbolically survives in a rudimentary manner" (Reinschmidt 1991:302). There are only some 20 Sauk speakers left, none of whom is younger than 56 years of age. For these speakers, social and religious gatherings serve as welcome opportunities to communicate in Sauk. Members of the same family who still command Sauk may also speak their ancestral language privately. Non-fluent speakers frequently employ certain Sauk
5 Reinschmidt consulted not only written histories, but also included data gathered during his fieldwork between 1989 and 1991. 416 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT phrases in order to underline their "Indianness".6 Generally, Sauk is spoken, or at least recited, for religious purposes in prayers or songs. Serious efforts aimed at language preservation include language instruction offered by a female tribal member. This language instruction is based on the Primer Book which was published by the Sac and Fox Nation in 1977. Although a firsteffort , the Primer Book deserves to be considered in relation to a revised orthography.
PHONES, PHONEMES, AND ORTHOGRAPHY Franz Boas challenged the Western prejudice which claimed that Native American languages were less accurately pronounced than European languages. He argued that the "inaccuracy" claim was due to different European sound systems which perceived and interpreted the same Native American sounds differently (Boas 1911:16). But Boas also noted one characteristic of Native American languages that might have fostered the notion of "inaccuracy":
This is the slurring of the ends of words, which is sometimes so pronounced that, in an attempt to write the words, the terminations, grammatical or other, may become entirely inaudible. (Boas 1911:78)
The Central Algonquian languages were no exception to this observa tion. The Sac and Fox in particular, have been known for "swallowing" the last syllable of many words. Naturally, this characteristic makes identification of individual sounds more difficult. Sapir differentiated between phonetic and phonemic sounds:
The concept of the "phoneme" (a functionally significant unit in the rigidly defined pattern of configuration of sounds peculiar to a language), as distinct from that of the "sound" or "phonetic element" as such (an objectively definable entity in the articulated and perceived totality of speech) is becoming more and more familiar to linguists. (Sapir 1949:46)
Sapir identified the difference between phonetic and phonemic sounds and their spelling as crucial for the purpose of orthographies. According to Sapir, a phonetic orthography is more accurate, but too complex for a writing system, and, I would add, also redundant from a speaker's point of view.
6 Mo ko mo na 'white man, American', for example, is one of those words that can be heard frequently. SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 417
In the following, I will compare and contrast the sound system of Mesquakie as it was perceived by different linguists. These perceptions and the two existing syllabaries of Mesquakie will serve as basis for a tentative new orthography. One of the earliest descriptions came from the trader Thomas Forsyth, who was appointed sub-agent of Indian Affairs in 1812 (Forsyth 1912: 244). While Forsyth noted that some Sauk and Mesquakie sounds could not be represented by the alphabet, he listed others as (a b c h i k 1 m n o p q s t u w z). Forsyth (1912:239) perceived the accent to be generally placed on the second syllable, and sometimes on the first. Forsyth's lay linguistic observations prove adequate when compared to linguistic analysis. During the early 20th century, William Jones and Truman Michelson conducted linguistic studies with the Mesquakie of Tama, Iowa. Bloomfield simplified his colleagues' work by operating with phonemes rather than with phones. The work of all three scholars is excellent, because the long vocabulary lists provided illustrate their descriptive studies of sounds. Jones' pioneering linguistic work contains the most detailed data, although his phonetic analysis of Mesquakie renders his work complica ted. Jones (1911:741) characterized Mesquakie as a language with a "preponderance for forward sounds, and a lack of sharp distinctions between p, t, k and their parallels b, d, g... Externally the language gives an impression of indolence. The lips are listless and passive." Jones described vowels as rather indistinct, and word-final vowels as often inaudible. Despite this inaudibility, Jones distinguished between thirteen varieties of vowels, (Aaaaeeailoouu). Two semivowels, (y w), and fourteen consonants — the stops f p b t d k g>, fricatives (c s ' h), and the nasals (1 m n) — complement the sounds identified by Jones. He recognized the consonant clusters (sk ck ste), while he considered
Jones' linguistic work. Michelson's major interest and contribution to the knowledge of Sauk lay in the many stories he collected in the language. This body of linguistic data is of great anthropological value, but due to the limits of this paper, cannot be discussed here. Bloomfield (1925) summarized the detailed phonetic work of both Jones and Michelson, and identified the short and long vowels as the high front vowels / and t, the high back vowels u and 6, the low front vowels e and a, and the low back vowels a and a. Bloomfield retained the two semivowels found by Jones and most of the consonants, including the stops p, t, k, g, the fricatives c, s, h, and the nasals ra and n. Basically, Bloomfield also kept Jones's consonant combinations, although in a different notation: (tc, hp, ht, hk, htc, ck). (hw) is the only consonant combination found in Jones but not used by Michelson. Bloomfield's work is valuable because it clarifies the Mesquakie phonemic system. In the end, phonemes are more important for developing an orthography than phones, which cannot be realistically represented in any workable orthography. The most recent specialist on Mesquakie linguistics, Ives Goddard, classifies Mesquakie as the most conservative and phonetically most archaic of the Algonquian languages. According to Goddard, Mesquakie is to a great extent mutually intelligible with Sauk. He names the following Fox phonemes: the short vowels i, e, a, o, and the long vowels i-, e-, a-, o-; the semivowels w and y; the stops p, t, k; the fricatives s, s, h; and the nasals ra, n. He continues to use hp, ht and hk as consonant combinations, as well as ts (which he writes as c); and he re-establishes hw which was already used by Jones. Goddard explains that most of the consonants except fricatives can be followed by both semivowels. Fricatives can only be followed by the semivowel w, not y. Consonant combinations permit stops, the affricate c, and the semivowel w to be preceded by h. In general, h may proceed any non-fricative (Goddard 1988:193^1). Comparing the description of sounds discussed so far (Table 1), a continuum of linguistic work can be observed. The original tendency to note each single phone, as can be seen in Jones's work, was replaced by a focus on phonemes. In general, vowels are described consistently as short and long vowels. The semivowels remain the same (y, w) in the SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 419
FORSYTH JONES BLOOMFIELD GODDARD JONES SACAND FOX 1827 1911 1925 1988 1906 1977 ALGONQUIAN FOX FOX FOX SAUK SAUK
aei o Aaaaeeaiibouu a a ea iTu o a a'e e"i i'o cr U./A e. C -Cr a ei o
w yw yw y w 0 IT y w
£ pbtk pbtdkg P'kg ptk I 4. -"•: Ptkg csz h cs'h csh Ssh et-A sc lmn lmn mn mn Tri -r>_. mn
q tc 'p 't 'k hw tchphthk chpht hkhw it e sk ck ste ckhtc Table 1: Phones and Phonemes notations of Jones, Bloomfield and Goddard. The consonants and consonant combinations, however, deserve further comments. Goddard summarizes the stops as p, t, k, while Jones gives the allophones [p b, t d, k g]. Jones also adds the glottal stop, (e), which is not represented in any of the other writings. Bloomfield's notation of stops seems to lie between Goddard's and Jones's, since he gives p and t as phonemes, but distinguishes the allophones [k] and [g]. Goddard's fricatives s s, h are the same as Bloomfield's (csh). In addition to these phonemes, Jones gives the phone (') as a slight aspiration. All three scholars include raan d n as nasals. Additionally Jones has /, which most likely goes back to 19th century Mesquakie, where / and n were used indiscriminately (Goddard 1978:585). Contrasting the consonant combinations described, one wonders to what extent they would be crucial for defining an alphabet. Goddard, Bloomfield and Jones all list the combinations of h with the stops p, t, k, and they also agree on ts. Jones and Goddard also have hw in common. However, Jones additionally notes ts, while Bloomfield includes (ck) and (htc). The differences may be due to actual language shifts among speakers, or to different levels of scholarly attention and varying phonetic representations. In spite of these slight variations, a clear picture of Sauk phonemes emerges. Now that I have demonstrated the sound system of Mesquakie, I would like to examine the "syllabary alphabet" in light of its sound 420 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT system. Goddard (1988:194) describes the Fox syllabary as a "traditional method" of writing which was well established by 1880. This phonemic alphabet is of recent European origin, derived from primers prepared for native speakers of Algonquian languages by Roman Catholic missionaries in the 19th century. The syllabary creates ambiguity in written language, because the phenomena ignored by the writing system — vowel length and aspiration — have a distinguishing function. Goddard gives the following example: ana-kani means 'dish' while ana-hkani means '(bench) mat'. In his 1906 article "An Algonquian syllabary", Jones described a cursive style of writing for syllabic symbols which was used by the Sauk, the Mesquakie and the Kickapoo (Table 2a). He stated that the closeness of their dialects did not pose problems in communicating in the syllabic alphabet. The sounds represented in this writing include four vowels and eleven consonants (including the semivowels y and w). Each symbol has "collective value" which means that one symbol may represent different vowels, e.g. (a) for short a and long a-, and it does not distinguish voicing, e.g., (p) for [p] and [b]. The h sound is not represented in any form by the syllabary. Jones (1906:89) criticized the syllabary as too "weak in its range of expression" and as lacking "a gradation sound". At this point one should remember that Jones's criticism was based on his own focus on phones, while syllabary symbols represent phonemes. However, Jones's criticism still seems justified, because not all phonemes are distinguished by the syllabary. The Mesquakie syllabary provides symbols for each consonant followed by each of the vowels — 44 combinations — plus the vowels by themselves, for a total of 48. Although quite systematic, this syllabary is confusing, because neither vowel length nor aspiration is included. This syllabary uses a period or a dash for the separation of words, while it employs the multiplication or the plus sign to mark the end of a sentence. Another problem with the syllabary is described by Goddard (1988: 197-8, 206). He distinguishes two styles of Mesquakie which go back to the beginning of the 20th century, the deliberate style, which corresponds to the older language, and the casual style, which is considered to be contemporary Mesquakie. The difference between these SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 421
CO -J & 4- 0-
&* s& & 6r jfa cZco <&• *&> JsCO ^Le *J^ *d
A E I O A E I O A E I O mya mye myi myo cla cle cli clo na ne ni no ga ge gi go nwa nwe nwi nwo gwa gwe gwi gwo nya nye nyi nyo ka ke ki ko sa se si so kwa kwe kwi kwo ska ske ski sko kya kye kyi kyo swa swe swi swo la le li lo ta te ti to lwa lwe lwi lwo tta tte tti tto lya lye lyi lyo twa twe twi two ma me mi mo wa we wi wo mwa mwe mwi mwo ya ye yi yo able 2b: Sauk Syllabary (Sac and Fox Nation 1977:11)
two styles is important for writing Mesquakie, because the writing system is based on the deliberate style. Younger speakers, ignorant of the deliberate style of the language, especially about the placement of semivowels, were thus rendered illiterate. 422 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT
The Sac and Fox Primer Book, printed in 1977, is based on the "traditional" Sauk alphabet and the Sauk syllabary. Today, the syllabary is proudly considered "theirs" by some elders (Reinschmidt 1991:299). However, the syllabary described by Jones has been modified slightly by the Sauk during the second half of the 20th century. In 1973, the Business Committee of the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma, concerned about the preservation of their language, became aware that no written documents in their native tongue were available. This prompted them to begin a language program which was funded by the Shawnee Agency of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, in Shawnee, Oklahoma. The money was "directed to beginning at the very lowest level to teach phonetic sound principles" (Sac and Fox Nation 1977:3) and to design an alphabet to "sound out" words. Although their good intentions are obvious, a basic mistake was made from the beginning: their "phonetic sound principles" in reality are phonemes. In fact, their phonemes are very close to those described by Jones for Mesquakie in 1906, and they also reflect Mesquakie phonemes as described by Bloomfield and Goddard. Thus, what the Sauk call "Sauk and Fox Alphabet Symbols" are phonemes, their hidden phones, and their graphemes. Their "Sauk and Fox Language Alphabet" is the syllabary which writes combinations of phonemes. The latter is what is actually used to spell words according to Sauk phonemes. The characteristics of the Sauk phonemic alphabet are described by the Primer (1977:4) as follows: (1) The [h] sound is not spelled out, because no agreement on the part of fluent speakers could be reached. (2) The last syllable is omitted. (3) The sound [s] is represented by (cl), <1> represents [p] and [b], (s> stands for [0], and A NEW ORTHOGRAPHY Reinschmidt (1991:299) argues that since the syllabary was originally designed for people who were native speakers of Sauk, this syllabary no longer fits the situation today where English is the official tribal language. Indeed, the existing syllabary leads to much confusion. During language class some of the fluent elders may argue with the instructor about pronunciation, while at other times, they agree on several strikingly different versions (Reinschmidt 1991:299-300). However, the primer used during these language classes is not that bad. English spelling should not be advocated, because it is rather incon sistent itself. In order to write in Sauk, it seems crucial to me that the difference between an alphabet which represents phonemes and the syllabary which is for the purpose of writing must be clarified. The Sauk syllabic writing will emerge as a perfectly acceptable method of writing, when — for learning purposes — accompanied by phonetic explanations. In the following, I will modify the Sauk alphabet as an alternative to using the traditional syllabary system or a modern phonetic system. I will aim at Norris's goal (1988:318), namely to suggest a solid working orthography: (1) Sauk phonemes are not numerous. As with Mesquakie, there are four vowels, both short and long, two semivowels, and eight consonants composed of stops, fricatives and nasals. The phonemes are accompanied by tentative graphemes (see Table 3):7 phonemes graphemes vowels a, e, i,o a, e, i, o a, e, T,6 aa, a, ii, oo semivowels y, w y, w consonants stops p, t, k I, t, k fricatives s, 0, h c, s, h nasal m, n m, n 7 "Tentative", because these graphemes are only my suggestions and the agreement of the Sac and Fox has not been asked. 424 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT GODDARD American SAUK ALPHABET TENTATIVE 1988 Phonetic 1906 1977 1994 FOX Alphabet SA UK SAUK a [AJ V 111 0 y y w [w] V w w P IPllb] l 1 1 t [tlldl t t t k 4L MlRl kK k s [8] A s s S m cC c c h [h] h m Iml •m. m m n Inl -a n n Ikw) It is important to represent vowel length due to its distinctive function. In this respect, the new system differs from both the 1906 and the 1977 syllabaries. The long vowels are simply represented by doubling, except for e which is written (a), a more adequate representation of this particular phoneme which sounds similar to the German umlauted a (as in English bear). (2) h needs to be re-added to the alphabet, because it is an important distinctive sound. The stops p, t, k will be represented by only one grapheme each, which connotes all possible allophones ([p b, t d, k g]). This phonetic distinction is not needed for an orthography, but will be contained in phonetic explanations for the learner of Sauk. I do, SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 425 SAC AND FOX TENTATIVE American Phonetic 1977 1994 Alphabet A a/ aa [A, a, hA, ha] cla cla/ claa [sA, sa] ka / 9a__ ka / kaa [kA, gA, ka, ga] kwa / gwa kwa / kwaa [kwA, gwA, kwa, gwa] kya kya / kqaa [kjA, gjA, kja, gja] la la / laa [pA, bA, pa, ba] Iwa Iwa / Iwaa [pwA, bwA, pwa, bwa] >ya pya/ pyaa [pjA, bjA, pja, bja] ma ma / maa [mA, ma] mwa mwa / mwa a [mwA, mwa] mya mya / myaa [mjA, mja] na na / naa [nA, na] nwa nwa / nwaa [nwA, nwa] nya nya / nya a [njA, nja] sa sa / saa [0A, 0a] ska / sga ska / skaa [0kA, 6gA, Oka, ©ga] swa cwa / cwaa [§wA, Swa] ta ta / taa [tA, dA, ta, da] tta tea / tcaa [cA, ca] twa twa / twaa [twA, dwA, twa, dwa] wa wa / waa [wA, wa] ya ya / yaa [JA, ja] Table 4: Proposed Sauk syllabaries for consonants + a however, maintain the Sauk spelling (1) for p, as well as (c) for s, (s) for 0, and (tt) for ts. The maintenance of these graphemes may seem rather arbitrary to a linguist; however, to the Sac and Fox the form of writing system is embedded in questions of identity. Most Sac and Fox in Oklahoma seem to consider the syllabary "theirs". (3) I also intend to keep the Sauk syllabary in addition to the Sauk alphabet, albeit changed to correspond to the new phonemic alphabet. There will be more syllables than shown in the Primer because of the inclusion of vowel length, even though stops are only represented by one symbol (1, t, k). This syllabary should serve only for the purpose of 426 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT learning how to write. When considering the numerous phonetic possi bilities, it seems very reasonable to limit the syllabary, and to compro mise between phonetic accuracy and phonemic necessity (see Table 4). (4) Pitch, tone and intonation will not be represented in the orthography, but must be learned. As a general rule, the firsto r second syllable is stressed, while the end of the word slowly fades away.8 (5) Importantly, the deliberate, formal, traditional style will be used for the spelling of words, because the "slang" style can always be derived from it. Also, spoken and written languages do not have to be congruent. (6) The syllables of each word will be hyphenated to make the polysynthetic morphology9 of Sauk more intelligible (see Table 5). (7) The punctuation of text should also include a capital letter for each new sentence, and the symbols {. ! ?) for showing the end of a sentence. It seems to me that the modified version of Sauk orthography should satisfy not only linguists, but more importantly the majority of the Sac and Fox people. There is no need for written Sauk to look like written English. This would take away from the uniqueness of the language. Ho! Ne nu ta ma!w Policy makers describe the contemporary situation of Native American languages as a "language problem". This expression refers to a situation where potential speakers are not as skilled in "their" language as they might want to be (Leap 1988:284-5). Clearly, a "language problem" only emerges when the native speech community perceives their contemporary situation as such. Recognizing a "language problem" is only the first step toward renewing a language. Renewal processes are deeply embedded in socioeconomic and political interests. Linguists who design writing systems need to be conscious of this context. Brandt (1988:328) has summarized the language situation as follows: Ultimate language maintenance and renewal are a series of complex social and political processes at the individual, group, social, tribal, and This observation along with many others in this paper is drawn from fieldwork conducted by the author with the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma during the summer of 1990. "Polysynthetic" refers to languages that are characterized by adding suffixes in order to modify the meaning of a word (Boas 1911:74). 10 "Hi! I speak Sauk!" SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 427 national levels that an individual linguist can only hope to influence and not control. The Sac and Fox are highly interested in their traditions and language. Despite this interest, the tribal government has not sufficiently supported the tribe's ancestral language with policies or proposals that aim at revival and seek financial help. Today, the Sauk language "no longer can be seen as the most dynamic element in [the Sac and Fox] cultural world" (Reinschmidt 1991:302). However, as long as some of the fluent speakers, as well as few concerned tribal members, show interest in a language preservation project the slightest possibilities for language renewal should be taken advantage of. A new orthography seems to be one of these possibilities. The value of a working writing system for non-Western languages should not be underestimated. Original documentation of Sauk grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation can escape the destiny of "declining" to historical data on a once spoken language. Sauk as a written language can foster the preservation of Sauk as as spoken language in several ways. Texts, grammar and exercises can facilitate the teaching and learning of Sauk. I would like to give a few examples: (1) Sauk could be used for children's books. (2) Both children and adults could communicate with each other in writing. (3) The popular tribal newspaper could include text printed in Sauk and thus continuously remind the Sac and Fox of their tribal language. An important decision the tribe has to take for the purpose of language survival concerns the choice of appropriate institutional learning facilities (Leap 1988:285): (1) The existing Sauk language instruction class already functions semi-institutionally and is directed at adults. Temporary support by a linguist can help to systematize and "professionalize" this language class and render it more efficient. The language instruction class is also a welcome forum for discussing tribal matters — in English. Traditional clan life, its function and importance, genealogies, the origin of ceremonial customs, and sometimes contemporary tribal politics are discussed (Reinschmidt 1991:301). The interest in oral tradition and cultural life could serve as framework for teaching Sauk. 428 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT B FORSYTH 1827 JONES 1911 '• LOOMFIELD 1925 ENGLISH ALGONQUIAN FOX FOX American muc-a-mon mohkuman silver/^nciney shoo-ne-aw doc ^-lem^mo_ A'nenVo^a anemoha bear mju>cjua mA^kw"- mahkwa „JS°d- man-nit-too manetowa woman ..VC!^^'vy.0U. ihkwawa j 0 pipe u'^pwagA'n | uhpwagana GOpDARD 1988 j JONES 1906 ; SAC & FOX 1977 j TENTATIVE 1994 FOX FOX - reconstructed SAUK SAUK ~mV ."Kc?" Th O fVU. mo ko mo na mooh-ko-moo-na j^JIJyjrh. cic? *te. 3-u. jdojie_ya_ _doo^m-yjiah_ anemo'h u. -fte -imcr •rnxt y.O- ma kwa mah-kwa in^n^^j^&L ma ne to wa ma-ne-too-wa ihkwe'wa I iknjTe- 7JJT/. i kwe wa ih-kwa-wa ohpa'kana Cr 6ixyjL Av no. o Iwa ga na j oh-pwaa-ga-na Table 5: Orthographies compared (2) Sauk children could learn how to speak their ancestors' language actively during second language classes offered in local schools. These classes should also include additional instruction in tribal customs. SAUK LANGUAGE PRESERVATION 429 (3) The reformation of the Algonquian league could support sociocultural exchange among the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma, the Mesquakie and the Kickapoo. This idea of "tribal exchange" expressed by a former chief (Reinschmidt 1991:304) is modeled after contemporary international student exchanges and is worth closer consideration. Both children and adults could participate, visiting relatives and learning to speak their ancestral language. (4) The "new Sauk" would surely not be exactly like the "old Sauk" language. However, language is always changing, and the borrowing of words among Algonquian tribes is not new (cf. Rhodes 1992:7). The quarrels of fluent, native speakers about the "proper" pronunciation of Sauk should not be allowed to disrupt the process of language preservation. The syllabary will leave enough room for different pronunciations of the Sauk, Mesquakie and Kickapoo dialects, which — after all — constitute only variants of the same language. Renewal of the ancestral language can serve the immediate future in promoting meaning to life and in giving tribal identity as members of the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma. In this sense, I hope that Sac and Fox people may be able to revive their ancestral language. Maybe some day Sauk children can again smile at Sauk and Fox fables that reflect the great Indian humor of their ancestors: Ni swi me cli ke a ki a la se te ke wa ki a la te ki ki e ka ta wi ke mi ya ki e we li ke mi ya ki ne ko ti me cli ke a e cla gwe ne mo tti wi ne li wi tti cle we na li ta ske wa ne li se ke. 'Two turtles were sunning on a bank when a thunderstorm approached. When it began to rain, one turtle said to the other, "I don't want to get wet", and jumped into the lake.' (Sac and Fox Nation 1977:45) REFERENCES Bloomfield, Leonard. 1925. Notes on the Fox language [I]. International Journal of American Linguistics 3:219-232. . 1925. On the sound-system of Central Algonquian. Language 1:130-156. Boas, Franz. 1911. Introduction. Handbook of American Indian languages, ed. by Franz Boas. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 40(1): 1-83. Brandt, Elizabeth A. 1988. Applied linguistic anthropology and American Indian language renewal. Human Organization 47:322-329. Forsyth, Thomas. 1912. An account of the manners and customs of the Sauk and Fox nations of Indians tradition [sic]. The Indian tribes of the upper Mississippi Valley 430 KERSTIN MULLER REINSCHMIDT and region of the Great Lakes, ed. by Emma Helen Blair (Cleveland: The Arthur H. Clark Co.), 2:183-245. Goddard, Ives. 1978. Central Algonquian languages. Handbook of North American Indians, v. 16: Northeast, ed. by Bruce G. Trigger (Washington: Smithsonian Institution), 583-587. . 1988. Stylistic dialects in Fox linguistic change. Historical dialectology, regional and social, ed. by Jacek Fisiak (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter), 192-209. Hoijer, Harry. 1973. History of American Indian linguistics. Current trends in linguistics, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok; v. 10: Linguistics in North America (The Hague and Paris: Mouton), 657-676. Jones, William. 1906. An Algonquin syllabary. Boas anniversary volume (New York: G. E. Stechert), 88-93. . 1911. Algonquian (Fox), revised by Truman Michelson. Handbook of American Indian languages, ed. by Franz Boas. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 40(1): 735-873. Leap, William. 1988. Applied linguistics and American Indian language renewal: introductory comments. Human Organization 47:283-291. Michelson, Truman. 1912. Preliminary report on the linguistic classification of Algonquian tribes. Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report 28:221-290. Mithun, Marianne, and Wallace L. Chafe. 1979. Recapturing the Mohawk language. Languages and their status, ed. by Timothy Shopen (Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop), 3-33. Norris, Evan J. 1988. Language awareness and linguistic training in American Indian bilingual programs. Human Organization 47:317-322. Pentland, David H., and H. Christoph Wolfart. 1982. Bibliography of Algonquian linguistics. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press. Pierce, Joe E. 1952. Dialect distance testing in Algonquian. International Journal of American Linguistics 18:203—210. Pilling, James C. 1891. Bibliography of the Algonquian languages. Washington: Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. Reinschmidt, Michael. 1991. Observations on the last stage of a vanishing Algonquian language. Papers of the 22nd Algonquian Conference, ed. by William Cowan (Ottawa: Carleton University), 291-306. Rhodes, Richard. 1992. Language shift in Algonquian. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 93:87-92. Sac and Fox Nation. 1977. Primer book — Sac and Fox language, ed. by Mary McCormick. Stroud, Okla.: Sac and Fox Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma. Sapir, Edward. 1949 [1933]. Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture and personality, ed. by David G. Mandelbaum (Berkeley: University of California Press), 46-60. Teeter, Karl V. 1973. Algonquian. Current trends in linguistics, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok; v. 10: Linguistics in North America (The Hague and Paris: Mouton), 1143— 1163.