The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Papers on the Penobscot Language About Penobscot Culture and Language 1986 Dialect Symbols in Aubrey's Dictionary Pauleena MacDougall Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/papers Part of the Anthropological Linguistics and Sociolinguistics Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Comparative and Historical Linguistics Commons, First and Second Language Acquisition Commons, Language Description and Documentation Commons, Linguistic Anthropology Commons, Other Linguistics Commons, Phonetics and Phonology Commons, Semantics and Pragmatics Commons, Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons, Syntax Commons, and the Typological Linguistics and Linguistic Diversity Commons Repository Citation MacDougall, Pauleena, "Dialect Symbols in Aubrey's Dictionary" (1986). Papers on the Penobscot Language. 2. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/papers/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Papers on the Penobscot Language by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 296 RICHARD RTIODES REFERENCES Crawford, John C. 1983 speaking Michif in Four M6tie Communitiee. The canadian Journal t7 vb ol Native Studies 3:47-55. Dialect Symbols in Aubery,s Dictionary Douaud, Patrick C. 1985 An Ethnolinguigtic Profile of the canadian M6tig. National Museum of Man, Mercurg Series 99. Ottawa. PATILEENA MACDOUGALL SEEBER Goddard, Ives Penobscot Nation, OId Town, Maine 1982 Linguistic variation in Moraviantown Delaware. Paper presented at the Thirteenth Algonquian Conference, 'Ioronto. Hancock, Ian F. Lg77 Appendix: Repertory ofPidgin and Creole Languages' Pp' 362-391 in Pidgin and Creole Linguialics. Albert Valdmand, ed' Blooming- Aubery's Abenaki Dictionary is composed of two manuscripts, ton: Indiana UniversitY Prese. one a trtench-Abenaki rexicon, and the oiher Abenaki-Ftench. The French-Abenaki Laverdure, Patline, and Ida Rose Allard part is dated August g, rzls. In the introductory notes of the French-Abenaki 1983 The Michil Dictionary. John C. Crawford, ed. Winnipeg: Pemmi- part, Aubery stated that he had known the Abenaki tanguage, can Publicationg. but he tr.it"d forLor" th";;;;;;ars before setting about writing it down according Larry to the French. He also stated Lovell, that he 1984 Michif Relative Clauseg. MA thesie, University of North Dakota, to birds i'flH:*r:"fil.,11ff;;f",Tl:: Grand Forke. metob Rhodes, Richard have been composed later than t Pp. 6-25 in Actes du Huitiine Lg77 French cree - A case of Borrowing. there is no date in the Abenaki-F} congrts des Algonquindsle,t. William Cowan, ed' Ottawa: Carleton Both parts include numerous en University. and languages, although in the main, the dictionary is a record of the Aroosagunticook Thomaeon, Sarah G. (Androscoggin River, Maine) diarect of Eastern 1984 Ie Michif Unique? lv{s. Abenaki' In many cases there ls no indication that Aubery was aware of the fact that he was recording samples from more than one Weaver, Deborah variety of speech' Grand st'r, Aubery', m.iy years at st. Francis (rater 1982 obviation in Michif. MA thesis, univeraity of North Dakota, called odanak), must have red to an awareness of the many different Forke. Ianguages represented by temporary residents and ui"iti.rs peopres. In addition, his maps show that rr" rrua knowredge tr,l location of communities of Indians other than his own. Jom""i of Aubery,s entries are marked with a small capit ar uL' a *P'. uL, and some similarly with We know that the stands for uloup,, because entry umot in one marked "L' Aubery wrote Loup". Aubery teils introductory us in his notes to the Ftench-Abenaki part, that the letter ,,p,, is a mark indicating that ihe word is from another language close to 297 298 PAI'LEENA SEEBER DHLECT SY-I\4BoLS 299 like to present Abenaki. Unfortunately, he does not tell us which one. some of the assumptions that have been made in this paper' First, we lvere several Eastern Algonquian peoples that were called must assume that each corpus represents a sam- There pleaom Loup in Aubery,s time. Gordon Day has given an extensive dis- only one.speech community. within tli. assumftion there is the of the subject in his introduction to "The Mots Loups of related notion that Aubery did not err in his und'erstanding or his transcriptions. ".rr.io1Father Mathevet". Day states that Loup was first used to designate Both of these assumptions are risky and nei- ther can be proved the Mahican of the Hudson River, but as early as 1662 Sokoki indi- irrefutabry. In addition, oou *u.t *rr*e that the speech communities viduals were registered at Notre Dame de Montr6al under the name that we are describing were located approxi- mately where Loup. Day's investigations of maps in the Public Archives of canada they always had been. If this is-true, one would expect a dialect continuum revealed that in 1680 a map of Canada shows two types of Loups, from east to west and north [o south. Mahicans and Sokokis. Another map (171S, attributed to informa- what was the nature of the speech community at odanak when Aubery was there? According to pilling, Aubery served as mission- ary at the st. Flancis River or odanail vilrage from rz07 until he died -As in 1755. odanak was a refugee vilrage. earry * roog trr" village consisted primarily to spea^k with the English, and suggests that this came from Aubery, of sokokis. rn iogo ro-u io,rps (?) ar- the rived. Abenakis from the saco, who must have noticed the linguistic afnliation existing between Androscoggin,-Ftancis and the kerrnube" Rivers_ were Sokokis, Penacooks and the Abenakis (1975:35-aa). led by Jacques Bigot from st. de sales on the chaudibre to A number of communities located in northern New England were odanak in the autumn of 1200. In rz02 r00 persons including sokokis, Algonkins, and Abenakis were added. In 1202, the year that Aubery came, there were also pigwackets arriving, and they remained for seven years. These pigwJckets were poriticaily aligned with the Abenakis of Maine, having reaffirmed piace with one another at casco Aubery. For some time, scholars have noticed that the language spo- Bay in June, 1703. In izza s"hughticokes from the Hudson River pocumtucks, ken at modern odanak does not appear to be the same language including some sokofis, Nipmucks and others arrived at odanak. as that of Aubery's dictionary. In fact, the odanak speech has been They were followed in rz'go by some Mississiquoi and in rz54 classified as western Abenaki to distinguish it from Eastern Abenaki more refugees arrived from schaghticoke. (first used by Siebert in personal comnrunications to Gordon Day It is likely and Ives Goddard in 1960). Eastern Abenaki includes Penobscot, that the languages that were recorded by Aubery are samples of speech represented by one or more of the groups who were living at Odanak before 121b. The body of Aubery,J dictionary is for the most part understood by penobscot speake'rs of *od"., limes. Aubery certainly knew Abenaki weil at some time in "rrouih his career to be capable of differentiating some of the dialects that were spoken at Odanak. Following is an annotated list of the words Aubery marked ,,L, and penobscot "Po. For the most part, words are from diebert (1gg4). offers a small contribution towards solving this problem' uL' Before discussing the two word lists labelled and "P" , I would 298 PAI'LEENA SEEBER DHLECT SY-I\4BoLS 299 like to present Abenaki. Unfortunately, he does not tell us which one. some of the assumptions that have been made in this paper' First, we lvere several Eastern Algonquian peoples that were called must assume that each corpus represents a sam- There pleaom Loup in Aubery,s time. Gordon Day has given an extensive dis- only one.speech community. within tli. assumftion there is the of the subject in his introduction to "The Mots Loups of related notion that Aubery did not err in his und'erstanding or his transcriptions. ".rr.io1Father Mathevet". Day states that Loup was first used to designate Both of these assumptions are risky and nei- ther can be proved the Mahican of the Hudson River, but as early as 1662 Sokoki indi- irrefutabry. In addition, oou *u.t *rr*e that the speech communities viduals were registered at Notre Dame de Montr6al under the name that we are describing were located approxi- mately where Loup. Day's investigations of maps in the Public Archives of canada they always had been. If this is-true, one would expect a dialect continuum revealed that in 1680 a map of Canada shows two types of Loups, from east to west and north [o south. Mahicans and Sokokis. Another map (171S, attributed to informa- what was the nature of the speech community at odanak when Aubery was there? According to pilling, Aubery served as mission- ary at the st. Flancis River or odanail vilrage from rz07 until he died -As in 1755. odanak was a refugee vilrage. earry * roog trr" village consisted primarily to spea^k with the English, and suggests that this came from Aubery, of sokokis. rn iogo ro-u io,rps (?) ar- the rived. Abenakis from the saco, who must have noticed the linguistic afnliation existing between Androscoggin,-Ftancis and the kerrnube" Rivers_ were Sokokis, Penacooks and the Abenakis (1975:35-aa). led by Jacques Bigot from st. de sales on the chaudibre to A number of communities located in northern New England were odanak in the autumn of 1200. In rz02 r00 persons including sokokis, Algonkins, and Abenakis were added. In 1202, the year that Aubery came, there were also pigwackets arriving, and they remained for seven years.