the white people have changed the Lakota language

[Deleted]

Thank you so much for your input gregor. I've no doubt that Eugene Buechel and those other men were well meaning, but I am sending you the same message that I sent to Henry Quick Bear Sr.

I think my best response would be to suggest that you read my post about how James Riley Walker wrote that George Sword attempted to explain the loss of the original language in the Stone Boy story. It seems to me that learning five hundred syllables would be much easier than learning the contents of the New Lakota Dictionary. It seems to me that George Sword was emphatic in trying to communicate that the written form of the language destroyed the spoken form. It is my belief that the only way to restore their language to the Lakota is through the use of those five hundred syllables that once comprised the spoken language.

Sword's version of "Stone Boy" in both old and modern forms
amertribes.proboards.com/thread/2597/swords-version-stone-modern-forms

What if Buechel and those others had not been so well meaning and had not CONSTRUCTED whole new words out of those original syllables, but instead, had been content to merely reproduce those basic syllables as being the ENTIRE LAKOTA LANGUAGE? You do see that, in their construction of words into existence and then teaching those written words to the young Lakota, that they destroyed the existing spoken language don't you?

[gregor]

Georg, thanks for the reply. I believe there is an error here. Buechel has not invented new words, but has written down the ones he has heard, partly even with his Lakota sources. While I am not a linguist, I think the Red Shirt text about Sword is more about the formal structure of the oral narration and its transmittance into a written text. As far as I know, the Lakota distinguished between everyday speech and ritual language (for example in war, ceremonies, and cures). Sword was an outstanding leader and healer, and he certainly served both languages. When Sword decided to write down culturally important myths and descriptions of ceremonies etc. for posterity, he certainly chose a formally ritual language. And I believe we agree that he has done this well with the limitations of the English Alphabet.

I do not know how to learn Lakota best. But surely no one expects to memorize a dictionary with thousands of terms. E.g., in general, the vocabulary of the German present speech is set to between 300,000 and 500,000 words - most Germans use max. 7.000 words only. And this with 26 letters and 4 mutated vowel.
But only learn 500 syllables? And then master a language? Certainly not! The combination of single or multiple syllables give surely thousands of words.

I know Delphine Red Shirt / Shaw's dissertation about Sword. In any case, I found it remarkable that, although she speaks Lakota fluently, she used both Buechel’s grammar and the Buechel Dictionary (in her own words and in her notes) while translating the Sword texts. Which is of course no disgrace.

In addition, we have to consider that language is also subject to Evolution. I certainly do not speak like my grandparents and they have certainly not spoken like their grandparents. Like that or not, culture and language changes with and in every generation.
In Germany, we have taken over a lot of Anglicism (single words but also in the area of grammar) in the last 50 years. What my parents and grandparents certainly did not like. I think that’s what happened to Sword. He had to adapt to a new time / culture and mourned the good old times. And WE will mourn the "good old time" too. Or?

Toksha, Gregor

[Deleted]

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

[Deleted]

Káŋ means anything that is old or that has existed for a long time or that should be accepted because it has been so in former times, or it may mean a strange or wonderful thing or that which can not be comprehended, or that which should not be questioned or it may mean a sacred or supernatural thing. Other words are used before or after the word káŋ to give it a particular meaning. The words that may be used before it are a-, wa-, wo-, ya-, and yu-. The words that may be used after it are -la and -pi. When the word a- is used before káŋ, it makes the word akáŋ. This means that the thing spoken of is káŋ. The word wa- means that something or someone is something or does something. When it is used before káŋ, it makes the word wakȟáŋ. This means that which is káŋ, or does káŋ; or one who is or does káŋ. If one says wa-ma-káŋ, this means what I do is káŋ. The younger Oglála do not understand this for they speak Lakȟóta iyápi in a new way. The word wo- is made of two words which are ma- and on-. On- means relative to or of that kind. If one should say on-káŋ or onkáŋ, this word means that the thing spoken of related to something káŋ. Onkáŋ is a good Lakȟóta word but the young people would not understand it. The old people would say wa-on-káŋ if they used all the words. But instead of saying wa-on-, they say wo- and when using this before káŋ they say wo-káŋ or wokáŋ. If an old Oglála were speaking of himself, he would say wo-ma-káŋ. This would mean that what I do is relative to káŋ. The word ya- means to change a thing or person and make it different from what it was before the change or a thing that has been made thus different. When one says ya-káŋ, it means that the thing spoken of has been made káŋ by changing it, or if one says ya-ma-káŋ, he means that he is changed so that he is now káŋ. If I now say ya-ma-káŋ, the young people laugh at me a say I talk foolish. They say ma-wakȟáŋ. When an old Oglála would say ya-wa-wičha-káŋ, the young people would say wičháša yawákȟaŋ. When one speaks Lakȟóta iyápi as it was spoken if former times, the young Lakȟóta do no understand it. The word yu- means nearly the same as ya-. Ya- means that a thing is caused by action done for the purpose of causing it, while yu- means that a thing is caused indirectly. If it is said that a thing is ya-káŋ, it is understood that action was done for the purpose of making it káŋ, but if it is said that it is yu-káŋ, it is understood that it became káŋ because of action for some other purpose. The word -la means a little like, but not exactly like. To say káŋ-la means that the thing spoken of is almost káŋ, or that it is a little like káŋ. Or it may mean that it is a little but not entirely káŋ. The word -pi means more than one or it may mean that which is done in a particular manner by many persons. Káŋ-pi means the things that are káŋ. Wačhí means a dance and wačhí-pi means dancing by a number of persons while wačhí-káŋ-pi means a dance that must be done by a number of persons and is káŋ. The young people say wačhípi wakȟáŋ, meaning a wačhí that is káŋ. In the ceremonies of the Oglála, the wa-wačhí-káŋ, or as the young people would say, the wičháša wakȟáŋ, which means a holy man, use these words a great deal and this is what they mean when the speak them. Káŋ is that which is established by custom and should not be changed, or it is something sacred that can not be comprehended. A-káŋ is that which is mysterious or supernatural. Wa-káŋ when relative to the a-káŋ is a God; when relative to mankind is a holy man or shaman; when relative to other things is sacred. Wo-káŋ is consecrated to the wa-káŋ or for ceremonial purposes. Ya-káŋ means to have supernatural potency. Yu-káŋ means that a thing or person is sacred while being or doing something.
-- George Sword

[Deleted]

akáŋ (noun) formed when the prefix a- is used before káŋ (sacred)
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) that which is spoken of is káŋ (sacred);
(3) that which is mysterious or supernatural;
(4) that which is spoken of is incomprehensible to the common ordinary person (ikčé wičháša) and can only be comprehended by an initiated person endowed with sacred spiritual power (wičháša wakȟáŋ or wíŋyaŋ wakȟáŋ)

onkáŋ (noun) formed when the prefix on- is used before káŋ (sacred)
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) the thing spoken of relates to something or someone káŋ (sacred);
(3) the old people would say wa-on-káŋ if they used all the words

wókaŋ (transitive verb) formed when the prefix wo- is used before káŋ (sacred)
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(1) something done or something used which relates to something or someone káŋ (sacred);
(2) something consecrated to the wakȟáŋ (the incomprehensible deities)
(3) something used for ceremonial purposes

wamákȟaŋ (transitive verb) formed when the prefix wa- and the prefix ma- are used before káŋ
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) something that somone does is something káŋ (sacred);
(3) if someone says wa-ma-káŋ, this means that “what I do is káŋ (sacred)”

wómakȟaŋ (transitive verb) formed when the prefix wo- and the prefix ma- are used before káŋ
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) something that someone does relates to something or someone káŋ (sacred)
(3) if someone says, wo-ma-káŋ, this mean that “what I do is relative to káŋ (sacred)”

yakȟáŋ (stative verb) formed when the prefix ya- is used before káŋ (sacred)
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) refers to something or someone having supernatural potency;
(3) someone spoken of has been changed into someone káŋ (sacred);
(4) something spoken of has been changed into something káŋ (sacred);
(5) if one says ya-káŋ, this means that “the thing spoken of has been made káŋ by changing it”
(6) if one says that a thing is ya-káŋ, it is understood that action was done for the purpose of making it káŋ (sacred)

yamákȟaŋ (stative verb) formed when the prefix ya- and the prefix ma- are used before káŋ
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) someone is changed by their own action to become káŋ (sacred);
(3) if someone says ya-ma-káŋ, this means that the person is changed so that they are now káŋ;
(4) the construction ya-ma-káŋ has been lost from the language and the expression now in use is ma-wakȟáŋ

yukȟáŋ (stative verb) formed when the prefix yu- is used before káŋ (sacred)
(1) considered lost from the language due to not being listed in NLD;
(2) something or someone is sacred while being or doing something;
(3) someone is changed by an outside influence to become káŋ (sacred);
(4) if one says that that a thing is yu-káŋ, it is understood that it became káŋ because of action for some other purpose