FIVE

Serian
A.kwáetūm, kwáe-tūm
B.huavat’hom, kova-t`hom
C.kuaotom, kuao-tom, kooχtom, kooχ-tom
D.kouton, kou-ton
Yuman
8.hairrap’k
6.harabk
22.herápe
18.hěrä´pi
10.hatábuk
11.hûtápa
2.satabé
IV.hwipey (Laymon)
II.muguacogüi
III.naganná tejueg ignimel=“one whole hand”
IV.naganna tejuep=“one hand”
I.nyakivampai
9.çarhápa
7.tharrapa
4.saráp
5.saráp
13.sarap
15.saráp
17.sarap
24.sarap
20.saaráp
16.sarrap
14.selkhakai
12.seráp
21.seräpa
19.sarápi
23.sol-chepam
3.s’rap

The several forms of the Serian numeral “five” appear to be derivatives from a common original. There seems to be no doubt that it is a compound expression, meaning “one full, complete (hand)”. The final -tūm, -t’hom, -tom, and -ton are evidently forms of tó`χun, tohom, tokχom, meaning “one”, while the initial kwáe-, huava-, (kova- in “fifty”), kooχ-, and kou- are apparently derived from the term kov’, occurring in ishshaχ´ kov’, “full, complete moon”.

In the Yuman list, however, there are several different stems employed to designate the digit “five”. The forms sarap, seráp, harabk, and hairrap’k are clearly variants of a single original. Its literal signification, however, is not so evident, but from the data at hand the inference is warranted that it signifies “entire, whole, complete”. In the Mohave of Dr Corbusier hi-sal koçar̃ápa signifies “the whole hand”, and “fingers”, koçar̃ápa being also written kothar̃ápa. Now, hi-sal means “his hand”, and koçar̃ápa or kothar̃ápa would soon lose its initial ko-, from the wear to which it is subjected. In hatábuk, hûtápa, and satabé a new stem is to be recognized; it signifies “to grasp”, or rather “grasps”, and is found in aauwa sataba, “fire-tongs”, in which, aauwa means “fire” and sataba “to hold, take hold”. The reference here is to the clasped hand as signifying the digit “five”, because in counting the fingers are bent down upon the palm of the hand, the result being a closed or clasped hand. Now, in selkh-akai and sol-chepam, a form of the usual säl, “hand”, occurs, and -akai and -chepam have presumptively a signification semantically equivalent to koçar̃apa and sataba in the preceding Yuman examples, but the meagerness of the material at hand prevents the setting forth of the data necessary to prove this conjecture; yet it may be stated that if the term “hand” is a constituent element of the name for the digit “five”, it is because of the fact that the fingers and the thumb thereof are in number “five”, so that “the entire hand, the whole hand, the complete hand”, may become the name for the digit “five”. Hence, when the word hand is an element of the name thereof, as it is in the present instance, it is presumptively certain that some word like “entire, complete, whole, clasped, bent down”, must form the other element of the compound. The Cochimi (II) muguacogüi is seemingly a combination of mugua for the cognate humuga, “three”, and cogüi for goguó, “two”. And the Cochimi (I) nyakivampai is a compound of gi-nyak, “hand” [mi-nyak, foot], and some element denoting the completion of the count of the digits of one hand, -i-vampai or vampai. The Cochimi (III) and (IV) are self-explanatory, naganna, signifying “hand”, while Laymon (IV) is not explainable from the accessible data. These analyses fail to show genetic relationship between the two lists, in so far as the digit “five” is concerned.

SIX

Serian
A.nahpsūk
B.napk’schoch
C.napshoχ´, imapkasho
D.snapkashroj
Yuman
2.geshbe
3.hamhoke
13.hoomahook
17.hoomahook
15.humhôck
16.humhoke
12.humhóok
24.humhock
4.humhóque
20.joumjóc (j as in Spanish)
5.χemχúk
I.ic̲h̲kyum-kabiak
IV.kamioec kawam=2×3
8.maike-sin-kenaich
23.m´sig-eleepai
14.niu-gushbai
25.kumhōk
26.kŭmhok
7.seeinta
9.siínta
6.siyinta
18.dě-spé
10.ta-sbe-k
19.tě-shbé
21.te-shpě´-k
22.te-zpé
11.tû-spě´
1.tü-rspe

The given forms of the Serian digit “six” are evidently mere variants of a common original, which seems quite naturally to have been composed of the stem -apka of the numeral “three”, and of both a prefix and a suffix. The prefixes, for there are two, are, to judge from the one in imapkasho, demonstrative in character. It may be compared with im- in imk´, “he”; imke, “that”; imkove, “they”; imki, “that”, in which it appears to be a directive prefix. And the initial n- and sn- may be cognate in origin. But the final -sūk, -’schoch, -shoχ´, -sho, and -shroj, according to the audition or otosis of the collector, must mean “repeated, doubled, again”, etc., or an equivalent. Hence, the Seri number “six” would be literally “three repeated”.

In the Yuman column at least eight different elements are involved in the formation of the digit “six” in the several dialects of the group. The digits “two” and “three” compose the larger portion of the forms, resulting in such outlines as hamhoke, hoomahook, humhoke, humhóque, χemχúk, kumhok. Hamok (10), “three”, is a characteristic form of this digit, and ẖooak (23), habick (4), and kuáka (19), óak (14), uake (2), are characteristic outlines of the digit “two”. Compare these two lists. The final -k; of the numeral “three” is elided in composition, as it is merely a predicative element, as has been indicated in discussing the Yuman digit “three”; hence, ham- or hum-, symbolizing “three”, with the suffixion of such forms as ẖooak, huáka, or uake, “two”, readily becomes humnhoke or hamhoke, literally “two threes”. In such forms as geshbe (2), despé (18), and niugushbai (14) there occurs a common element -shbe, -spé, or -shbai, which evidently signifies “added, over, plus”, just as -eleepai does in m´sig-eleepai (23), “six”, literally “one added, one more than”. The ge- or -g- in (2) is evidently the final g of the Kiliwi form of the numeral one, mesig, m´sig, which may have at one time been the digit “one” in the Tonto (2); so that geshbe or g-eshbe stands for an earlier měsig-eshbe, “six”, literally “one added (to five)”. The term de-spé is evidently a contracted form of siínta-spe, “one added”, as the other similar forms show. Compare ta-sbe-k (10) and siínta, (9) and siyinta (6), in the last two of which the suffix is wanting or at least overlooked by the collector. In ic̲h̲kyum-kabiak (I) the digit kabiak, “three”, occurs, so that ic̲h̲kyum, must mean “repeated, again, iterated”, just as it was shown in the remarks on the digit four. Now, the form maike-sin-kenaich is, perhaps, an ordinal and not a cardinal. The initial maike- signifies “more, over, added, plus”, the final -kenaich is the doubtful part, and the middle portion -sin- is a contracted form of sinta, siínta, “one”, as may be seen in the list of the Yuman forms of the digit “one”. One other form remains to be considered. The Diegueño (14) of Dr Loew has niu-gu-shbai (the syllabication is the writer’s, showing the elements of the combination). An examination of the digits “seven”, “eight”, and “nine” reveals the fact that the initial niu- has the value of “added, over, plus, in addition to”, five. But it has been seen that the ending -shbaí has a like signification. The only reasonable explanation of this anomaly is that like the Tonto (2) g-eshbe, it owes its origin to the term represented by the Kiliwi měsig; and, moreover, it seems to be a dialectic loan-word. If the term geshbe (2) was adopted as meaning six, supplanting, it may be, an earlier form like hamhoke, the force of analogy, to assimilate this to the other forms, namely, of “seven”, “eight”, and “nine”, would affix the regular dialectic prefix niu- (or nio-). These explanations and analyses of the diverse forms of the numeral “six” reveal no relationship between the Serian and the Yuman groups.

SEVEN

Serian
A.kahkwūū
B.kachqhue
C.kaχkχue, tomkaχkue
D.tomkujkeui
Yuman
22.hawake-zpé
18.hěwakě-spé
10.hoáge-shbe-k
2.hoage-shbe
19.huáké-shpë
11.hwag-spě, hwagû-spě
1.waka-spe
23.ẖooak-eleepai
8.maik-kewikenaich
14.nio-khoak
20.paajkék
13.pahkae
17.pahkai
5.paχkyèk
21.pakai
24.pakai
3.pakha
16.parkai
4.patchkieque
12.pathcayé
I.chaquera-vampai
7.bee-eeka
9.víka
6.viiga