_Zoque._ _Mixe._ _Zapotec._ _Mixtec._
Man, puen, yai-tohk, beni niguio, yee.
Woman, yoma, toix, beni gonaa, ñahadzehe.
Sun, hama, xeuh, { chii,
{ gobiche.
Moon, poya, xapa, xona xibeo.
Fire, hucata, xöön, guii.
Water, na, noo, niza.
Head, copac, cobaac, icqui, dzini.
Eye, vitem, huin, bizaloo, tenu.
Ear, tatzec, tatzc, tiaga, tutnu, dzoho.
Mouth, angnaca, au, rua, rohua, yuhu.
Nose, quina, höp, xii, dzitui.
Tongue, totz, yen, luuchi, yaa.
Tooth, tetz, tötz, chitalaaga, noho.
Hand, tzamguica, cöö, naa, daha.
Foot, manguica, teic, nii.
House, töc, tenk, yuu, lichi, huahi.
1, tuma, tuuc, tubi, ek.
2, metza, metzc, tiopa, uvui.
3, tucay, tucoc, chona, uni.
4, macscuy, mactaxc, tapa, kmi.
5, mosay, mocoxc, guayo, hoho.
In the above vocabularies the relation of the Zoque to the Mixe is more
clearly shown than that of the Zapotec to the Mixtec. A more extended
comparison of the two latter has been instituted by Pimentel in his work
on the languages of Mexico, which appears to strengthen the belief that
they belong to the same stock. Prof. Friedrich Müller, however, continues
to regard them as separate stocks (_Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_,
Bd. II., Ab. I., s. 298, sq.). The question is discussed with fullness
in the introduction, by Dr. Nicholas Leon, to the _Arte del Idioma
Zapoteco_, of Juan de Cordova (ed. Morelia, 1886), to which the student
is referred. I think the evidence is sufficient to regard them as allied
idioms. The Zapotec of the mountains, _Zapoteco serrano_, differs
considerably from that which is given above.