Chapter XXII: Appendix: Vocabularies of Amazonian Languages

The accompanying Vocabularies were collected with much care, and several of them tested by a second party. The words are spelt with the vowels sounded as in Portuguese, thus, _a_, _e_, _i_, _o_, _u_, _ai_, pronounced _ah_, _a_, _e_, _o_, _oo_, _i_, and the consonants as in English. A til, thus ~, over a letter denotes that it has a nasal sound; the accent shows where the stress is to be laid; and a letter placed above the line shows that it is to be very faintly sounded, often in a peculiar way, as the _l_ in walnut. The languages are arranged in geographical order, commencing with those spoken on the banks of the Amazon, near the frontiers of Ecuador and terminating on the tributaries of the Orinooko. The Lingoa Geral is placed first, because it is the most widely spread language of South America, but it does not contain a single word in common with any of the other ten languages here given; and those that agree with it in not placing the pronoun “_my_” as a prefix to the words signifying parts of the body, differ most remarkably from it in the general combinations of the letters and the sounds of the words.

The Lingoa Geral, the Uainambeu, and the languages spoken at Maroa and Javita are soft and euphonious, while the Curetu and Tucano are particularly harsh and guttural, the former having the _ll_, and the latter the _ch_, sounded as in Welsh. The Tucano and Tariana are spoken by adjoining tribes on the Uaupés, who often intermarry, yet they have not a word in common, and differ remarkably in the character of the pronunciation. The last two languages in the list are spoken in villages not twenty miles apart.

In order to elucidate in some degree the grammatical forms of these languages, I subjoin a few idioms in the Lingoa Geral, which probably much resembles the rest in this respect.

_Change of the initial consonant._

Eggs Súpia.
Fowls’ eggs Sapucáia rupia.
Alligators’ eggs Jacaré rupia.

_Different forms used by male and female._

The father says—

My son Seraíra.
My daughter Seraíra cunhá.

The mother says—

My son Señ bira.
My daughter Señ bira cunhá.

_Form of the genitive case._

This is the white man’s knife Coa caríwa kisé.
This a white knife Coa kisé murutínga.

_Form of the superlative._

Pretty Puránga.
Very pretty Purángareté.
Canoe Igára.
Good canoe, large canoe Igárité.

_Composition of words._

Small stream Igarapé (literally “path of the canoe”).
Dog Iauará.
Jaguar (great or real dog) Iauarité.
Eagles, hawks (great birds) Uera assú.
Smoke (white fire) Tatatínga.
Very well, yes, or a general
affirmation, used also for
farewell Eré.
No, I will not, (negative) Nim bá, een tío.

_Names of natural objects, showing the repetition of vowels and
syllables._

_Names of Palms._

Jará.
Caraná.
Baccába.
Patawá.
Bussú.
Marajá.
Murumurú.

_Names of Forest-trees._

Masserandúba Milk tree.
Itaúba Iron-wood tree.
Socoúba Heron tree.
Jacaréuba Alligator tree.
Miratauá Yellow wood.
Mirapiními Painted wood.
Mirapiránga Red wood.

_Names of Animals and other natural objects._

Paraná River.
Maracajá Tiger-cat.
Caiarára A monkey (_Cebus gracilis_).
Surucuá Trogons.
Arára Macaw.
Arapapá Boatbill.
Maracaná Parrot (genus _Conurus_).
Parawá Parrot.
Panapaná Butterfly.
Jararáca A serpent (_Craspedocephalus_).
Surucucú A serpent (_Lachesis mutus_).
Sucurujú Water boa (_Eunectes murinus_).

As connected with the languages of these people, we may mention the curious figures on the rocks commonly known as picture-writings, which are found all over the Amazon district.

The first I saw was on the serras of Montealegre, as described in my Journal (p. 152). These differed from all I have since seen, in being painted or rubbed in with a red colour, and not cut or scratched as in most of the others I met with. They were high up on the mountain, at a considerable distance from any river.

The next I fell in with were on the banks of the Amazon, on rocks covered at high water just below the little village of Serpa. These figures were principally of the human face, and are roughly cut into the hard rock, blackened by the deposit which takes place in the waters of the Amazon, as in those of the Orinooko.

Again, at the mouth of the Rio Branco, on a little rocky island in the river, are numerous figures of men and animals of a large size scraped into the hard granitic rock. Near St. Isabel, S. Jozé, and Castanheiro, there are more of these figures, and I found others on the Upper Rio Negro in Venezuela. I took careful drawings of all of them,—which are unfortunately lost.

In the river Uaupés also these figures are very numerous, and of these I preserved my sketches. They contain rude representations of domestic utensils, canoes, animals, and human figures, as well as circles, squares, and other regular forms. They are all scraped on the excessively hard granitic rock. Some are entirely above and others below high-water mark, and many are quite covered with a growth of lichens, through which however they are still plainly visible. (Plates VII. and VIII.) Whether they had any signification to those who executed them, or were merely the first attempts of a rude art guided only by fancy, it is impossible now to say. It is however beyond a doubt that they are of some antiquity, and are never executed by the present race of Indians. Even among the most uncivilized tribes, where these figures are found, they have no idea whatever of their origin; and if asked, will say they do not know, or that they suppose the spirits did them. Many of the Portuguese and Brazilian traders will insist upon it that they are natural productions, or, to use their own expression, that “God made them;” and on any objection being made they triumphantly ask, “And could not God make them?” which of course settles the point. Most of them in fact are quite unable to see any difference between these figures and the natural marks and veins that frequently occur in the rocks.

_Figures on The Granite Rocks of the River Uaupes._

A. R. Wallace del. et. lith. F. Reeve, imp.]

_Figures on the Granite Rocks of the River Uaupes._

A. R. Wallace, del. et lith. F. Reeve, imp.]

REMARKS ON THE VOCABULARIES.

BY R. G. LATHAM, M.D.

The observation which is the most necessary to the general student, as a preliminary to Mr. Wallace’s tables, is the nature of certain syllables which in the Uainambeu, Juri, Tariana, and other lists, appear at the beginning of the names of the different parts of the human body. It is certainly not by accident that in one language they all begin with _eri-_, in another with _n-_; and so on. It is equally certain that these prefixes are no part of the original word. In the Baniwa of the Rio Isanna, the term for _hand_ is _capi_; the syllable _nu-_ is a _non_-radical prefix. Now the non-radical prefix is (almost to a certainty) the possessive pronoun, so that _nu_-cabi = _my head_: the amalgamation of the two elements being common in the American, as well as in certain languages of the Old World. (Appendix to Macgillivray’s ‘Voyage of the Rattlesnake’—Languages of the Louisiade.) The distribution of these prefixed possessive pronouns is a better guide than the affinities of the substantives themselves: since the personal pronouns are parts of speech which languages are slow to borrow from each other.

To apply the observation to the details of the vocabularies under notice, we find that the Juri and Javita prefixes are different from each other, and different from those of the Tariana, etc. throughout,—the pronominal syllables being _tch_, and _wa_, respectively. Neither of these elements lead to anything very clear and patent in the way of affinity. On the other hand it is equally clear that in the Tariana, Isanna, Barré, and Tomo-Maroa lists the prefix (_-n-_) is constant, however much the roots which follow it may differ; so that the inference, in favour of the possessive pronouns (at least) being the same throughout those four tongues, is legitimate. In the Uainambeu the case is slightly different. It is only in some of the words that the prefix is _-n_: in others it is _-eri_. This however is not very material, since the two forms, in all probability, represent two persons,—_nu_ = _my_, and _eri_ = _thy_ (or _vice versâ_) respectively.

Without, then, taking cognizance of the roots at all, the classification of the languages before us, according to the similarity of their pronominal prefixes, is as follows:—

_a. Allied._—Uainambeu, Tariana, Isanna, Barré, Tomo-Maroa.

_b. Disconnected._—Juri, Javíta.

_c. Uncertain._—Lingoa Geral, Coretu, Cobeu, Tucano.

The geographical localities of these tongues coincide with the nature of their pronominal prefix, and favour (_pro tanto_) the notion that they all belong to one and the same class,—a class of which the value is at present wholly conjectural.

How far are the roots themselves similar? Upon the whole it may be said that where the geography and where the pronominal prefixes indicate affinity, the roots themselves do the same; though not so clearly and patently as the investigator unpractised in American philology has a tendency to expect. To go into the reasons of this would take up much time and paper. It is sufficient to state that, whether the percentage of similar words be great or small, it tallies with the similarity of the prefixes. This may be verified by noticing the distribution of such words as the following:—

_Head_ = root _b–d_ in Uainambeu, Tariana (?), Isanna (?).

_Mouth_ = root _n–m_ in Uainambeu, Tariana, Isanna, Barré, Tomo-Maroa.

_Eye_ = root _-t_ or _-d_, in Uainambeu, Tariana, Isanna, Barré.

_Nose_ = root _t–k_ in Uainambeu, Tariana, Isanna.

_Teeth_ = root _-i-_ in Uainambeu, Tariana, Isanna, Barré.

This list may be extended, but the foregoing words suffice for illustration. That the root, in many cases, agrees where the pronouns differ is evident: but it must be remembered that the position to which the present writer commits himself is simply that of the _greatest amount of radical affinities going along with the greatest amount of pronominal similarity_. He by no means asserts, that where the pronouns differ everything else differs also.

When specimens of a language are laid before the public, and such specimens are, at one and the same time, limited in extent and the first of their kind, it is rarely safe to go beyond the indication of their probable affinities, and a general sketch of the class they illustrate. This is the reason why the present writer limits himself to observations of the miscellaneous and unsystematic character of those here made.

_The Barré._—The Barré forms the centre of a group—a group of which the value is uncertain. The other members of this, are the Baniwa of the Tomo and Maroa to the north, the Uainambeu to the south, the Tariana, and Baniwa of the Isanna to the west.

This statement (as has been already suggested) lies in the identity of the prefix _n-_, throughout.

The name requires notice. In Humboldt’s account of the population between the Orinooko and Amazon, we meet with a notice of the _Poignavi_, called also Gui-_punavi_: which are probably neither more nor less than _Baniwa_, as modified by the pronunciation of a different dialect or language. The localities coincide nearly as closely as the name. That branches however of the same population are denoted by these forms is by no means certain; inasmuch as the name may be applied by one population to several,—just as the root _Wel_-sh (a term equally foreign to Wales, Italy, Wallachia, and the French portion of Belgium, as a native name) is applied to the Germans, to the Welsh, the Italians, the Wallachians, and the Walloons.

The Poignavi of Humboldt are said to speak a form of the Maypure; which is likely enough, and which is by no means incompatible with their affinities to the Baniwa. A full vocabulary however of their language is wanting. In place hereof we have but two words,—

ENGLISH. POIGNAVI.
_Water_ Oueni.
_Moon_ Zenquerot.

Of these _oueni_ is Baniwa.

Further notice of the name will occur when we come to the Baniwa of Javita. That the _Manivas_ of the maps are _Baniwa_ is suggested by Mr. Wallace; and probably the E-_quinabi_ are but little different.

_The Juri._—The geographical relations of the Juri to the other languages of Mr. Wallace’s list may be seen on the map. The population which uses it lies south of the Japura, and probably on the water-system (we can scarcely apply the word _valley_ to these vast levels) of the Iça or Putumayo. It is perhaps as far from the Uainambeu, as the Uainambeu is from the Isanna; and certainly farther from any other member of the class last under notice than any such members are from each other. Hence, the _primâ facie_ view afforded by its geographical position is in favour of comparative isolation, at least as far as regards the tongues which delight in the use of the _n-_ prefix.

Neither is it in any very close geographical contact with the Tucano and Coretu, the nearest of the other languages.

It is comparatively _isolated_, as far as the languages of the present tables are concerned.

Now if we go from these to the ordinary maps, we find the contiguous populations to bear the names Tapaxana, Cambeva, Ticuna, etc., etc. What are the relations of the Juri tongue in this direction? Unknown. We have no specimens of the Ticuna, no specimens of the Cambeva, no specimens of the Tapaxana. There may be anything or nothing in the way of likeness; anything or nothing in the way of difference.

_The Baniwa of Javita._—The relation of this to the other Baniwas must be determined by the vocabulary itself: since (as has been already suggested) the identity of name goes for nothing either way. It proves nothing in favour of affinity; nothing in favour of difference.

The pronominal prefixes (_wa-_) are different; but this again is only _primâ facie_ evidence of real difference. A pronoun of a different person (as has also been already suggested) may have been used.

_The Lingoa Geral._—Last in the order of notice, though first in the list, is the Lingoa Geral. The basis of this is the Guarani language; and, with two exceptions, the distribution of the numerous dialects and subdialects of the Guarani tongue is the most remarkable in the world; the exception lying with the Malay and the Athabascan tongues. The Malay numerals have long been known to extend from Polynesia on one side to Madagascar on the other, and, along with the numerals, a notable percentage of other words as well. The Athabascan dialects are spoken on the shores of the Arctic Sea, at the mouth of the River Columbia, and within the tropics; since the speech of certain of the formidable Apach tribes of Mexico has been shown to belong to the same class with that of the Loucheux at the month of the Mackenzie River.

These are the two most remarkable instances of a wide and irregular distribution of language known to investigators; and next to these comes, as already stated, that of the Guarani tongues.

It matters little from what point we begin to consider them. Perhaps the mouth of the Amazons is as convenient as any. If this be our starting-point, we may follow the coast southwards, and in the direction of the River Plate. In nine cases out of ten, as often as the earlier Portuguese adventurers came upon an Indian population occupying the sea-shore, that population spoke a language which they called _Tupi_, _Tupi_naki, _Tupi_nambi, or something similar in the way of a compound of the root _tup_, and which they found to be intelligible with the forms of speech spoken in several distant districts elsewhere. If they landed on the parts about Bahia, the language was akin to what they had previously heard at Olinda, and what they would afterwards hear at Rio Janeiro: and so on along the whole sea-board. Hence, there were Tupi forms of speech as far north as the Island of Marajo, Tupi forms of speech as far south as Monte Video, and Tupi forms of speech in all (or nearly all) the intervening points of coast. The fishermen of the Laguna de los Patos spoke Tupi. The Cahetes of Bahia did the same. So did the Tamoyos of the Bay of Rio Janeiro, and so the Tupinaki, Tupinambi, and Tupinaes—the Tupi Proper so to say. This made the Tupi pass for the leading language of Brazil; so long at least as Brazil was known imperfectly, or along the sea-coast only.

It was soon however noticed that, as a general rule, the Tupi was spoken to only an inconsiderable distance inland, _i.e._ until one got to the Province of San Paolo, going southwards. In Goyaz, in the hill-ranges of Pernambuco, Bahia, Porto Seguro, etc., came forms of speech which those who spoke the Tupi separated from their own,—forms of speech of the barbarians (so to say) of the interior as opposed to the more civilized mariners of the coast. The Botocudo, the Canarin, the Coroado, the Coropo, the Machacari, the Camacan, the Penhami, the Kirivi, the Sabuja, the Gran, the Timbyra, and a vast list of other Brazilian Indians besides, were different from and other than the Tupi. But this distinction between the coastmen and the inlanders ceases as we go southwards; and when Cabeza de Vaca, in 1540, made his overland journey from St. Catalina to the city of Assumcio on the Parana, the chief Indians with whom he came in contact were allied to each other and allied to the tribes of the coast.

But the nomenclature changed with the change from Portuguese to Spanish dominion; and, though the Indians of the Brazilian province of San Paolo (the province of Brazil where they first began to extend inland and towards the centre of the continent) and those of Rio Grande de Sul might be Tupi, the allied populations of Entre Rios, Corrientes, Monte Video, and Paraguay were known under the designation of _Guarani_. This gave us a _Tupi-Guarani_ class of languages in which it was not very incorrect to say that the Tupi were the Guarani of Brazil, and the Guarani the Tupi of Paraguay. The _chief_ difference was a verbal and nominal one.

The first part, then, of the South American continent where the Tupi-Guarani (or Guarani-Tupi) were found in large masses, with an extension inland as well as an extension coastwise, were the Brazilian provinces of San Paolo in its southern part, the Brazilian province of Rio Grande de Sul, and the Spanish territories of Entre Rios, Corrientes, part of Buenos Ayres, Monte Video, and Paraguay—Paraguay in its southern and eastern rather than in its northern and western parts. In these quarters the language changed, and the affinities of the populations were with the Indians of the Chaco—the Mocobi, Toba, and Abiponians, etc.

It was through the Guarani of Paraguay that the Jesuits did the chief part of their labours in the way of conversion, and it was through the Tupi of Brazil that the Portuguese did the chief part of their Indian trading: facts which favoured the formation of a Lingua Franca on a Tupi-Guarani basis.

At present we have seen the Indians of this family following the coast or the water-system of the Plata. But there is another series of fact connected with their distribution, clear and patent enough to have been known to the earlier philologists, such as Hervas and his contemporaries. The extension of populations akin to the Tupi-Guarani was just as great along the course of the Amazon as it was along that of the Parana,—just as great, and probably greater. It was also spread along the feeders of the Amazon; the southern feeders, and the northern feeders of that river. By the southern feeders the line ran towards the system of the Parana, by the northern towards that of the Orinoco. So that as far northwards as the equator, and as far south as Buenos Ayres, Tupi-Guarani were to be found. More than this, as the Amazon arises on the Andes, and as its head-waters were Tupi-Guarani, the extension of that family from east to west was as remarkable as its diffusion from south to north. Still it gives us the hem of the garment, the fringe of the carpet, rather than the carpet or the garment itself. It gave the circumference of a circle rather than the parts pertaining to the centre. I call it a circle for the sake of illustration; for the sake of showing that there were a vast class of distinct and different languages which it had more or less completely surrounded. In reality the outline was irregular, formed in the main by the Ocean and the Amazons, but with long processes attached to it; dipping in towards the centre on one side, and flying off from the periphery on another.

We will go further in the details of the same processes, offsets, indentations, or prolongations. The Omaguas are found as far west as the Napo; and they preponderate at the junction of the Japura. They are said to speak the Yete, Putumayo, and Zeokeyo dialects of the Sucumbia language. This gives us a third term; possibly a third philological division—Tupi, Guarani, Sucumbia. Such are the names of the languages, the populations being Tupi, Guarani, and Omagua; the Tupi (chiefly) in Brazil, the Guarani in Paraguay, the Omagua in New Granada. The full details of the Tupi-Guaranis of the Amazons are somewhat obscure. At the mouth of the Tapajos, and the mouth of the Tocantins, they are specially mentioned, so they are in the great island of the Tupenambazes.

The Napo and Putumayo are the chief rivers that carry us along the Tupi-Guarani (Omagua) lines northwards. The most important of the southern lines are those of the Ucayale and the Huallaga, rivers, be it observed, of the extreme west; the latter running at the very foot of the Andes. The Cocamas and the Cocamillas occupy the watershed of these two streams for an undetermined distance southwards; and they navigate them with the boldness of the Omaguas. This gives us a fourth section—Tupi, Guarani, Omagua, Cocamilla.

Fifthly and (in the present state of our knowledge) lastly, come the Indians of the Peruvian province of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, extended, on one side, into the Republic of Tarija and the Chaco, and, on another, into the Mission of Chiquitos. Three sections of the division have been visited and described—_a_, the Guarayos; _b_, the Chiriguanos; _c_, and the Sirionos. These are described by D’Orbigny in his ‘Homme Américain,’ pp. 338–348.

It is submitted that, in the question as to the original _habitat_ and _focus_ of the Guarani family the _primâ facie_ evidence is in favour of the Provinces of Santa Cruz de la Sierra; the locality of the Guarayos, Chiriguanos and Sirionos, the two latter bearing, probably, the same name in a modified form. This view is proposed because the locality in question is the only portion of the Guarani occupancy which is common to the two great water-systems on which they are so remarkably distributed; and it rests upon the principle of not multiplying causes unnecessarily, rather than upon any special evidence. In one respect indeed, there is an accredited fact against it. The Chiriguanos are said to have been pressed forward into their present locality by the Spanish conquest—a fact, however, of which the evidence is very unsatisfactory, and one which does not apply to the Guarayos. I repeat the statement that the present notice goes no further than the indication of the _primâ facie_ probabilities of the question, and that it merely points out the most promising line of criticism, a line which has yet to be worked out.

But there is a point of detail which may well find its place here. The languages which have hitherto been placed in the Guarani class are languages of which the Guarani character has long been admitted. Of new additions no notice has been taken; yet one such new addition can probably be made—one, and perhaps more.

Into the details of a language spoken to the south of the Amazons, and to the east of the Madeira, the language of the Mundrucu Indians, I have gone no further than the short list of Balbi’s ‘Atlas Ethnographique.’ However, the inspection of this is sufficient to show that it is more Guarani than aught else.—_e. g._

_English_ Sun.
Mundrucu _uashi_.
Guarani _cuarazi_.
Lingoa Geral _arassi_.
Tupinamba _gouarassi_.
Tupi _coaracy_.
Omagua _huarassi_.

_English_ Moon.
Mundrucu _uashiat_.
Guarani _yaci_.
Lingoa Geral _iassu_.
Tupinamba _iasce_.
Tupi _iacy_.
Omagua _yase_.

_English_ Earth.
Mundrucu _ipu_.
Guarani _ibi_.
Lingoa Geral _bu_.
Tupinamba _ubuy_.
Tupi _ibi_.
Omagua _tujuca_.

_English_ Water.
Mundrucu _hu_.
Guarani _i_.
Lingoa Geral _hu_.
Tupi _i_.
Omagua _uni_.

_English_ Fire.
Mundrucu _tasha_.
Guarani, etc. _tata_.

_English_ Eye.
Mundrucu _uieta_.
Guarani _teza_.
Lingoa Geral _tessa_.
Tupinamba _dessa_.
Tupi _tesa_.
Omagua _ssissazaicana_.

_English_ Head.
Mundrucu _oija_.
Guarani _acang_.
Lingoa Geral _acanga_.
Tupinamba _acan_.
Tupi _acanga_.
Omagua _yacae_.

_English_ Nose.
Mundrucu _ueinampo_.
Guarani _hu_.
—— _tu_.
Lingoa Geral _una_.
Tupinamba _tin_.
Tupi _un_.
Omagua _ti_.

_English_ Mouth.
Mundrucu _woi-pi_.
Guarani _yurù_.
Lingoa Geral _puru_.
Tupinamba _ioure_.
Tupi _puru_.
Omagua _yuru_.

_English_ Tongue.
Guarani _wai-co_.
Lingoa Geral _cu_.
—— _apo-cum_.
Tupinamba _ape-cou_.
Tupi _ape-cu_.
Omagua _cu-muera_.

_English_ Tooth.
Mundrucu _woi-no_.
Guarani _tai_.
Lingoa Geral _tanha_.
Tupinambi _ram_.
Tupi _tanha_.
Omagua _sai_.
—— _dai_.

_English_ Hand.
Mundrucu _woi-po_.
Guarani _po_.
—— _mbo_.
Lingoa Geral _po_.
Tupinambi _po_.
Tupi _poo_.
Omagua _pua_.

_English_ Foot.
Mundrucu _woi-canuputa_.
Guarani _pi_.
—— _mbi_.
Lingoa Geral _purumga_.
Tupinambi _povy_.
Tupi _pu_.
Omagua _pueta_.

If this view be tenable, the _uaschi_ of Mundrucu simply = _light_, and its difference in form from the Guarani words is explained. So is its similarity to the name _uashiat_ = _moon_.

_The Coretu._—It by no means follows that because two languages have the same name they are identical; on the contrary, they may be widely different—a point which has already been noticed. Now the ‘Atlas Ethnologique’ of Balbi gives us a short Coretu vocabulary which is _not_ the Coretu of Mr. Wallace.

ENGLISH. CORETU (_Balbi_). CORETU (_Wallace_).
_Sun_ haie aoué.
_Moon_ haia-pucku jamímaíga.
_Earth_ gaira thetáh.
_Water_ cootabre deco.
_Fire_ aegacae puílre.
_Eye_ siroho yeellúh.
_Head_ caumeo cuilrí.
_Nose_ liiissapo ergílli.
_Mouth_ hiamolecko dishí.
_Tongue_ coahuri dolóʳ.
_Tooth_ simahapo gophpecuh.
_Hand_ coholo muhú.
_Foot_ namacgo giápah.

In these two lists the only two similar words are the names for _sun_. Hence, the phenomenon illustrated by the name _Baniwa_ is repeated in the case of the word _Coretu_.

Upon the _Cobeu_ and _Tucano_, no facts beyond those that lie in the tables themselves are known.

With the exception of the Lingoa Geral, Mr. Wallace’s vocabularies represent languages hitherto unknown. What is their geographical relation to the known ones?

It is only through the northern tongues (the Baniwa of Javita and the Tomo) that we even approach the areas of any well-described dialect. The Uainambeu in the south-west, the Juri in the south, and the Coretu in the west, are each and all on the limits of _terræ incognitæ_. For the parts between the western watershed of the Rio Magdalena in New Granada, the 71st degree of west longitude, the 4th degree of north latitude (there or thereabouts), the River Napo, and the Amazons, I know of no vocabularies, still less of any grammars. Hence, of any tongue spoken at one and the same time to the west of the Rio Negro, to the south of the Rio Inirida, to the north of the Amazons, and to the east of the Putumayo, the only specimens are the ones under notice.

1. To the east of the Rio Negro, the vocabularies that bring us nearest to Mr. Wallace’s are those of Sir Robert Schomburgk, of which the Guinau is the most western. They are all dealt with by Sir Robert Schomburgk himself as members of the great Carib (Carib-Tamanak) family, and this upon reasonable and sufficient grounds.

2. For the north we must seek our chief data in the ‘Mithridates’ and in Humboldt.

Along the rivers Meta, Vichada, and Guaviare, feeders of the Orinoco, different forms of the Saliva language are spoken—a language of which the distribution reminds us of the Guarani, although it is far less remarkable for its extent. At the same time it is so far _fluviatile_ as to follow to the system of the Orinoco, and so far extensive as to occur on the Upper Meta at the present time, and to be supposed (on reasonable grounds) to have once reached as far eastwards as Trinidad.

_b._ Conterminous with the Saliva, and also conterminous with the Guiana and Venezuelan members of the great Carib family, lie the populations speaking languages akin to the Maypure and Pareni—of both of which forms of speech we have specimens (Humboldt’s and that of the ‘Mithridates’), though short and insufficient. That the Caveri, the Avani, and the Poignavi (Guipunavi) speak dialects akin to each other and to the Maypure rests upon external evidence. Specimens are wanted. South of the Rio Uapes in Arrowsmith’s London Atlas lie the Meppuris, similar in name to the Maypure, but by no means necessarily allied to them.

_c._ Further north (in a north-western direction) on the Casanare and the Lower Meta, are the Yarura, Betoi, and Otomaca tongues.

3. South of the Amazons we must descend as far as the Province of Moxos (on the Beni) before we get anything beyond the most fragmentary specimens of language.

4. _Westwards_, and in the direction of the Andes, the break is greater still. For New Granada, a few words of the old Muysca language from the parts about Tunja, and, then, a short list from the mouth of the Atrato (at the very neck of the Isthmus of Darien) constitute the whole of our materials.

_b._ And matters are but little better in Ecuador. Between the Andes (of which the different Quichua dialects are pretty well known) and the area now under notice, the Zapara vocabulary of Osculati’s recently published work is all we have. The Zapara is spoken on the Rio Napo.

Hence, if we pass from the area illustrated by the specimens before us—specimens from a _terra incognita_—to the region of known dialects, we have (after a few Puru and Mundrucu samples from the south bank of the Amazons), as languages nearest in respect to their geographical localities—

_East._—-The, Carib dialects, of which the nearest is Sir R. Schomburgk’s Guinau.

_North._—The Maypure and Saliva families.

_West._—The Zapara.

_South._—The languages of the Province of Moxos.

To the Zapara the present vocabularies are the _least_ like; and perhaps they are _most_ like the Carib dialects. Now the Carib dialects have numerous affinities—some of them of a very remarkable kind. In the first place they have them with the Maypure and Saliva; next, they have them with the Guarani; thirdly, there is the statement (accompanied by a table which partially verifies it) in the ‘Mithridates’ that the Moxos and Maypure have several important elements in common.

* * * * *

The following Tables are formed from a very slight collation, viz. from one with short specimens of Guiana languages by Sir R. Schomburgk, and the equally scanty lists in D’Orbigny’s ‘Homme Américain.’ They are laid before the reader less on account of their own merits than for the sake of counteracting the common (but erroneous) belief that the South American tongues are wholly unconnected in respect to their vocabularies. The extent to which the commoner roots occur in different languages may be surmised from even so short a table as the subjoined.

_English_ Head.
Cobeu i-_pobu_.
Carabisi yu-_bupo_.
Accaway yu-_popo_.
Macusi _pupei_.
Woyawai i-_pawa_.
Arecuna o-_puwei_.
—— o-_pei_.

_English_ Mouth.
Uainambeu eri-_numa_.
Baniwa (I.) no-_numa_.
Barre no-_numa_.
Baniwa (J.) wa-_noma_.
Baniwa (T.M.) e-_noma_.
Tariana no-_numa_.
Guinau noma.

_English_ Nose.
Baniwa (T.M.) ny-_apeu_.
Aturia _ohipe_.
Dauri _ohebe_.
Juri _youcone_.
Tucano ich-_kena_.
Sœrikong _akone_.
Salivi _incuu_.

_English_ Hand.
Uainambeu eri-_kiapi_.
Baniwa (I.) nu-_capi_.
Barre nu-_cabi_.
Baniwa (J.) wa-_cavi_.
Guinau in-_kabo_.
Mawakwa ngn-_kowa_.
Atorai un-_kuai_.
Arawàk de-_cabbu_.
Maypure nu-_capi_.

_English_ Foot.
Uainambeu er-_upa_.
Baniwa (I.) nu-_hipi_.
Macusi _hupu_.
Taruma _appa_.
Cobeu ki-_bouba_.
Carabisi _pupu_.
Saliva caa-_bapa_.

_English_ Water.
Baniwa (I.) _uni_.
Barre _uni_.
Baniwa (J.) _weni_.
Baniwa (T.M.) _weni_.
Tariana _uni_.
Guinau _oni_.
Mawakwa _wune_.
Taruma _ona_-bo.
Arawak _wuni_-abo.
Maypure _weni_.
Sarabeca _une_.
Paioceneca _une_.
Moxa _une_.
Pacaguara _jene_.

_English_ Water.
Tucano _oghcogh_.
Cobeu _oghcogh_.
Saliva _cagua_.

_English_ Fire.
Baniwa (I.) _tidge_.
Guinau _tsheke_.
Mawakwa _tshikase_.
Wapisiana _tegherre_.
Atorai _tegherre_.
Dauri _tekerre_.
Sarabeca _tikiai_.
Mataguayo _itag_.
Baniwa (J.) _cathi_.
Maypure _cãtti_.
Araucanian _cutal_.

_English_ Fire.
Juri _ii_.
Taruma _hua_.

_English_ Bow.
Uainambeu _paro_.
Atorai[3] _parauri_.

_English_ Arrow.
Baniwa (I.) _capoui_.
Taruma _cupa_.

_English_ Tree.
Tucano _yukena_.
Zapara _nackuna_.

_English_ Sun.
Cobeu _ouia_.
Carabisi _wehu_.
Accaway _wiyheu_.
Macusi _weh_.
Arecuna _wae_.

_English_ Sun.
Juri _iye_.
Warau _yah_.
Maypure _khie_.

_English_ Sun.
Uainambeu _camiu_.
Baniwa (I.) _camuí_.
Barre _camu_.
Guiana _kamuhu_.
Woyawai _kamu_.
Mawakwa _kamu_.
Wapisiana _kamo_.
Atorai _kamoi_.
Dauri _tamoi_.
Sarebeca _caame_.

_English_ Moon.
Uainambeu _cari_.
Baniwa (I.) _keri_.
Quichua _killa_.
Mataguayo _guela_.
Guinau _kewari_.
Mawakwa _kirsu_.
Wapisiana _keirrh_.
Atorai _keirrhe_.
Dauri _kaiira_.
Baniwa (J.) _enu_.
Carabisi _nuna_.

_English_ Star.
Baniwa (I.) _kiwiri_.
Wapescana _weri_.

_English_ One.
Uainambeu _apari_.
Mawakwa _apaura_.
Arawak _abaru_.

_English_ One.
Tariana _paita_.
Wapisiana _peit_-e-ieppa.
Atorai _peit_-aghpa.
Dauri _weit_-appa.

[3] In several of the other Carib dialects the root _p–sr_ = _arrow_.

THE END.

PRINTED BY
JOHN EDWARD TAYLOR, LITTLE QUEEN STREET,
LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS.

Transcriber’s Notes:

- Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
- Blank pages have been removed.
- Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.