54 Comments on Cotton's Vocabulary.••* George F. Aubin Assumption College Introduction The Cotton Vocabulary. ., probably compiled in the late 17th and early 18th century, is one of the more important documents that have come down to us on the Massachusett Indian language of that period. The principal author, Josiah Cotton, was ably seconded by his father, John Cotton, who made many important contributions to the original manuscript. Among their duties, both John and Josiah were missionaries to the Indians at Plymouth and had an intimate knowledge of the Indian dialect of that area, as their collaborative effort clearly reveals. The original manuscript is now the property of the Massachusetts Historical Society in Boston, where it is available for study by interested scholars. A number of minor but significant differences can be noted between the manuscript and the 182 9 published version. These involve primarily a confusion of letters (u and n, h and k, s_ and ss, for example). The English orthography has also been changed in several places to conform to 19th century practice. In addition, not found in the published version are a number of words that were crossed out, presumably by Josiah's father, John, who not only corrected his son's work, but, inspection shows, also added a great deal to it. Some of these deleted words are still legible and may prove important in comparative Algonquian linguistic work. The dates of the manuscript, apparently compiled over a number of years, are difficult to determine with precision. The date 1707 is found on page 111 and the date 1708 on page 99 and again on page 117, yet John Cotton, who worked on much of it, died in 1699. In this paper, I will examine a number of selected problems in the historical phonology of the Plymouth dialect of Massachusett (hereafter referred to as PMs). I have benefited greatly from my study of the original manuscript, and, although I have kept the page references of the published version, I have made emendations in the forms cited wherever I deemed it necessary. At the same time, I will compare my findings from Cotton's Vocabulary... with the evidence from the Williams materials (referred to as Nr) and the Wood vocabulary (referred to as LMs) in order to point out some of the similarities and differences in the treatment of the problems investigated. Borrowing My study of the Cotton Vocabulary... thus far has revealed only one instance of what may be borrowing. The normal negonnereflex o f'chief PA *n (24)is PM *ni:ka:nis n, as i n'ahead, the followin leading'g examples : 55 nowhitche mat nogquissog '...some stay away' (82) *no:kwesiwaki 'they appear, are visible' pakonnotam 'a hadduck' (15) *pe:nkweno:tamwa 'haddock' In one form, however, the PMs reflex is clearly not n, but y: siokke 'hard, or difficult' (27) Although this may come from PA *sanak- 'difficult', there is some evidence for positing as the proto-form PA *sayak-, which, if correct, would mean that the PMs reflex is completely regular.1 If further research confirms the conclusion that the Cotton Vocabulary... is in fact virtually free of borrowed forms, it would make this document quite different from either the Williams materials, where there is considerable mixture of forms from at least two dialects, or the Wood vocabulary, which also shows evidence for forms from at least two dialects . Long and Short Vowels Although the evidence is difficult to interpret, it appears that the reflexes of the PA long and short vowels do not coalesce in PMs. The principal support for this conclusion comes from a consideration of the spellings used for the PMs long vowel reflexes, which show more apparent consistency than those used for the short vowel reflexes. I will illustrate this point with examples of the PMs reflexes of PA *i: and *i. Proto-Algonquian *i: becomes T in PMs, presumably a high front tense vowel, written 'e' or 'ee' by Cotton: muskesuk 'the eye' (13) *meski:nsekwi 'someone's eye' sesep, or qunusseps 'a duck' (12) *Si:?si:pa 'duck' nen 'I' (34) *ni:la 'I' ween wutch manittooo[nk] 'the marrow of divinity' (13) *wi:ni 'marrow' Proto-Algonquian *i becomes a high front lax i in PMs, with centralized allophones. It is written as 'e' and 'ee', but also as 'i' and 'u'. mishee 'big' (24) *me?si 'big' wuskenin, nunkomp 'a young man' (13) *weskilenyiwa 'young man' meepit 'a tooth' (13) *mi:pit- 'someone's tooth' nesasuk 'seven' (33) *nyi:swa:Sika 'seven' sontim 'a governor' (49) *sa:kima:wa 'chief In both Williams and Wood, the reflexes of PA *i: and *i do not appear to merge either, as the following examples show: Nr kekick 'to your house' (4) *ki:kenki 'at your house' Nr anamakeesuck 'this day' (63) *ki:sekwi 'day, sky' LMs nees '2' *ni:swi 'two' LMs whenan 'the tongue' *wi:9ani 'his tongue' 56 Nr mishque 'the blood" (51) *meskwi 'blood' Nr nkeke, nkequock 'otter, otters' (103) *nekikwa 'otter' Nr shwosuck '8' (22) *ne?swa:sika 'eight' Nr wepit-teash 'tooth, teeth' (50) *wi:pitali 'his teeth' LMs matchemauquot 'it stinketh' *macimya:kwatwi 'it smells bad' LMs nitchicke 'the hand' *we9encyikani 'his hand' LMs seat 'the foot' *mesit- 'someone's foot' LMs shannucke 'a squerill' *me?9anyikwa 'big squirrel' A preliminary consideration of stress also appears to lend support to the view that the long and short vowels do not merge in PMs. If one applies rather common Algonquian stress rules, rules used in various dialects of Algonquin, for example (Piggott (1978:173)), one can account for much of the inconsistency in the spellings used for the short vowels in Cotton, Williams, and Wood. The stress rules in question are: 1) V •* [ + stress ] [+ tense ] 2) V •+ [+ stress]/ V C /[ - stress] Rule 2, the alternating stress rule, is of particular interest here. Applying this rule to the forms above containing PA *i, one can see that the PMs reflex is spelled 'e' or 'ee' when stressed and 'i' or 'u' when unstressed. The apparent inconsistency in the spellings used thus shows an underlying regularity and can be accounted for in a principled way by the operation of the alternating stress rule. Further, since the PMs reflex of PA *i: is stressed by rule 1, the spellings used for this reflex show, as expected, a high degree of consistency. These remarks also seem to be valid for the forms cited above from Williams and Wood, thus suggesting that these stress rules apply to all three cases under consideration. If further research confirms that the interpretation of stress outlined here for PMs, LMs, and Nr is essentially correct, it will provide strong evidence for the view that the reflexes of the Proto-Algonquian long and short vowels do not coalesce in any of these dialects.2 Proto-Algonquian *a: The spellings used by Cotton indicate that the PMs reflex of Proto-Algonquian *a: had both nasalized and non-nasalized allophones, as in the following examples: nampash 'a cocke' (12) *na:pe:?le:wa 'male bird' sontim 'a governor' (49) *sa:kima:wa 'chief wunnonk 'a dish' (17) *wela:kani 'dish, plate, bowl' nesasuk 'seven' (33) *nyi:swa:sika 'seven' nunnoonoosquadtam 'I lick' (56) *no:skwa:t- 'lick' tiohquohqassu wosketomp 'a low man' (28) *tayaxkwa:xkwesiwa 'he is short' 57 It is not at all clear what to attribute this alternation to. The following example shows that it certainly did not pass unnoticed,_and suggests that a may have been in free variation with a: wechim8quat, or wetimunkquat 'a sweet smell' (19) *wi:nkimya:kwatwi 'it smells good' Whatever the ultimate reason for the a/a alternation, it is clearly not limited to the Cotton Vocabulary..., but is also found in both Williams and Wood: Nr taquonck 'fall of leaf and antumne' (65) *takwa:kiwi 'it is autumn' Nr wunnauquit 'evening' (63) *we9a:kw- 'evening (yesterday)' LMs ottump 'a bow' *ahta:pya 'bow' LMs matchemauquot 'it stinketh' *ma£imya:kwatwi 'it smells bad' Proto-Algonquian *k The normal reflex of Proto-Algonquian *k is PMs lenis k, which had both voiceless and voiced allophones: ken 'thou' (34) *ki:la 'thou' sequan 'spring' (20) *si:kwanwi 'it is spring' negonne 'chief (24) *ni:ka:ni 'ahead, leading' piog 'ten' (33) *pe:yakwi 'ten' This development is not at all unusual, and evidence for it is found in both Williams and Wood: Nr kuckqussuckqun 'you are heavy' (73) *kekwesekwa9e 'you are heavy' Nr aumauog 'they are fishing' (14) *a:me:waki 'they fish' LMs piocke '10' *pe:yakwi 'ten' LMs wigwam 'a house' *wi:kiwa:mi 'house' In addition, Proto-Algonquian *k becomes PMs t (or ty?) in a number of cases. The determining factor appears to be the segment following *k in Proto-Algonquian, with *k ->• t in PMs before *y, *i, or *e:, as in the following examples: mosketuash 'hay' (16) *maskixkyiwali 'grass' mehpeteak 'a rib' (13) *-xpike:kani 'rib' peetitteash 'come in' (41) *pi:ntwike:lwe 'come in (you sg.)!' sontim 'a governor' (49) *sa:kima:wa 'chief mehtukque wunnadteask 'the bark of a tree' (20) *walake:9kwa 'bark' Evidence for this same sound change is also found in the Williams materials, where we have examples such as the following: Nr ashaunt-teaug 'lobsters' (114) *ahsa:ke:wa 'lobster' Nr kaukont tuock 'crow, Crowes' (89) *ka:ka:kiwa 'raven' Nr maskituash 'grass or hay' (96) *ma£kixkyiwali 'grass' Nr weetimoquat 'it smells sweet' (14) *wi:nkimya:kwatwi 'it smells good' 58 The Nr and PMs forms for 'grass' are particularly interest­ ing If the Proto-Algonquian reconstruction is correct, it indicates that the change in question could also affect Proto-Algonquian *k in consonant clusters.