- This topic has 5 voices and 14 replies.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #1304
I just read a bit where this word Chalaqui, Creek ( Muskogee?) is a term used for non Muskogean speakers, an early term for Cherokee!
All Others were called Cherokee by the Creeks who could not speak Creek including eastern Souians!
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12842Tom, where did you find this? What’s the source?
Thats interesting.
thanks
vance
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12860Hey Vance it is in a book called catawba Indians of Sc, people along the river ‘ or something close to that by Brown. A very interesting book!
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12870Yes, Tom, that does sound interesting. Thank you!:) Lynella.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12898Here’s a hint of some research that is being done by people who have published through Harvard!
“Sisspaha”; – SIsspahaw;-
Sixsapahaw- Sixsapaha;-
Cherokee Ani indiactes clan as a prefix.
Sixsapahaw speaker to Cherokee, Sixsapaha(w)”ANI”
English/ British -American
Sixsapah-ani; Sipaha-ani; Sipahani; Sapa-ni;
SAPONI!
I wonder where the Blackfoot went too!
This is a theory and it still needs to be nailed down!
Look for names that are core Blackfoot and later they become core Saponi!
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12924Thanks Tom.
Tom,
Ani is prefix tho, not a suffix, and I believe it was used to denote any people of any tribe or nation, even Caucasian Nations, and not just clan afiliation, altho it was used for this as well. The “Ani” in Cherokee goes before the word, not after it. Thus the “Ani-Yunwiya”, the Cherokee word for “Cherokee”, meanin the principle people, I believe.
vance
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12932Vance,
Hey, I didn’t know that.:) Thank you! You have so much to teach me!;) Love & Light, Lynella
Tom,
This does sound like something I want to look at though. I haven’t gotten a chance yet, but I will get to it.:) Thank you again! Love & Light to you Too, Lynella.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12947Hey Vance yes they know how that ani is applied and they had mentioned that is a SApona was talking they might use it aas a suffix rather than as a prefix, just thier theory!
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12949Tom and others:
I have been exploring a possible connection of mine, a Rev. Richard Sankey and his father-in-law, Rev. John Thomson. Both were Presbyterian Scotch-Irish who preached in places of the Tutelo, Sankey in PA and middle VA and Thomson in the same places but also Mecklenberg County. Anyway, while surfing, I stumbled across a description of Frank Specht’s papers at http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/s/speck.pdf If you read this description, it states that they include a comparison of Tutelo and Cherokee.
Techteach
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #12953You guys, this is cool!:)
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #13141I had sked a friend about this and he tells me it’s a Cherokee word that the Creeks use, after hearing the Cherokee people use it they termed everyone this after wards.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #13167Tom,
Interesting. So, were they trying to say “Cherokee” but couldn’t pronounce it the way whites did? Then they just figured it was a good catch all? Lynella.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #13255Well I don’t know what their method of pronounciation was, but Creek and Cherokee are to different language families and so things are adapted like French to English etc.
The etymology is what interestes me when it comes to language and word history.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #13272I don’t know everything, but “An’I”, as pronounced (AHn’ ‘ee) by several language groups, specifically Iroquois and Algonquin speakers, literally translates in both language groups as “I am”, as in “I belong to” or “I am from”. Refer to Cheyenne AND Cherokee. In Algonquin, the prefix is shortened to “A’ ” (“AH”) or “An’ Shee’in” by Cheyenne (the “n” is barely aspirated).
This is one of those “add-on’s” that form the basis of linguists’ attempts to identify and relate (or “unite”) different language groups based on the theory that all human populations share the same origin, therefore, share some basic linguistic building blocks in common. This is as subjective as many other origin hypotheses but bears some additional study and attention.
January 4, 2005 at 11:22 pm #13303Bill,
Thank you for sharing that with us. I’d say you know quite a bit of stuff!;) Love & Light, Lynella.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
