Talk:Chingachgook

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Indigenous peoples of North America

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chingachgook. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225614/http://www.talk-lenape.org/detail.php?id=14537 to http://www.talk-lenape.org/detail.php?id=14537

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Say what??

The pronunciation part of the "Etymology and pronunciation" seems rather less than helpful, to put it mildly.

"Chingachgook is derived from Lenape xinkwi xkuk, 'big snake', pronounced xiŋɡwixkuk"

Really? "Chingachgook" is pronounced "zing-wicks-kuk"? This seems a little unlikely. If true, why wouldn't Cooper have written it as "Zingwickuk", or perhaps "Zingwixkuk"?

Later we are told that the "adjective xinkwi" is "pronounced IPA". Huh? Is that that "ippa" ("i" as in "tip") or "eye-pah"? And if the conglomeration "xinkwi" is pronounced "eye-pah", wouldn't "xinwi xkuk" be pronounced "eye-pah-icks-kuk"?

From the spelling it looks like the pronunciation should be "Ching", as in "ring", "ach" as in "catch" (or maybe "crotch"), and "gook" as in "book" (or perhaps "kook").

Isn't it more likely that Cooper used the spelling he did because he intended "Ching" to rhyme with "ring" --- as most of his early readers would probably have assumed? The second "ch" being pronounced as the "ch" in "Bach" is not too unreasonable, but that would make the pronunciation "Ching-gah-kook" with perhaps only soft emphasis on the first "k".

The purpose of transliteration, after all, is to enable non-native speakers to at least approximate the native pronunciation, by providing clear referents in their (the non-native speakers') language. If nothing else, a (much) clearer explanation of the transliteration used in this section should be provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 01:12, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reference no 3

I read the referenced text no.3 and fail to see how it has anything to do with the explanation behind the Great Serpent name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0C:5A80:3D00:400:3888:6BF1:5C89:A877 (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]