Cover not available
Part of
Language Contact and Change in the Americas: Studies in honor of Marianne Mithun
Edited by Andrea L. Berez-Kroeker, Diane M. Hintz and Carmen Dagostino
[Studies in Language Companion Series 173] 2016
► pp. 385–410

Words for ‘dog’ as a diagnostic of language contact in the Americas

| Leiden University
| Leiden University
| Russian State University for the Humanities
Words for ‘dog’ are frequently borrowed in several parts of the world, including the Americas. Often words for ‘dog’ are borrowed along with other lexical material. The study of the distribution of these borrowed words can serve as a first step towards the identification of evidence for linguistic and cultural contact. We offer three case studies from the Americas that illustrate how the identification of borrowings of ‘dog’ can lead to discoveries of intricate networks of interaction and provide surprising evidence for prehistorical commercial relations. The three areas studied are: Native California, the U. S. Southeast together with Mesoamerica, and the central Andes together with the eastern lowlands of South America.
Keywords: Californian languages, lexical borrowing, Mesoamerican languages, pre-Columbian interaction networks, Uru-Chipayan languages
Published online: 19 April 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.173.17pac
References (135)
References
Adelaar, Willem F.H. 1987. Comentario a Alfredo Torero, ‘Lenguas y pueblos altiplánicos en torno al siglo XVI’. Revista Andina 5(2): 373-375.Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willemwith the collaboration of Pieter Muysken, . 2004. The Languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. The Languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logo
Allen, Glover M. 1920. Dogs of the American aborigines. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 63(9): 431-517.Google Scholar
Anawalt, Patricia Rieff. 1992. Ancient cultural contacts between Ecuador, West Mexico, and the American Southwest: Clothing similarities. Latin American Antiquity 3(2): 114-129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Applegate, Richard. 1973. A sketch of Ventureño Chumash. Ms. <[URL]>
. 2007. Samala-English Dictionary. A Guide to the Samala Language of the Ineseño Chumash People. The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians in collaboration with Dr. Richard B. Applegate, Ph.D. and the Santa Ynez Chumash Education Committee.Google Scholar
Beam de Azcona, Rosemary G., Arellanes Arellanes, Francisco, Hernández Luna, Mario Ulises, Manzano Corona, Miriam Itzel, Morales Camacho, Sofía Gabriela, & Wagner Oviedo, Carlos de Jesús. In press. Umlaut (armonía vocálica) en el desarrollo histórico de las lenguas zapotecas. In Debates en torno a la lingüística histórica indomexicana, Lucero Meléndez & Marcela San Giacomo (eds). México DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Anthropológicas.
Beeler, Madison S. & Klar, Kathryn A. 1977. Interior Chumash. The Journal of California Anthropology 4(2): 287-305.Google Scholar
Berman, Howard. 2001. Chimariko linguistic material. In The Collected Works of Edward Sapir, Vol. 14: Northwest California Linguistics, Victor Golla & S. O’Neill (eds), 1039-1076. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blau, Harold. 1964. The Iroquois white dog sacrifice: Its evolution and symbolism. Ethnohistory 11(2): 97-119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2002. Notes on sources of Yurok glottalized consonants. In Proceedings of the Meeting of the Hokan-Penutian Workshop, June 17-18, 2000, University of California at Berkeley [Survey of California and Other Indian Languages, Report 11], Laura Buszard-Welcher (ed.), 1-18. Berkeley CA: The Survey of California and Other Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Bricker, Victoria R., Poot Yah, Eleuterio & Dzul de Poot, Ofelia. 1998. A Dictionary of the Maya Language As Spoken in Hocabá, Yucatán. Salt Lake City UT: The University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Bright, William & Gehr, Susan. 2005. Karuk Dictionary. Happy Camp CA: Karuk Tribe of California.Google Scholar
Brizinski, Morris & Savage, Howard. 1983. Dog sacrifices among the Algonkian Indians: An example from the Frank Bay site. Ontario Archaeology 39: 33-40.Google Scholar
Broadbent, Sylvia M. 1964. The Southern Sierra Miwok Language [University of California Publications in Linguistics 38]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Broadbent, Sylvia M. & Pitkin, Harvey. 1964. A comparison of Miwok and Wintun. In Studies in Californian Linguistics [University of California Publications in Linguistics 34], William Bright (ed.), 19-45. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Brothwell, Don, Malaga, A. & Burleigh, Richard. 1979. Studies on Amerindian dogs, 2: Variation in early Peruvian dogs. Journal of Archaeological Science 6(2): 139-161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Cecil H., Wichmann, Søren, & Beck, David. 2014. Chitimacha: A Mesoamerican language in the Lower Mississippi Valley. International Journal of American Linguistics 80(4): 425-474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buckwalter, Albert S. & Ruiz, Roberto. 2007. Mocoví [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Buckwalter, Albert S. & Sánchez, Orlando. 2007. Toba [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Buckwalter, Albert S. & Suárez, Julio. 2007. Pilagá [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Burchell, Simon. 2007. Phantom Black Dogs in Latin America. Loughborough: Heart of Albion Press.Google Scholar
Callaghan, Catherine. 2014. Proto Utian Grammar and Dictionary [Trends in Linguistics: Documentation 31]. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callaghan, Richard T. 2003. Prehistoric trade between Ecuador and West Mexico: A computer simulation of coastal voyages. Antiquity 77(298): 796–804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Camp, Elizabeth & Liccardi, Millicent. 2007. Itonama [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1988. The Linguistics of Southeast Chiapas, Mexico [Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation 50]. Provo UT: Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Cerrón-Palomino, Rodolfo. 2006. El chipaya o la lengua de los hombres del agua. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Google Scholar
Cerrón-Palomino, Rodolfo & Ballón Aguirre, Enrique. 2011. Chipaya. Léxico-etnotaxonomía. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Google Scholar
Cipolletti, Maria Susana. 1982. Jenseitsvorstellungen bei Indianern Südamerikas. PhD dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich.
Clutton-Brock, Juliet & Hammond, Norman. 1994. Hot dogs: Comestible canids in Preclassic Maya culture at Cuello, Belize. Journal of Archeological Science 21(6): 819-826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colton, Harold S. 1970. The Aboriginal Southwestern Indian dog. American Antiquity 35(2): 153-159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cordy-Collins, Alana. 1994. An unshaggy dog story. Natural History 103(2): 34.Google Scholar
Créqui-Montfort, Georges de & Rivet, Paul. 1913. Linguistique bolivienne. La langue lapaču ou apolista. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 45: 512-531.Google Scholar
Davis, James T. 1961. Trade Routes and Economic Exchange among the Indians of California [Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 54]. Berkeley CA: University of California Berkeley Anthropology Department.Google Scholar
Eatough, Andrew. 1999. Central Hill Nisenan Texts with Grammatical Sketch [University of California Publications in Linguistics 132]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Edmonson, Barbara Wedemeyer. 1988. A Descriptive Grammar of Huastec (Potosino Dialect). PhD dissertation, Tulane University, New Orleans LA.
Eliade, Mircea. 1951. Le chamanisme et les techniques archaïques de l’extase. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Estatutos orgánicos y reglamentos de la nación originaria uru, Año 0–2000, Chipaya, Muratu, Iruhito, Coro, Isluga, Uru. Kiriwill qamanakz̄tan nijz̄ cheqanchis̄tanpacha tiy wajtha qalltiñiki uruz̄, Wata roy–pis̄l, Chipaya, Muratu, Iruhitu, Koro, Isluka, Uroz. 2001. [Serie Marka 19]. Oruro: Centro Diocesano de Pastoral Social (CEDIPAS) and Nación Originaria Uru (N.O.U.).Google Scholar
Fabre, Alain. 1995. Lexical similarities between Uru-Chipaya and Pano-Takanan languages: Genetic relationship or areal diffusion? Opción 11(18): 45-73.Google Scholar
Fernández de Miranda, María Teresa. 1995. El protozapoteco [Serie Estudios de lingüística y literatura 28], Michael J. Piper & Doris A. Bartholomew (eds). México DF: El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Lingüísticos y Literarios and Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew, Blevins, Juliette, & Conathan, Lisa. 2005. Preliminary Yurok Dictionary. Berkeley CA: Yurok Language Project, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Gatschet, Albert S. & Swanton, John R. 1932. A Dictionary of the Atakapa Language Accompanied by Text Material [Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 108]. Washington DC: United States Printing Office.Google Scholar
Gill, Ruth & Gill, Wayne. 2007. Trinitario [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Golla, Victor. 2011. California Indian Languages. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Grant, Anthony P. 1994. Karankawa linguistic materials. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 19(2): 1-56.Google Scholar
Guerra Eissmann, Ana María. 2007. Yagán [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Haynie, Hannah, Bowern, Claire, Epps, Patience, Hill, Jane & McConvell, Patrick. 2014. Wanderwörter in languages of the Americas and Australia. Ampersand 1: 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofling, Charles Andrew. 2011. Mopan Maya – Spanish – English Dictionary. Diccionario Maya Mopan – Español – Inglés. Salt Lake City UT: The University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Hofling, Charles Andrew with Félix Fernando Tesucún . 1997. Itzah Maya – Spanish – English Dictionary. Diccionario Maya Itzaj – Español – Inglés. Salt Lake City UT: The University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Holman, Eric W., Brown, Cecil H., Wichmann, Søren, Müller, André, Velupillai, Viveka, Hammarström, Harald, Sauppe, Sebastian, Jung, Hagen, Bakker, Dik, Brown, Pamela, Belyaev, Oleg, Urban, Matthias, Mailhammer, Robert, List, Johann-Mattis & Egorov, Dmitry. 2011. Automated dating of the world’s language families based on lexical similarity. Current Anthropology 52(6): 841-875. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosler, Dorothy H. 1988. Ancient West Mexican metallurgy: South and Central American origins and West Mexican transformations. American Anthropologist 90(4): 832-855. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosler, Dorothy, Lechtman, Heather & Holm, Olaf. 1990. Axe-Monies and Their Relatives [Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology 30]. Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William HortonJr. 1964. A Grammar of the Washo Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Jany, Carmen. 2009. Chimariko Grammar: Areal and Typological Perspective [University of California Publications in Linguistics 142]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Judy, Robert A. 2007. Movima [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Karttunen, Frances. 1983. An Analytical Dictionary of Classical Nahuatl. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1964. Materiales lingüísticos para el estudio de las relaciones internas y externas de la familia de idiomas mayanos. In Desarrollo cultural de los mayas, Evon Z. Vogt & Alberto Ruz (eds), 81-136. México DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coordinación de Humanidades, Centro de Estudios Mayas.Google Scholar
. 1976. Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Mayaland and associated areas of Meso-America. World Archaeology 8(1): 101-118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1980. Pre-Columbian borrowings involving Huastec. In American and Indo-European Studies in Honor of Madison S. Beeler, Kathryn Klar, Margaret Langdon, & Shirley Silver (eds), 101-112. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keller, Kathryn C. & Luciano, Plácido G.. 1997. Diccionario chontal de Tabasco. Tucson AZ: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Koch-Grünberg, Theodor. 1923. Vom Roroima zum Orinoco. Ergebnisse einer Reise in Nordbrasilien und Venezuela in den Jahren 1911–1913, Dritter Band: Ethnographie. Stuttgart: Strecker und Schröder.Google Scholar
Kroeber, Alfred L. 1907. The Washo language of East Central California and Nevada. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 4(5): 251-317.Google Scholar
. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California [Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78]. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
. 1941. Culture Element Distributions, XV: Salt, Dogs, Tobacco [Anthropological Records Vol. 6, No. 1]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1944. The historical position of Chicomuceltec in Mayan. International Journal of American Linguistics 10: 159-160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1963. Yokuts Dialect Survey [Anthropological Records Vol. 11(3)]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Larsen, Ramón. 1997. Vocabulario huasteco del Estado de San Luis Potosí. México DF: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano and Dirección General de Asuntos Indígenas de la Secretaría de Educación Pública.Google Scholar
Lastra de Suárez, Yolanda. 1986. Las áreas dialectales del náhuatl moderno. México DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Lathrap, Donald W., Collier, Donald, & Chandra, Helen. 1976. Ancient Ecuador: Culture, Clay and Creativity, 3000-300 B.C. Chicago IL: Field Museum of Natural History.Google Scholar
Latocha, Hartwig. 1982. Die Rolle des Hundes bei südamerikanischen Indianern [Münchner Beiträge zur Amerikanistik 8]. Hohenschäftlarn: Renner.Google Scholar
. 1983. Der Hund in den alten Kulturen Mittel- und Südamerikas. In Zur frühen Mensch-Tier-Symbiose [Kolloquien zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie 4], Hermann Müller-Karpe (ed.), 219-241. Munich: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
Launey, Michel. 1992. Introducción a la lengua y a la literatura náhuatl. México DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Leonard, Jennifer A., Wayne, Robert K., Wheeler, Jane, Valadez, Raúl, Guillén, Sonia & Vilà, Carles. 2002. Ancient DNA evidence for Old World origin of New World dogs. Science 298: 1613-1616. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levy, Richard L. 1976. Costanoan Internal Relationships. Berkeley CA: Archaeological Research Facility, Department of Anthropology, University of California.Google Scholar
Lugo, Bernardo. 1978 [1619]. Gramatica en la lengva general del nvevo reyno, llamada mosca. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispánica del Centro Iberoamericano de Cooperación.Google Scholar
Mason, J. Alden. 1918. The Language of the Salinan Indians [University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 14(1): 1-154]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Medina Pérez, Alberto & Alveano Hernández, Jesús. 2011. Vocabulario español-p’urhépecha; p’urhépecha-español, 2nd edn. México DF: Plaza y Valdés, S. A. de C. V.Google Scholar
Miller, Wick R. & Hill, Kenneth C. 2003. Miller’s Uto-Aztecan Cognate Sets, revised and expanded by Kenneth C. Hill. Ms.
Mithun, Marianne. 2010. Contact in North America. In Handbook of Language Contact, Raymond Hickey (ed.), 673-694. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morán, Francisco de. 1695. Arte y vocabulario de la lengua Cholti que quiere decir la lengua de Milperos. Manuscript Collection 497.4/M79, American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia.
Muysken, Pieter. 2008. Introduction. In From Linguistic Areas to Areal Linguistics [Studies in Language Companion Series 90], Pieter Muysken (ed.), 1-23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, Stanley. 1944. Yokuts Language of California [Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 2]. New York NY: Viking Fund.Google Scholar
Norcliffe, Elizabeth. 2003. The reconstruction of Proto-Huastecan. MA thesis, University of Canterbury.
Noyer, Rolf. 2012. Diccionario etimológico y comparativo de las lenguas huaves. Ms.
Ochoa Peralta, María Ángela. 1984. El idioma huasteco de Xiloxuchil, Veracruz. México DF: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Google Scholar
Olson, Frances & Olson, Ronald D. 2007. Chipaya [Intercontinental Dictionary Series], Bernard Comrie (ed.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Oswalt, Robert L. 1958. Russian loanwords in Southwestern Pomo. International Journal of American Linguistics 24(3): 245-247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1964a. A comparative study of two Pomo languages. Studies in Californian Linguistics [University of California Publications in Linguistics 34], William Bright (ed.), 149-162. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1964b. The internal relationships of the Pomo family of languages. XXXV Congreso International de Americanistas, 413-427. México DF: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2012. The fox in the Andes: An alternative interpretation of the trickster. Anthropos 107: 481-496.Google Scholar
. 2013. Surprise!. .. and its encoding in Kamsá and other languages of western South America. In Wege im Garten der Ethnologie. Zwischen dort und hier. Festschrift für María Susana Cipolletti [Collectanea Instituti Anthropos 46], Hanna Heinrich & Harald Grauer (eds), 203-221. Sankt Augustin: Academia.Google Scholar
Payne, David L. 1991. A classification of Maipuran (Arawakan) languages based on shared lexical retentions. In Handbook of Amazonian Languages, Vol. 3, Desmond C. Derbyshire & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds), 355-499. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pérez Martínez, Vitalino, García, Federico, Martínez, Felipe, & López, Jeremias. 1996. Diccionario del idioma ch’orti’. La Antigua Guatemala: Proyecto Lingüístico Francisco Marroquín.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Harvey. 1985. Wintu Dictionary [University of California Publications in Linguistics 95]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Quirós, Seberino Bernardo de. 2013. Arte y vocabulario del idioma huasteco (1711). Edición crítica con anotaciones filológicas de Bernhard Hurch. Madrid: Iberoamericana.Google Scholar
Read, Kay Almere & González, Jason. 2000. Handbook of Mesoamerican Mythology. Oxford: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Rosat Pontacti, Adalberto. 2004. Diccionario enciclopédico quechua-castellano del mundo andino. Cochabamba: Editorial Verbo Divino.Google Scholar
San Román, Francisco J. 1890. La lengua cunza de los naturales de Atacama. Revista de la dirección de obras públicas: sección de geografia 5: 77-94. Santiago de Chile: Imprenta Gutenberg.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1909. Takelma Texts [University of Pennsylvania. Anthropological Publications of the University Museum II(1)]. Philadelphia PA: University Museum.Google Scholar
. 1922. The Takelma Language of Southwestern Oregon. Handbook of American Indian Languages, Part 2 [Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 40], Franz Boas (ed.). Washington DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward & Swadesh, Morris. 1953. Coos-Takelma-Penutian comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 19(2): 132-137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapper, Karl Theodor. 1912. Ueber einige Sprachen von Südchiapas. Reseña de la 2ª sesión del XVII Congreso Internacional deAmericanistas efectuada en la ciudad de Méxicodurante el mes de septiembre del 1910 (Congresodel Centenario) , 295-320, México.
Sawyer, Jesse O. 1965. English-Wappo Vocabulary [University of California Publications in Linguistics 43]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shaul, David Leedom. n.d. Esselen Texts and Glossary. Santa Bárbara Mission Archive-Library. <[URL]> (2 August 2013).
Shaul, David Leedom. 2014. A Prehistory of Western North America: The Impact of Uto-Aztecan Languages. Albuquerque NM: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Shepherd, Alice. 2005. Proto-Wintun [University of California Publications in Linguistics 137]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shipley, William F. 1963. Maidu Texts and Dictionary [University of California Publications in Linguistics 33]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris. 1947. The phonemic structure of Proto-Zapotec. International Journal of American Linguistics 13(4): 220-230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1963. La lingüística de las regiones entre las civilizaciones meso-americanas y andinas. Actas del XXIII Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, San José de Costa Rica, 20-27 julio 1958, Vol. 1, 123-136.Google Scholar
Tapia Zenteno, Carlos de. 1767[1975]. Noticia de la lengua huasteca que en beneficio de sus nacionales, de orden del ilmô. Sr. Arzobispo de esta Santa Iglesia Metropolitana, y a sus expensas, da Carlos de Tapia Zenteno. México DF: Imprenta de la Biblioteca Mexicana. Reprint: Vaduz – Georgetown: Cabildo.Google Scholar
Termer, Franz. 1926. Über die Mayasprache von Chicomucelo. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference of Americanists , 926-936.
Tito, Raul Y., Belknap III, Samuel L., Sobolik, Kristin D., Ingraham, Robert C., Cleeland, Lauren M., & Lewis, Cecil M., Jr. 2011. Brief communication: DNA from Early Holocene American dog. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 145(4): 653-657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torero, Alfredo. 1992. Acerca de la familia lingüística uruquilla (uru-chipaya). Revista Andina 19(1): 171-191.Google Scholar
. 2002. Idiomas de los Andes: Lingüística e historia. Lima: Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos, Editorial Horizonte.Google Scholar
Torres Cisneros, Gustavo. 2004. Mixes [Pueblos indígenas del México contemporáneo]. México DF: CDI, PNUD.Google Scholar
Turner, Christy G. 2002. Teeth, needles, dogs, and Siberia: Bioarchaeological evidence for the colonization of the New World. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World, Nina G. Jablonski (ed.), 123-158. San Francisco CA: Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Turner, Katherine. 1987. Aspects of Salinan Grammar. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Uhle, Max. 1919. Fundamentos étnicos de la región de Arica y Tacna. Boletín de la Sociedad Ecuatoriana de Estudios Históricos Americanos 4(2): 1-37.Google Scholar
Uldall, Hans Jørgen & Shipley, William. 1966. Nisenan Texts and Dictionary [University of California Publications in Linguistics 46]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ultan, Russell. 1967. Konkow Grammar. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Vellard, Jehan. 1954. Dieux et parias des Andes. Les Ourous, ceux qui ne veulent pas être des hommes. Paris: Emile-Paul.Google Scholar
. 1967. Contribución al estudio de la lengua Uru [Cuadernos de Lingüística Indígena 4]. Buenos Aires: Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Vilà, C., Maldonado, J.E., & Wayne, R.K. 1999. Phylogenetic relationships, evolution, and genetic diversity of the domestic dog. The Journal of Heredity 90(1): 71-77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wachtel, Nathan. 1990. Le retour des ancêtres. Les indiens urus de Bolivie XXe-XVIe siècle. Essai d’histoire régressive. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Whistler, Kenneth. 1977. Wintun prehistory: An interpretation based on linguistic reconstruction of plant and animal nomenclature. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 3: 157-174.
Whistler, Kenneth W. & Golla, Victor. 1986. Proto-Yokuts reconsidered. International Journal of American Linguistics 52(4): 317-358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Nancy Marie & Weinstein, Richard A. 2008. The Mexican connection and the Far West of the U.S. Southeast. American Antiquity 73(2): 227-277.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 1995. The Relationship among the Mixe-Zoquean Languages of Mexico. Salt Lake City UT: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
. 2013. A classification of Papuan languages. In History, Contact and Classification of Papuan Languages [Language and Linguistics in Melanesia, Special Issue 2012], Harald Hammarström & Wilco van den Heuvel (eds), 313-386. Port Moresby: Linguistic Society of Papua New Guinea.Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren & Brown, Cecil H. 2003. Contact among some Mayan languages: Inferences from loanwords. Anthropological Linguistics 45(1): 57-93.Google Scholar
. n.d. Panchronic Mayan Dictionary [Database with 6,800+ reconstructions and corresponding cognate sets].
Wichmann, Søren, Müller, André, Wett, Annkathrin, Velupillai, Viveka, Bischoffberger, Julia, Brown, Cecil H., Holman, Eric W., Sauppe, Sebastian, Molochieva, Zarina, Brown, Pamela, Hammarström, Harald, Belyaev, Oleg, List, Johann-Mattis, Bakker, Dik, Egorov, Dmitry, Urban, Matthias, Mailhammer, Robert, Carrizo, Agustina, Dryer, Matthew S., Korovina, Evgenia, Beck, David, Geyer, Helen, Epps, Patience, Grant, Anthony, & Valenzuela, Pilar. 2013. The ASJP Database (version 16). <[URL]>.
Willey, Gordon R. 1974. Das alte Amerika [Propyläen Kunstgeschichte 18]. Berlin: Propyläen.Google Scholar
Wyatt, Andrew R. n.d. The food and cuisine of Precolumbian Mesoamerica. Ms.
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Anza-Burgess, Kasia, Dana Lepofsky & Dongya Yang
2020. “A Part of the People”: Human-Dog Relationships among the Northern Coast Salish of SW British Columbia. Journal of Ethnobiology 40:4 ► pp. 434 ff. DOI logo
Mitchell, Peter
2017. Disease: A Hitherto Unexplored Constraint on the Spread of Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) in Pre-Columbian South America. Journal of World Prehistory 30:4 ► pp. 301 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.