Among the many peculiarities connected with Indian personal names, far too many for discussion here, is their avoidance of them in direct address, terms of kinship or relative age taking their place. Major J. W. Powell, in some remarks before the Anthropological Society of Washington, on the functions performed by kinship terms among Indian tribes, stated that at one time he had the Kaibab Indians, a small tribe of northern Arizona, traveling with him. The young chief was called by white men “Frank.” For several weeks he refused to give his Indian name, and Major Powell endeavored to discover it by noticing the term by which he was addressed by the other Indians; but invariably some kinship term was employed. One day in a quarrel his wife called him “Chuarumpik (Yucca-heart.)” Subsequently Major Powell questioned the young chief about the matter, who explained and apologized for the great insult which his wife had given him by stating that she was excused by great provocation. The insult consisted in calling the man by his real name.
The following is quoted for comparison with the name-system of the Indians of Guiana, from Everard F. im Thurn, _op. cit._, p. 219, _et seq._:
The system under which the Indians have their personal names is intricate, and difficult to explain. In the first place, a name, which may be called the proper name, is always given to a young child soon after birth. It is said to be proper that the peaiman, or medicine-man, should choose and give this name; but, at any rate now, the naming seems more often left to the parents. The word selected is generally the name of some plant, bird, or other natural object. Among Arawak proper names may be mentioned _Yambenassi_ (night-monkey) and _Yuri-tokoro_ (tobacco-flower), and among Macusi names _Ti-ti_ (owl), _Cheripung_ (star?), and _Simiri_ (locust-tree). But these names seem of little use, in that owners have a very strong objection to telling or using them, apparently on the ground that the name is part of the man, and that he who knows the name has part of the owner of that name in his power.
To avoid any danger of spreading knowledge of their names, one Indian, therefore, generally addresses another only according to the relationship of the caller and the called, as brother, sister, father, mother, and so on; or, when there is no relationship, as boy, girl, companion, and so on. These terms, therefore, practically form the names actually used by Indians amongst themselves. But an Indian is just as unwilling to tell his proper name to a white man as to an Indian; and, of course, between the Indian and the white man there is no relationship the term for which can serve as a proper name. An Indian, therefore, when he has to do with a European, asks the latter to give him a name, and if one is given to him, always afterwards uses this. The names given in this way are generally simple enough--John, Peter, Thomas, and so on. But sometimes they are not sufficiently simple to be comprehended and remembered by their Indian owners, who therefore, having induced the donor to write the name on a piece of paper, preserve this ever after most carefully, and whenever asked for their name by another European, exhibit the document as the only way of answering. Sometimes, however, an Indian, though he cannot pronounce his English names, makes it possible by corruption. For instance, a certain Macusi Indian was known to me for a long time as Shassapoon, which I thought was his proper name, until it accidentally appeared that it was his ‘English name,’ he having been named by and after one Charles Appun, a German traveler.