From s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM Tue Feb 1 11:15:23 2005 From: s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM (SIMON LEVACK) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 11:15:23 -0000 Subject: A Question for Experts Here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Richley Crapo wrote: <> Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) For the full text of the circular, follow this link: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc Simon Levack Author of the Aztec Mysteries Please take a few moments to visit my website at www.simonlevack.com From rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU Tue Feb 1 12:49:53 2005 From: rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:49:53 -0700 Subject: A Question for Experts Here Message-ID: Thanks. This leads to a second question: If copyright no longer pertains, does this simply reduce the procedure to paying the holder of the material to produce a glossy print or digital scan and would it be improper to do this oneself using a secondary publication (e.g., Dibble's reproduction of the Codice Xolotl) rather than going through the actual holder of the original document? Richley >>> s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM 02/01/05 04:16 AM >>> Richley Crapo wrote: <> Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) For the full text of the circular, follow this link: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc Simon Levack Author of the Aztec Mysteries Please take a few moments to visit my website at www.simonlevack.com From brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU Tue Feb 1 14:03:21 2005 From: brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU (Galen Brokaw) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:03:21 -0500 Subject: A Question for Experts Here Message-ID: This is interesting. I paid to have photographic images made of some Mexican pictographic documents housed in the Lilly Library, and they say that if I ever use them in a publication, I have to pay them a fee of $100.00 per image. They also charge $100.00 for use of an image in an exhibition and $15.00 for use in a public or classroom lecture. Is this passage from 2004 that you cite a change in the law, or has the Lilly Library been collecting unjustifiable fees? Also, assuming that the passage cited is not being taken out of context, I assume that this applies to images that you obtain directly from the manuscript or original book. In other words, you wouldn't be able to reproduce an image taken from a facsimile edition without permission from the publisher, right? Galen SIMON LEVACK wrote: > Richley Crapo wrote: > > < Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library > typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the > entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of > such a document place it into public domain?>> > > Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in > the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office > > "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or > phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides > that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a > protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." > (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) > > For the full text of the circular, follow this link: > > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc > > Simon Levack > Author of the Aztec Mysteries > Please take a few moments to visit my website at > www.simonlevack.com > > From rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU Tue Feb 1 14:45:18 2005 From: rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 07:45:18 -0700 Subject: A Question for Experts Here Message-ID: It's nice to know that I am not alone in wondering about this. The question arose for me when my publisher informed me that he expects his authors to secure copyright permissions for illustrations, but didn't offer any guidelines that cover this question. He's aiming for being in print in 5 or 6 months, and I know from experience, for instance, that the library in Paris that holds the original of Anonymo will reply to my request for images with about a two month turnaround time, and then only to send a billing statement that they will want to have paid before actually making the copies--another two month process. I don't mind paying them to do the work of making a copy, but the time lag being what it is, I would prefer a faster option if one legally exists. So I've begun to wonder whether (1) the fact that the original was written four centuries ago makes it fair game as "public domain" material and (2) whether there is still a copyright interest in facsimile editions of more recent vintage or whether it is legitimate to take one's own copy from such a source, say by doing one's own scan of an image in it. I'm still interested in whatever insights others have who have experience in this arena. Richley >>> brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU 02/01/05 07:04 AM >>> This is interesting. I paid to have photographic images made of some Mexican pictographic documents housed in the Lilly Library, and they say that if I ever use them in a publication, I have to pay them a fee of $100.00 per image. They also charge $100.00 for use of an image in an exhibition and $15.00 for use in a public or classroom lecture. Is this passage from 2004 that you cite a change in the law, or has the Lilly Library been collecting unjustifiable fees? Also, assuming that the passage cited is not eing taken out of context, I assume that this applies to images that you obtain directly from the manuscript or original book. In other words, you wouldn't be able to reproduce an image taken from a facsimile edition without permission from the publisher, right? Galen SIMON LEVACK wrote: > Richley Crapo wrote: > > < Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library > typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the > entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of > such a document place it into public domain?>> > > Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in > the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office > > "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or > phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides > that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a > protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." > (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) > > For the full text of the circular, follow this link: > > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc > > Simon Levack > Author of the Aztec Mysteries > Please take a few moments to visit my website at > www.simonlevack.com > > From mmccaffe at INDIANA.EDU Tue Feb 1 14:50:19 2005 From: mmccaffe at INDIANA.EDU (Michael Mccafferty) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:50:19 -0500 Subject: A Question for Experts Here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: An archive in Canada is allowing me to reproduce an important early historical map of which they hold the original. The permission was free, but I had to buy and will have to use *their* photo of the map. That cost $100 US. Michael On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Richley Crapo wrote: > It's nice to know that I am not alone in wondering about this. The question arose for me when my publisher informed me that he expects his authors to secure copyright permissions for illustrations, but didn't offer any guidelines that cover this question. He's aiming for being in print in 5 or 6 months, and I know from experience, for instance, that the library in Paris that holds the original of Anonymo will reply to my request for images with about a two month turnaround time, and then only to send a billing statement that they will want to have paid before actually making the copies--another two month process. I don't mind paying them to do the work of making a copy, but the time lag being what it is, I would prefer a faster option if one legally exists. So I've begun to wonder whether (1) the fact that the original was written four centuries ago makes it fair game as "public domain" material and (2) whether there is still a copyright interest in facsimile editions of more recent vintage or whether it is legitimate to take one's own copy from such a source, say by doing one's own scan of an image in it. > > I'm still interested in whatever insights others have who have experience in this arena. > > Richley > > >>> brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU 02/01/05 07:04 AM >>> > This is interesting. I paid to have photographic images made of some > Mexican pictographic documents housed in the Lilly Library, and they say > that if I ever use them in a publication, I have to pay them a fee of > $100.00 per image. They also charge $100.00 for use of an image in an > exhibition and $15.00 for use in a public or classroom lecture. > Is this passage from 2004 that you cite a change in the law, or has the > Lilly Library been collecting unjustifiable fees? > Also, assuming that the passage cited is not eing taken out of context, > I assume that this applies to images that you obtain directly from the > manuscript or original book. In other words, you wouldn't be able to > reproduce an image taken from a facsimile edition without permission > from the publisher, right? > > Galen > > > > SIMON LEVACK wrote: > > Richley Crapo wrote: > > > > < > Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library > > typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the > > entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of > > such a document place it into public domain?>> > > > > Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in > > the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office > > > > "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or > > phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides > > that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a > > protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." > > (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) > > > > For the full text of the circular, follow this link: > > > > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc > > > > Simon Levack > > Author of the Aztec Mysteries > > Please take a few moments to visit my website at > > www.simonlevack.com > > > > > > > From jrabasa at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Tue Feb 1 16:17:09 2005 From: jrabasa at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Rabasa) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 08:17:09 -0800 Subject: A Question for Experts Here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: In this respect the Biblioteca del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia at the Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City lead all libraries I have visited by not only not charging for the reproduction and use of images but by providing high resolution reproductions in free CDs. It appears that Metropolitan centers that claim to be only responsible holders of collections hog materials and display outlandish greed. Now, as most of you, I am most interested in the resolution to this most pressing question. Note that the University of California Press edition of Codex Mendoza does not own the copyrights of the images but the Bodleyian as "owners" of the codex. The Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris might be slow but does not charge for use and allows the use of scanned images free of charge. Jose >An archive in Canada is allowing me to reproduce an important early >historical map of which they hold the original. The permission was free, >but I had to buy and will have to use *their* photo of the map. That cost >$100 US. > >Michael > >On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Richley Crapo wrote: > >> It's nice to know that I am not alone in wondering about this. The >>question arose for me when my publisher informed me that he expects >>his authors to secure copyright permissions for illustrations, but >>didn't offer any guidelines that cover this question. He's aiming >>for being in print in 5 or 6 months, and I know from experience, >>for instance, that the library in Paris that holds the original of >>Anonymo will reply to my request for images with about a two month >>turnaround time, and then only to send a billing statement that >>they will want to have paid before actually making the >>copies--another two month process. I don't mind paying them to do >>the work of making a copy, but the time lag being what it is, I >>would prefer a faster option if one legally exists. So I've begun >>to wonder whether (1) the fact that the original was written four >>centuries ago makes it fair game as "public domain" material and >>(2) whether there is still a copyright interest in facsimile >>editions of more recent vintage or whether it is legitimate to take >>one's own copy from such a source, say by doing one's own scan of >>an image in it. >> >> I'm still interested in whatever insights others have who have >>experience in this arena. >> >> Richley >> >> >>> brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU 02/01/05 07:04 AM >>> >> This is interesting. I paid to have photographic images made of some >> Mexican pictographic documents housed in the Lilly Library, and they say >> that if I ever use them in a publication, I have to pay them a fee of >> $100.00 per image. They also charge $100.00 for use of an image in an >> exhibition and $15.00 for use in a public or classroom lecture. >> Is this passage from 2004 that you cite a change in the law, or has the >> Lilly Library been collecting unjustifiable fees? >> Also, assuming that the passage cited is not eing taken out of context, >> I assume that this applies to images that you obtain directly from the >> manuscript or original book. In other words, you wouldn't be able to >> reproduce an image taken from a facsimile edition without permission >> from the publisher, right? >> >> Galen >> >> >> >> SIMON LEVACK wrote: >> > Richley Crapo wrote: >> > >> > <> > Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library >> > typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the >> > entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of >> > such a document place it into public domain?>> >> > >> > Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in >> > the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office >> > >> > "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or >> > phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides >> > that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a > > > protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." >> > (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) >> > >> > For the full text of the circular, follow this link: >> > >> > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc >> > >> > Simon Levack >> > Author of the Aztec Mysteries >> > Please take a few moments to visit my website at >> > www.simonlevack.com >> > >> > >> >> >> From MBOLIVAR at SAN.RR.COM Tue Feb 1 16:50:43 2005 From: MBOLIVAR at SAN.RR.COM (Maria Bolivar) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 08:50:43 -0800 Subject: Copyright my foot! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I agree with José. In publishing, I have run into both greed and extreme generosity. Copyright is a myth. If you read the copyright agreement on anything it is so limited, there is, unfortunately, a way out for every time a user wants to take advantage of someone else's property. To give you my most immediate example. I once had to request permission to reprint a couple of quotes coming from an original of Rosario Castellanos translated by a US scholar (for obvious reasons I will not mention the name). The publisher sent me on the quest, at my expense of course, conditioning my participation on a book. Rosario Castellano´s heir granted unlimited use at no charge of any text by Castellanos. The translator, instead, who claimed unlimited rights, charged roughly 100 dollars per word. Totally ridiculous! And was there a way around? Of course, so close to my keyboard. I did my own translations and copyrighted them myself it cost me thirty dollars. A lot of people and institutions get away with copyright claims due to our ignorance. I recently copyrighted a manuscript and though its idea is totally original anybody can take the character, parts of the research, anything and copyright it on their name. There are specifics on intellectual work that exceeds fifty years. But you could check yourself. Someone has already posted the page in the US. You can also sign up for a newsletter that deals in all these issues and that is very interesting. I wrote a journalistic article on the very interesting case of a Scholar who claimed intellectual property on a mural done by a huichol, Santos de la Torre Santiago. The story was totally pathetic. Santos was asked to make a mural de chaquiras to be donated by Carlos Salinas to France, and placed in the Metro -station Louvre-. The moneys to pay Santos came from a grant and were allocated for the production of two identical murales. Santos, as you may imagine was given enough to buy the chaquiras and to survive while working on the mural. The rest of the money and the final work went to the scholar who bluntly claimed sole the property and copyright. This all happened under the eye of very intense media coverage. I think it was channel 4 that first aired scenes from San Andrés, in the Sierra, depicting the real author of the mural, claiming he was not even invited to Paris, to the ceremony of the donation between governments. Years passed and Santos lost both murals and was not given credit. Finally someone started to reclaim Santos´ rights and made some noise. Santos got his mural back and the last think I knew is that he wanted to have it sent to the US, as a response to an offer he couldn't refuse. The whole story was outrageous. All cultural authorities in Mexico were involved, the museo de antropología, Conaculta, etcetera. Santos being a chamán, of the highest rank, can care less about property, yet, it seemed so unfair to me, at the time, that copyright issues touched in such crooked ways the wonderful sierra huichola. Maria Dolores Bolívar -----Original Message----- From: Nahua language and culture discussion [mailto:NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU] On Behalf Of José Rabasa Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 8:17 AM To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU Subject: Re: A Question for Experts Here In this respect the Biblioteca del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia at the Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City lead all libraries I have visited by not only not charging for the reproduction and use of images but by providing high resolution reproductions in free CDs. It appears that Metropolitan centers that claim to be only responsible holders of collections hog materials and display outlandish greed. Now, as most of you, I am most interested in the resolution to this most pressing question. Note that the University of California Press edition of Codex Mendoza does not own the copyrights of the images but the Bodleyian as "owners" of the codex. The Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris might be slow but does not charge for use and allows the use of scanned images free of charge. Jose >An archive in Canada is allowing me to reproduce an important early >historical map of which they hold the original. The permission was free, >but I had to buy and will have to use *their* photo of the map. That cost >$100 US. > >Michael > >On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Richley Crapo wrote: > >> It's nice to know that I am not alone in wondering about this. The >>question arose for me when my publisher informed me that he expects >>his authors to secure copyright permissions for illustrations, but >>didn't offer any guidelines that cover this question. He's aiming >>for being in print in 5 or 6 months, and I know from experience, >>for instance, that the library in Paris that holds the original of >>Anonymo will reply to my request for images with about a two month >>turnaround time, and then only to send a billing statement that >>they will want to have paid before actually making the >>copies--another two month process. I don't mind paying them to do >>the work of making a copy, but the time lag being what it is, I >>would prefer a faster option if one legally exists. So I've begun >>to wonder whether (1) the fact that the original was written four >>centuries ago makes it fair game as "public domain" material and >>(2) whether there is still a copyright interest in facsimile >>editions of more recent vintage or whether it is legitimate to take >>one's own copy from such a source, say by doing one's own scan of >>an image in it. >> >> I'm still interested in whatever insights others have who have >>experience in this arena. >> >> Richley >> >> >>> brokaw at BUFFALO.EDU 02/01/05 07:04 AM >>> >> This is interesting. I paid to have photographic images made of some >> Mexican pictographic documents housed in the Lilly Library, and they say >> that if I ever use them in a publication, I have to pay them a fee of >> $100.00 per image. They also charge $100.00 for use of an image in an >> exhibition and $15.00 for use in a public or classroom lecture. >> Is this passage from 2004 that you cite a change in the law, or has the >> Lilly Library been collecting unjustifiable fees? >> Also, assuming that the passage cited is not eing taken out of context, >> I assume that this applies to images that you obtain directly from the >> manuscript or original book. In other words, you wouldn't be able to >> reproduce an image taken from a facsimile edition without permission >> from the publisher, right? >> >> Galen >> >> >> >> SIMON LEVACK wrote: >> > Richley Crapo wrote: >> > >> > <> > Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library >> > typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the >> > entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of >> > such a document place it into public domain?>> >> > >> > Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in >> > the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office >> > >> > "Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or >> > phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides >> > that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a > > > protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright." >> > (US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004) >> > >> > For the full text of the circular, follow this link: >> > >> > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc >> > >> > Simon Levack >> > Author of the Aztec Mysteries >> > Please take a few moments to visit my website at >> > www.simonlevack.com >> > >> > >> >> >> From MBOLIVAR at SAN.RR.COM Tue Feb 1 17:14:31 2005 From: MBOLIVAR at SAN.RR.COM (Maria Bolivar) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:14:31 -0800 Subject: Copyright my foot! In-Reply-To: <001401c5087e$2e9efcc0$eacf4a42@Main> Message-ID: I here send you a copy of the article I wrote on the issue of the missing mural and the "despojo" against Santos de la Torre Santiago. It is in Spanish, I apologize for those of you who do not read Spanish. This is but a very tiny example (though magnificent in it power to awaken many) of the atrocities committed in the name of "copyright". To this day, the plagiario gets "credit" for having planned the despojo... believe it or not. María Dolores Bolívar Misterio y viaje de los Tres Espíritus Sagrados Por María Dolores Bolívar La anécdota detrás de esta historia gira en torno al mural Misterio y viaje de los tres espíritus sagrados, cuantificado, según se lo vea, en dos millones de chaquiras de colores, convertidas en narrativa visual, o en 1 millón de pesos, de acuerdo al avalúo del Instituto Nacional de Bellas Artes. Este mural, ganador del premio Fondo Nacional para la Creación Artística, FONCA, para su realización, se le extravió a su dueño, Santos de la Torre Santiago, en el año de 1998. Entre tanto la directora del Museo Zacatecano, Julieta Medina Briones, le proponía a de la Torre Santiago la idoneidad del recinto para albergar la obra desaparecida, luego de que el artista expresara su deseo de hacerla participar en el Festival Cultural 1999. ¡Lo primero era recuperarla! El trabajo aludido no se pudo traer para las fechas propuestas por Santos, Epigmenio Mendieta, visitador a cargo del asunto, gestionaba condiciones para su devolución. El etnólogo-investigador Adán Xicohténcatl Elízaga, que participó con Santos en el trámite ante el FONCA, había fungido como figura protagónica, suplantando al artista y apoderándose del mural, al cabo de su exhibición en el Antiguo Colegio de San Ildefonso, en 1998. Cuando el Museo Zacatecano intervino, las pesquisas para la recuperación del mural llevaban ya un tramo adelantado, ocho o diez meses, pero el caso todavía no estaba resuelto. La obra desaparecida sería entregada al Museo, en octubre de 1999, con el acta respectiva de la CNDH. Quedaban estipuladas ciertas condiciones. Las principales, que permaneciera en exhibición y que se le diera una gran difusión. Se solicitó al INBA un avalúo y Santos autorizó el traslado al Museo para el resguardo del mural. Las condiciones no las imponía Santos, curiosamente, sino el plagiario de la obra, quien, a pesar del hurto, del agravio, jamás fue tratado como un criminal. La historia era más larga, más escabrosa, pues había un segundo mural, expuesto permanentemente en París, hecho también por Santos, en 1997, bajo circunstancias similares. No se trataba de una copia y un original, sino de dos originales. El artista tampoco había participado en la develación de ese otro trabajo. El mismo etnólogo, Elízaga, recibió los honores merecidos por De la Torre Santiago. Intervinieron en tremendo entuerto, ante cámaras, funcionarios públicos, instituciones de gobierno, la presidencia de Francia... cual si todos estuviesen al tanto de este acto de pillaje. El segundo mural, había sido solicitado a Santos para ofrecerlo como regalo a Francia, con motivo del trigésimo aniversario del convenio Metro México, Metro París. La gestión se había hecho mediante el mismo intermediario. La obra se encuentra, todavía hoy, en exposición en la estación Palais Royal, en los subterráneos del Museo del Louvre. Pillaje expuesto por el Museo Zacatecano y el Metro de Paris ¿Cómo desaparece de San Ildefonso un mural de esas dimensiones: 80 piezas de 30 por 30 centímetros, se trata de un rectángulo, armado, de 2.40 metros por 3? Realizada en 1994, la gigantesca obra había sido expuesta por primera vez en el Museo de las Culturas Populares. “Se le dedicaron 300 metros cuadrados; se hizo una reproducción de cada uno de los cuadros que conforman el montaje final, en fotografía; se trató de explicar la cultura, la cosmogonía; se le dio una gran difusión”, contaba Julieta Medina. “Efectivamente, era muy visible. La prensa capitalina había cubierto magníficamente. Alguien lo recogió, cuando se exponía en San Ildefonso y hubo que ir a la CNDH para recuperarlo.” Santos fue utilizado y no se le dio nunca el crédito de creador de esos trabajos... ¿No es esa la presunta obviedad? Y esto, indirectamente, con la anuencia del FONCA, del INBA, de los curadores, hasta del Presidente de la República, a través de las autoridades del entonces Departamento del Distrito Federal. Cuesta trabajo creer que el país regaló una muestra de su arte más preciado y nadie se incomodó por la ausencia del artista, del autor. El canal 4 llegó a la comunidad serrana de Santos a entrevistarlo, cuando el mural se iba a Francia. “Se arrimó a la sierra para entrevistarme...” nos compartió Santos con esa mirada limpia de quien nada debe... Y no era difícil imaginarlo entre el ruido ensordecedor de las hélices de aquel aparato, “arrimado” a la sierra. Se hacía evidente que no lo habían invitado a Francia y que Santos, con la sencillez que lo caracteriza, consignaba, con sencillez, que el mural se lo debían. Los fondos del FONCA, obtenidos para el primer mural deben haber sido aplicados a la realización de la obra. En el segundo caso, el trabajo se concertó del mismo modo, sin ganancia ni reconocimiento para el creador. Tal vez, lo que denota mayor irregularidad es que el valor adquirido por esos trabajos hubiera pasado por nulo, si no se descubre el entuerto. Ninguna ganancia, de las que los artistas se benefician de común; el reconocimiento, la retención de derechos, la autoridad sobre el destino y uso de esos trabajos. No fue el gobierno, portador del obsequio, ni las autoridades culturales del país, quienes intentaron subsanar las pérdidas de Santos. Gente altruista de Francia financió su pasaje para que el artista fuese a París, a conocer el montaje de su obra, un año después de develado éste en la capital francesa. Los datos revelan que la recuperación del mural, y no su desaparición o el usufructo que terceras personas hicieron de él, dio pie a que, finalmente, se reconociera a Santos. El mural, a salvo bajo la custodia del Museo Zacatecano durante todo un año, sirvió de pretexto para la producción de un tercer mural, a modo de que el desaparecido pudiese convertirse en un mural móvil, cuya residencia temporal inicial fue Estados Unidos. Y todavía no se ha encontrado evidencia de que se haya obrado en justicia del despojo de los derechos de Santos, el creador y, por tanto, el único dueño de la obra. Una solicitud del Museo hecha al Fondo Estatal para la Cultura y las Artes, FECAZ, que proponía facilitar la realización del un tercer trabajo expositivo, ya como parte del acervo zacatecano, fue denegada, sin aparente motivo de peso, por la comisión evaluadora de los proyectos propuestos. Y Misterio y viaje de los tres espíritus sagrados, esta vez con todo y Santos, se fue al Centro Museo de Bellas Artes Mexicanas de Chicago, a participar en El año de la mexicanidad. -¿Se queda en los Estados Unidos la obra, hay negociaciones de compra con Santos? -No, hasta donde se sabe, se va y regresa, a Santos, no sé si al museo. Santos solo nos ha pedido que, a donde quiera que vaya, le apoyemos en checar cuestiones de tipo técnico, trámites administrativos, avalúo, convenios, garantías de traslado. Para Santos es mucho más fácil que el mural se encuentre en un lugar como el museo y, de ahí, ir a diferentes exposiciones. Por eso la idea de conseguir fondos para contar con una obra, expresamente creada para ese propósito. Por el momento los tres murales se encuentran “en buenas manos”. Y sirvió esta triste historia de piratas para que en lugar de un mural hubiera tres... Extraño giro de una historia igualmente extraña. En Zacatecas, a los huicholes sólo se los ve en la calle, vendiendo, pidiendo ayuda. Es raro encontrarlos en restaurantes, librerías, bibliotecas. En ninguno de los Estados que integran la demarcación geográfica de ese grupo, se fomenta la participación integral de su cultura en la vida pública. Cuando se inauguró el mural se sentía esa marginalidad, incluso por parte del Instituto Zacatecano de Cultura que eligió como logo de los Festejos del Milenio una figura antigua, pudiendo utilizar algo de las culturas vivas que expresan diversidad en el Estado, que denotan, en su vigencia, el esplendor y la historia trágica de quinientos años. Julieta Medina que completó para nosotros lo consignado por Santos, nos habló de que en “uno de los ochenta cuadros que componen el mural aparece una representación muy parecida a la pictografía utilizada de logo de los Festejos; representa más o menos lo mismo. La del mural es la impresión del espíritu descarnado de Tatewari, el dios fuego, puente entre los chamanes y los dioses. Puede que sea coincidencia... ¡no lo sabemos! Lo que sí nos genera incógnita es por qué consultar a Peter Jiménez, el norteamericano que dirige el sitio arqueológico de La quemada, antes que a Santos de la Torre Santiago, líder huichol, de la cosmogonía, de la cultura, de la herencia del México Antiguo. Y nos quedamos con esa duda... Compromiso del Museo Zacatecano por la cultura huichola La presencia huichola en el Museo Zacatecano no inicia con Santos de la Torre Santiago, autor de esta obra. La institución tuvo que rescatar la colección de bordados, única en su género, reunida en los años 20 y 30 por el doctor Enrique F. Mertens. Mertens dio a los artistas materiales de trabajo y facilitó así la recuperación de sus tradiciones. Existe un libro, Bordados huicholes, de Fernando Benítez, editado en 1991. Ahí quedó plasmado el reconocimiento al nivel artístico de esos bordados. La colección, con el tiempo, había pasado a manos de Dolores Olmedo. Ante la apatía de la Universidad Autónoma Zacatecana, hubo que recurrir a todo para que los bordados volviesen a Zacatecas. El Museo Zacatecano tuvo como enfoque, en sus inicios, revalorar lo popular y elevarlo al nivel de arte, que le es propio. En 1995 este principio estuvo detrás de su montaje. Su coordinador, Alfonso Soto Soria realizó la museografía con ese objetivo. Se contaba, para su apertura, con la colección de Mertens, donada a la Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas. Fue en ese tiempo que se llevó a cabo la curaduría para rehabilitar las áreas del museo, dotarlas de vidrios polarizados y lámparas; se trabajó en transmitir a la comunidad el valor de un arte respaldado por todo un proceso formativo, como el huichol. Se recurrió también a colecciones propias de la creación artística del estado, como la colección de Exvotos, donada por Ernesto Juárez Frías y la de hierros forjados, donada por el historiador Guillermo Tovar y de Teresa. Al referirse a los inicios del Museo, en particular, a la colección de bordados huicholes, Guadalupe Dávalos, que participó en la primera fase, comentó que “había la idea de que la gente entendiera cosas sencillas como por qué los dioses son animales; por qué refleja este arte una liberación de mitos ancestrales.” Dávalos dijo que se partió de que no se trataba de un arte mimético, “en la medida en que no se podía ver ningún trazo con líneas de color, sino que se había hecho conforme a la mente y la memoria de una cosmogonía específica.” Al preguntar a Julieta Medina respecto de la respuesta de la comunidad zacatecana para con el mural comentó: “La experiencia que tenemos de afluencia respecto del año pasado es el doble. El museo es visitado por muchos zacatecanos. Yo creo que esto se debe a la gran difusión, pero sobre todo al impacto que produce en el visitante la obra de Santos.” -¿Y los huicholes, visitan el museo? -Pocos, pero sí visitan. Les tenemos un registro; no son muchos, alrededor de unos cincuenta. Los huicholes sólo acuden a las ciudades a vender sus artesanías, ese es su medio de subsistencia. En el museo les compramos las jícaras pequeñas. -¿Y Adán Xicohténcatl Elizaga está en una cárcel, por robo; sigue un juicio por plagio; se le han fijado multas en base a la ley de derechos de autor; se le percibe como el pillo que es? -No, a la negociación que se llegó con la CNDH fue que entregaba la obra a cambio de que siguiera apareciendo su crédito. El argumento es que él hizo las gestiones ante el FONCA. Su nombre continúa apareciendo en la ficha técnica, como el etnógrafo. -Eso y respetar el pillaje es lo mismo... -Pero queda fuera, desafortunadamente, de nuestra injerencia. La labor del museo es, sí, promover, fundar, por qué no, esa conciencia, no podemos más. No hay una política agresiva de defensa, no se va más allá. En Zacatecas hay mucho que “rescatar” y son pocos los avances en esa dirección. Las riquezas patrimoniales, es el caso de la Quemada, el Mixtón, las Ventanas, la Caxcania toda. Continúan bajo la vigilancia laxa de las autoridades del INAH, que supervisa desde lejos; de investigadores nacionales y extranjeros que adquieren derechos, por desconocimiento y falta de precisión de las leyes. La cultura que yace en esos sitios, al resguardo del tiempo y del olvido, no se conoce. Los especialistas, muchas veces extranjeros, se dan acceso a esos sitios y usufructúan su valor, mediante becas, estudios, ediciones, en buen número financiadas con recursos nacionales, cuando no mediante el pillaje más directo, de sustracción de piezas. Eso no hace sino desvincular a centros de estudios mexicanos de una posible perspectiva que le de la vuelta al saqueo ocurrido por estos contactos. La universidad, los museos, el gobierno deberían tener una política más agresiva de rescate del patrimonio cultural. Santos de la Torre Santiago Santos es un personaje de coordenadas vagas. Como bien expresan quienes han entrado en contacto con él, no se sabe como encontrarlo, salvo si se le envía un mensaje vía El Nayar, la estación de radio del Instituto Nacional Indigenista, en Nayarit, que transmite regularmente en Cora y Huichol a toda la región. Con motivo de la ampliación del plazo dado originalmente a la exhibición de uno de sus murales, Misterio y viaje de los tres espíritus sagrados, en el Museo Zacatecano, se le entrevistó en marzo, del 2000, para que hablara del calvario que vivió por la desaparición de su obra, en el programa del Instituto Zacatecano de Cultura, La carreta alegórica. Esa entrevista no había sido concertada con antelación; se había previsto, simplemente, comentar en la radio la importancia de que la estancia de la obra en Zacatecas se prolongara hasta abril, durante el Festival Cultural, idea que había motivado el contacto de Santos con el Museo, en primera instancia. Al momento mismo de iniciar la transmisión al aire, apareció Santos, según él mismo relató, de manera mágica, conducido hasta ahí por sus deidades. Al otro lado de la puerta de vidrio, de la cabina improvisada en una casa de la calle de Yanguas, a unas cuatro cuadras del Museo Zacatecano, estaba Santos, tranquilo, listo para contar las peripecias de sus murales, al aire. Está en buenas manos, comunicó a la audiencia, mientras tocaba discretamente la pluma de su sombrero, símbolo del papel que él desempeña como chamán de su comunidad, “los dioses así quisieron”. Santos es chamán, peyotero. En el viaje que los huicholes realizan a Viricuta, desempeña labores importantes; dedica mucho tiempo a las actividades religiosas de grupo. Pertenece a un núcleo de comunidades huicholas que ven extenderse su territorio por ahí donde comparten geografía Jalisco, Zacatecas, Durango y Nayarit. En Zacatecas los huicholes se encuentran al Sur de Valparaíso. Santos radica en una comunidad pequeña, Mesa del Venado o Colonia Nueva o Las latas. Tiene tierras, también, en Santa Lucía de Valparaíso. Aunque ellos no se sienten ni de Zacatecas, ni de Jalisco; son huicholes, independientemente de la región o de los límites geográficos que nosotros tenemos. Santos abundó poco, durante la entrevista, en el pillaje efectuado contra su obra. A cada pregunta respondió con explicaciones referentes al trabajo colectivo, a los mensajes sagrados de los que es portadora su obra. Todos los símbolos e imágenes representados en el mural son elementos míticos. Antes de iniciar los trabajos de cada uno de sus murales, “se realizó una ceremonia especial para que los dioses nos condujeran,” explicó Santos. Se trataba de plasmar la memoria colectiva de su pueblo, su visión del mundo, su cosmogonía. La labor colectiva, que dio a luz a tan controvertidas obras, resultó del empeño y compromiso familiar con las tradiciones comunitarias -Santos contó con el trabajo de 8 colaboradores de su familia y no de la incidencia accesoria del etnólogo que a la fecha reclama un papel preponderante en las exhibiciones de este arte que, tiene dueño. From s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM Tue Feb 1 20:53:12 2005 From: s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM (SIMON LEVACK) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:53:12 -0000 Subject: Copyright my foot! In-Reply-To: <001401c5087e$2e9efcc0$eacf4a42@Main> Message-ID: Galen wrote: <> Right. Now as I understand the *legal* position (and bear in mind that my expertise, for what it's worth, is as a former *English* lawyer - the position in all or any of the 50 US jurisdictions will differ, if only in detail) is that copyright in the *original* image belongs (if it ever existed at all - I'm not sure there was such a concept 400 years ago!) to the creator of the original document (and for all practical purposes can be ignored) but of course copyright in a facsimile belongs to the creator of the facsimile (in the same way as, if you took a photograph of me, you would own the copyright in the photo, but not in its subject, ie my face). However, in practical terms, if you ask a library to provide you with a copy of a document in their possession, I guess they may attach whatever conditions they think fit to the service they have provided you, ie copying the document and sending it to you. Bear in mind also that (1) the library may have had copyright in the original document assigned to them (though if it has expired that should not make a difference) and (2) any alteration to a document will be the property of the creator of the alteration. I think the answer is to check the library's terms and conditions very carefully! If they are purporting to charge you for or attach conditions to the use of copyright material, *on the grounds that it is copyright material*, they are probably wrong unless they actually do own the copyright. On the other hand if they are saying 'we will copy this item for you (or even give you access to it for the purpose of making your own copy) provided that...' then I would think they may do that, and impose pretty much any conditions they like. Simon Levack Author of the Aztec Mysteries Please take a few moments to visit my website at www.simonlevack.com From rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU Tue Feb 1 21:48:42 2005 From: rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 14:48:42 -0700 Subject: Antiquarian Question Message-ID: Anyone have a good guess for the meaning of the abbreviation "R. F." in an acquisition stamp of the Biblioteque Nacionale de France during the 1800s? The mark is found on codices such as "Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca" and "Anonymo Mexicano" Richley From idiez at MAC.COM Tue Feb 1 22:27:39 2005 From: idiez at MAC.COM (idiez at MAC.COM) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 16:27:39 -0600 Subject: scholarships for indigenous students in Zacatecas Message-ID: Members of nahuat-l, The following is a request for donations to support indigenous college students at the Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, and their work at the Zacatecas Institute for Teaching and Research in Ethnology. Low-income Nahua students from the states of Veracruz, Hidalgo and San Luis Potosí come to Zacatecas to study, because the state university here is one of the few remaining institutions of higher education in Mexico that still offers low tuition (20 dollars per semester), as well as free housing and meals. In the program we have set up here at the university, these students receive a small scholarship and in return fulfill their social service requirement by working on proyects designed to revitalize their culture. They study older and modern Nahuatl for one hour per day, and participate in the production of the first ever monolingual dictionary of Nahuatl, with word definitions and grammatical terminology in Nahuatl. They also help to teach Nahuatl to the mestizo students at the university. Would you like to support a Nahua college student at 50 dollars per month? The student will correspond with you weekly in Nahuatl via email. If you are interested, or would like to know more about what we do, please contacto me at idiez at mac.com. John Sullivan, Ph.D. Professor of Nahua language and culture Centro de Estudios Prospectivos Unidad Académica de Idiomas Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Director Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology Tacuba 152, int. 47 Centro Histórico Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 Mexico Work: +52 (492) 925-3415 Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 Home: +52 (492) 768-6048 Mobile: +52 (492) 544-5985 idiez at mac.com www.idiez.org.mx From Ian.Mursell at BTINTERNET.COM Tue Feb 1 22:55:42 2005 From: Ian.Mursell at BTINTERNET.COM (Ian Mursell) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:55:42 +0000 Subject: Copyright my foot! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I agree with Simon on this. I hope this topic will run on for a while as it's one that affects many of us directly or indirectly fairly constantly. ADEVA are not charging us anything for reproducing scans from their superb facsimiles on our educational website, and they don't mind us doing our own scans - but they're not a library, and I suspect the Bodleian in Oxford will be stricter about permission to reproduce from facsimiles of the Mendoza, even though they're not the publishers of the facsimiles. If there's sufficient interest I don't mind approaching the Bodleian to get an 'official' answer from them on specifically this topic. By the by, my partner and I met the keeper of ancient manuscripts at the Bodleian, Dr. Bruce Barker-Benfield, a year ago and he gave us permission to request that a photograph be taken (for the first time ever!) of the spine of the binding case that contains the original Codex Laud (where you can - just - make out the famous handwritten caption 'Liber Hieroglyphicorum Aegyptorum MS'). We paid a standard photo request fee (something like £20 if I remember right) and received the photo a few weeks later. One of these days I mean to ask permission from the Bodleian to upload the photo to our site, in a little section on codices. By coincidence, I'm in touch right now with a professional picture researcher in Texas, Holly Marsh, who asked us to supply scans of assorted images for an educational US textbook on the Aztecs, which we've done. Several images are from codex facsimiles in our collection and I've asked Holly to write a paragraph for this group summarizing the main points about permissions/copyright for images taken from facsimiles. From the exchange we've had I understand that publishers expect to 'share' costs for this sort of thing between reproduction fees to the creator of the facsimile (e.g. ADEVA) and service fees to a lab or whoever actually makes the scans; but I don't think they expect to pay fees to the library 'owner' of the original itself. I think it would be good to consult a company like ADEVA in Graz (Austria) on the subject to hear what their policy is. I'll post Holly's answer as soon as I get it. Incidentally, she has asked me to post the following query to this forum in case anyone can help with suggestions. Thanks on her behalf to anyone who can help her out. *** So here's another question/favor to ask you: could you post a query to the list asking for *immediate* (we're talking today I hope) help in locating an easy-to-obtain low (and eventually high) res image of these: 1) illustration showing Aztec numbering system 2) illustration of Aztec days in the form of glyphs/pictograms 3) illustration of toponyms, combinations of glyphs or pictograms that form place names such as towns *** Regards to all, Ian Ian Mursell Director Mexicolore 28 Warriner Gardens London SW11 4EB, U.K. Tel: +44 (0) 20 7622 9577 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7498 3643 www.mexicolore.co.uk Ian.Mursell at btinternet.com info at mexicolore.co.uk 1980-2005: 25 years of bringing Mexico and the Aztecs to life in schools and museums throughout England. Team visits, online teaching resources and services, live interactive videoconferencing sessions, and much more - all from Mexicolore, the 'highly successful teaching team' (British Museum Education Service) From swood at DARKWING.UOREGON.EDU Tue Feb 1 23:41:17 2005 From: swood at DARKWING.UOREGON.EDU (Stephanie Wood) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 15:41:17 -0800 Subject: A Question for Experts Here Message-ID: I had a different experience with INAH. I published some drawings made from manuscripts that INAH owns (and these drawings were made by an artist I hired, drawings of details from published photographs), and INAH insisted I had to pay a fee of $75 USD per image. Ouch! In contrast, the AGN Mexico charged me a nominal fee to obtain slides but added nothing for the permission to publish the images as long as I cited the institution. Stephanie Wood From kristina.tiedje at COLLEGE-DE-FRANCE.FR Wed Feb 2 09:42:24 2005 From: kristina.tiedje at COLLEGE-DE-FRANCE.FR (Kristina Tiedje) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:42:24 +0100 Subject: Antiquarian Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: R.F. means République Française in contemporary France. It is on all official documents, stamps etc., so depending on the date (before or after the Revolution, it might means simple that. Kristina On Feb 1, 2005, at 10:48 PM, Richley Crapo wrote: > Anyone have a good guess for the meaning of the abbreviation "R. F." > in an acquisition stamp of the Biblioteque Nacionale de France during > the 1800s? The mark is found on codices such as "Historia > Tolteca-Chichimeca" and "Anonymo Mexicano" > Richley > > > ************************************************************************ ******* Kristina Tiedje, Ph.D. FYSSEN Postdoctoral Fellow CNRS Laboratoire d'Anthropologie Sociale Collège de France 52, rue du Cardinal Lemoine 75005 Paris France tél.: 01 44 27 17 45 fax: 01 44 27 17 66 kristina.tiedje at college-de-france.fr http://www.ktiedje.com ************************************************************************ ******* Kristina Tiedje, Ph.D. FYSSEN Postdoctoral Fellow CNRS Laboratoire d'Anthropologie Sociale Collège de France 52, rue du Cardinal Lemoine 75005 Paris France tél.: 01 44 27 17 45 fax: 01 44 27 17 66 kristina.tiedje at college-de-france.fr http://www.ktiedje.com From RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU Wed Feb 2 15:17:52 2005 From: RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:17:52 -0700 Subject: Antiquarian Question Message-ID: Thanks! Richley >>> kristina.tiedje at COLLEGE-DE-FRANCE.FR 02/02/05 02:42AM >>> R.F. means République Française in contemporary France. It is on all official documents, stamps etc., so depending on the date (before or after the Revolution, it might means simple that. Kristina On Feb 1, 2005, at 10:48 PM, Richley Crapo wrote: > Anyone have a good guess for the meaning of the abbreviation "R. F." > in an acquisition stamp of the Biblioteque Nacionale de France during > the 1800s? The mark is found on codices such as "Historia > Tolteca-Chichimeca" and "Anonymo Mexicano" > Richley > > > ************************************************************************ ******* Kristina Tiedje, Ph.D. FYSSEN Postdoctoral Fellow CNRS Laboratoire d'Anthropologie Sociale Collège de France 52, rue du Cardinal Lemoine 75005 Paris France tél.: 01 44 27 17 45 fax: 01 44 27 17 66 kristina.tiedje at college-de-france.fr http://www.ktiedje.com ************************************************************************ ******* Kristina Tiedje, Ph.D. FYSSEN Postdoctoral Fellow CNRS Laboratoire d'Anthropologie Sociale Collège de France 52, rue du Cardinal Lemoine 75005 Paris France tél.: 01 44 27 17 45 fax: 01 44 27 17 66 kristina.tiedje at college-de-france.fr http://www.ktiedje.com From institute at CSUMB.EDU Wed Feb 2 16:59:44 2005 From: institute at CSUMB.EDU (Archaeology Institute) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:59:44 -0800 Subject: Antiquarian Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nahua language and culture discussion writes: >Anyone have a good guess for the meaning of the abbreviation "R. F." in an acquisition stamp of the Biblioteque Nacionale de France during the 1800s? The mark is found on codices such as "Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca" and "Anonymo Mexicano" > >Richley Republique Frances? Ruben G. Mendoza, Ph.D., Director Institute for Archaeological Science, Technology and Visualization Social and Behavioral Sciences California State University Monterey Bay 100 Campus Center Seaside, California 93955-8001 Email: archaeology_institute at csumb..edu Voice: 831-582-3760 Fax: 831-582-3566 http://archaeology.csumb.edu http://archaeology.csumb.edu/wireless/ Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message is sender-privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, electronic storage or use of this communication is prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, attaching the original message, and delete the original message from your computer, and any network to which your computer is connected. Thank you. -- This message has been scanned for viruses, worms, and potentially dangerous attachments and is believed to be safe. We do not recommend opening attachments unless you are expecting them. To learn more about virus protection at CSUMB, visit: http://it.csumb.edu/services/virus/ From RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU Wed Feb 2 17:33:29 2005 From: RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:33:29 -0700 Subject: Antiquarian Question Message-ID: Thanks. (I probably should say, 'duh!' or "Doh!' whichever acknowledges better that I think you are right and wonder why I didn't think of it.) Someone else also made this suggestion. Richley >>> institute at CSUMB.EDU 02/02/05 09:59AM >>> Nahua language and culture discussion writes: >Anyone have a good guess for the meaning of the abbreviation "R. F." in an acquisition stamp of the Biblioteque Nacionale de France during the 1800s? The mark is found on codices such as "Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca" and "Anonymo Mexicano" > >Richley Republique Frances? Ruben G. Mendoza, Ph.D., Director Institute for Archaeological Science, Technology and Visualization Social and Behavioral Sciences California State University Monterey Bay 100 Campus Center Seaside, California 93955-8001 Email: archaeology_institute at csumb..edu Voice: 831-582-3760 Fax: 831-582-3566 http://archaeology.csumb.edu http://archaeology.csumb.edu/wireless/ Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message is sender-privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, electronic storage or use of this communication is prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, attaching the original message, and delete the original message from your computer, and any network to which your computer is connected. Thank you. -- This message has been scanned for viruses, worms, and potentially dangerous attachments and is believed to be safe. We do not recommend opening attachments unless you are expecting them. To learn more about virus protection at CSUMB, visit: http://it.csumb.edu/services/virus/ From schwallr at morris.umn.edu Thu Feb 3 17:19:20 2005 From: schwallr at morris.umn.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 11:19:20 -0600 Subject: Fwd: Re: Xolotl Message-ID: Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:13:07 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Swanton >Dear Richley, >The Xolotl is kept in the Bibliothèque nationale de >France, which is quite explicit in requiring >authorization for the publication of documents they >conserve: > >"Tout usage public de reproduction de documents >conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale de France doit >faire l'objet d'une autorisation préalable et de >l'acquittement d'une redevance." >(http://www.bnf.fr/pages/zNavigat/frame/accedocu.htm?ancre=repro_pres.htm) > >I've worked with the BnF regarding publication of >images from their collection on two occasions and have >found them quite helpful, even if a little >bureaucratic. You can also request images from them, >which in my experience have been of excellent quality, >certainly much better than those published in the 50s. >I see that now its possible to request some images >online (e.g. for the Xolotl: >http://images.bnf.fr/jsp/index.jsp?destination=afficherListeCliches.jsp&origine=rechercherListeCliches.jsp&contexte=resultatRechercheSimple) > >If you have questions you can always ask the >institutions that curate the documents. They >understand that "scientific" publications are >worthwhile and benefit from these images but are not >big money makers. You can also ask your editor. > >Regards, >Mike Swanton > > From rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU Thu Feb 3 17:22:30 2005 From: rcrapo at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 10:22:30 -0700 Subject: Fwd: Re: Xolotl Message-ID: Thanks for the added information. Richley >>> schwallr at morris.umn.edu 02/03/05 10:20 AM >>> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:13:07 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Swanton >Dear Richley, >The Xolotl is kept in the Bibliothèque nationale de >France, which is quite explicit in requiring >authorization for the publication of documents they >conserve: > >"Tout usage public de reproduction de documents >conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale de France doit >faire l'objet d'une autorisation préalable et de >l'acquittement d'une redevance." >(http://www.bnf.fr/pages/zNavigat/frame/accedocu.htm?ancre=repro_pres.htm) > >I've worked with the BnF regarding publication of >images from their collection on two occasions and have >found them quite helpful, even if a little >bureaucratic. You can also request images from them, >which in my experience have been of excellent quality, >certainly much better than those published in the 50s. >I see that now its possible to request some images >online (e.g. for the Xolotl: >http://images.bnf.fr/jsp/index.jsp?destination=afficherListeCliches.jsp&origine=rechercherListeCliches.jsp&contexte=resultatRechercheSimple) > >If you have questions you can always ask the >institutions that curate the documents. They >understand that "scientific" publications are >worthwhile and benefit from these images but are not >big money makers. You can also ask your editor. > >Regards, >Mike Swanton > > From idiez at MAC.COM Fri Feb 4 19:50:19 2005 From: idiez at MAC.COM (idiez at MAC.COM) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 13:50:19 -0600 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Guanacev=ED,_Durango?= Message-ID: A teacher from the state of Durango has asked me for the meaning and origin of the name of a municipality in that state: Guanaceví. For those listeros who can`t read accented characters, the last letter of the word is an accented "i". Any ideas on the language this word comes from? John Sullivan, Ph.D. Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua Unidad Académica de Idiomas Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Director Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. Tacuba 152, int. 47 Centro Histórico Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 México Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 idiez at mac.com www.idiez.org.mx From micc2 at COX.NET Fri Feb 4 21:32:44 2005 From: micc2 at COX.NET (Mario E. Aguilar) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 16:32:44 -0500 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?R3VhbmFjZXbtLA==?= Durango Message-ID: The ending of this town reminds me of the indigenous people of Califonria known as the Chemehuevi. According to : http://www.fourdir.com/chemehuevi.htm the are Southern Numic Family: Numic Stock: Uto-Aztecan Phylum: Aztec-Tanoan Macro-Culture: Colorado River Maybe it is a name from the TUBAR, TEPEHUÁN, or PIMA BAJO peoples: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=1847 > > From: idiez at MAC.COM > Date: 2005/02/04 Fri PM 02:50:19 EST > To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU > Subject: Guanaceví, Durango > > A teacher from the state of Durango has asked me for the meaning and > origin of the name of a municipality in that state: Guanaceví. For > those listeros who can`t read accented characters, the last letter of > the word is an accented "i". Any ideas on the language this word comes > from? > > John Sullivan, Ph.D. > Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua > Unidad Académica de Idiomas > Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas > Director > Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. > Tacuba 152, int. 47 > Centro Histórico > Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 > México > Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 > Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 > Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 > Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 > idiez at mac.com > www.idiez.org.mx From karttu at NANTUCKET.NET Mon Feb 7 23:42:12 2005 From: karttu at NANTUCKET.NET (Frances Karttunen) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:42:12 -0500 Subject: Seeking le marc Message-ID: I am trying to contact Marc Eisinger, and the email address I have for him seems to be out of date. Marc, will you speak up? Or does anyone have Marc's current address? Tlazohcamati huel miac. Fran From RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU Tue Feb 15 17:34:49 2005 From: RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:34:49 -0700 Subject: UNAM Address Message-ID: Does anyone have a mailing addres for UNAM, or more specifically, for Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas? Richley From schwallr at morris.umn.edu Tue Feb 15 17:48:32 2005 From: schwallr at morris.umn.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:48:32 -0600 Subject: UNAM Address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:34 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >Does anyone have a mailing addres for UNAM, or more specifically, for >Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas? >Richley There is an on-line directory: http://www.unam.mx/iih/instituto/pers_iih.html John F. Schwaller Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean 315 Behmler Hall University of Minnesota, Morris 600 E 4th Street Morris, MN 56267 320-589-6015 FAX 320-589-6399 schwallr at morris.umn.edu From schwallr at morris.umn.edu Tue Feb 15 17:52:33 2005 From: schwallr at morris.umn.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:52:33 -0600 Subject: UNAM Address In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050215114811.04740cc8@schwallr.email.umn.edu> Message-ID: At 11:48 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >At 11:34 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >>Does anyone have a mailing addres for UNAM, or more specifically, for >>Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas? >>Richley The Mailing address is as follows: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) Cto. Mtro. Mario de la Cueva, Zona Cultural, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, C. P. 04510, México, D. F., México John F. Schwaller Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean 315 Behmler Hall University of Minnesota, Morris 600 E 4th Street Morris, MN 56267 320-589-6015 FAX 320-589-6399 schwallr at morris.umn.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU Tue Feb 15 18:05:33 2005 From: RCRAPO at HASS.USU.EDU (Richley Crapo) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:05:33 -0700 Subject: UNAM Address Message-ID: Thanks to everyone who replied. Richley >>> schwallr at morris.umn.edu 02/15/05 10:52AM >>> At 11:48 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >At 11:34 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >>Does anyone have a mailing addres for UNAM, or more specifically, for >>Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas? >>Richley The Mailing address is as follows: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) Cto. Mtro. Mario de la Cueva, Zona Cultural, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, C. P. 04510, México, D. F., México John F. Schwaller Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean 315 Behmler Hall University of Minnesota, Morris 600 E 4th Street Morris, MN 56267 320-589-6015 FAX 320-589-6399 schwallr at morris.umn.edu From idiez at MAC.COM Tue Feb 15 19:27:10 2005 From: idiez at MAC.COM (idiez at MAC.COM) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:27:10 -0600 Subject: dictionary verb citations Message-ID: Sooner or later I'm going to have to make a decision regarding headword entries in a monolingual nahuatl dictionary. There is obviously a long tradition of using the present tense as the citation form. Although the early dictionary makers didn't understand exactly how nahua verbs work, this system is very efficient as far as intuitively distinguishing between verb classes 1-4 or a-d, depending on the terminology one uses. Fran's dictionary is the prime example of this: parenthesis mark class 2 verbs, and the few class 4 verbs are rewritten in the preterite form. Class 1 and 3 are unmarked. It's pretty well known that if you ask a native speaker how to say "jump", for example, in nahuatl, he or she will answer, "nihuitoniz". In other works, the future tense in nahuatl serves as a kind of infinitive verb form. My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as the dictionary headword form? And what do you listeros think about incorporating this future based form into a monolingual dictionary? Obviously it would be followed by a number (1-4) to show verb class, and perhaps some kind of notation showing transitivity, causitive, applicative, etc. I'm not generally in favor of breaking with tradition, especially when it works, so I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an opinion on the matter. John John Sullivan, Ph.D. Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua Unidad Académica de Idiomas Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Director Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. Tacuba 152, int. 47 Centro Histórico Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 México Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 idiez at mac.com www.idiez.org.mx From karttu at NANTUCKET.NET Tue Feb 15 19:59:14 2005 From: karttu at NANTUCKET.NET (Frances Karttunen) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:59:14 -0500 Subject: dictionary verb citations In-Reply-To: <90d3f537cca1fcb1569db909b1ae34b0@mac.com> Message-ID: > My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as the > dictionary headword form? One reason is that one can form the future from the present by regular rules, but future forms are ambiguous. Since the final vowel is dropped from Class 2 and 3 (b and c) verbs in the future, one can hypothesize more than one possible stem for a verb that ends in iz or oz. Leaving aside contrastive vowel length for a moment, is temoz from invariant temo or from temoa? Is yoliz form yoli or yolia? Fran From idiez at MAC.COM Tue Feb 15 20:55:02 2005 From: idiez at MAC.COM (idiez at MAC.COM) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:55:02 -0600 Subject: dictionary verb citations In-Reply-To: <8bee29636414799a2bf43318799bdff4@nantucket.net> Message-ID: This is what the modified entries might look like: First using unicode overbars: tēmōz. vt3. nicyehyecōz nitlapantīz / to look for s.t. temōz. vi1. niyāz cacatlani / to descend. For those who canʻt read the overbars: te:mo:z. vt3. nicyehyeco:z nitlapanti:z / to look for s.t. temo:z. vi1. niya:z cacatlani / to descend. Actually, in these examples the information denoted by "v", "i" and "t" is implicit in the headword form and the definitons. John On Feb 15, 2005, at 1:59 PM, Frances Karttunen wrote: >> My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as the >> dictionary headword form? > > One reason is that one can form the future from the present by regular > rules, but future forms are ambiguous. Since the final vowel is dropped > from Class 2 and 3 (b and c) verbs in the future, one can hypothesize > more than one possible stem for a verb that ends in iz or oz. Leaving > aside contrastive vowel length for a moment, is temoz from invariant > temo or from temoa? Is yoliz form yoli or yolia? > > Fran > John Sullivan, Ph.D. Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua Unidad Académica de Idiomas Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Director Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. Tacuba 152, int. 47 Centro Histórico Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 México Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 idiez at mac.com www.idiez.org.mx From schwallr at morris.umn.edu Tue Feb 15 21:27:31 2005 From: schwallr at morris.umn.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:27:31 -0600 Subject: dictionary verb citations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: From: "Mr. Tezozomoc" To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU Subject: Re: dictionary verb citations Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:59:18 +0000 I was going to blame Antonio de Nebrija, Latin.... and his gramatica style... but I think that Karttunen .. has a better answer..... Tlazohcamati... Tezozomoc At 03:00 PM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >----Original Message Follows---- >From: Frances Karttunen >Reply-To: Nahua language and culture discussion >To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU >Subject: Re: dictionary verb citations >Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:59:14 -0500 > >>My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as the >>dictionary headword form? > >One reason is that one can form the future from the present by regular >rules, but future forms are ambiguous. Since the final vowel is dropped >from Class 2 and 3 (b and c) verbs in the future, one can hypothesize >more than one possible stem for a verb that ends in iz or oz. Leaving >aside contrastive vowel length for a moment, is temoz from invariant >temo or from temoa? Is yoliz form yoli or yolia? > >Fran > From joostkremers at FASTMAIL.FM Tue Feb 15 23:02:34 2005 From: joostkremers at FASTMAIL.FM (Joost Kremers) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:02:34 +0100 Subject: dictionary verb citations In-Reply-To: <90d3f537cca1fcb1569db909b1ae34b0@mac.com> Message-ID: Hi John, It's funny, really, seeing you mention this. There is a similar discrepancy in Arabic, where dictionaries compiled by Western Arabists tend to use the perfective form as citation form, while dictionaries compiled by native speakers tend to use the imperfective form. The imperfective is indeed the form that a native speaker will give you when you ask him what 'to jump' means in Arabic. So I would suggest, if your target audience are native speakers (which I assume is the case, given that the dictionary is to be monolingual), use the form that they would themselves use. Just imagine how you would feel about a dictionary of English that listed all the verbs in their gerund forms, or worse, in their past tense forms... i mean, you'd get used to it easily enough, but it would nonetheless be kind of "off". Just my two dimes, of course... Joost On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 01:27:10PM -0600, idiez at MAC.COM wrote: > Sooner or later I'm going to have to make a decision regarding > headword entries in a monolingual nahuatl dictionary. There is > obviously a long tradition of using the present tense as the citation > form. Although the early dictionary makers didn't understand exactly > how nahua verbs work, this system is very efficient as far as > intuitively distinguishing between verb classes 1-4 or a-d, depending > on the terminology one uses. Fran's dictionary is the prime example of > this: parenthesis mark class 2 verbs, and the few class 4 verbs are > rewritten in the preterite form. Class 1 and 3 are unmarked. > It's pretty well known that if you ask a native speaker how to say > "jump", for example, in nahuatl, he or she will answer, "nihuitoniz". > In other works, the future tense in nahuatl serves as a kind of > infinitive verb form. My questions is, why didn't Molina and his > successors use this as the dictionary headword form? And what do you > listeros think about incorporating this future based form into a > monolingual dictionary? Obviously it would be followed by a number > (1-4) to show verb class, and perhaps some kind of notation showing > transitivity, causitive, applicative, etc. > I'm not generally in favor of breaking with tradition, especially > when it works, so I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an opinion > on the matter. > John > > John Sullivan, Ph.D. > Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua > Unidad Académica de Idiomas > Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas > Director > Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. > Tacuba 152, int. 47 > Centro Histórico > Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 > México > Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 > Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 > Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 > Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 > idiez at mac.com > www.idiez.org.mx -- Joost Kremers, PhD Graduate College "Satzarten" J.W. Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main Varrentrappstrasse 40-42 60486 Frankfurt am Main Germany Tel. +49 69 798 28050 From dfrye at UMICH.EDU Wed Feb 16 03:26:13 2005 From: dfrye at UMICH.EDU (Frye, David) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:26:13 -0500 Subject: dictionary verb citations Message-ID: On the other hand, there is no reason why you couldn't list the verbs in the same way that most English-English dict's list English verbs, i.e. by the standard form (which could very well be the future) followed by other relevant forms. E.g. "write (vb), wrote, written," etc. In this case, "temoz (vb), temo" could be one entry, and "temoz (vb), temoa" could be another. david ________________________________ From: Nahua language and culture discussion on behalf of Frances Karttunen Sent: Tue 2/15/2005 2:59 PM To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU Subject: Re: dictionary verb citations > My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as the > dictionary headword form? One reason is that one can form the future from the present by regular rules, but future forms are ambiguous. Since the final vowel is dropped from Class 2 and 3 (b and c) verbs in the future, one can hypothesize more than one possible stem for a verb that ends in iz or oz. Leaving aside contrastive vowel length for a moment, is temoz from invariant temo or from temoa? Is yoliz form yoli or yolia? Fran -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonathan.amith at YALE.EDU Wed Feb 16 05:41:40 2005 From: jonathan.amith at YALE.EDU (Jonathan Amith) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:41:40 -0500 Subject: dictionary verb citations In-Reply-To: <71F249219F2E3845B88BE93BEC6DA4FB028B6D4F@lsa-m2.lsa.adsroot.itcs.umich.edu> Message-ID: Hi John, I would assume that you are talking about the best headword entry for printed monolingual dictionaries; with electronic versions there is no problem. It is not hard to allow look-up from any inflected form. For print versions for monolingual speakers the problem is interesting. First, if you are right in stating that "It's pretty well known that if you ask a native speaker how to say "jump", for example, in nahuatl, he or she will answer, "nihuitoniz" that does not mean that the most likely way for a native speaker to LOOK UP a word is in the first person future. From my experience asking for a translation and asking for a look up are not the same. So an argument might be made that while speakers respond 'nicho:kas' for 'como se dice llorar' they might be more comfortable in looking up cho:kas, ticho:kas, etc. I don't know, but this is something to think about. Another problem for not using a canonical form is that of keeping words together that might facilitate dictionary construction. There are also words that in the intransitive might not take a 1st person subject but that would with a transitive. For example, think of poso:ni and poso:nia (also poso:naltia). One cannot say niposo:nis. So poso:ni would be entered under poso:nis. But poso:nia can take a human agent: nicposo:ni:s. Entering by stem keeps these two entries close. There is also the example of posteki (intransitive) vs. posteki (transitive). By entering most common inflected form the first would be postekis (although one can say, less commonly, nipostekis 'I'll get a broken bone'). However, for the transitive nikpostekis (or ? nitlapostekis). Speakers might be confused in looking up posteki when for some this usually takes an inanimate subject and for others it can take an human subject. There are probably a lot of verbs like this, that are most common with 3rd-person inanimate and less common with human subject. A question, then, is it easier to create a dictionary- look-up culture based on stems, or have speakers look back and forth between ni- and zero- subjects? There is also the problem of directionals, etc. If I ask a speaker to say 'fall over' the answer will be (at least in the Balsas) niwetsis (let's say). But if I ask for the way to say 'to fall down (i.e., off of something) the answer will be niwa:lwetsis or nonwetsis. Again, there might be a reason to keep all these entries together. What of the case such as o:nemiko 's/he was born'. The future is wa:lnemis 's/he will be born.' Speakers will need to know that they are equivalent. Another example: te:mowa 'to look for'. With a specific object in the Balsas it is always reduplicated: niktehte:mo:s 'I'll look for it' but with the meaning of 'sabanear' (to go out looking for animals) it takes a directional, nonspecific object, and no reduplication: nontlate:mo:s. There is also the question of when to give a reflexive a distinct entry. Thus nimomikti:s 'I will kill myself' could perhaps be listed under nikmikti:s 'I kill him/her/it.' But what of the cases when there is a significant semantic gap between the reflexive and nonreflexive, e.g, nihki:xti:s 'I will remove it' and nimoki:xti:s 'I will have a child who looks like me' (though also 'I will remove myself (from a task/cargo/unpleasant situation).' The question of impersonal passives (or whatever) such as tlawa:kis 'everything will dry up'; is this to be given a separate entry from wa:kis? Finally, there are modismos that are only found with third person verbs. For example -pan (y)ehko 'to have a bout of craziness' thus nopan yehko 'at times I get attacks (e.g., of epilepsy, etc.). Here both the future and non-3rd-person inflections are not used. Where would these be listed? Under nehkos? under (y)ehkos. But if the later then you'll be splitting the verb entry and covering up an important relationship. Anyway, I think that the problem is quite complex and what at first glance might appear to be a speaker-centered solution in the long run might not be. Jonathan Quoting "Frye, David" : > On the other hand, there is no reason why you couldn't list the verbs > in the same way that most English-English dict's list English verbs, > i.e. by the standard form (which could very well be the future) > followed by other relevant forms. E.g. "write (vb), wrote, written," > etc. In this case, "temoz (vb), temo" could be one entry, and "temoz > (vb), temoa" could be another. > > david > > ________________________________ > > From: Nahua language and culture discussion on behalf of Frances > Karttunen > Sent: Tue 2/15/2005 2:59 PM > To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU > Subject: Re: dictionary verb citations > > > > > My questions is, why didn't Molina and his successors use this as > the > > dictionary headword form? > > One reason is that one can form the future from the present by > regular > rules, but future forms are ambiguous. Since the final vowel is > dropped > from Class 2 and 3 (b and c) verbs in the future, one can > hypothesize > more than one possible stem for a verb that ends in iz or oz. > Leaving > aside contrastive vowel length for a moment, is temoz from > invariant > temo or from temoa? Is yoliz form yoli or yolia? > > Fran > > > Jonathan D. Amith Center for Latin American Studies University of Chicago 5848 S. University Ave. Kelly Hall, Room 305 Chicago, IL 60637 773/834-9753 From idiez at MAC.COM Thu Feb 17 21:34:21 2005 From: idiez at MAC.COM (idiez at MAC.COM) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 15:34:21 -0600 Subject: ordinal numbers Message-ID: Listeros, A while ago I sent a message asking if anyone knew how to do ordinal numbers in some variant of Modern Nahuatl. Well, today I found out how to do it. Since the learning process was interesting I'll start from the beginning. We were having a discussion in the native speakers' class, and Angel, who is from Veracruz, said to another student, "Xicompohui.", which he said means, "Do it again", or "Repeat that action." Eliazar, who is from Hidalgo, said that in his town, you say, "Xiconpahui." This is ok, because in many cases in Veracruz, an "a" before the round consonant "hu", is pronounced as or becomes an "o". So we analyzed the word, and we got: ome (two) + pa (times) = ompa (twice). ompa + huia (applicative suffix) = ompahuia, nic. (to apply s.t. twice, to do s.t twice) Then the kids remembered (after two years of my asking them), the ordinal numbers: achtohui (for both regions), first ompohui/ompahui, second expohui/expahui, third nauhpohui/nauhpahui, fourth macuilpohui/macuilpahui, quinto etc., etc., John John Sullivan, Ph.D. Profesor de lengua y cultura nahua Unidad Académica de Idiomas Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Director Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas, A.C. Tacuba 152, int. 47 Centro Histórico Zacatecas, Zac. 98000 México Oficina: +52 (492) 925-3415 Fax: +52 (492) 925-3416 Domicilio: +52 (492) 768-6048 Celular: +52 (492) 544-5985 idiez at mac.com www.idiez.org.mx From micc2 at COX.NET Sat Feb 19 02:17:51 2005 From: micc2 at COX.NET (micc2@cox.net) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 18:17:51 -0800 Subject: ordinal numbers In-Reply-To: <2517bb222841335bff4ee7df5ef146f7@mac.com> Message-ID: Piali to all! I am trying to contact Jeff Burnham. He was my first Nahuatl instructor, and I believe now he does editorial work. Does anyone know his e-mail address? Tlazo'camati!!! > From campbel at INDIANA.EDU Sat Feb 19 02:55:43 2005 From: campbel at INDIANA.EDU (r. joe campbell) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:55:43 -0500 Subject: ordinal numbers In-Reply-To: <4216A1CF.3080908@cox.net> Message-ID: Mariohtzin, The last address I have for Jeff, he was at University of Oklahoma Press at jburnham at ou.edu. Am I out of date and out of touch? Saludos, Joe On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, micc2 at cox.net wrote: > I am trying to contact Jeff Burnham. He was my first Nahuatl > instructor, and I believe now he does editorial work. > Does anyone know his e-mail address? > From micc2 at COX.NET Sat Feb 19 22:55:17 2005 From: micc2 at COX.NET (micc2@cox.net) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:55:17 -0800 Subject: ordinal numbers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Tlazo'camati Joe, that is the last address I also had. But when I sent a message, it returned as undeliverable. Maybe wrote it wrong. I will try again. r. joe campbell wrote: >Mariohtzin, > > The last address I have for Jeff, he was at University of Oklahoma >Press at jburnham at ou.edu. Am I out of date and out of touch? > >Saludos, > >Joe > > >On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, micc2 at cox.net wrote: > > > >>I am trying to contact Jeff Burnham. He was my first Nahuatl >>instructor, and I believe now he does editorial work. >>Does anyone know his e-mail address? >> >> >> > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Irene.Padilla at FMC-NA.COM Mon Feb 28 22:09:40 2005 From: Irene.Padilla at FMC-NA.COM (Irene Padilla) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 14:09:40 -0800 Subject: Another translation/pronunciation Message-ID: Can I get some help w/this? Always on my mind and forever in my heart. Thanks ~Irene -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: