in cuappetlapan

[Michael Mccafferty]

Good point.  I'm sure somebody who knows something will weigh in soon on
this.  I thought that there might have been a printing error and that the
oimma was part of manca.  As a past tense indicator it'd have to be on a
verb, not possessed noun.  And then, I thought -on- only went with birds,
I mean verbs, or as the case may be.

Michael

On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Galen Brokaw wrote:

> >
> >  the next
> > > doubt is 'oimmac' (unless 'imma' means 'their hands', immac = 'in
> > > their hands' and o- is the antecessive prefix ??);
> >
> > sim.  o <o> indica o passado e a traducao de <imma> e correcta.
>
> This is an interesting issue. If "o" is the past tense indicator then it is
> being attaching to the locative phrase "immac"[in their hands] rather than
> the verb "manca". Did they do this? Is it possible that this "o" is actually
> the directional "on" without the "n"? I think a little while back Fran
> mentioned "n" dropping, but I'm not sure if this was only in certain
> environments. If it is the past tense "o" then does this suggest that the
> "immac" is actually imbedded in the verb like nouns often are? I don't know,
> but if I had to guess, I would say that the "o" was actually "on".
> Galen
>


Michael McCafferty
C.E.L.T.
307 Memorial Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
47405
mmccaffe at indiana.edu

*******************************************************************************
"Glory" (what a word!) consists in going
from the me that others don't know
to the other me that I don't know.

-Juan Ramon Jimenez

*******************************************************************************