It is considered desirable to indicate some points to which for
special reasons the attention of collaborators for the future
publication on the general subject of sign language may be invited.
These now follow:
_INVENTION OF NEW SIGNS._
It is probable that signs will often be invented by individual Indians
who may be pressed for them by collectors to express certain ideas,
which signs of course form no part of any current language; but while
that fact should, if possible, be ascertained and reported, the signs
so invented are not valueless merely because they are original and not
traditional, if they are made in good faith and in accordance with the
principles of sign formation. Less error will arise in this direction
than from the misinterpretation of the idea intended to be conveyed by
spontaneous signs. The process resembles the coining of new words to
which the higher languages owe their copiousness. It is observed in
the signs invented by Indians for each new product of civilization
brought to their notice.
An interesting instance is in the sign for _steamboat_, made at the
request of the writer by White Man (who, however, did not like that
sobriquet and announced his intention to change his name to Lean
Bear), an Apache, in June, 1880, who had a few days before seen a
steamboat for the first time. After thinking a moment he gave an
original sign, described as follows:
Make the sign for _water_, by placing the flat right hand before the
face, pointing upward and forward, the back forward, with the wrist as
high as the nose; then draw it down and inward toward the chin; then
with both hands indicate the outlines of a horizontal oval figure
from before the body back to near the chest (being the outline of the
deck); then place both flat hands, pointing forward, thumbs
higher than the outer edges, and push them forward to arms'-length
(illustrating the powerful forward motion of the vessel).
An original sign for _telegraph_ is given in NATCI'S NARRATIVE,
_infra_.
An Indian skilled in signs, as also a deaf-mute, at the sight of a
new object, or at the first experience of some new feeling or mental
relation, will devise some mode of expressing it in pantomimic gesture
or by a combination of previously understood signs, which will be
intelligible to others, similarly skilled, provided that they have
seen the same objects or have felt the same emotions. But if a number
of such Indians or deaf-mutes were to see an object--for instance an
elephant--for the first time, each would perhaps hit upon a different
sign, in accordance with the characteristic appearance most striking
to him. That animal's trunk is generally the most attractive lineament
to deaf-mutes, who make a sign by pointing to the nose and moving the
arm as the trunk is moved. Others regard the long tusks as the most
significant feature, while others are struck by the large head and
small eyes. This diversity of conception brings to mind the poem of
"The Blind Men and the Elephant," which with true philosophy in an
amusing guise explains how the sense of touch led the "six men of
Indostan" severally to liken the animal to a wall, spear, snake,
tree, fan, and rope. A consideration of invented or original signs,
as showing the operation of the mind of an Indian or other uncivilized
gesturer, has a psychologic interest, and as connected with the vocal
expression, often also invented at the same time, has further value.
_DANGER OF SYMBOLIC INTERPRETATION._
In the examination of sign language it is important to form a clear
distinction between signs proper and symbols. The terms signs
and symbols are often used interchangeably, but with liability to
misconstruction, as many persons, whether with right or wrong lexical
definition, ascribe to symbols an occult and mystic signification. All
characters in Indian picture-writing have been loosely styled symbols,
and, as there is no logical distinction, between the characters
impressed with enduring form and when merely outlined in the ambient
air, all Indian gestures, motions, and attitudes might with equal
appropriateness be called symbolic. While, however, all symbols
come under the generic head of signs, very few signs are in accurate
classification symbols. S.T. Coleridge has defined a symbol to be a
sign included in the idea it represents. This may be intelligible if
it is intended that an ordinary sign is extraneous to the concept
and, rather than suggested by it, is invented to express it by some
representation or analogy, while a symbol may be evolved by a process
of thought from the concept itself; but it is no very exhaustive or
practically useful distinction. Symbols are less obvious and more
artificial than mere signs, require convention, are not only abstract,
but metaphysical, and often need explanation from history, religion,
and customs. They do not depict but suggest subjects; do not speak
directly through the eye to the intelligence, but presuppose in the
mind knowledge of an event or fact which the sign recalls. The
symbols of the ark, dove, olive branch, and rainbow would be wholly
meaningless to people unfamiliar with the Mosaic or some similar
cosmology, as would be the cross and the crescent to those ignorant
of history. The last named objects appeared in the class of _emblems_
when used in designating the conflicting powers of Christendom and
Islamism. Emblems do not necessarily require any analogy between the
objects representing, and the objects or qualities represented, but
may arise from pure accident. After a scurrilous jest the beggar's
wallet became the emblem of the confederated nobles, the Gueux of
the Netherlands; and a sling, in the early minority of Louis XIV,
was adopted from the refrain of a song by the Frondeur opponents of
Mazarin. The portraiture of a fish, used, especially by the early
Christians, for the name and title of Jesus Christ was still
more accidental, being, in the Greek word [Greek: ichthus], an
acrostic composed of the initials of the several Greek words
signifying that name and title. This origin being unknown to persons
whose religious enthusiasm was as usual in direct proportion to their
ignorance, they expended much rhetoric to prove that there was some
true symbolic relation between an actual fish and the Saviour of men.
Apart from this misapplication, the fish undoubtedly became an emblem
of Christ and of Christianity, appearing frequently on the Roman
catacombs and at one time it was used hermeneutically.
The several tribal signs for the Sioux, Arapahos, Cheyennes, &c.,
are their emblems precisely as the star-spangled flag is that of the
United States, but there is nothing symbolic in any of them. So the
signs for individual chiefs, when not merely translations of their
names, are emblematic of their family totems or personal distinctions,
and are no more symbols than are the distinctive shoulder-straps of
army officers. The _crux ansata_ and the circle formed by a snake
biting its tail are symbols, but _consensus_ as well as invention
was necessary for their establishment, and the Indians have produced
nothing so esoteric, nothing which they intended for hermeneutic as
distinct from descriptive or mnemonic purposes. Sign language can
undoubtedly be and is employed to express highly metaphysical ideas,
but to do that in a symbolic system requires a development of the
mode of expression consequent upon a similar development of the mental
idiocrasy of the gesturers far beyond any yet found among historic
tribes north of Mexico. A very few of their signs may at first appear
to be symbolic, yet even those on closer examination will probably be
relegated to the class of emblems.
The point urged is that while many signs can be used as emblems and
both can be converted by convention into symbols or be explained as
such by perverted ingenuity, it is futile to seek for that form of
psychologic exuberance in the stage of development attained by the
tribes now under consideration. All predetermination to interpret
either their signs or their pictographs on the principles of symbolism
as understood or pretended to be understood by its admirers, and
as are sometimes properly applied to Egyptian hieroglyphs, results
in mooning mysticism. This was shown by a correspondent who
enthusiastically lauded the _Dakota Calendar_ (edited by the present
writer, and which is a mere figuration of successive occurrences in
the history of the people), as a numerical exposition of the great
doctrines of the Sun religion in the equations of time, and proved to
his own satisfaction that our Indians preserved hermeneutically the
lost geometric cultus of pre-Cushite scientists.
Another exhibition of this vicious practice was recently made in the
interpretation of an inscribed stone alleged to have been unearthed
near Zanesville, Ohio. Two of the characters were supposed, in liberal
exercise of the imagination, to represent the [Greek letter: Alpha]
and [Greek letter: Omega] of the Greek alphabet. At the comparatively
late date when the arbitrary arrangement of the letters of that
alphabet had become fixed, the initial and concluding letters might
readily have been used to represent respectively the beginning and the
end of any series or number of things, and this figure of speech was
employed in the book of Revelations. In the attempted interpretation
of the inscription mentioned, which was hawked about to many scientific
bodies, and published over the whole country, the supposed alpha
and omega were assumed to constitute a universal as well as sacred
symbol for the everlasting Creator. The usual _menu_ of Roman feasts,
commencing with eggs and ending with apples, was also commonly known
at the time when the book of Revelations was written, and the phrase
"_ab ovo usque ad mala_" was as appropriate as "from alpha to omega" to
express "from the beginning to the end." In deciphering the stone it
would, therefore, be as correct in principle to take one of its oval
and one of its round figures, call them egg and apple, and make them
the symbols of eternity. In fact, not depending wholly for significance
upon the order of courses of a feast or the accident of alphabetical
position, but having intrinsic characteristics in reference to the
origin and fruition of life, the egg and apple translation, would
be more acceptable to the general judgment, and it is recommended to
enthusiasts who insist on finding symbols where none exist.
_SIGNS USED BY WOMEN AND CHILDREN._
For reasons before given it is important to ascertain the varying
extent of familiarity with sign language among the members of the
several tribes, how large a proportion possesses any skill in it, and
the average amount of their vocabulary. It is also of special interest
to learn the degree to which women become proficient, and the age
at which children commence its practice; also whether they receive
systematic instruction in it. The statement was made by Titchkematski
that the Kaiowa and Comanche women know nothing of sign language,
while the Cheyenne women are versed in it. As he is a Cheyenne,
however, he may not have a large circle of feminine acquaintances
beyond his own tribe, and his negative testimony is not valuable. Rev.
A.J. Holt, from large experience, asserts that the Kaiowa and Comanche
women do know and practice sign language, though the Cheyenne either
are more familiar with it than the Kaiowa or have a greater degree
of expertness. The Comanche women, he says, are the peers of any
sign-talkers. Colonel Dodge makes the broad assertion that even among
the Plains tribes only the old, or at least middle-aged, men use signs
properly, and that he has not seen any women or even young men who
were at all reliable in signs. He gives this statement to show the
difficulty in acquiring sign language; but it is questionable if the
fact is not simply the result of the rapid disuse of signs, in many
tribes, by which, cause women, not so frequently called upon to employ
them, and the younger generation, who have had no necessity to learn
them, do not become expert. Disappearing Mist, as before mentioned,
remembers a time when the Iroquois women and children used signs more
than the men.
It is also asserted, with some evidence, that the signs used by males
and females are different, though mutually understood, and some
minor points for observation may be indicated, such as whether the
commencement of counting upon the fingers is upon those of the right
or the left hand, and whether Indians take pains to look toward the
south when suggesting the course of the sun, which would give the
motion from left to right.
* * * * *
A suggestion has been made by a correspondent that some secret signs
of affiliation are known and used by the members of the several
associations, religious and totemic, which have been often noticed
among several Indian tribes. No evidence of this has been received,
but the point is worth attention.
_POSITIVE SIGNS RENDERED NEGATIVE._
In many cases positive signs to convey some particular idea are not
reported, and in their place a sign with the opposite signification
is given, coupled with the sign of negation. In other words, the only
mode of expressing the intended meaning is supposed to be by negation
of the reverse of what it is desired to describe. In this manner
"fool--no," would be "wise," and "good--no," would be "bad." This mode
of expression is very frequent as a matter of option when the positive
signs are in fact also used. The reported absence of positive signs
for the ideas negatived is therefore often made with as little
propriety as if when an ordinary speaker chose to use the negative
form "not good," it should be inferred that he was ignorant of the
word "bad." It will seldom prove, on proper investigation, that where
sign language has reached and retained any high degree of development
it will show such poverty as to require the expedient of negation of
an affirmative to express an idea which is intrinsically positive.
_DETAILS OF POSITIONS OF FINGERS._
The signs of the Indians appear to consist of motions more often
than of positions--a fact enhancing the difficulty both of their
description and illustration--and the motions when not designedly
abbreviated are generally large, free, and striking, seldom minute.
It seems also to be the general rule among Indians as among deaf-mutes
that the point of the finger is used to trace outlines and the palm
of the hand to describe surfaces. From an examination of the identical
signs made to each other for the same object by Indians of the same
tribe and band, they appear to make many gestures with little regard
to the position of the fingers and to vary in such arrangement from
individual taste. Some of the elaborate descriptions, giving with
great detail the attitude of the fingers of any particular gesturer
and the inches traced by his motions, are of as little necessity as
would be, when quoting a written word, a careful reproduction of the
flourishes of tailed letters and the thickness of down-strokes in
individual chirography. The fingers must be in _some_ position, but
that is frequently accidental, not contributing to the general and
essential effect. An example may be given in the sign for _white man_
which Medicine Bull, _infra_, page 491, made by drawing the palmar
surface of the extended index across the forehead, and in LEAN WOLF'S
COMPLAINT, _infra_, page 526, the same motion is made by the back of
the thumb pressed upon the middle joint of the index, fist closed. The
execution as well as the conception in both cases was the indication
of the line of the hat on the forehead, and the position of the
fingers in forming the line is altogether immaterial. There is often
also a custom or "fashion" in which not only different tribes, but
different persons in the same tribe, gesture the same sign with
different degrees of beauty, for there is calligraphy in sign
language, though no recognized orthography. It is nevertheless better
to describe and illustrate with unnecessary minuteness than to fail
in reporting a real distinction. There are, also, in fact, many
signs formed by mere positions of the fingers, some of which are
abbreviations, but in others the arrangement of the fingers in itself
forms a picture. An instance of the latter is one of the signs given
for the _bear_, viz.: Middle and third finger of right hand clasped
down by the thumb, fore and little finger extended crooked downward.
See EXTRACTS FROM DICTIONARY, _infra_. This reproduction, of the
animals peculiar claws, with the hand and in any position relative
to the body, would suffice without the pantomime of scratching in the
air, which is added only if the sign without it should not be at once
comprehended.
_MOTIONS RELATIVE TO PARTS OF THE BODY._
[Illustration: Fig. 233.]
The specified relation of the positions and motions of the hands
to different parts of the body is essential to the formation and
description of many signs. Those for _speak_, _hear_, and _see_,
which must be respectively made relative to the mouth, ear and eye,
are manifest examples; and there are others less obviously dependent
upon parts of the body, such as the heart or head, which would not
be intelligible without apposition. There are also some directly
connected with height from the ground and other points of reference.
In, however, a large proportion of the signs noted the position of
the hands with reference to the body can be varied or disregarded.
The hands making the motions can be held high or low, as the gesturer
is standing or sitting, or the person addressed is distant or near
by. These variations have been partly discussed under the head of
abbreviations. While descriptions made with great particularity are
cumbrous, it is desirable to give the full detail of that gesture
which most clearly carries out the generic conception, with, if
possible, also the description of such deviations and abbreviations
as are most confusing. For instance, it is well to explain that signs
for yes and no, described with precise detail as in EXTRACTS FROM
DICTIONARY, _infra_, are also often made by an Indian when wrapped
in his blanket with only a forefinger protruding, the former by a
mere downward and the latter by a simple outward bend of that finger.
An example may be also taken from the following sign for _lie,
falsehood_, made by an Ankara, Fig. 233. in which the separated index
and second fingers are moved sidewise in a downward line near but
below the mouth, which may be compared with other executions of the
motion with the same position of the fingers directly forward from the
mouth, and with that given in LEAN WOLF'S COMPLAINT, illustrated on
page 528, in which the motion is made carelessly across the body.
The original sign was undoubtedly made directly from the mouth, the
conception being "two tongues," two accounts or opposed statements,
one of which must be false, but the finger-position coming to be
established for two tongues has relation to the original conception
whether or not made near or in reference to the mouth, the latter
being understood.
It will thus be seen that sometimes the position of the fingers
is material as forming or suggesting a figure without reference to
motion, while in other cases the relative position of the hands
to each other and to parts of the body are significant without any
special arrangement of the fingers. Again, in others, the lines drawn
in the air by the hand or hands execute the conception without further
detail. In each case only the essential details, when they can be
ascertained, should be minutely described.
_SUGGESTIONS FOR COLLECTING SIGNS._
The object always should be, not to translate from English into signs,
but to ascertain the real signs and their meaning. By far the most
satisfactory mode of obtaining this result is to induce Indians or
other gesturers observed to tell stories, make speeches, or hold talks
in gesture, with one of themselves as interpreter in his own oral
language if the latter is understood by the observer, and, if not,
the words, not the signs, should be translated by an intermediary
linguistic interpreter. It will be easy afterward to dissect and
separate the particular signs used. This mode will determine the
genuine shade of meaning of each sign, and corresponds with the plan
now adopted by the Bureau of Ethnology for the study of the tribal
vocal languages, instead of that arising out of exclusively missionary
purposes, which was to force a translation of the Bible from a tongue
not adapted to its terms and ideas, and then to compile a grammar and
dictionary from the artificial result. A little ingenuity will direct
the more intelligent or complaisant gesturers to the expression of
the thoughts, signs for which are specially sought; and full orderly
descriptions of such tales and talks with or even without analysis and
illustration are more desired than any other form of contribution.
The original authorities, or the best evidence, for Indian
signs--i.e., the Indians themselves--being still accessible, the
collaborators in this work should not be content with secondary
authority. White sign talkers and interpreters may give some genuine
signs, but they are very apt to interpolate their own improvements.
Experience has led to the apparently paradoxical judgment that the
direct contribution of signs purporting to be those of Indians, made
by a habitual practitioner of signs who is not an Indian, is less
valuable than that of a discriminating observer who is not himself
an actor in gesture speech. The former, being to himself the best
authority, unwittingly invents and modifies signs, or describes what
he thinks they ought to be, often with a very different conception
from that of an Indian. Sign language not being fixed and limited, as
is the case with oral languages, expertness in it is not necessarily
a proof of accuracy in anyone of its forms. The proper inquiry is not
what a sign might, could, would, or should be, or what is the best
sign for a particular meaning, but what is any sign actually used
for such meaning. If any one sign is honestly invented or adopted by
any one man, whether Indian, African, Asiatic, or deaf-mute, it has
its value, but it should be identified to be in accordance with the
fact and should not be subject to the suspicion that it has been
assimilated or garbled in interpretation. Its prevalence and special
range present considerations of different interest and requiring
further evidence.
The genuine signs alone should be presented to scholars, to give
their studies proper direction, while the true article can always be
adulterated into a composite jargon by those whose ambition is only to
be sign talkers instead of making an honest contribution to ethnologic
and philologic science. The few direct contributions of interpreters
to the present work are, it is believed, valuable, because they were
made without expression of self-conceit or symptom of possession by a
pet theory.