Page:IJAL vol 1.djvu/279

 NO. 4

��HAS TLINGIT A GENETIC RELATION TO ATHAPASCAN

��271

��mon objects, that it was possible for Tlingit to be supplied with one set, and all the many Athapascan languages with the other, totally different set.

3. That the Tlingit have a creative genius for language-formation which, since they sepa- rated from the Athapascan peoples, has led them to replace all the older forms with newly- created ones.

It must be conceded that the linguistic uni- verse might have been so ordered that any one or all of these three things might have happen- ed. In particular, there seems to be no evident reason why words should not be created con- stantly in any language. However, modern linguistic study is based on a belief in phonetic laws which produce uniform results under identical conditions. The one recognized method of establishing genetic relationship is to point out the uniform changes which in the course of time have caused the separation of a uniform linguistic area into dialects and related lan- guages. This method of establishing genetic relationship has failed in several instances to produce a definite conviction that relationship really exists. Critics are urged to accept the results on the plea that the particular problems are too difficult to be solved by this method. The question then presents itself whether we shall retain the old definition of a linguistic stock as a group of languages whose genetic

��relationship has been established by showing that they have diverged as a result of uniform phonetic change, or whether we shall form a new definition. A linguistic stock, such as the proposed Na-dene, consists of a group of lan- guages called Athapascan which have become divergent as a result of phonetic change, and of two other languages which contain a few words and elements resembling similar ones in the first group.

For one, I contend that the present defini- tion should be kept. " Athapascan " is an exceedingly useful designation of a definite group. If the name " Na-dene '' is to be esta- blished, may we not have also a new generic term to be applied to such groups of a linguist- ic stock plus others ?

When once we have concluded that Tlingit and Athapascan are either unrelated, or so remotely related as to have left no clearly per- ceptible evidence of the relationship, a new and interesting problem will present itself. When two peoples either linguistically unrelated or very remotely related come into prolonged contact, to what extent do their languages become assimilated, phonetically, morphologi- cally, and lexically ?

That the various correspondences pointed out in this paper and by Dr. Sapir are the result of such acculturating influence, I have little doubt.

��i. 2.

>

4-

��COMPARATIVE VOCABULARY '

��NOUNS

��TLINGIT. 'd a lake

'at' father's sister 'as tree

'an town

��i. The abbreviations used in the vocabularies to indi- cate the dialect from which the examples are taken are

��ATHAPASCAN

mank lake H

at older sister, father's sister K

k\n tree H

kai village Ten'a.

the following: B, Beaver j CC, Chasta Costa ; Chip, Qhi; i; H, Hupa; K, Kato ; Nav, Navajo; T, Tolowa.

�� �