Dakota language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Dakota | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dakhótiyapi/Dakȟótiyapi | ||
| Pronunciation | [Daˈkʰotijapi]/[Daˈqˣotijapi] | |
| Spoken in | United States, with some speakers in Canada | |
| Region | Primarily North Dakota and South Dakota, but also northern Nebraska, southern Minnesota | |
| Total speakers | 1,000 | |
| Language family | Siouan-Catawban | |
| Language codes | ||
| ISO 639-1 | None | |
| ISO 639-2 | dak | |
| ISO 639-3 | dak | |
| Note: This page may contain IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode. | ||
Dakota (also Dakhota) is a Siouan language spoken by the Dakota people of the Sioux tribes. Dakota is closely related to and mutually intelligible with the Lakota language.
Contents |
[edit] Dialects
Dakota has two major dialects with two sub-dialects each (and minor variants, too):[1]
- Eastern Dakota (a.k.a. Santee-Sisseton or Dakhóta)
- Santee (Isáŋyáthi: Bdewákhatuŋwaŋ, Waȟpékhute)
- Sisseton (Sisítuŋwaŋ, Waȟpétuŋwaŋ)
- Western Dakota (a.k.a. Yankton-Yanktonai or Dakȟóta)
- Yankton (Iháŋktȟuŋwaŋ)
- Yanktonai (Iháŋktȟuŋwaŋna)
- Upper Yanktonai (Wičhíyena)
The two dialects differ phonologically, grammatically, and to a large extent, also lexically. They are mutually intelligible to a high extent, although Western Dakota is lexically closer to the Lakota language with which it has higher mutual intelligibility.
[edit] Writing systems
For a comparative table of the various writing systems conceived over time for the Sioux languages, cf. the specific section of the article Sioux language.
[edit] Sound system
[edit] Vowels
Dakota has five oral vowels, /a e i o u/, and three nasal vowels, /aŋ iŋ uŋ/.
| Front | Central | Back | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | oral | i | u | |
| nasal | iŋ | uŋ | ||
| mid | e | o | ||
| low | oral | a | ||
| nasal | aŋ | |||
[edit] Consonants
| Bilabial | Alveolar | Post-alveolar | Palatal | Velar | Uvular | Glottal | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasal | m [m] | n [n] | ||||||
| Plosive | unaspirated | p [p] | t [t] | č [tʃ] | k [k] | ’ [ʔ] | ||
| voiced | b [b] | d [d] | g [ɡ] | |||||
| aspirated | ph [pʰ] / pȟ [pˣ] | th [tʰ] / tȟ [tˣ] | čh [tʃʰ] | kh [kʰ] / kȟ [kˣ] | ||||
| ejective | p’ [pʔ] | t’ [tʔ] | č’ [tʃʔ] | k’ [kʔ] | ||||
| Fricative | voiceless | s [s] | š [ʃ] | ȟ [χ] | ||||
| voiced | z [z] | ž [ʒ] | ǧ [ʁ] | |||||
| ejective | s’ [sʔ] | š’ [ʃʔ] | ȟ’ [χʔ] | |||||
| Approximant | w [w] | y [j] | h [h] | |||||
[edit] Comparison of the dialects
[edit] Phonological differences
In respect to phonology Eastern and Western Dakota differ particularly in consonant clusters. The table below gives the possible consonant clusters and shows the differences between the dialects: [1]
| Dakota consonant clusters | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Santee Sisseton |
Yankton | Yanktonai | ||||||||
| b | ȟ | k | m | p | s | š | t | h | k[2] | g |
| bd | ȟč | kč | mn | pč | sč | šk | tk | hm | km | gm |
| ȟd | kp | ps | sk | šd | hn | kn | gn | |||
| ȟm | ks | pš | sd | šb | hd | kd | gd | |||
| ȟn | kš | pt | sm | šn | hb | kb | gb | |||
| ȟp | kt | sn | šp | |||||||
| ȟt | sp | št | ||||||||
| ȟb | st | šb | ||||||||
| sb | ||||||||||
The two dialects also differ in the diminutive suffix (-da in Santee, and -na in Yankton-Yanktonai and in Sisseton) and in a number of other phonetic issues that are harder to categorize. The following table gives examples of words that differ in their phonology.[1]
| Eastern Dakota | Western Dakota | gloss | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Santee | Sisseton | Yankton | Yanktonai | |
| hokšída | hokšína | hokšína | boy | |
| nína | nína | nína / dína[3] | very | |
| hdá | kdá | gdá | to go back[4] | |
| hbéza | kbéza | gbéza | ridged | |
| hnayáŋ | knayáŋ | gnayáŋ | to deceive | |
| hmúŋka | kmúŋka | gmúŋka | to trap | |
| ahdéškada | ahdéškana | akdéškana | agdéškana | lizzard |
[edit] Lexical differences
There are also numerous lexical differences between the two Dakota dialects as well as between the sub-dialects. Yankton-Yanktonai is in fact lexically closer to the Lakota language than it is to Santee-Sisseton. The following table gives some examples:[1]
| English gloss | Santee-Sisseton | Yankton-Yanktonai | Lakota | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northern Lakota | Southern Lakota | |||
| child | šičéča | wakȟáŋyeža | wakȟáŋyeža | |
| knee | hupáhu | čhaŋkpé | čhaŋkpé | |
| knife | isáŋ / mína | mína | míla | |
| kidneys | phakšíŋ | ažúŋtka | ažúŋtka | |
| hat | wapháha | wapȟóštaŋ | wapȟóštaŋ | |
| still | hináȟ | naháŋȟčiŋ | naháŋȟčiŋ | |
| man | wičhášta | wičháša | wičháša | |
| hungry | wótehda | dočhíŋ | ločhíŋ | |
| morning | haŋȟ’áŋna | híŋhaŋna | híŋhaŋna | híŋhaŋni |
| to shave | kasáŋ | kasáŋ | kasáŋ | glak’óǧa |
[edit] Grammatical differences
Yankton-Yanktonai has the same three ablaut grades as Lakota (a, e, iŋ)[5], while in Santee-Sisseton there are only two (a, e). This significantly impacts word forms, especially in fast speech and it is another reason why Yankton-Yanktonai has better mutual intelligibility with Lakota than with Santee-Sisseton.
Some examples:
| English gloss | to go [4] | I shall go | to go back [4] | he/she/it will go back |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| santee-sisseton | yá | bdé kte | hdá | hdé kte |
| yankton-yanktonai | yá | mníŋ kte | kdá/gdá | kníŋ/gníŋ kte |
| lakota | yá | mníŋ kte | glá | gníŋ kte |
There are other grammatical differences between the dialects.
[edit] References
- ^ a b c d Ullrich, Jan (2008). New Lakota Dictionary (Incorporating the Dakota Dialects of Yankton-Yanktonai and Santee-Sisseton). Lakota Language Consortium. ISBN 0-9761082-9-1.
- ^ many Yankton speakers pronounce le following clusters in the same way as the Yanktonai (Ullrich, p. 5).
- ^ in Upper Yanktonay
- ^ a b c more precisely: ‘he/she/it is going (back)’ (hence elsewhere).
- ^ which means that, in many words ending in -a (which are conventionally cited, in Ullrich’s dictionary (cf. pp. 699/700), with a capitalized final –A/Aŋ), the same -a turns into -e or into -iŋ when some circumstances occur (the word is the last in a sentence, or is modified by suffixes that trigger the ablaut, or, still, is followed by a word that triggers the ablaut, as well).
[edit] Bibliography
- DeMallie, Raymond J. (2001). Sioux until 1850. In R. J. DeMallie (Ed.), Handbook of North American Indians: Plains (Vol. 13, Part 2, pp. 718–760). W. C. Sturtevant (Gen. Ed.). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. ISBN 0-16-050400-7.
- Parks, Douglas R.; & Rankin, Robert L. (2001). The Siouan languages. In Handbook of North American Indians: Plains (Vol. 13, Part 1, pp. 94–114). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
- de Reuse, Willem J. (1987). One hundred years of Lakota linguistics (1887-1987). Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 12, 13-42. (Online version: https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/509).
- de Reuse, Willem J. (1990). A supplementary bibliography of Lakota languages and linguistics (1887-1990). Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 15 (2), 146-165. (Studies in Native American languages 6). (Online version: https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/441).
- Rood, David S.; & Taylor, Allan R. (1996). Sketch of Lakhota, a Siouan language. In Handbook of North American Indians: Languages (Vol. 17, pp. 440–482). Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution.
- Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.), 2005. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Fifteenth edition. Dallas, Tex.: SIL International. Online version: [1]
- Parks, D.R. & DeMallie, R.J. (1992). Sioux, Assiniboine, and Stoney Dialects: A Classification . Anthropological Linguistics vol. 34, nos. 1-4
- Riggs, S.R., & Dorsey, J.O. (Ed.). (1973). Dakota grammar, texts, and ethnography. Minneapolis: Ross & Haines, Inc.
- Shaw, P.A. (1980). Theoretical issues in Dakota phonology and morphology. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
- Ullrich, Jan. (2008). New Lakota Dictionary. & Incorporating the Dakota Dialects of Santee-Sisseton and Yankton-Yanktonai (Lakota Language Consortium). ISBN 0-9761082-9-1. on-line version
