Seri and Chontal (Tequistlateco) Author(S): Paul R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Seri and Chontal (Tequistlateco) Author(s): Paul R. Turner Source: International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 33, No. 3 (Jul., 1967), pp. 235- 239 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1264216 Accessed: 08-01-2018 14:00 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of American Linguistics This content downloaded from 12.14.13.130 on Mon, 08 Jan 2018 14:00:11 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms SERI AND CHONTAL (TEQUISTLATECO) PAUL R. TURNER UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA 0. Introduction vocabulary terms, kinship terms, numeral 1. Phonological systems systems, and grammatical categories of Seri 2. Basic vocabulary terms and Chontal to see if they are related lan- 3. Kinship terms guages as claimed by Kroeber. 4. Numeral systems The data for the Seri language are taken 5. Grammatical categories from the bilingual dictionary Vocabulario Seri3 as well as personal communication with 0. The data presented in this paper sug- one of the authors, Edward Moser, who has gest that Chontal and Seri are not related worked on the Tiburon dialect as a member languages. If Seri is a Hokan language, then of the Summer Institute of Linguistics. Chontal is not, and vice versa. It would The data from Highland Chontal are seem as if neither of these languages has asfrom my own work as a member of the Sum- yet been properly classified. Kroeber's mer Institute of Linguistics from 1959-63 article, Serian, Tequistlatecan, and Hokan, while living in the village of San Matias has not proven that they are related;' addi- Petacaltepec. tional data given below suggest that these languages are unrelated. 1. The phonemic inventory of Seri is The history of the classification of Te- taken from the Seri dictionary with modifi- quistlateco, or Chontal of Oaxaca, can be cations from a Spanish-type orthography to divided into two main periods which are a more phonemic representation. The Seri separated by Kroeber's article. In the first consonants consist of: p, t, k, h, kw, ?, , s, period linguists differed widely in their s, x, xw, W, y, 1, 1, m, n, r, and r. The Seri opinions as to whether Chontal was a vowels are: i, e, a, and o, which occur Mayan, Aztecan, Hokan, or unclassified nasalized and non-nasalized. language. After Kroeber's article, the con- The Chontal consonants are as follows: sensus of opinion among linguists has been p, b, t, d, k, k', h, ?, g, f, f, s, , , c, ', W, that Chontal is a Hokan language. Actually w, y, 1, 1, L' (L' = t'), m, n, 7, and N. Brinton2 was probably the first to see a rela- Consonants occurring only in words of tionship between Chontal, Seri, and the Spanish origin are: r, r, d, and b. The Chon- Hokan languages, but his demonstration was tal vowels include: i, e, a, o, and u. not as convincing. Kroeber's article has been Some obvious contrasts between the two far more impressive to linguists and such anphonemic systems are: Seri has no voiced historically decisive article deserves in- stops, no glottalized stops, no affricates, and vestigation. no voiceless nasals. Chontal has no labiali- This paper will discuss Kroeber's article zation, no uvular trills (x and XW), no nasal- and compare the phonological systems, basic ized vowels, and no flapped vibrant (r) occurring in words of non-Spanish origin. 1 Kroeber, A. L. Serian, Tequistlatecan, and Actually, though, the two phonemic in- Hokan. University of California Publications in ventories are quite similar. Voiced and American Archaeology and Ethnology 11. 279-90. 1915. 8Moser, Edward and Mary B. Vocabulario 2 Brinton, Daniel G. The American Race. Phila- Seri. Vocabularios Indigenas 5. Instituto Linguis- delphia, 1891. tico de Verano. Mexico, D.F. 1961. 235 This content downloaded from 12.14.13.130 on Mon, 08 Jan 2018 14:00:11 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 236 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. XXXIII voiceless stops fluctuate in the San This Matias number of cognates between Chontal dialect of Chontal. A labialized velar and Seri stop is even as more impressive when you a complex phoneme in Chontal isconsider an accept- the fact that there are five words able interpretation of the data. missing And, in the the Chontal column and three other phonemes are so comparable, words with missing per- in the Seri column. Of these haps a few exceptions, that it is rather remaining obvi- twenty seven word pairs, six ous that we are dealing with two appear languages to be cognate, as listed above. This that have similar phonemic inventories. percentage This of cognates is impressive, if true means that we can expect a greater of the number entire languages, and could not be at- of accidental cognates between tributedthese two to accident. Perhaps we could ex- languages than we could if they pect had about more eight percent accidental word contrastive phonemic inventories. cognates, given the similar phonemic in- The syllable patterns of the two ventorieslanguages listed above, but not twenty may be summarized as follows: Seripercent. has fif- teen syllable patterns with three consonantsDo these languages actually share this in a consonant cluster and six syllable percentage pat-of cognates? There are a number terns with four consonants in a consonant of ways of presenting the data that would cluster. Chontal has only two syllable pat- answer this question. Perhaps as good a way terns with three consonants in a consonant as any would be to use the 100 word basic cluster and no syllable patterns with more vocabulary list employed by glottochrono- than three consonants in a cluster. Seri has logists and check for percentage of cognates. twenty nine syllable patterns having vowel Following this list there will be presented in clusters of from two to four vowels whereas summary form the results of comparing a Chontal has no vowel clusters. still larger body of data. Other aspects of the phonological systems The order of reference in this presentation of these two languages should be compared is: Chontal, Seri. 1. all bulaf'ka?, k6oxo; 2. in the future. There is, however, an im- ashes -abi?, ?antimak; 3. back* -spila?, portant contrast in the data under con- ?asliikot; 4. belly -igui?u, anoya?it; 5. big sideration. The phonemic inventories of the agw6ga?, kaakoh; 6. bird -aga, siik; 7. bite two languages are quite similar but the dis- -ga-, kkasni; 8. black umi, k6opol; 9. blood tribution of these phonemes in syllables -Wac',is ?ait; 10. bone -6gal, itak; strikingly different. 11. burn -bi-, ka?itah; 12. cloud -umaway?, ?6kaala; 13. cold asida, kaapl; 14. come 2. Kroeber's article included a chart of -?wa-/-gway-, iki kiin/m6ka; 15. die -ma-, thirty five English words with Chontal, ?akx kmii?; 16. dog -ciki, ?axs; 17. drink Seri, and Mohave translation equivalents. -sna-, kisi; 18. dry ihul, kkuootih; 19. ear He also included data from other Hokan -a?mas, ?&sla; 20. earth -mac', ?ant; languages in a fourth column to reinforce 21. eat -de-, k6o?it; 22. egg -abi?e, iipx; 23. his argument. Kroeber felt that this chart eye at-?u, ?ato; 24. fat -fuNm-, ifaakapii; 25. least made the case for the relationship fight* be- -fule-, kaato; 26. fire -uira, ?amak; 27. tween Chontal and Seri to Hokan a plausible fish -adu, sixkam; 28. fly -yu-, kkap; 29. foot one. At first glance the evidence seems -2mis,rather ?at6aa; 30. give -gu-/-ni?i-/-bi?i-/ convincing. There seem to be six word -buL'i-, cog- kike; nates as follows (references are in this order: 31. good ak'a, kiipe; 32. green -swayga9, Chontal, Seri): 1 water a-ha, ax; 2 earth k6il; a-33. hair -Wak', ?alit k6pxWt; 34. hand mats, amt; 3 sky e-maa, amime; 5 tongue * Starred forms are words taken from the larger i-paL (L = 1), ipL; 6 sleep cmai (c = s), 200 word list when Chontal or Seri data is missing sim/kim; 22 two o-ke, ka-xku-m. for the word in the 100 word list. This content downloaded from 12.14.13.130 on Mon, 08 Jan 2018 14:00:11 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms NO. 3 SERI AND CHONTAL (TEQUISTLATECO) 237 -mane, ?anol; 35. guts* -bugwiyale, ?atoosh; the list would not be significantly changed. 36. hear -gya-/-gwe-, kii; 37. heart -un- What is important is that the percentage of sahma?, ?amos; 38. I iya?, ?e; 39. kill cognates in the basic vocabulary list does -ma?a-, ?akx kamii?it/kiokW; 40. know not even come close to the twenty percent -sim-, kiya; figure that Kroeber's article might suggest. 41. leaf -ib6la, isth; 42. lie -felay-, kwatsh; There are only about eight word pairs that 43. liver -eda, iyas; 44. long id6gi, kaoksxah; are cognate in this 100 word list, or eight 45. louse -9i1, ?ask; 46. man -sans, ktam; 47. percent. many aspela?, anxW/katxo; 48. meat -isik', Another 500 word pairs were compared to ipxasi/siix ipxasi; 49.