Many thoughtful men have been trying for a century, at least, to give mankind a world-speech which would overstep all linguistic barriers, and one cannot help wondering why they have overlooked the Sign Language, the one mode common to all mankind, already established and as old as Babel. Yes, more ancient than the hills.

As far back as the records go, we find the Sign Language in use. General Hugh L. Scott has pointed out nineteen examples in Homer. Greek vases, Japanese bronzes, ancient Hindu statuary, as well as songs and legends older than history, give testimony in like tenor. While Egyptologists remind us that the oldest records show, not only that the Sign Language was then used, but that the one original code was much like that in use to-day. The fact that it is yet found all over the world wherever man is man, is proof of its being built on human nature in the beginnings. We might even argue that it is more ancient than speech.

Ideas certainly came before the words that express them. The idea of “hunger” must be a thousand times as old as any existing “word” for “hunger.” When it became necessary to communicate to another the idea of hunger, it certainly was easier and more direct to communicate it by gesture than by word. The word had, perforce, to be more or less arbitrary, but the gesture was logical, and could at once indicate the pain, its place, and even hint at the cause.

The possible variations of a mere squeak in a concealed pipe are obviously less in number and far less graphic and logical than the various movements of two active, free-moving, compound, visible parts of the body that utilize all the dimensions of space, all the suggestions of speed, motion, physical form and action, juxtaposition, yes, even a measure of sound, and that could in a multitude of cases reproduce the very idea itself.

Animals have far more gestures to express thoughts and emotions than they have sounds, and children instinctively use gestures for various ideas long before they acquire the sound for them. In all races as a rule the very young children’s gestures are the same, but the different words imposed by the different mothers have little or nothing in common, and no obvious basis in logic. All of which goes to prove the greater antiquity of eye-talk over ear-talk. To which conclusion we are forced also by the superiority of sight over hearing as a sense. “Seeing is believing,” is convincement: hearing is more open to challenge.

Nor can the sign-talk have changed radically, for it is founded on the basic elements of human make-up, and on mathematics, and is so perfectly ideographic that no amount of bad presentation can completely divert attention from the essential thought to the vehicle; while punning is an impossibility.

It had all the inherent possibilities of speech, was indeed capable of even greater subtleties, as we have noted, and had a far greater distance range, three or four times that of spoken words.

In view of the greater antiquity and many advantages that hand gestures have over spoken language, one is prompted to ask: Why did it not develop and continue man’s chief mode of inter-communication? The answer is, doubtless, partly because it was useless in the dark or when the person was out of sight or partly hidden by intervening things. Diagrammatically expressed it was thus:

Speech therefore covers all directions night and day.

Gesture covers one-third of the circle in hours of light.

Therefore speech serves six times as many occasions as gesture.

But the chief reason for the triumph of the appeal to the ear is doubtless because the hands were in constant use for other things; the tongue was not; was indeed practically free to specialize for this end.

ITS UNIVERSALITY

Being so fundamental, ancient, and persistent, Sign Language is, perforce, universal. In some measure it is used by every race on earth to-day. Eskimo and Zulu, Japanese and Frenchman, Turk and Aztec, Greek and Patagonian. And whenever two men of hopelessly diverse speech have met, they have found a medium of thought exchange in the old Sign Language—the pantomimic suggestion of ideas.

Latin races are proverbially hand-talkers, so that the Sign Language is more widely used among them than with Anglo-Saxons.

But the American Plains Indian is undoubtedly the best sign-talker the world knows to-day. There are, or were, some thirty different tribes with a peculiar speech of their own, and each of these communicated with the others by use of the simple and convenient sign-talk of the plains. It is, or was, the language of Western trade and diplomacy as far back as the records go. Every traveller who visited the Buffalo Plains had need to study and practise this Western Volapuk, and all attest its simplicity, its picturesqueness, its grace, and its practical utility.

Many of the best observers among these have left us long lists of signs in use, Alexander Henry in his gossipy journal among the Mandans of the Missouri in 1806 tells us of the surprise and interest he felt in watching two Indian chiefs of different tribes who conversed freely for hours on all subjects of common interest, conveying their ideas accurately by nothing but simple gestures.

The European races are much less gifted as sign-talkers. But we all have a measure of it that is a surprise to most persons when first confronted with the facts. Our school children especially make daily use of the ancient signals.

AMONG SCHOOL CHILDREN

In taking observations among school-boys and girls, I had this uniform experience: All denied any knowledge of the Sign Language, at first, but were themselves surprised on discovering how much of it they had in established use.

One very shy little girl—so shy that she dared not speak—furnished a good illustration:

“Do you use the Sign Language in your school?” I asked.

She shook her head.

“Do you learn any language but English?”

She nodded.

“What is the use of learning any other than English?”

She raised her right shoulder in the faintest possible shrug and at the same time turned her right palm slightly up.

“Now,” was my reply, “don’t you see you have answered all my three questions in signs which you said you did not use?”

Following the subject, I said: “What does this mean?” and held up my right hand with the first and second fingers crossed.

“Pax,” she whispered; and then, after further trials, I learned that at least thirty signs were in daily use in that local school.

This was in England. In America the sign “Pax,” or “King’s cross,” is called “King’s X,” “Fines” or “Fins” or “Fends,” “Bars up” or “Truce,” meaning always, “I claim immunity.”

This is a very ancient sign and seems to refer to the right of sanctuary. The name “King’s cross,” used occasionally in England, means probably the sanctuary in the King’s palace.

In general I found about 150 gesture signals in established use among American school children, namely:

• Me (Tap one’s own chest).
• You (Pointing to you).
• Yes (Nod).
• No (Shake head).
• Good (Nod and clap hands).
• Bad (Shake head and grimace).
• Go (Pushing flat hand forward, palm forward).
• Come (Drawing in flat hand, palm toward one).
• Hurry (The same repeated vigorously several times).
• Come for a moment (Beckon with forefinger, hand unmoved).
• Stop (Flat hand held up, palm forward).
• Gently (Flat hand held low, palm down, gently waved).
• Good-bye (Flat hand held high, palm down and forward, fingers quickly waved up and down).
• Up (Point up).
• High (Flat hand, palm down, held up at arm’s length).
• Deep (Left flat hand palm down at level of mouth, right palm up, as low as possible).
• Heaven (Point up very high and look up).
• Down (Point down).
• Forward (Swing index forward and down in a curve).
• Backward (Jerk thumb over shoulder).
• Across (Hold left hand out flat, palm down, run right index across it).
• Over or Above (Hold out flat left, palm down, and above it hold ditto right).
• Under (Reverse of foregoing).
• Hush (Index finger on lips).
• Listen (Curved hand behind ear).
• Look (Flat hand over eyes).
• Look there (Point and look in same direction).
• Touch (Reach out and touch with index).
• Taste (Lay finger on tongue).
• Smell (Hold palm to nose).
• Friendship (Hand shake).
• Warning (Index finger held up).
• Threatening (Fist held up).
• Weeping (With index finger at each eye, trace course of tears).
• Shame on you (Point one index at the person and draw the other along it several times in same direction).
• You make me ashamed (Cover eyes and face with hands).
• Mockery (Stick tongue out at person).
• Disdain (Snap fingers toward person).
• Scorn (Throw an imaginary pinch of sand at person).
• Insolent defiance (Thumb to nose, hand spread).
• Arrogant (Indicate swelled head).
• Pompous (Indicate big chest).
• Incredulity (Expose white of eye with finger, as though proving “No green there”).
• I am no fool (Tap one side of the nose).
• Joke (Rub side of nose with index).
• Connivance (Winking one eye).
• Puzzled (Scratch the head).
• Crazy (Tap forehead with index then describe a circle with it).
• Despair (Pulling the hair).
• Sleepy (Put a fist in each eye).
• Bellyache (Hands clasped across the belly).
• Sick (A grimace and a limp dropping of the hands).
• Applause (Clap hands).
• Victory (Swing an imaginary flag over head).
• Upon my honor (Draw a cross over heart or cross the hands over breast).
• I am seeking (Looking about and pointing finger in same directions).
• I am thinking (Lay index on brow, lower head and look out under brows).
• I have my doubts (Slowly swing head from side to side).
• I will not listen (Hold flat hands on ears).
• I will not look (Cover eyes with hands).
• I forget (Slowly shake head, and brush away something in air, near the forehead).
• I claim exemption, or “Fins” or “Bar up” (Middle finger crossed on index).
• I beg of you (Flat hand palm to palm, pointing to the person).
• I pray (Clasped hands held up).
• I am afraid, or surrender (Hold up both flat hands, palm forward).
• I wind him around my finger (Make the action with right thumb and index around left index).
• I have him under my thumb (Press firmly down with top of right thumb).
• You surprise me (Flat hand on open mouth).
• I send you a kiss (Kiss the finger tips of right hand and throw it forward).
• Search me (Hold the coat flaps open, one in each hand).
• Swim (Strike out with flat hands).
• Dive (Flat hands together, moved in a curve, forward and down).
• Will you come swimming? (Two fingers in V shape held up level).
• Will you? or Is it so? (Look, nod and raise brows).
• Fool or Ass (A thumb in each ear, flat hands up).
• Cut-throat (Draw index across throat).
• Indifference (A shoulder shrug).
• Ignorance (A shrug and a head shake).
• Pay (Hold out closed hand, palm up, rubbing thumb and index tips together).
• Jew (Flat hands waved near shoulders, palms up).
• Bribe (Hold hollow hand, palm up, behind one).
• It is in my pocket (Slap pocket with flat hand).
• Give me my bill (Beckon, then write on air).
• Match (Make the sign of striking a match on the thigh).
• Set it afire (Sign match, and then thrust it forward).
• Pistol (Making barrel with left index, stock and hammer with right hooked on; snapping right index from thumb).
• That tastes good (Smack the lips).
• The food was good (Pat the stomach).
• Bad taste (Grimace and spitting out).
• Bad smell (Hold the nose).
• Bend (With right hand bend left index).
• Break (With fists touching, make as though to bend a stick, then swing the fists apart).
• Hot (Wet middle finger in mouth, reach it forward and jerk it back).
• Cold (Fists near shoulder and shaken).
• Paint (Use flat right as a brush to paint flat left).
• Shave (Use finger or thumb on face as a razor).
• Wash (Revolve hands on each other as in washing).
• Knife (With right fist as though holding knife, whittle left index).
• Revolver (Hold out right fist with index extended and thumb up).
• Gun or shooting (Hold hands as in aiming a gun).
• Drive horses (Work the two fists, side by side).
• Give me (Hold out flat hand, palm up).
• Write (Make the action with index).
• Strike (Strike down with fist).
• Fighting (Make the fists menace each other).
• Drinking (Lift right hand to mouth as though it held a glass).
• Smoking (Make as though holding a pipe and drawing).
• Rub it out (Wet tips of right fingers, and seem to rub).
• Thank you (Bow and, at the same time, swing flat right, palm up, a little way down and to one side).
• Church (Hands clasped, fingers in, but index fingers up and touching).
• Get up (Raise flat right, palm up, from low up high).
• Sit down (Drop flat right, palm down, from high, down low).
• Here (Pointing down, hand swung in small circle).¹

In all, 110; besides the compass points, the features of the face, the parts of the body, the numerals up to 20 or 30, and a great many half-established signs, such as book, telephone, ring the bell, etc., which, if allowed, would bring the number up to nearly 200.

As another line of observation, I have asked New York boys, “How many signs does the Broadway policeman use in regulating the traffic?” Any bright child remembers presently that the officer seldom speaks, could scarcely be heard if he did. Indeed, he relies chiefly on Sign Language and hourly uses the established signs for “Stop,” “Come on,” “Come here,” “Go right,” “Go left,” “Go back,” “Hurry up,” “Go easy,” “I warn you,” “I’ll punish you,” “Pass,” “Keep behind me,” “Scorn,” and, perhaps, one or two others.

While not infrequently the small boy responds with the sign of “insolent defiance” that is used the world ’round, and was probably invented by Cain and Abel.

Similarly, the car conductor uses the signs for “Do you want this car?” “Do you want transfer?” “How many?” “Go on,” as well as most of the above.

Evidently, then, the Sign Language is used of necessity in much of our life where speech is impossible.

CODES, ETC.

It is inevitable that a world-wide language be split into variant forms. Besides the fragmentary Sign Code among our children, the more copious list of signs among Latins, and the code of the Cistercian or Trappist Monks, there are the Deaf Code and the Sign Language of the American Indians. Only the two last are widely established and at all complete as languages to-day.

DEAF CODE

The Sign Language used by the deaf was originated in France by AbbÉ de l’EpÉe about 1759, with a view to facilitating the intercommunication of the deaf. His signs were largely arbitrary or founded on the spelling of French words, usually in abbreviated form, so that it was merely a short-hand of French done into finger-spelling.

While this was the case at its beginning, the deaf themselves had instinctively done so much in the way of introducing pantomime and expressive gesture, that they have half redeemed the Code from its unfortunate original plan, and, in so doing, have made themselves intelligible to an immensely larger audience.

THE INDIAN CODE

So far as I can learn, no student hitherto has compared the various methods without being convinced that the American Indian Sign Language is the best extant. It is theoretically perfect and practically complete. In order to make this evident, I must offer a definition and some comparative details.

A true Sign Language is an established code of logical gestures to convey ideas; and is designed as an appeal to the eye, without the assistance of sounds, grimaces, apparatus, personal contact, written or spoken language, or reference to words or letters; preferably made by using only the hands and adjoining parts of the body.

Measured by these standards, there is only one true Gesture Language in the field to-day; that is the sign-talk of the American Indians. It is established over the whole area of the Great Plains; and, though varied locally, is essentially the same from Saskatchewan to Rio Grande.

In general, it is claimed that there are two well-marked dialects of this: the northern, which is a whole hand and a two-hand dialect; the central and southern, which is a finger and one-hand dialect.

The former is better for far signalling; the latter for conversation. There are, however, many exceptions to these rules; and, in any case, they are so close akin that Indians from opposite extremes of the Plains have no difficulty in conversing with each other.

The Cheyennes originally lived in a central region where they had intercourse with a dozen tribes whose spoken language differed from their own; so they became very expert sign-talkers, perhaps the best. They have amplified to the number of several thousand signs, and simplified until theirs has become largely a one-hand code; therefore, as far as possible, I make the Cheyenne sign-talk my standard. All signs herein given I have found in use among the southern Cheyennes and are understood to be Cheyenne except when another source is specifically mentioned.

Clark gives first place among gesture talkers to the Cheyennes and their associates the Arapahoes, whose sign-talk was the same, though their speech was very different, so that the signs for which he is authority may also be considered Cheyenne.

The signs given me as Indian by Sheeaka and his friend, Tom Frosted, should be cautiously received if one would study the ancient code. Sheeaka had in his family a deaf-mute, who probably imported some signs from the Deaf Code, as indicated.

In cases where there were different signs for the same idea, I have selected the simplest and clearest, the least like other signs; or, other things equal, the one most extensively used, preferring a one-hand to a two-hand sign.

Usually that sign is best from the locality where the idea is most familiar. Thus the Sioux sign for “tree squirrel” is poor; the Modoc sign is very good. The Navaho signs for “domestic sheep” are numerous and clearly differentiated; those of the north are not, and refer back to the “bighorn.” Southern signs for “snow” are descriptive and cumbrous, while those of the northern tribes are simple and perfect.

A COMPARISON OF THE TWO CODES

A comparison of the Deaf and Indian Codes seems to emphasize the superiority of the Indian. The Deaf was intended to convey, word by word, a vocal language; it assumes that you know the other man’s speech, and can spell. Whereas, the Indian was invented to over-ride linguistic barriers and, knowing nothing of spelling, deals only with ideas.

The next great advantage of Indian style is its picturesqueness. The two systems can be illustrated and fairly compared by the signs for the months.

First the Deaf:

January—Sign for Month, then J, N, and R, that is 4 signs.

June—Sign for Month, then J and N, that is 3 signs.

July—Sign for Month, then J and L, again 3 signs.

Whereas the Indian calls January the Snow Moon, thus moon or “Horns in the sky” and snow, that is two signs. June is Rose Moon i.e., horns or Crescent in the sky and rose (the right hand plucking an imaginary petal from each finger tip of the left). July is the Thunder Moon, i.e., horns in the sky, then the right index darted downward in a quick zigzag to imitate lightning. All need but two signs each.

The first involving a certain amount of spelling is limited to those who can read, and who use that word. The second, touching nothing but the idea, is widely acceptable, much shorter, and visible much farther off. It was apparently developed for the safe distance beyond arrow range.

Again the Indian method is strong in its dignity. The deaf often spoil their sign-talk by grimacing, the Indian never does so. One may occasionally help the idea by facial expression, but it should be used with great reserve, as there is nothing more unlovely or likely to harm the study of the Sign Language than the excessive grimacing that one sometimes sees in an uneducated deaf-mute. The Indian sign-talker’s face is calm and little changed, his head is moved in graceful sweeps, and never jerked unless to express some jerky action. His communication is indeed a study in beautiful, dignified gesture. There is not an Indian sign in this book that depends on facial expression for its usefulness, and there are but few that involve the face in any way.

Last year (1910) my friend Hamlin Garland met a party of moving picture men returning from a business tour among the Indians. He asked, “Did you get two old chiefs talking together in the Sign Language?” They said “No, hadn’t heard of it.”

“Then,” he replied, “you have missed one of the most graceful and rewarding chances for your special art that the western country affords.”

They were so much impressed with his description that they went back. Having brought together two chiefs of diverse speech they got results on their films which amply justified their time and trouble.

Finally a large number of the signs used by the deaf are conventional and arbitrarily fixed, dating back about 100 years, whereas each Indian sign is the slow evolutionary product of ages, with its roots deep in human nature. It is never arbitrary, but so logical and so reasonable that it is easily and quickly learned.

Every interested person, therefore, must regret profoundly that the teachers of the deaf should have gone out of their way to fabricate an unnatural, localized code, when there was awaiting them ready-made, and already established, a system founded on universal human nature, old as the hills, full of the charms of grace and poetry, and so logical that any one of any race can learn it in a tithe of the time required for the acquisition of the merest smattering of a spoken language, and the adoption of which would at once have greatly lessened the handicap of the deaf. One can only suppose that the founders of the code were unaware of the other’s existence.

Undoubtedly actual service has done much to reform and redeem the Deaf Code and make it more nearly a true Sign Language, but one cannot help wishing that their teachers would take the inevitable step at once and adopt the natural system.

Thus we have logic with us as well as the opinion of ethnologic students in giving preference to the Indian System. While in the extent of usage honors are about even, I am credibly assured that about 100,000 people are daily using the Deaf Code and an equal number using the Indian.

It is my belief that an available popular Manual will soon establish the latter as the universal code and result in its further and full development.

ATTITUDE TOWARD THE SIGN LANGUAGE

There are two distinct attitudes toward Indian Sign Language:

First, that of the student who sees in it a beautiful product of evolution, a perfect demonstration of the subtle laws of speech growth, the outcome of human mind yearning for converse with human mind, rebellious at its shut-in loneliness, battering with its hands the prison walls, till it could reach out and signal to the next locked-in, before it had yet found the way of modulated sounds. This, then, was the means which responded to the demand for communion and mental fellowship before there was a spoken speech. It began, as all codes must, with the broadest, simplest root ideas, and expressed their inter-relationships at most by context, sequence, proximity, or emphasis, but not by inflection.

Every student of the Sign Language is impressed by this thought and very naturally considers every true sign of the old Sign Language a thing sacred, precious as a pre-Homeric manuscript. He believes that to modify it or tamper with it would be to rob it of all value as a living expression of growth, and much like trying to readjust the crystalline forms on a frost-covered pane by shaping them with a hot iron. The student recognizes it as his first and highest duty to make faithful, unadulterated, untooled records of the oldest types of signs. This is the academic attitude. I am fully in sympathy with it.

Second, the practical attitude which realizes that Sign Language, never dead, is coming to its renaissance and can serve many useful ends among us here to-day. But to complete its possibilities it must be brought up to date by the addition of elements that stand for the latest modern ideas; and therefore does not hesitate to seize on and adopt these elements wherever they may be found. Thus, it may be held, is a contamination of the thought by interminglement of spurious recent creations. But it is merely submitting the code to the ordinary rules of all language. We should remember, further, that the ancient signs, as well as the modern, were invented by men who had need of them. The only difference is that the one was invented recently, the other maybe thousands of years ago; and that without such changes the Sign Language could not serve its beneficent purpose to-day among the deaf, the distant, the roar-environed, the moving picture folk, and those of unknown speech about us. Hand-talk fully developed will find much good work to do; and it matters little where the elements of the code were gathered so long as they meet with general acceptation; which implies that they be needed, serviceable, and of sound construction. The forty odd Deaf Signs included here have been admitted on this basis.

PROPER NAMES

There is at least one place where all pure Sign Language must fail; that is in dealing with proper names, especially new proper names. If I wish to signal “New York State” to an expert sign-talker, I can use the nickname “Empire State” and signal “Country great crowned”; or, for “Kentucky” I can signal “Country blue grass”; or Boston, “The Hub City”; or Chicago “Windy City”; but when I come to South America or Oberammergau or Poughkeepsie, I am obliged to fall back on the white man’s method and spell the name. For this reason then we begin our sign-talk by teaching the one-handed sign alphabet of the deaf. The two-handed will answer, but obviously a one-handed sign is better than a two-handed, other things equal. We aim at simplicity; and there are many occasions when one has but one hand free.

TO WHAT PURPOSE?

My own interest in the study had been growing for thirty years, and to satisfy myself that it was not a mere fad of slight and passing import, I set down carefully the reasons for studying and using the Sign Language, not forgetting its limitations. I set these also in hostile array and will give them first:

It is useless in the dark.

It cannot serve over the telephone.

It can scarcely be written, except by cumbrous pictographs.

It cannot give new proper names; they must be spelled.

But the reasons for the study were more numerous and stronger.

1st. It develops observation and accurate thinking. All races that excel in sign-talking are noted for their keenness of observation. Which is cause and which effect one cannot certainly determine, but it is sure that this method of communication is excellent practice to develop observation, and it makes for a wonderfully graphic descriptive power.

Herein, perhaps, is its most enduring, the least obvious, claim to a high place. There is a sweet reasonableness, a mathematical accuracy, in the fabric of the Sign Language that has an insistent and reactionary effect on the mental processes and pictures of those who use it. Therefore, it is valuable for the kind of mind it makes.

2d. It is easily learned. Unlike most languages, it is very easily acquired, for most of the signs are natural in concept, and so logical that they explain themselves where their history is known. Six hundred signs (that is ideas) make a fairly good sign-talker.

3d. It is Indian talk. By means of this you can talk to any Plains Indian no matter what his speech; and there are many tribes each with its own tongue or dialect. In some measure it is understood and used by savages and keen observers all over the globe.

4th. A cognate code is the talk of the deaf; and is used the world round by them in preference to the manual alphabet when possible; so that a wide use of the much better Indian Sign Language will certainly result in their accepting it and thus tend to lessen the barrier between the deaf and their more fortunate brethren.

5th. It is silent talk. It can be used on occasions when it is necessary to give information, but improper or impossible to speak aloud. Thus, lecturers use it in directing their lanternist; friends use it for necessary information during musical performances; it is used at the bedside of the sick, the actors in a moving picture can utilize it, and so be comprehended the world round; the pantomime stage, forbidden to use speech, can easily make clear the plot by sign-talk.

In a recent letter, Prof. J. S. Long has furnished me with a touching instance (one that has since recurred) that indicates another and final service that the silent method can render: An eminent divine was on his deathbed. His life had been devoted to ministering to the deaf, he knew the Sign Language perfectly; for several hours before the end his power of ordinary speech had deserted him, but his mind was clear, and to the last he conversed freely with those about him, in this, the universal talk, the one which for its exercise depended on muscular powers that in his case were the last of all to fail.

6th. It allows talk in an uproar. It can be used when great noise makes it impossible to use the voice; therefore it can be of daily service in modern life, city or country, and each year it discovers new uses. Friends talk across a rackety thoroughfare or from a moving train; firemen and policemen, or sailors in a storm find it of growing service. The baseball umpire uses it when the roar of the multitude makes him voiceless; the catcher talks to the pitcher; the aeroplanist talks to his friends on earth; the stockholder on the curb buys and sells in it; the football captain or the army officer issues clear sign orders when the uproar of fight would drown even the trumpet call. The politician facing a shrieking mob may find it useful for conveying a few crude truths to his crude, unruly audience, thus opening the way for a more usual form of harangue, or failing in the attempt, he can at least inform his friends of his next move and his audience what he thinks of them. In St. Paul’s epoch-making address on the stairs of Jerusalem we have a good illustration of the first part of this.

7th. It is practical far-talk. It is a valuable method of talking at a distance, far beyond earshot. Compared with the other modes of far-signalling it has the great advantages of speed, for it gives a sentence while semaphore, Morse, or Myer code give a letter, and of inconspicuousness at short range, or in a crowd; also it is independent of apparatus.

8th. It is a true universal language. It is already established. Instinctively the whole world has adopted it in a measure; and daily proofs of this are seen. Rasmussen among the Eskimo would have been helpless, he tells us, for he knew not their tongue, and they not a word of his, but they were expert sign-talkers and the lingual barrier was swept away. So also Henry among the Mandans, and Butler among the Basutos, while a thousand other cases could be aligned.

It is so complete that Dr. W. C. Roe and many others regularly preach and lecture in the language of Signs, to congregations in which several spoken tongues are used and would be necessary to the preacher were he limited to sounds.

It is so fundamental indeed that it is the easiest means of communicating with animals; the best trainers of dogs and horses use Sign Language as the principal medium of command.

But, for lack of standards and codification, its use is much smaller than it might be; and yet larger than commonly supposed. At least 100 of the 725 signs herein given are in daily employ among hearing white folk in America. After a little extension of the study, as is inevitable with a standard code, one will be able to travel all over Europe, the world indeed, on Sign Language alone. No matter what the other man’s language may be, French, German, Russian, Greek, all are the same in the Sign Language because it expresses ideas, not words. This, then, is its chief obvious strength—It is a universal language.

It was with this in view that the French and German equivalents were added after each sign; and since it is impossible to render in one word a sign that stands for a broad idea and is capable of conveying many meanings, according to the context and sense, the foreign equivalents are understood to deal only with the simplest root idea, that which usually is expressed by the first of the English words given.

It is my earnest hope that we may have an International Society of the Sign Language whose functions would be to keep it pure, to add new signs as they are needed, and to aim at its complete development.

Also, that in furtherance of this a thorough, full, and careful record of the old Indian Sign Language will be made before it is too late; that is, before all the old-time Indians of the Plains are dead.

My own effort is meant not as a record of the past, but a starting point for the future.

SYNTAX OF THE SIGN LANGUAGE²

The Sign Language is a system of root ideas expressed by gestures, preferably made only by the hands, without sounds or reference to letters, or words, spoken or written, and not delimited by anything corresponding to words. There can be but little doubt that Sign Language preceded all audible speech.

Being fundamentally a true spontaneous language, wholly removed from any spoken language, it must necessarily have its own syntax and idiom.

Its syntax is simple and primitive, much like that of spoken language in its earliest or monosyllabic stage, as defined by Hovelacque. Yet clearly many signs are amplified by an associated but subsidiary root, so that we may consider it entering the second or agglutinative stage. Thus deer, signed by holding up the hands to indicate branching horns, is a simple or isolated root; but white-tailed deer which gives first deer, then adds the qualifying sign banner tail by waving the right index up high, is in close correspondence with agglutinative language. Still more so are the signs finished or done added to a verb to show the past tense, or the different twists to the sign give that turns it respectively into give me or give you, or the variations of talk which make it mean I talk to you, you talk to me, or they talk to each other.

The sentence construction is elemental. Dependent sentences are not used nor are negative or involved questions.

The relation of one idea to another is indicated chiefly by proximity and sequence, rarely by connectives and (with a few exceptions) never by inflection. So that the same sign may be the equivalent of a noun, a verb, or a phrase, etc., according as it is used.

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

The Nominative and Objective cases are not distinguished except by context and sequence, that is, the Nominative precedes, the Objective usually follows, the verb.

A partial exception is the first personal pronoun—the starting point of most inflection—for I, mine, and me are sometimes given as cognate but distinctive signs.

The Possessive case is usually shown by the addition of the possessive sign, equivalent to “his,” “hers,” “its,” etc. “That man’s” horse would be signed: Man, that, his horse, or Man, that there, possession, horse.

The Gender of nouns is indicated when necessary by adding the signs male or man and female or woman. Thus “A She bear” would be rendered Bear Woman.

The Number of nouns is indicated by the signs 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., many or few.

In the Personal Pronouns the plural is made by adding all to the singular. Thus Me all is the equivalent of “We,” You all of “Ye.” He all is the equivalent of “they.”

The Person by pointing to myself, to you, or to the third person. The first person is understood unless otherwise indicated.

VERBS

The Verb is usually placed between the subject and the object, but need of emphasis may change this so the verb comes last.

The Tense of verbs is marked by the auxiliary prefixes now, future and past, finished or done. Thus “I have eaten” would be I done eat, “I shall eat” will be I time ahead, eat.

The present is understood, unless otherwise stated; but the sign is plastic and may be any part of the verb, according to context. Thus Arrange, Arranged, or Arranging are the same.

The Number of the verb is shown by the context.

The Voice is assumed to be active, indeed the passive is not used.

The Imperative is shown by following the verb with the sign must, that is, strike down with right fist, giving the significance of command, or else by emphasis.

The Subjunctive is shown by the signs if, so that, perhaps.

ADJECTIVE AND ADVERB

The Adjective usually follows the substantive. Thus “A bad man” would be rendered Man bad. But numerals are exceptions to this rule.

The Adverb of time precedes the verb.

Qualities are compared by the use of the signs little, more, much, most, ahead, and behind. They are further modified by adding such signs as strong, brave, very much, or very strong.

The Numeral sign is often prefaced to small numbers to prevent confusion. Thus when prefaced by the numeral sign the sign Wolf may become two and Man become one.

Mere particles and expletives, as “a” “the,” etc., have no equivalent signs.

PREPOSITIONS

Prepositions were little used by the Indian sign-talkers, though they did have above, about, across, around, at, below, beside, beyond, by, for, from, in, near, on, out, to, under, upon, with, etc. Of or pertaining to has been added by the deaf.

CONJUNCTIONS

And or also (add on) but or if (pick out or cut off), so that, with are the equivalents of conjunctions. Sometimes the close continuity of two signs serves the purpose of “and,” conversely a pause may indicate a full stop.

INTERROGATION

The sign of interrogation always precedes the question, but is sometimes added after it as well, for emphasis or certainty.

PERIOD OR FULL STOP

For period, the sign finished is generally used. The Blackfeet make the sign broken off and often clap the flat right down on the flat left, palm to palm, for both beginning and end of a sentence.

ABSTRACT IDEAS

Abstract ideas are not copiously rendered in signs. But it often happens that a gesture with the index alone is specific, while the same gesture with the flat hand becomes abstract. For example, compare yonder and far, up and up there.

OPPOSITION

The principle of opposition as pointed out by Mallery plays an important part in the pairing of signs. Thus above being fixed, below is the reverse; the sign come is reversed in go, and out reversed in in, etc.

EMPHASIS

Emphasis is sometimes given by using both hands for a sign that can be made by one, sometimes by repeating the sign, sometimes by energetic rendering, and sometimes by adding the sign very much or heap.

PARALLEL OR DUPLICATE SIGNS

Many signs are made by parallel action of both hands. Most of these are permissibly rendered by using only one hand as, woman, abandon, gratitude, etc.

ENUNCIATION OR DELIVERY

In actual and expert practice most signs are abbreviated. But the beginner, as in all new arts, should go slowly and be careful to make each sign clear-cut and complete in itself.

The hands are always held or moved so as to illustrate, as far as possible, the action in mind or its manner, or its direction, or the point where it takes place, or the shape of an object, or their relative positions if two objects are being considered.

ELEGANCE

Grace and dignity are of large importance in all good sign-talk. Ugly or vulgar gestures should be abandoned. Even angular gestures should be avoided, except to express some angular idea.

Many times my Indian teachers have said to me as I imitated their signs, “Yes, that is correct enough in a way, but it is awkward”; or “it is not graceful. We do it this way.” Then they sketched the same structure, but in sweeping lines. In this work many movements are indicated in straight lines, for the sake of simplicity. As a matter of fact, I never saw a Cheyenne make a straight-line movement, all had a graceful curve.

Many signs are followed by a changeable liaison; that is, by an introduced sweep to join it on to the sign that follows and avoid a jerk or unpleasant movement. This elegant manner is what I call an Indian accent, few whites achieve it.

In a dignified way, the expression of face and the pose were used in elucidation of the gesture, but very sparingly.

THE CONCEPT AND ITS VALUE

The student of vocal language finds vital help in remembering the derivation of words; so also the sign-talker.

Most signs were pantomimic originally, but through much use have become shortened, till now they are conventional. Yet it is well worth while in each case to note the original concept as fully as possible; first as a great help to the memory, and second as a guard against slovenly gesture and a guarantee of point, power, and structural accuracy. Some of the concepts given are evidently right, but some are mere guesses, probably wrong in many cases. It is quite permissible in any one to challenge any of them.

Nevertheless, the fact that most signs are capable of logical explanation does not mean that they are self-explanatory. Indeed nearly all have become conventional, and each must be learned separately before it can be rightly used.

Signs which make the heart the seat of the mind are, I think, older than those which give the place of honor to the brain.

THE MANUAL ALPHABET

Although not at all Indian, it is exceedingly helpful to know the single-hand alphabet as given in the cut on page li; partly because it must sometimes be used for giving proper names and also because it saves time in describing hand positions. For example, we say “position A or B” instead of describing each hand all over again for each new sign.

THE NUMERALS

Fingers and numbers are nearly synonymous the world round when making signs, manual or written, hence the universality of the decimal system. The Indian Code, the Popular Code, and the Deaf Code are nearly alike in this, but in most points of difference the Indian is best.

To prevent mistakes in certain cases preface the number with the sign of numbers or arithmetic.

THE ORDINALS

For Ordinals, make the figure sign, 1, 2, or whatever it is, then without changing the position of hand or arm, give the hand a twisting from the wrist, to add point or emphasis, meaning “number-so-and-so.” This is not Indian but adopted from the Deaf, nevertheless quite logical.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF SIGN LANGUAGE

Clark gives the following (pp. 17–18) as a good illustration of the syntax of the Sign Language:

In English. “I arrived here to-day to make a treaty—my one hundred lodges are camped beyond the Black Hills, near the Yellowstone River. You are a great chief—pity me, I am poor, my five children are sick and have nothing to eat. The snow is deep and the weather intensely cold. Perhaps God sees me. I am going. In one month I shall reach my camp.”

In Signs, this literally translated would read, I—arrive here—to-day—to make—treaty. My—hundred—lodge—camp—beyond—Hills—Black—near—river—called—Elk—you—chief—great—pity me—I—poor—My—five—child—sick—food—all gone (or wiped out)—Snow—deep—cold—brave (or strong). Perhaps—Chief Great (or Great Mystery)—above—see—me—I—go. Moon—die—I—arrive there—my—camp.

“An Indian in closing or terminating a talk or speech wishing to say, ‘I have finished my speech or conversation,’ or, ‘I have nothing more to say,’ simply makes the sign for ‘Done’ or ‘Finished.’”

THE LORD’S PRAYER

FATHER ISADORE’S VERSION

Our Father up high, medicine thy name. Thy sit-aboard down here on earth as up high. Give us all bread. Forgive our bad as we forgive bad. Lead us bad not. Ended.

Professor Elmer D. Read has supplied me with the foregoing two examples done into the Sign Language of the deaf, as below:

I—came—here—to-day—make—agreement (think parallel)—name (written). My—1 C (100) tents—beyond—B-l-a-c-k H-i-l-l-s, near Y-e-l-l-o-w-s-t-o-n-e water flow. You—most—chief, feel—tender—me. I—ragged sleeve (poor). My—five—children (sign size)—sick—nothing—eat. Snow—deep. Weather (air, wind)—very cold. Perhaps—God—look down on (see) me. I—go. In—one—month—I—shall—arrive—tents—home (eat, sleep).

The Lord’s Prayer in Deaf Signs:

PICTURE-WRITING

As already noted, a weakness of Sign Language is the difficulty of writing it without translating it into words, and thereby changing its nature and its world-wide application. Yet it can be written; and some mention of its recorded form may fitly round out this introduction.

The characters used, because they represent ideas, not words or letters, are called ideographs or picture-writing. It is widely believed that Sign Language is the oldest of all languages, that indeed it existed among animals before man appeared on earth. It is universally accepted that the ideograph is the oldest of all writing. The Chinese writing, for instance, is merely picture-writing done with as few lines as possible.

Thus, it is said that their curious character for Hearing was once a complete picture of a person listening behind a screen, but in time it was reduced by hasty hands to a few scratches; and War, now a few spider marks, was originally a sketch of Two women in one house.

We may also record our Sign Language in picture-writing, as was the custom of many Indian tribes; and we shall find it worth while for several reasons: it is picturesque and useful for decoration; and it is likely that a pictographic inscription dug up 10,000 years from now would be read, whether our language was understood or not.³

When the French Government set up the Obelisk of Luxor, in Paris, and wished to inscribe it for all time, they made record, not in French or Latin, but in pictographs.

It is, moreover, a good thing to take the young through the stages of race development; just as the young bird must run for a send-off, before it flies, so pictography, being its earliest form, is the natural first step to writing.

In this dictionary I give the written form after many of the signs that have an established pictograph. These are chiefly from Mallery, 10th Annual Report Bureau of American Ethnology. A few are popularly accepted among ourselves.

NOTE

The letters, initials, etc., after the paragraphs indicate the chief authority for the sign.

Where no authority is given, it means that the sign was observed by myself among the Cheyenne Indians. Those ascribed to other Indians also were observed by myself. Besides these the following are cited:

C. Standing for Captain William Philo Clark, U. S. A.

Scott, for General Hugh L. Scott, U. S. A.

Seger, for John M. Seger, of Colony, Oklahoma.

R. B., for Robert Burns, the Cheyenne interpreter at Concho, Oklahoma.

Long, for Major Stephen H. Long, U. S. A.

Pop. for Popular; that is, established among ourselves.

D. for Deaf Sign, as given in J. Schuyler Long’s Dictionary.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

The drawing shows the hands as seen by the second person.

The digits are named: thumb, first or index finger, second or middle finger, third or ring-finger, and fourth or little finger.

The following marks, etc., are used in the illustrations:

Unless otherwise stated the solid outline indicates the position of the hands at the beginning of a sign, the dotted outlines indicate the position of the hands at the finish.

................ Dotted lines indicate the course of hand employed in the sign.

Greater-than sign > Indicates the commencement point of the movement.

Rightwards arrow ? Indicates the direction of movement.

Latin capital letter X Indicates the point in the gesture line at which the hand position is (x) changed.

Circled dot ? Or full stop represents the termination of the movement.

“A hand” means like A, and “B hand” means like B, etc., in the one-handed Deaf Alphabet (Cut 1) on next page. The positions meant by “4 hand,” “5 hand,” “flat hand,” “flat fist,” or “compressed hand,” are figured on the same page.

Begin by learning the Single-hand Manual alphabet as noted above.

Next learn the Numbers and the signs for Question and its combinations; also Yes and No, Good and Bad, Come and Go, Big and Small, Truth and Lie, Strong and Weak, Understand, Perhaps, Talk and Sign-talk, after this refer to the Dictionary for the signs that serve your purpose and use them according to the rules of syntax as herein set forth.

Never lose a chance of talking the Sign Language with an old Plains Indian, preferably of the Cheyenne or Arapahoe tribes. Their wonderful facility and grace are as hard to convey on paper as the pronunciation of French, and are as essential for the best style in Sign Talk. One may, indeed, know every sign in this book and not be a good sign-talker, so fundamental is this correct accent, or manner.