1This information was found in Land of the Spotted Eagle written by Luther Standing Bear, an Oglala (possibly Brulé) Sioux (1868-1939). I do not know how well it holds in the modern day. Polynesian cultures such as the Sāmoan people, are famous for lacking motherese.

2In his tale, Black Elk clarifies: "this was not a dream, it happened," (Niedhart 2008, 15)

3By 'W sound' I am referring to [ʊ].

4Ullrich comments that resulted from missionaries hearing as [õ] (Ullrich 2008, 695), but Manhart remarks is simply an alternate spelling of meant to distinguish words with from pronouns and the verbs úŋ to be, and úŋ to use, (Buechel & Manhart 1998, xiii).

5Some analyses of Lakota phonology classify b as phonemically /p/, and g as phonemically /k/, however, a very small set of words contain [b] that is not predictable. Rood and Taylor call /b/ 'marginally phonemic', (Rood and Taylor 1996, 443).

6Some of these sample languages actually have a velar fricative [x] in their standard dialects, but it sounds very much like the one in Lakota, which is a uvular fricative [χ].

7Some linguists consider s’, š’, and ȟ’ ejectives.

8White Hat Sr. notes that in slang, the vowels in ea and au (in words besides háu) can mix together (White Hat Sr. 1999, 13). His first example is philámayayephilámayea where the sound change rules given by Rood and Taylor (1996), would predict [philámajæ]. His second example is lila waštelilaušte, where we would expect [lila:ʃte].

9The only consonants that can end words in Lakota are l (most frequent), n (second most frequent), b, g, m, n, s, š, and ȟ (Rood and Taylor 1996, 446).

10The rule, given in Rood and Taylor (1996), is actually more complicated than this. According to his wording, he further claims:

aŋye/ahe/aŋhe become long 'ae' (as in 'bat')
become aŋaŋ
aŋwa/awaŋ/aŋwaŋ become oŋoŋ

11The fact that the diacritics used are somewhat similar to one another is, unfortunately, a drawback in some cases. For instance White Hat Sr. marks guttural consonants with overhead dots, but Manhart marks unaspirated consonants as such.

12Rood and Taylor claim, without supporting evidence, that a wedge easier to see than dot Rood and Taylor 1975, 7). I strongly object to this assumption. An argument in support of dots is that they require less space, thereby consuming less ink, and intuitively are easier and faster to draw consuming one stroke rather than two, especially if permitted to morph into an accent mark in handwriting.

© 2009-2011 SAIVUS. All Rights Reserved.
Last Updated: 04/29/2011