Animate and inanimate possessors
So here is an essentially randomly picked li’l stretch of Chinook Jargon:
Kimta klaska kakshit Sidisias iaka
Then they beat on Zedechiah’s
siahus pi klaska mamuk klatwa iaka kopa Babilon skukum haws.
face and they sent him off to Babylon’s prison.
Taii wawa wiht kopa solshirs pus klaska mamuk k’aw
The chief also ordered soldiers to tie up
Shirusalim tilikom pi kiskis klaska kopa Babilon pus iawa
Jerusalem’s people and herd them to Babylon so that there
klaska ilaitin. Taii wawa pus solshirs mamuk paia
they would be slaves. The chief told the soldiers to burn
kanawi tlus haws kopa Shirusalim. Solshirs mamuk paia
all the beautiful houses in Jerusalem. The soldiers burned
styuil haws, klaska paia Shuda taii klaska haws pi
the temples, they burned Judah’s chiefs’ homes and
kanawi hloima haws. Shirusalim tawn mimlus alta, kopit
all the other houses. The city of Jerusalem was dead now; only
ston mitlait. Taii kopa Shuda chako kopit. Shuda tilikom
rocks remained. The chiefs of Judah came to an end. Judah’s people
klatwa klahani kopa klaska ilihi. Asiria taii kiskis
went away from their land. Assyria’s chief drove
klaska kopa Babilon pus klaska ilaitin iawa…
them to Babylon to be slaves there…
(– Kamloops Wawa #133 [October 1895], page 155, “Bishop Durieu’s Old Testament”)
Look how I’ve bolded and underlined certain things. These all are possessive constructions. So each one means “X’s thing”. (In various flavours.)
See any pattern?
In a few words: animate possessors (people for instance) => “X iaka thing”, inanimate possessors (geographical names for instance) => “X thing”.
This is another important detail of Chinook Jargon grammar that has never been pointed out for the benefit of would-be fluent speakers.
Naika nim: Dave