Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

translations, cannot be given to them. There is, through the whole book, such a want of precision in the translations, and such a confusion of Delaware and Munsee words, as render the deductions very unsatisfactory.

Mr Heckewelder's reply to Mr Duponceau's inquiries, respecting some analagous word in the Delaware, to the word morituri in Latin, affords another illustration in point. He seems unwilling, that any syntactical forms should be found, which do not exist in the Delaware, and produces examples pari passu. Not certainly with the slightest disposition to misrepresent, but because the subject was not very familiar to him, and because slight analogies are easily traced between languages, the most remote in their principles. Mr Heckewelder says, (p. 423,) that there is a Delaware word, Elumiangellatschik, which means, those who are on the point of dying, or who are about to die.' The word meant to be written here, is Alumeeungelutcheek, but it has been evidently formed to meet the case, and formed upon erroneous principles. Alemee is an adverb, and means about. Mr Heckewelder calls it Elumi, and says it is derived from the verb N'dallemi, which means, I am going about (something.') N'dallemi Wickheen, I am going to build.' There is no such verb in the Delaware language as dallemi. The N' is the pronominal sign of Nee, 1. The d is inserted in all cases after this sign, where the next word begins with a vowel. Alemee is the adverb, which generally, in the arrangement of Indian sentences, precedes the verb. Ungelukeek is from Ungel, to die, with the pronominal sign suffixed, ukeek, or keek, they, which we believe is confined in this form to neuter verbs, and retains or drops the u, as euphony may require. Tsh, which indicates the future, is not used in this combination. The word Alemee sufficiently indicates, that the time is about to commence. The word, therefore, intended to be formed by Mr Heckewelder, should be written Alemee ungelukeek, and, literally translated, means, 'about they die.' So much for analogy.

There is, in all our Indian languages, a strong tendency to combination. We believe they were originally monosyllabic in their formation, and extremely limited in their application. Even now at least one fourth part of the Chippewa words are monosyllables. As the poverty of these languages be

came apparent, and necessity required the introduction of new terms, they were formed by the combination of words already existing. It is not easy to define the limits of this principle, nor to analyse the rules of its application. Some letters are omitted, and the changes are frequently so great, as to render it difficult to reduce the word to its original elements. Mr Heckewelder has given many examples of this process, but too often with the negligence, which characterises his work. Mr Duponceau exclaims in a quotation from Göethe, 'O how a nation is to be envied, that can express such delicate shades of thought in one single word.' Here follow other examples.

[blocks in formation]

Mamschalgussiwagan,

Honor, the being honored.

The receiving favor, mercy, tender

ness.

The being held in remembrance. Amangachgenimgussowagan, The being raised or elevated by

praise.

Mamamchtschimgussowagan, The being insulted.

Pronounce these who can. We eschew the task. It is idle to talk of such words. Every language may have as many, as the most ecstatic philologist could require. It is only to combine the words together, and when the combination ceases, there is an end to the compound word, and not before. But little would be gained for the ear, or the mind, by such a process.

In page 368, we have,

Wuskilenno,
Kigeyilenno,
Gichtochqueu,

A young man,

An aged man,
An aged woman.

Wooskee is young, and Lunno is man, and the word given as a combination by Mr Heckewelder is pronounced Wooskee lunno, and is as much two words, as young man in the English language. Kigeyilenno' should be written Khiki, old, Lunno, man. 'Gichtochqueu' should be Khiki, old, Ohkwaa, (not Ochqueu,) woman. The unsettled orthography adopted in this work conveys to the reader very imperfect notions of the sounds of the words.

In the translation of works from one language to another, it is commonly the object of the translator to preserve the spirit

of his author, and to avoid the introduction of foreign idioms. But in inquiries into the comparative principles of different languages, words should be literally rendered; and this precision can alone give value to these investigations. Mr Heckewelder has violated this rule, and to such a degree as greatly to impair the utility of his work.

In page 422, Eliwulek is said to be, He who is above everything.' The expression should be Aloo Woolituk, from Aloowee, more, and Woolit, good. The uk is the mark of the superlative degree; so that Aloo woolituk is 'most good.' Eluwantowit is translated, 'God above all.' The word should be Aloo wontoowit, and is formed from Aloowee, more, and Katunatoowit, a compound, of whose elements we are ignorant, but which means God; so that Aloo wontoowit is, more God.'

6

Eluwiahoalgussit is translated, 'The beloved of all things,' (p. 423.) It should be Aloowee ahoalkooseet, 'more he is loved.' Eluwitschanessik is said to be, the strongest of all.' It should be Aloowee tsharnesseek, 'more he is strong.' Eluwischiechsit, the supremely good,' should be Alooweek sheekseet, most he is good.'

Again, (p. 454,) it is said, that N'dellemuske means, 'I am going away.' This word is formed from the pronominal sign N', I, the adverb Alemee, about, and bumskau, go, and should be rendered, 'I about go.' So Ickalli áal is said to be,' away with you.' Ikarle means there, and awl is a verb, which means to go or come, properly, to move, and this expression should be translated, there move.'

[ocr errors]

In page 458, N'dapi aman, is rendered, 'I come from fishing with a hook and line.' Aman on the same page is rendered a fish hook. So that the word Aman, must mean fishing with a hook and line, and a fish hook. But this incongruity is to be found, not in the Delaware language, but in Mr Heckewelder's book, and results from the unjustifiable liberties taken with the translation. N'dapi does not mean, 'to come from.' That idea implying locomotion is conveyed by the word Noom, I come. N'dapi implies the termination of a recent act; and Aman is simply a fish hook. The words cannot with any propriety be used together. Naumase is a fish, and the participial form of that word should have

been used here, as it is upon the same page, where he says, 'I am come from taking fish with a spear,' N'dapi notamæsi. In the next page several examples are given of the use of the addition ink.

Gauwálenink,
Pachséyink,
Gámink,

At the place of fallen timbers.
In the valley.

On the other side of the river.

The ink in these instances is translated at, in, and on. It is neither of these, but is a mere sign of locality. A Delaware cannot express that operation of the verb upon the object, which is indicated in many of the ancient languages, by inflections, or cases, and in the modern, by prepositions. He cannot discriminate between, in the house, and out of the house, and over the house, and under the house. This strange poverty in languages, abounding with many useless variations, is supplied by gesticulation only; and no man has ever seen an Indian in conversation, without being sensible, that the head, and the hands, and the body, are all put in requisition to aid the tongue in the performance of its appropriate duty.

In our Indian languages, we have almost everything yet to learn. Till within a few years, our whole stock of information comprised only a few meagre vocabularies, collected here and there, and written with such an unsettled orthography, as to render them almost useless. Recently the subject has excited greater attention, and several grammars, with more or less merit, have been published. We trust these inquiries will be pursued, and at all events, that this almost only enduring memorial of Indian existence, will not be suffered to pass away unheeded and forgotten.

The range of thought of our Indian neighbors is extremely limited. Of abstract ideas they are almost wholly destitute. They have no sciences, and their religious notions are confused and circumscribed. They have but little property, less law, and no public offences. They soon forget the past, improvidently disregard the future, and waste their thoughts, when they do think, upon the present. The character of all original languages must depend, more or less, upon the wants, means, and occupations, mental and physical, of the people who speak them, and we ought not to expect to find the complicated refinements of polished tongues, among those of our Indians. He, who sits down to these investigations with such

an expectation, will certainly rise from his task disappointed. It would lead us too far to give even a brief analysis of any of these languages, or to enumerate those particulars, in which they are most deficient, and which render them, in all the business of life, indeterminate in their application.

It is, however, not a little singular, that some complicated forms and strange redundancies should be found, of which it is difficult to trace the origin, or to assign the object. Among these are the combinations, by which the pronouns, actor and subject, are associated with the verb. One is prefixed, and the other suffixed; and the latter is generally inseparable in its form. The active verbs cannot be used without this personal association. An Indian cannot say, 'I love,' 'I hate,' 'I fear,' abstracted from the operation of the verb upon the object. He must say, 'friend I love him;' enemy I hate him; bear I fear him.'

It is stated in the work under notice, (p. 378,) that N'dahoala means 'I love,' and it is placed in the present tense of the indicative mood. On the same page, and in the first personal form, N'dahoala is said to be, I love him or her.' Such is the spirit of accommodation in which examples are furnished! The latter, however, is the true meaning of the word, and no Indian, we have reason to believe, certainly no Delaware, can express the former idea.

These combinations give to the Delaware verbs what has been called, the richness of their grammatical forms.' But they are certainly useless appendages, adding no precision to the language, condensing its phraseology but little, and perplexing it with an almost infinite variety of combinations. How came they here, associated with syntactical forms in other respects simple and inartificial, and useless to the people by whom they are spoken? Are they the wrecks of more polished tongues, acquired in far different circumstances, and almost lost in the lapse of ages?

In some of these languages, the adjectives are subjected to variations depending not on the gender nor degree, but on the nature of the objects to which they are applied. Among the Delawares, things which have life, whether animal or vegetable, are qualified by adjectives, different from those which are applied to inanimate objects.

« PředchozíPokračovat »