Believing that languages are a kind of text, I have made some effort to
study western Abenaki (without much success, since I find it hard to be
disciplined in a linguistic limbo). I have also collected language texts
& dictionaries whereever possible. As an historian, I can't imagine writing
the history of any European group without being required to learn the
language. It seems even more imperative when trying to write the history
of a group that did not produce most of the written documents.
Request #1:
Among other things, I have the text of a document written in
Abenaki in 1691. It was transcribed by Jacques Bigot, a priest who
spoke the language, during a council at Sillery, at that time a mostly
Abenaki mission near Quebec. I have a "modern Abenaki" translation of
the document done by Joseph Laurent in 1871, plus three different French
translations done by Laurent, apparently a word-for-word, a colloquial,
and a more "formal" French translation. There is also a very bad
translation published in Vetromile's book some years earlier. The
translations suggest some very interesting things about how Abenakis
understood Catholicism in 1691. I can do some work just based on the
different French translations but could really use some help from a
linguist. I have contacted Laurent's son, an Abenaki elder in his
80s who would be well qualified to help me except that his health is
not what it used to be (although he may simply have reservations
about working with me on such a formal level).
If anyone can help me with this, or if you (or a grad student of
your acquaintance) might be interested in doing work with the languages
of Wo^banakia, please let me know.
Request #2:
I am especially interested in questions of gender and social
relations and how they changed in the centuries after contact. For
example, as a feminist historian living in 1995, I'm interested in gender
questions. But with a language that makes its primary distinction
between animate and inanimate, maybe gender(sex) isn't even the right
question. Also, how do I understand what seems to be the equivalent of
male=universal and female=other, as in nido^ba [friend] and nido^baskwa
[female friend]? Does this suggest historical change, i.e., an early
hunting society that favored males and later, when agriculture came in
[Abenaki stories specifically talk about the introduction of corn into an
already formed society] gender balances changed but the linguistic
structure remained? Or does this only seem possible because I'm not a
linguist and don't know better?
Any help you can give me in these areas, including reading
suggestions, would be greatly appreciated. [I am already familiar with
the work of Gordon Day, A. Irving Hallowell, Frank Speck and Frank Siebert,
and have spent time at Odanak, the Abenaki reserve in Quebec.]
If you have any questions about who I am or the work I have done
so far, please contact me directly.
Olewni!
Alice Nash
(Columbia University)
email: ann3@columbia.edu
318 West 108 St., #9
NY, NY 10025