berry, grape

noun plant_part

Proto-Siouan-Catawba

Proto-Siouan *há•sE ~ *há•s-hu

Proto-Crow-Hidatsa *wa•cu

Crow baáčuu ‘chokecherry’ RG, GG:18, RGG:13

Hidatsa wá•cu ‘berry’ J , má•cu

Pre-Mandan *hą́šE

Mandan hą́hse ‘bullberry’ RTC , hą́šE ~ hą́š ‘grapes’ RTC

Proto-Mississipi-Valley *há•ze

Proto-Dakota *háza

Lakota háza ‘grapes’ RTC

Dakota hastaŋhaŋka , †hastąhąka ‘grape’ WM:77a

Proto-Hoocąk-Chiwere *há•ze

Chiwere há•ðe RR

Hoocąk háas ‘berry, fruit’ KM:534 , haas

Proto-Dhegiha *házü

Omaha-Ponca házi ‘grape’

Kanza/Kaw házü ‘grape’ RR

Osage házi ~ házü ‘grape’ RR

Quapaw házi ‘grape’ RR

Proto-Southeastern *hási

Proto-Biloxi-Ofo *ási

Biloxi asi , †asi ‘berry, berries’ D&S:174a , ástaⁿtká , †ástątka ‘mayhaws’ D&S:174a , ástĕpáx kotká , †ástepax ‘strawberries’ D&S:174b

Ofo iyā´fhu , †iyá•fhu ‘blackberry’ D&S:325a, JSS

Proto-Tutelo-Saponi

Tutelo hasisiāi , †hasi- ‘raspberry’ H , haspahīnuk , †has- ‘strawberry’ H

General comment

The variation between final -e and -u ~ -i in this stem is due to the fact that ‘berry’ is compounded with *hu•tree, bone, leg, stalk, stem, trunk’ in DH, Biloxi and Ofo, and possibly in Crow/Hidatsa. Ofo gives direct confirmation, with -hu postposed to the stem iya•f-. The Ofo form presumably paralleled the Biloxi asi. The stem formative -e is lost when -hu is compounded with the root throughout Siouan; s > f regularly in Ofo; i- is a prefix (possessive) ‘its’, leaving the y as epenthetic (between i and a). Proto-Siouan *y > čh regularly in Ofo. The resultant construction ‘its berries’ parallels areally prevalent Muskogean ‘berry’ constructions best exemplified by Creek nak inlókci• ‘something its berries’ = ‘berries’. Initial h- is lost frequently in Biloxi and Ofo; the Biloxi dictionary contains numerous instances of doublets with and without h-.

This explanation has the advantage of accounting for nearly all developments in terms of a single proto form. The Crow/Hidatsa forms appear to prefix wa- to *ha•s-; loss of #h- under these circumstances may or may not be regular, but the postulated development is strengthened by rising pitch in Crow (*wahás > *waás). Crow/Hidatsa lose inherited aspiration but preserve newly-created aspirated spirants. Thus lack of e.g. Hidatsa ch here suggests either that *hu was completely fused to *has prior to Proto-Crow-Hidatsa or that the form has been reshaped under the influence of ‘hail’, q.v. Mandan nasalization is not accounted for; the form hą́hse appears to be a compound of hą́š- with se ‘red’.

Details Language Word Source