MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF BLACKFOOT PERSONAL NAMES

MIRANDA MCCARVEL

University of Utah

RYAN DENZER-KING

Rutgers

1. Introduction

Traditionally, the Blackfoot bestow names at birth. Names come from many sources: a living or

dead person from that person’s band, an attribute of the person in their first few weeks of life,

certain deeds of the father if he is a powerful man (Wissler 1912). While women’s names are

generally fixed, a man’s name can change many times throughout his life. Typical progression

includes a baby name, given a few weeks after birth, a youth name (often with an element of

ridicule) given after a boy comes back from his first war party, and an adult name once the

youth has distinguished himself and is considered a man (Wissler 1912). A person may choose

to change their own name or they may be given a name by someone else at any point in their

adult lives.

Blackfoot names often have some historical meaning. Lombard (2008) includes an

excerpt from an interview with a Blackfoot man named Kiitokííaapii (kíítokii ‘prairie chicken,’

náápi ‘Old Man’). Kiitokííaapii explains that his name refers back to a period in Blackfeet

history when they were at war with the Crow. During a skirmish between the two tribes, the

Blackfeet were outnumbered, and Kiitokííaapii and another man concealed themselves in a

group of willow trees and were helped by a flock a prairie chickens, who flew out of the

thicket as the Crow approached, concealing the young men, who were able to escape in order

to bring back reinforcements (Lombard 2008:59-60). This is one example of how Blackfoot

names serve to reference and preserve personal and cultural memories. de Jong (1914) provides

another example of how personal accomplishments make their way into personal names. A man

who stole a much-coveted black horse in broad daylight derived three names from this event.

He named his son ‘Black-horse-rider,’ his daughter ‘Day-steals-woman,’ and his nephew ‘Day-

rider’ (de Jong 1914:112). Personal names encapsulate personal and tribal experiences and

history.

As there are papers that discuss the cultural aspects of Blackfoot personal names and

naming practices (Lombard 2008, Wissler 1912), this paper focuses on the morphology of

Blackfoot personal names. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the morphological

composition of Blackfoot names. We analyze the roots, stems, and affixes used to form

personal names and highlight some unique ways in which they are combined. Throughout we

use (whenever possible) the orthography developed by Donald G. Frantz. §2 gives a general

overview of what elements can be in Blackfoot names, and what sorts of combinations are

possible. §3 takes a detailed look at seventeen names taken from Uhlenbeck (1912), a

collection of texts recorded from the Aamsskáápipikani (Southern Peigan) Blackfeet people,

and includes transliterations from Uhlenbeck’s mostly phonetic system of spelling to Frantz’s

modern phonemic orthography. §4 provides a summary and conclusions.

2. Name composition

Blackfoot personal names can be combinations of nouns, verbs, adjectives and other parts of

speech used to describe items and concepts found in daily life. The Blackfoot do not restrict the

parts of speech that can be combined to form Blackfoot names; all parts of speech may freely

combine to form a name. The only restriction appears to be one of animacy. Gender in the

Blackfoot language is an animate/inanimate distinction, with nominal roots being either animate

or inanimate, and verb roots indicating the animacy of their subjects (for intransitive verbs) and

objects (for transitive verbs) (Frantz 1991). Volitional entities (humans, animals, spirits) are

always animate, but non-volitional entities (plants, rocks, man-made items) can be either

animate or inanimate (though the majority are inanimate). There does not seem to be a

definitive criterion for predicting the animacy of a non-volitional entity, though cultural

importance seems to be often associated with animacy, as is the case for other gender

languages (see Birchall 2008). After reviewing our sample of Blackfoot personal names, it

appears that all personal names must be composed of animate roots. This is almost to be

expected given that humans are always animate. Yet aside from animacy there is little

restriction on the composition of Blackfoot personal names.

The free composition of Blackfoot names can be seen in the examination of a few

personal names. The name, Sikimiå’χkitopi, Black-horse-rider’ (analyzed in detail in §3 below)

combines two animate intransitive verbs to form a proper noun, while the name Kyáietapò

‘Went-to-the-bear’ combines an animate noun with an animate intransitive verb (see §3 below).

The name Ksiksínopa ‘White-quiver’ combines the adjectival prefix for white with the noun for

‘quiver.’ The few names given here show common combinations and the names analyzed in §3

cover a fuller range of possible combinations. The restriction of animacy is also illustrated in

§3 below.

3. Analysis

This section analyzes a sample of seventeen names taken from Uhlenbeck (1912) and de Jong

(1914). The first fourteen names are from Uhlenbeck (1912), and are all male names. In order

to include some female names, three examples were taken from de Jong (1914). Throughout,

names are presented with original orthographic representation on the first line, followed by a

transcription in Frantz’s orthography (currently the most widely used orthography for the

Blackfoot language), a line separating out the individual morphemes in the name, and finally a

morphemic English gloss and free English translation (taken from the original sources). When

no modern equivalent for certain morphemes or names could be found in Frantz and Russell

(1995), we have created a more modern orthographic representation based on standard

Blackfoot spelling rules (e.g., replacing Uhlenbeck’s <x> and <χ> with Frantz’s <h>).

One of the most basic Blackfoot personal names involves the combination of a noun

and the suffix indicating personhood. The name in (1) below is composed of the animate noun

káínaa ‘Blood’ and the suffix –ikoan ‘male person.’

(1) Káinaikoăn

Káínaikoan

káínaa-ikoan

Blood-male.person

‘Blood’

The word káínaa refers not to human blood, for which the relevant root is aáápin (which is

inanimate), but to the Blood tribal division of the Blackfoot. The double <a> at the end of the

noun is shortened. This is due to a vowel shortening rule found in Blackfoot, where a long

vowel (indicated orthographically by the doubling of the letter) is reduced when it occurs

before an affix that begins with a vowel, Vi: Vi / _ + V (Frantz 1991, 153).1 This

phonological process is common in Blackfoot and will be seen in other examples below.

The use of nouns and affixes is a productive way of forming personal names in

Blackfoot. In (2) below the personal name is composed of an animate noun with an adjectival

prefix.

(2) Ksiksínopa

Ksikksínopaa

ksikk- onopa

white-quiver

‘White-quiver’

Ksiksínopa appears to combine the affix ksikk ‘white’ (see (8) below for a discussion of

ksikk) with what we believe to be the root for quiver: o(n)nopa. When reviewing the two words

used for quiver, asonnopa’tsis ‘quiver for arrows’ and ponopaan ‘quiver of arrows,’ both words

appear to have the morpheme o(n)nopa in common. Both asonnopa’tsis and ponopaan are

inanimate nouns. The use of the morpheme o(n)nopa instead of either of these nouns may be

due to animacy restrictions. The presence of the word medial <i> is likely due to initial

change in Blackfoot, where /o/ commonly changes to [i]. See Proulx (2005) for a historical

perspective. This <i> triggers the affrication of <k> to <ks>, as both <k> and <t>

affricate in Blackfoot when they precede an <i>, though /k/ does so only sporadically, leading

Frantz to posit two underlying forms of /i/ (Frantz 1991).

(3) Otsímmokuistαmik

Otssímmokoyistamik

otss-ímmokoyi-stámik

green-grass-bull

‘Green-grass-bull’

As in (2), (3) shows the use of a color adjectival stem. Such stems occur frequently in names

recorded in Uhlenbeck (1912) and de Jong (1914). The original orthography shows the raising

of /o/ to [u] in the root ímmokoyi. This raising occurs sporadically, but especially before /y/.

On the other hand, there does not seem to be a principled environment in which Uhlenbeck

transcribes <α> versus <a>. Since Blackfoot has a single phonemic low vowel, it is likely

that in an attempt to be as phonetically accurate as possible, Uhlenbeck simply transcribed

whichever vowel quality he perceived.

(4) Sépistòkòs

Síppisttooko’s

sipisttoo-oko’s

owl-offspring

‘Owl-child’

Sépistòkòs ‘Owl-child’ is formed by combining two animate noun stems, sipisttoo ‘owl’

(literally ‘night announcer’) and okós ‘child.’ The shortening of the three <o>’s can be

explained by the vowel shortening phonological rule: Vi: Vi / _ + V (Frantz, 153). There is

no rule regarding the reduction of <tt> to <t> in Uhlenbeck’s orthography, but this may

possibly be explained by differences in orthography, dialect, or translation. Uhlenbeck simply

may have not represented the double stop. Another could be difference in speaker dialect.

Sépistòkòs was a Kainaa (Blood) from whom Uhlenbeck solicited data, while most of Frantz’s

data is from Siksika (Blackfoot) speakers. Another reason could be that Frantz is fluent in

Siksika, while Uhlenbeck used an interpreter, Joseph Tatsey. Thus Uhlenbeck may simply have

not noticed the gemination of the /t/ in this name.

(5) Síkimiå'χkitopi

Síkimiohkitopii

sikimi-ohkitópii

be.black-ride.horseback

‘Black-horse-rider’

Síkimiå'χkitopi, also mentioned by de Jong (1914) and may have been the same

individual that Uhlenbeck (1912) references. The name, Síkimiå'χkitopi ‘Black-horse-rider’

combines two animate intransitive verbs to create a noun. The first is sikimi ‘to be black.’ This

verb is only used when speaking of animals. The second verb is ohkitópii ‘ride on horseback,’

which literally translates as ‘sit upon.’ Uhlenbeck’s <å> (presumably a phonetic [ɔ])

represents /o/, and his <χ> corresponds to modern orthographic <h>. The difference in the

long /i/ present in the underlying form versus the short /i/ transcribed by Uhlenbeck is likely

due to error, especially since long vowels are often shortened word-finally. An interesting

aspect of this name is the reference to the horse. There is no evidence of either word used to

describe horses, ota’s ‘mount’ or ponokáómitaa ‘horse.’ Since sikimi is only used when

referring to animals and ohkitópii means ‘to ride horseback,’ this is unexpected. Apparently the

verb ‘ride horseback’ is sufficient to introduce a horse as a discourse reference, thus triggering

the use of the stem sikimi, which is only used for animals.

(6) Nínoχkyàio

Nínohkiááyo

nínaa-kiááyo

chief-bear

‘Bear-chief’

The -oh- in (6) is a common, seemingly lexicalized, prefix that shows up only word-

internally before certain roots, especially those signifying body parts or family relations, but

also kiááyo, as in sikohkiááyowa ‘black bear,’ from sik- ‘black’ + kiááyo ‘bear.’ Surprisingly,

what we would expect to be the modifier in this name comes last, with the root appearing

initially. This is in contrast to many other Blackfoot names and seemingly contradicts the

Righthand Head Rule (henceforth RHR; originally proposed in Williams 1981), which states

that in compounds, the rightmost element derives the category of the compound. It might be

possible to say instead that ‘chief’ is the modifier here, preserving the idea behind the RHR.

However, this is questionable in two regards. One reason is that Joseph Tatsey, Uhlenbeck’s

interpreter, chose ‘Bear-chief’ as the translation rather than ‘Chief-bear.’ Treating ‘chief’ as the

modifier goes against the more literal interpretation of the English translation. A second reason

is that in following Tatsey’s translation, we find an expected asymmetry between the words for

‘chief’ and ‘man,’ viz., that ‘chief’ is initial while ‘man’ is final (cf. Okína ‘Breast-man,’ from

ok- ‘breast’ and nínaa ‘man’). This provides a distinguishing feature between the two otherwise

identical roots nínaa ‘chief’ and nínaa ‘man.’

(7) Nisoótskina

Niisóótskina

Niisó-mootskína’yi

four-horn

‘Four-horns’

The short vowel in the original transcription in (7) is no doubt an error; as discussed

above, early transcribers of Blackfoot rarely transcribed the vowel length distinction

consistently (when at all). The same may be true of the single accent over the second /o/.

Blackfoot has no rising accent. However, sequences of identical vowels can have low tone

followed by high tone (though only across a syllable boundary). While we have assumed that

the short and long /o/ merge, preserving the accent in niisó, it is also possible that the vowels

are not merging, leading to the form Niisoóótskina, where the accent shifts to the first syllable

of the root. This form could have been misheard as Nisoótskina. The disappearance of word-

medial /m/ is a common feature of Blackfoot, and additionally applies to other sonorants as

well as /s/ (which is exceptional in Blackfoot, and in fact may count as a sonorant). This

marginal consonant deletion may relate to the low perceptibility of prevocalic sonorants word-

initially, and seems to occur primarily when two roots are joined (e.g., the underlying /n/ in

isttoan ‘knife’ is preserved before a person marking suffix as in isttoana ‘knife-3,’ but lost in

the compound omahksísttoayáapiikoan ‘American, lit. big-knife-person’). The loss of the final -

’yi in the root is unexplained. This loss is also attested in iitskinaiksi ‘Horn society’ (with

initial change, and the animate plural suffix -iksi). Shortening could be due to a reanalysis of

this final syllable as the obviative suffix -yi and subsequent stripping of the person-marking

suffix in isolation. This might be supported by the fact that, especially in rapid speech, there is

little phonetic difference between mootskína’yiiksi ‘animal horns’ and the hypothetical form

mootskínaiksi, which would be the plural form of mootskína.

(8) A'pssùyi

Áápsstoyi

aap-yisstoyi

white-have.whiskers

‘White-whiskers’

(8) presents another example of a color root, in this case another root for ‘white.’ The

root aap(i) is likely older than ksikk- as a root for ‘white,’ since aapi can also mean generally

light-colored, whereas ksikk- means specifically ‘white.’ Many animal names contain aap(i).

Blackfoot has five basic color terms: white, yellow, red, blue/green, and black, which

corresponds to stage IV in the Berlin and Kay (1969) hierarchy. The more general root aap(i)

may date from an earlier stage in Blackfoot or Algonquian history when there were only two

color terms, one for light/warm colors and one for dark/cool colors. As discussed above,

marginal consonant deletion is common in Blackfoot, and the sequence iss generally undergoes

i-deletion (Frantz 1991); these process lead from underlying /pyiss/ to surface [pss]. The

absence of the /t/ in yisstoyi is probably due to transcription error. The <u> above is due to

/o/ raising as discussed previously.

(9) Kyáietapò

Kiááyitapoo

kiááyo-itapoo

bear-go.to

‘Went-to-the-bear’

(9) provides another example of a name formed by combining a noun and a verb. The

name Kyáietapò is translated in past tense, probably due to the fact that forms not marked as

durative or future are often interpreted as past tense. This could also be influenced by the

pragmatics of names, which often refer to historical or personal events. The spelling <ky> for

the initial /ki/ emphasizes the fact that the vowels /i/ and /o/ often become glides when they

occur after a consonant but before another vowel. The <e> in the original transcription shows

an example of /i/ lowering, which is sporadic but fairly common in Blackfoot. However,

Blackfoot only has one phonemic front vowel, so instance of phonetic or orthographic e stem

from underlying /i/.

(10) Nápiua

Náápiwa

náápi-wa

old.man-3

‘Old Man’

Here Náápi signifies the Old Man character of Blackfoot narrative. Old Man (Náápi) is

an oft-recurring character in Blackfoot oral tradition, typically taking on the role of a mischief-

maker or immoral person (Wissler and Duvall 1908) in many ways similar to the trickster

Coyote character in other North American cultures. Unlike most names, this one takes the

standard proximate suffix -wa.

(11) Nínaisaiài

Nínaisaiai

nínaa-saiái

chief-goose

‘Goose-chief’

(11) is parallel to (6), and poses a similar problem for the RHR. The compound consists

of two nouns, yet the overall compound is treated as a human chief, even though the right-hand

root is ‘goose.’ The medial -i- is of uncertain origin, unless it indicates the presence of the

obviative suffix -yi within the compound, which seems unlikely.

(12) A'pekoχkùminimà

Áápikohkomiinimaa

waapikii-ohkomíí-ini-maaáí

skin.eruption-be.round-cut-robe

‘Round-cut-scabby-robe’

Another example of marginal consonant deletion occurs at the beginning of the name in

(12), where the initial /w/ in waapikii is dropped word-initially. Vowel coalescence occurs in

the first two boundaries. It is unclear why the final -áí of maaáí ‘robe’ is left off, though as in

(7) it might be an instance of reanalysis, where the -áí was reinterpreted as -á-yi with the

obviative suffix, which was then dropped in isolation. Alternately these may be instances of

simple word-final clipping.

(13) χ'pauα kskiu

Ihpawákkssskiwa

ohpawakki-sski-wa

scar-face-3

‘Scar-face’

In Scar-face we see initial change from /o/ to /i/. Uhlenbeck frequently did not

distinguish between short and long consonants, but the expected form has a long /kk/ from the

root ohpawakki as well as an extra-long /sss/, from the long /ss/ in sski and k-affrication before

/ss/, which yields the expected form Ihpawákkssskiwa.

(14) Katoyísa

Katoyísa

katoyís-wa

blood.clot-3

‘Clot-of-blood’

This is one of the simplest names in our sample, with no mismatch between the original

orthographic form and the expected form. (14) is an example of an animate noun with the

proximate (3rd person) suffix.

(15) Ksískstαkyake

Ksísskstakiaakii

ksísskstaki-aakíí

beaver-woman

‘Beaver-woman’

Since Uhlenbeck (1912) contains few, if any, female names, this form is from de Jong

(1914). The first element is the root for ‘beaver,’ with the original transcription lacking the

length on the second /s/, but otherwise as expected. The root for ‘woman’ shows reduction of

the previous root-final /i/ to the glide /y/, and the final /ii/ shows lowering to /e/ in the original

orthographic form.

(16) Étomauayake

Ítoomaawayaakii

otoom-waawayáki-aakíí

first-strike-woman

‘First-strike-woman’

As discussed in previous examples, the initial o- in the initial otoom- undergoes initial

change to i-. Here the verbal root is waawayáki ‘strike.’ This name may represent a type of

pun, in that the actual form of the name features either truncation of the verbal root, or the

absence of the root aakíí ‘woman,’ even though it is included in the translation. Thus the namer

may have been playing with the fact that the root for ‘strike’ ends with the same vowels and

consonants as the root for ‘woman.’ n (16) we have represented the name as replacing the final

part of the root with the long vowels of aakíí. However, in de Jong’s orthography long vowels

were not typically distinguished, so the sequence <ake> could represent /aki/ or /aakii/ (as

before, /i/ lowers to [e]).

(17) Matsenámayake

Matsináámayaakíí

matsowá’p-náámaa-aakíí

fine-gun-woman

‘Fine-gun-woman’

The clipping in the root for ‘fine’ in (17) is unexpected but not uncommon in Blackfoot

names and other compounds. This clipping may stem from the large number of related roots in

Blackfoot that involve longer or shorter forms of the same original root, e.g., mi’k- vs.

mi’kotsi, both of which are roots for ‘red.’ Another oddity in (17) is the presence of /y/

between náámaa and aakíí. This may be an error on the part of the transcriber (cf. the similarity

to examples (15) and (16), which all have an underlying /y/ before aakíí) or could reflect the

presence of the obviative suffix -yi as part of the compound ‘fine gun.’

As a general note, it is worthwhile to mention that names given in isolation do not seem

to feature the person-marking suffixes typical of Blackfoot nouns (exceptions are in (10), (13),

and (14)). Nouns are marked either as proximate (commonly called 3rd person) with the suffix

-wa, if they are the topic of discourse, or as obviative (commonly called 4th person) with the

suffix -yi, if they are not the topic of discourse. There is also the much rarer subobviative suffix

-iaii (commonly called 5th person), which is reserved only for family relations and possessions

of non-topic discourse referents. Further discussion of person-marking in Blackfoot can be

found in Uhlenbeck (1938), Frantz (1991), Pustet (1994), and Bliss (2005). This lack of person-

marking on isolated names stands in contrast to the general tendency for person-markers to be

used in isolation with common nouns. The root for ‘heart,’ mósskitsipahp, will typically be

given as mósskitsipahpi, with the obviative person-marking suffix (since the stem is inanimate,

it cannot receive proximate person-marking), rather than as the bare stem.

4. Conclusion

As shown, Blackfoot personal names can be formed from nouns, verbs, and adjectives using

stems, roots, and affixes. Even tense markers can be seen in names. The original intent of the

research leading to this paper was to analyze Blackfoot personal names for a phonological

marker within the name that would indicate to the listener that the word used was a personal

name. This was stimulated by the fact that Blackfoot names are often common words used in

daily conversation, such as Okoέsaua ‘Bellyfat,’ O'mahksistséksin'aikoan Big-snake,’ and

Nisóhkyaio ‘Four-bears.’ While we did not find a phonological marker, we did discover some

of the interesting ways in which Blackfoot names are formed. We also found that parts of

speech used in Blackfoot name composition must be animate.

1 The following abbreviations are used in this paper: V – vowel; : - long; and 3 – 3rd person animate singular

REFERENCES

Berlin, Brent and Paul Kay. 1969. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution.

Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Birchall, Joshua. 2008. “Determining Gender Markedness in Wari’.” In Proceedings of the 11th

Annual Workshop on American Indigenous Languages, ed. Joye Kiester & Verónica

Muñoz-Ledo, pp. 15-24. (Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics 19.) Santa Barbara:

University of California Press.

Bliss, Heather. 2005. “Topic, Focus, and Point of View in Blackfoot.” In Proceedings of the

24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. John Alderete and other, pp. 61-

69. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

Frantz, Donald G. and Norma Jean Russell. 1995. Blackfoot Dictionary. Toronto: University of

Toronto Press.

Frantz, Donald G. 1991. Blackfoot Grammar. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Josselin de Jong, Jan Petrus Benjamin de, and Black-Horse-Rider. 1914. Blackfoot texts from

the Southern Peigans, Blackfoot reservation, Teton county, Montana, with the help of

Black-Horse-Rider collected and published, with an English translation, by J. P. B. de

Josselin de Jong. Amsterdam J. M ller.

Lombard, Carol Gaye. 2008. An Ethnolinguistic Study of Niitsitapi Personal Names. University

of South Africa Thesis.

Proulx, Paul. 2005. “ nitial Change in Blackfoot.” Calgary Papers in Linguistics 26 1-26.

Pustet, Regina. 1994. “Obviation and Subjectivization.” Studies in Language 19:37-72.

Uhlenbeck, C. C. 1938. A Concise Blackfoot Grammar. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Noord-

Hollandsche Uitgevers-Maatschappij.

Uhlenbeck, C.C. 1912. A New Series of Blackfoot Texts. Amsterdam: North Holland

Publishing Co.

Williams, Edwin. 1981. “On the Notions ‘Lexically Related’ and ‘Head of a Word.’”

Linguistic Inquiry 12:245-274.

Wissler, Clark. 1912. “Social Organization and Ritualistic Ceremonies of the Blackfoot

Indians.” Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History Vol. VII.

Part I.

Wissler, Clark. and D. C. Duvall. 1908. “Mythology of the Blackfoot Indians.”

Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History Vol. II. Part I.