﻿70 
  ANNUAL 
  REPORT 
  SMITHSONIAN 
  INSTITUTION, 
  1927 
  

  

  He 
  has 
  devoted 
  considerable 
  time 
  to 
  work 
  upon 
  the 
  manuscript 
  

   report 
  on 
  the 
  Indian 
  tribes 
  of 
  the 
  Upper 
  Missouri 
  made 
  by 
  Edwin 
  

   Thompson 
  Deni<jj 
  to 
  the 
  Hon. 
  Isaac 
  Stevens, 
  Governor 
  of 
  Washing- 
  

   ton 
  Territory, 
  which 
  has 
  been 
  under 
  consideration 
  for 
  publication 
  by 
  

   the 
  bureau 
  for 
  more 
  than 
  10 
  years. 
  This 
  report 
  has 
  intrinsic 
  merit, 
  

   as 
  it 
  contains 
  much 
  ethnologic 
  information 
  which 
  it 
  is 
  now 
  impos- 
  

   sible 
  to 
  obtain 
  because 
  of 
  changed 
  conditions 
  in 
  the 
  life 
  of 
  the 
  tribes 
  

   mentioned 
  in 
  it. 
  

  

  Several 
  evenings 
  each 
  week 
  during 
  the 
  autumn 
  and 
  winter 
  Mr. 
  

   Hewitt 
  devoted 
  to 
  the 
  recording 
  of 
  lexical 
  and 
  grammatical 
  material 
  

   in 
  the 
  language 
  of 
  the 
  Nez 
  Perce 
  Indians 
  of 
  the 
  Shahaptian 
  linguistic 
  

   stock 
  of 
  the 
  Powellian 
  classification 
  of 
  Amerindian 
  languages 
  north 
  

   of 
  Mexico. 
  In 
  this 
  work 
  Mr. 
  Hewitt 
  was 
  assisted 
  by 
  Mr. 
  Mark 
  

   Phinney, 
  an 
  intelligent 
  and 
  well-educated 
  young 
  man 
  of 
  that 
  tribe, 
  

   who 
  is 
  employed 
  in 
  the 
  Office 
  of 
  Indian 
  Affairs 
  of 
  the 
  Interior 
  

   Department. 
  

  

  This 
  work 
  was 
  undertaken 
  primarily 
  to 
  obtain 
  ampler 
  and 
  more 
  

   accurate 
  linguistic 
  material 
  in 
  this 
  language 
  further 
  to 
  elucidate 
  and 
  

   confirm 
  certain 
  fundamental 
  conclusions 
  reached 
  by 
  Mr. 
  Hewitt 
  in 
  

   1894 
  in 
  regard 
  to 
  the 
  genetic 
  linguistic 
  relationship 
  of 
  three 
  con- 
  

   tiguous 
  northwestern 
  linguistic 
  stocks 
  — 
  namely, 
  the 
  Shahaptian, 
  the 
  

   Waiilatpuan, 
  and 
  the 
  Lutuamian 
  — 
  of 
  the 
  Powellian 
  classification 
  of 
  

   Amerindian 
  languages 
  north 
  of 
  Mexico. 
  These 
  fundamental 
  con- 
  

   clusions 
  were 
  embodied 
  in 
  tAvo 
  formal 
  reports 
  to 
  the 
  director 
  of 
  the 
  

   bureau, 
  having 
  been 
  prepared 
  for 
  his 
  especial 
  use 
  and 
  at 
  his 
  behest 
  

   as 
  appears 
  in 
  the 
  administrative 
  report 
  of 
  the 
  director 
  for 
  1894. 
  He 
  

   approved 
  the 
  findings 
  of 
  both 
  reports, 
  although 
  the 
  last 
  w^as 
  not 
  de- 
  

   livered 
  until 
  after 
  the 
  administrative 
  report 
  had 
  been 
  written; 
  he 
  

   had 
  been 
  verbally 
  informed 
  of 
  what 
  the 
  conclusions 
  would 
  be. 
  The 
  

   first 
  of 
  these 
  reports 
  showed 
  genetic 
  linguistic 
  relationship 
  between 
  

   the 
  Shalfaptian 
  and 
  the 
  Waiilatpuan 
  linguistic 
  stocks 
  of 
  the 
  Pow- 
  

   ellian 
  classification 
  of 
  Amerindian 
  tongues 
  north 
  of 
  Mexico; 
  and 
  

   the 
  second 
  showed, 
  likewise, 
  genetic 
  linguistic 
  relationship 
  between 
  

   the 
  Lutuamian 
  stock 
  of 
  languages 
  and 
  the 
  new 
  group, 
  Shahaptian- 
  

   Waiilatpuan, 
  established 
  by 
  the 
  findings 
  of 
  the 
  first 
  report. 
  Thus 
  

   these 
  two 
  formal 
  reports 
  brought 
  together 
  into 
  one 
  linguistic 
  stock 
  

   the 
  Shahaptian, 
  the 
  Waiilatpuan, 
  and 
  the 
  Lutuamian 
  linguistic 
  

   stocks 
  of 
  the 
  Powellian 
  classification. 
  To 
  this 
  new 
  grouping 
  of 
  lan- 
  

   guages 
  was 
  tentatively 
  assigned 
  the 
  name 
  Shapwailutan, 
  an 
  

   artificial 
  term 
  made 
  up 
  of 
  the 
  initial 
  syllables 
  of 
  the 
  names 
  of 
  the 
  

   three 
  combined 
  stocks. 
  Mr. 
  Hewitt 
  has 
  since 
  then 
  found 
  no 
  reason 
  

   to 
  change 
  his 
  conclusions 
  in 
  these 
  two 
  reports, 
  and 
  his 
  work 
  with 
  

   Mr. 
  Phinney 
  has 
  only 
  strengthened 
  his 
  findings. 
  

  

  As 
  custodian 
  of 
  manuscripts, 
  Mr. 
  Hewitt 
  reports 
  that, 
  with 
  the 
  

   exception 
  of 
  a 
  number 
  of 
  cross-references, 
  the 
  cataloguing 
  of 
  the 
  

  

  