'Totatzine'

[R. Joe Campbell]

Tlen tai Leonel,

   I tried to fill in some comments on what Fran wrote.  If between the
two of us, something is left uncovered, some "cuauhixe" of Nahuat-l will
point it out.

Best regards,

Joe



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

to-tlatlacol  =  to-tlahtlacol
                    tlahtlacolli  =  sin, fault, something damaged
from the verb  ihtlacahui = deteriorate, spoil, suffer damage
               ihtlacahui + caus06 > ihtlacoa = damage, hurt
               nitlahtlacoa = I damage something  (the /i/ of the stem elides)
                 tlahtlacolli = something damaged (back where we started)

*********

<>in yuh tiquin-popolhuia     in techtlatlacalhuia
                     ||||                   ||||||
               benefactive on popoloa      benefactive on ihtlacoa
                                           they damage s.o. on us
                                           they offend us

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


note on  yuh:

from the verb  ihui = be similar, seem, be thus

Without getting into "deep" word formation (or what really amounts to
showing word formation by embedding a historical account in the
explanation -- which I, incidentally, am in favor of), "adjectives"
are usually formed in Nahuatl by adding -c or -qui to the perfective
form of a verb stem.

Examples:
        nipaqui         I rejoice
        opac            he rejoiced
        pacqui          happy

        tzimpitzahua    it is narrow at the bottom
         (tzintli = buttocks)
        tzimpitzahuac   narrow at the bottom

        tlilihui        it gets black, dark-colored (said of an object)
         (tlilli = lampblack)
        tliliuhqui      blackened

        tlapani         it breaks
        tlapanqui       broken

        xocomiqui       she gets drunk
         (xocotl = sourness; generic reference to fruit and wine)
        xocomicqui      drunk

        pahti           he gets well
         (pahtli = medicine, potion; pahti = he *has* cure)
        pahtic          well, cured

        acalti          it develops a groove (it becomes like a canoe)
        acaltic         grooved


  ihui forms the preterit "iuh" as well as the adjective "iuhqui",
both occurring in text meaning 'thus, so'.  The "yuh" spelling
represents the freedom of 16th century spelling, which, in itself, is
not bad.  The only problem is that for us, in the 20th century (and
not *hearing* 16th century Nahuatl on a daily basis, it could cause
the mis-impression that either word begins with [y], not [i]. The
pronunciations are [iw] and [iwki] (voiceless w's), not [y...] and
[y...ki]. The spelling here broke down, since [yw] is impossible (if
you don't buy a vowel, you can't have a syllable).

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


<>Again I have *momaquilia= to give, instead of momaquilli; I coud not find
<>'axcan' or 'in axcan' but that I conjecture to mean 'this day=today' (?);
<>but I did find 'momoztlaye= daily' and 'totechmonequi= totech monequi
<>= we need'; does totech monequiz is the future and means ' as we will
<>come to need' or something alike? Or has the final -z another meaning?
<>This form "totech monequiz" is very intriguing to me and I would be grateful
<>to the lady or gentleman who is so kind as to explain it to me.

   Two comments on momaquilli:
 1) after you have read enough of a certain text and you find the
writer not distinguishing between 'l' and 'll', you always read each
word (or instance of any 'l' within a word) both ways.  Double 'll' is
always derived in Nahuatl (i.e., it never occurs inside morphemes and
is always the result of 1) l + y (as Fran pointed out) or 2) l + tl).
Since the honorific is composed of a reflexive prefix and either a
causative or benefactive suffix, 'he [H] gives it to us' (using the
most common form of the benefactive, "-ilia", is:

     techmomaquilia
         ||    ||||

However, in command and optative forms, -ia and -oa drop their final
vowels, so the honorific way to say 'give it to me' is:

     xinechmomaquili

*********

in totlaxcal ... totech monequiz:
   Nahuatl made use of either of two grammatical structures to express
the notion of *passive*, either the reflexive or the impersonal.  So
for instance, 'it is drunk' is:

   m[o]-i
   or
   i-hua (the impersonal endings are -lo and -hua; each verb stem has
          license for one of them; some even take both: -lohua or -hualo)

Yes, -z is the future suffix.  To indicate plural subject, simply add -queh.

     choloa       he flees
   ticholoz       you will flee
   ticholozqueh   we will flee
   cholozqueh     they will flee

Note that -ia and -oa also drop their second vowel in future (just as
they do in the commands, optatives, and preterits).

So:

   monequiz = it will be wanted (it will be necessary)

   -tech is one of the more slippery postpositions semantically, being
variously translated as 'to, for, against' -- even 'with regard to',
so "totech monequiz" means 'it will be needed with regard to us' or
'we will need it'.  The postposition allows a noun argument which
*might* be attached directly to the verb to be expressed in an
"outrigger" position.
   The best way to learn the semantics and uses of postpositions is to
start with a *rough* idea of their respective meanings and then refine
one's feeling for them by reading them in context.