II. abilg 4. edoóche 3. amea (Peabody)
12.{epulch 12. aredóche 13. mee
{epailche
4. epalch 6. idó 17. mee
10. ipal 8. ido 11. mi (Gilbert)
11. ipā´l (Gilbert) 5. hidoö´s 19. mi
21. ipä´l 9. hidhó (hi¢ó) 21. mĭ´
20. ipáll 7. meet’dho 10. mie
8. ipala 13. medok 18. mĭh
2. pala 20. edháw 11. mĭnh (Renshawe)
6. ipaylya 11. yâ (Gilbert) 1. míi
I. hapara 19. yâ 24. emil
18. hipä´l 21. yâ´ 15. emil-yepiyen
5. hipálsh 11. yō (Renshawe) 4. emésh
9. hipälý 2. yo 8. eme-culepe
13. mepal 18. yoh 23. emepah
7. meepahlya, hípala 1. yóo 12. emetch-slip aslap-yah
IV. mabela 10. yoo 20. eme-guzlapa-zl´áp
15. anapalch 17. yeow 16. emmee
24. anapalch 16. eow (ow long) 6. ime
14. anepáilkh 23. eau 3. imi-coushu
16. anpatl 14. iyao 14. i-mil
17. ẖenapail 3. iyahui 9. himé
23. neẖapal 15. iyáou 5. himís
3. inyapatch 24. iyaou 7. meemee
1. yupáu 11. foea 2.{nanyo
{nanû (White)
11. yupäl (Renshawe) I. hastaá I. ma-nyakkoyan (cf.
ma-nyak, “leg”)
IV. agannapa (cf. “leg”,
“hand”)
After a careful examination of the collated lists of names purporting
to signify “tongue” in the Serian and Yuman languages it will be seen
that the relationship conjectured to exist between the two groups
is fortuitous or coincidental rather than real. The guttural rough
breathing χ preceding the _l_ sound in M Pinart’s record, and indicated
by an apostrophe in Mr Bartlett’s spelling and by an _s_ in Professor
McGee’s orthography, is clearly wanting in all the Yuman terms cited.
Were there linguistic relationship between the two groups of terms
here compared it would seem that this sound should find a place in one
or another of the long list of Yuman terms, notably divergent among
themselves. It is possible, if not probable, that the final _l_, _la_,
or _ra_ of the Yuman terms is not a part of the stem; but this would
not affect the want of accordance noted above.
An analytic investigation of the comparative list of vocables
purporting to signify “tooth” in the Serian and the Yuman languages
discloses no evidence of genetic relationship between them. Those who
classify the Serian speech as a dialect of the Yuman cite the Yuman
_ido_, _hidhó_ (the _eh-doh_ of Lieutenant Bergland), signifying
“tooth”, as one of the vocables indicating a genetic relationship
between the two groups of languages. The comparison is made between
the _ido_, _hidhó_, and _eh-doh_ cited above and the close variants of
the Serian _ata`st_. An inspection of the comparative list of names
for “tooth” shows that this particular Yuman form is confined to the
Mohave, Maricopa, and Kutchan dialects (for the _M’mat_, which also
employs this term, is nearly identical with the Kutchan), and that the
remainder of the Yuman list of dialects has, with a single exception,
an entirely different word; this exception being the Cochimi, which
independently has another. The Yuman group, then, has three radically
different words purporting to signify “tooth”.
The Serian vocable for “tooth” is a compound term, being composed of
elements denoting “mouth” and “stone”. In the Seri word-collection
of Professor McGee _attě´nn_ signifies “mouth”; _atta-moχ_, “lower
lip”, possibly “down about the mouth”; _attahk_, “saliva” (“water of
the mouth”); _attahkt_, “the chin”; _takōps_, “upper lip”; _attěms_,
“beard”; _ata`st_, “tooth”; and _a`st_, “rock, stone”. Mr Bartlett,
in his vocabulary, recorded _îten_, “mouth”; _ita-mocken_, “beard”;
and _hast_, “stone”. M Pinart, in his Seri word list, wrote _hiten_,
“mouth”; _hita-mokken_, “beard”; and _hast_, “stone”. Lastly, Sr
Tenochio wrote _iten_, “mouth”, and _ahste_, “stone”, in _ahsteka_
“large, high stone, rock”. Sr Tenochio also recorded _obeke_, “hair,
down (pelo)”. One of the peculiarities of the sounds represented
by the letters _m_ and _b_ is that in many instances they grade
one into the other. There is here, seemingly, a case in point. The
_moχ_ of Professor McGee, the _mocken_ of Mr Bartlett, the _mokken_
of M. Pinart, and the _obeke_ of Sr Tenochio appear to be cognates.
Substituting _m_ for the _b_ in _obeke_, _omeke_ results, which is
approximately the _moχ_, _mocken_, _mokken_ cited above. Hence,
_hita-mokken_ and its congeners, it seems, signify “down of the mouth”.
In _attahk_, “saliva”, the element combining with _attě_ (for it is
plain that the final _-n_ is dropped in compounding) is _`ahk_ or
_`akh_, “water”, so that this compound signifies, literally, “water of
the mouth”. These analyses show that _attě´nn_, _iten_, and _hiten_,
dropping the final _n_-sound, unite with other elements in the form
_attě_, _ite_, and _hite_, respectively. Now, these, in combination
with _a`st_ or _ast_, “stone”, become, respectively, _atta`st_,
_itast_, and _hitast_, the forms of the word for “tooth” recorded by
Professor McGee, Mr Bartlett, and M Pinart, in the order given. The
Seri name for “tooth” signifies, then, literally “stone of the mouth”
or “stones of the mouth”. This analysis demonstrates the lack of
relationship between the Serian and Yuman names for tooth.
The comparative schedules of names for “foot” in the Serian and the
Yuman languages show no accordances of a phonetic character tending to
show any genetic relationship between the two groups compared.