Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, LINGUISTICS (linguistics.oxfordre.com). (c) Oxford University Press USA, 2016. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited. Please see applicable Privacy Policy and Legal Notice (for details see Privacy Policy).

date: 21 August 2017

Muskogean Languages

1. Distribution

When Europeans began exploring the southeastern United States, the Muskogean languages were spoken in what is now Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and north Florida. In 2015 they were spoken in Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida.

2. Internal Classification

All linguists recognize that the Muskogean languages constitute a family of related languages thought to descend from Proto-Muskogean. Table 1, for example, shows related words for ‘foot’ and ‘dog’ in IPA showing inalienable and alienable possessive prefixes in each language.

Table 1. Inalienable and Alienable Possessive Prefixes

Choctaw

Alabama

Mikasuki

Muskogee

English

ijji

ijji

iːji

ilí

‘his/her foot’

sa-jji

ʧa-jji

ʧa-ːji

ʧa-lí

‘my foot’

ʧi-jji

ʧi-jji

ʧi-ːji

ʧi-lí

‘your foot’

pi-jji

po-jji

po-ːji

po-lí

‘our feet’

ofi

ifa

iːfi

ifá

‘dog’

am-ófi

am-ifa

am-iːfi

am-ífa

‘my dog’

ʧim-ófi

ʧim-ifa

ʧim-iːfi

ʧim-ífa

‘your dog’

pim-ófi

pom-ifa

pom-iːfi

pom-ífa

‘our dog’

Source: Martin, 2004, p. 71.

There is also agreement on the low-level grouping of languages within the Muskogean family. All linguists appear to accept the groups in Table 2.

Table 2. The Muskogean Family

a.

Chickasaw-Choctaw: Chickasaw, Choctaw

b.

Alabama-Koasati: Alabama, Koasati

c.

Apalachee

d.

Hitchiti-Mikasuki

e.

Muskogee (Creek, Seminole Creek)

Source: Martin, 2004, p. 71.

Of the five groups in Table 2, the Chickasaw-Choctaw and Muskogee groups are the furthest apart lexically and grammatically. Haas (1979, p. 306) suggests that Alabama-Koasati and Hitchiti-Mikasuki were “more or less pulled between these two poles.” Groups b–e, for example, appear to share a development of final *iho to /o/(Haas, 1979; Booker, 1988). This group is sometimes called Eastern Muskogean; the Chickasaw-Choctaw group is then called Western Muskogean. Groups a–d share a development of Proto-Muskogean *kʷ to /b/ (Haas, 1947; Booker, 1993). This group is sometimes called Southern Muskogean (Swanton, 1922; Munro, 1985, 1987, 1993). Finally, groups b and d are sometimes grouped into a Central Muskogean (Booker, 1993).

Some of the phonological correspondences in the family can be seen in Table 3 (modified slightly from Martin, 2004; based on Haas, 1941, 1969; Booker, 2005). As Table 3 shows, /n/ in Chickasaw and Choctaw corresponds to /ɬ/ or /n/ in the other languages. In this case, Haas (1969) reconstructed a voiceless nasal in Proto-Muskogean. The words for ‘fish’ show final /i(Ɂ)/ in Chickasaw and Choctaw, corresponding to /o/ in the other languages. Booker (1988) reconstructed final *iho for correspondences like this. In the set for ‘mulberry’, we see /k/ in Muskogee corresponding to /b/ in the other languages. Here Haas (1947) reconstructed *kʷ.

Table 3. Developments in the Muskogean Languages

‘fish’

‘male’

‘mulberry’

‘yellow’

Proto-Muskogean

*n̥an̥iho

*nakni

*kʷihi

*lakna

Chickasaw

naniɁ

nakniɁ

bihiɁ

lakna

Choctaw

náni

nákni

bíhi

lakna

Alabama

ɬaɬo

naːni

bihi ‘fig’

laːna

Koasati

ɬaɬo

naːni

bihi ‘fig’

laːna

Mikasuki

ɬaːɬ-i

nakn-i

biːh-i

lakn-i

Muskogee

ɬaɬó

honánwa

kíː

láːn-iː

Source: Martin, 2004, p. 72.

Basic sources on the classification of the family include Booker (1988, 1993), Haas (1941, 1947, 1979), Martin (1994), and Munro (1985, 1987, 1993). Studies reconstructing aspects of Proto-Muskogean include Booker (1980, 1988, 1993, 2005), Broadwell (1993), Haas (1941, 1946, 1950, 1969, 1977), Kimball (1992), Martin (1994), Munro (1993), and Martin and Munro (2005).

3. Phonology

Most of the languages in the family have the consonant phonemes in Table 4.

Table 4. Consonant Phonemes in IPA

Labial

Alveolar

Palatal

Velar

Glottal

stops/affricate

p b

t

ʧ

k

fricatives

f

s ɬ

h

nasals

m

n

approximants

w

l

j

The phoneme /f/ may be rounded in some of the languages, leading some authors to use the symbol /ϕ‎/. In Hitchiti-Mikasuki, the phoneme /s/ is generally palatal.

Muskogee differs in lacking /b/, the only voiced obstruent in the other languages. In this case Proto-Muskogean *kʷ is thought to have developed as /b/ in all the languages except Muskogee, where *kʷ merges with *k or *p (Haas, 1947; Booker, 1993).

Choctaw and Chickasaw differ in having an additional fricative /ʃ/. Chickasaw has a phonemic glottal stop (Munro and Willmond, 1994).

The Muskogean languages all have the vowel phonemes in Table 5. Nasal vowels are phonetically long unless followed in the same syllable by a sonorant. Nasal vowels have a more restricted distribution than oral vowels.

Table 5. Vowel Phonemes in IPA

non-open

i iː ĩ

o oː õ

open

a aː ã

All the Muskogean languages make some use of tone. Tone in nouns is generally fairly limited, but all the languages make pitch distinctions in verbs to express grammatical aspect. The different pitch patterns (sometimes accompanied by nasalization, aspiration, etc.) are referred to as “grades.” In Koasati, for example, a pattern of low tone followed by high tone is used on the last two syllables of a verb for events. Rising tone on the same syllable indicates a resulting state (Gordon, Martin, & Langley, 2015):

(1)

Muskogean Languages

(2)

Muskogean Languages

Depending on the context, a verb stem in Koasati can appear without tone, with low tone, or with rising tone.

4. Grammar

All members of the family have basic subject, object, verb word order. Case marking appears at the ends of noun phrases and distinguishes subjects from nonsubjects (including patients, goals, and locations). In Muskogee (Creek), for example, the subject case is -(i)t and the nonsubject case is ‑(i)n (Martin, 2011, p. 22; spelled here in IPA):

(3)

Muskogean Languages

(4)

Muskogean Languages

(The variants -it and -in are found after consonants; -t and -n are found after vowels.) The same suffixes appear at the ends of clauses, where they indicate switch-reference:

(5)

Muskogean Languages

(6)

Muskogean Languages

In (5), woːhk-ít is used because the subject of that clause is the same as the following clause. In contrast, woːhk-ín is used in (6) to signal a change in subject. In Muskogee, then, -(i)t is used for subject or same-subject, and -(i)n is used for nonsubject or different-subject.

The Muskogean languages all have affixes on verbs agreeing with first- and second-person arguments. (Third person is generally not marked.) These person markers are divided into an agentive series (typically used for actions that are controlled) and a nonagentive series (typically used for states or actions that are not done intentionally). In Muskogee, for example, running, singing, and working are done deliberately. The first-person singular agentive suffix -ej- is therefore used with verbs expressing these actions:

(7)

Muskogean Languages

In contrast, being hungry, falling, and wanting are not done deliberately. The first-person singular nonagentive prefix ʧa- is used with verbs expressing these concepts:

(8)

Muskogean Languages

Agentive and nonagentive appear to be the best semantic labels for these two series of person markers. There are uses in each language, however, where these labels may require further explanation. In Koasati, for example, sobbǎjli-l ‘I know’/‘I have learned’ uses the agentive series (with first singular agentive -l(i) in Koasati), while the negative form ʧa-sobǎj-kõ ‘I don’t know’ uses the nonagentive series. Here the agentive series presumably reflects greater accomplishment. Similarly, most numerals are verbs in the Muskogean languages and use the agentive series for their subjects (again, possibly reflecting the idea that a certain number has been achieved).

A dative series of person markers may be used for participants that are less directly involved in a situation (typically used for benefactives, goals, sources, or experiencers). In Muskogee, the first-person singular dative prefix is am-:

(9)

Muskogean Languages

The nonagentive and dative series are also used for possessors on nouns. Returning to the data in Table 1, a Muskogee noun like ilí ‘(his/her) foot’ is inalienable. It uses the nonagentive series of person markers (10). A noun like ifá ‘dog’ is alienable. It uses the dative series of person markers (11):

(10)

Muskogean Languages

(11)

Muskogean Languages

A full noun phrase possessor precedes the possessed item:

(12)

Muskogean Languages

(13)

Muskogean Languages

Demonstratives follow nouns in Choctaw and Chickasaw, though they precede them in the other languages. Numerals and words translating as adjectives follow nouns in all the languages.

The Muskogean languages vary in the number of tense distinctions they have. Choctaw is described as having two past tenses (Nicklas, 1979; Broadwell, 2006, p. 171): -tok ‘past, perfect’ and -ttoːk ‘distant past’. Muskogee has five past tenses, from Past 1 (earlier today or last night) to Past 5 (very long ago) (Martin, 2011).

Verbs in the Muskogean languages that refer to motion or position often also encode the number of participants involved in the action. In Chickasaw (Munro and Willmond, 2008, pp. 176–177, 278–279), some verbs have a two-way distinction between singular and plural:

(14)

Muskogean Languages

Other verbs may indicate a three-way distinction between singular, dual, or triplural (indicating more than two):

(15)

Muskogean Languages

Verbs in the Muskogean languages also offer an array of choices for marking applicatives, direction, and evidentiality.

5. Individual Languages

5.1 Chickasaw

Until the 1830s, the Chickasaw were primarily concentrated in the northeastern part of what is now Mississippi. During the 1830s and 1840s, they were forcibly relocated to Indian Territory. The Chickasaw Nation was established in the south-central portion of Indian Territory, which became the state of Oklahoma in 1907. In 2015, Chickasaw had fewer than 75 speakers (Joshua D. Hinson, p.c.).

Chickasaw did not have a widely accepted spelling until the publication of Munro and Willmond (1994). In this system, the consonants are represented as /Ɂ/, b, ch /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, lh /ɬ/, m, n, p, s, sh /ʃ/, t, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short a, i, o; long aa /aː/, ii /iː/, oo /oː/; and nasal /ã/, /ĩ/, and /õ/.

Humes and Humes (1973) is an English–Chickasaw dictionary. Munro and Willmond (1994) is a bilingual Chickasaw–English dictionary. Munro (2005) gives an overview of the language and an analyzed text. Munro and Willmond (2008) is a textbook. Hinson, Dyson, and Munro (2012) is a book of Christian prayers in Chickasaw and English.

5.2 Choctaw

Choctaw is spoken in the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and in the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians. The numbers of speakers in Oklahoma have been declining rapidly: no accurate information currently exists.

Missionaries such as Cyrus Byington and Alfred Wright developed a writing system for Choctaw in the 19th century. In this system, the consonants are represented as b, ch /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, hl (before a vowel) or lh /ɬ/, m, n, p, s, sh /ʃ/, t, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short ʋ /a/, i /i/, u or o /o/; long a /aː/, i or e /iː/, o /oː/; and nasal /ã/, /ĩ/, and /õ/. Mississippi Choctaw has a newer alphabet in which lh is used for /ɬ/and in which the vowels are short a, i, o and long á, í, ó.

Wright (1880) and Byington (1915) are Choctaw–English dictionaries. Watkins (1892) is an English–Choctaw dictionary. Jacob, Nicklas, and Spencer (1977) and Haag and Willis (2001, 2007) are textbooks. Nicklas (1979) is a teaching grammar. Ulrich (1986) examines phonology and morphology. Davies (1986) considers the syntax within Relational Grammar. Broadwell (2005) is a sketch of the language with an analyzed text. Broadwell (2006) is a full reference grammar. There are few published texts for Choctaw other than the New Testament (American Bible Society, 1902), portions of the Old Testament, a hymnal (Wright and Byington, 1872), and laws and constitutions from the 19th century (see, e.g., Pitchlynn, 2013).

5.3 Alabama

Alabama is spoken alongside Koasati by members of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas. In the earliest records, the Alabama tribe was found in what is now northwestern Mississippi.

Sylestine, Hardy, and Montler (1993) introduced a spelling for Alabama. In this system, the consonants are b, ch /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, ɬ, m, n, p, s, t, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short a, i, o; long aa /aː/, ii /iː/, oo /oː/; and nasal aⁿ /ã/, iⁿ /ĩ/, and oⁿ /õ/.

Lupardus (1982) is a grammar. Sylestine, Hardy, and Montler (1993) is a dictionary. H. Hardy (2005) is a grammatical sketch and analyzed text.

5.4 Koasati

Koasati [ˌkowəˈsɑti] is spoken by members of the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana and of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas. In 2015, there were about 250 speakers in Louisiana (Bertney Langley, p.c.).

In 2007 the Coushatta Tribe held a community meeting to establish an alphabet. In this system, the consonants are b, ch /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, m, n, p, s, t, th /ɬ/, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short a, i, o; long aa /aː/, ii /iː/, oo /oː/; and nasal /ã/, /ĩ/, and /õ/.

The main sources on Koasati are a reference grammar (Kimball, 1991), a dictionary (Kimball, 1994), and a collection of traditional narratives (Kimball, 2010).

5.5 Apalachee

Apalachee [ˌæpəˈlæʧi] was formerly spoken in what is now northwestern Florida. The only record currently known is a letter written in Apalachee and Spanish to the King of Spain in 1688. The location of the original letter is unknown, but a facsimile was published in 1860 (Smith, 1860).

The most important analyses of the language based on this letter are a grammatical sketch (Kimball, 1987) and a vocabulary (Kimball, 1988).

5.6 Hitchiti-Mikasuki

Hitchiti [ˈhɪʧəˌti] and Mikasuki [ˌmɪkəˈsuki] were separate tribal towns sharing a single language, variously referred to as Hitchiti or Mikasuki (or Miccosukee). The language was formerly spoken in southern Georgia and northern Florida. Beginning in the 18th century, some speakers began moving into central Florida and identified themselves as Seminoles. Some speakers were removed with Muscogees to Indian Territory in the 19th century, where they formed the Hitchiti and Big Town tribal towns. A few others were removed with Seminoles to Indian Territory and became members of the Seminole Nation (Hitchiti band). The largest portion remained in central and south Florida. The language is now spoken by several hundred members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida.

John David West helped develop a practical alphabet in the 1960s. In this system, the consonants are b, ch /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, ł /ɬ/, m, n, p, sh /ʃ/, t, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short a, e /i/, o; long aa /aː/, ee /iː/, oo /oː/; and nasal /ã/, /ĩ/, and /õ/.

Gatschet (1884, 1888) provide a sketch and vocabulary of Hitchiti based on the speech of Judge G. W. Stidham, Muscogee (Creek) Nation, Indian Territory.

Mikasuki as spoken in Florida has been the subject of two dissertations (Derrick-Mescua, 1980; Boynton, 1982), and several papers by John David West (1962, 1974a, 1974b).

5.7 Muskogee (Creek)

In the 18th century Muskogee (or Creek) was spoken by members of several dozen tribal towns in Alabama and Georgia. Some of the Lower Creek towns in Georgia speaking Muskogee and Hitchiti-Mikasuki began moving into Florida and became known as Seminoles. From 1836 to 1840, most Muskogee speakers in Alabama and Georgia were removed to Indian Territory, where they established the Muscogee (Creek) Nation. As a result of the Second Seminole War (1835–1842), most Muskogee-speaking Seminoles were removed to Indian Territory where they established the Seminole Nation. In 2015, Muskogee was spoken in three locations: the Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, and the Seminole Tribe of Florida (where Hitchiti-Mikasuki is the dominant language).

Missionaries began developing a writing system for Muskogee in the 19th century. In this system, the consonants are c /ʧ/, f, h, k, l, m, n, p, r /ɬ/, s, t, w, and y /j/. The vowels are short v /a/, e /i/, u /o/; long a /aː/, ē /iː/, o /oː/; and nasal ą /ã/, ę̄ /ĩ/, and ǫ /õ/.

The main sources on Muskogee are two dictionaries (Loughridge and Hodge, 1890; Martin and Mauldin, 2000), a reference grammar (Martin, 2011), a grammatical sketch (D. Hardy, 2005), and two text collections (Gouge, 2004, Haas and Hill, 2015). Nathan (1977) is a description of Muskogee as spoken by Florida Seminoles. Hardy (1989) explores the meanings and uses of grammatical affixes.

5.8 Mobilian Jargon

Mobilian Jargon was a trade language used in the lower Mississippi Valley. The groups that used Mobilian Jargon in Louisiana were the Biloxi, Chacato, Apalachee, Alabama, Pakana, Tunica, Pascagoula, and Taensa (Sibley, 1832). Crawford (1978) and Drechsel (1997) are the major sources on the language. Drechsel (1996) is a vocabulary.

6. Distant Relations

Several linguists have speculated that the Muskogean languages might be distantly related to other languages. Swanton (1907, 1924) and Haas (1956) saw resemblances between Natchez and Muskogean. Sapir (1929, 1949) placed a group he called Natchez-Muskogian in his Hokan-Siouan. Haas (1951, 1952, 1969) grouped all of Atakapa, Chitimacha, Natchez, Tunica, and Muskogean into a group she called Gulf. Swanton (1929) saw similarities between Timucua and Muskogean. Greenberg (1987) grouped Gulf with Yukian in Penutian (see also Munro, 1994). Of these proposals, most specialists today would probably consider a connection between Natchez and Muskogean to be a promising, but as yet unproven, proposal.

Further Reading

H. Hardy and Scancarelli (2005b) is a book-length introduction with sketches of Alabama, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Muskogee. Articles providing descriptions of the family include Crawford (1975), Haas (1979), Martin (2004), Sturtevant (2005), Goddard (2005), and Munro (2015). Useful bibliographies of Muskogean and southeastern languages include Pilling (1889) and Booker (1991).

References

American Bible Society. (1902). The new testament of our lord and savior Jesus Christ translated into the Choctaw language. Pin chitokaka pi okchalinchi Chisvs Klaist in testament himona, chahta anumpa atoshowa hoke. New York: American Bible Society.Find this resource:

Booker, K. M. (1980). Comparative Muskogean: Aspects of Proto-Muskogean verb morphology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence. (Photocopy: University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI, 1980.)Find this resource:

Booker, K. M. (1988). The loss of preconsonantal *k in Creek/Seminole. International Journal of American Linguistics, 54, 371–386.Find this resource:

Booker, K. M. (1991). Languages of the aboriginal southeast: An annotated bibliography. Native American Bibliography Series 15. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.Find this resource:

Booker, K. M. (1993). More on the development of Proto-Muskogean *kw. International Journal of American Linguistics, 59, 405–415.Find this resource:

Booker, K. M. (2005). Proto-Muskogean phonology. In H. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the Southeastern United States (pp. 246–298). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Boynton, S. S. (1982). Mikasuki grammar in outline (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).University of Florida, Gainesville. (Photocopy: University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI, 1983.)Find this resource:

Broadwell, G. A. (1993). Subtractive morphology in Southern Muskogean. International Journal of American Linguistics, 59, 416–429.Find this resource:

Broadwell, G. A. (2005). Choctaw. In H. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the Southeastern United States (pp. 157–199). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Broadwell, G. A. (2006). A Choctaw reference grammar. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Byington, C. (1915). A dictionary of the Choctaw language. John R. Swanton & Henry S. Halbert (Eds.). Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 46, Washington, D.C. (Reprinted: Oklahoma City Council of Choctaws, 1973. Reprinted: St. Clair Shores, MI: Scholarly Press, 1978.)Find this resource:

Crawford, J. M. (1975). Southeastern Indian languages. In J. Crawford (Ed.), Studies in southeastern Indian languages (pp. 1–120). Athens: University of Georgia Press.Find this resource:

Crawford, J. M. (1978). The Mobilian trade language. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Find this resource:

Davies, W. D. (1986). Choctaw verb agreement and universal grammar. Studies in Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidell.Find this resource:

Derrick-Mescua, M. T. (1980). A phonology and morphology of Mikasuki (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Florida, Gainesville. (Photocopy: University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI, 1980.)Find this resource:

Drechsel, E. J. (1996). An integrated vocabulary of Mobilian Jargon, a Native American pidgin of the Mississippi Valley. Anthropological Linguistics, 38, 248–354.Find this resource:

Drechsel, E. J. (1997). Mobilian Jargon: Linguistic and sociohistorical aspects of a Native American pidgin. Oxford Studies in Language Contact. Oxford: Clarendon.Find this resource:

Gatschet, A. S. (1884). A migration legend of the Creek Indians, with a linguistic, historic, and ethnographic introduction. Vol. 1. Brinton’s Library of Aboriginal American Literature 4. Philadelphia: D. G. Brinton. (Reprinted: Kraus Reprint, New York, 1969.)Find this resource:

Gatschet, A. S. (1888). A migration legend of the Creek Indians, texts and glossaries in Creek and Hitchiti, with a linguistic, historic, and ethnographic introduction and commentary. Vol. 2. St. Louis: Printed for the author. (Reprinted: Tchikilli’s Kasi’hta Legend […]. Transactions of the Academy of Science of St. Louis 5, 1892. Reprinted: Kraus Reprint, New York, 1969.)Find this resource:

Goddard, I. (2005). The indigenous languages of the Southeast. Anthropological Linguistics, 47, 1–60.Find this resource:

Gordon, M., Martin, J. B., & Langley, L. (2015). Some phonetic structures of Koasati. International Journal of American Linguistics, 81, 83–118.Find this resource:

Gouge, E. (2004). Totkv Mocvse /New Fire: Creek Folktales. J. B. Martin, M. M. Mauldin, & J. McGirt (Eds. and Trans.). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Greenberg, J. H. (1987). Language in the Americas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Find this resource:

Haag, M., & Willis, H. (2001). Choctaw language and culture: Chahta Anumpa (Vol. 1). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Haag, M., & Willis, H. (2007). Choctaw language and culture: Chahta Anumpa (Vol. 2). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1941). The classification of the Muskogean languages. In L. Spier et al. (Eds.), Language, culture, and personality: Essays in Memory of Edward Sapir (pp. 41–56). Menasha, WI: Banta. (Reprinted: University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, 1960.)Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1946). A Proto-Muskogean paradigm. Language, 22, 326–332.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1947). Development of Proto-Muskogean *kw. International Journal of American Linguistics, 13, 135–137.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1950). On the historical development of certain long vowels in Creek. International Journal of American Linguistics, 16, 122–125.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1951). The Proto-Gulf word for water (with notes on Siouan-Yuchi). International Journal of American Linguistics, 17, 71–79.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1952). The Proto-Gulf word for land (with a note on Proto-Siouan). International Journal of American Linguistics, 18, 236–240.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1956). Natchez and the Muskogean languages. Language, 32, 61–72.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1969). The prehistory of languages. Janua Linguarum, Series Minor 57. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1977). From auxiliary verb phrase to inflectional suffix. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change (pp. 525–537). Austin: University of Texas Press.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R. (1979). Southeastern languages. In L. Campbell & M. Mithun (Eds.), The languages of native North America: Historical and comparative assessment (pp. 299–326). Austin and London: University of Texas Press.Find this resource:

Haas, M. R., & Hill, J. H. (2015). Creek (Muskogee) texts. J. B. Martin, M. M. Mauldin, & J. McGirt (Eds. and Trans.). University of California Publications in Linguistics 150. Berkeley: University of California Press.Find this resource:

Hardy, D. E. (1989). The Semantics of Creek morphosyntax (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rice University, Houston, Texas.Find this resource:

Hardy, D. E. (2005). Creek. In H. K. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 200–245). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Hardy, H. K. (2005). Alabama. In H. K. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 75–113). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Hardy, H. K., & Scancarelli, J. (2005a). Introduction. In H. K. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 3–7). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Hardy, H. K., & Scancarelli, J. (Eds.). (2005b). Native languages of the southeastern United States. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Hinson, J. D., John P. Dyson, J. P., & Munro, P. (2012). Anompilbashsha’ Asilhha’ Holisso. Chickasaw Prayer Book. Ada, OK: Chickasaw Press.Find this resource:

Humes, J., & Humes, V. M. (1973). A Chickasaw dictionary. Ada, OK: The Chickasaw Nation.Find this resource:

Jacob, B., Dale Nicklas, D., & Spencer, B. L. (1977). Introduction to Choctaw. Durant, OK: Choctaw Bilingual Education Program, Southeastern Oklahoma State University.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (1987). Grammatical sketch of Apalachee. International Journal of American Linguistics, 53, 136–174.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (1988). An Apalachee vocabulary. International Journal of American Linguistics, 54, 387–398.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (1991). Koasati grammar. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (1992). The Proto-Muskogean word for ‘woman; female’. International Journal of American Linguistics, 58, 239–241.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (1994). Koasati dictionary. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Kimball, G. D. (2010). Koasati traditional narratives. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Loughridge, R. M., & Hodge, D. M. (1890). English and Muskokee dictionary collected from various sources and revised and Dictionary of the Muskokee or Creek language in Creek and English. St. Louis: J. T. Smith.Find this resource:

Lupardus, K. J. (1982). The language of the Alabama Indians (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence. (Photocopy: University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI, 1983.)Find this resource:

Martin, J. B. (1994). Implications of plural reduplication, infixation, and subtraction for Muskogean subgrouping. Anthropological Linguistics, 36, 27–55.Find this resource:

Martin, J. B. (2004). Languages. In R. D. Fogelson (Ed.), Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 14. Southeast (pp. 68–86). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.Find this resource:

Martin, J. B. (2011). A grammar of Creek (Muskogee). Studies in the Anthropology of North American Indians. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Martin, J. B., & Mauldin, M. M. (2000). A dictionary of Creek/Muskogee, with notes on the Florida and Oklahoma Seminole dialects of Creek. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Martin, J. B., and Pamela Munro, P. (2005). Proto-Muskogean morphology. In J. Scancarelli & H. Hardy (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 299–320). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (1985). Proto-Muskogean LI and li deletion. Presented at the Conference on American Indian Languages, American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (1987). Introduction: Muskogean studies at UCLA. In P. Munro (Ed.), Muskogean linguistics (pp. 1–6). UCLA Occasional Papers in Linguistics 6. Los Angeles: University of California.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (1993). The Muskogean II prefixes and their implications for classification. International Journal of American Linguistics, 59, 374–404.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (1994). Gulf and Yuki-Gulf. Anthropological Linguistics, 36(2), 125–222.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (2005). Chickasaw. In H. Hardy & J. Scancarelli, (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 114–156). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Munro, P. (2015). American Indian languages of the Southeast: An introduction. In M. D. Picone & C. E. Davies (Eds.), Language variety in the South: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 21–42). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Find this resource:

Munro, P., & Willmond, C. (1994). Chickasaw: An analytical dictionary. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Munro, P., & Willmond, C. (2008). Let’s speak Chickasaw: Chikashshanompa’ kilanompoli’. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Nathan, M. (1977). Grammatical description of the Florida Seminole dialect of Creek (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tulane University, New Orleans.Find this resource:

Nicklas, T. D. (1979). Reference grammar to the Choctaw. Choctaw Bilingual Education Program. Durant, OK: Southeastern Oklahoma State University.Find this resource:

Pilling, J. C. (1889). Bibliography of the Muskhogean languages. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 9. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.Find this resource:

Pitchlynn, P. P. (2013). A Gathering of Statesmen: Records of the Choctaw Council Meetings 1826–1828. M. Haag & H. J. Willis (Eds. and Trans.) Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Find this resource:

Sapir, E. (1929). Central and North American languages. In The Encyclopaedia Britannica (14th ed., Vol. 5, pp. 138–141). London: Encyclopaedia Britannica Company. (Reprinted: In Mandelbaum, D. G. (Ed.). (1963). Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality (pp. 169–178). Berkeley: University of California Press; also, Johnson Reprint Corporation, New York, 1968.)Find this resource:

Sapir, E. (1949). Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture and personality. D. G. Mandelbaum (Ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Reprinted in 1963; also, Johnson Reprint Corporation, New York, 1968.)Find this resource:

Sibley, J. (1832). Historical sketches of the several Indian Tribes in Louisiana, south of the Arkansas River, and between the Mississippi and River Grande. In American State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States, Vol. IV, Class II: Indian Affairs (pp. 721–725). Washington, D.C.: Gales and Seaton.Find this resource:

Smith, B. (1860). Dos cartas en lengua apalachino y timuguana. New York: Buckingham Smith.Find this resource:

Sturtevant, W. C. (2005). History of research on the native languages of the southeast. In H. K. Hardy & J. Scancarelli (Eds.), Native languages of the southeastern United States (pp. 8–65). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Find this resource:

Swanton, J. R. (1907). Ethnological position of the Natchez Indians. American Anthropologist, 9, 513–528.Find this resource:

Swanton, J. R. (1922). Early history of the Creek Indians and their neighbors. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 73. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.Find this resource:

Swanton, J. R. (1924). The Muskhogean connection of the Natchez language. International Journal of American Linguistics, 3, 46–75.Find this resource:

Swanton, J. R. (1929). The Tawasa language. American Anthropologist, n.s. 31, 435–453.Find this resource:

Sylestine, C., H. K. Hardy, & T. Montler. (1993). Dictionary of the Alabama language. Austin: University of Texas Press.Find this resource:

Ulrich, C. H. (1986). Choctaw morphophonology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA.Find this resource:

Watkins, B. (1892). Complete Choctaw Definer: English with Choctaw definition. Van Buren, AR: J.W. Baldwin.Find this resource:

West, J. D. (1962). The phonology of Mikasuki. Studies in Linguistics, 16, 77–91. (Reprinted with corrections: USF Quarterly 12:2–8, 1974.)Find this resource:

West, J. D. (1974a). Mikasuki verb prefixes. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, North Dakota Session, 18, 67–75.Find this resource:

West, J. D. (1974b). Number in the Mikasuki verb stem. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, North Dakota Session, 18, 133–138.Find this resource:

Wright, A. (1880). Chahta leksikon: A Choctaw in English definition for the Choctaw academies and schools. St. Louis: Presbyterian.Find this resource:

Wright, A., & Byington, C. (1872). Vba ist taloa holisso. Choctaw hymn book (6th ed.). Richmond, VA: Presbyterian Committee of Publication.Find this resource: