speck] 



A MOHEGAN-PEQUOT DIARY 



281 



Cujep (163S). 



Poquiantup. 



Cocheat. 



Wyokes {1750). 



Wyyogs. 



Wauby. 



Nausipouck (163S). 



Wincumbone (1637). 



Puttuqiippuunok (1037) . 



Pupompogs. 



Sassaciis. 



Kithansh. 



Nanasquionwut. 



PEQUOT 



Mausaumpous. 

 Pamatcsick (1638). 

 Weaugonhick. 



(Mononotto. 

 Monowattuck. 



Kiswas. 



Cassasinamon. 



Momoho. 



Catapazet. 



CiLshamequin (1602). 

 fScattup. 

 jScadob (1694). 



Sliantnp (1S20) (184S). 



Meazen (1832). 



Tassaquanot. 



Obechiquod. 



Wampushet. 



Wopigwooit. 



Wequash (1634), 

 "Swan." 3 



Tumsquash (1655). 



Metumpawett. 



Yowwematero. 

 (Kiiiess. 

 I Kindness (1788). 



Poquoiam. 



REMARKS ON GRAMMATICAL MATERIAL 



Occasional comments on Mohcgan-Pcqiiot grammar have been 

 undertaken by Professor Prince and Doctor Michelson. The ac- 

 companying material permits some additional deductions to be made 

 on points of structure, especially covering those emphasized by Doctor 

 Michelson as somewhat determining features in the dialectic group 

 to which Mohegan-Pequot belongs, namely, the imperative -c and 

 inanimate plural -tc, -c, and the absence of I. I have attempted, 

 conseciuently, in the following section to bring together some prom- 

 inent illustrations of his points. It is evident from the recent 

 material that Mohegan-Pequot fits the classification with Massa- 

 chusetts-Narragansett he ascribes to it in his second paper ^ after 

 he had cautiously alluded to such a probability in his first study. 

 This warrants us, then, on the Algonkian dialectic chart he made, to 

 extend the color representing Massachusetts-Narragansett over the 

 uncolored Mohegan-Pequot area, though I should like to repeat what 

 was meant to be sufficiently expressed in the introduction to this paper 

 (pp. 214-215), that Mohegan-Peciuot, while conforming to the charac- 

 teristics of the larger (Massachusetts-Narragansett) grouping in its 

 general characteristics, is more divergent from both than they are 

 from each other, and peculiar to itself in some respects, on at least 

 two phonetic points, y for n, and prominence of sonants in Mohegan- 

 Pequot, a tendency toward nasalization before certain consonants 

 (Moh.-Peq. (japa'nc, Nat. kuppash) and in some lexical and gram- 

 matical minor details (Moh.-Peci- locative -Tc and -g for Mass.- 

 Narr. -t). 



The analytic character of Mohegan is highly pronounced when 

 compared in syntax with other eastern Algonkian languages. It is 



> The authority for this translation is found in S. O. Drake. Book of the Indians. Boston (1837), Vol. U, 

 p. 102. It is a most interesting and instructive term, as may be .'^een. The equivalent in St. Francis Abe- 

 naki is wifTuSla (J. Laurent, .\benakis and English Dialogues, Quebec, 1884, p. 38), which not only cor- 

 roborates the meaning but gives a reason for supposing Pequot -c(sh)=Wabanaki -1. 



' T. Michelson, Int. Journ. Amer. Linguistics, Vol. I, No. I, 1917. 



19078°— 2S 19 



