Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
T�nisi �kwa, Sh�:kon. I'm entering the discussion of Native North American "verby" vs. "nouny" languages somewhat late. Having studied Algonquian and Iroquoian languages languages, I would like to add my voice to the frey. On the question of whether an Algonquian language like Cree has and actively uses nouns, the answer is a definitive 'yes'. As was stated earlier in the discussion, Alg. languages are well known for their animate vs. inanimate noun 'genders'. Nouns such as 'woman' iskw�w, 'bear' maskwa, or 'rock' asin�, are all classified by the language as animate, and consequently take the -k plural ending (eg. iskw�wak, women), as well as determine animate gender agreement with the verb. Inanimate nouns like 'shoe' maskisin, 'book' masinahikan, or 'wood' mistik, have different verb agreement, and a different plural -a ending (eg. maskisina, shoes). Many nouns in Cree are just that, nouns. The word maskwa (bear) is not derived from a verb root. The word for book, masinahikan, should also be regarded as a noun, although its stem is masinahik�, meaning to write. This is no different than English getting the noun 'visualisation' from the verb 'visualise'. Looking through a few Cree language texts, it ought to be said that spoken (then transliterated) Cree doesn't appear to use nouns as often as literary English would appear to. This is typical of oral discourse in any language (including English), because the both the speaker and the audience know from context which objects, people, places, etc. are being refered to. Languages keep track of who's doing what to whom by using agreement or pronouns, and Cree uses both, including an extensive catalogue of demonstrative pronouns (eg. this one, those ones, that one right there, etc.) which are both grammatically and conceptually nounish. Thus a concept that is described verbishly in Cree, such as 'bananas' k�-w�kisicik, literally something like 'the ones they are bent', could be referred to later in the discourse by a demonstrative pronoun. When Cree has fully developed a literary style, I would expect the use of nouns to increase. In an Iroquoian language such as Mohawk, the use of verbish constructions where English would use a noun is even more pronounced. Virtually all of the vocabulary for objects or people is built by verb roots. Even words like 'man' r�n:kwe can be translated as 'he is a person'. To make the plural, change the pronominal prefix from 3sg to 3pl. Yet even here, there is a relatively small group of roots which are distinctively grammatical nouns, 'Dog' �:rhar is different than 'man' in that it does not take a pronominal prefix, and may not incorporate (a sort of compounding) into a verb complex as verbish roots do. Yet the idea of 'noun' is certainly a productive Mohawk concept, as the language has on occasion borrowed nouns into the language where the traditional vocabulary lacked terminology (eg. akar�:t - cake, mat�n:t - my aunt, from French ma tante). If Mohawk lacked nouns altogether, such borrowings would be impossible. All of this being said, there is a certain validity to the argument that an Algonquian language is more verby than French or English, meaning that a Cree speaker would find that verbs are the more expressive or powerful category in the language. This can be exemplified by the M�tis language Mechif of Western Canada, a mixed French-Cree language. When the Michif language was forming, it was able to draw upon the linguistic resources of both French and Cree, and chose to take its verbs from Cree and its nouns from French, getting the best of both worlds. Niawen'k�:wa Chris Harvey charveyMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueattcanada.net