OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. 187 



It seems probable that five centuries would be insufficient to render dialects of tlie 

 same language incapable of being understood collocpiially by the two peoples; and 

 that twice or tlirice that length of time would not destroy all trace of identity in the 

 vocables for common objects. This is as much, perhaps, as can be safely suggested. 

 There is one important fact, with reference to the American Indian languages, 

 which should not be overlooked, tending to show that change would be more rapid, 

 comparatively, among them, than in other verbal languages. In no part of the 

 earth, not excepting the islands of the Pacific, are dialects and even stock lan- 

 guages intrusted for their preservation to such a small number of people. The 

 Mandan, for example, which for colloquial purposes is an independent speech, is 

 now in the exclusive keeping of two hundred and fifty persons ; and so the Munsee, 

 which is one of the oldest forms of the Algonkin, is in the custody of about two 

 hundred persons. The Iroquois, which is a stock language, and now spoken in 

 seven dialects, including the Wyandote, is dependent for its preservation, as a 

 whole, upon less than eight thousand people, and they in widely separated locali- 

 ties. In like manner, the Pawnee, another stock language, spoken in four dialects, 

 including the Arickaree and excluding the Hueco, and its immediate cognates, is 

 in the keeping of about five thousand persons. If we take particular dialects, the 

 number of people, by whom they are severally spoken, will be found to range from 

 two hundred persons, which is the minimum, to one thousand which is about the 

 average, and on to twenty-five thousand, which is the maximum number now 

 speaking any one so called stock language within the limits of the United States. 

 This is the number of the Cherokees, whose language, it is somewhat remarkable, 

 is contained in but two dialects, the standard and the mountain Cherokees, or the 

 modern and the ancient. When the people who speak a certain dialect advance 

 in prosperity and multiply in numbers, the increased intellectual power invariably 

 expends a portion of its strength upon the language ; in the increase of the number 

 of its vocables, in the advancement of its grammatical forms to a higher stage of 

 development, and in imparting nerve and tone to the plastic and growing speech. 

 On the other hand, when the same people meet with reverses, and decline in 

 numbers and prosperity, their dialect necessarily impoverishes in its vocables, and 

 recedes in its strength, although it does not follow that its grammatical forms 

 must wither. At best these dialects are in a constant flux and oscillation. 



There is another consideration which connects itself with the question of the 

 stability of the American Indian dialects, namely ; to what extent are words propa- 

 gated by adoption from one language into another'? It is impossible, Avith our 

 present knowledge, to answer this question ; but it is not improbable that this and 

 other equally important problems wiU ultimately be solved. These languages are 

 becoming more open, and are growing more accessible each and every year. There 



he found it difficult to understand the Minnitaree. His impression was that the change had been 

 of slow and gradual growth. 



It is not a little singular that the Mandans should learn the Minnitaree, and the Minnitarees the 

 Crow with comparative ease ; while the reverse is attended with difficulty. Can those who speak 

 the mother tongue learn a derived dialect with more ease than those who speak the latter can learn 

 the former, or the reverse ? 



