Untitled - Smithsonian Institution

56 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bdll. 44
But the differences between these dialects appear to have been
comparatively slight and not coincident with marked subtribal distinctions,
hence no attempt has been made to place them on the map.
The Mixtec and Zapotec Languages Compared
Attention is called to the following question: Does the evidence
justify the association of the Mixtec and Zapotec languages and
their dialects in one stock, as they are now usually classified by phi-
lologists? We notice first that Friedrich Miiller (Ab. 1) objects to
this association, contending that the two languages are distinct.
Althotigh Pimentel (i, 319) speaks of Zapotecs and Mixtecs as
"tribus o naciones hermanas," he does not attempt the presentation
of any linguistic evidence (it may be he does so in the second edition,
1875, 3 vols., 4to, of his Cuadro, which the author has not exam-
ined) ; nor does Brinton or any other author at hand except Nicolas
Leon and Seler. In his introduction to the reprint of Cordova's
"Arte del Idioma Zapoteco" (p. Ix et seq.), Leon, copying his data
chiefly from Pimentel, presents some arguments in favor of relationship.
What value is to be attached to his argument from the gram-
matical standpoint the author can not say, but that of his brief
word comparison is very small. First, it is brief, yet apparently as
full as the data afforded; second, the words are culled to suit (observe
Brinton's standard word comparison, 3:339); and after all this
care the similarity in several instances is not apparent, and the comparison
forced. For example (p. Ixvi) : Tres and oclio, the former
ch-ona, the latter xo-ono in Zapotec, to compare with uni and una
in Mixtec.
Now "three" in Zapotec (same work, 176) is chona or cayo, accord-
ing to relation, custom, etc.; and "eight," xoono or xono (see p. 177);
ck and xo are never prefixes, so far as the author can find. In
Charencey's comparison of Zapotec and Mixtec numerals {Melanges,
p. 44.) , which takes in the numbers from 1 to 20 and includes, by tens,
30 to 100, there is scarcely the slightest resemblance, except in the plan
or system of the formation of numbers, which is the same in half a
dozen stocks in that part of North America. (See also list below.)
It is probable that "one" in Mixtec should be ce instead of ec, as
"eleven" is usice (10 and 1).
Seler (550 et seq.) gives a short grammatical comparison.
Attention is called to what appears to be some wide differences.
According to Pimentel (r, 41) the Mixtec letters (Spanish pro-
nunciation, of course) are:
achdehijJcmnfiostuvxo
Ics gs y z dz nd tn Teh