University of Southern Denmark The Mayan Languages


Data Sources Listed by Author

The material in this section is in the form of an annotated bibliography. Each entry concludes with a) a list of the Mayan languages from which data has been excerpted, and b) the exact format of the date under which the language material is entered in the Comparative Vocabulary. Each source is thereby uniquely identified.

Thus under KAUFMAN 1969 appears the line "Aguacatec, Ixil, Mam, Teco (1969a)," which indicates that this source has contributed data on these four languages, and that the data is tagged with the date 1969a in the Comparative Vocabulary.

Where data has been excerpted from a facsimile or other form of reproduction, rather than from the original document, this is indicated by means of a slash (/) separating the date of the original from the date of the copy. Thus the Ixil data from ANONYMOUS 1824 is coded 1824/1935a, and a reference to the reproduction in GATES 1935 is provided.

If a work contains clearly documented data from a variety of sources, each source is listed separately under this work, and given a unique code (using the slash technique). Thus under FISHER 1973 are listed several documents (most of them unpublished manuscripts) which Fisher drew on, e.g. Blair's 1964 dissertation on Yucatec (1964a/1973).



Noticia de la lengua huasteca. Boletín de la Sociedad de Geografía y Estadistica de la Republica Mexicana. Second series, Vol. 2, pp. 733-790.

As noted years ago by Gates, this is a (plagiarized) copy of Tapia Zenteno 1767. In his note to the Peabody copy, Gates writes: "The Alejandre printed with so much flourish by the Museo Nacional is a mere straight plagiarism page after page of Tapia, with here and there a new sentence added to show he did something; all done as if he were the author." For the letters "A" and "B" Alejandre made some effort to integrate his new entries into Tapia Zenteno's list, at the same time correcting Tapia Zenteno's order where it was not strictly alphabetical; but by the time he reached "C", Alejandre seems to have given up on this attempt at integration and merely appends his additions to the end of each letter in Tapia Zenteno's list. Many of Alejandre's additions are of an abstract nature ("futuro," "fastidioso," etc.). As far as I can determine, there is not a single mention of Tapia Zenteno, so "plagiarism" seems to be the appropriate word here. According to Frederick Starr (1902:11), Alejandre was "a pure Indian of Huaxtec blood" who had just turned 74 when Starr met him (ca. 1900). For additional commentary, see Alejandre 1890.

Huastec (1870)



Cartilla huasteca con su gramática, diccionario y varias reglas para aprender el idioma. Mexico: Oficina Tipográfica de la Secretaria de Fomento. 179 pp.

This work contains 17 "chapters," most of them small (1-5 pp. each). The bulk of the material is found in chapter 7 (pp. 37-106) and chapter 8 (pp. 107-153). Chapter 7 is a Spanish-Huastec vocabulary, based heavily on Tapia Zenteno 1767 and Alejandre 1870 (q.v.). But there are many new words here which are not found in the 1767 and 1870 works. Presumably these are Alejandre's first-hand additions. Chapter 8 is a Huastec-Spanish vocabulary, apparently arranged by Alejandre. It does not fully match the Spanish-Huastec part. In general, the Huastec-Spanish portion seems to be the more conservative, in that more of Tapia Zenteno's forms are preserved verbatim here than in the Spanish-Huastec portion. On the whole, the work should be used with caution, since it contains numerous printing errors. Even the three-page list of errata (pp. 177-179) contains printing errors. Of special historical interest is the fact that some of the errors are continuations of errors made in the printing of Tapia Zenteno 1767. For example, the word "black" is correctly given as "ejec" in Tapia Zenteno's 1747 ms., but is apparently misspelled as "ejet" in the published 1767 version. Alejandre obviously copied his "ejet" from the 1767 version, sensed that something was wrong, however, and added "ejec" as a variant. This is further evidence that Alejandre was plagiarizing Tapia Zenteno (see above, Alejandre 1870). It is also evidence that Alejandre was checking some, if not all, of Tapia Zenteno's 18th century Huastec material against 19th century forms. One might cautiously conclude that where Alejandre did not add to or alter Tapia Zenteno's data, he found it unchanged in the 19th century.

Huastec (1890)



Aprendamos castellano. Una gramática española para los choles. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 54 pp.

This is a little grammar of Spanish, written in Spanish and Chol for Chol speakers. It contains eleven lessons, each with a short Spanish-Chol vocabulary explaining the items in the given lesson. Pages 43-48 contain a Spanish-Chol vocabulary, and pages 49-54 contain a Chol-Spanish vocabulary. The two versions of the vocabulary overlap but are not identical. Both are based on the actual data in the eleven lessons. I have incorporated material from the eleven lessons as well as from the two larger vocabularies.

Chol (1953a)



Materials on the Mam, Jacaltec <read Kanjobal>, Aquacatec, Chuj, Bachahom, Palencano, and Lacandon languages. Chicago: Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, No. 10.

This microfilm contains the field notes made by Andrade for the Carnegie Institution of Washington in 1931, 1935, and 1937 among Mayan Indians in Chiapas and Western Guatemala. I have included material from his first-hand recordings of Chuj (1931; pp. 866-910), Lacandon (1931; pp. 1121-1136), Kanjobal (1935; pp. 715-763), and Aguacatec (1937; pp. 916-964). The Kanjobal data is from Santa Eulalia and Barillas, areas which were classified as "Jacaltec" at the time of Andrade's investigations. All his Mayan material is excellent.

Aguacatec, Chuj, Kanjobal, Lacandon (1946)



"Mopan" notes (with Yucatec, Itza and Quekch'i) gathered in Bacalar, Corozal, San Luis, San Antonio, Belize in 1931 by Manuel J. Andrade. Chicago: Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, No. 246. 244 pp.

This manuscript contains first-hand Mopan data collected in 1931 by Andrade in the communities of San Luis (pp. 49-51) and San Antonio (pp. 52-95 and pp. 100-216). The data represents some of Andrade's very early work in his prodigious collection of Mayan language material (1930-1939). Though he had not yet worked out his Linguistic Survey forms, which he introduced in 1935 for the purpose of regularizing vocabulary sampling, nor adopted the IPA transcription system (this, too, he did in 1935), the data is sensitively recorded by an excellent linguist.

Mopan (1977)



Doctrina y confesionario en lengua ixil. Manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library.

Ixil (1824/1935a; in GATES 1935, q.v.)



Bocabulario de lengua tzeltal según el orden de Copanabastla. Manuscript. Chicago: Newberry Library.

Tzeltal (1571/1616; in GUZMAN 1616, q.v.)



Vocabulario breve de la lengua maya recogido por Isaias Armas en el pueblo de San José y San Luis. Manuscript. 53 ll. New Orleans: Tulane University Library.

This ms. was apparently purchased from Rudolf Schuller when Tulane bought his library in 1926. Arthur Gropp describes the ms. in his Manuscripts in the Department of Middle American Research (Pub. No. 5 in Tulane's Middle American Research Series, 1933:265): "Spanish-Maya vocabulary, incuding some 1500 Maya words. Carbon copy of title-page (language, author and place excepted) and of the Spanish words and expressions, the corresponding Maya (in this case) being inked in. (Evidently a number of these Spanish word-lists were prepared and distributed among Indians who supplied the Indian language equivalent.) Whenever the Indian was not familiar with the Maya word, he wrote in the answer, "no es conocido en el Maya", "no se conoce", or he repeated the same word in Spanish." The data is thus first-hand, and was probably recorded by (or for) Armas on the basis of responses from one or more native speakers. An unusual feature is the direct translation into Mayan of any parenthetical remark appearing in the Spanish list; thus "Madre (dice el hijo)" is rendered as "Náa (cuyalic le yal)." In addition to the main vocabulary, there are lists of plants and animals. A distinction is generally made between glottalized and non-glottalized stops (which was not always the case, unfortunately, in the 19th century). On the whole, the material is surprisingly reliable, considering the period, which is fortunate since this is one of the few sources we have for Itza.

Itza (1897a)



Lak t'an - a grammar of the Chol (Mayan) word. Ph.D. dissertation. Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Anthropology.

This manuscript of 382 pages consists of the following chapters: Chapter I - Overview (pp. 1-20); Chapter II - Phonology (pp. 21-98); Chapter III - Morphology (pp. 99-234); Chapter IV - Lexicon (pp. 235-351); Appendix (pp. 352-365); Bibliography (pp. 366-377); Table of Materials (pp. 378-382). The lexicon consists of a Chol-English word list arranged basically according to Chol roots. The appendix contains a list of the phonological rules employed in the text. Most of the data was collected by the author in and around Tila between 1971 and 1973. He credits Allen Turner with a few of the plant and animal names, which were collected in Limar (Municipality of Tila); this data is marked "AT" in the lexicon, but converted to "Allen Turner" in the database version. Some of the entries are tagged in the lexicon as "ed" for "Eastern dialects" (Tumbalá, Salto de Agua, Palenque) or "wd" for "Western dialects" (Tila, Sabanilla). Again, the full forms ("Eastern dialects", "Western dialects") have been entered in the database. The data seems on the whole to be very reliable.

Chol (1973)



Chol dictionary. Manuscript.

This is a 30-page typescript, with handwritten insertions and corrections, prepared by Evelyn Aulie on the basis of fieldwork done under the auspices of the Summer Institute of Linguistics. The data, which is arranged alphabetically in the form Chol-English, is available on microfilm. See under Materials on the Mayan Languages of Mexico.




Diccionario ch'ol-español, español-ch'ol. Serie de Vocabularios y Diccionarios Indígenas, No. 21. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 215 pp.

This is an excellent bilingual dictionary of Chol. The Chol-Spanish version (pp. 25-145) is longer than the Spanish-Chol version (pp. 147-183), primarily because it contains numerous examples of words used in context. Three Appendices supply information on Chol grammar (pp. 187-196), verb conjugations (pp. 197-209), and plants and animals (pp. 211-215). All the data is very well recorded and printed. In addition to marking glottalized consonants, the authors transcribe the glottal stop (as in /bu'ul/ "beans") and employ a six-vowel system. Most of the material comes from Tumbala, but variants are occasionally noted from Sabanilla and Tila. I have drawn heavily on this work, leaving the Tumbala forms unmarked (1978), and marking the others as "1978 S" and "1978 Ti", respectively.

Chol (1978)



Two studies on the Lacandones of Mexico. Summer Institute of Linguistics, Publication 33. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. 274 pp.

As the title indicates, this work is divided into two major parts: Part I (pp. 1-134) is entitled "Recent History of the Southern Lacandones," and Part II (pp. 139-253) is on "Lacandone Subsistence." An Appendix (pp. 255-267) provides statistics (name, date of birth, date of death if deceased, cause of death, etc.) for the 305 Lacandon individuals mentioned in Part I. As Baer and Merrifield remark (p. 17), "the Lacandones have been struggling at a precarious population level" for more than a century. According to their estimates (chart, p. 13) the Southern Lacandon population was at 67 in 1876, reached a nadir of 48 in 1946, and numbered 83 in 1968. Their study of these people is basically historical and ethnographic, with very little linguistic information offered as such. No vocabulary list is provided. I have, however, extracted a few words from the text, all of which appear to be first-hand. From a statement in the Introduction (p. 1), it seems likely that the linguistic forms were supplied by speakers in Lacanjá, Chiapas.

Lacandon (1971a)



Vocabulario de las lenguas castellana y maia. Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris. First series, Vol. 18, pp. 215-217.

This is a brief vocabulary (91 entries plus numerals) appended to Juan Galindo's report on Palenque. It contains no other information, except a date (Flores, Feb. 18, 1831) and the name, Perfecto Baezo. Galindo makes a brief reference to Baezo's vocabulary in his own paper (p. 213): "Plus loin est un vocabulaire de la langue maya, écrit par un Indien de la ville de Flores." Though small, Baezo's list is fairly important, since we have very little early data on Itza. Berendt later copied Baezo's word list and offered a few "corrections" (see Berendt 1864).

Itza (1832)



Tojolabales, tzeltales y mayas. Breves apuntes sobre antropología, etnografía y lingüística. Mexico: Talleres Gráficos de la Nación. 163 pp.

In 1928 Tulane University undertook the "John Gedinns Gray Memorial Expedition" to Central America under the leadership of Frans Blom. One of the members of the expedition was Carlos Basauri, "representative of the Secretary of Public Education in Mexico, in charge of the work in physical anthropology and ethnography." In 1931 Basauri published the report of his investigation. In addition to ethnographical material, the report contains linguistic data on Tojolabal (but not on Tzeltal or Yucatec). Pages 80-82 describe the symbols used; pages 82-96 contain a Spanish-Tojolabal vocabulary of words and phrases; and pages 97-99 contain some textual material with Spanish translation. The vocabulary is not alphabetized, but is ordered roughly according to semantic category. The material is apparently first-hand, but it is inconsistently recorded. For example, /c!hat/ is recorded in three different ways: tch/ch/tsh. This suggests that the data might have been recorded by more than one person, perhaps under the direction of Basauri. Though the glottal stop is used frequently (often where other sources have a consonant such as c/q/c'/q'), glottalized consonants appear only rarely.

Tojolabal (1931a)



Los chontales de Tabasco. Investigaciones Lingüísticas, Vol. 2, pp. 29-34.

This contains a short vocabulary of Chontal (pp. 33-34). It consists of 97 words, Spanish-Chontal, alphabetically arranged, with a few Yucatec cognates supplied in parentheses. In addition there is a small comparative vocabulary containing 21 words. Though small, this comparative list is of some value because of the scope of its dialectal investigation: the words are recorded in 11 different Chontal regions, 3 Chol regions, and 2 Yucatec regions - all in the state of Tabasco, Mexico. The vocabularies are first-hand, in the following sense: Becerra was Secretary of the district governed by Dr. Mestre Ghigliazza in Tabasco in 1912, at which time he ordered that these vocabularies be collected. Some of the collected lists were "signed by natvie interpreters or by school masters" (Becerra, 1934:34). It is not clear who collected the separate Chontal vocabulary, which is from the Chontalpa region, and is not one of the 11 Chontal regions appearing in the comparative list. These 11 Chontal regions show marked variation at times. The differences are particularly noticeable in three words: "stone" (/c!hata/ vs. /jitun/), "meat" (/becet/ vs. /yee/), and "face" (/jut/ vs. /ti/ vs. /pul/ vs. /c!hatoj/). Glottalization is not recorded, though vowel length is. The data seems to be without obvious misprints, and, except for the lack of glottalization, to be reasonably accurate.

Chol, Chontal, Yucatec (1934)



Arte de el idioma maya reducido á sucintas reglas y semilexicon yucateco. Mexico. 259 pp.

Beltran's grammar of Yucatec is "by far the best of early works" on Yucatec (Tozzer, A Maya Grammar with Bibliography and Appraisement of the Works Noted, 1921:164-165). It was apparently written around 1742, and has gone through several editions since the first printing in 1746. It contains a great deal of vocabulary material. In 1898 Perez published much of this vocabulary. Since I acquired Perez 1898 long before I got hold of a copy of Beltran, my material is "second-hand," and so indicated by means of the compound date, 1746/1898a. For further discussion see Perez 1898.

Yucatec (1746/1898a; in PEREZ 1898)




Berendt's copy of the Motul dictionary (manuscript, 1590). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library. 3 vols.

Berendt, though trained as a doctor, was one of the best Mayan linguists in the 19th century. A perfectionist, he published little, but left a large collection of manuscripts, most of which are now in Philadelphia. This particular ms. is his copy (with additions and emendations) of the original Motul ms. in the John Carter Brown Library, which he made in Providence, Rhode Island in 1864. Berendt's copy is in three volumes: Vol. 1 - Maya-Spanish, 4to., pp. viii, 1565; Vol. 2 - Spanish-Maya, 4to., pp. 508; Vol. 3 - additions and corrections, ca. 600 pages. Brinton, in his Catalogue of the Berendt Linguistic Collection (p. 3) observes that "very many errors are in <the original Motul ms.> which have been corrected in the present one, with infinite pains, by Dr. Berendt." Berendt's emendations come from his own knowledge of Yucatec and from the other great Yucatec vocabularies: the Ticul and the San Francisco manuscripts. The Motul dictionary is itself one of the most valuable of Mayan sources, and Berendt's meticulous copy, with its emendations, increases that value. Unfortunately, the cost of a copy of the original Motul ms. is prohibitive, so I have made (limited) use of Berendt's copy, assigning the data the compound date, 1590/1864. As a double check, I have added material from the 1929 publication of the Maya-Spanish portion of the Motul dictionary by Martínez Hernández (q.v.), tagging these entries 1590/1929. For further discussion, see under Motul Dictionary 1590 and Martínez Hernández 1929.

Yucatec (1590/1864)



Colección de palabras en el idioma del Petén. Manuscript. In: Berendt's Miscelanea I (pp. 37-40). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library.

This is Berendt's 1864 copy of Baezo 1832, with additions and a few corrections made by Berendt. Berendt's copy provides a good check on Baezo, since it is reasonable to assume that where Berendt made no emendations, he found Baezo's recordings acceptable.

Itza (1832/1864a)



Some words of the Chorti <read Pocomam> language of Zacapa. Manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library. 1 page.

This is a copy by Berendt (ca. 1864) of Gallatin's (1845) copy of Stephens' alleged Chorti <read Pocomam> vocabulary from 1839. Berendt's copy is perfect except for one item: "bread" is given as "semeet-ah" in Gallatin, but as "semet-ah" in Berendt (vowel length being lost). Stephens' list is also reproduced in Stoll 1884. For further comments see under Gallatin 1845, Stephens 1839, and Stoll 1884.

Pocomam (1839/1864b)



Lengua maya: dialecto del Petén. Manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library. 12 pp.

This is first-hand data recorded by Berendt at Sacluk in 1866-67. The handwriting is not up to Berendt's usual standard, though the native words, being printed, are more legible than the written Spanish glosses. There has been some discussion about what Berendt's "Petén" dialect really is. Thus J. Eric Thompson argued that it was not a dialect at all, but a confused mixture of Itza and Mopan (see his Ethnology of the Mayas of Southern and Central British Honduras, Field Museum of Natural History, Pub. 274; 1930:38), while Manuel Andrade concluded that the data differs very little from modern Yucatec and hardly warrants the label "dialect" (see Andrade's A Grammar of Modern Yucatec, Univ. of Chicago microfilm No. 41 in the Middle American Cultural Anthropology Series, 1955:442-445). I have discussed the issue in detail elsewhere (Dienhart, "On the Phonology of Itza"; Pre-publications of the English Department of Odense University, No. 37, 1986) and reached the conclusion that it is Itza. This opinion was shared by Philip Means, who translated most of Berendt's ms. document into English and published it as Appendix II in his History of the Spanish Conquest of Yucatan and of the Itzas (1917:188-191). Means' translation is very useful in working with the Spanish portion of the original ms., but his rendition contains errors of both omission and commission. To take but one example: the cross-bars on Berendt's consonants have been omitted, with the result that a number of glottalized consonants have inadvertently been converted to their non-glottalized counterparts. So the original ms. is much to be preferred, and this is the source used here. Berendt usefully adds an occasional Lacandon expression for comparison with the Itza forms. I have included these as well.

Itza, Lacandon (1867)



Apuntes sobre la lengua chaneabal con un vocabulario. Manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Library. 25 pp.

This little manuscript contains original material on Tojolabal (earlier called Chaneabal or Chañabal) recorded by Berendt in January 1870 in the town of Tuxtla Gutierrez. Unfortunately, Berendt was not too happy with his choice of informants in this particular case. They consisted of one Doña Tula Agnede de Figueroa (whom Brinton later describes as a "Spanish-American lady") and two of her servants. All three persons, says Berendt, had spent most of their lives in Comitán, where Tojolabal was spoken "by Indians and whites." Berendt fears, however, that the data may contain some errors since the Doña "no es muy fuerta en la lengua" and the two servants are "muy poco inteligentes." Berendt recorded the data in his new "Analytical Alphabet" (published by the American Ethnological Society in 1869). Pages 7-22 of the ms. constitute the main vocabulary (Spanish-Tojolabal). In 1888 Brinton published most of this ms. of Berendt's, translating it from Spanish into English ("On the Chane-abal (four language) tribe and dialect of Chiapas," American Anthropologist, 1888:77-96). Berendt's original ms. is much to be preferred, however, since Brinton's version contains a few printing errors and some infelicitous symbol changes.

Tojolabal (1870a)



Yucatec Maya noun and verb morpho-syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University. 127 pp. + Appendices (12 pp.).

This dissertation consists of a description of Yucatec phonology (pp. 1-26) followed by an analysis of Yucatec "morpho-syntax" (pp. 27-127). The (unnumbered) Appendices contain illustrations of verb paradigms and a short (2 pp.) Yucatecan text with grammatical analysis. Though Yucatec forms are, of course, cited throughout the ms., there is no separate vocabulary list. This makes it a rather daunting process to go through the document page by page, line by line, and pick out the individual lexical items. Fortunately, we have been spared this effort by the fine work done by William Fisher, who did just this for his own dissertation (see Fisher 1973). I have therefore relied on Fisher's excerpts, tagging this Blair material with the compound date 1964a/1973. Blair's recordings are excellent, and Fisher appears to have done his excerpting with commendable care. An important aspect of Blair's data is the inclusion of tone markings, a feature which was not viewed as relevant for Yucatec or any other Mayan language until Kenneth Pike's important 1946 article, "Phonemic Pitch in Maya" (International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 12, pp. 82-88).

Yucatec (1964a/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Spoken (Yucatec) Maya. Three vols. Chicago: University of Chicago, Dept. of Anthropology. Book I (Lessons 1-12), Book II (Lessons 13-18), Book III (Lessons 19-30).

This work aims at teaching spoken Yucatec to non-natives, such as Peace Corps volunteers, who are interested in attaining fluency in the language. The text consists of a large corpus of written transcriptions of taped material accompanied by a wide variety of drills. Short but relevant observations on pronunciation and grammar accompany the drills, and each lesson is followed by a vocabulary list of items found in that lesson. For his dissertation, William Fisher (see Fisher 1973) extracted an extensive number of Yucatec lexical items directly from the individual sentences throughout this work, supplying paragraph and sentence number for all his excerpts (e.g. 17.1.17 marks an item from Lesson 17, section 1, sentence 17), so every item can easily be traced back to its original source. Rather than duplicate Fisher's labors, I have relied on his list, marking the entries with the compound date 1967/1973. The original data is excellently recorded, with markings for both tone and intonation contours. The intonation markings are not reproduced by Fisher, which is natural since the excerpted lexical items are no longer in the context of an utterance. Fisher's reproductions are extremely reliable.

Yucatec (1967/1973; in FISHER 1973)



English-Yucatec Maya vocabulary (preliminary computerized version). Chicago: Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, No. 161. 176 pp.

As the title indicates, this is a computer printout of lexical items and phrases found in the three volumes of Blair and Vermont-Salas 1967 (q.v.), alphabetized by English gloss. There is a second microfilm (No. 160, 174 pp.), which provides a computer printout in the reverse order, Yucatec-English. I have used the English-Yucatec version, and that only partially, since it overlaps to a considerable extent with the material provided by Fisher 1973 (q.v.), who also reproduced much of the data in Blair and Vermont-Salas 1967. Each of the entries in the 1975 work is tagged with a number which indicates where it can be found in the 1967 volumes. Thus the Yucatec expression for the noun "back" (p. 30) is tagged as 16.1.2, which means that it can be found in Lesson 16, section 1, sentence 2 (in this case, page 744 of Volume 2). The computer format forced Blair and Vermont-Salas to make certain symbol modifications. For example "back" is transcribed as /pàac!hat/ in the original (1967:744), but as /pa'ac/ in the computer printout (1975:30). Both forms are converted to /pa<ac!hat/ in my system, the < symbol marking "low tone." The Blair/Vermont-Salas data is valuable from whatever source, since it is very well recorded, not least when it comes to marking tone.

Yucatec (1975a)






Data collected by John Dienhart during an interview in Denmark, July 1981, and in New Hampshire, June-July 1982.

Alejandre Bolles is a native Yucatec speaker married to the Mayanist, David Bolles. I am very grateful for their help and comments on much of the Yucatec material and for their contributions in the form of new data. They had a lot more to offer and I am sorry that time did not allow for a much larger collection of modern Yucatec data from this first-hand source. My transcriptions mark glottalization and vowel length, but not tone, which I was unable to detect with any consistency.

Yucatec (1981)



Gramática del lacandón. Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia. 152 pp.

This is a very useful and reliable source on the Lacandon. It opens with a discussion (pp. 11-18) of the distribution of this threatened group of Mayan speakers (Bruce estimates, p. 13, that there were no more than 300 Lancandones left when he visited them). Then come sections on Lacandon phonology (pp. 19-33), morphophonology (pp. 34-37), morphology (pp. 38-91), and syntax (pp. 92-108). The work concludes with a series of Appendices (pp. 109-148) which include, among other things, several Lacandon texts with interlinear Spanish translations. Unfortunately, for our purposes, the book contains no separate vocabulary list. Fortunately, we have been saved the laborious task of sifting through more than 100 pages of phonology, grammar and textual material to pick out the individual Lacandon vocabulary items. This has been done for us, and done well, by William Fisher, who included much of Bruce's Lacandon data in his own dissertation on proto-Yucatec (see Fisher 1973). I have relied on Fisher's reproductions, coding the data with the compound date 1968a/1973.

Lacandon (1968a/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Notes on the Kekchí language. American Anthropologist (new series), Vol. 4, pp. 441-463.

This article contains notes on Kekchi pronunciation, texts (with translation and grammatical analyses), and notes on numerals and personal names. One of the more suprising features of Burkitt's article is a clear description of the role of the glottal stop in Kekchi. He uses a dieresis to mark vowels which are cut off by glottalization, even offering minimal pairs such as "nä" (/na'/) for "mother" vs. "na" (/na/) for "perhaps", and "pö" (/po'/) "rot" vs. "po" (/po/) "moon". Also of interest are forms for "two lost numerals" (pp. 456-457). In an old Kekchi manuscript which he discovered in Cajabón, Burkitt found archaic forms for the numerals 8,000 (/c!hatuy/) and 160,000 (/calab/). No date is given for the ms., which seems subsequently to have passed into the possession of Charles Bowditch (according to fn. 1 in Burkitt 1905:272). Burkitt's article contains no vocabulary list, but I have extracted a few of the Kekchi forms from the text itself, including the two numerals.

Kekchi (1902a)



A Kekchi will of the 16th century. American Anthropologist (new series), Vol. 7, pp. 271-294.

Around 1900, Carl Sapper gave Burkitt a copy which he had made of a Kekchi will dated December 3, 1583. The manuscript was found in Carchá and was sent to the Berlin Museum after Sapper had made his copy. (This will is not the same as the Cajabón ms. Burkitt discusses in his 1902 paper.) In this article, Burkitt reproduces the will, which is 33 lines long, along with an interlinear rendition which "is the same thing made plain; that is, the Indian is deciphered in my phonetic alphabet, each word apart and without abbreviation" (Burkitt, 1905:273). One of the major differences between the two versions is that Burkitt has provided glottalization in his transcription. The will itself, for example, uses only "c" (or "qu") for all the stops in the series c/c'/q/q'. Burkitt's interlinear version "restores" the missing glottalization. The text of the will is followed (pp. 275-287) by Burkitt's translation of and linguistic commentary on each of the 33 lines. The article concludes (pp. 288-293) with a vocabulary, Kekchi-English, listing - in Burkitt's modified transcription - all the Kekchi words found in the will. According to Burkitt's count, the will contains about 112 Kekchi words, including Kekchi surnames, and 36 Spanish words. Given the fact that the document was 320 years old when Burkitt analyzed it, he was surprised not "that parts of the document should be obscure, but that so much of it should be clear" (p. 293). The few items I have extracted from this document bear the compound date 1583/1905.

Kekchi (1583/1905)






Historical linguistics and Quichean linguistic prehistory. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. 395 pp.

This is a very fine thesis on the Quichean languages: Cakchiquel, Tzutujil, Quiche, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Uspantec, and Kekchi. The work is structured as follows: Chapter I (pp. 9-113) - Generative dialectology (pp. 9-52) and Cakchiquel dialect word list (pp. 55-111); Chapter II (pp. 114-141) - Dialects of Quichean languages; Chapter III (pp. 142-170) - Sound change; Chapter IV (pp. 171-217) - Proto-Quichean (pp. 171-195) and Word list in Quichean languages (pp. 196-217); Chapter V (pp. 218-251) - Subgrouping; Chapter VI (pp. 252-303) - Proto-Mayan; Chapter VII (pp. 304-348) - Diffusion; Chapter VIII (pp. 349-365) - Philology. The thesis concludes with a bibliography (pp. 366-376) and two Appendices. Appendix I (pp. 377-390) deals with Sipacapa (a language which had just been "discovered" by Terrence Kaufman; see Kaufman 1976), and Appendix II (pp. 391-394) provides lists of the 20 day-names which Campbell collected for Quiche (from seven different communities, including Sacapulas), Cakchiquel, Pocomchi and Uspantec. I have incorporated practically all the material in the comparative word list (pp. 196-217). This consists of 296 lexical items for 7 languages, or approximately 2000 entries (there are a few gaps in the list). The data is sensitively recorded, and printing errors are few (since Campbell was obliged to put in a number of diacritics by hand, it is understandable that an occasional /c!hat/, for example, shows up as /c/, as in the entries for "stinking", p. 210). Because the lexical items are arranged basically by semantic class rather than alphabetically, I have indicated the page number for each of the entries (e.g. 1971b:203).

Cakchiquel, Kekchi, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche, Tzutujil, Uspantec (1971b)



Vocabulary of San Quintín. Manuscript and computer file. Copenhagen, Denmark: University of Copenhagen. 141 pp. (depending on page layout when printing the file).

Una Canger describes this vocabulary as follows: "Work on the present vocabulary of the Mayan language, Lacandón of San Quintín, was carried out between November 19, 1969, and January 25, 1970, in San Cristobal de Las Casas. My main informant was K'i:n Yùk Ba'tz', who came from San Quintín with his wife, two young children, and an uncle, Jorge, to San Cristobal de Las Casas to work with me. We all - I also had two children with me - lived together there in a rented house. I recorded some texts and songs with K'i:n's wife and his uncle, most of which K'i:n helped me transcribe. The work was done for Terry Kaufman, who financed it through a grant. What Terry wanted was a vocabulary elicited according to a method he had developed in his work with other Mayan Languages (T. Kaufman, 1968. 'Making Monosyllable Dictionaries of Mayan Languages'. Anthropological Linguistics). This method owes its success to the simple shape of roots in the Mayan languages: most of them are simply CVC. The method is: one figures out the phonology of the language, computes the possible roots, figures out the basic morphological patterns, and then sets up an elicitation frame."

Lacandon (1970)



Pronunciación de las letras del alfabeto en lengua maya. Manuscript. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum Library, Harvard. 18 pp.

This is a typewritten document on legal-size paper, consisting of 18 unnumbered pages. The first two pages contain notes on the Yucatec alphabet by Carrillo y Ancona. The remaining pages contain parallel lists of data from four Yucatec towns, all collected by various persons in 1893. The towns are: Peto (Sept. 19, pp. 3-6), Sotuta (no month or day given, pp. 7-10), Valladolid (Aug. 23, pp. 11-14), and Tizimin (Aug. 25, pp. 15-18). According to Tozzer, who reprinted the vocabularies - with English glosses - in his Maya Grammar (1921:293-301), "the document, which is a typewritten copy of the original lists of words, was purchased from Paul Wilkinson in the sale of his library by Mr. Charles P. Bowditch and presented by him to the Peabody Museum. This ms. has an introduction on Maya pronunciation by Crescencio Carrillo y Ancona. It is probable that the collection of words was made for a contemplated work by him on the Maya language" (1921:293). Both glottalization and vowel length are recorded and Tozzer is therefore justified in attaching some importance to this ms., not least because of the representative vocabularies from four widely separated Yucatec communities. I have found very few errors in Tozzer's copy, which is useful particularly for his additions of parallel forms from the Motul, Ticul, and San Francisco dictionaries. Here, however, I have drawn my data directly from the Peabody manuscript.

Yucatec (1893)



Aprendamos castellano. Una gramática castellana-tzotzil. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 73 pp.

This is intended as a grammar book for teaching Spanish to the Tzotzil Indians. Pages 1-52 consist of 15 lessons, each containing a list of sentences followed by exercises and paradigms, all in both Spanish and Tzotzil. At the end of each lesson is a short Spanish-Tzotzil vocabulary listing the words in that lesson. Pages 53-63 consist of a Spanish-Tzotzil vocabulary taken from all the texts. A Tzotzil-Spanish listing is given on pages 64-73. Though the two lists are nearly identical, there are many Tzotzil words that are not in either list, though they appear elsewhere in the book. I have included all the relevant words I could find, giving page numbers if the words are not from the vocabulary lists themselves. In the vocabulary lists, the verbs are generally listed in the third person singular present (thus the root /centsignac/ for "hold/take", Spanish "agarrar", is listed as "ta stsak", "agarra"). Since Cowan credits no other sources, it appears that his material may be first-hand. But I find such a high degree of correlation between Cowan 1956 and the 1949 Tzotzil vocabulary by Weathers and Weathers (q.v.) - also published by the S.I.L. - that it is likely that he was quite familiar with that work.

Tzotzil (1956)



Vocabulario tzotzil de San Andrés, Chiapas. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics (Serie de vocabularios indígenas No. 10). 81 pp.

This is very good material, apparently first-hand, collected in the municipalities of Bochil and Larrainzar. Pages 1-60 consist of a Tzotzil-Spanish list, and pages 61-81 of a Spanish-Tzotzil list. The Tzotzil-Spanish version is the richer of the two, since it includes a good deal of exemplification of individual words (in Tzotzil phrases) not found in the Spanish-Tzotzil list. Possessed nouns are cited with a prefixed third-person pronoun. The data is carefully and accurately presented, both linguistically and typographically. The few printing errors I have found can generally be spotted (and corrected) by cross-checking in the two vocabulary lists.

Tzotzil (1964)



Mopan vocabulary. Manuscript.

Mopan (1971c/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Lacandon vocabulary. Manuscript.

Lacandon (1971d/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Yucatec vocabulary. Manuscript.

Yucatec (1971e/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Towards the reconstruction of proto-Yucatec. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago.

This is a superb collection, organization, and analysis of lexical material on four Yucatecan languages: Itza, Lacandon, Mopan and Yucatec. Much of the data provided by Fisher had never before been published. This includes his own field notes on Lacandon (1971), Mopan (1971), and Yucatec (1971); manuscript material on Mopan from Otto Schumann (1971) and from Matthew and Rosemary Ulrich (1962, 1971); and data on Yucatec from Stephen Straight (1968). The material on Mopan and Lacandon is particularly welcome, since linguistic information on these languages is sparse. Fisher also performs a very useful service in extracting, with commendable accuracy, lexical items from three works which contain extensive Mayan material but no comprehensive vocabulary list: Blair 1964 (Yucatec), Blair and Vermont-Salas 1967 (Yucatec), and Bruce 1968 (Lacandon). I have incorporated this data as well. Fisher's thesis opens with synchronic studies of the phonology of each of the four languages: Yucatec (pp. 6-29), Mopan (pp. 30-60), Itza (pp. 60-70), Lacandon (pp. 70-96). Then comes a chapter on the reconstruction of proto-Yucatec (pp. 97-150). Appendix B (pp. 192-356) presents all the lexical material used in the thesis, nicely arranged in the form of 791 cognate sets (in the order: Yucatec, Mopan, Itza, Lacandon). This list thus contains over 3,000 entries for these four languages, most of which I have included. The cognates are arranged alphabetically by Mayan root, which means that it is not always easy to relocate an affixed or derived form if one is interested in checking my entry against the form in Fisher. To simplify this process, I have included the cognate set ("cs") number with each item. Thus /'al/ "heavy" for Mopan from Blair and Vermont-Salas is tagged as 1967/1973:cs11. Since Fisher is careful to cite the exact location (page, paragraph, item number, etc.) of all his excerpts, every entry can thus be traced back to its original source. The following list indicates the title and the date for each of the 11 different sources I have drawn on from Fisher's work. (Fisher actually makes use of 23 sources in his list of cognates. I have not, however, included those which can be easily accessed - such as Schumann 1971 - or which appear to be short specialized texts - such as the Ulrichs' "La Tuberculosis." In the case of Schumann 1971 (q.v.), which has been published and contains a nicely organized bilingual vocabulary, I have drawn directly from the original source itself.)

Robert BLAIR: Yucatec Maya noun and verb morpho-syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1964.

Yucatec (1964a/1973)

Robert BLAIR and Refugio VERMONT-SALAS: Spoken (Yucatec) Maya. University of Chicago, 1967.

Yucatec (1967/1973)

Roberto BRUCE: Gramática del lacandón. Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 1968.

Lacandon (1968a/1973)

William FISHER: Mopan vocabulary. Manuscript. 1971.

Mopan (1971c/1973)

William FISHER: Lacandon vocabulary. Manuscript. 1971.

Lacandon (1971d/1973)

William FISHER and Refugio VERMONT-SALAS: Yucatec vocabulary. Manuscript. 1971.

Yucatec (1971e/1973)

Otto SCHUMANN: Mopan field notes. Manuscript. 1971.

Mopan (1971f/1973)

Otto SCHUMANN: Mopan lexicon. Manuscript. 1971.

Mopan (1971g/1973)

Stephen STRAIGHT: Yucatec vocabulary. Manuscript. 1968.

Yucatec (1968b/1973)

Matthew and Rosemary ULRICH: Mopan vocabulary list, ca. 1962. Manuscript.

Mopan (1962/1973)

Matthew and Rosemary ULRICH: Preliminary notes for a Mopan Maya dictionary. 1971. Manuscript.

Mopan (1971h/1973)




Informé de la comisión científica formada para el reconocimiento de las antiguadades de Copán. Photographic copy of manuscript. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum Library, Harvard. 46 pp.

This manuscript contains 41 Chorti words plus the numerals 1-10. According to Sylvanus Morley this document had been considered lost for eighty years, and was rediscovered in Gates' collection of Mayan mss. in 1919. Gates kindly loaned the ms. to Morley, who published an English translation of the document as Appendix XI of his Inscriptions at Copán (Carnegie Pub. 219, 1920:593-604). In 1945 the original Spanish version was published in the Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia (Vol. 20, pp. 217-228). The ms. is more important for its information on the ancient city of Copán and on the geographic distribution of the Chorti language than for its linguistic content. Nonetheless, the data seems to be first-hand and represents the earliest Chorti word-list with which I am familiar. William Gates (in Morley, 1920:606) notes that this is "the first Chortí vocabulary yet found" and that it "is definitely good Chortí, having come from Copán itself." I have taken the data directly from the Peabody photographic copy of the ms., though both Morley's rendering (1920:601-602) and the 1945 reproduction (pp. 226-227) are error-free.

Chorti (1834)



Notes on the semi-civilized nations of Mexico, Yucatan, and Central America. Transactions of the American Ethnological Society, Vol. 1. 352 pp. + chart.

This is an ambitious work, covering a large number and variety of the known Indian languages spoken in Mexico and Central America. Drawing on a variety of sources, Gallatin attempts a linguistic classification of these languages. For the Maya, this involves Huastec, Yucatec, Pocomchi, Quiche, and "Chorti". On the basis of a word list of some 200 items, Gallatin was able to ascertain (e.g. p. 8) that distant Huastec was indeed related to the Mayan languages of Yucatan and Guatemala. On pages 9-10, Gallatin provides a comparative list of 72 lexical items (in English) for these five languages. The Huastec data is from Tapia Zenteno (1767), the Yucatec from Beltran (1746) and ms. notes by Perez. The Pocomchi data comes from Gage (1648; Thomas Gage: The English-American, his Travels by Sea and Land; London). The Quiche material (very sparse) is from a ms. version of the Lord's Prayer, and the "Chorti" is based on a short word-list taken down by John Stephens in Zacapa in 1839. The "Chorti" list is really Pocomam. It contains only 18 lexical items (and 19 Pocomam words, there being two entries for "bread"). The Stephens material, which is reproduced in Berendt 1864 and Stoll 1884, is of historical interest for reasons further discussed under Stephens 1839 (q.v.). Since references to this curious list have often relied on Stoll 1884, it is worth pointing out that Stoll 1884 is not a true copy, whereas Berendt 1864 is an exact copy except for one item: "bread" is given as "semeet-ah" in Gallatin, but as "semet-ah" in Berendt (vowel length being lost). I did not discover Berendt's single infelicity until after the dictionary portion of this work went to press. For the record, I reproduce here Gallatin's 1845 "Chorti" list in full: Man ("mas"), Woman ("eshoc"), Father ("pahle"), Head ("cokholum"), Mouth ("cahchi"), Ear ("casiken"), Arm ("cahkamp"), Foot ("cock"), Bird ("tzeken"), Meat ("chatih"), Maize ("hal"), Bread ("semeet-ah", "whue"), Body ("wohed"), Fire ("aak"), Water ("ha"), Earth ("ahkal"), Sun ("ey-eh"), House ("pati"). Gallatin also has some notes on the grammar of Yucatec (pp. 252-268), Pocomchi (pp. 269-275), Quiche (pp. 275-276) and Huastec (pp. 276-286), material being drawn from the sources cited above. In addition, Huastec and Yucatec figure in the comparative vocabulary on pages 298-304 (247 words).

Pocomam (1839/1864b and 1839/1884; in BERENDT 1864 and STOLL 1884)



Arte y diccionario en lengua cholti. Baltimore: The Maya Society, Publication No. 9. (7 + 24 + 16 + 68 pp.)

This is a facsimile edition by Gates in 1935 of (Berendt's copy of?) a 1695 copy of Francisco Moran's work, ca. 1635. The work opens with introductory notes by Gates; then comes an "Arte en lengua cholti" (24 pp.); this is followed by a "Confesionario en lengua cholti" (16 pp.); and last but not least is a "Vocabulario en lengua cholti" (68 pp.). The final page bears the following identification: "En este pueblo de Lacandones llamado de la Señora de los Dolores, en 24 de Junio, dia de San Juan, de 1695 años." Gates (p. 5) rightly places this manuscript "in the very front rank of importance for our historical and linguistic study of the whole Mayan family." In addition to supplying a wealth of information on Chol(ti), it appears to offer enticing clues to the nature of Lacandon at this time: many of the Chol(ti) entries are followed by a linguistic form introduced by the letter "l". It seems quite likely that these are Lacandon forms added for comparative purposes. For the (limited) material which I have excerpted from Moran, I have relied on the Gates facsimile, tagging the data with the compound date, 1695/1935. I have included Lacandon forms as well. Additional material from this ms. is currently being keypunched into the computer and will appear in a later supplement.

Chol, Lacandon (1695/1935)



Arte y vocabulario de la lengua ixil con doctrina y confesionario. Baltimore: The Maya Society, Publication No. 14. 20 pp.

This is a facsimile edition by Gates of an anonymous 1824 manuscript entitled "Doctrina y confesionario en lengua ixil." The original ms. is apparently to be found in the University of Pennsylvania Museum Library, Philadelphia. Peabody has a photographic copy made by Gates, referred to as the Gates-Bowditch reproduction, which is not quite identical with this published facsimile in that it seems to be seven pages longer than the facsimile. A Peabody note observes: "The Gates-Bowditch reproduction consists of the title-page and pages 3-47. The Maya Society Publication gives a facsimile of the title-page but omits what corresponds to pages 3 and 4 and 16-20 in the Gates-Bowditch reproduction. Pages 13 and 14 of the Gates-Bowditch copy are transposed in the Maya Society Publication." The Gates-Bowditch reproduction thus has 45 pages plus a title page. Gates' facsimile has 38 pages, numbered consecutively 1-38 (probably by Gates). The seven-page difference corresponds to the gaps mentioned in the Peabody note. I have not seen the original ms., nor the Gates-Bowditch reproduction. Gates' facsimile, which is the source I have used, opens with comments on Ixil grammar (pp. 1-8); then comes a short vocabulary list (Spanish-Ixil) of 41 words (pp. 9-11), which in turn is followed by religious tracts (pp. 12-38). Gates is justified in attaching some importance to this document since it is, as far as I am aware, the earliest data we have on Ixil. I have incorporated the material in the vocabulary list (pp. 9-11).

Ixil (1824/1935a)






Los chortís ante el problema maya; historia de las culturas indígenas de America, desde su origen hasta hoy. 5 volumes. Mexico: Antigua Librería Robredo.

This impressive work on the Chorti Indians contains a good deal of linguistic information in Volume 1, Chapter III (pp. 91-138), which bears the title "El lenguaje chortí." Unfortunately, it is not clear what part of the material (if any) is first-hand. Girard opens the chapter with a short discussion of available Chorti vocabularies (pp. 91-92), discusses briefly his system of transcription (pp. 93-95), and then provides a Spanish-Chorti vocabulary arranged by semantic category (pp. 95-119), though the verbs (pp. 115-119) are listed alphabetically by Spanish gloss. Additional Chorti material, in the form of paradigms, phrases and grammatical notes, is supplied on pp. 119-134. Girard informs us (1949:95) that the vocabulary is from various sources, not least Alberto Membreño (1897), who in turn apparently took most of his Chorti material from a manuscript by Ruano Suarez (1892). Because of its second-hand nature, I have therefore made very little use of Girard's vocabulary, hoping instead to find time to add material directly from Ruano Suarez's ms., a copy of which I have recently acquired.

Chorti (1949a)



The linguistic unity of Cakchiquel-Tzutujil. International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 34, pp. 104-114.

This contains first-hand data from seven communities, five of which (Patzún, Panajachél, San Antonio Palopó, San Martín Jilotepeque, and Tecpán) are traditionally viewed as Cakchiquel-speaking, and two of which (Santiago Atitlán, San Pedro La Laguna) as Tzutujil-speaking. It is no accident that the title of this article parallels that used by Mayers in 1960 (q.v.) in his discussion of Pocomam and Pocomchi. Grimes argues in his article that no clear division between Cakchiquel and Tzutujil exists. Though he makes a good case, it is worth noting that occasionally the two "Tzutujil" communities do share forms which differ from the forms in the remaining communities. At any rate, I have followed tradition and entered Grimes' data from San Pedro La Laguna and from Santiago Atitlán under Tzutujil, the rest under Cakchiquel. But I have kept the distinctions noted by Grimes by assigning dialect codes to the communities. Thus the "Cakchiquel" data is entered as 1968 P, Pn, Sa, Sm, and T, respectively, and the "Tzutujil" data as 1968 Snt and Sp. For each of the seven communities, Grimes provides 100 native words, with English glosses. His recordings are excellent.

Cakchiquel, Tzutujil (1968)



Bocabulario de lengua tzeltal según el orden de Copanabastla. 5 ll. + 154 ll. Photographic copy of manuscript. Chicago: Newberry Library.

This manuscript is presumably a 1616 copy by Guzman of an earlier work (1571?) by Fray Domingo de Ara. The Newberry Library has a Gates photographic copy. The original Ara manuscript is in the Bancroft Library. The first leaf of the Bancroft ms. contains a bookplate with the name of Brasseur de Bourbourg, who evidently had the ms. in his collection. The Newberry Library has kindly supplied me with a copy of this manuscript, but so far I have only included a sampling of the material from this early, important Tzeltal source.

Tzeltal (1571/1616)



Compendio de nombres en lengua cakchiquel. Manuscript. Providence, Rhode Island: John Carter Brown Library. 336 pp.

This is a beautifully written manuscript. The bulk of the material (pp. 1-246) is in the form of Cakchiquel-Spanish word lists, presented by semantic category. Curiously, the first 61 pages are divided into twenty very small categories, e.g. "fruit trees" (pp. 1-3), "fruits and vegetables" (pp. 11-14), "animals" (pp. 31-36), etc., which are then followed by a long list (pp. 61-187) of "names of diverse things." There does not appear to be any order, alphabetical or otherwise, to the entries within the small categories, but in the case of the larger list there is a clear tendency toward alphabetical order starting on page 83. Interestingly, the list is in reverse alphabetical order, starting at the end of the alphabet and moving down to "A". It is difficult to resist drawing the conclusion that the larger list (at least) is a copy, from back to front, of some earlier work. Following the vocabulary lists there are a number of religious texts, translated into Cakchiquel, no doubt intended for use by Spanish missionaries. These are interrupted (pp. 199-250) by a long list of verb forms and other material relating to Cakchiquel grammar. The work concludes with "Addiciones de nombres de diversas cosas" (pp. 327-331). Parra's specially designed symbols for glottalized consonants are used throughout, which adds to the importance of this source. (Parra was a Franciscan missionary who died in Guatemala in 1590. He designed four special symbols, called "letras heridas", for representing /c'/, /q'/, /centsign'/, and /c!hat'/. For an excellent discussion, see Jakob Schoembs, "Die 'letras heridas' in den Mayasprachen," Anthropos (1951), Vol. 46, pp. 616-621.) Only a small portion of Guzman's material is included here, though much of it has now been key-punched and is awaiting future editing. I have used a Gates photographic copy which is in the Peabody Museum Library. In a preface to his copy, Gates notes that the original belonged to Ephraim Squier, and that from Squier's ms., Berendt made a copy, which is now at the University of Pennsylvania.

Cakchiquel (1704)



Vocabulario tojolabal. Breve coordinación alfabetica de una lengua mayance del estado de Chiapas. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 52 pp.

This is apparently first-hand data, though there is no indication of where the data was collected, only a note that most Tojolabal speakers reside near Las Margaritas. The vocabulary is presented first as Spanish-Tojolabal (pp. 1-23) and then as Tojolabal-Spanish (pp. 28-52). The latter contains some words not in the former. Pages 26-27 contain a list of numerals. The data is excellently recorded, with clear distinctions between glottalized and non-glottalized consonants. The authors write /p'/ where others use /b/, but this appears to be simply a notational variant, since they do not use /b/ at all. I have included nearly all of their vocabulary.

Tojolabal (1952)



Gramática descriptiva y vocabulario del lenguaje mam, con las pruebas y los materiales del kiché. Manuscript. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum Library, Harvard. 569 pp.

Peabody records show that this typewritten document was purchased in 1928 by the Peabody Museum Library from Jaramillo's widow. The mediator was the Rev. Dudley Peck, who was living in Guatemala. There then ensued a series of letter exchanges between Alfred Tozzer (at Peabody) and Dudley Peck regarding possible publication, Peck being interested in undertaking the editing of the ms. Tozzer, uncertain about the linguistic value of the ms., sought advice from Manuel Andrade, who (in a personal letter to Tozzer in 1935) voiced enough criticism of the ms. to discourage Tozzer from letting Peck, or anyone, undertake publication, and the ms. resides now in a Peabody safe. Andrade's criticism was directed primarily at the grammar, though he faulted Jaramillo also for distinguishing only three (rather than four) palatal/velar and velar/uvular stops. Even more damaging, in Andrade's view, was Jaramillo's failure to recognize the presence of retroflexion in the stops and fricatives. Despite Andrade's criticisms, I have included material from Jaramillo because it is first-hand data, and because in Jaramillo's day it would have been remarkable for anybody to record retroflexion. The failure to record a full series of back stops is unfortunate, but Jaramillo was not alone in this.

Mam (1918)



Teco - a new Mayan language. International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 35, pp. 154-174.

In this article, Kaufman presents a good deal of first-hand data on a "new" Mayan dialect which he "discovered" in the following communities: Mazapa and Amatenango (both in Mexico), and Chiquihuil, La Laguna, Tectitán, and Cuilco (all in Guatemala). He gives this dialect the name "Teco", and claims that though it is "clearly Mamean ... it is difficult to believe that it could be a dialect of the same language. Nevertheless, Mazapeños say there is a fair degree of mutual intelligibility between Mam speakers and themselves" (1969:155, fn.). I have followed Kaufman and added Teco to the list of Mayan dialects, incorporating much of his data from this article. Most of the material is from Mazapa, though he also cites forms from Amatenango and Tectitán. I have included these as well, distinguishing them from the Mazapa forms by means of the codes "A" and "T", respectively. In addition, Kaufman cites, for comparative purposes, considerable material from the other Mamean languages: Aguacatec, Ixil, and Mam. Since this, too, appears to be first-hand, I have included it as well. Kaufman's data is always highly reliable.

Aguacatec, Ixil, Mam, Teco (1969a)



Projecto de alfabetos y ortografías para escribir las lenguas mayances. Guatemala: Proyecto lingüístico Francisco Marroquín. 161 pp.

This is an excellent source of modern comparative material on a number of Mayan languages. Mayan words corresponding to Swadesh's 100-item word list are supplied for 19 Mayan "languages." In addition, several of the languages are represented by more than one dialect. The work is divided into three major sections: Part 1 (pp. 1-44) deals with Mayan orthography, and includes an Appendix showing Kaufman's reconstruction of the sounds of proto-Mayan; Part 2 (pp. 45-68) offers Kaufman's classification of the languages (with population estimates) spoken in Guatemala; and Part 3 (pp. 69-152) contains phoneme lists and the vocabulary lists for each of the 19 Mayan languages described. The document concludes with a short treatment of glottalization and vowel length (pp. 153-161). The Mayan languages treated are: Chuj (pp. 73-75), Kanjobal (pp. 76-78), Acatec (pp. 79-81), Jacaltec (pp. 82-84), Teco (pp. 85-87), Mam (pp. 88-93), Aguacatec (pp. 94-96), Ixil (pp. 97-99), Uspantec (pp. 100-102), Quiche (pp. 103-113), Sipacapa (pp. 114-116), Sacapultec (pp. 117-119), Tzutujil (pp. 120-124), Cakchiquel (pp. 125-133), Pocomam (pp. 134-136), Pocomchi (pp. 137-138), Kekchi (pp. 139-143), Mopan (pp. 144-146), Chorti (pp. 147-149). (Pages 150-152 provide phoneme lists for three non-Mayan languages: Xinca, Caribe, Pipil.) Five of the Mayan languages are represented with word lists from more than one dialect area. These are (with my codes in parentheses): Mam - San Juan Ostuncalco (O) and San Ildefonso Ixtahuacán (Si); Quiche - Momostenango (M), Rabinal (R), Santa Catarina Ixtahuacán (Sc), Santa María Chiquimula (Sm), and Totonicapán (T); Tzutujil - San Juan La Laguna (Sj) and Santiago Atitlán (Snt); Cakchiquel - Patzún (P), San Andrés Itzapa (Si), San Martín Jilotepeque (Sm), and Tecpán (T); Kekchi - Cahabón (C) and San Juan Chamelco (Sj). This means that there are all in all 29 word lists of roughly 100 words each, giving a total of 2900 entries, all of which have been incorporated. The data appears to be first-hand and is well-recorded throughout. An unusual feature is the marking of tone in Uspantec. According to Kaufman (pp. 19-20, 100), long vowels in Uspantec can be either high (and presumably level) or falling. I have marked the former as >, the latter as >>. Particularly welcome is the data on Sipacapa and Sacapultec, languages "discovered" by Kaufman in 1970/1971 and described by him in a 1976 article entitled "New Mayan Languages in Guatemala: Sacapultec, Sipacapa, and others" (in Mayan Linguistics, Vol. 1, pp. 67-89).

Acatec, Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Chorti, Chuj, Ixil, Jacaltec, Kanjobal, Kekchi, Mam, Mopan, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche, Sacapultec, Sipacapa, Teco, Tzutujil, Uspantec (1976)



Tribes and temples: a record of the expedition to Middle America conducted by the Tulane University of Louisiana in 1925. Two volumes: Vol. 1 (1926), pp. 1-237, and Vol. 2 (1927), pp. 239-536. New Orleans: Tulane University.

On this, Tulane's first expedition to Central America, the tasks were "so distributed that Mr. Blom made studies of everything pertaining to archaeology and he also collected geographic data. Mr. La Farge gathered material relating to the customs and languages of the present-day Indians" (p. 1). The bulk of the linguistic material is contained in Appendix III (Vol. 2, 1927:465-486) - "Comparative word-lists: Yocotan, Chontal, Tzeltal, Chaneabal, Jacalteca", and Appendix IV (pp. 487-498) - "Yocotan grammar". "Yocotan" is simply a Chontal variant spoken at San Carlos and San Fernando (p. 465). All the Mayan material was recorded by La Farge except for the "Chontal proper," which was taken down by Gates. I have included nearly all the data in Appendix III, keeping La Farge's Chontal data distinct from Gates' data by appending the codes Sc and Sf to La Farge's material. La Farge was a poet-ethnographer, not a trained linguist. In transcribing, his ear picked up every little nuance, and he made up symbols (especially for the vowels) to record them. To cope with the "richness" of his recordings (in both this and his 1931 work), I have had to make do with standard symbols in the transcriptions, adding in the comment fields such "diacritical" information as: "<u> said to be palatalized", or "<p> has delayed release". La Farge later (1931) published an improved version of his Jacaltec material, which I have also incorporated (see La Farge and Byers 1931).

Chontal, Jacaltec, Tojolabal, Tzeltal (1927)



The year bearer's people. Middle American Research Series, Publication No. 3. New Orleans: Tulane University. 336 pp.

Section II (pp. 244-329) of this work is entitled "The Jacalteca Language." It contains: notes on phonetics (pp. 250-255) and grammar (pp. 255-294), texts, with English translations (pp. 295-313) and an English-Jacaltec vocabulary (pp. 314-329). The material was collected by La Farge, primarily at Jacaltenango. La Farge states (p. 331) that this Jacaltec material "entirely supersedes that published by me in Tribes and Temples. Although that list is fairly accurate, in the light of further knowledge, I find that I then stumbled into many of the pitfalls which await the investigator who makes a list without any knowledge of the language under consideration. Whatever material was valid in that list, has been incorporated into the present one." It is often interesting to see the different forms side by side. For example, the Jacaltec word for "beans" is given as /hupal/ in 1927, as /hopal/ and /upal/ in 1931. Even where the forms are identical, we learn something: we learn that La Farge is confident of the form, and that the printing is reliable. One of the major differences between the 1927 and the 1931 lists is the introduction of "Q" for a "fortis velar" sound (which I have interpreted as /q'/). Appendix I (pp. 330-336) offers a comparative word list: "Chaneabal, Chuj, Santa Eulalia, Jacalteca (San Miguel and Jacaltenango), Mam". All the data is first-hand, collected by La Farge. It consists of 129 words (mostly nouns) and 18 numerals, arranged alphabetically by Spanish gloss. Of particular interest is the "Santa Eulalia" material, which represents one of our "early" Kanjobal sources, and the material from San Miguel Acatán, which I have classified as Acatec (following Kaufman, "New Mayan languages in Guatemala: Sacapultec, Sipacapa, and others"; in Mayan Linguistics (ed. Marlys McClaran), Vol. 1, 1976:67-89). As in his earlier publication (1926-1927), La Farge's transcriptions tend to be more "phonetic" than "phonemic," and I again resort to the comment field to pass on the relevant "diacritical" information.

Acatec, Chuj, Jacaltec, Kanjobal, Mam, Tojolabal (1931)



Vocabulario huasteco del estado de San Luis Potosí. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 207 pp.

This is a large and good bilingual dictionary of Huastec: Huastec-Spanish (pp. 1-92), Spanish-Huastec (pp. 97-208). It appears to be first-hand, the data coming from Cd. Santos (= Tancanhuitz; 1955:iii). Glottalization and vowel length are clearly marked. Where appropriate, nouns are generally illustrated in the possessed form, and verb entries usually have several examples illustrating how the verb is used in conjunction with nouns and pronouns.

Huastec (1955)



The great Tzotzil dictionary of San Lorenzo Zinacantán. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology, Number 19. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. 586 pp.

This magnificent work contains some 30,000 Tzotzil-English entries (pp. 37-390) and 15,000 English-Tzotzil entries (pp. 393-538). It is one of the most remarkable collections of Mayan data produced in the 20th century (or any century). For reviews see Ray Freeze (American Anthropologist, 1977, Vol. 79, pp. 950-951), Louanna Furbee-Losee (Language, 1977, Vol. 53, pp. 464-466) and Ulrich Köhler (International Journal of American Linguistics, 1978, Vol. 44, pp. 156-159). Entries from this immense work are still being key-punched for inclusion in my data base. Consequently only a smattering of Laughlin's material is reproduced here.

Tzotzil (1975)



Un intérprete huasteco. Mexico: Oficina Tipográfica de la Secretaria de Fomento. 43 pp.

This little book is designed as a learner's guide to Huastec, particularly for Spanish-speakers interested in "buying and selling" in the Huastec area. The author modestly claims (p. 5) that "las personas que desean aprender el idioma huaxteca, no necesitan otra cosa más que dedicarse al estudio de esta obrita." Left-hand pages contain Spanish words and phrases, right-hand ones contain Huastec equivalents. The Huastec material seems to be first-hand. There is no discussion of the transcription system employed, which is not a serious obstacle, since it is fairly transparent. There is under-differentiation in that glottalized stops are not recorded, nor is vowel length. On the other hand, the author makes a distinction between /j/ and /h/, and the data seems to be consistently transcribed. Misprints are few.

Huastec (1896a)




Diccionario de Motul - maya-español - atribuido a Fray Antonio de Ciudad Real. Merida: Talleres de la Compañía Tipográfica Yucateca. 935 pp.

This is a 1929 edition by Martínez Hernández of the Maya-Spanish portion of the Motul Dictionary (q.v.), the manuscript of which is in the John Carter Brown Library in Providence, Rhode Island. It also contains a reprint of Coronel's 1620 Yucatec grammar (1929:3-55). Gates published a highly critical review of this reproduction, pointing out a number of printing (and other) errors (see his review of the "Diccionario de Motul" in The Maya Society Quarterly, Vol. 1, pp. 93-96). For further discussion, see under Motul Dictionary 1590 and Berendt 1864.

Yucatec (1590/1929)



Texts and dictionaries in Chol, Tojolabal and Tzotzil, by field workers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, during the period 1939-1948. Chicago: Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, No. 26.

This is a collection of six "documents": three sets of texts and three sets of vocabularies. The microfilm was prepared in December 1948, and made available in 1949. The first texts (pp. 5-59), in the Chol language, were collected by Ruth Hitchner Yourison in 1945 in the village of Hidalgo; the material has been lightly edited by Evelyn Aulie. The texts are preceded (pp. 1-4) by comments on Chol phonology, including a chart of phonemes (p. 2). Then comes a 30-page (numbered 1-30) Chol-English dictionary prepared in 1948 by Evelyn Aulie. It is typed, with handwritten insertions and corrections, and arranged alphabetically on the basis of the Chol forms. Next comes (pp. 60-156) a series of typed Tojolabal texts collected (no date) by Celia Douglass Mendenhall and Julia Supple. This is followed by a Tojolabal vocabulary in the form of typed index cards (unnumbered) prepared in 1948 by the same investigators (Mendenhall and Supple); the cards are basically Tojolabal-English, though some are in the form Tojolabal-Spanish. The microfilm concludes with Tzotzil texts (pp. 157-215) and vocabulary cards (unnumbered) prepared in 1948 by Nadine Weathers. The texts are typed, with interlinear English glosses, handwritten, for each of the Tzotzil words. A free translation into English follows each text. The vocabulary cards are in the form Tzotzil-Spanish, and arranged alphabetically on the basis of the Tzotzil form. Some of the cards are typed, others are handwritten. I have included excerpts from the Chol and the Tzotzil vocabularies. The material is first-hand and well-recorded.

Chol, Tzotzil (1949b)



The linguistic unity of Pocoman-Pocomchi. International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 26, pp. 290-300.

In this article, Mayers investigates the question of whether Pocomam and Pocomchi are linguistically separate languages. He provides a comparative vocabulary of 110 words (English-Maya) from six communities. Four are Pocomam: Chinautla, San Luís Jilotepeque, Mixco and Palín; two are Pocomchi: San Cristóbal (Verapaz) and Tamahú. The Pocomchi data was collected by Mayers in the field between 1953 and 1957. The Pocomam material is from McQuown's dialect survey "of the four major dialects of Pocomam" which he presented in 1949 at a linguistic conference in Guatemala. Mayers adds (1960:290) that "alternate recordings of forms have been noted from previous work done in the Pocomam area by Manuel Andrade." Presumably material from Andrade is present only when there is a double entry in Mayers, such as "moloj/maloj" for "egg" in Palín. There is, however, no indication of which form in the double entries is from Andrade, which from McQuown, though it seems reasonable to assume that the first entry is always McQuown's. On the basis of the data from these six communities, Mayers concludes (p. 300) that "the Pocomchi and Pocomam languages do diverge from each other. It is also clear that within the languages, the separate dialects diverge, ... the divergence is clear and is possibly increasing rather than diminishing." I have included nearly all of Mayers' material from all six communities, distinguishing them by the codes C, L, M, P for the Pocomam areas, and S, T for the Pocomchi ones. I have not attempted to distinguish Andrade's Pocomam contributions from McQuown's, since Mayers does not provide clear guidelines here. There cannot, however, be much more than 10 years' difference in the dates of the recordings, since Andrade worked in the Pocomam area in 1936. All the data - from Andrade, McQuown and Mayers - is excellent.

Pocomam, Pocomchi (1960)



Languages of Guatemala. The Hague: Mouton and Co. 318 pp.

This is a fine source of linguistic material on 13 Mayan languages. Prior to this, one had to go back to the publications by Otto Stoll in 1884 (Zur Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala) and Carl Sapper in 1897 (Das nördliche Mittel-Amerika) to find such a variety of comparative material published under one cover. The contributors are all "linguists and linguistically trained missionaries who are concerned with the translation of the Bible into the language of the people among whom they have lived" and they are all "well prepared in the languages they have been asked to discuss, having spent from two to forty years in the study of the language of which they write" (p. 11). There is a comparative vocabulary (pp. 275-302) in which entries from 12 languages are provided for 250 different lexical items (Morris Swadesh's extended list). In addition, data for Mopan (pp. 270-271) has been provided using Swadesh's 100-item list. The bulk of the book is devoted to ethnographic and linguistic descriptions of 11 of the languages: Achi (Mary Shaw and Helen Neuenswander, pp. 15-48), Quiche (Dora Burgess, David Fox, pp. 49-86), Pocomchi (Marvin and Marilyn Mayers, pp. 87-109), Kekchi (Francis Eachus and Ruth Carlson, pp. 110-124), Ixil (Raymond and Helen Elliot, pp. 125-139), Aguacatec (Harry and Lucille McArthur, pp. 140-165), Mam (H. Dudley and Dorothy Peck, Edward Sywulka, pp. 166-195), Jacaltec (Dennis and Jean Stratmeyer, Clarence and Katherine Church, pp. 196-218), Chuj (Kenneth and Barbara Williams, pp. 219-234), Chorti (Helen Oakley, pp. 235-250), and Mopan (Matthew and Rosemary Ulrich, pp. 251-271). Where the authors' names are separated by commas, the first cited did the ethnography, the second provided the linguistic material. Grammatical sketches use Kenneth Pike's tagmemic model. The material in the comparative word-list (some 3,000 Mayan entries) comes presumably from the same contributors. I have included practically all the comparative data.

Achi, Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Chorti, Chuj, Ixil, Jacaltec, Kekchi, Mam, Mopan, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche (1966)



see ZAVALA, M. and A. MEDINA






Arte y diccionario en lengua cholti. Manuscript.

Chol, Lacandon (1695/1935; in GATES 1935, q.v.)



Vocabulario en la lengua maya. Manuscript. Part I: Maya-Spanish, 465 ll; Part II: Spanish-Maya, 236 ll. Providence, Rhode Island: John Carter Brown Library.

This is one of the most important manuscripts we have on any Mayan language. According to Brinton (The Maya Chronicles, 1882:76-77), the ms. was discovered by Brasseur de Bourbourg in a bookstall in Mexico City, and eventually sold to John Carter Brown of Providence, Rhode Island. The work has been attributed (for example by Martínez Hernández in his 1929 reproduction of the Maya-Spanish portion) to Ciudad Real, who, according to Tozzer (A Maya Grammar, 1921:170), arrived in America in 1573 and died in 1617. Whether or not it is from Ciudad Real's hand, Tozzer believes that it is a copy of an even earlier work. The date 1590 is thus an approximation, though it cannot be too far off the mark. Brinton observes that the author of the Motul dictionary refers to a comet he saw in 1577. For further comments see under Berendt 1864 and Martínez Hernández 1929. See also the discussion by e.g. Daniel Brinton (The Maya Chronicles, 1882:76-77), Alfred Tozzer (A Maya Grammar, 1921:170-171), William Gates ("Diccionario de Motul," The Maya Society Quarterly, 1932, Vol. 1, pp. 93-96), and Dorothy Andrews Heath de Zapata ("Estudio comparativo para determinar cual es el diccionario maya mas antiguo," Revista de la Universidad de Yucatan, 1965, Vol. 7, pp. 87-98). A copy of the original Motul ms. is unfortunately so expensive that I have had to rely on the reproductions by Berendt (1864) and Martínez Hernández (1929). These are distinguished by means of compound dates: 1590/1864 and 1590/1929. Material from both these prodigious sources is still being entered in the computer, so only a fraction of the data appears here.

Yucatec (1590/1864 and 1590/1929; in BERENDT 1864 and MARTINEZ HERNANDEZ 1929)



Diccionario de la lengua maya. Merida: Imprenta Literaria de Juan F. Molina Solis. 437 pp.

According to Tozzer (A Maya Grammar, 1921:175) this work was compiled from material in Beltran, the Ticul, and the San Francisco dictionaries. Tozzer informs us that it was "written as far as the word 'ulchahal' by Perez, down to 'ven' by Carillo y Ancona, and completed by Berendt." It contains approximately 20,000 words, Yucatec-Spanish. Normally, I prefer to make use of the original ms. where possible. The problem is that both the San Francisco and the Ticul dictionaries seem to have disappeared. Regarding the San Francisco dictionary, for example, Daniel Brinton writes: "When, in 1820, the Franciscan convent of Merida was closed, the original ms. was presented to a citizen of Merida, and passed through various hands until it reached those of Don Juan Pio Perez. He made a faithful copy of it, from which ... <Berendt made his copy> in 1870. The original could nowhere be found at that date" (Catalogue of the Berendt Linguistic Collection, 1900/1958:4). A similar fate seems to have befallen the Ticul dictionary (q.v.). Fortunately, however, Perez has provided us with a "pure" copy of the Ticul manuscript in Perez 1898. Consequently, I have made much greater use of Perez 1898 than of Perez 1866-77. For further discussion of this work, see Gatschet ("Perez' Maya-Spanish dictionary," American Antiquarian, 1879, Vol. 2, pp. 30-32), Brinton (The Maya Chronicles, 1882:75), and Tozzer (cited above).

Yucatec (1866-77)



Coordinación alfabetica de las voces del idioma maya. Merida: Imprenta de la Ermita. 296 pp.

In this publication, Perez (1798-1859) collected material from two main sources. Pages 1-121 contain material gleaned from Beltran's 1746 grammar and dictionary (and possibly other works by Beltran), arranged as a Yucatec-Spanish vocabulary; pages 123-296 contain Perez's copy of the 1690 Ticul dictionary, arranged as Spanish-Yucatec. Perez's work was published posthumously, with apparently a bit of editing, in 1898 by Ignacio Peon. According to Tozzer (A Maya Grammar, 1921:174-175), "Perez was the author of several manuscript vocabularies. He started with the Maya words in Beltran's Arte (1746). He amplified this with the words in Beltran's Doctrina (1746) and Sermons (1740) ..." It is thus possible that pages 1-121 contain material from a number of different writings by Beltran. Tozzer (1921:143) says of Perez that he "was the first modern Maya scholar ... He was selected as the Maya <= Yucatec> interpreter to the Secretary of State at Merida. The successful fulfillment of the duties of this office shows his ability to use the Maya language and the position gave him access to much Maya material." Unfortunately, there are a number of errors in both parts of Perez's vocabulary. For example, the cross-bar on some of the stops is sometimes omitted (or so weak as to be nearly illegible), with the result that some glottalized stops are rendered as their non-glottalized counterparts. Nonetheless, since Perez was apparently the last scholar to have the original Ticul ms. in his hands, I have made extensive use of this copy. The two portions of the vocabulary I have coded as follows:

Perez's copy (pp. 123-296) of the 1690 Ticul dictionary.

Yucatec (1690/1898a)

Extracts (pp. 1-121) from Beltran.

Yucatec (1746/1898a)



Monografía del Departamento de Huehuetenango. (2nd, revised, edition; 1st edition 1913.) Guatemala: Editorial del Ministerio de Educación Pública. 518 pp.

This contains (between pages 224 and 225) a short comparative vocabulary of four Mayan languages. The list is arranged as follows: Spanish, Mam, Aguacatec, Chuj, and Jacaltec. The Mam data is apparently from two areas, since some of the entries are tagged with the initials "T. S." for Todos Santos. It is not clear whether or not the Mayan data was collected by Recinos himself, though this seems likely. The list contains 81 lexical items, most of them nouns, a few of them adjectives. Glottalization is marked to a certain extent. Since there is at least one entry from each of the four languages for each of the 81 items, the list contains something over 320 entries. I have incorporated all of them, keeping the Mam sources distinct by using the code "1954 T" for the data from Todos Santos.

Aguacatec, Chuj, Jacaltec, Mam (1954)



Das nördliche Mittel-Amerika nebst einem Ausflug nach dem Hochland von Anahuac. Braunschweig: Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn. 436 pp.

This is Sapper's report of his travels and investigations in Central America during the years 1888-1895. Pages 408-436 contain a comparative vocabulary with data from 24 different Mayan dialects. Pocomam appears twice in the list, once for data from Stoll, and once for new data from Sapper. All the Pocomam data is from Jilotepeque, both Sapper's and Stoll's (due to a printing error, the two Pocomam sources are mislabelled, so that the one labelled "Stoll" is actually Sapper's, and vice versa). There are thus 25 different entries for 213 different lexical items. Some gaps appear in the data, particularly in the case of Tzutujil, where entries are few. Sapper's list is modelled on Stoll's 1884 list. In fact, material for 11 of the dialects is taken directly from Stoll 1884 (Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Chontal, Huastec, Itza, Ixil, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche, Tzotzil, and Yucatec). The Chuj data was collected by a friend of Stoll's, Edwin Rockstroh, sometime between 1884 and 1887, some of it appearing subsequently in Stoll 1887 (q.v.). The rest of the data, however, is primarily first-hand material collected by Sapper: Chicomuceltec, Chol, Chorti, Jacaltec, Kekchi, Mam, Mopan, Motozintlec, Pocomam, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, Tzutujil, and Uspantec. I say "primarily," because it appears that Sapper has also included some of Stoll's data in his Tojolabal, Tzeltal, and Uspantec lists (such items are enclosed in parentheses in Sapper's list). I have drawn basically only from Sapper's own data, but included occasionally what is allegedly a form from Stoll (or Rockstroh) if I cannot find it in Stoll 1884 or 1887. Sapper is not fully to be trusted when it comes to glottalization. Consonants which are glottalized in Stoll sometimes lose their glottalization in Sapper's reproduction, and an occasional non-glottalized stop in Stoll shows up as glottalized in Sapper. Furthermore, the sequence of Vowel + glottal stop + Consonant (e.g. [a'p]) in Stoll is sometimes rendered in Sapper as accented Vowel + Consonant (e.g. [áp]). Though it is possible that Sapper may be "correcting" Stoll on such occasions, it is more likely that these are printing errors. If so, it suggests that similar errors may be present in Sapper's own data. Nonetheless, Sapper 1897 is a valuable first-hand source of late 19th century material, not least because it contains data from two "new" languages "discovered" by Sapper, namely Chicomuceltec and Motozintlec.

(Aguacatec), Chicomuceltec, Chol, (Chontal), Chorti, (Chuj), (Ixil), Jacaltec, Kekchi, Mam, Mopan, Motozintlec, Pocomam, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, (Tzotzil), Tzutujil, Uspantec, (Yucatec) (1897)



Choles und Chorties. Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress of Americanists (1906), pp. 423-465.

This contains first-hand data, collected by Sapper, on Chol, Chorti and Pocomam. The word list consists primarily of nouns, with a few numerals. Although some of this data duplicates material in Sapper 1897 (q.v.), there are some differences in the transcriptions themselves as well as several totally new entries. Furthermore, the Chol and Chorti data comes from several different communities, which are distinctly labelled here (but not in Sapper 1897). The communities (with my codes) are: for Chol - Alianza (A) and Tila (Ti); for Chorti - Hacienda Grande (H), Jocotan (J), El Obraje (O), and Quezaltepeque (Q). Unfortunately, this is a very poorly printed document, and must consequently be used with considerable caution. Some of the more common types of errors are: "e" instead of "c"; "a" instead of "r"; "in" or "un" instead of "m". It is some consolation that the printing errors seem to be less frequent in the Mayan data than in the text itself.

Chol, Chorti, Pocomam (1907)



Über einige Sprachen von Südchiapas. Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Congress of Americanists (1910), pp. 295-320.

This contains Sapper's full Chicomuceltec and Motozintlec vocabularies, portions of which were published in Sapper 1897 (q.v.). It also contains his field vocabularies of Jacaltec and Mam, and a Huastec vocabulary compiled from Stoll 1884 and Tapia Zenteno 1767. I have included Sapper's original data, but excluded the second-hand Huastec material. Like Sapper 1907, this article is marred by misprints, though not to the same extent as Sapper 1907. Examples of printing errors are: "sakui" for "sakni"; "uaxui" for "yaxni"; and "uné'al" for "unc'al". Nonetheless, the document is of considerable importance for its material on the "newly discovered" Chicomuceltec and Motozintlec languages (see Sapper 1897).

Chicomuceltec, Jacaltec, Mam, Motozintlec (1912)



El tuzanteco y su posición dentro de la familia mayanse. Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (1967-68). Vol. 1, (No. 49), pp. 139-148.

This article on Tuzanteco (the dialect of Tuzantán) contains first-hand data collected by Schumann in Dec. 1966 and Oct. 1967. It also contains a first-hand comparative vocabulary (pp. 147-148): Spanish - Mam - Tuzanteco - Motozintlec. Tuzanteco looks very similar to Motozintlec, and the two are classified as dialects of the same language by Schumann. The same opinion was held by Sapper, who visited Tuzantán when he collected his Motozintlec data (see e.g. Sapper 1912:300), and by Kaufman, who visited the area at very nearly the same time as Schumann (see Kaufman 1969). Schumann informs us that "there are no children" who speak Tuzanteco, all Tuzanteco speakers being "over twenty years old." This is in line with Kaufman's statement that "Mochó" (the name Kaufman gives to the language spoken in the three towns of Motocintla, Tuzantán and Amatenango de la Frontera) is spoken by "not more than 500 individuals, all of whom are adults" (Kaufman: Preliminary Mochó Vocabulary, ms. 321 pp., 1967:ii). Neither Sapper nor Kaufman seem to have published any data from Tuzantán, so we are very fortunate in having this vocabulary from Schumann. I have entered the data from both Motozintla and Tuzantán under the label Motozintlec, keeping the material from the two towns distinct by means of the codes M and T, respectively. I have also included Schumann's Mam data. All the material is reliably recorded and printed.

Mam, Motozintlec (1969)



Descripción estructural del maya itza del Petén, Guatemala, C. A. Con un diccionario itza-español, español-itza. Centro de Estudios Mayas, Cuaderno 6. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico. 134 pp.

This is one of the finest sources we have on Itza. It opens with a short ethnographic description (pp. 9-23), followed by a linguistic description of Itza (phonology, morphophonology, morphology, syntax: pp. 27-53). The rest of the book consists of an analysis of two Itza texts (pp. 57-66) and a bilingual dictionary: Itza-Spanish (pp. 69-94), Spanish-Itza (pp. 95-121). The material is very reliable. In particular, Schumann is careful to record "glottalized vowels" (V'V). I have incorporated practically all of his data.

Itza (1971)



Mopan field notes. Manuscript.

Mopan (1971f/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Mopan lexicon. Manuscript.

Mopan (1971g/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Die alten Ansiedlungen von Chaculá im Distrikte Nenton des Departments Huehuetenango der Republik Guatemala. Berlin: Verlag von Dietrich Reimer. 223 pp.

Chapter 10 (pp. 196-205) of this work is entitled "Einige sprachliche Notizen." It contains a comparative vocabulary of "Chuj" and Tojolabal (pp. 197-201), as well as short vocabularies of Jacaltec (pp. 202-204) and Tzotzil (pp. 204-205). The data on "Chuj" and Tojolabal is clearly first-hand. The Jacaltec (from Jacaltenango) and the Tzotzil material (from Iztapa) was probably also collected by Seler, though this is not stated clearly. The "Chuj" data is from Trinidad, in the Chaculá district. The reason I have put quotation marks around "Chuj" is that Seler informs us (p. 196) that the Chaculá area was settled by speakers from Santa Eulalia and San Mateo Iztatán, both of which Seler classified as Chuj. Today, the former is classified as Kanjobal-speaking. Seler does note, however, that there are dialectal differences between the two towns. For example, he observes that the people from Santa Eulalia refer to their language as "coconop" ("our village"), whereas those from San Mateo Iztatán call their language "chonáb" ("village"). We know today that one of the differences between Kanjobal and Chuj is that "c" (/c/) in the former corresponds to "ch" (/c!hat/) in the latter. An examination of Seler's list of words from Trinidad indicates that it is indeed Chuj, not Kanjobal; "two" (p. 200), for example, is /c!hatab/ (vs. Kanjobalan /cab/). Also, Seler carefully compares his Trinidad data with the Chuj data collected by Rockstroh and published by Sapper in 1897 (q.v.). The fact that he comments only twice on differences (one a misspelling in Sapper, the other an identification of Rockstroh's "pale" as Spanish "padre") indicates further that Trinidad is Chuj. It also increases our confidence in the Sapper-Rockstroh list. Though Seler's vocabularies are not extensive, it is good to have this early 20th century data, especially the Chuj material from Trinidad.

Chuj, Jacaltec, Tojolabal, Tzotzil (1901)



Vocabulario tzeltal-español. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 93 pp. + 75 pp.

This bilingual vocabulary consists of two separately numbered sections: Spanish-Tzeltal (pp. 1-86) and Tzeltal-Spanish (pp. 1-75). Pages 87-93 of the first section contain Tzeltal material relating to: the calendar (p. 87), names of towns where Tzeltal is spoken (p. 88), numerals (p. 89), numeral classifiers (pp. 90-91), and family names (pp. 92-93). The material is first-hand, collected at Oxchuc, in Chiapas. It is excellent.

Tzeltal (1953)



Vocabulario tzeltal de Bachajon. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 216 pp.

This fine vocabulary is divided into two parts: Spanish-Tzeltal (pp. 9-112) and Tzeltal-Spanish (pp. 115-207). The work concludes with a series of short appendices: numeral classifiers (pp. 209-211), family names (pp. 211-212), first names (pp. 213-214), place names (p. 215), and a map of the Tzeltal region in Chiapas. The material is first-hand, collected at Bachajón. When the first printing (1300 copies) sold out, it was reprinted in 1971 (400 copies). My material is taken from the 1965 printing.

Tzeltal (1965)




Notes upon the ethnography of southern Mexico, part II. Davenport Academy of Natural Sciences, Vol. 9, pp. 1-101.

In this work, Starr supplies a good deal of information on the Maya from his travels in southern Mexico. It is rich in ethnographic detail, including comments on the linguistic affiliation of various communities. In addition, Starr provides (pp. 82-99) a first-hand Chol vocabulary collected by a Mr. Henry Rau in El Triunfo. Starr met Rau in El Triunfo (see pp. 73-74) and was given the list to publish. Rau's data must be used with considerable caution, however. Glottalization is inconsistently marked, and there seem to be printing errors which confuse his apostrophe (for glottalization) with an accent mark. Morpheme and syllable boundaries are sometimes violated by curious hyphenation, and "e" seems to appear occasionally for "c". Rau also has an overabundance of symbols for recording what are probably identical sounds; thus "ch", "tch", and "tsch" appear to be different ways of recording /c!hat/. It also seems to me that there is some mixture of Tzeltal in Rau's Chol list. In addition to Rau's data, Starr publishes other first-hand material, in the form of a comparative vocabulary containing 71 words (51-71 being numerals) in "eight Mexican dialects" (Appendix III). Six of the "dialects" are Mayan; the other two are Zoque and Chiapanec. The Mayan lists are from: Chol (Hidalgo), Huastec (Tancoco), Yucatec (Tekax), and Tzotzil (San Bartolomé, Socoltenango, and Soyalo). The Chol, Huastec, and Yucatec data was collected by Starr. The Tzotzil words were "given by Padre José Maria Sanchez of San Cristobál: they were written down about 1886 by natives, upon blanks sent out by the Government: we believe them to be unpublished" (Starr, 1902, Appendix III). I have used the codes Sb, Sc, and Sy for the three Tzotzil lists, and E (for El Triunfo) to distinguish Rau's Chol data from Starr's. Of the three Tzotzil vocabularies, the one from Socoltenango seems to be the most poorly recorded; it also occasionally resembles Tzeltal more than Tzotzil. In general, the data in the comparative vocabulary suffers from the same shortcomings mentioned above for Rau. In addition, most of the vowels have the curious feature of being marked as "long" (having a macron as diacritic). I assume that this is a mark of vowel quality rather than quantity.

Chol, Huastec, Tzotzil, Yucatec (1902)



List of 19 alleged Chorti <read Pocomam> words gathered in Zacapa by Stephens.

This list was given to Gallatin, who published it in 1845 (see Gallatin 1845). Berendt copied Gallatin's list around 1864 (ms. in University of Pa. Museum Library). The list also appears in Stoll 1884 (p. 108), and caused Stoll to classify Chorti, erroneously, with Pocomam. Berendt's copy is perfect except for one item (see Berendt 1864). Stoll's copy, however, contains some odd deviations (see Stoll 1884). The list is relatively unimportant, but it has been included here (under Pocomam, not Chorti) because of its historical interest: besides being very "early" Pocomam, it played a rather notorious role in obscuring for several years the linguistic affinity between Chol and Chorti. (For a discussion of the issue, see Dienhart, "On Gatschet, Sapper, Stoll and Gates: or another look at Gatschet's classification of the Mayan languages," Journal of Mayan Linguistics, 1981, Vol. 2, No 2, pp. 146-159.)

Pocomam (1839/1864b and 1839/1884; in BERENDT 1864 and STOLL 1884)



Zur Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala. Zurich: Orell Füssli und Co. 175 pp.

In 1878, Otto Stoll (1849-1922), a Doctor of Medicine from the University of Zurich, began an extensive first-hand study of the Mayan Indians and their languages in Guatemala. The results of his investigations were published over the next two decades. This superb 1884 publication was his first, and on the basis of it alone he has generally been viewed as the father of comparative Mayan studies. Stoll unassumingly states (1884:v) that he is simply carrying on the work begun by Brasseur de Bourbourg and continued by Berendt. In his comparative word list (pp. 46-70), Stoll supplies 271 words for 17 Mayan languages (one of these, "Peten" <Itza>, is treated as a dialect of Yucatec). The data for the Guatemalan languages (Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Ixil, Kekchi, Mam, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche, Uspantec) was collected mainly by Stoll himself. (I say "mainly," because the Mam material, which is sparse, was apparently supplied by a priest named R. Coronado at Stoll's request - see Stoll, 1884:165.) For the rest (Chol, Chontal, Huastec, Itza, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Yucatec) he relied on manuscript material from Berendt. (Berendt died the year Stoll arrived in Guatemala, but Edwin Rockstroh, a good friend of Berendt's, became a friend of Stoll's, too, and lent him manuscript material which Berendt had left in his hands.) Two of the languages, Aguacatec and Uspantec, were "discovered" by Stoll and recorded here apparently for the first time. I have included nearly all the material in Stoll's comparative vocabulary, including that which was supplied by Berendt, since Berendt's own data was unpublished until this time. The recordings are excellent, considering the period, and the printing is first-rate. If we are to fault Stoll (and/or Berendt) for anything, it would be for over-differentiating in the series of back stops for the Lowland languages such as Yucatec (where their four-way distinction between /c/, /c'/, /q/ and /q'/ is too "rich").

Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Chol, Chontal, Huastec, Itza, Ixil, Kekchi, Mam, Pocomam, Pocomchi, Quiche, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Uspantec, Yucatec (1884)

This 1884 publication of Stoll's also contains (p. 108) a copy of John Stephens' alleged Chorti <read Pocomam> vocabulary from 1839. Curiously, Stoll's copy lacks "father", "water", "body", and one of the entries for "bread". Even more surprising is the fact that it adds "heart" and "grandfather". Where did these two additions come from? Since Stoll's copy has often been the source of information on Stephens' list, I have included the exact list under Gallatin 1845 (q.v.). See also Berendt 1864 and Stephens 1839.

Pocomam (1839/1884)



Die Sprache der Ixil-Indianer: Ein Beitrag zur Ethnologie und Linguistik der Maya-Völker. Nebst einem Anhang: Wortverzeichnisse aus dem nordwestlichen Guatemala. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. 157 pp.

This excellent monograph contains extensive information on Ixil grammar (pp. 8-100), a first-hand Ixil vocabulary collected at Nebaj (pp. 103-130, Ixil-German), and a section which compares some vocabulary items of Aguacatec, Chuj, Jacaltec, and Mam (pp. 131-146). In addition, a very brief comparative vocabulary (31 words) of Chuj, Jacaltec, Mam, Quiche, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, and Yucatec is given on page 133. Stoll seems to imply (pp. 131-132) that all the items in this little comparative vocabulary were supplied by his friend, Edwin Rockstroh. This is certainly the case for all the data on Jacaltec and Chuj, which represents the first published information on these two languages with which I am familiar. The Aguacatec material, like that on Ixil, is surely Stoll's own (for a discussion of the two "Aguacatec" dialects (one Mayan, one not) which Stoll encountered during his visit to Aguacatan, see Stoll 1884:166-169). In addition to participating in the larger comparative word list (259 items, pp. 131-146), Aguacatec is well represented in the extensive footnotes on these pages. Considering the period, and the fact that Stoll was not a trained linguist, the quality of the recordings throughout the monograph is remarkable. The printing is also first-rate. I have included Stoll's material on all the Mayan dialects described here.

Aguacatec, Cakchiquel, Chuj, Ixil, Jacaltec, Mam, Quiche, Tojolabal, Tzeltal, Yucatec (1887)



Die Maya-Sprachen der Pokom-Gruppe, Erster Theil: Die Sprache der Pokonchí-Indianer. Vienna: Alfred Hölder. 203 pp.

This work opens with a discussion of the nature and extent of the "Pocom" area (that is, the area where Pocomam and Pocomchi are spoken). Then comes a long and informative section on the grammar of Pocomchi (pp. 15-136), followed (pp. 136-142) by a brief comparison of Pocomchi and Pocomam (phonology and lexis). This is followed by two pages (pp. 141-142) of textual material. An interesting feature here is a comparison of "The Lord's Prayer" as recorded in Pocomam by Thomas Gage (1648) with Stoll's own recording in Pocomchi. Pages 143-145 contain additional notes on the grammar of Pocomchi. The work concludes with a Pocomchi-German vocabulary (pp. 146-200). In this vocabulary, Stoll occasionally supplements his own first-hand recordings (from Tactic) with material from Gage and Berendt; these additions are clearly marked as "G" and "Bdt", respectively. The vocabulary contains some Pocomam words (Stoll's own) as well. I have not entered the material from Gage or Berendt, limiting myself to Stoll's own data, which is extensive and excellent.

Pocomam, Pocomchi (1888)



Die Maya-Sprachen der Pokom-Gruppe, Zweiter Teil: Die Sprache der K'ek'chi-Indianer. Nebst einem Anhang: Die Uspanteca. Leipzig: K. F. Köhler's Antiquarium. 221 pp.

This is a continuation of Stoll 1888. It contains information on Kekchi grammar (pp. 15-122), some early Kekchi textual material (published by e.g. Hervaz in the 18th century) with German translation (pp. 123-127) and a Kekchi-German vocabulary (pp. 128-191). We know that Stoll's travels took him to Coban, so no doubt much of the Kekchi material is his own. In his vocabulary, however, he draws heavily on Berendt ("Bdt.") and two other sources, "A. C." and "Ch." I have not found an explanation for these abbreviations, but conclude that "A. C." stands for "Anonymus von Coban" and "Ch." for "Charencey". The "Anonymus von Coban" is the name by which Stoll refers to an anonymous document entitled "Vocabulario de las lenguas Ixil, Cacchi (de Coban) y de San Miguel Chicah." This ms. was in the possession of Brasseur de Bourbourg, who characterized it as a "petit manuscrit moderne où il manque beaucoup de choses" (see Stoll 1888:5 and Stoll 1884:96). The Charencey ms., "Mélanges sur la langue Cakgi", is characterized by Stoll (1896:5) as "mangelhaft, nicht einheitlich ortographiert, und zum Teil durch Druckfehler verwirrt." Because of its mixture of sources, two of which are not reliable, I decided not to include material from this Kekchi vocabulary. However, the situation is radically different when it comes to the Uspantec supplement (pp. 193-221). This opens with a brief (but important) discussion of the linguistic position of Uspantec (pp. 193-196; for further commentary, see Dienhart, "On Gatschet, Sapper, Stoll and Gates: or another look at Gatschet's classification of the Mayan languages," Journal of Mayan Linguistics, 1981, Vol. 2, No 2, pp. 146-159). This is followed by a short description of Uspantec phonology and grammar (pp. 197-205), and the work concludes with a vocabulary (Uspantec-German) on pages 206-221. The data was collected by Stoll in San Miguel Uspantán, and is an important supplement to the Uspantec material published by Stoll in 1884. I have included nearly all the data in this supplement.

Uspantec (1896)



Die ethnische Stellung der Tz'utujil-Indianer von Guatemala. Jahresbericht der Geographisch-Ethnographischen Gesellschaft (Zurich, 1901) pp. 27-59.

Stoll never made it to Tzutujil-speaking territory during his Guatemalan travels. Consequently, he was delighted to receive linguistic material on Tzutujil from a former medical student of his, Dr. Eustorijo Calderon. Calderon was born in El Salvador, but spent most of his life in Guatemala, where Stoll met him. He then went to Zurich, where he studied medicine under Stoll. Upon his return to Guatemala, he collected linguistic material which he sent to Stoll. This formed the basis for Stoll's classification of several Mayan languages he had not personally investigated, one of them being Tzutujil. This paper opens with a historical sketch of the Tzutujil Indians (pp. 27-42). Then comes information on Tzutujil grammar (pp. 42-52), followed by a short Tzutujil-German vocabulary (pp. 52-56) of some 265 entries. The paper ends with a comparison of Tzutujil and Cakchiquel (pp. 56-59), in which Stoll concludes: "Trotz der politischen Unabhängigkeit des Tz'utujil-Reiches steht die Sprache der Tz'utujiles ihrem nördlichen Nachbarn, dem Cakchiquel so ausserordentlich nahe, dass die Unterschiede beider Sprachen nur geringfügig und wenig zahlreich sind" (p. 56). This view foreshadows that expressed in Grimes 1968 (q.v.). In the vocabulary, Stoll converts Calderon's data to his own transcription system (of 1884). There is no indication of exactly where Calderon recorded the material, but it is well done. There are a few misprints, but not many. An example from the German: "Banmast" for "Baumast"; and from the Tzutujil: "ck'uch'uj" instead of "ch'uch'uj".

Tzutujil (1901a)



Yucatec vocabulary. Manuscript.

Yucatec (1968b/1973; in FISHER 1973)






Paradigma apologetico que desea persuadir ingenuo, escribiendo desapassionado, la not<ic>ia de la Huasteca a los vv. sacerdotes... Manuscript. Chicago: Newberry Library. 17 pp. + 145 pp.

This manuscript is structured as follows: a 17-page introduction, an extensive commentary on Huastec grammar (pp. 1-69), a Spanish-Huastec vocabulary (pp. 70-106), and a "Cathecismo y Doctrina Christiana" (pp. 106-145) containing Huastec equivalents of a variety of Spanish religious texts. The whole ms. is written in a very fine hand. It is an important document, being one of our earliest sources of information on Huastec. This 1747 ms. is quite clearly the basis for Tapia Zenteno's 1767 publication on Huastec, though the two works are not identical. This was noted years ago by Gates, who made a copy of the ms. for the Peabody Museum Library, commenting: "I found this to be Tapia's own autograph, and further to vary in many places from the printed work; words, illustrations, etc. being given <which are> not in the printed work." So, besides offering us a good check on the accuracy of the printed version, this ms. contains material not available in the 1767 publication. For example, the word "charcoal" is given as "calul" in 1767, whereas we find both "calul" and "cuyxix" in the 1747 ms. When the two sources disagree, it is not always immediately obvious which source is the more reliable. For example, "boat" appears as "tan" in 1747, but as "tam" in 1767. Possibly both pronunciations are possible. Glottalized consonants do not appear in either version, though Tapia Zenteno does distinguish between /h/ and /j/. He also records both long and short vowels, marking length by doubling the vowel.

Huastec (1747)



Noticia de la lengua huasteca... Mexico: En la Imprenta de la Biblioteca Mexicana. 128 pp.

This is basically the published version of Tapia Zenteno 1747 (q.v.), though as mentioned above, the two versions are not identical. The book opens with a grammar of Huastec (pp. 1-47); then comes a Spanish-Huastec vocabulary (pp. 48-88), and a cathechism (pp. 89-128). This is the work which Alejandre "plagiarizes" so heavily in his 1870 and 1890 publications (see Alejandre 1870 and 1890 for further comments). Where entries in the published 1767 version differ from those in the 1747 ms., it is not always easy to determine whether the differences are due to misprints (in 1767), or to alterations consciously made by the author. In any event, this is an excellent source to have. For further discussion, see Tapia Zenteno 1747.

Huastec (1767)




Über die Mayasprache von Chicomucelo. Proceedings of the Twenty-third International Congress of Americanists (New York, 1928), pp. 926-936.

Motivated by Sapper's 1897 data on the speakers of Chicomuceltec (but apparently unfamiliar with Sapper's 1912 article, which contains additional Chicomuceltec material), Termer visited the town of Chicomucelo in 1926. He found a community of some 2500 people. To his surprise, he was able to locate only three people, all over 60 years old, who spoke Chicomuceltec. The rest spoke Spanish, Motozintlec, or Mam. Even the three Chicomuceltec speakers had stopped using Chicomuceltec to converse in, preferring Spanish instead. Termer collected 284 words, of which 203 were not in Sapper's 1897 list. Since Sapper had 169 Chicomuceltec words, the total list of different lexical items from the two sources is 372. So this article of Termer's is of vital importance for our knowledge of Chicomuceltec, which is presumably now extinct (see Lyle Campbell and Una Canger's "Chicomuceltec's Last Throes," in International Journal of American Linguistics, 1978, Vol. 44, pp. 228-230). Termer presents the data in the form of a four-column list (pp. 929-935): German gloss, Termer's Chicomuceltec, Sapper's Chicomuceltec, Stoll's Huastec. His recordings are good, and printing errors appear to be rare. In addition to this comparative list, Termer appends a little vocabulary (66 words, pp. 935-936) in which he compares Chicomuceltec with Jacaltec, Chuj, and Mam. Part of the Jacaltec and Chuj data is from Oliver La Farge, while the Mam data is in part from Otto Stoll (1884) and Diego de Reynoso (1664). Because of this mixture of sources, I have not included the data on Chuj, Jacaltec, and Mam, but drawn only on the first-hand Chicomuceltec material collected by Termer.

Chicomuceltec (1930)



Vocabulario de la lengua maya que comienza en romance, compuesto de varios autores de esta lengua. Manuscript. 154 ll.

This manuscript has had an unfortunate history. Its fate is described by Daniel Brinton in his Catalogue of the Berendt Linguistic Collection (1900/1958:3): "In 1936 the cura of Ticul, Don Estanislas Carrillo, found among the baptismal archives of his parish a manuscript of 154 leaves with the <above> title ... It bore as the date of completion Jan. 26, 1690. He presented it to his friend, Don Juan Pio Perez, the distinguished Yucatecan linguist. The latter copied it, after which the original, not being cared for, was lost. In 1847 he made another copy, and either gave away or otherwise disposed of that of 1836. From that of 1847 ... <Berendt made his copy> in Merida in 1870, with the utmost care." The original Ticul was apparently Spanish-Maya, and contained about 6200 words (Tozzer, A Maya Grammar, 1921:173). According to Tozzer (1921:173), Perez also made a Yucatec-Spanish version of the Ticul in 1847. Berendt copied both parts. The Spanish-Yucatec version (based on the 1847 copy, apparently) is published in Perez 1898 (q.v.). This is the source I have used, giving it the compound date 1690/1898a.

Yucatec (1690/1898a; in PEREZ 1898)



Mopan vocabulary list. Manuscript.

Mopan (1962/1973; in FISHER 1973)



Preliminary notes for a Mopan Maya dictionary. Manuscript.

Mopan (1971h/1973; in FISHER 1973)











ca. 1600

Bocabulario de Mayathan. Manuscript. Vienna: Austrian National Library. 6 ll + 204 ll.

This ms., popularly known as the "Vienna Dictionary," is in the Austrian National Library in Vienna, where it is classified as the Codex Vindobonensis S. N. 3833. It is a Spanish-Yucatec vocabulary attributed by some to Diego Rejón Arias and presumably written in the early 17th century. Peabody Museum Library has a photographic copy of the ms. made by William Gates. A facsimile edition of the original ms. was published by Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt in Graz, Austria in 1972. This is the source I have used, giving it the compound date 1600/1972. The ms. is lacking leaves 110, 199, and 200. (David Bolles recently found a copy of page 199 in the Gates material at the Peabody Museum Library.) The facsimile edition contains an introduction (pp. 7-24), by the late Ernst Mengin of Copenhagen, which discusses the history of the document. Here we learn, for example, that it was purchased by the Austrian National Library at an auction in 1916, and that the librarians there were well aware of the value of this early Mayan document, and pleased that they had acquired it at a very low price. In Mengin's view, the lucky purchase also probably saved the ms. for posterity. Though he finds it impossible to date the document exactly, he feels that the Austrian estimate of 1670 is not far off the mark. Mengin is also convinced (p. 18) that the ms. is the work of several Franciscan authors and that the name of Diego Rejón Arias which appears on page vi (recto) identifies the "owner", not the author. The exact phrase in which the name appears is: "Este Bocabulario de lengua Maya es de Diego Rejon. Rejon Arias." A number of pages in the ms. are damaged, particularly along the right-hand side, thereby obliterating portions of the Yucatec material. There are also places where the neat, but tiny, handwriting is nearly illegible. I have as yet made only limited use of this ms.

Yucatec (1600/1972)






Diccionario español-tzotzil y tzotzil-español. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 28 pp. + 24 pp.

This is a small but well-executed bilingual dictionary of Spanish and Tzotzil. It consists of two sections, separately numbered: Spanish-Tzotzil (pp. 1-28) and Tzotzil-Spanish (pp. 1-24). A brief introduction contains two pages of commentary on the symbols used (pp. ii-iii). The data is first-hand, collected by the authors in Zinacantán. Glottalization is consistently recorded. Verbs and possessed nouns are generally cited in the third person singular form. Curiously, the title page bears the date 1949 and the notice that 300 copies were printed, whereas the Prologue is dated December 1950 and informs us that 400 copies were printed. I have adopted the date on the title page. The two versions of the vocabulary overlap heavily, but are not identical. The Spanish-Tzotzil portion is the most extensive; in only a few cases is a word listed in the Tzotzil-Spanish version that is not also found in the Spanish-Tzotzil counterpart. Occasionally, however, the Tzotzil-Spanish section does contain an additional Tzotzil "synonym" or two for a given form. There are 664 entries in the Spanish-Tzotzil portion, and 515 entries plus 27 numerals in the Tzotzil portion. Since the numerals are found only in the latter portion, there is a minimum of 691 different entries in this vocabulary. I have included nearly all of them.

Tzotzil (1949)



Tzotzil dictionary. Manuscript.

This is a collection of typed and handwritten index cards, prepared by Nadine Weathers during fieldwork done under the auspices of the Summer Institute of Linguistics. The cards, which are in the form Tzotzil-Spanish, have been photographed and made available on microfilm. See under Materials on the Mayan Languages of Mexico.




Chol texts on the supernatural. Norman, Oklahoma: Summer Institute of Linguistics, Publication No. 13. 171 pp.

This publication contains Chol texts on the supernatural. It is divided into three sections: I. Creation Stories (12 stories, pp. 13-61), II. Religious Ceremonies (9 stories, pp. 63-86), III. The Spirit World and Witchcraft (19 stories, pp. 87-154). The stories are followed by a Chol-English glossary (pp. 156-171) in the Tumbala Chol dialect. The data was collected from 1948-1962 by the Oklahoma Summer Institute of Linguistics through field work among the Chol Indians of Chiapas, Mexico. The material is first-hand data and seems highly reliable.

Chol (1965a)



Vocabulario español-maya. Merida: Imprenta de la Ermita. 72 pp.

This is a rather curious, but useful Spanish-Yucatec vocabulary. Curious, in that the collection of lexical items is quite unusual. Useful, in that the authors record both glottalized consonants and long vowels. Surprisingly, the word list does not contain such common items as "bad", "good", "moon", "rain", "star", "sun", "water", but does contain entries such as "to embrace between the chest and the hands." This leads me to infer that the work is original and first-hand, even though the authors nowhere indicate the source of their data. There are a few printing errors (such as an occasional "l" for a "t"), but these are infrequent. The recordings are quite reliable and sensitive. For example, there are three different Yucatec words listed for "big", where many vocabularies of this size would supply only one. I have included much of the material.

Yucatec (1898)



Cotoque. Die Maya-Sprache von Chicomucelo. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie (Braunschweig), Vol. 80, pp. 59-87.

In this 1955 article, Zimmermann reproduces Chicomuceltec material from Sapper 1897 and from Termer 1930, and updates the Huastec comparisons in Termer by adding data from e.g. Andrade, Stoll, and Larsen. He also adds "new" Chicomuceltec material from Sapper's field notes, which had been passed on to Walter Lehmann, deposited in the Latin American Library in Berlin, discovered there by Thomas Barthel, and loaned to Zimmermann. Zimmermann apparently did not realize that much of the "new" material had in fact been published by Sapper in 1912 (q.v.). Zimmermann's (re)publication is nonetheless useful, since Sapper 1912 is badly printed, and since Zimmermann does include some material not in Sapper 1912. Zimmermann also adds a few new Chicomuceltec forms from Termer's field notes, which he borrowed from Termer. The comparative vocabulary (German, Sapper's Chicomuceltec, Termer's Chicomuceltec, Huastec), which appears on pages 64-78, contains 402 lexical entries. The first 374 consist of individual lexical items with data from both Sapper and Termer. New material from Sapper and Termer is prefaced with an asterisk. Nos. 375-385 contain additional items taken from Termer's field notes; and nos. 386-402 contain Chicomuceltec sentences from Sapper's ms. I have not included any of the Huastec material, since this is a mixture of various sources, without source identification. With respect to the Chicomuceltec data, however, I have included material from Zimmermann wherever it adds to or differs from the Chicomuceltec forms supplied in Sapper 1897, Sapper 1912, or Termer 1930. Zimmermann's article is also interesting because he includes a copy of a two-page Chicomuceltec (1775) confession which he found in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. It contains eight sentences of Chicomuceltec, the earliest data known from this language. In addition it informs us that the language was referred to as "Cotoque". Pages 79-85 contain a linguistic analysis of this ms. by Zimmermann, and comments on the relationship between Chicomuceltec and Huastec.

Chicomuceltec (1912/1955a, 1930/1955a)