Lenno, a man. Wuskilenno, a young man. Pilapeu, a lad. Pilawesis, or pilawétzitsch, a boy. Pilawétit, a male infant babe. Kigeyilenno, an aged man. Mihilusis, an old man, worn out with age. Ochqueu, a woman. Wusdóchqueu, a young woman, a virgin. Ochquetschitsch, a girl. Quetit, a female infant babe. Gichtochqueu, an aged woman. Chauchschìsis, a very old woman.
Note “len” or “lenno” in the male, and “que” or “queu” in the female, distinguish the sexes in compound words; sometimes the L alone denotes the male sex, as in “pilapeu,” “mihilusis,” &c.
The males of quadrupeds are called “lenno wéchum,” and by contraction “lennochum;” the females “Ochqueu wéchum,” and by contraction “ochquéchum,” which is the same as saying he or she beasts. With the winged tribe, their generic denomination “wehelle” is added to the word which expresses the sex; thus, “lenno wehelle” for the male, and “ochquechelle” (with a little contraction) for the female. There are some animals the females of which have a particular distinguishing name, as “Nunschetto” a doe, “Nunscheach” a she bear. This, however, is not common.
Thus I have endeavoured to answer your questions, and I hope, have done it to your satisfaction. I shall always be willing and ready to give you any further information that you or the Philosophical Society may require; I mean, always to the best of my knowledge and abilities.
I am, &c.
LETTER VIII.
MR. DUPONCEAU TO MR. HECKEWELDER.
Philadelphia, 10th June, 1816.
Dear Sir.—Your favour of the 27th ult. has done me the greatest pleasure. I am very thankful for the goodness you have had to answer the questions which I took the liberty of putting to you through our common friend Dr. Wistar. I shall not fail to avail myself of your kind offer to answer such further questions as I may ask, as in so doing I shall fulfil a duty which the Historical Committee of the Philosophical Society has imposed upon me, and at the same time I am satisfied that I shall derive a great deal of pleasure to myself. But I must acknowledge that I am entirely ignorant of the subject on which I have been directed to obtain information from you, so much so that I am even at a loss what questions to ask. As I have, however, undertaken the task, I must endeavour to go through it as well as I can, and rely on the instruction which I shall receive from your letters, to point out to me further enquiries. I am fortunately employed in translating the late Mr. Zeisberger’s Grammar of the Lenni Lenape, which will lead me a little into the right path, and I read at the same time such books as I can find in our scanty libraries respecting the languages of the American Indians. This study pleases me much, as I think I perceive many beauties in those idioms, but the true enjoyment of those beauties is, I presume, only accessible to those to whom the languages are familiar.
From what I have above stated, you will easily perceive that my questions to you must necessarily be desultory, and without any regular order or method. But you will diffuse light through this chaos, and every thing at last will find its proper place.
I cannot express to you how delighted I am with the grammatical forms of the Indian languages, particularly of the Delaware, as explained by Mr. Zeisberger. I am inclined to believe that those forms are peculiar to this part of the world, and that they do not exist in the languages of the old hemisphere. At least, I am confident that their development will contribute much to the improvement of the science of universal grammar. About fifty years ago, two eminent French philosophers published each a short treatise on the origin of language. One of them was the celebrated mathematician Maupertuis, and the other M. Turgot, who afterwards was made a minister of state, and acquired considerable reputation by his endeavours to introduce reform into the administration of the government of his own country. M. Maupertuis, in his Essay, took great pains to shew the necessity of studying the languages even of the most distant and barbarous nations, “because,” said he, “we may chance to find some that are formed on new plans of ideas.” M. Turgot, instead of acknowledging the justness of this profound remark, affected to turn it into ridicule, and said he could not understand what was meant by “plans of ideas.” If he had been acquainted with the Delaware language, he would have been at no loss to comprehend it.