The origin of the words $lsquo;cacao$rsquo; and
$lsquo;chocolate$rsquo; and their use in the reconstruction
of the early history of Mesoamerica, remain very controversial
issues. Cambell and Kaufman (1976, American Antiquity
41:80–89), for example, proposed that the word $lsquo;cacao$rsquo;
originated from Mixe–Zoque languages, thus possibly
representing Olmec traditions. According to this argument,
other Mesoamerican languages, including Nahuatl, borrowed
the word as a symbol of prestige and Olmec influence. Other
researchers claim the word $lsquo;chocolate$rsquo; represents
a more recent neologism, a possible Maya–Nahuatl
hybrid, due to the late appearance of the word in central
Mexico's Colonial sources. We refute the putative
Mixe–Zoque origin of $lsquo;cacao$rsquo; and provide
linguistic evidence to propose that $lsquo;cacao,$rsquo;
like $lsquo;chocolate,$rsquo; is a Uto-Aztecan term. Analysis
of these words highlights general and particular evolutionary
trends that originate from the Uto-Aztecan language family.
In addition, we show that these two words were initially
used as descriptive terms to refer to the shape of the
plant's bean and the techniques of drink preparation.
Etymological evidence verifies the use of a Mayan term
for cacao as early as the Classic period (fourth century
a.d.). This early appearance of the term in Mayan
and the later diffusion of the Nahua word throughout all
of Mesoamerica correlate with additional data to support
the conclusion that Teotihuacanos spoke Nahuatl.