A LORD'S PRAYER IN WAMPANOAG?

Transcription

1 239 A LORD'S PRAYER IN WAMPANOAG? George Aubin Assumption College Introduction At the 1981 Algonquian Conference, Gordon Day was kind enough to give me a copy of a tape that he had recorded in 1961 as part of his work on the Dartmouth College Indian Language Project. This tape contains a short interview with Chief Wild Horse (Clinton Haines), who claimed to be the last speaker of Wampanoag, and, because of this, merits some attention by Algonquianists interested in New England. Tape The tape can be conveniently divided into four sections. First, there are some introductory comments by Gordon Day, who informs us that Chief Wild Horse was a past Medicine Man and Chief of the Mashpee division of the Wampanoag tribe, had been a Sagamore of the New England Federation of American Indians, and, at the time of the taping, was a representative of the League of North American Indians and a trustee of the Indian Council of that league. Following these comments, Chief Wild Horse recites the Lord's Prayer in Wampanoag (see A, below). He then repeats four phrases from the Lord's Prayer and adds a new one, giving each phrase in Wampanoag and in English (see B, below). Finally, he gives a number of expressions in Wampanoag, each with an English translation (see C, below). Some comments on my transcription of the Wampanoag material are in order. Since my primary aim is to give an overall picture of the Wampanoag sections of the tape, the transcription used is a rather broad one, with some phonetic details intentionally omitted. Although every attempt short of machine analysis was made to ensure accuracy, there is the very real possibility that I may have erred in a number of places. I found it extremely difficult at times, for example, to distinguish among [t], fk], and [?]. I also expected to find a distinction between long and short vowels, but could detect only differences in vowel quality, not in vowel quantity. Further, the word divisions indicated are somewhat arbitrary, corresponding to what I perceived to be pauses on the tape. The same caveat applies to my indications of

2 240 George Aubin stress, with an acute accent indicating what appeared to me to be the stressed syllable. The three Wampanoag sections of the tape, described above, are as follows: A. nin ka nun nfgak.it k>cm jt xmic k jwfsjwjrjk ka? kanaen tamuwak nfn a nfnani kfsakat ka okid kokasi sakoki patekwanag aekwd ckname acinic. nig noli.) pasag nuna marjtakahonan ka sekuseg kampagm nfnm kwaciwanit pakwa w.iff mxcitad nin ka nun...nin ka nusan kisakwad kocinatx in if kawisawank 'we appeal to the Great Spirit of the forest and the four winds to protect us' ka?kanxn tamuwag nfnani kfsakad 'we depend upon the Great Spirit to lead and guide us always' kokasf sakoki patekwansg 'the forest and the rivers you have given us' na macasi jnaenanes ni wacanin njw.i 'the flowers and the forest are in prayer' pakwa woci mccitad 'we are thankful for the gifts of the forest' nin nit amp mccitad naputumat pamatimu 'I am your friend until death' nin namisu awi?ametm 'my beloved brother' nin awamisu nataci 'my beloved sister' P0 ey5 eya? eyaci 'come over here quickly' nin nxkrj, nfta? mxkata? napafama? pamatamu 'I am your friend until death' mst pamatimu 'without life' mxsi magwamp 'big governor' mxsi mita 'big heart' mstwa pacatag 'enemy' waninak kijkweturjk 'how are you this morning?' kwe 'hi', or 'how, are you?' nin katapatanamas 'I thank you very much' nun 'you'

3 Lord's Prayer ) nun nfnamkanipi 'you're entirely welcome' Comments Although a complete analysis of the preceding data goes beyond the scope of the present paper, I would like to make a few brief comments. On the phonetic level, the phone [q] in A.l and A.2 is clearly non- English, but it is usually not postulated for any of the languages of Southern or Central New England. The same is true for [0] in C.4, which, however, may simply indicate hesitation on the part of the speaker. In B.4, the sequence [on] followed by a vowel, while possible in English normally occurs only when a word boundary (#) follows the nasal. The phone [f] in C.5 is not usually considered a New England Algonquian sound, but, like [0], may be due simply to speaker hesitation, an impression which is reinforced by the numerous occurrences of [a] and [?]. In CIO, the phone [a], if not misheard, is of some interest. In addition to these phonetic observations, I would like to point out that the following forms appear in two variants: [kisakat] (A.2): [kisakwad] (B.l); [nin o nfnani] (A.l) : [nfnani] (B.2); [maecrtad] (A.4) : [mecrtad] (B.5); and [kawfsawaqk] (A.l) : [kawisawank] (B.l). It should also be noted that the English translations of section B are clearly incorrect and fanciful. The translation of B.l, for example, should be something like: 'I and our father in heaven, thy name be blessed'. Although the translations of section C appear to be more accurate, even here there are difficulties. In C.l, for example, [nitamp] means 'my friend', not 'your friend'. Finally, the form [mita] in C.8 is questionable. This appears to be a misreading of 'metah' (Trumbull 1903:56), which represents in all likelihood [mata(h)]; cf.narrragansett /wuttah/ 'the heart' (Williams 1936:51), Proto-Algonquian */metehi/ 'someone's heart'. Comparison From the preceding remarks, it is clear that the quality of the taped material is somewhat uneven, containing phonetic peculiarities, incorrect translations, and at least one item that was probably taken from an early written source. Exploring this latter possibility a bit further, since translations of the Lord's Prayer have long been available in various Algonquian languages, I would now like to compare the taped Wampanoag version of this prayer with the closest version to it I could find, that given by Eliot in Luke 11.2 (Cotton 1829:104). In what

4 242 George Aubin follows, the numbered line is the Eliot translation, indicates the Wampanoag version given above in section A, and indicates the Wampanoag given above in section B. 1. Ncoshun kesukqut, nin ka nun nigakjt nin ka nun..nfka nusan kfsakwad 2. quttianattamunch koowesuonk, kacinatcmic kawfsawagk kocinatxmic kawisawarjk 3. kukketasscotamoonk peyaumcoutch, 4. kuttenantamooonk ne naj neyane ka 7 kancn tamuwak nin 3 nfnani ka 7 kana*n tamuwag niiu jni 5. kesukqut kah ohkeit kisakat ka okid kisakad 6. Assamaiinnean kokokesukodae kokasi kokasi 7. nutase[ke]sukokke petukqunneg sakoki patekwanag sakoki patekwanag 8. kah ahquoantamaiinnean a?kw.) aekname acinic 0. nummatcheseonganonash, na macasi Jijarunt newutche nenawun wonk ni wacanfn nawa 11. nutahquoantamauounnonog 12. nishnoh pasuk ni; nohj pasag 13. nconamontukquohwhonan, mini mangtakahonan 14. kah ahque sagkompaginnean en ka skuseg kampagm nin in 15. qutthehettuonganit, kwaciwamt 16. qut pohquawussinnean pakwj pakwa

5 Lord's Prayer wutch matchitu. wjf 1 mscitad waci mecitad This comparison is instructive. On the one hand, in l.a, l.b, a 8.a, the Wampanoag version shows some added material that is not found in the Eliot translation. On the other hand, in several places the Wampanoag forms appear to be abbreviated or truncated in relation to the forms in the Eliot translation: 4.b, 6.a, 6.b, 7.a, 7.b, 8.a, 10.b(?), 15.a(?), 16.a, and 16. Further, there are numerous gaps in the Wampanoag version, with individual words and even entire phrases missing: l.a, 3.a, 3.b, 6.a, 6.b, 8.a, 8.b, 9.a, lo.a, 10.b(?), ll.a, ll.b, 16.a, and 16. It is clear, then, that the Wampanoag version is not an exact copy of the Eliot translation. Nonetheless, many interesting resemblances can still be detected. Both the Eliot translation and the Wampanoag version omit a possible last line in the Lord's Prayer (For Thine is the kingdom,... ), a line which is included in some translations (see, for examples, Cotton 1829:104 and Trumbull 1873). Both also use approximately the same form to translate 'bread', petukqunneg and [patekwanag] respectively, rather than a form such as, for example, nummeetsuongash, given by Eliot in Matthew 6.9 (Cotton 1829:104). Further, the words of the Wampanoag version are in the same order as those of the Eliot translation. Finally, it is important to note that, in a large number of cases, there is substantial agreement between the Eliot and Wampanoag, with the Wampanoag form representing a possible phonetic rendition of the Eliot form: l.b, 2.a, 2.b, 4.a, 4.b, 5.a, 5.b, 7.a, 7.b, 9.b, lo.b, 12.a, 13.a, 14.a, 17.a, and 17. Conclusion In conclusion, it appears from the evidence presented in this p that, although there clearly are Algonquian elements in the Wampanoag data discussed above, the source of these Algonquian elements must be considered an open question. It is perhaps not impossible that at least some of them are due to a limited but continuous oral tradition. Unfortunately, there is also the very real possibility that much that is on the tape was taken from other sources. In any case, it would seem advisable at the present time to view these data with a healthy skepticism and to use them only with caution.

6 244 George Aubin REFERENCES Cotton, Josiah 1820 Vocabulary of the Massachusetts (or Natick) Indian language. Pp in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 3, volume II. Trumbull, James 1873 Notes on Forty Versions of the Lord's Prayer in Algonkin Languages. Pp in Transactions of the American Philological Association, Natick Dictionary. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 25. Washington. Williams, Roger 1036 A Key into the Language of Americ [1643] Providence: The Roger Williams Press.