I E ska tarry, Gk kta possess; Dak kta defer, tarry, used also as sign
of future tense. The Mandan future inflection -kit -kt -t appears to be
an abridgement of this.
Eu skat spring, leap; Dak skata play.
Eu ska, skad burn; Dak shku roast.
Eu skap annihilate; Dak skepa evaporate, remove entirely, cause to
disappear.
Eu skap strike; Dak -skapa strike.
Eu skad, Gk keda spill, scatter; Dak kada spill, scatter, applied only
to solids.
Eu skap scratch, shave; Min kape scratch.
Eu kopa concave; Dak skopa concave.
Eu skid press; Dak -ski- press.
Eu sku shave off, flay; Dak -sku shave off, flay.
Eu skru rough hew; Dak sku broken in gaps.
Eu snigh cold; Dak sni cold.
Eu swan sonare; Dak sna ring, rattle.
Eu skud, Teut skut shoot; Dak kate shoot.
Teut sota soot; Dak shota smoke, shotkazi soot.
Eu sad sit; Dak si, siha the foot.
The Dakota words that most resemble I E forms are those in daily use,
those roots entering into the largest number of compounds, those most
widely distributed in languages more nearly related.
Excluding words repeated in compounds and those contained in phrases I
have not satisfactorily analyzed, and including words derivative rather
than compound, I find in Hayden, Morgan and Schoolcraft 262 different
Iowa words. Of these thirty-five as words represent words discussed in
this paper; thirty-nine others appear to be derived from roots herein
discussed, a number of them varying from the Dak. word only by using a
different suffix also herein compared. Out of 159 that I have been able
plainly to trace to Dakota words and roots 121 are to Dakotan roots and
words which seem to be related to I E forms. If I had sufficient Iowa
material to enable me to find Iowa roots independently, I doubt not the
resemblance to the Dakota would be much increased, and the resemblance
to the I E in a still greater degree.
The parable of the prodigal son as printed in Dr. Rigg's dictionary,
page 61, contains as there printed 417 words, 199 different[K] words. Of
these 36 words, occurring 186 times, are in the exact form[L] given in
this paper; 8 other words, occurring 11 times, as given in my preceding
paper; 75 other words, occurring 106 times, are composed wholly of the
words, roots and pronominal elements compared with I E forms in the two
papers. There remain 114 words, 80 different words. If I have correctly
analyzed them they contain the following elements compared in this
paper: words and verb roots, 9 times, pronouns 19 times, prepositional
and pronominal prefixes 35 times. Much of the remainder, in all about
nine-tenths of the whole, seems to me represent I E materials with which
I have compared it. I do not doubt that some of the similarities will
prove in the end fallacious. On the other hand I have no doubt that many
new similarities will be found. My father made a list of 1,243 Dakota
verb stems, radical words and words which he could not satisfactorily to
himself derive from simpler elements. Of these about 500 seem to be
similar to I E forms with which I have compared them, and from them are
derived more than three-fourths of the 16,000 words in Dr. Rigg's
dictionary.
The pronouns, prepositions and suffixes herein given seem to indicate
that the Dakotas did not separate from the Teutonic family till long
after the latter separated from the South European family. The fact that
the Dak resembles the Icelandic and Gothic in vocabulary and in
structure much more than it resembles the older Latin, points in the
same direction. The laws of consonantal change in many cases produce the
same result as Grimm's law, but the laws themselves are entirely
different. It _is certain_, therefore, that the Dakota has not been
connected with the Teutonic since the development of Grimm's law made
any considerable progress. I have studied the question less, yet I think
I have enough evidence in the system of consonantal change _to prove_
that the Dakota has not been connected with the Slavonic or Lithuanian
since they separated from each other, or for some time previously. It is
possible so far as I can now say that the Dak may have borrowed material
from some language not I E, but I have found no evidence of it.
Undoubtedly the adoption of prisoners has introduced a considerable
percentage of Algonkin blood. It is also certain that they have adopted
some Chippewa religious observances, but even in these they do not
appear to have adopted any Chippewa words.