From HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com  Sat Apr  4 07:09:20 2009
From: HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com (HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 03:09:20 EDT
Subject: Mesoamerican Musical Workshop
Message-ID: <SAT.4.APR.2009.030920.EDT.>

Greetings Listeros,

     My friends of the musical group TRIBU who specialize in Mesoamerican 
music and instruments will put on a workshop free to the public from April 13 to 
april 16, 2009. The title of the workshop will be presented in Spanish at the 
historic "Héroes de Nacozari" Center in Querétero, Querétero, Mexico. The 
title of the workshop is "La música en Mesoamérica". TRIBU asked me to share this 
announcement with all people interested in indigenous culture. There is a 
flyer that I include as an attachment. If it does not come through on the list 
serve please e-mail me in the next few days and I will send it to you as a 
separate e-mail.

Sincerely,
Henry Vásquez



 


**************
Hurry! April 15th is almost here. File your Federal taxes FREE 
with TaxACT. 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220239440x1201335902/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.taxact.com%2F08tax.asp%3Fsc%3D084102950001%26p%3D82)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090404/7144946e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TallerenQuerétaro.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 312320 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090404/7144946e/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Mon Apr  6 12:25:02 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:25:02 -0400
Subject: Wired Humanities Project
Message-ID: <MON.6.APR.2009.082502.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

From: "Robert Haskett" <rhaskett at uoregon.edu>
Date: April 6, 2009


Dear national and international colleagues,

(Please excuse any duplication.) I am writing to alert the Mesoamericanist
community to a situation at the University of Oregon that threatens the integrity, and perhaps the survival, of the Wired Humanities Project. At risk are not only WHPs digital Mesoamerican projects, such as the Mapas Project close study of indigenous pictorial manuscripts; http://mapas.uoregon.edu/), the Virtual Mesoamerican Archive finding aid (http://vma.uoregon.edu/), and the online Nahuatl Vocabulary (http://whp.uoregon.edu/NahVocab/), but WHP is currently in the process of adding six sixteenth-century manuscripts to the Mapas Project.  WHP wwas also just beginning to clone and adapt these Mesoamerican projects for use in studies about Asia, medieval Europe, and indigenous cultures of the U.S.  Despite the success of WHP and its ability to win significant grants from agencies such as the NEH and NSF (almost $750,000 since 2006), internal university support is on the brink of disappearing, or at least of being reduced to a level that would make the survival of WHP problem!
 atic.  This situation is not merely monetary in nature (a forced retirement, 100% reduction in support to a technical assistant, more than 50% cuts to graduate students, slashing of office space, etc.), but stems as well from a drive to subordinate WHP to a campus unit whose leadership intends to radically alter its mission, rather than to nurture its successes. If you are willing to make a statement in support of the broader importance of the online resources or in support of the continued leadership and vision of Stephanie Wood at WHP, this would be very helpful.  It is my goal to get these comments to the Vice President for Research, who may be able to reverse the cuts. Here is the link for making your comments: 
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=3DYfayu7axnjRf5AZ23wrUnA_3d_3d

Thank you so much for considering this.
Robert Haskett
Professor of History
University of Oregon
rhaskett at uoregon.edu



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr  8 14:19:17 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 10:19:17 -0400
Subject: Moctezuma exhibit at British Museum
Message-ID: <WED.8.APR.2009.101917.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Date: 7 Apr 2009
From: "michael ruggeri" <michaelruggeri at mac.com>

Listeros,

Erik Boot has an extensive posting on the Moctezuma exhibit opening at  
the British Museum in September. I am reproducing his posts for you  
here;

Ancient MesoAmerica News Updates 2009, No. 8: London, England - More  
Information on the Upcoming Exhibition "Moctezuma" at The British Museum
Today, Tuesday April 7, 2009, the online edition of the daily British  
newspaper The Telegraph posted an extensive note on the upcoming  
exhibition entitled "Moctezuma: Aztec Ruler" at The British Museum.  
The exhibition will be shown at the museum from September 25, 2009, to  
January 24, 2010. It will feature an alternative rendering of the  
final moments in the life of Moctezuma, supported by two small images  
from 16th century manuscripts: He was killed by the Spaniards, not his  
own people (edited by AMaNU) (photo: The Telegraph/AP: Aztec mosaic  
mask, probably a potrait of Xiuhtecuhtli):
Moctezuma, last Aztec ruler 'was no traitor', British Museum  
exhibition to claim - Moctezuma, the last ruler of the Aztec empire,  
was not a traitor who sold out to the Spanish conquistadors, a new  
British Museum exhibition will claim later this year. To date, history  
has cast him as the man who ceded his empire to the Spanish in 1520  
largely without a fight. However, evidence never before presented in  
public in Britain will show that he was humiliated before his people  
by being paraded in chains, supporting an alternative theory that  
power was wrested from his grasp.
Two portraits from the 1560s will show that he was bound in chains and  
rope before being paraded on a balcony. Colin McEwan, curator at the  
British Museum, said it was likely that the conventional picture of  
Moctezuma as a willing agent of colonial rule had been painted by the  
Spanish victors.
He thought the version of events indicated by the 1560s manuscripts –  
which were produced by indigenous scribes under Spanish patronage –  
was "probably closer to what actually happened".
He argued: "Is it likely that a feared military ruler just completely  
changes his complexion and weakly and willingly subjects himself to  
ceding his empire to the Spanish? Is that plausible?"
Moctezuma came to power in 1502, ruling over one of the day's largest  
and most advanced civilisations, which straddled much of Central  
America from the Caribbean to the Pacific. While the Aztec empire was  
at its zenith, its politics were fragile. Moctezuma consolidated power  
by heavily taxing his subjects, in the form of raw materials or  
precious art works. One such object is thought to be the turquoise,  
gold foil and mother of pearl mask that will go on display in the  
exhibition.
Consequently the Spanish found it easy to find high-powered enemies of  
the emperor among his ranks, said Neil MacGregor, director of the  
British Museum. He said: "What is so interesting is that this is an  
empire that is at the top of its form when it falls. The way it was  
constructed made it vulnerable because it made it easy for the Spanish  
to recruit disaffected allies." Ironically, the lasting picture of  
Moctezuma as a turncoat meant he has become more celebrated more in  
Europe than in Mexico, noted Mr McEwan.
Moctezuma: Aztec Ruler, which opens in September, is the fourth and  
last exhibition in a British Museum series about great historical  
rulers. It began two years ago with The First Emperor, which brought a  
small selection of China's Terracotta Army to London. That coup earned  
the museum 850,000 visitors over seven months. Last summer Hadrian:  
Empire and Conflict attracted 244,000 over three months while 50,000  
have seen the third, about the Iranian ruler Shah Abbas, since it  
opened in February (written by Stephen Adams; source Telegraph).
The British Museum now has a special website on which further  
information, relevant to the exhibition, can be found: Moctezuma:  
Aztec Ruler. It features, for instance, a link to the full press  
release.
Another British newspaper, The Guardian, provided the following online  
report on the upcoming exhibition (edited by AMaNU) (photo: The  
Guardian/Museo de America, Madrid: Detail from Enconchado 16, by Juan  
y Miguel Gonzalez, A.D. 1698, Moctezuma shown on the balcony):

New exhibition challenges view of Aztec emperor Moctezuma as traitor -  
Contrary to popular belief, the Aztec emperor Moctezuma was murdered  
by his Spanish captors and not by his own people, the British Museum  
will argue in a new exhibition that will try to rehabilitate the  
emperor's image as a traitor.
The exhibition will bring together spectacular loans from Europe,  
where the Spanish conquistadors brought many of the Aztecs' greatest  
treasures, and from Mexico, where recently excavated relics from the  
lost civilisation continue to be found under its modern capital,  
Mexico City. Scientific tests on objects including a spectacular  
turquoise mask, from the British Museum's own collection, show that in  
a single piece, the gold, precious stone and feather decorations were  
drawn from many different places. "What we are trying to do is look at  
an absolutely key moment in the history of the world through the  
filter of one man," museum director Neil MacGregor said. "There has  
never been an exhibition on this man, a great emperor of an extremely  
sophisticated empire in ways which seemed very strange to European  
eyes."
The traditional account of the death of Moctezuma – the museum has  
adopted the spelling as closer to his name in his own Nahuatl language  
than the more common Montezuma – is that having been taken a willing  
hostage by Hernán Cortés and the conquistadors, he was killed by his  
own outraged people.
According to several versions of the story, in 1520, the Spanish  
brought him out onto a balcony of his own palace to try and calm the  
riotous mob, but he was pelted with stones and killed. One Spanish  
account, written years later, even insists that he refused medical  
help and food from his Spanish captors, who "spoke very kindly to  
him", before suddenly dying.
However, the exhibition will include two small images from later  
manuscripts, one now in Glasgow, one in Mexico, both probably made by  
Aztecs working for Spanish patrons, which show the leader distinctly  
less kindly treated, brought out with a rope around his neck, or  
shackled. Once the Aztecs began to revolt against the presence of the  
Spanish in their capital city, Tenochtitlan, this version suggests,  
Moctezuma was useless to them, so they killed him before just managing  
to escape with their lives.
"Moctezuma is the last in our series on great rulers and their  
legacies and presents perhaps one of the most fascinating examples of  
implosion of power and the clash of civilisations," MacGregor said.  
The series included China's first emperor, Qin, the Roman emperor  
Hadrian, the wall builder, and the 16th-century Iranian ruler Shah  
Abbas. While there were writings by, and many contemporary accounts  
of, the characters, curator Colin McEwan admitted that authentic  
personal details about Moctezuma are so scarce that one academic he  
consulted said he thought the exhibition would be impossible.
"We will raise many questions but we may not succeed in answering them  
all," Mc Ewan said. The exhibition, with a related show of 20th- 
century revolutionary posters and images opening in October, with both  
running into next year, will mark both the bicentenary of Mexico's  
declaration of independence from Spain in 1810, and of the Mexican  
Revolution 100 years later (written by Maev Kennedy; sourceThe  
Guardian).

Mike Ruggeri

The British Museum Link on the Exhibit;

http://www.britishmuseum.org/whats_on/future_exhibitions/moctezuma.aspx


Erik Boot's Ancient  Mesoamerican News Updates
http://ancient-mesoamerica-news-updates.blogspot.com/

Mike Ruggeri's Ancient America Museum Exhibitions, Conferences and  
Lectures
http://tinyurl.com/c9mlao

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr  8 19:11:20 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 15:11:20 -0400
Subject: Readings on Moctezuma
Message-ID: <WED.8.APR.2009.151120.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Date: 8 Apr 2009
From: "Michael Smith" <Michael.E.Smith.2 at asu.edu>

I haven't seen the new Moctezuma exhibit, but readers who want to read 
some of the recent "revisionist" scholarship on the Mexica king can look 
at some of the following works:

Burkhart, Louise M.
2008 Meeting the Enemy: Moteuczoma and Cortés, Herod and the Magi. In 
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the 
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A. 
Jackson, pp. 11-24. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Fernández-Armesto, Felipe
1992 "Aztec" Auguries and Memories of the Conquest of Mexico. 
Renaissance Studies 6:287-305.

Gillespie, Susan D.
2008 Blaming Moteuczoma: Anthropomorphizing the Aztec Conquest. In 
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the 
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A. 
Jackson, pp. 25-56. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Smith, Michael E.
2005 Motecuhzoma II. In Berkshire Encyclopedia of World History, edited 
by William H. McNeill, pp. 1302-1303, vol. 3. Berkshire Publishing, 
Great Barrington, MA. Available at:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-05-MoctEncyc.pdf

Townsend, Camilla
2003 Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico. 
American Historical Review 108:659-687.

Townsend, Camilla
2003 No One Said it was Quetzalcoatl: Listening to the Indians in the 
Conquest of Mexico. History Compass 1:1-14.

Mike

Dr. Michael E. Smith
Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Arizona State University
www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Fri Apr 10 12:09:08 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:09:08 -0400
Subject: Translation request
Message-ID: <FRI.10.APR.2009.080908.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>


*From:* ripken1 at gmail.com
Date: April 10, 2009

All,
I have a very interesting Nahuatl broadside printed in 1766 in Mexico that I
need translated. It is one page. If you are qualified, please contact me 
off line.
Thanks.
Brian Murphy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090410/d8e5f89a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Sat Apr 11 00:49:23 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:49:23 +0200
Subject: Atotoztli
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.024923.0200.>

Who was Atotoztli?

According to Wikipedia, she was the daughter of Nauhyotzin, tlahtoani of
Colhuacan from 1377, or 2 Calli. (Lehmann 1938, p.173).

Other sources, like Clavigero, mentioned her as daughter of Achitometl, the
last tlahtoani of Colhuacan, who became that in 1336, or 13 Tecpatl, after
murdering Acamapichtli the Old.

Chimalpahin, on the other hand, pretended that she was the daughter of
Coxcoxtli, tlahtoani of Colhuacan in 1281, or 10 calli (Chim.3, 38f,76r.).

Apparently (cfr.Wikipedia) she was was the wife of Opochtli Iztahuatzin, a
Mexicah chief, the so called father of the first tlahtoani of Tenochtitlan,
Acamapichtli Itzpapolotl, but in the Anales of Tlatelolco she was mentioned
as the wife of Acamapichtli the Old, tlahtoani of Colhuacan. 

I know that the tlahtoani of both cities sometimes had many wifes but that
is a little bit to confusing I think.

Lahun Ik 62 

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/1ab6956f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 11 05:07:11 2009
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:07:11 +0000
Subject: Atotoztli
In-Reply-To: <CF33EDDD9A024B14919755528ADD7024@baert>
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.050711.0000.>

--- On Sat, 11/4/09, lahunik.62 at skynet.be <lahunik.62 at skynet.be> wrote:
> Who was Atotoztli? According to Wikipedia, ...

Etymology: "Atotoztli" seems to look like [a_tl] = "water" + [toto_tz(a)] = "to hurry (something) along".

Perhaps more than one person was named Atototzli.

Citlalyani

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/9e3c17fa/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From macehual08 at gmail.com  Sat Apr 11 06:29:45 2009
From: macehual08 at gmail.com (macehual08 at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:29:45 -0400
Subject: studies of "olin"
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.022945.0400.MACEHUAL08@GMAIL.COM>

Could anyone point me in a direction toward information about "olin" (as a
concept, a glyph, a word, etc.) I would be interested in any material,
linguistic, philosophical approach to olin.
I'd appreciate any titles of books or articles (in Spanish, French or
English)--or even suggestions for researching the topic. You may e-mail me
directly with any hunches.

Thanks!
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/7cfd8073/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From gwhitta at gwdg.de  Mon Apr 13 08:04:43 2009
From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:04:43 +0200
Subject: Olin
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1239555601.11481.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <MON.13.APR.2009.100443.0200.GWHITTA@GWDG.DE>

Dear Paul,

A paper devoted entirely to Olin (but focused on the aspect related to
earthquakes) has been published recently in the journal Indiana and can be
downloaded at:
<http://www.iai.spk-berlin.de/publikationen/indiana/bisherige-ausgaben/indiana-23.html>.

It's in German, but this is a hurdle to be overcome if you need
information on Olin for academic purposes.

Here are the refs.:

Thiemer-Sachse, Ursula
Olin. Zur Bedeutung von Erdbeben und deren Registrierung bei den Azteken.
Indiana 23 (2006): 309-344.

It is the most detailed study of Olin available, as far as I am aware.
However, the definitive study of the subject, which would require a
thorough command of Nahuatl and of Nahuatl writing and iconography, has
yet to be written.

I hope this helps.

Best,
Gordon


> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:29:45 -0400
> From: "macehual08 at gmail.com" <macehual08 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] studies of "olin"
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>
> Could anyone point me in a direction toward information about "olin" (as a
> concept, a glyph, a word, etc.) I would be interested in any material,
> linguistic, philosophical approach to olin.
> I'd appreciate any titles of books or articles (in Spanish, French or
> English)--or even suggestions for researching the topic. You may e-mail me
> directly with any hunches.
>
> Thanks!
> Paul


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gordon Whittaker
Professor
Linguistische Anthropologie und Altamerikanistik
Seminar fuer Romanische Philologie
Universitaet Goettingen
Humboldtallee 19
37073 Goettingen
Germany
tel./fax (priv.): ++49-5594-89333
tel. (office): ++49-551-394188
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Mon Apr 13 19:56:13 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:56:13 -0400
Subject: [Aztlan] Ball game question
Message-ID: <MON.13.APR.2009.155613.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Dear Pedro,

   Frank is right about the root for "tlachco" being <tlach> -- that's 
implied in my notation in a prior message: "tlach(tli)".  Sometimes I 
forget to repeat that I refer to noun stems in Nahuatl with their 
absolutive suffixes attached -- I think that makes them more quickly 
recognizable.  On the other hand, "tlachtli" has no linguistic relation 
to 'rubber'.  Further, roots don't 'produce' words with another meaning 
by the addition of the absolutive suffix.

   With regard to the claimed relationship between "tlachia" and 
"chia", there are two schools of thought.  "Chia" means 'wait for' and 
some people believe that the "tla-" prefix fused onto it, producing an 
intransitive stem: "tlachia" ('to look, gaze). Some other people 
believe that "chia" and "tlachia" are simply independent stems/roots.
   In any case, "chia" has nothing to do with 'to make' -- that's the 
job of "chihua" (where there is a /w/ in the  i_a  slot).  Actually, 
when I say 'nothing to do with', that's not fair to the dialect of 
Nahuatl spoken along the coast in Michoacan -- it has forms of <chiwa / 
chihua> in which there is homophony with forms of <chia>.

   Your remark about "tlachiaya" and "coa" / "cohua" points to a need 
to clarify what is going on with "ia" vs. "iya" and "oa" vs. "ohua".  
In both "older" Nahuatl and in modern Nahuatl, there is no phonetic 
(i.e., pronunciation) distinction between these pairs.  In the well 
known modern dialects and in the Nahuatl contained in the works of 
Molina and Sahagun, "y" is deleted after "i" when another vowel 
follows, just as "w" (spelled "hu") is deleted after "o" when another 
vowel follows.  On the other hand, some dialect *insert* "y" after "i" 
and "w" ("hu") after "o" in these sequences.
   So it seem that sequences like "ia" and "iya" (like "oa" and "ohua") 
cannot be distinguished...?  But it *is* possible if we look at the 
variable behavior of relevant stems:

   nitlachia  I gaze         ninihtotia    I dance
  onitlachix  I gazed        oninihtotih   I danced

   niccoa     I buy it       nitlahcuiloa  I write
  oniccouh    I bought it   onitlahcuiloh  I wrote

   The appearance of final "x" ("sh") and "uh" ("w") in "chia" and 
"cohua" betrays the presence of a "y" and "w", respectively, in 
"tlachia" and "coa", whereas "ihtotia" and "tlahcuiloa" behave 
otherwise, simple dropping their "a" and adding "-h".  In other words, 
"ihtotia" and "tlahcuiloa" really do end in a sequence of two vowels, 
but "tlachia" and "niccoa" have a surreptitious consonant before their 
final vowel!!

All the best,

Joe

p.s.  I brought our discussion back to Nahuat-l, since I thought it was 
of general interest.


Dear Professor Campbell

I spoke to my nawatl teacher Frank Diaz, the root for Tlachko is Tlach, it
produces the noun Tlachtli "Rubber" , in the other hand the word Tlachia
observe comes form the word Chia to make and when we add Tla as an
acentuation is tranformed to Tlachia observe, to see with atention.
Tlachiaya is a derivation like koa produces kowa in certain areas.

good day

Pedro


----- Original Message -----
From: "Campbell, R. Joe" <campbel at indiana.edu>
To: "John F. Schwaller" <schwallr at potsdam.edu>
Cc: "Pedro de Eguiluz" <temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org>;
<aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Aztlan] Ball game question


>  Further, the verb "tlachiya" (or, in its frequent spelling, "tlachia") is
> not related to the noun "tlachtli".  Word pieces are assumed to be the
> 'same' piece (morphemes) when they share enough in both form (phonological
> composition) and content (meaning).  A proposed relationship should also
> be credible within observed formal variations of both members of a
> morpheme.
>
>  "tlachiya" never loses enough of its basic shape to allow us to identify
> it with "tlach(tli)".  While it *does* lose the /y/ segment in most
> Nahuatl dialects (after /i/ -- just as /w/ is lost after /o/) and the /a/
> sometimes lost, the /i/ is never lost (i.e., the stem never shortens to
> "tlach...".
> The fact that "tlachiya" actually *does* have an underlying /y/ is obvious
> in the preterite where the /y/ shows up as 'x' "(o)nitlachix" 'I saw' and
> the nominal derivation "tlachixqui" 'sentinel', where the /y/ undergoes a
> general syllable-final change to 'x' (pronounced sh).
>
>  This fact about the form of "tlachiya" is fatal to its proposed
> relationship with "tlachtli", but on the semantic/content side, it would
> also fail.  Where could we find evidence for the relationship between
> 'seeing' and 'contest'?
> Obviously, in modern cultures, 'spectators' are tightly associated with
> 'games'.
> There wouldn't be nearly as many contestants as there are in all our
> modern contests if the pool of spectators disappeared.  But that's not the
> point --
> the question is whether we can identify a relationship between 'seeing'
> and 'contest' in the community where "tlachiya" might have given rise to
> "tlachtli'.
>
> Iztayohmeh,
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> Quoting "John F. Schwaller" <schwallr at potsdam.edu>:
>
>> You have the words somewhat reversed:
>>
>> Tlachtli is the ball game
>>
>> Tlachco is the place where it is played.
>>
>>
>>
>> Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
>>> Ball Game in classic nawatl is Tlachko, in the middle of
>>> Tenochtitlan there was one called Teotlachko "Divine Game court".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the clues that lead us to the origins of this game being
>>> astronomic observation, comes from the verbal form of the word
>>> Tlachtli "Ball game", Tlachia "Observe, see". It was used to say
>>> Ilwikakpa nitlachia "I look at the sky". "Observation post" was
>>> Tlachialoyan.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pedro
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Aztlan mailing list
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
>>> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
>>> Click to view Calendar of Events
>>> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> John F. Schwaller
>> President
>> SUNY - Potsdam
>> 44 Pierrepont Ave.
>> Potsdam, NY  13676
>> Tel. 315-267-2100
>> FAX 315-267-2496
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aztlan mailing list
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
>> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
>> Click to view Calendar of Events
>> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



----- End forwarded message -----


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Tue Apr 14 17:16:48 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:16:48 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 123, Issue 5
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2.1239469202.6503.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <TUE.14.APR.2009.121648.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

For a great interpretation of the interrelation of the different accounts of
the identity of Atotoztli I would reccommend reading Susan Gillespies "The
Aztec Kings". In chapter 3 she describes how the name of Atotoztli was
apparently frequently used for examples of a dynasty founding queen in
central mexican nahua myth-history.


Magnus Pharao Hansen
Cuernavaca


>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Atotoztli (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
>   2. Re: Atotoztli (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: <lahunik.62 at skynet.be>
> To: "Aztlan" <aztlan at lists.famsi.org>, "Nahuatl List" <
> nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:49:23 +0200
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Atotoztli
>
> *Who was Atotoztli?*
>
> *According to Wikipedia, she was the daughter of Nauhyotzin, tlahtoani of
> Colhuacan from 1377, or 2 Calli. (Lehmann 1938, p.173).*
>
> *Other sources, like Clavigero, mentioned her as daughter of Achitometl,
> the last tlahtoani of Colhuacan, who became that in 1336, or 13 Tecpatl,
> after murdering Acamapichtli the Old.*
>
> *Chimalpahin, on the other hand, pretended that she was the daughter of
> Coxcoxtli, tlahtoani of Colhuacan in 1281, or 10 calli (Chim.3, 38f,76r.).
> *
>
> *Apparently (cfr.Wikipedia) she was was the wife of Opochtli Iztahuatzin,
> a Mexicah chief, the so called father of the first tlahtoani of **
> Tenochtitlan**, Acamapichtli Itzpapolotl, but in the Anales of Tlatelolco
> she was mentioned as the wife of Acamapichtli the Old, tlahtoani of
> Colhuacan. *
>
> *I know that the tlahtoani of both cities sometimes had many wifes but
> that is a little bit to confusing I think.*
>
> *Lahun Ik 62 *
>
> *Baert Georges*
>
> *Flanders** Fields*
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: ANTHONY APPLEYARD <a.appleyard at btinternet.com>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:07:11 +0000 (GMT)
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Atotoztli
> --- On Sat, 11/4/09, lahunik.62 at skynet.be <lahunik.62 at skynet.be> wrote:
> > Who was Atotoztli? According to Wikipedia, ...
>
> Etymology: "Atotoztli" seems to look like [a_tl] = "water" + [toto_tz(a)] =
> "to hurry (something) along".
>
> Perhaps more than one person was named Atototzli.
>
> Citlalyani
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090414/248ee821/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Wed Apr 15 19:05:02 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:05:02 +0200
Subject: Codex Mendoza
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.210502.0200.>

I want to thank everyone who gave me information about Atotoztli, a name
given to many wives in the Mexicah history.

Could anyone give me the name of a website where one could download all the
pages or the folios of the Codex Mendoza.

Thanks anyway.  

Lahun Ik 62

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090415/b5f815e8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr 15 19:28:29 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:28:29 -0400
Subject: Codex Mendoza
In-Reply-To: <061F8B890A894B12A81F109062B41E91@baert>
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.152829.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

I do not know about online.  The full codex is available in print from 
the University of California Press, edited by Frances Berdan and 
Patricia Anawalt.  There is also an economy paperback edition which has 
most of the illustrations, but not all.



lahunik.62 at skynet.be wrote:
>
> /I want to thank everyone who gave me information about Atotoztli, a 
> name given to many wives in the Mexicah history./
>
> /Could anyone give me the name of a website where one could download 
> all the pages or the folios of the Codex //Mendoza//./
>
> /Thanks anyway.  /
>
> /Lahun Ik 62/
>
> /Baert Georges/
>
> /Flanders// Fields/
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   


-- 
*****************************
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY - Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676
Tel. 315-267-2100
FAX 315-267-2496

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090415/734fc69e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From bortiz at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 15 21:09:52 2009
From: bortiz at earthlink.net (Bernard Ortiz de Montellano)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:09:52 -0500
Subject: e-mail change
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.160952.0500.BORTIZ@EARTHLINK.NET>

Dear Sirs please change my e-mail from bortiz at earthlink.net to bortizdem at gmail.com

Thanks

Bernard Ortiz de Montellano
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Thu Apr 16 17:45:47 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:45:47 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <THU.16.APR.2009.124547.0500.>

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee�s recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  
 
Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below�
 
http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
  
 
Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content of the Mappe Quinatzin.
 
1.  Lee states:  �According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl.�  Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to reconcile the various reports of the tribute and service system of Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns. 
 
2. Lee tells us:  �Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2 appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl established.�   Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59) carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of Teotihuacan. 
 
To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as evident and important as someone writing about �the eleven apostles� and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001. Lee�s investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We therefore cannot rely on Lee�s description of the content of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources or on Lee�s reporting on more than a century of later, better investigations.
 
Lee is not entitled to his own set of �facts.�  He has set the clock back on interpretation of this document more than a century and presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political structure.
 
Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 will be pointed out in a subsequent post.



Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090416/3755d8b2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Apr 16 19:23:40 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:23:40 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094416174547531@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <THU.16.APR.2009.152340.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Mr. Offner:

I can't speak for the rest of this list, but I've found your critiques 
of Lee's work on Nezahualcoyotl way beyond the pale. I don't quite get 
it, don't quite get all this jumping and screaming. I find it 
suspicious, in fact.

You made your point in your first posting on this topic, and that was 
sufficient. I'm interested in the topic, but no longer interested in 
anything you have to say on it.

The next time your name pops up on my screen, off it goes.

Cualli ohtli,

Michael McCaffertyu


Quoting Jerry Offner <ixtlil at earthlink.net>:

> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee’s recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> Nahuatl.
>
> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below—
>
> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>
>
> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>
> 1.  Lee states:  “According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl.”  Everyone else who
> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> reconcile the various reports of the tribute and service system of
> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>
> 2. Lee tells us:  “Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> established.”   Everyone else who has examined this document,
> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> Teotihuacan.
>
> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> evident and important as someone writing about “the eleven apostles”
> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> Lee’s investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
> therefore cannot rely on Lee’s description of the content of the
> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> or on Lee’s reporting on more than a century of later, better
> investigations.
>
> Lee is not entitled to his own set of “facts.”  He has set the clock
> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> structure.
>
> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>
>
>
> Jerry Offner
> ixtlil at earthlink.net




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Fri Apr 17 17:24:40 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:24:40 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122440.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

Dear List

Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final "e", for example two stones is Ontetl. 

 

With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.

 

In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read ".the first cause, called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three dignities"



This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few people in the world undestand it, if any.



Regards



Pedro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/9a92030f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 17:53:19 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:53:19 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <1E70F0C418A743EA9EC3FAB45AA6725D@eguiluz>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.105319.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

Dear Pedro,

While it would seem that this analysis could be valid, there are  
examples of where the numerical is not treated to the loss of the final 
part:

nahuiollin or nahui ollin.

perhaps out of convention or style the name ome teotl became one word?

What do you have as proof of ....."This conception of this trinity an[d] 
the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica"?

I have seen one, two, four, eight, 13, 52, etc., spoken of as being 
significant often,  but I cannot remember any pre-conquest allusions to 
a "trinity"

Duality (twins, life, death...) yes.... trinity... I have not seen it

Please let me know your citations.

If there are post-conquest allusions to a trinity,  I believe that that 
would be a negotiation of theology by the indigenous people to

conform their world view to a Christian view imposed by the Spanish.

When we look at post-conquest writings (especially 1530-1690) we need to 
look for resilient negotiation and bicultural meaning when indigenous
informants speak of the divine.


respectfully,

Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org




Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
> Dear List
>  
>
> Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we 
> join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final 
> "e", for example two stones is Ontetl.
>
>  
>
> With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it 
> looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it 
> looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and 
> teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.
>
>  
>
> In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read "...the first cause, 
> called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three 
> dignities"
>
>  
>
> This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all 
> the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived 
> with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and 
> destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher 
> conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few 
> people in the world undestand it, if any.
>
>  
>
> Regards
>
>  
>
> Pedro
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/56173cd7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From ipedrozar at gmail.com  Fri Apr 17 18:11:17 2009
From: ipedrozar at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Iv=E1n_Pedroza?=)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:11:17 -0600
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <49E8C20F.90506@cox.net>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.121117.0600.IPEDROZAR@GMAIL.COM>

I agree with Mario. All symbols are  conceived as dual: Tonacatecuhtli,
Tonacacihuatl; Tlaloctlamacazqui, Chalchiuhtlicue; Mictecacihuatl,
Mictlatecuhtli and a long etcetera... I don't think we have much valid
evidence on such thing as "trinity"...

Besides, ome doesn't lose the E when composed with a suffix beginning with T
(as well as other letters), as in Ometepec...

And yet, yei-eyi is composed mostly (but not only) as "ex" like in expa,
excan...

I recommend Salvador Díaz Síntora's book *Meses y cielos
*where you can find a brilliant discussion about the meaning of numbers for
nahuatl philosophy..

Titottazqueh,

Iván Pedroza
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/73ffce86/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 19:20:02 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:20:02 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <1dde854d0904171206vbbdd9f0t5892959710bb956f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122002.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

Forgive my error of semantics,  I should have said: 

"Please let me know your references/sources"


cuix.......Somethings are incomprehensible because we attach our own values to them, and they do not fit what is out there.



Mario

Owen Thomas wrote:
> PEDRO the scholar; and those who read his comments
> Proof by references is a very European concept. I prefer to follow the
> concept of scholarly study of all sources and also follow the Nahuatl
> way of accepting all as equal. Indepemdent, dependent on one other,
> dependent on three, or all equal in Mexico. I respect all attempts to
> understand the incomprehensible.
>
> On 4/17/09, micc2 <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:
>   
>> Dear Pedro,
>>
>> While it would seem that this analysis could be valid, there are
>> examples of where the numerical is not treated to the loss of the final
>> part:
>>
>> nahuiollin or nahui ollin.
>>
>> perhaps out of convention or style the name ome teotl became one word?
>>
>> What do you have as proof of ....."This conception of this trinity an[d]
>> the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica"?
>>
>> I have seen one, two, four, eight, 13, 52, etc., spoken of as being
>> significant often,  but I cannot remember any pre-conquest allusions to
>> a "trinity"
>>
>> Duality (twins, life, death...) yes.... trinity... I have not seen it
>>
>> Please let me know your citations.
>>
>> If there are post-conquest allusions to a trinity,  I believe that that
>> would be a negotiation of theology by the indigenous people to
>>
>> conform their world view to a Christian view imposed by the Spanish.
>>
>> When we look at post-conquest writings (especially 1530-1690) we need to
>> look for resilient negotiation and bicultural meaning when indigenous
>> informants speak of the divine.
>>
>>
>> respectfully,
>>
>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
>>     
>>> Dear List
>>>
>>>
>>> Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we
>>> join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final
>>> "e", for example two stones is Ontetl.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it
>>> looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it
>>> looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and
>>> teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read "...the first cause,
>>> called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three
>>> dignities"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all
>>> the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived
>>> with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and
>>> destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher
>>> conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few
>>> people in the world undestand it, if any.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pedro
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nahuatl mailing list
>>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>>
>>>       
>
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/672b3cf1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 19:22:53 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:22:53 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <d9630e790904171111p9bee065g569e7572429ac6d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122253.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>



Iván Pedroza wrote:
> I agree with Mario. All symbols are  conceived as dual: 
> Tonacatecuhtli, Tonacacihuatl; Tlaloctlamacazqui, Chalchiuhtlicue; 
> Mictecacihuatl, Mictlatecuhtli and a long etcetera... I don't think we 
> have much valid evidence on such thing as "trinity"...
>
> Besides, ome doesn't lose the E when composed with a suffix beginning 
> with T (as well as other letters), as in Ometepec...
This change of ending can also be seen with verbs like "piya" -to hold, 
carry, or guard...  

The preterit becomes "pix" as in "teopixqueh"  Those that 
carry/guard/hold the god/divine"


Mario




>
> And yet, yei-eyi is composed mostly (but not only) as "ex" like in 
> expa, excan...
>
> I recommend Salvador Díaz Síntora's book /Meses y cielos
> /where you can find a brilliant discussion about the meaning of 
> numbers for nahuatl philosophy..
>
> Titottazqueh,
>
> Iván Pedroza
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/63dcfbf7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mwswanton at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 17 21:07:52 2009
From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:07:52 -0700
Subject: Readings on Moctezuma
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.140752.0700.MWSWANTON@YAHOO.COM>





I would
suggest adding the work of Antonio Aimi to this useful list of “revisionist”
scholarship on Moteuczoma.

 

Aimi, Antonio. 2002. La “vera” visione dei vinti: la Conquista
del Messico nelle fonti azteche. Roma: Bulzoni.

 

_____. 2001. Il retorno del Serpente Piumato: Cortés inventa
il più “famoso” dei miti aztetechi. Studi di letterature ispano-americane, 33:
7-43.

 

_____. 1996. I presagi della Conquista e la “hybris” di
Motecuhzoma: la “vera” visione dei vinti. Quaderni di letterature iberiche e
iberoamericane, 25: 23-64.

 



--- On Wed, 4/8/09, John F. Schwaller <schwallr at potsdam.edu> wrote:

From: John F. Schwaller <schwallr at potsdam.edu>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Readings on Moctezuma
To: "Nahuat-l ((messages))" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 3:11 PM

Date: 8 Apr 2009
From: "Michael Smith" <Michael.E.Smith.2 at asu.edu>

I haven't seen the new Moctezuma exhibit, but readers who want to read
some of the recent "revisionist" scholarship on the Mexica king can look
at some of the following works:

Burkhart, Louise M.
2008 Meeting the Enemy: Moteuczoma and Cortés, Herod and the Magi. In
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A.
Jackson, pp. 11-24. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Fernández-Armesto, Felipe
1992 "Aztec" Auguries and Memories of the Conquest of Mexico.
Renaissance Studies 6:287-305.

Gillespie, Susan D.
2008 Blaming Moteuczoma: Anthropomorphizing the Aztec Conquest. In
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A.
Jackson, pp. 25-56. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Smith, Michael E.
2005 Motecuhzoma II. In Berkshire Encyclopedia of World History, edited
by William H. McNeill, pp. 1302-1303, vol. 3. Berkshire Publishing,
Great Barrington, MA. Available at:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-05-MoctEncyc.pdf

Townsend, Camilla
2003 Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico.
American Historical Review 108:659-687.

Townsend, Camilla
2003 No One Said it was Quetzalcoatl: Listening to the Indians in the
Conquest of Mexico. History Compass 1:1-14.

Mike

Dr. Michael E. Smith
Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Arizona State University
www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/c1e64c0e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From campbel at indiana.edu  Sat Apr 18 03:21:36 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <d9630e790904171111p9bee065g569e7572429ac6d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.232136.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Pedro,

   Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
they were.  If they were, I might be a chemist.  But I'm glad I'm not.
I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.

   When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with.  If we are going to
entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
combination with others.

   An example:

   1) When I started the English translation and morphological
analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
in the future.
   I looked at Molina's entry:
     Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.

   The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
simple..." I thought).
  "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
'water-man, sailor'.
   But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
sailors?  And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
place less than pleased with their behavior.  That seemed like a
satisfactory semantic bridge to me.  So the behavior of water-persons
was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
behavior.

   Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
glottal stop as well --"ah-".  Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
human' = 'not human, bad'.  (It can be noted that I still don't
always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)


   The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
...and that there is always more to know.

................

   On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
be a single word, maybe a two word phrase.  There are other apparent
words might deceive us:

     coatlicue    name of a divinity
really: coatl i-cue  (her skirt is snakes)

     Coatlichan   name of a town
really  coatl i-chan (snake's house)

     Atlihuetzia  name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
really  atl i-huetziya(n)  (water's falling place -- waterfall)

.............................

   On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
before X" statement.

   "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc."   It happens too after the other
front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".

   As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):

   castolcan omexcan         in eighteen places
   cempoalpa omexpa.         twenty-three times
   chicuexpa.                eight times
   excampa nacaceh           triangular

   Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:

   epantli.                  three rows
   oc epoalcan               in another sixty places
   epoalilhuitl              sixty days


   Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi".  And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From rich_photos at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 18 20:42:22 2009
From: rich_photos at yahoo.com (rick dosan)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:42:22 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.134222.0700.RICHPHOTOS@YAHOO.COM>

There's an article by Richard Haly called "Bare Bones: Rethinking Moesoamerican Divinity" in which he suggests that Ometeotl is a God of Bones.   And an article by Una Canger and Karen Dakin from Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl, Oct. 1985, that says that according to the region, the word Bone could be Ometl, or Omitl. 

--- On Fri, 4/17/09, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:


From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
To: "Iván Pedroza" <ipedrozar at gmail.com>
Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 8:21 PM


Pedro,

   Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
they were.  If they were, I might be a chemist.  But I'm glad I'm not.
I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.

   When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with.  If we are going to
entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
combination with others.

   An example:

   1) When I started the English translation and morphological
analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
in the future.
   I looked at Molina's entry:
     Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.

   The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
simple..." I thought).
  "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
'water-man, sailor'.
   But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
sailors?  And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
place less than pleased with their behavior.  That seemed like a
satisfactory semantic bridge to me.  So the behavior of water-persons
was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
behavior.

   Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
glottal stop as well --"ah-".  Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
human' = 'not human, bad'.  (It can be noted that I still don't
always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)


   The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
...and that there is always more to know.

................

   On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
be a single word, maybe a two word phrase.  There are other apparent
words might deceive us:

     coatlicue    name of a divinity
really: coatl i-cue  (her skirt is snakes)

     Coatlichan   name of a town
really  coatl i-chan (snake's house)

     Atlihuetzia  name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
really  atl i-huetziya(n)  (water's falling place -- waterfall)

.............................

   On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
before X" statement.

   "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc."   It happens too after the other
front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".

   As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):

   castolcan omexcan         in eighteen places
   cempoalpa omexpa.         twenty-three times
   chicuexpa.                eight times
   excampa nacaceh           triangular

   Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:

   epantli.                  three rows
   oc epoalcan               in another sixty places
   epoalilhuitl              sixty days


   Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi".  And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/d86853a2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From david_becraft at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 19 05:35:18 2009
From: david_becraft at hotmail.com (David Becraft)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:35:18 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl=tloque nahuaque
In-Reply-To: <20090417232136.3tp9d4ylz144c8os@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.223518.0700.DAVIDBECRAFT@HOTMAIL.COM>


Cuachitin,

 

All sources that I have seen have related Ometeotl as being the same "person(s)" as Tloque Nahuaque, Yohualli-Ehecatl, Quetzalcoatl (Quetzalcuate?), and Moyocoyani.  Different names relating to different attributes of one divine god, who being invisible (yohualli-ehecatl) is also everywhere near us (tloque nahuaque) and is also the creator of humanity (quetzalcoatl), yet is the creator of him/herself (moyocoyani), yet, it is one divine being (ometeotl).  Due to these theological perspectives on Nahua though, I would translate Ometeotl as a metaphorical translation: " plurality of divine persons", or "god of plurality".

 

timota,

 

Pancho


 
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
> From: campbel at indiana.edu
> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
> 
> Pedro,
> 
> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
> 
> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
> combination with others.
> 
> An example:
> 
> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
> in the future.
> I looked at Molina's entry:
> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
> 
> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
> simple..." I thought).
> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
> 'water-man, sailor'.
> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
> behavior.
> 
> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
> 
> 
> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
> ...and that there is always more to know.
> 
> ................
> 
> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
> words might deceive us:
> 
> coatlicue name of a divinity
> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
> 
> Coatlichan name of a town
> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
> 
> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
> 
> .............................
> 
> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
> before X" statement.
> 
> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
> 
> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
> 
> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
> chicuexpa. eight times
> excampa nacaceh triangular
> 
> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
> 
> epantli. three rows
> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
> epoalilhuitl sixty days
> 
> 
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
> 
> Iztayomeh,
> 
> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_042009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/52a53ed2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From oudyk at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 19 12:57:49 2009
From: oudyk at hotmail.com (Michel Oudijk)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:57:49 +0000
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <20090417232136.3tp9d4ylz144c8os@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.125749.0000.OUDYK@HOTMAIL.COM>


Dear Listeros,

 

Joe's words are wise one:

 

Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.


His very specific example has consequences on broad levels of our respective disciplines. Scholars apply certain analyses and then use their results to make statements about indigenous societies. After all, that's what we do. But there are dangerous pitfalls there and the discussion on Ometeotl is a good one as far as that's concerned. In the literature Ometeuctli is too often regarded as the god of duality intimately related with the "Mesoamerican concept of duality", while the first question is if Ometeuctli can be regarded as a god of duality at all. And I'm not speaking in favor or against here. Several authors have suggested that 'ome' actually may refer to 'bones' with, therefore, no reason whatsoever to see any duality in it. But even if we would agree that 'ome' refers to 'two', how do we get to duality? Two automatically means duality? And what does duality mean? In many publications 'duality' is regarded as typical Mesoamerican but if 'duality' is regarded as it used to be (or still is) regarded in (sixteenth-seventeenth century) Europe, than I would have serious arguments against such an existense in Mesoamerica. Many authors have tried to get out of the 'duality' problem and refer to many Mesoamerican concepts as 'oppositional', 'complementary', 'part of dichotomy', etc, etc. But this doesn't get us any further if we are not specific about what we mean when we use such terminology. Even though 'duality' is considered an essential part of Mesoamerican cultures by many if not the majority of scholars, this doesn't necessarilly mean that this is actually the case. But more importantly, and to come back to Joe's words, we have to be aware what is hard data and what is our interpretation in the literature.

 

On top of all this we also have to be very careful in our use of sources. The 'trinity' issue related with Ometeuctli come straight out of the Italian commentary to the pictography of the Codex Vaticano A. We have to be extremely careful with such commentaries as these are European colonialist views on Mesoamerican religion and society. Several authors have faced the problems of glosses in Mesoamerican codices and there shouldn't be any reason for using these sources without any critical analysis.

 

Un abrazo,

 

Michel


 
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
> From: campbel at indiana.edu
> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
> 
> Pedro,
> 
> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
> 
> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
> combination with others.
> 
> An example:
> 
> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
> in the future.
> I looked at Molina's entry:
> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
> 
> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
> simple..." I thought).
> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
> 'water-man, sailor'.
> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
> behavior.
> 
> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
> 
> 
> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
> ...and that there is always more to know.
> 
> ................
> 
> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
> words might deceive us:
> 
> coatlicue name of a divinity
> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
> 
> Coatlichan name of a town
> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
> 
> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
> 
> .............................
> 
> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
> before X" statement.
> 
> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
> 
> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
> 
> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
> chicuexpa. eight times
> excampa nacaceh triangular
> 
> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
> 
> epantli. three rows
> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
> epoalilhuitl sixty days
> 
> 
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
> 
> Iztayomeh,
> 
> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090419/b3773a69/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Sat Apr 18 16:01:24 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:01:24 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.110124.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

Dear Listeros

The name Ometeotl can be analize lingisticly as as frase Ome-teotl "2 Divinity" or as Ometeotl "2 3 Divinity". So in order for us to find the truth we have to look in the cosmovisión, and find the answer there. Here you have 5 evidence of primary sources whre we find the maximum divinity express as 3:

"Omeyocan: este es como si dijésemos la causa primera, por otro nombre llamado Ometeotl, que es tanto como Señor de Tres Dignidades... (cuyos aspectos son) Olomris, Hivenavi y Nipaniuhca" (Códice Vaticano 3738 f. 17). 
  a.. Olomris (Oloni), de quien mana la existencia. 
  b.. Hivenavi o Iwinawi, el dispensador de dicha. 
  c.. Nipaniuhca o Nepaniu'ka, el que media o sintetiza. 

"Cuando los dioses quisieron hacer el Sol, hicieron penitencias para merecerlo, ofreciendo a los Tres Grandes perlas preciosas, incienso y otras cosas muy ricas" (Teogonía e Historia de los Mexicanos).

"Toda sangre (generación humana) llega al lugar de su reposo, como llegó a su poder y a su trono. Medido esta el tiempo en que podamos alabar la magnificencia de Los Tres, y medido el que encontremos la protección del Sol." (Chilam Balam de Chumayel) 

"He aquí cómo existía el Cielo y el Corazón del Cielo, que tal es el nombre de Dios. Estaba cubierto de plumas verdes y azules, por eso se le llama Serpiente Emplumada. Su primer nombre es Relámpago, el segundo Huella Sutil del Relámpago, y el tercero, Rayo que Golpea. Los tres son el Corazón del Cielo" (Popol Vuh I.1,2).

"¡Grande era su triple naturaleza! En verdad, Tohil es el mismo dios de los yaquis, cuyo nombre es Yolcuat Quizalcuat ('serpiente oscura y serpiente emplumada')." (Popol Vuh III.4,9)

This investigation was made by F. Diaz.

Does anybody has evidence like above, stating that Ometeotl is Duality?

To translate correctly some of the nahuatl words, we need a deep knowledge of mesomericna cosmovisión. This cosmovisión has diferent ways of undestanding the maximun divinity as:

Unity - Senteotl

Duality - Ometekutli / Omesiwa 

Ometeotl - Uni Dual trinity Divinity http://www.templotolteca.com/tse/imagenes/ometeotl3.JPG

5 Tezkatlipoka http://mexicoantiguo.org/imagenes/Tonaleque.gif

There are other divisións, but the interesting isuee is that they where not politeist, as we can read in the Huehuetlatillis: "kisemmatia inkinotsaia inkitlatlau'tiaia
initoka Ketsalkoatl". They just had one god, to whom they pray.His name is Feathered Serpent.

On our modern cristianity culture we say it has just one God, but we pray to many saints, vigins, angels etc. Mesoamericans had a more complex cosmovision than our own, when we see just duality as a posibility for Ometeotl, is a proyection of our modern culture limited by good-bad paradigma. When we have a third point, we have more information to act wiser.

There is more evidence about Ometeotl being 2 3 Divinity, but if you already know this is wrong, they won´t help to clarify it.

I respect that most people will see it diferent, I am not interested in convincing anyone. I just want to share this with you.

Have a good day.

Pedro









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/19ad080c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sun Apr 19 15:33:14 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:33:14 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <BAY138-W55D80A587A0B3DD8D953CCA3790@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.113314.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Michel and los otros listeros,

The founder of analytical psychology James Hillman in the conclusion to 
his book titled _Anima_ proposes that the use of the concept "tandem" 
can be of more benefit than the use of "duality" or "opposite". Perhaps 
this is something that can be worked into the study of ancient 
Mesoamerica.

Bien a vous,

Michael


Quoting Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com>:

>
> Dear Listeros,
>
>
>
> Joe's words are wise one:
>
>
>
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
>
>
> His very specific example has consequences on broad levels of our
> respective disciplines. Scholars apply certain analyses and then use
> their results to make statements about indigenous societies. After
> all, that's what we do. But there are dangerous pitfalls there and
> the discussion on Ometeotl is a good one as far as that's concerned.
> In the literature Ometeuctli is too often regarded as the god of
> duality intimately related with the "Mesoamerican concept of
> duality", while the first question is if Ometeuctli can be regarded
> as a god of duality at all. And I'm not speaking in favor or against
> here. Several authors have suggested that 'ome' actually may refer to
> 'bones' with, therefore, no reason whatsoever to see any duality in
> it. But even if we would agree that 'ome' refers to 'two', how do we
> get to duality? Two automatically means duality? And what does
> duality mean? In many publications 'duality' is regarded as typical
> Mesoamerican but if 'duality' is regarded as it used to be (or still
> is) regarded in (sixteenth-seventeenth century) Europe, than I would
> have serious arguments against such an existense in Mesoamerica. Many
> authors have tried to get out of the 'duality' problem and refer to
> many Mesoamerican concepts as 'oppositional', 'complementary', 'part
> of dichotomy', etc, etc. But this doesn't get us any further if we
> are not specific about what we mean when we use such terminology.
> Even though 'duality' is considered an essential part of Mesoamerican
> cultures by many if not the majority of scholars, this doesn't
> necessarilly mean that this is actually the case. But more
> importantly, and to come back to Joe's words, we have to be aware
> what is hard data and what is our interpretation in the literature.
>
>
>
> On top of all this we also have to be very careful in our use of
> sources. The 'trinity' issue related with Ometeuctli come straight
> out of the Italian commentary to the pictography of the Codex
> Vaticano A. We have to be extremely careful with such commentaries as
> these are European colonialist views on Mesoamerican religion and
> society. Several authors have faced the problems of glosses in
> Mesoamerican codices and there shouldn't be any reason for using
> these sources without any critical analysis.
>
>
>
> Un abrazo,
>
>
>
> Michel
>
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
>> From: campbel at indiana.edu
>> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
>> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
>>
>> Pedro,
>>
>> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
>> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
>> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
>>
>> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
>> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
>> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
>> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
>> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
>> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
>> combination with others.
>>
>> An example:
>>
>> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
>> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
>> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
>> in the future.
>> I looked at Molina's entry:
>> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
>>
>> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
>> simple..." I thought).
>> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
>> 'water-man, sailor'.
>> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
>> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
>> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
>> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
>> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
>> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
>> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
>> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
>> behavior.
>>
>> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
>> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
>> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
>> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
>> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
>> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
>>
>>
>> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
>> ...and that there is always more to know.
>>
>> ................
>>
>> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
>> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
>> words might deceive us:
>>
>> coatlicue name of a divinity
>> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
>>
>> Coatlichan name of a town
>> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
>>
>> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
>> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
>>
>> .............................
>>
>> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
>> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
>> before X" statement.
>>
>> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
>> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
>> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
>> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
>> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
>>
>> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
>> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
>>
>> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
>> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
>> chicuexpa. eight times
>> excampa nacaceh triangular
>>
>> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
>>
>> epantli. three rows
>> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
>> epoalilhuitl sixty days
>>
>>
>> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
>> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
>> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
>> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
>>
>> Iztayomeh,
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Sun Apr 19 17:02:00 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:02:00 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <0F457B754F7F441D803C1E844D50872B@eguiluz>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.130200.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting Pedro de Eguiluz <temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org>:

> Dear Profesor Campbell
>
> Thanks for tyour answer, enclosed a link in spanish where frank Diaz
> explains the Ometeotl concept
>
> http://www.templotolteca.com/tse/articulos/ometeotl.html
>
> The idea of Ometeotl being 2 3 divinity is not just from a Language
> point of view, more from a comsovisión view. As we can see the
> vertical space divided in three infraworld-earth- heaven.
>
> All the best
>
> Pedro
>
>

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

(I am bringing this discussion back to Nahuat-l since I believe it to 
be of general interest to members of the list and should not be a 
private communication.)

Pedro,
     Since I have no expertise in cosmology, I will not address those issues.
But as a long-time linguist and Nahuatlahtoh (since 1962) I can tell you
unequivocally that the linguistic argument fails. I have been studying
Molina's dictionary closely and analyzing it morphologically since 1970. In
about 1979 I began to add Sahagun's Florentine Codex to my morphological data.
So I feel fairly confident in discussing Nahuatl morphology (the study of
meaningful word-pieces).
     The word "ome" does NOT have two analyses. "ome" means 'two' and it
cannot be further divided. The 'e' part is not a separate morpheme (meaningful
word piece). It can be deleted in certain circumstances, primarily before
count-words such as -tetl, -tzontli, etc., but it has no meaning in itself.

     Consider the following:
     1) the word for three is "e:yi" or "e:i". It has a long vowel. "o:me" has
a short "e". Vowel length is distinctive in Nahuatl. That is, words can be
differentiated merely by the length of a vowel. This shows that the "e" in
"o:me" cannot be part of the word "e:yi". The "e:" in "e:yi" is not the same
vowel from the classical Nahuatl perspective. See Fran Karttunen's dictionary
and J. Richard Andrews' books.
     2) Even if it were possible to relate the two e's, Nahuatl numbers do not
compound by just butting up against each other except in the cases of the
numbers involving "chiuc" "five" in combination: "six" "chicuace:", "seven"
"chico:me", "eight" "chicue:i", "nine" "chiucna:hui". "two-three" just isn't a
possible Nahuatl combination.
     3) Aside from your assertion concerning "ometeotl", there are NO
instances of a word with the morpheme variants "o:me, o:m, o:n" meaning "two-
three". I am looking at 1,389 examples from the Molina and Sahagun data.
     4) Consider some examples from Molina's dictionaries:
        ometica "son dos" 71m2
        ometlacatl ititlan "mensajero entre dos" 55m
        omilhuitl "dos dias" 55m
In no such cases does he define these words with "dos-tres" or "dos o tres".
        Also, he defines "la trinidad de dios" as "yeitilitzin dios". Molina
was apparently a semi-native speaker of Nahuatl, having lived with the
language since childhood. He and the other friar missionaries used native
concepts whenever they could, but I've never seen anything involving "trinity"
and "ome".

All the best,

Joe


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Mon Apr 20 03:12:18 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:12:18 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.221218.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

I belive Ometeotl to be a protonawatl Word, so probably it does not apply the same structure as XVI century classic nawatl.

I deeply respect your information and opinions, thanks for all you responses, I will try to learn from all of them.

I would like to share a final link to a translation of the Huehuetlatollis http://mexicoantiguo.org/huehuetlatolli.htm

If we still breath, everything is fine.

Pedro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090419/26738fc7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From joslee at unt.edu  Mon Apr 20 20:07:59 2009
From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:07:59 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094416174547531@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <MON.20.APR.2009.150759.0500.JOSLEE@UNT.EDU>

Dear listeros,

I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the long message below. I will begin my response with the background behind this debate.

Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars, including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be understood in the broader context of this dispute.

With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source, it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl as a great warrior king.

Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system. To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which Offner ascribes.

Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together with Offner's critique.

I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example, Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work, but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.

Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.

Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.

Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research, including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more compelling.

I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.

Best,

Jongsoo


From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
To: Nahuat-L
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.

Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-

http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg


Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content of the Mappe Quinatzin.

1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.

2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2 appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl established."   Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59) carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of Teotihuacan.

To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles" and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001. Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better investigations.

Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock back on interpretation of this document more than a century and presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political structure.

Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 will be pointed out in a subsequent post.



Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090420/cedf2634/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 11:55:49 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <71051540B09FC644A84053884764774A6FEB1EB3A0@GABMB03.ad.unt.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.075549.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Dear Dr. Lee:

Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
I plan to get your book this week.

These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
seeing it.

Michael


Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:

> Dear listeros,
>
> I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> behind this debate.
>
> Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> understood in the broader context of this dispute.
>
> With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> as a great warrior king.
>
> Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> Offner ascribes.
>
> Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> with Offner's critique.
>
> I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
>
> Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
>
> Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
>
> Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> compelling.
>
> I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
>
> Best,
>
> Jongsoo
>
>
> From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> To: Nahuat-L
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
>
> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> Nahuatl.
>
> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
>
> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>
>
> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>
> 1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who
> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>
> 2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> established."   Everyone else who has examined this document,
> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> Teotihuacan.
>
> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
> therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> investigations.
>
> Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock
> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> structure.
>
> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>
>
>
> Jerry Offner
> ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
>
>
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From oudyk at hotmail.com  Tue Apr 21 14:19:01 2009
From: oudyk at hotmail.com (Michel Oudijk)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:19:01 +0000
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <20090421075549.dmmvfpm5wcgskswg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.141901.0000.OUDYK@HOTMAIL.COM>


Hey Michael,

 

I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....

 

I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation. Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a different tone). I personally appreciate the efforts of all these people, although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route, cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who agree with each other.

 

I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".


Un abrazo,

 

Michel

 

 
> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> 
> Dear Dr. Lee:
> 
> Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
> I plan to get your book this week.
> 
> These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
> that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
> such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
> smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
> details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
> whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
> seeing it.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
> 
> > Dear listeros,
> >
> > I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> > feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> > long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> > behind this debate.
> >
> > Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> > of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> > including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> > political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> > Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> > proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> > demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> > to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> > of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> > relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> > the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> > disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> > understood in the broader context of this dispute.
> >
> > With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> > earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> > one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> > interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> > Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> > demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> > one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> > that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> > kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> > identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> > debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> > which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> > whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> > responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> > it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> > other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> > as a great warrior king.
> >
> > Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> > cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> > to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> > but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> > there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> > honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> > Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> > discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> > Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> > courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> > which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> > tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> > believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> > included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> > argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> > (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> > as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> > system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> > of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> > To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> > tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> > Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> > secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> > is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> > supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> > Offner ascribes.
> >
> > Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> > with Offner's critique.
> >
> > I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> > listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> > English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> > scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> > this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> > lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> > Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> > works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> > Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> > were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> > Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> > does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> > the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> > disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> > but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> > critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> > interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
> >
> > Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> > always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> > with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> > than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> > dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> > claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> > point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> > general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> > upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> > Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> > my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> > Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> > the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> > scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> > its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
> >
> > Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> > between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> > relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> > the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> > not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> > and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> > other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> > Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> > own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> > were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> > historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> > Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> > perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> > Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> > between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> > misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> > interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> > substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
> >
> > Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> > Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> > emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> > larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> > source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> > an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> > similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> > against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> > course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> > which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> > listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> > including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> > based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> > compelling.
> >
> > I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> > much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> > listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> > read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jongsoo
> >
> >
> > From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> > [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> > To: Nahuat-L
> > Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> >
> > Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> > two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> > Nahuatl.
> >
> > Note: Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> > Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
> >
> > http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
> >
> >
> > Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> > of the Mappe Quinatzin.
> >
> > 1. Lee states: "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> > cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> > they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl." Everyone else who
> > has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> > cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> > Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> > with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> > Texcoco. See also Lesbre in the latest ECN. Many writers, beginning
> > with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> > reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> > Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
> >
> > 2. Lee tells us: "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> > appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> > established." Everyone else who has examined this document,
> > including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> > cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers. Lee
> > omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> > carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> > Teotihuacan.
> >
> > To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> > evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> > and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> > relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> > expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> > by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> > Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> > structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient. We
> > therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> > Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> > or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> > investigations.
> >
> > Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts." He has set the clock
> > back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> > presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> > structure.
> >
> > Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> > will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jerry Offner
> > ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/0a319d5d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 16:12:20 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:12:20 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <20090421075549.dmmvfpm5wcgskswg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.121220.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Honesty has nothing to do with disagreement. Disagreement is good. 
Dishonesty is kinda not good, nicht wahr?


> :-)

Michael


Quoting Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>:

> Dear Dr. Lee:
>
> Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And
> I plan to get your book this week.
>
> These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me
> that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars"
> such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the
> smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor
> details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among
> whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to
> seeing it.
>
> Michael
>
>
> Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
>
>> Dear listeros,
>>
>> I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
>> feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
>> long message below. I will begin my response with the background
>> behind this debate.
>>
>> Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
>> of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
>> including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
>> political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
>> Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
>> proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
>> demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
>> to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
>> of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
>> relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
>> the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
>> disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
>> understood in the broader context of this dispute.
>>
>> With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
>> earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
>> one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
>> interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
>> Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
>> demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
>> one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
>> that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
>> kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
>> identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
>> debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
>> which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
>> whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
>> responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
>> it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
>> other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
>> as a great warrior king.
>>
>> Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
>> cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
>> to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
>> but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
>> there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
>> honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
>> Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
>> discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
>> Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
>> courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
>> which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
>> tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
>> believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
>> included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
>> argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
>> (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
>> as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
>> system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
>> of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
>> To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
>> tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
>> Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
>> secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
>> is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
>> supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
>> Offner ascribes.
>>
>> Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
>> with Offner's critique.
>>
>> I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
>> listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
>> English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
>> scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
>> this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
>> lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
>> Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
>> works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
>> Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
>> were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
>> Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
>> does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
>> the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
>> disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
>> but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
>> critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
>> interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
>>
>> Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
>> always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
>> with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
>> than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
>> dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
>> claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
>> point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
>> general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
>> upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
>> Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
>> my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
>> Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
>> the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
>> scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
>> its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
>>
>> Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
>> between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
>> relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
>> the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
>> not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
>> and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
>> other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
>> Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
>> own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
>> were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
>> historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
>> Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
>> perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
>> Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
>> between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
>> misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
>> interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
>> substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
>>
>> Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
>> Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
>> emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
>> larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
>> source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
>> an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
>> similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
>> against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
>> course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
>> which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
>> listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
>> including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
>> based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
>> compelling.
>>
>> I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
>> much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
>> listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
>> read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jongsoo
>>
>>
>> From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
>> [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
>> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
>> To: Nahuat-L
>> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
>>
>> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
>> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
>> Nahuatl.
>>
>> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
>> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
>>
>> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>>
>>
>> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
>> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>>
>> 1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
>> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
>> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who
>> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
>> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
>> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
>> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
>> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
>> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
>> reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
>> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>>
>> 2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
>> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
>> established."   Everyone else who has examined this document,
>> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
>> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
>> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
>> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
>> Teotihuacan.
>>
>> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
>> evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
>> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
>> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
>> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
>> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
>> Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
>> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
>> therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
>> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
>> or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
>> investigations.
>>
>> Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock
>> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
>> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
>> structure.
>>
>> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
>> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jerry Offner
>> ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From micc2 at cox.net  Tue Apr 21 16:44:08 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2 at cox.net)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:44:08 -0400
Subject: 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.124408.0400.>

One of the great advantages (and thus great disadvantages) of  working with Mesoamerican culture, language and, thought is that there is great leeway in
intellectualizing what WAS, what IS, and WHY.

The disadvantage lies in that since none of us were "there"  all conjecture must rest on either of the following:

1. empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data (carbon-14, archaeologically correct field methods, and newer computational processes). These must then be analyzed in a fashion that gives us a HUMAN picture of the indigenous ancestors of the Modern Mexcoehuani (those that have risen out of Mexico). 
Most members of these spaces are of the above tribe....

OR

2. One can SELECTIVELY take empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data AND CREATE suspicious "truths" (according to ones ideological, religious, or political needs) a SUPRA-HUMAN picture of the "grandfathers" how then give the evaluator a sense of superiority.

 I call this "selective memory of the greater past."  I think this is what is meant by 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'...

These gentle folks have a large Internet based system that provides a feedback loop that re-enforces their claims, and their distaste of the "scientific" revisionists. A small case in point is the great lofe affair with the end of the world in 2012........ enough said.

 In some of the most extreme cases of selective memory,  this superiority becomes outright racism and a longing for an ethnic cleansing of _____ (please feel free to place our favorite homeland/ancestral land name in whichever indigenous language your prefer).

I believe that spaces such as the Nahuat-l, Aztlan, and other means of communication (Nahuatl-Twtter?) are important in allowing persons who are sincere in their desire to better understand the underpinnings of modern indigenous reality, to see a sober discussion between those that want to look at empirical data, and those that want to look for mythological validation of their personal "-isms"

It may not be pretty, and many times the discussion  may be outlandish and painful....(you really believe WHAT???), but in the long run, these spaces can give sincere learners the facts necessary to look at the rich and majestic past, present, and future of Mexico and Central America without the need for 3D-glasses, Surround sound special effects, or a host of precolumbian deities dancing on the head of a  sting ray's needle.

Respectfully,

Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org






---- Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> Hey Michael,
> 
>  
> 
> I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....
> 
>  
> 
> I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation. Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a different tone). I !
 personally appreciate the efforts of all these people, although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route, cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who agree with each other.
> 
>  
> 
> I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".
> 
> 
> Un abrazo,
> 
>  
> 
> Michel
> 
>  
> 
>  
> > Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> > From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> > To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> > 
> > Dear Dr. Lee:
> > 
> > Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
> > I plan to get your book this week.
> > 
> > These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
> > that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
> > such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
> > smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
> > details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
> > whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
> > seeing it.
> > 
> > Michael
> > 
> >

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From cberry at cine.net  Tue Apr 21 18:49:19 2009
From: cberry at cine.net (Craig Berry)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:49:19 -0700
Subject: 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'
In-Reply-To: <20090421124408.9RCTK.696148.imail@fed1rmwml36>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.114919.0700.>

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:44,  <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:

> 2. One can SELECTIVELY take empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data AND CREATE suspicious "truths" (according to ones ideological, religious, or political needs) a SUPRA-HUMAN picture of the "grandfathers" how then give the evaluator a sense of superiority.

It should be noted that this tendency exists in all ages and cultures.
 Notably, the Aztec-period Nahua themselves mythologized the Toltec
golden age and made themselves its heirs.  As long as the scientific
and cultural stances on history are kept carefully distinct, I see no
problem in their existing side by side.  They serve different
purposes.

-- 
Craig Berry - http://www.cine.net/~cberry/
"Lots of things in the universe don’t solve any problems, and
nevertheless exist."  -- Sean Carroll

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ipedrozar at gmail.com  Tue Apr 21 15:58:03 2009
From: ipedrozar at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Iv=E1n_Pedroza?=)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 09:58:03 -0600
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <BAY138-W179DE4B4C4D94DB37E14FCA3770@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.095803.0600.IPEDROZAR@GMAIL.COM>

I agree with Michel... Michael, have you ever thought that such haughtiness
might severly disable your skills for understaning an indigenous culture?
Moreover, this attitude which tends to stick labels on people is the basis
for many forms of discrimination, which is a social problematique that we, *
nahuanemachtianimeh*, always have to deal with...

Without empathy, any witty scholar will end up *haciéndose sólo chaquetas
mentales*.

Excuse all of us the *sine nobilitate*, crackpot philosophers. Make your own
mailing list with the people you think it's worth discussing with.

Iván Pedroza


2009/4/21 Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com>

>  Hey Michael,
>
> I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....
>
> I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not
> necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify
> the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation.
> Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of
> the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree
> and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the
> tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's
> argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded
> to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a
> better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars
> our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these
> instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to
> them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a
> different tone). I personally appreciate the efforts of all these people,
> although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying
> people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more
> worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We
> may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal
> for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying
> people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route,
> cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who
> agree with each other.
>
> I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh
> discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and
> walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a
> conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".
>
> Un abrazo,
>
> Michel
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> > From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> > To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf
> 3
>
> >
> > Dear Dr. Lee:
> >
> > Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And
> > I plan to get your book this week.
> >
> > These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me
> > that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars"
> > such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the
> > smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor
> > details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among
> > whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to
> > seeing it.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
> >
> > > Dear listeros,
> > >
> > > I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> > > feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> > > long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> > > behind this debate.
> > >
> > > Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> > > of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> > > including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> > > political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> > > Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> > > proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> > > demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> > > to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> > > of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> > > relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> > > the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> > > disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> > > understood in the broader context of this dispute.
> > >
> > > With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> > > earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> > > one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> > > interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> > > Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> > > demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> > > one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> > > that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> > > kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> > > identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> > > debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> > > which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> > > whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> > > responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> > > it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> > > other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> > > as a great warrior king.
> > >
> > > Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> > > cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> > > to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> > > but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> > > there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> > > honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> > > Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> > > discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> > > Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> > > courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> > > which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> > > tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> > > believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> > > included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> > > argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> > > (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> > > as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> > > system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> > > of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> > > To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> > > tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> > > Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> > > secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> > > is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> > > supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> > > Offner ascribes.
> > >
> > > Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> > > with Offner's critique.
> > >
> > > I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> > > listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> > > English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> > > scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> > > this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> > > lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> > > Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> > > works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> > > Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> > > were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> > > Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> > > does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> > > the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> > > disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> > > but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> > > critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> > > interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
> > >
> > > Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> > > always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> > > with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> > > than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> > > dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> > > claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> > > point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> > > general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> > > upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> > > Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> > > my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> > > Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> > > the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> > > scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> > > its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
> > >
> > > Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> > > between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> > > relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> > > the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> > > not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> > > and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> > > other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> > > Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> > > own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> > > were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> > > historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> > > Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> > > perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> > > Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> > > between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> > > misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> > > interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> > > substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
> > >
> > > Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> > > Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> > > emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> > > larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> > > source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> > > an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> > > similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> > > against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> > > course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> > > which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> > > listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> > > including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> > > based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> > > compelling.
> > >
> > > I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> > > much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> > > listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> > > read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jongsoo
> > >
> > >
> > > From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> > > [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> > > To: Nahuat-L
> > > Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> > >
> > > Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> > > two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> > > Nahuatl.
> > >
> > > Note: Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> > > Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
> > >
> > > http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
> > >
> > >
> > > Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> > > of the Mappe Quinatzin.
> > >
> > > 1. Lee states: "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> > > cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> > > they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl." Everyone else who
> > > has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> > > cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> > > Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> > > with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> > > Texcoco. See also Lesbre in the latest ECN. Many writers, beginning
> > > with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> > > reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> > > Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
> > >
> > > 2. Lee tells us: "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> > > appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> > > established." Everyone else who has examined this document,
> > > including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> > > cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers. Lee
> > > omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> > > carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> > > Teotihuacan.
> > >
> > > To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> > > evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> > > and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> > > relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> > > expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> > > by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> > > Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> > > structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient. We
> > > therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> > > Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> > > or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> > > investigations.
> > >
> > > Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts." He has set the clock
> > > back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> > > presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> > > structure.
> > >
> > > Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> > > will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jerry Offner
> > > ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nahuatl mailing list
> > Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> ------------------------------
> See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> N <Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/42c33435/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 21 19:30:31 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:30:31 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.143031.0500.>

Jongsoo Lee�s attempt at a preemptory and dismissive post is well-timed and opens the door to allow me to speak briefly of generalities and to make some items clear.  As this post deals with generalities, it is easier to read, much less intense in focus and less compressed into journalese.  Perhaps these comments will relieve some anxieties, perhaps not.  First, I have stayed close to the facts in the sources and Lee�s handling of those facts.  This allows me to know and show precisely what Lee knows and does not know and what he does and does not do while performing the basic functions of Nahua research.  I have deliberately avoided the generalities that allow for loose argumentation and shifting frames of reference because I wanted to stick to the facts rather than jump to a useless and undisciplined discussion of what I maintain are faulty conclusions based on faulty facts.  In my view, it is the construction of any work from the ground up that requires examination and de!
 termines whether or not it is quality work.  
 
Second, if a person sets out to gore the sole pre-conquest Mexican national icon of law, he should at least have some knowledge of comparative law and legal anthropology and he should be prepared for a response or two.  The best I can determine is that Lee�s overall agenda is to show Nezahualcoyotl as somehow unoriginal in literary matters and so he has wandered into the legal realm and seeks �authorship� of a fresh and original set of legal rules concerning crimes and punishments by Nezahualcoyotl, even seeming to demand some certain mark of authorship on each item later in the article.  Leaving aside the fact that a fresh and original set of rules would have had scant chance of popular acceptance and would never have been attempted by a wise legal thinker, Lee should know that legal anthropologists emphatically dismiss lists of legal rules as important in favor of the flow of cases and decisions emanating from a legal system.  A few surviving legal rules are not a legal sy!
 stem.  Nor should the criminal justice system be mistaken for the entire legal system.  And one does not simply promulgate a list of rules into a vacuum that are then obeyed.  Nor can rules cover more than a small portion of human conduct, disagreement and conflict; it is for this reason that the great majority of legal systems in world history have not been rules oriented and extremely few have been legalistic in the sense of applying rules strictly to cases wherever possible.   Concepts of precedent and equity have to come into play, even if some behavior can be covered by rules.  And it is probably necessary to mention here some basic tenets of comparative law: that a legal system that has a legal code is not better (or more civilized, etc.) than one that doesn�t, and that a legal system that applies its legal rules strictly is not better than one that does not, and that a legal system that is more sophisticated is not better than one that is not (cf. our U.S. legal syst!
 em).  Legal systems are like people�there is little agreement about wh

at they are for or should be for.  Lee should read my prior post on this in Aztlan-l (Wed Jan 14 21:42:16 CST 2009)
 
 (http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/aztlan/2009-January/005515.html)
 
especially regarding the matter of comparing Nahua legal systems.  
 
It is important as a researcher to maintain a little humility.  In the sense that an orange expanded to the size of the earth would allow us to see its constituent atoms as the size of cherries, if we were able to observe the Texcocan legal system in operation in 1460, it would take a half dozen trained ethnographers two or three years to capture a synchronic slice of it with some diachronic depth.  In the same way, even in this arrogant age of revisionism, we have to realize we know only a very tiny part of the content of the system and have to be extremely circumspect about what we say about it.  That is why I rely on the opinion of the people on the ground at the time, Duran and Motolinia far more than others.  They, Pomar and Ixtlilxochitl, in addition to mentioning Nezahualcoyotl�s legislative activity, praise the entire legal construction and accomplishment of Nezahualcoyotl which involved the conception, negotiation among power and ethnic blocs, design, staffing and d!
 ay to day management of a system that was going strong past the time of the Spanish conquest for about a century from 1431.
 
Lee�s claim that Nezahualcoyotl was not an original legislator and did not legislate many legal rules is, simply put, feckless.  To legislate after all means �to create, provide or control by legislation,� with legislation meaning �the act of making or enacting laws.� And even these definitions are infused with a modern Western emphasis on rules found in few systems in world history.   The creation of the legal system and its maintenance necessarily involves initial and ongoing legislation and management of cases and decisions that might serve as future precedents or even legal rules. Legal systems need consistency to maintain public acceptance and just the management of determining and applying precedents in decisions and incorporating them or not incorporating them into a legal code in this or that area of their small empire, would have been a huge task, especially over Nezahualcoyotl�s reign from 1431-1472.  Lee needs to read up on the elaboration, complexity and expertis!
 e to be found in so many legal systems among all different sorts of societies to understand that the data we have on the Aztec system is most inadequate to appreciate its true level of sophisitication and complexity. Just unpacking the expertise in a single Aztec judge of the time would constitute a substantial part of a career for a legal anthropologist.  Overall, by searching in the forest for a piece of paper containing an initial, original list of rules regarding a limited number of crimes and punishments, Lee misses the trees and then disagrees with the people on the ground at the time about the nature of the forest.    
 
Third, the same pattern that initially caught my interest in Jongsoo Lee�s article, recurs in his most recent comments and I am going to point it out before sending on my, by now, third post on this matter.  One of his comments is not fair to Patrick Lesbre.  The pattern to which I object involves inaccurate facts, false claims and damage to others� perceptions of other people�s work, whether Nezahualcoyotl, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl or people from our time.  In this instance, Lee states: �I would just point out that Lesbre didn�t cite major works in English about Texcoco in his works either.  For example, Offner�s major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco and others were not even mentioned there.�  I am not sure of Lee�s frame of reference when he says �there� and �his works��the mere three works of Lesbre that I specifically cited, his entire output through 2001 or perhaps even until today--but this certainly is a false claim and I would think it is fair to consi!
 der at least his work to 2001 and then consider his latest work.  I should mention that Lesbre publishes in French and in Spanish, so why limit the publications of native speakers of English to those in English; why not extend the criteria to such people writing in Spanish?  But even that is not necessary.  Leaving aside Dibble�s indispensable work on the Codex Xolotl (in Spanish), I can note that in the 1998 article on the Mappe Quinatzin, Manumission d'esclave dans la Mappe Quinatzin ? Lesbre cites my 1983 work.  In the Coyohua Itlatollo work (on my short list) he cites Bierhorst�s 1992 History and Mythology of the Aztec: The Codex Chimalpopoca.  In Oublis et Censures, also on my short list, he cites Bierhorst (in English) and Gillespie (in Spanish).   In his 1998 Nezahualcoyotl entre historia, leyenda y divinizacion, El h�roe entre el mito y la historia, also on my short list, he cites Bierhorst (in English) as well as Barlow (in English). 
 
Lesbre�s 1998 Historiografia acolhua : seudo-rebelion e intereses coloniales (Ixtlilxochitl) cites Bierhorst, Codex Chimalpahin and a major Texcocan expert, Fred Hicks, all in English.  In his 2000 "Onomastique indiennes coloniale (Tezcoco, XVIe si�cle)� he cites Gillespie (in Spanish), Hewitt (in English), Lockhart (in English), and Barbara Williams (in English).  He also cites the U of Oklahoma Press Codex Chimalpahin by Anderson and Schroeder. Lesbre�s Mapas de Tepetlaoztoc (f. 208r, 209r). Cartografia indigena colonial temprana (M�xico Central, 1554) from 2001 cites Breton, Brotherston, Coy, Guzman, Leibsohn, Lockhart, Mundy, Offner, Robertson, Williams and Herb Harvey, all in English.  Skipping forward to his 2007 ECN article, he cites Berdan and Anawalt, Boone, Douglas, Lockhart, Offner and Robertson.  And this list in not exhaustive, being drawn only from the selection of articles that I have immediately at hand.  Is there a problem here with Lesbre�s knowledge of the!
  literature generated by Americans, British or anyone else writing in English before or after 2001, especially given the scant English language offerings on the subjects on which he wrote regarding Texcoco?  Thus, Lee�s related ad hominem comment that I seek to personalize these issues falls rather flat.  It is not one person�s work I prefer above another�s, but the quality.  But perhaps I  have misunderstood what Lee really meant to say and that he is not saying Lesbre is not knowledgeable on English language research.  
 
 
I can only observe that Lee�s understanding of the concept of �historical fact� continues to appear different from mine and I hope he masters the indiscipline that permits him to come out with such false and damaging claims as when he states in his article that I am among a rather ill-defined group of people with birth years (as far as I can determine from the Library of Congress) ranging from 1819 to 1950 who �bring into relief the peaceful and civilized image of Nezahualcoyotl as well as his anti-Mexican ideology.�  I have never imbued Nezahualcoyotl with anti-Mexican ideology, but I�ve got no problems with having portrayed him as �civilized.� A major part of my effort was to produce a clear portrait of something that could be easily understood by people outside of Aztec studies�Aztec law�that would offset the perpetual Aztec �apocalypto� to which they are always subjected.  The expression �bring into relief� is imprecise, but I suppose it was for nothing that I wrote many!
  pages in 1983 that recounted the (non-peaceful) wars of Nezahualcoyotl and his cooperation with the Mexica during them and after them.  I also wrote about the Mexica ruler Itzcoatl�s early activities and holdings near Tollantzinco (follow the obsidian�), on interlocking land holdings and on tribute being paid by towns and other entities to more than one entity, and on Texcoco rapidly losing power to Tenochtitlan, and I wrote an entire article on human sacrifice, prisoner capture and how they related to the ideology involved in Texcocan political divisions in 1979.    These ideas were common knowledge in the discipline by that time, in the same way it was understood Nezahualcoyotl was not against human sacrifice.  (OK, the jury was still officially out on the otiose high god, monotheism issue, but most people did not take it too seriously by that time and my interest in religious affairs has always been peripheral).  I have trouble seeing the novelty in Lee�s work other tha!
 n this insistence on authoring legal rules when the various dots are c

onnected and this counter-productive research strategy of overemphasizing the limited similarities in the few reports of legal rules.  Legal anthropologists would be urging us to look elsewhere to understand what was really going on in Nahua law.  
 
And by the way, an observation in that article on prisoner capture is part of the confirmation of the identity of Nezahualcoyotl in the Codex de Xicotepec.  The most honorable captor position was the first position.  The person Lee mistakes for Nezahualcoyotl in Section 10 is only in fourth position in the prisoner capture scene and his son is in fifth position�hardly fitting for an overlord.  Instead, the principal captor is the town founder of Cuauchinanco from Section 9, followed by his sons in second and third position.  The person that Lee mistakes for Nezahuacoyotl is instead the town founder of Xicotepec.  In addition, it is Thouvenot�s determination, not mine, that the glyph in Section 10 is not a coyo-based glyph but a xolo-based glyph and therefore not Nezahualcoyotl�s and he speaks with rather more authority on glyphs than Lee or me.  The irony is that when Nezahualcoyotl does show up in the Section 16 of the Codex de Xicotepec, he is on a peaceful trip bringing a!
  wife or wives for the local ruler or rulers and assigning tequitl or domestic service to support them, assuring the local rulers� place in the new world order.  Evidently, he was remembered in such a happy, peaceful light by the ruling people in Xicotepec in the mid-sixteenth century, but I can note, he does come wearing the Tenochcan or Triple Alliance hegemonic warrior hairdo at the same time.  (This article is in press and my presentation on it is scheduled for the ICA this Summer in Mexico).   The avenues for argument about this issue are closing down, although one can argue about anything I suppose � It is interesting that the codex does exhibit a two tier system a bit like the Tira de Tepechpan  in many of its sections, especially towards the end, with Cuauhchinanco's affairs at the top and Xicotepec's at the bottom.   
 
My concern, however, is centrally with Nezahualcoyotl and his city of Texcoco and false claims made about them and it is for that reason that I am going to pursue the matter on a fact-level basis in the next post.  It will be focused and in journalese.   
 
Finally�what�s my motivation?  Principally, it is keeping the Western perception of this important legal figure on track.  I have worked in private industry for nearly three decades and plan to stay there.  I had dropped out of active study due to my clients� needs until Stresser-Pean published the Codex de Xicotepec.  Being at the time one of about a dozen people who might have more to say about this document, and not seeing anyone saying much, I started looking at it every night.  After about two years, I stumbled on Lesbre�s review of it and was shocked (�yes, shocked�) to see how far ahead his analysis had gotten in similar time, without him even actively pursuing it.  I decided I needed to raise my game and contacted him.  He required me to study Thouvenot, and some people in the field whom I had never met arranged a visit to the Stresser-Peans in Mexico a few years ago.  And Marc Thouvenot has been astonishingly generous with his time during recent trips to Paris and t!
 he south of France, with help in one instance from the very sharp Sybille de Pury. 
 
Now I remain �in it� for the puzzles and the opportunity to find out more about the small empire that Texcoco had to the east of the Basin of Mexico.  It is a structured, dependable diversion from work. There are several areas in Aztec law that still beg addressing�one of which is an intensive effort to understand the legal system in Tenochtitlan.  Sylvie Peperstraete, in her most excellent study of the Cronica X has just made this even more difficult by pointing out that there is a very good chance that the legal reforms ascribed to Moteuczoma I, which were mostly concerned with palace or household law in any event, were thrust back in time from Moteuczoma II�s period.  Another project would be to study the ethnoscience or ethnojurisprudence of some Nahua legal terms and concepts.  What were or are the Nahua words, for example, for illegal taking and what do they tell us about Nahua culture and jurisprudence?  Still another would be to gather and try to understand the addit!
 ional Nahua land tenure terms that colonial researchers have been turning up at a pretty good rate.  Still another is to study the scant and scattered indigenous legal system information in the RG�s from Central Mexico to see if anything interesting �falls out.� 
 
So there it is, that�s my motivation.


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/541fa85d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From PGarcia at anselm.edu  Tue Apr 21 20:39:32 2009
From: PGarcia at anselm.edu (Pablo Garcia)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:39:32 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.163932.0400.PGARCIA@ANSELM.EDU>

Listeros,

 

Generally, I enjoy the back and forth on this list. However, this latest thread must have taken a wrong turn in Albuquerque. 

 

I don't think I need to defend Michael's character--nobody should be judged, much less condemned, by a couple of e-mails, a medium which lacks all the subtleties of live communication such as tone and gestures which may, for instance, indicate humor or irony. If nothing else, the current conversation has highlighted the importance of having as much context as possible before risking an interpretation.  

 

I would simply suggest we stop nursing our respective sensibilities, cease the personal attacks and refocus the conversation on Nahua language and culture. 

 

Respetuosamente,

Pablo 

 

PS: I will preemptively say that I do think some of the issues raised regarding scholarship are important and should be discussed, but I certainly find the tone, and perhaps the venue, inappropriate. 

 

"Let the honest scholar who has never concocted a crackpot theory cast his reflection in the smoking mirror."

 

Pablo García

Assistant Professor

Modern Languages and Literatures

Saint Anselm College

pgarcia at anselm.edu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/789d14f2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 21:14:31 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:14:31 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <0A691D909A42D849BE5A4061F1EE287A02D78F2D@exchange01.anselm.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.171431.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

En vrai, Pablo, i didn't read anything that came in today beside Mario 
Aguilar's posting, which looked like it had some substance, which of 
course it did.

En vrai, until the "Ometeotl" tlamantli appeared, i wasn't aware that 
contributors to Nahuat-l were other than serious *linguistic* scholars.

Mr. Offner today has provided what appears at first glance some 
substance to his earlier critiques of Dr. Lee's work. Not that he's 
necessarily right. The substance simply wasn't there before. And his 
intentions were not clear, either.

axcan yocoxca, ihuian,

Michael







Quoting Pablo Garcia <PGarcia at anselm.edu>:

> Listeros,
>
>
>
> Generally, I enjoy the back and forth on this list. However, this
> latest thread must have taken a wrong turn in Albuquerque.
>
>
>
> I don't think I need to defend Michael's character--nobody should be
> judged, much less condemned, by a couple of e-mails, a medium which
> lacks all the subtleties of live communication such as tone and
> gestures which may, for instance, indicate humor or irony. If nothing
> else, the current conversation has highlighted the importance of
> having as much context as possible before risking an interpretation.
>
>
>
> I would simply suggest we stop nursing our respective sensibilities,
> cease the personal attacks and refocus the conversation on Nahua
> language and culture.
>
>
>
> Respetuosamente,
>
> Pablo
>
>
>
> PS: I will preemptively say that I do think some of the issues raised
> regarding scholarship are important and should be discussed, but I
> certainly find the tone, and perhaps the venue, inappropriate.
>
>
>
> "Let the honest scholar who has never concocted a crackpot theory
> cast his reflection in the smoking mirror."
>
>
>
> Pablo García
>
> Assistant Professor
>
> Modern Languages and Literatures
>
> Saint Anselm College
>
> pgarcia at anselm.edu
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 00:19:07 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:19:07 -0400
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.201907.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Why are people using the Germanic graphemes k and w for writing Nahuatl?

This appears not to be a choice based on phonology since the same 
spellings that contain k and w do not mark vowel length.

What is behind this?

Whenever I see, for example "Nawatl" for "Nahuatl" or "temazkalli" for 
"temazcalli," I see Goethe, or much worse.

tlazohkamati wel miak, ;-)

Michael



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 21 19:58:26 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:58:26 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.145826.0500.>

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee�s recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  Here is the second post.   
 
Note:  Robert Barlow�s article on Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 can be found at this location, although, unfortunately the overall photo and line drawing have been obscured.  
 
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384#
 
A quick search has found no other free-access on-line images of leaf 3, although those with on-line journal access�increasingly available with a public library card--can use the excellent illustration on the first page of Douglas�s discerning article in The Art Bulletin cited below).
 
Here are errors in the paragraph on the Mappe Quinatzin that spans pages 246-247.
 
1. Lee relates: �Regarding adultery, the Mapa Quinatzin describes three types of adultery and their punishments.�  This is not true.  It depicts three punishments for adultery dictated by only two separate fact sets of a given case, or in Lee�s terms, only two types of adultery and their punishments. These are shown in only two of the three rows of the third column of leaf 3.  The second row shows that in the case of �los ad�lteros que mataban el adulterado� (Ixtlilxochitl�s explanation [1975:II,102]; the glosses on the codex offer no help), the man was roasted alive with water and salt (1975:II,102) splashed on him while the woman was executed by some form of strangulation. In the third row, adulterers are shown being stoned to death. The first row is not a crime and punishment vignette at all but instead deals with legal process�temporary imprisonment before the accused could be investigated and tried.  
   
2.  Lee then attributes his own false interpretation of the third column, row one to Ixtlilxochitl. �According to Ixtlilxochitl�s interpretation, adulterers were flattened by a large and heavy stone, or were stoned in the tianguis (market); or if the adulterers had killed their spouses, then the male was burned to death and the female was hanged.�  This is not Ixtlilxochitl�s interpretation.  I spend many pages discussing adultery legal rules in 1983 (257-266) and point out where Ixtlilxochitl�s descriptions do not resemble this column and the one instance where they do resemble it most closely (1983:258-59; Ixtlilxochitl 1975: II,101-102) and in this instance, Ixtlilxochitl does not mention head crushing by stones at all but instead describes the contents of column 3, rows two and three only.  What is clear is that Ixtlilxochitl does not confuse the first row of column 3 with being crushed by stones.  Lee must instead be the confused party, because he speaks of the Mappe Qu!
 inatzin describing �three types of adultery and their punishments� and then proceeds to describe rows two and three but also volunteers his own false description for the first row.  This is a fundamental error in pictorial interpretation contravened by plainly visible evidence and all other interpretations (except for Mohar Betancourt�s post-2001 confusion regarding this scene pointed out in my reviews recently in Ethnohistory [English] and ECN [Spanish, with additions] of her book on the Mappe Quinatzin).  
 
The scene in the first row of column 3 is not a legal rule and punishment, as is clear from Barlow�s article in 1950 and from my work in 1983.  My 34 year old photocopy of Barlow�s article (Journal de Ia Soci�t� des Am�ricanistes, n.s., 39 [1950]: 111-24), which Lee cites, clearly shows the Nahuatl gloss describing the scene in the first row as a wooden structure or jail where people are put and Barlow correctly translates it and describes it as a wooden jail and surmises correctly that it contains an adulterous pair.  Barlow (1950:120) reports and interprets the large and bold Nahuatl gloss as �coauhcalco tetlaliloya� �lugar de la casa de madera, lugar donde se pone a la gente� (cf. very similar paleography and translation in Mohar Betancourt 2004:307).  In addition, Motolinia describes exactly this sort of holding cell and its general role in legal process (1971:359).  Chimalpopoca is shown in one in the Codex Xolotl prior to his death (X.080.J, using Thouvenot�s modern, s!
 tandard reference system).  
 
3.  Before these errors, Lee makes the claim that �The majority of the crimes and punishments that appear in Ixtlilxochitl�s texts are clearly depicted in leaf 3 of this map.�  This is a false claim. There are indeed eleven legal vignettes on this leaf, showing ten crime and punishment pairs, although Lee would probably only count eight because he prefers not to understand the content of the fourth column as I explained it in 1982 and in 1983 (confirmed by Eduardo Douglas in 2003; Art Bulletin, LXXXV, no. 2 [June 2003]:  281-309; Mohar Betancourt also largely mishandles this column; both Lee and Mohar Betancourt falter where legal process, as opposed to mere legal rules, is depicted).
 
In column 1, there are three forms of one crime, theft, each with the same punishment.  In column 2 are two forms of offenses against the state with their punishments, one of which is the same as in column 1, and in column 3, there are three punishments (two of which are new) for one crime: adultery.  The fourth column depicts no new punishments but it does record two crimes of judicial corruption, at least one of which we know was a violation of a legal rule or became the case basis (or precedent) for a legal rule.  One vignette is in the time of Nezahualcoyotl and the other during the reign of Nezahualpilli, whose elaborately drawn glyphs respectively appear in each scene.  (A third scene in this column is cut off and only partly decipherable but a gloss seems to name Nezahualpilli).  In all, four separate kinds of punishment are shown.  Lee would evidently count five kinds of punishment (to include heads being crushed by stones) and four types of crimes or even eight if h!
 e wishes to consider each form of theft and adultery (i.e. the three he mistakenly describes) a separate crime. 
 
Lee himself cites a group of legal rules found in Ixtlilxochitl (1975:I, 385-386) earlier in this same paragraph.  These rules are considered without hesitation by O�Gorman to be his work (1975:I, 199), and contain at least seventeen additional offenses and three additional punishments�most of the time it does not define the exact punishment involved.  And there are a good number of other legal rules dealing with (additional) crime and (additional) punishment pairs in other places in Ixtlilxochitl, not to mention other sources with close ties to Texcoco. Lee�s mathematics is incorrect.  
 
4. Lee states:  �His (Ixtlilxochitl�s) alphabetic texts are supported by a pictorial source, the Mapa Quinatzin.�  This assertion of �a source� is a very weak argument from absence.  Lee cannot be sure this was the sole pictorial source and he would be clearly wrong if he is implying it was his sole source (see below).    Lee goes on to say:  �A comparison between the description of the crimes and punishments and the third part of the map reveals that the alphabetic texts are exact transcriptions/translations of the map.�  This is another false claim, and on two counts.
 
First, as can be seen by the variety of reports of legal rules in Ixtlilxochitl that are presented in my book from 1983, the simple reason that the alphabetic texts are not  �exact transcriptions/translations of the map� is that the very great majority of legal rules reported in the alphabetic texts are not shown on the Mappe Quinatzin at all. Second, Ixtlilxochitl provides information that is not found on the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 itself.  For example, without Ixtlilxochitl�s additional information, we would not know why there are differing punishments for the adulterous man and woman in column 3, row 2, nor would we know the details of the case of judicial corruption in column 4, row 2, and we would only have Vetancurt�s creative narrative transformation (or perhaps only defective explanation) of column 2, row 2, cited by Lee later in the article.  A careful consideration of the content of the alphabetic sources in comparison with the content of the Mappe Quinatzin shows!
  that the Mappe Quinatzin was not Ixtlilxochitl�s principal source of information on Texcocan law.  
 
5.  Having misinterpreted and misrepresented the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 and its role in Ixtlilxochitl�s work, Lee closes the paragraph with a singular misrepresentation of the work of Ixtlilxochitl:  �Based on his [actually, Lee�s erroneous perception and presentation of Ixtlilxochitl�s] reading of the Mapa Quinatzin, therefore, Ixtlilxochitl sees Nezahualcoyotl as the greatest lawmaker in all of Anahuac.�  Ixtlilxochitl, thoroughly bilingual beyond Lee�s or any modern person�s abilities, and with decades of intelligent fieldwork exploring Texcocan history and culture, with Texcocan and many other informants from the sixteenth century with whom any one of us would pay a great price to spend a single hour, and with access to many documents now lost to us, based his opinion on a rather broader set of evidence than Lee wishes to admit or advise the reader to perceive.  Lee consistently writes to diminish what evidence there is and thereby diminish and demean the judgment of pe!
 ople such as Ixtlilxochitl, Motolinia and Duran who knew more about Nahua culture and history than Lee or any of us can imagine.  
 
It is important to note that these errors are not differences in interpretation or differences in opinion.  They are serious mistakes in interpreting the central pictorial documents of Texcocan political and legal administration and history and relating them to the alphabetic texts.  Barlow, Dibble, Gibson and others were modern pioneers in the correct interpretation of such materials and their links to the alphabetic texts.  With regard to proper understanding of leaf 3 of the Mappe Quinatzin, first recognized by Barlow and published in 1950, Lee has set the clock back by more than half a century.  
 
Ethnohistorians take on a special burden in understanding a dead culture and must struggle to acculturate themselves into that culture through years of dedicated practice with the scant information available.  Lee is not well along in this process.  
 
For me it boils down to this:  what evidence is more credible:  (1) the opinions of people such as Duran and Motolinia, who lived and worked with the people on the ground in the early colonial period, regarding the origin, history, quality and relative reputation of the Texcocan legal system, or (2) the opinion of a literary critic well over four centuries later who wishes to expose such sources as somehow gullible or incompetent but who cannot interpret the scant available basic legal and political pictorial information accurately, relate it to the alphabetic texts correctly and report it accurately?  Careful and well-reasoned criticism of sixteenth century sources is valuable, but only when it is carried out without such basic errors involved. 
 
I am glad to hear that at least one of these errors in the ECN article was revised out by Lee and expunged during the peer review of the manuscript for Lee�s recent book. Hopefully, enough were caught so the trajectory of argumentation was significantly changed, but perhaps instead, blindered and boxed-in by this early demonstrably poor basic research, it has persisted unrevised.  If so, then this misrepresentation and disfigurement of Nezahualcoyotl, Texcoco, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl and others will simply expand.
 
It is time to set limits on such involuntary masquerades for the dead, arranged and conducted by practitioners proclaiming their superior critical abilities and going out of their way to demean those of others, while thrusting false masks in the face of the far more accomplished dead. This overconfidence in the discipline and the subsequent objectification and excessive and faulty criticism of these worthy sources need study and the resulting problems require correction. 
 
Can sources be effectively and critically handled within the limits of our current knowledge?  The answer of course is yes, with the best recent example being Sylvie Peperstraete�s La Chronique X : Reconstitution Et Analyse D'une Source Perdue Fondamentale Sur La Civilisation Azteque, D'apres L'Historia De Las Indias De Nueva Espana De D. Duran (1581) Et La Cronica Mexicana De F.A. Tezozomoc (Ca. 1598).  It is published by Archaeopress and is available through their US distributor at this address:   http://www.oxbowbooks.com/results.cfm/q/peperstraete/qt/All/ST/QS/StartRow/1
Upon finishing the book, the reader will understand as never before the limitations on the accuracy of this Tenochcan source and its two dependent sources, Duran and Tezozomoc, but, because of the author�s discerning, patient and perspicacious approach, the reader will also be part of a process of unlocking and understanding much additional information within these sources.  


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/9ab4ef77/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Wed Apr 22 04:30:03 2009
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:30:03 +0000
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <20090421201907.1w596366o84k00cg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.043003.0000.>

Both are clearer than the Spanish-based spelling:
* One letter instead of alternating between "uh" and "hu", and confusion in recording dalect forms where the vowel U occurs.
* One letter each for the K and S sounds instead of imitating the result of Latin C (originally pronounced K everywhere) softening before front vowels and Y in Spanish, a sound change that never happened in Nahuatl.

Citlalyani.

--- On Wed, 22/4/09, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] graphemes
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Date: Wednesday, 22 April, 2009, 1:19 AM

Why are people using the Germanic graphemes k and w for writing Nahuatl?

This appears not to be a choice based on phonology since the same 
spellings that contain k and w do not mark vowel length.

What is behind this?

Whenever I see, for example "Nawatl" for "Nahuatl" or
"temazkalli" for 
"temazcalli," I see Goethe, or much worse.

tlazohkamati wel miak, ;-)

Michael



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/c4f3963d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Apr 22 07:35:54 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 02:35:54 -0500
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.023554.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Dear Michael

I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any established
orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length when it is practical
(i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been ridiculed for it before on
this list.

I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single letter
(h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and k, q for writing
kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s and ts, ) - and to help
(english speaking) lay persons achieve a better pronunciation and for
example say ['na.watl] in stead of [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because
some native speakers (like Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it
because they find that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives
more of a separate identity to their language.

Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen kaxtillan?"

And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?

Magnus Pharao Hansen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/f8401223/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From budelberger.richard at wanadoo.fr  Wed Apr 22 11:22:00 2009
From: budelberger.richard at wanadoo.fr (Budelberger, Richard)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:22:00 +0200
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.132200.0200.BUDELBERGER.RICHARD@WANADOO.FR>

3 floréal an CCXVII (le 22 avril 2009 d. c.-d. c. g.), 13 h 13 : 18,4 °C...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: ANTHONY APPLEYARD
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] graphemes

> Both are clearer than the Spanish-based spelling:

    Is nothing clearer for your native language -- anglosaxon ? -- spelling ?...
Nahuatl has a wonderful *orthography*, so WE (¹) use it !

> * One letter instead of alternating between "uh" and "hu",
> and confusion in recording dalect forms where the vowel U occurs.
> * One letter each for the K and S sounds instead of imitating
> the result of Latin C (originally pronounced K everywhere)
> softening before front vowels and Y in Spanish, a sound
> change that never happened in Nahuatl.

    One letter for /k^w/ ? for long vowels ? for « ch », « tl » ?
How many for /saltillo/ ?...

    Nahuatl has a 500 year spelling, We (¹)  love it.

> Citlalyani.

    Budelberger, Richard.

1. Carochi, Launey... and Ignoramus (²)... ; not Wimmer...
Durand-Forest, Dehouve, Roulet... and Foreigners...

2.    Me !


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From idiez at me.com  Wed Apr 22 09:45:01 2009
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan, Ph.D.)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:45:01 -0500
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220035q58f77ed3i968beb054cb77f40@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.044501.0500.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Listeros,
	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and  
spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will eventually  
have to create separate systems for each town, and as science  
progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This is fine  
for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language if you've  
decided to eliminate the possibility of using native speakers as  
instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using writing as a  
means of communication for native speakers. And this is fine if your  
goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In  
Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their  
use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who  
created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the  
Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great  
lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural  
legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by  
using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity. He  
obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm  
between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If  
so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced  
nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the  
"n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in "tonal"  
and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent the  
devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart from  
tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your mouth is.  
Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible English  
spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would be that  
from now on, no native speaker would be able to read Shakespeare, Walt  
Witman or Gloria Anzaldúa. Second, your first task would be to  
dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need a team to  
continue after your death) writing a dictionary (preferably  
monolingual) that applies your new system to every word in the  
language. Because spelling systems are not codified by government  
decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by dictionaries.
	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".  
Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in the  
long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually have  
dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making dictionaries. And  
when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary" or "vocabulary",  
because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon, Campbell and  
Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants who build on  
the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to continue the  
tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start making one. And  
if you want to break with tradition, then sit down and get to work on  
your dictionary.
	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is  
that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been  
invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work  
(dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for  
use in the system?
John

John Sullivan, Ph.D.
Professor of Nahua language and culture
Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
Tacuba 152, int. 43
Centro Histórico
Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
Mexico
Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
idiez at me.com

On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:

> Dear Michael
>
> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any  
> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length  
> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been  
> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>
> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single  
> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and  
> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s  
> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a  
> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of  
> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like  
> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find  
> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a  
> separate identity to their language.
>
> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl  
> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen  
> kaxtillan?"
>
> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/939d53f7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Apr 22 13:43:30 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:43:30 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <mailman.421.1240405393.21905.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.084330.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Dear Dr. Sullivan

I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
unstandardized manner.

 It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.

The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
systemme.

As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
was the opposite.

Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
towards its extinction.

Magnus Pharao Hansen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/20bc8005/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:13:48 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:13:48 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <002c01c9c33c$9c081800$30de7253@q8u7w0>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.101348.0400.>

Dear Listeros,

The debate on Nahuatl standardization is quite interesting. I am working on a
presentation / paper and, given the discussion so far, thought I would include
the first 10 or so pages. Obviously missing is the section on Nahuatl
lexicosemantics and morphosyntax; and it is in discussing these realms of
linguistic communication that the chasms between variants becomes most clear.

I have taken the liberty of attaching the first half draft; by the time 
I finish
undoubtedly the discussion will have moved on (or back) to other themes.

Best, jonathan



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Amith-Nahuatl-standardization.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 129024 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/9958c94e/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:29:21 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:29:21 -0400
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220643v131e97a3vd9e0d609e7c13c2e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.102921.0400.>

Dear all,

There is an excellent article by Keith Thomas. I don't have it at hand, but I
believe it is

Keith Thomas, "The Meaning of Literacy in Early Modern England," The Written
Word: Literacy in Transition, ed. Gerd Baumann (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986)

that makes points very similar to Magnus (with whom I wholeheartedly agree, as
should be clear from the half-finished paper), for early modern reading.

Best, Jonathan


Quoting magnus hansen <magnuspharao at gmail.com>:

> Dear Dr. Sullivan
>
> I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
> non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
> disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
> overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
> have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
> evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
> literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
> French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
> any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
> taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
> really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
> unstandardized manner.
>
> It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
> language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
> that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
> quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
> different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
> used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
> of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
> orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.
>
> The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
> taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
> that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
> Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
> Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
> systemme.
>
> As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
> meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
> consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
> reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
> dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
> Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
> that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
> was the opposite.
>
> Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
> proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
> k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
> the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
> towards its extinction.
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:55:26 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:55:26 -0400
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220643v131e97a3vd9e0d609e7c13c2e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.105526.0400.>

Dear listeros,

John F. Schwaller has informed me that attachments often don't go through on a
listserve. For those who are interested in the thoughts on standardization, I
have put the first part of my essay up at
http://www.balsas-nahuatl.org/standardization

Comments are welcome, here on offlist.

Best, Jonathan

Quoting magnus hansen <magnuspharao at gmail.com>:

> Dear Dr. Sullivan
>
> I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
> non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
> disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
> overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
> have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
> evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
> literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
> French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
> any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
> taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
> really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
> unstandardized manner.
>
> It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
> language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
> that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
> quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
> different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
> used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
> of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
> orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.
>
> The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
> taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
> that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
> Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
> Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
> systemme.
>
> As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
> meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
> consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
> reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
> dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
> Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
> that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
> was the opposite.
>
> Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
> proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
> k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
> the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
> towards its extinction.
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 16:51:30 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:51:30 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <CC5B273B-8FEF-4E46-8511-64CEC2408717@me.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.125130.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Thank you, John, for this very interesting message. Dr. Karttunen wrote 
to me off-list to explain the origin of the k/w spelling.

All best,

Michael



Quoting "John Sullivan, Ph.D." <idiez at me.com>:

> Listeros,
> 	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and
> spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will
> eventually  have to create separate systems for each town, and as
> science  progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This
> is fine  for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language
> if you've  decided to eliminate the possibility of using native
> speakers as  instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using
> writing as a  means of communication for native speakers. And this is
> fine if your  goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
> 	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In
> Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their
>  use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who
> created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the
> Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great
> lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural
> legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by
> using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity.
> He  obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm
>  between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
> 	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If
> so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced
> nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the
> "n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in
> "tonal"  and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent
> the  devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart
> from  tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your
> mouth is.  Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible
> English  spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would
> be that  from now on, no native speaker would be able to read
> Shakespeare, Walt  Witman or Gloria Anzaldúa. Second, your first task
> would be to  dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need
> a team to  continue after your death) writing a dictionary
> (preferably  monolingual) that applies your new system to every word
> in the  language. Because spelling systems are not codified by
> government  decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by
> dictionaries.
> 	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".
> Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in
> the  long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually
> have  dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making
> dictionaries. And  when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary"
> or "vocabulary",  because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon,
> Campbell and  Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants
> who build on  the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to
> continue the  tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start
> making one. And  if you want to break with tradition, then sit down
> and get to work on  your dictionary.
> 	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is
> that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been
> invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work
>  (dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for
>  use in the system?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Tacuba 152, int. 43
> Centro Histórico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
> idiez at me.com
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael
>>
>> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any
>> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length
>> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been
>> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>>
>> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single
>> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and
>> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s
>> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a
>> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of
>> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like
>> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find
>> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a
>> separate identity to their language.
>>
>> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
>> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen
>> kaxtillan?"
>>
>> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>>
>> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 17:03:41 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:03:41 -0400
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.130341.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

http://rhettdashwood.com.au/#16575

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From karttu at nantucket.net  Wed Apr 22 17:54:13 2009
From: karttu at nantucket.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:54:13 -0400
Subject: 20th-century Nahuatl orthography
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.135413.0400.KARTTU@NANTUCKET.NET>

> In 1940 a meeting known as the First Aztec Congress was held in Milpa
>  Alta.  Among its several aims was the goal of establishing an
> orthography for modern Nahuatl.
>
> It was decided to eschew the Spanish look of the traditional
> orthography.  The letters k and w were preferred over c/qu and hu/uh,
>  but other digraphs such as tl and ch were retained.  Contrastive
> vowel length was not marked.
>
> For more about the First Aztec Congress, see Between Worlds:
> Interpreters, Guides, and Survivors, pp. 205-211.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/ec859576/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 18:20:45 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:20:45 -0400
Subject: 20th-century Nahuatl orthography
In-Reply-To: <5C53AB72-1385-4627-93C9-1A54AD922FF8@nantucket.net>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.142045.0400.>

Thanks so much Frances. I'll change my paper accordingly.

Jonathan
Quoting Frances Karttunen <karttu at nantucket.net>:

>> In 1940 a meeting known as the First Aztec Congress was held in Milpa
>>  Alta.  Among its several aims was the goal of establishing an
>> orthography for modern Nahuatl.
>>
>> It was decided to eschew the Spanish look of the traditional
>> orthography.  The letters k and w were preferred over c/qu and hu/uh,
>>  but other digraphs such as tl and ch were retained.  Contrastive
>> vowel length was not marked.
>>
>> For more about the First Aztec Congress, see Between Worlds:
>> Interpreters, Guides, and Survivors, pp. 205-211.
>>
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From joslee at unt.edu  Wed Apr 22 20:43:18 2009
From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:43:18 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094221195826109@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.154318.0500.JOSLEE@UNT.EDU>

Hi all,

I am pleased to see Offner demonstrated a clear difference between our respective views on Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco.  At the same time, I am very much disappointed by the fact that he continues to misunderstand or ignore the main point of my argument. Please see the following quote from Offner's book:

"I selected the Texcocan empire for investigation because its political structure is significantly different from that of Tenochtitlan and because its legal systems are the best reported of all of the Aztec legal systems" (xiii).

One of the main arguments of my article was to show that there was no significant difference between the systems of Texcoco and Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Offner's points on legal anthropology are well taken, but I am not trying to reconstruct the legal systems. And my argument makes no value judgment about such systems. I am more interested in the representation of these systems and the value judgments made by colonial writers. I should say that I appreciate the substantive critique that Offner has provided in his last two posts, and I will certain look closely at them. It may be that I need to reassess some of the details of my interpretation of the pictographic sources that I analyze. I'm sure I will learn from his critique as I have learned from his published work. However, I still see nothing that refutes my central argument. Aside from the issue of whether I have committed errors in some of the details of my interpretation of the pictographic sources, one of the main issues here has to do with our views of colonial texts such as those of Ixtlilxochitl, Duran, and Motolinia. Although I recognize that these and other writers had extensive knowledge of indigenous culture and history, this does not mean that they were completely objective in their writings. From what he says, Offner essentially wants to defer to them. It turns out that this uncritical reliance upon colonial sources was already pointed out by Pedro Carrasco's review of Offner's book (American Ethnologist, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1985: pp. 803-805). For more information on the methodological problems of Offner's approach to the Texcocan legal system, see Elizabeth Brumfiel's review of Offner's Book (Ethnohistory, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1985: pp. 187-188).

My argument does not deny that colonial Spanish and Texcocan writers had more knowledge about indigenous culture and history than we do today. Rather, I argue that their works willfully transform and misinterpret certain aspects of that culture and history to serve their ideological ends derived from the colonial context in which they were writing. It seems clear that this approach offends Offner as he names it "arrogant revisionism," because it runs contrary to his own views. While it is true that my argument maintains that Offner and others have not been sufficiently critical of colonial sources, I have attempted to be as respectful as possible in this critique.  My work is certainly revisionist, and I suppose that in a way any revisionist work may seem to have an inherent arrogance. But I hope that such arrogance is limited to the inherent nature of the revisionist project. Although it seems that Offner has taken my respectful critique personally, I do not take offense at the substance of his critique of my work. As I said, I'm sure I will learn from it. In a way I am flattered that Offner attributes such influence to my work that he fears it will change everyone's mind about Nezahualcoyotl. Although I am sure that I may have made some errors of interpretation (who hasn't?), I think my general argument is correct, so I hope it does change everyone's mind. But that is not the way scholarship works. Offner himself will be championing his views as will others with the same perspective. I'm sure that many people will agree with him. And as is evident from the reviews I cited above, others may agree more with me, although perhaps not in all the details. This is the way things work. As I said before, I hope people interested in the topic will actually read all the relevant research, look at the original sources, draw their own conclusions, and perhaps make their own contributions. And afterward we can all go out for that virtual beer that Michel mentioned.

Best,

Jongsoo


From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:58 PM
To: Nahuat-L
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  Here is the second post.

Note:  Robert Barlow's article on Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 can be found at this location, although, unfortunately the overall photo and line drawing have been obscured.

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384#<http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384>

A quick search has found no other free-access on-line images of leaf 3, although those with on-line journal access-increasingly available with a public library card--can use the excellent illustration on the first page of Douglas's discerning article in The Art Bulletin cited below).

Here are errors in the paragraph on the Mappe Quinatzin that spans pages 246-247.

1. Lee relates: "Regarding adultery, the Mapa Quinatzin describes three types of adultery and their punishments."  This is not true.  It depicts three punishments for adultery dictated by only two separate fact sets of a given case, or in Lee's terms, only two types of adultery and their punishments. These are shown in only two of the three rows of the third column of leaf 3.  The second row shows that in the case of "los adúlteros que mataban el adulterado" (Ixtlilxochitl's explanation [1975:II,102]; the glosses on the codex offer no help), the man was roasted alive with water and salt (1975:II,102) splashed on him while the woman was executed by some form of strangulation. In the third row, adulterers are shown being stoned to death. The first row is not a c! rime and punishment vignette at all but instead deals with legal process-temporary imprisonment before the accused could be investigated and tried.

2.  Lee then attributes his own false interpretation of the third column, row one to Ixtlilxochitl. "According to Ixtlilxochitl's interpretation, adulterers were flattened by a large and heavy stone, or were stoned in the tianguis (market); or if the adulterers had killed their spouses, then the male was burned to death and the female was hanged."  This is not Ixtlilxochitl's interpretation.  I spend many pages discussing adultery legal rules in 1983 (257-266) and point out where Ixtlilxochitl's descriptions do not resemble this column and the one instance where they do resemble it most closely (1983:258-59; Ixtlilxochitl 1975: II,101-102) and in this instance, Ixtlilxochitl does not mention head crushing by stones at all but instead describes the contents of ! column 3, rows two and three only.  What is clear is that Ixtlilxochitl does not confuse the first row of column 3 with being crushed by stones.  Lee must instead be the confused party, because he speaks of the Mappe Quinatzin describing "three types of adultery and their punishments" and then proceeds to describe rows two and three but also volunteers his own false description for the first row.  This is a fundamental error in pictorial interpretation contravened by plainly visible evidence and all other interpretations (except for Mohar Betancourt's post-2001 confusion regarding this scene pointed out in my reviews recently in Ethnohistory [English] and ECN [Spanish, with additions] of her book on the Mappe Quina! tzin).

The scene in the first row of column 3 is not a legal rule and punishment, as is clear from Barlow's article in 1950 and from my work in 1983.  My 34 year old photocopy of Barlow's article (Journal de Ia Société des Américanistes, n.s., 39 [1950]! : 111-24), which Lee cites, clearly shows the Nahuatl gloss describing the scene in the first row as a wooden structure or jail where people are put and Barlow correctly translates it and describes it as a wooden jail and surmises correctly that it contains an adulterous pair.  Barlow (1950:120) reports and interprets the large and bold Nahuatl gloss as "coauhcalco tetlaliloya" "lugar de la casa de madera, lugar donde se pone a la gente" (cf. very similar paleography and translation in Mohar Betancourt 2004:307).  In addition, Motolinia describes exactly this sort of holding cell and its general role in legal process (1971:359).  Chimalpopoca i! s shown in one in the Codex Xol otl prior to his death (X.080.J, using Thouvenot's modern, standard reference system).

3.  Before these errors, Lee makes the claim that "The majority of the crimes and punishments that appear in Ixtlilxochitl's texts are clearly depicted in leaf 3 of this map."  This is a false claim. There are indeed eleven legal vignettes on this leaf, showing ten crime and punishment pairs, although Lee would probably only count eight because he prefers not to understand the content of the fourth column as I explained it in 1982 and in 1983 (confirmed by Eduardo Douglas in 2003; Art Bulletin, LXXXV, no. 2 [June 2003]:  281-309; Mohar Betancourt also largely mishandles this column; both Lee and Mohar Betancourt falter where legal process, as opposed to mere legal rules, is depicted).

In column 1, there are three forms of one crime, theft, each with the same punishment.  In column 2 are two forms of offenses against the state with their punishments, one of which is the same as in column 1, and in column 3, there are three punishments (two of which are new) for one crime: adultery.  The fourth column depicts no new punishments but it does record two crimes of judicial corruption, at least one of which we know was a violation of a legal rule or became the case basis (or precedent) for a legal rule.  One vignette is in the time of Nezahualcoyotl and the other during the reign of Nezahualpilli, whose elaborately drawn glyphs respectively appear in each scene.  (A third scene in this column is cut off and onl! y partly decipherable but a gloss seems to name Nezahualpilli).  In all, four separate kinds of punishment are shown.  Lee would evidently count five kinds of punishment (to include heads being crushed by stones) and four types of crimes or even eight if he wishes to consider each form of theft and adultery (i.e. the three he mistakenly describes) a separate crime.

Lee himself cites a group of legal rules found in Ixtlilxochitl (1975:I, 385-386) earlier in this same paragraph.  These rules are considered without hesitation by O'Gorman to be his work (1975:I, 199), and contain at least seventeen additional offenses and three additional punishments-most of the time it does not define the exact punishment involved.  And there are a good number of other legal rules dealing with (additional) crime and (additional) punishment pairs in other places in Ixtlilxochitl, not to mention other sources with close ties to Texcoco. Lee's mathematics is incorrect.

4. Lee states:  "His (Ixtlilxochitl's) alphabetic texts are supported by a pictorial source, the Mapa Quinatzin."  This assertion of "a source" is a very weak argument from absence.  Lee cannot be sure this was the sole pictorial source and he would be clearly wrong if he is implying it was his sole source (see below).    Lee goes on to say:  "A comparison between the description of the crimes and punishments and the third part of the map reveals that the alphabetic texts are exact transcriptions/translations of the map."  This is another false claim, and on two counts.

First, as can be seen by the variety of reports of legal rules in Ixtlilxochitl that are presented in my book from 1983, the simple reason that the alphabetic texts are not  "exact transcriptions/translations of the map" is that the very great majority of legal rules reported in the alphabetic texts are not shown on the Mappe Quinatzin at all. Second, Ixtlilxochitl provides information that is not found on the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 itself.  For example, without Ixtlilxochitl's additional information, we would not know why there are differing punishments for the adulterous man and woman in column 3, row 2, nor would we know the details of the case of judicial corruption in column 4, row 2, and we would only have Vetancurt's creative narrative tran! sformation (or perhaps only defective explanation) of column 2, row 2, cited by Lee later in the article.  A careful consideration of the content of the alphabetic sources in comparison with the content of the Mappe Quinatzin shows that the Mappe Quinatzin was not Ixtlilxochitl's principal source of information on Texcocan law.

5.  Having misinterpreted and misrepresented the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 and its role in Ixtlilxochitl's work, Lee closes the paragraph with a singular misrepresentation of the work of Ixtlilxochitl:  "Based on his [actually, Lee's erroneous perception and presentation of Ixtlilxochitl's] reading of the Mapa Quinatzin, therefore, Ixtlilxochitl sees Nezahualcoyotl as the greatest lawmaker in all of Anahuac."  Ixtlilxochitl, thoroughly bilingual beyond Lee's or any modern person's abilities, and with decades of intelligent fieldwork exploring Texcocan history and culture, with Texcocan and many other informants from the sixteenth century with whom any one of us would pay a great price to spend a single hour, and with ac! cess to many documents now lost to us, based his opinion on a rather broader set of evidence than Lee wishes to admit or advise the reader to perceive.  Lee consistently writes to diminish what evidence there is and thereby diminish and demean the judgment of people such as Ixtlilxochitl, Motolinia and Duran who knew more about Nahua culture and history than Lee or any of us can imagine.

It is important to note that these errors are not differences in interpretation or differences in opinion.  They are serious mistakes in interpreting the central pictorial documents of Texcocan political and legal administration and history and relating them to the alphabetic texts.  Barlow, Dibble, Gibson and others were modern pioneers in the correct interpretation of such materials and their links to the alphabetic texts.  With regard to proper understanding of leaf 3 of the Mappe Quinatzin, first recognized by Barlow and published in 1950, Lee has set the clock back by more than half a century.

Ethnohistorians take on a special burden in understanding a dead culture and must struggle to acculturate themselves into that culture through years of dedicated practice with the scant information available.  Lee is not well along in this process.

For me it boils down to this:  what evidence is more credible:  (1) the opinions of people such as Duran and Motolinia, who lived and worked with the people on the ground in the early colonial period, regarding the origin, history, quality and relative reputation of the Texcocan legal system, or (2) the opinion of a literary critic well over four centuries later who wishes to expose such sources as somehow gullible or incompetent but who cannot interpret the scant available basic legal and political pictorial information accurately, relate it to the alphabetic texts correctly and report it accurately?  Careful and well-reasoned criticism of sixteenth century sources is valuable, but only when it is carried out without such basic errors involved.

I am glad to hear that at least one of these errors in the ECN article was revised out by Lee and expunged during the peer review of the manuscript for Lee's recent book. Hopefully, enough were caught so the trajectory of argumentation was significantly changed, but perhaps instead, blindered and boxed-in by this early demonstrably poor basic research, it has persisted unrevised.  If so, then this misrepresentation and disfigurement of Nezahualcoyotl, Texcoco, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl and others will simply expand.

It is time to set limits on such involuntary masquerades for the dead, arranged and conducted by practitioners proclaiming their superior critical abilities and going out of their way to demean those of others, while thrusting false masks in the face of the far more accomplished dead. This overconfidence in the discipline and the subsequent objectification and excessive and faulty criticism of these worthy sources need study and the resulting problems require correction.

Can sources be effectively and critically handled within the limits of our current knowledge?  The answer of course is yes, with the best recent example being Sylvie Peperstraete's La Chronique X : Reconstitution Et Analyse D'une Source Perdue Fondamentale Sur La Civilisation Azteque, D'apres L'Historia De Las Indias De Nueva Espana De D. Duran (1581) Et La Cronica Mexicana De F.A. Tezozomoc (Ca. 1598).  It is published by Archaeopress and is available through their US distributor at this address:   http://www.oxbowbooks.com/results.cfm/q/peperstraete/qt/All/ST/QS/StartRow/1
Upon finishing the book, the reader will understand as never before the limitations on the accuracy of this Tenochcan source and its two dependent sources, Duran and Tezozomoc, but, because of the author's discerning, patient and perspicacious approach, the reader will also be part of a process of unlocking and understanding much additional information within these sources.


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/b321b778/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 21:06:22 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:06:22 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <CC5B273B-8FEF-4E46-8511-64CEC2408717@me.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.170622.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Just wanted to add that none of my students here at I.U. had any 
trouble with the hu them...English majors, business majors...you name it.

Wild and whacky English orthography has been quite standardized, 
probably since Samuel Johnston's dictionary came out in the 1750s, 
right? There was an attempt, wasn't there?, in the 1960s or 70s to 
simplify the orthography so that kids could learn to read more easily, 
and that was shot down quite readily, owing to the fear, as John has 
mentioned in reference to Nahuatl, that the body of English literature 
would be inaccessible to children versed in the new orthography. 
Perhaps the folks in Mexico teaching k and c and the like aren't 
concerned whether native speakers' have access to "classic" Nahuatl. 
That may not be an issue either in literacy or language revitalization.

Personally speaking, I find it takes me longer--and two steps--to read 
this "modernized" Nahuatl orthography. This is because I "sight-read" 
so much of it with ease. This is not a great example, but a phrase such 
as "Iuhqui in mah miequintin totomeh ic tlahtoa" can go right in. With 
something as moderately modified as "Iwki in mah miekintin totomeh ik 
tlahtoa," I have to sound it out as I read it, although I first start 
out by saying "What the heck is 'iwki'? A misplaced kiwi fruit?"

I guess it's a matter of getting acclimatized.

Michael





Quoting "John Sullivan, Ph.D." <idiez at me.com>:

> Listeros,
> 	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and
> spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will
> eventually  have to create separate systems for each town, and as
> science  progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This
> is fine  for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language
> if you've  decided to eliminate the possibility of using native
> speakers as  instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using
> writing as a  means of communication for native speakers. And this is
> fine if your  goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
> 	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In
> Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their
>  use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who
> created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the
> Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great
> lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural
> legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by
> using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity.
> He  obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm
>  between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
> 	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If
> so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced
> nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the
> "n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in
> "tonal"  and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent
> the  devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart
> from  tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your
> mouth is.  Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible
> English  spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would
> be that  from now on, no native speaker would be able to read
> Shakespeare, Walt  Witman or Gloria Anzaldúa. Second, your first task
> would be to  dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need
> a team to  continue after your death) writing a dictionary
> (preferably  monolingual) that applies your new system to every word
> in the  language. Because spelling systems are not codified by
> government  decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by
> dictionaries.
> 	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".
> Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in
> the  long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually
> have  dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making
> dictionaries. And  when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary"
> or "vocabulary",  because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon,
> Campbell and  Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants
> who build on  the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to
> continue the  tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start
> making one. And  if you want to break with tradition, then sit down
> and get to work on  your dictionary.
> 	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is
> that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been
> invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work
>  (dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for
>  use in the system?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Tacuba 152, int. 43
> Centro Histórico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
> idiez at me.com
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael
>>
>> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any
>> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length
>> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been
>> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>>
>> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single
>> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and
>> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s
>> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a
>> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of
>> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like
>> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find
>> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a
>> separate identity to their language.
>>
>> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
>> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen
>> kaxtillan?"
>>
>> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>>
>> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Thu Apr 23 06:20:10 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:20:10 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leafs 2 and 3
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.012010.0500.>

I like Jongsoo Lee�s post for a variety of reasons and have a proposal for joint effective action at the end of this post.  
 
Lee�s quote from my book�s introduction is a good, basic starting place.  Certainly, regarding political systems, in the early 1980s, there was further development of the idea of Tenochtitlan�s dual (maybe tandem) cihua:co:a:tl/tlahtoa:ni  internal/external governmental structure and process, especially as described by Hr. Dr. R.A.M. van Zantwijk (pardon my orthography if necessary; I can�t tell what is approved and disapproved after the last few days and this after I had just decided to follow Karttunen strictly in the last several months).  There is no evidence for a cihua:co:a:tl with any significant power at Texcoco.  In addition, the Mexica empire grew rapidly; its urban core ballooned in size and diversity; its economy intensified; and it had a more rapid turnover of rulers while the Texcocan empire maintained its traditional conformation, with a foothold in the Basin and control of the ancient and lucrative trade route through Cuauhchinanco and Xicotepec at least unti!
 l Ahuitzotl�s time (there�s interesting evidence in the Codex de Xicotepec on this).   From 1431 to 1515, there were only two long-lived Texcocan rulers who seemed to have had great, enjoyable, perhaps more slow paced lives.  Also, Torquemada tells us that the ruler was not the head of the legal hierarchy in Tenochtitlan, while in Texcoco the ruler was.  So, I am quite comfortable about maintaining there were importance political system differences on the macro level as well as below.  
 
On the other hand, the last time I saw Fred Hicks he gave his customary well-crafted paper on similarities between the noble houses of the Nahua both inside and outside of the Basin of Mexico in a session I co-chaired at the 2005 Ethnohistory meetings in Santa Fe.  There were only so many ways to collect tribute and recruit labor in those days.  So, similarities and differences there were of course at the same time.  It is perhaps going to prove best at some time in the future for Jongsoo Lee and me to list these items and discuss them and their degrees of difference and similarity, rather than just say things overall were more or less the same or different.  The same goes for a thorough study of the events of the period from about 1400 to 1440.  These remain in many instances unnecessarily unresolved.
 
You can also note from the quote that I believe the jury was still out on the legal differences and similarities between Tenochtitlan and Texcoco because of the scarcity of evidence for Tenochtitlan.  A bit more basic research by those who control the Tenochcan sources better may turn up facts to decide the matter more clearly�I have remained optimistic about this for thirty years but haven�t put sufficient priority on this project.  The nature of the more urban Tenochtitlan may well have led to the development of a different legal approach and jurisprudence.  It would be surprising if it had not.  The list of legal rules in the Historia � por sus pinturas seems a bit more commercially minded and I have often thought it might have come from Tlatelolco via Azcapotzalco and, speculating on the fringe here, if Azcapotzalco is as old and continuous as some think, perhaps from the jurisprudence of Classic Teotihuacan  (there are some continuities or apparent continuities in other!
  cultural areas and morality and jurisprudence tend to be conservative cultural subsystems).  Another approach is to observe that after the recitation of some legal cases (as opposed to legal rules) from Tenochtitlan, the document mentions cases at Tenayuca and Cuauhtitlan and only then transitions into a list of legal rules.  This may indicate the rules are not from Tenochtitlan but instead from the fairly well documented Cuauhtitlan.  This would make the task of understanding what was going on in Tenochtitlan that much more difficult.   It would be unfortunate if we can�t do the extra work to investigate this further.  
 
Jongsoo Lee did not come up with the most critical and interesting of the reviews my book received a quarter of a century ago.  I think it was by Jane Collier and the part that was not consumed in a sidebar with my advisor Leo Pospisil, had good ideas on the need to study other than mere legal rules, some of which have stayed with me and helped lead to what I recently presented�the worst reviews tend to be the best.  Unfortunately rules are mostly what we have left so we can never act fully on such criticisms.  (I could not search this on-line quickly, my apologies to her if she was not the reviewer).    Laura Nader also wrote an interesting review although with some sidebar with Pospisil and also expressing reservations regarding rules.  I think Pedro Carrasco was still distracted by our dispute in American Antiquity in 1981 over �doctrinal issues� when he wrote his review.  In that dispute, I advanced the scandalous notion (at the time) that the case in favor of the Aztec !
 economy being almost entirely redistributive was not closed and that it was necessary to pursue research into the market sector of the economy.  Others, doubtless on their own trajectories beforehand, have pursued that line of argument very successfully in the last three decades.  Nevertheless, those who follow Polanyi in their research will probably never forget.  My favorite review is by another person, Brumfiel, still strongly influenced by Polanyi, because I gave her most of the criticisms she makes during a phone call she initiated one Saturday about noon, saying she had her tape recorder running to take notes, while I lived in San Antonio, Texas and was making the index for my book.  By that time, I was irretrievably captured by the remuneration levels in the private sector and at the end of the conversation, I gave her complete freedom to acknowledge or not acknowledge the source of the comments.  Maybe this was why the French researcher Durand-Forest�s favorable rev!
 iew of my book criticized the quality of its index.  In addition, it w

as an entertaining review because she assumed I was a na�ve American because I emphasized that it was important to note that the state assumed the right to punish adulterers and would not allow the aggrieved party to do it.  Herb Harvey, directly active in Texcocan history and about to make some significant discoveries on Aztec mathematics and surveying with Barbara Williams, had no axes to grind and gave it a very good review.  In the end the book was the co-winner of the 1985 Cline Prize from the Council of Latin American History (CLAH).  My calligraphed prize certificate arrived with the title of the book misspelled (cf. my misspelling of their name above) and a request to get it corrected was never answered.  I also remember a review from Scandinavia where the reviewer did not seem to realize that my description of early Texcocan history was merely a report of the version in the sources, rather than some definitive analysis and report on my part.  He did seem taken by my!
  work on political numerology and divisions, which I have always considered one of the most speculative parts of the book.   I think the best comment on all this reviewing was made by my colleague at the time, Russ Ciochon, still a physical anthropology professor today.  �Jerry,� he said, �this is the same book and look at all these reviews.  How can you call Social and Cultural Anthropology a science?�  I have never been able to answer him.  Jongsoo Lee will go through a similar process.
 
Overall, this on-line disputation process has not been unlike my day-to-day job where I arrange practical, ongoing solutions between three and sometimes four parties by establishing the basic facts with great accuracy, identifying and outlining differences and reaching a durable solution that contains no errors�these would lead to catastrophic or at least extremely expensive problems down the road.  One gets inured so that any level of conflict becomes routine, so my everyday focus and manner of doing things which doesn�t strike people in my work as intense or aggressive--to the contrary, I am seen as some mild-mannered ex-egghead--may have been carried over inadvertently to this discussion.  (�It�s what I do and it hasn�t gotten to me in years.�)  
 
Nevertheless, I think well-refereed online disputation can move issues along quickly and accurately in this very slow moving discipline�no wonder that museum or university administrators or even worse, outsiders, sometimes get impatient or crossways with researchers and want to question the resources they consume and the quantity and nature of the product they produce.  Changes to working conditions for those in universities are going to accelerate further.  No matter how I try to explain things, the people I work with and meet everyday just don�t understand the value of very much of the enterprise at all and think I am quaint at best, stupid at worst, for spending my time on such things when I should be out playing golf or some such.  Maybe our moderator and others can devise some rules and a forum to faciliate the process.  Otherwise, it would take years to get a reply in a journal and then there would be an answer, etc.  
 
I do think that this process is too dangerous for untenured people, who must avoid essentially all risk for many years, but my understanding has been that Lee is tenured.  And as I have seen before, American academics prove more averse to conflict that others, with Europeans tending to rather enjoy it.  Careful reading of the posts already reveals each of us declaring what is and is not really important to us and where there are no important differences, so my experience tells me we have the beginnings of a working arrangement.
 
I suppose my remaining gripe with Lee is that he needs for generational reasons to label me as �old school� and not a new and true critical reader of sources.  Certainly, I am not a new reader, but anyone with doubts about critical should read my 1979 Ethnohistory article on Techotlalatzin where I very delicately and without objectifying and damaging the objects of study, work close to the facts in the Codex Xolotl to show that Torquemada�s (and the Anonimo Mexicano�s) version of events is not as accurate as Ixtlilxochitl�s description.   I recall seeing Brumfiel making good use of this article in years past.  (There is one small error in my article, hiding like Waldo, who will find it?)  Still, the old (all of 58 in my case) must eventually make way for the new and there is a pleasing symmetry with the timing of my disagreement with Pedro Carrasco when he was at an age very similar to mine now when I have had to respond to both Lee and Luz Maria Mohar Betancourt.  This must!
  be the life cycle of ideas in this field, but it needs speeding up, perhaps by as much as an order of magnitude or the rest of the world is going to lose interest, patience and eventually respect.  That process is already well under way; the situation is not good.    
 
As for my proposal mentioned at the beginning, I find that a virtual beer is not sufficient.  Instead, I propose that Lee and I co-chair a session at the upcoming Ethnohistory meeting in New Orleans (or at another meeting soon).  The airfare is low from Houston, Denton and also from Mexico City and hotels remain inexpensive.   The session proposal would have to go in by May 15.   The only ground rules would be that participants eschew reviews of prior work and instead develop new research on Aztec/Central Mexican law and perhaps the closely related field of morals and that neither I nor Lee would serve as discussant.  Topics for short, feasible projects would be easy to generate.  Lee can decline if he wishes and I will not pursue it independently, although I would continue to work toward some sessions on Aztec law fairly soon.  I do think it would be the start of hammering out a joint position with residual differences so the two squabbling people from North America can qui!
 t messing with Nezahualcoyotl and quit blocking the view.  
 
I also want to acknowledge our moderator�s steadfastness in allowing this debate to continue and to thank those who emphasized the standard bounds and rules of the arena.  I hope serious disputation will continue here, such as in the last 48 hours over orthography.  That also got a bit heated, but the stakes involving a living culture and people were quite a bit higher. 
 
Finally, if there is any lingering resentment I invite people to read my upcoming publication on the Codex de Xicotepec.  It has been possible to interpret some of the document very well; some other parts are damaged and obscure but I have, like Guy Stresser-Pean, put up my best current tentative (i.e. lower probability) interpretations for them precisely so that others can disagree, expose bad readings and propose better wholly or partly-formed alternatives.  The Stresser-Peans told me a few years ago that they had done their best in the time they had away from their planned publication schedule and strongly wanted to see more research into the document.  Its coming to light was a most unlikely event. This is no "one person" project, so, as no one can deny me tenure or limit my raise and so forth, I decided to put myself up for �arrow sacrifice� to jumpstart a new wave of study of this very interesting document and to further research into the nearby Map of Metlatoyuca, the!
  Papers of Itzcuintepec, and the very enigmatic reverse of the Codice de Chiconquiaco, recently published and available for purchase from the FCE Mexico website (about $12 plus shipping--only $17, so order more than one title).  
 
Jerry Offner 


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/0dc5098a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Thu Apr 23 18:09:47 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:09:47 -0700
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.110947.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  
*[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"

*

*can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word is, 
and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as **"what 
has been lived, to complete"?
*

*
Thanks in advanced!***

-- 

I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:

"Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz


Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/902b77ed/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Thu Apr 23 20:27:26 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:27:26 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0AEEB.8050107@cox.net>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.162726.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I 
puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember 
posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I 
couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that 
query, I don't think I got any response.
I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this 
word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain 
elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work 
together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology. 
I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been 
lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word 
is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is 
'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this 
morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound 
ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that 
I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure. 
Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is 
particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the 
five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the 
end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of 
the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the 
period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day 
remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle 
involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is 
used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the 
365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative 
attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly 
obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to 
account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be 
grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here, 
though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a 
very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So 
the term may even have originally derived from some other language. 
There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this 
in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few. 
This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why 
this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.

Galen Brokaw



micc2 wrote:
> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  
> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>
> *
>
> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word 
> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as 
> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
> *
>
> *
> Thanks in advanced!***
>
> -- 
>
> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>
> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>
>
> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
> www.mexicayotl.org
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Thu Apr 23 23:37:55 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:37:55 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.193755.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

I'd like to second Galen's judgement of "good question".  "nemontemi" 
certainly gets the linguistic cogs turning in more frenzy than the 
analysis of some other problems.  I'll give here what is a short form 
of what I think is a possible solution and come back later with more 
material.

   I think the initial element of "nemontemi" is the particle "ne:m" 
and the rest of the "phrase" is "on-te:mi".  "ne:m" means "useless, in 
vain, fruitless" and usually shows up as "nen", since it appears more 
often before consonants than before vowels (e.g., "ninenquiza (I fail 
to have success), nentlacatl (worthless person, nentlachiuhtli 
(unnecessary thing), etc.).

   I think the sense of "nemontemi" (or perhaps earlier, as a phrase, 
"nen ontemi": it uselessly fills (those empty five days)

   Mary finds in the vocabulario anonimo (Ayer ms. 1478):

  nenontemi             Bissiesto

  ilhuitl nenontemi     entrepuesto dia

I'll be back later,

Joe


Quoting Galen Brokaw <brokaw at buffalo.edu>:

> This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I
> puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember
> posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I
> couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that
> query, I don't think I got any response.
> I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this
> word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain
> elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work
> together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology.
> I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been
> lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word
> is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is
> 'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this
> morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound
> ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that
> I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure.
> Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is
> particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the
> five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the
> end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of
> the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the
> period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day
> remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle
> involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is
> used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the
> 365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative
> attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly
> obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to
> account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be
> grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here,
> though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a
> very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So
> the term may even have originally derived from some other language.
> There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this
> in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few.
> This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why
> this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.
>
> Galen Brokaw
>
>
>
> micc2 wrote:
>> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:
>> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>>
>> *
>>
>> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word
>> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as
>> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
>> *
>>
>> *
>> Thanks in advanced!***
>>
>> --
>>
>> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>>
>> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>>
>>
>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 02:30:52 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:30:52 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.223052.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

This is a "morpheme concordance" of 'ne:m' in the Florentine Codex -- 
that is all the sentence contexts for the ne:m's that I could identify.

In a separate e-mail I'll send a morpheme index of all words containing 
"ne:m" in the Florentine and in Molina's dictionaries.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

p.s. ...and when you go out to eat, order the Chicken Florentine!




ne:m
1.  *ahmonenencahua*.  niman ahmonenencahua, ahmoxixiccahua, huel
    nohuiyampa mixpetzoa, mixpepetztza, tlacentoca, tlacencoltoca .
    never suffering from being defrauded, not losing anything through
    mismanagement, he sought diligently in all parts for advantageous
    dealings and continued to seek them out. . <ah1-p54-dupl-ne:m
    ca:hui-caus09> (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
2.  *ahne*.  ane nicuic tociquemitla, .  not in vain I take the yellow
    feathered cape; . <ah1-ne:m +del.n> (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.219)
3.  *ahnemiuhcan*.  quinotza in tlapouhqui, in teyolmelauhqui: in
    omoyolmelauh, quilhuia ha ca nican, tihuallatia, timoquetzaco
    tiquizaco, in anemiuhcan, in temamauhtican: in oncan iicac in
    atoyatl, in tepexitl .  the soothsayer, the confessor, addressed
    the one who confessed; he said to him: "here thou dost hide, thou
    hast come to place thyself, thou hast come to pass the
    uninhabitable place, the place of fright, where stand the torrent,
    the crag." . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
4.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  a ca camachaloa, ca tentlapani in tlalteuctli: auh
    ca hualmomana in cuauhxicalli, in cuappiaztli in tlapotonilli in
    anemiuhqui: .  for tlaltecutli openeth his mouth, parteth his
    lips, and there appear the eagle vessel, the reed tube, the ritual
    feathering, the incomparable. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.1
    c.3 p.11)
5.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  o ye tlacauhqui in moyollotzin, in monacayotzin:
    ca nican nicana, nican niccui in anemiuhqui in tlazotli in
    chalchiuhtic, in teoxiuhtic: in nayotl in tayotl in atemaconi, in
    ateilhuiloni in nelpilli: .  already thou hast inclined thy heart,
    thy body; for here i take, I grasp, the incomparable, the
    precious; that which is like a precious green stone, that which is
    like a precious turquoise; the [words of] motherhood, of
    fatherhood; that which cannot be given, cannot be repeated; that
    which is bound. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.12 p.61)
6.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tle ticmomachiltia, a ca nican ticmoquixtilia, in
    cententli, in cencamatl in anemiuhqui in a cacauhtihui, in ipan
    molpilitihui in amotechiuhcahuan: in ye nachca ommantihui in
    nayotl, in tayotl, in tlazotic, in chalchiuhtic in teoxiuhtic, in
    maquiztic. .  "be welcomed, for here thou hast brought forth a
    word or two, the incomparable [words] which your progenitors,
    those who have gone on to remain beyond, who went having
    treasured, who went having cherished the motherhood, the
    fatherhood, the precious, that which was like a precious green
    stone, like a precious turquoise, like a bracelet. . <ah1-ne:m
    v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.13 p.63)
7.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  auh inin, in ticmoquixtilia in anemiuhqui in
    tlazotli, in cuihuani, in pialoni, in neyollotiloni in ihiyotl, in
    tlatolli: ahzo cana contlazaz, ahzo compoloz, ahzo conilcahuaz: .
    and this which thou hast brought forth, the incomparable, the
    precious--that which can be taken, guarded, remembered: the
    spirit, the word--perhaps he will cast it away, perhaps destroy
    it, perhaps forget it. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.13
    p.63)
8.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  in mitznotza, in mitztzatzilia, inomatca in
    mitzmaca, in mixpan quitlalia, in mixpan quichayahua in
    chalchiuhtli, in teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui, in atemaconi, in
    ateilhuiloni: in ipan molpilitoque in toteucyohuan in teteuctin,
    in tlatoque, in apixque, in tepepixque: in yehhuantin inca mani
    tlalli, .  he speaketh to thee, crieth out to thee, personally
    giveth thee, placeth before thee, scattereth before thee the
    precious green stones, the precious turquoise, the incomparable,
    the unofferable, the unsayable which our lords, the lords, the
    rulers, the guardians of the city, those by whom the earth
    existeth, took unto themselves. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7
    c.15 p.79)
9.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  mixpan chayahui in cozcatl, in quetzalli, in
    chalchiuhtli, in teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui. .  before thee are
    scattered the precious necklace, the precious feathers, the
    precious green stones, the precious turquoises, the incomparable
    ones. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.80)
10.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  in nican tictlapoa in toptli, petlacalli in
    mixpan chayahui, in ticcecemmana, in ticmomoyahua in cozcatl, in
    quetzalli, in tlazotli, in maquiztli, in chalchiuhtli, in
    teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui in atemaconi in ateilhuiloni, in intop,
    in impetlacal in toteucyohuan, in huel innelpil, in impial. .
    here we open the coffer, the reed chest; before thee are scattered
    what we have spread, what we have strewn about: the precious
    necklace, the precious things; the precious bracelet, the precious
    green stones, the precious turquoises; the incomparable, the
    ungivable, the unsayable, the treasures of our lords, their very
    possessions, their very stores. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7
    c.15 p.81)
11.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  a in mitzmomaquili, in mitic quimaquili in
    toteucyo, in tlazotli, in mahuiztic, in anemiuhqui in
    moxillantzinco, in motozcatlantzinco in cepoatoc, in
    cuelpachiuhtoc. .  that which our lord gave thee, which he placed
    within thee: the precious, the wonderful, the incomparable, which
    lieth inert, lieth folded in thy lap, within thy breast. . <ah1
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.83)
12.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  auh ca ohuel quicuic, quicac, ca oquimoyolloti,
    ca oquimopialti: auh ca oquimonemilizti in tlazotli, in anemiuhqui
    in oquiz in cententzin, in cencamatzin, in achitzin in mihiyotzin:
    .  and well he took, heard, took to heart, guarded unto himself,
    and put into practise the precious, the incomparable which came
    forth, the word or two, the little of thy spirit. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.84)
13.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tlazotitlacatle, totecue: ca oquiz, ca hualchiton
    ca oquicacque in tlatconi, in tlamamaloni, in tlazotli, in
    mahuiztic in anemiuhqui, in quipialia in quitquilitoque in atl, in
    tepetl. .  "o precious person, o our lord, it hath come forth, it
    hath sparked forth; the governed have heard it -- the precious
    thing, the marvelous thing, the incomparable thing which the city
    guardeth, which [the citizens] take with them." . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.85)
14.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  otoconcuic in anemiuhqui, in atemaconi, in
    ixillantzinco, in itozcatlantzinco cepoatoc, cuelpachiuhtoc: .
    thou hast taken the incomparable, the ungivable, which lieth
    inert, which lieth folded on his lap, in his breast. . <ah1-ne:m
    v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.8 c.19 p.99)
15.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  mac itla namechnolcahualtili: a ca ye nican
    oninonocuiltono, oninotlamachti: ca onoconan in anemiuhqui in
    amonayotzin, in amotayotzin, in cepoatoc, in cuelpachiuhtoc, in
    amoxillantzinco, in amotozcatlantzinco mahuiztic in tlazotli: .
    no little thing have I caused you to forget, for already here I
    have rejoiced exceedingly, have enjoyed pleasure, for I have taken
    your motherhood, your fatherhood, the incomparable in your
    breasts, the wonderful, the precious. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>
    (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.146)
16.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ah nican amoquechtlan, amotozcatlan, amomac
    quimotlalilia in cozcatl, in quetzalli, in anemiuhqui in
    mahuiztic, in tlazotli, in anecohuiloni, in acan ca: .  here on
    your neck, in your bosoms, in your hands he placeth a precious
    necklace, a precious feather, the incomparable, the wonderful, the
    precious, the priceless, the rare. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6
    f.15 c.33 p.181)
17.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  quitoa: oticmihiyohuilti, oticmociahuilti
    nopiltzintzine: ca nican tlacahua in moyollotzin, in monacayotzin:
    ticmocahuilia in monanyotzin, in motayotzin: in
    amechmocahuililitiaque, in amechmomaquilitiaque in huehuetque, in
    ilamatque, in moxillantzinco in motozcatlantzinco in
    cuelpachiuhtoc, ih cepoatoc in anemiuhqui: .  he said: "thou hast
    suffered pain, thou hast endured fatigue, o my son, for here thou
    hast inclined thy heart, thy body; thou hast delivered thy
    motherliness, thy fatherliness which the old men, the old women
    caused to be left to you, caused to be given to you; that which
    lieth folded, that which resteth inert in thy bosom, in thy
    breast: an incomparable thing. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15
    c.35 p.190)
18.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  onican tocohcencuique in anemiuhqui, in
    mahuiztic, in tlazotli, in monayotzin, in motayotzin: .  here we
    have taken all the incomparable, the wonderful, the precious
    [words] of thy motherliness, thy fatherliness. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15 c.35 p.191)
19.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ohualquiz, ohualchayahuac: otococecemmanque in
    anemiuhqui, in mitictzinco caqui, quitlali in toteucyo, in
    mitzmoyollotili: .  the incomparable hath come forth, hath spread
    out; we have scattered it about; that which our lord hath
    inserted, that which he hath placed within thee, that with which
    he hath inspired thee. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15 c.35
    p.191)
20.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tichualmomapiquilitia in anemiuhqui, in
    tlazoquizqui: in acan ca iceyo, ih cenquiztica chalchihuitl,
    teoxihuitl, inic motlatlatlauhtitzinoa in toteucyohuan in
    teteuctin, in tlatoque: inic ica, in ipampa ih ce cozcatl, ih ce
    quetzalli in oquimomacahuili in toteucyo: .  thou clutchest in thy
    hand the incomparable, the perfectly formed [words, like] the
    unshadowed, the perfect precious green stone, the precious
    turquoise with which are entreated our lords, the lords, the
    rulers, in behalf of, as a result of, a precious necklace, a
    precious feather which our lord hath given. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1
    c2> (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.192)
21.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ca omitzommomaquilique in anemiuhqui in tlazotic,
    in maquiztic, in chalchiuhtic in cuecueyoca: auh in iuhqui in
    quetzalli in xopalehuac, in patlahuac, in huel yaque, in
    inxillantzinco, in intozcatlantzinco, in cepoatoc, in
    cuelpachiuhtoc. .  they have given thee the incomparable [words],
    like precious things, like bracelets, like precious green stones,
    resplendent like precious feathers, deep green, wide, perfect,
    which lie inert, lie folded in their bosoms, in their laps. . <ah1
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.216)
22.  *ammonentlamachitia*.  in nican hualquiza in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin inic ica, inic ipampa, ammonentlamachitia, in
    amocozqui, in amoquetzal, .  here your breath, your words come
    forth [telling] how because of, for the sake of your jewel, your
    precious feather, you are in torment. . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati
    caus03 H3 +t>ch> (b.3 f.4 c.ap7 p.62)
23.  *ammonentlamachitia*.  auh mazo namantecatl, cuix nehhuatl itlan
    naquiz in ichimal, in itehuehuel, in nochpochtzin, in noxocoyouh,
    in nican ommehuiltitica: in ica ammonentlamachitia: .  and
    although I am a skillful practitioner, will I perchance be
    diligent in the matter of the shield, the small shield of my
    daughter, of my youngest daughter, who is here seated, for whom ye
    suffer affliction? . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati-caus03 H3 +t>ch> (b.6
    f.13 c.27 p.154)
24.  *amonentlamachitia*.  oannechmocnelilique, otlacauhqui in
    amoyollotzin, in noca ammotequipachihuitia, in noca in
    amonentlamachitia: .  in my behalf ye have suffered anguish, in my
    behalf ye have suffered affliction. . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati
    caus03 +t>ch> (b.6 f.11 c.23 p.127)
25.  *annentlamati*.  ca noconana, ca noconcui in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin: auh in amochoquiz, in amotlaocol, inic ica anchoca,
    antlaocoya, inic ica annentlamati in amocozqui, in amoquetzal in
    cihuatzintli, in at amotlacoyehuauh, in at amotiacapan, in at nozo
    amoxocoyouh. .  verily I grasp, I accept your spirit, your words,
    and your weeping, your compassion with which ye weep, ye feel
    compassion; with which ye are anguished for the sake of your
    precious necklace, your precious feather, the little woman who is
    perhaps your second child, perhaps your eldest, or perhaps your
    youngest. . <p22-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.6 f.13 c.27 p.153)
26.  *hualnenenquizan*.  zan hualnenenquizan tlalticpac: .  he was
    quite purposeless on earth. . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za--> (b.4 f.3
    c.6 p.21)
27.  *hualnenenquizaya*.  zan hualnenenquizaya, motquitica
    netoliniliztli, in ilhuil, in imahcehual, inemac, .  he labored
    only in vain; his fate, deserts, and gifts were full of misery. .
    <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-ya3> (b.4 f.5 c.13 p.48)
28.  *inencauhyan*.  ca inencauhyan ticmochihuilia tlacatle totecue. .
    for thou, o master, o our lord, makest it his place of desolation.
    . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.2 c.5 p.23)
29.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan ticmochihuiliz: .  wilt thou
    make it his place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.2 c.5 p.23)
30.  *inencauhyan*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia
    in titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n>
    (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
31.  *inencauhyan*.  a mach oc quihualmati in imauh in intepeuh, in ye
    cactimani, in ye yohuatimani in ye inencauhyan quimochihuilia
    toteucyo: .  "do they still know of their city, which already
    lieth abandoned, which already lieth darkened, which our lord hath
    already made his place of desolation?" . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09
    prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.47)
32.  *inencauhyan*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in
    ye inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
33.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan momantiquizaz: .  will it
    perhaps result as a place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.81)
34.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan momantiquizaz in atl, in tepetl:
    .  will the city perhaps result as a place of desolation? . <poss
    ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.82)
35.  *inencauhyan*.  ahzo iuh quimonequiltiz: at cauhtimaniz, at
    yohuatimaniz in atl, in tepetl: at inencauhyan quimochihuiliz in
    toteucyo. .  perhaps he will so determine that the city will
    remain desolate, will remain in darkness; perhaps our lord will
    cause it to become his place of abandonment. . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.184)
36.  *inentlamachiliz*.  tlacatle, toteucyoe, tloquehe nahuaquehe,
    manozo xicmocuili, ma xicmocaquiti, in inentlamachiliz in
    macehualli. .  master, our lord of the near, the nigh, receive,
    hear the torment of this lowly one. . <poss-ne:m-p51-mati-liz
    +t>ch> (b.1 f.1 c.12 p.25)
37.  *inentlamachiliz*.  in tlatoani oc cenca quimocuitlahuiaya in
    tetlatzontequililiztli, quicaquia in ixquich in ineteilhuil: ihuan
    in ichoquiz, in inentlamachiliz in inetoliniliz in cuitlapilli,
    atlapalli in icnotlacatl, in motolinia in macehualli: .  the ruler
    watched especially over the trials; he heard all the accusations
    and the complaints, the afflictions, and the misery of the common
    folk, the orphans, the poor, and the vassals. . <poss-ne:m-p51
    mati-liz +t>ch> (b.8 f.3 c.17 p.54)
38.  *m[o]ixnempehualtia*.  zan mixnempehualtia, moyolcapehualtia in
    mocuicui, za mixhuia, moyolhuia, inic ipan quizaz, in zazo tlein
    mochihuaz, in ahzo cuextecatl, ahzo tohueyo, yacahuicole,
    yacacoyonqui, ixtlan mihua, motlaquicuilo itzcohuatica: .  [if] a
    good likeness, an animal, was started, [the core] was carved to
    correspond to the likeness, the form in nature [that] it imitated,
    so that from it would issue [in metal] whatsoever it was desired
    to make -- perhaps a huaxtec, perhaps a stranger, one with a
    pierced, perforated nose, an arrow across the face, painted
    [tattooed] upon the body with obsidian serpents. . <p54-i:xtli
    ne:m-pe:hua-caus01 +prob> (b.9 f.6 c.16 p.73)
39.  *monencahua*.  hatle quiyolitlacoa, tlatepotzcahua, tlaxiccahua,
    tlaquelmati, monencahua tlaquelyecoa .  he is unfeeling,
    neglectful of duty, untrustworthy; a shirker, a loafer, a sullen
    worker. . <p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.1)
40.  *monenencoa*.  zan nenia motlatlamota, monenencoa, mocuauhtlaza .
    to no purpose did he struggle; in vain did he travail. . <p54-dupl
    ne:m-coa> (b.4 f.1 c.2 p.8)
41.  *monenencoa*.  zan monenencoa. .  he only frustrated himself. .
    <p54-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
42.  *monentlamatia*.  quitoznequi: ac ahzo can tle huel ommochihuaz,
    ac ahzo can tle ommaquitiz in motiamic, in mocnopillo, in
    monentlamatia, .  that is to say, perchance it will not prosper;
    perhaps thy stock of goods, thy just deserts, thy dealings, will
    not result well. . <--ne:m-p51-mati--> (b.4 f.7 c.17 p.63)
43.  *motenemmaca*.  amo zan motenemmaca, amo zan teixpanhuetzi, in
    necuiltonolli, in netlamachtilli, in netlacamatiliztli, in
    netlacamachiliztli. .  to no purpose did he give or publicly
    display wealth and prosperity, and the joys and comforts of
    wealth. . <p54-p52-ne:m-maca> (b.4 f.6 c.16 p.57)
44.  *motlanemiuhyantililia*.  ca motlanemiuhyantililia in toteucyo:
    ca motlapilquixtilia. .  for our lord reduceth [one], maketh [one]
    as a child. . <p54-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-ben H1>
    (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.191)
45.  *nemihquitqui*.  quiquiti, in itichicoyo in yollo, in
    totolitipetlayo, in cacamoliuhqui, in ilacatziuhqui, in neniuhqui,
    in nemiquitqui, in ichpetztli, in ichtilmatli, in ce ichtli, in
    ayatl, in nopalayatl, in zanitli: .  they wove the diagonal
    central motive, the turkey with mat-designed interior, the violet
    colored, the cape of twisted weave, the good-for-nothing, the
    useless weave, the glossy maguey weave; the maguey fiber cape, the
    one of single maguey threads, the netlike cape, the netlike nopal
    cape, the netlike shift. . <ne:m-ihquiti-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.11 c.29
    p.180)
46.  *nemiuhqui*.  yehhuan huel quihuelnextiaya, quiyectlaliaya in
    tlazoihhuitl, inic tlatoltecatia, in ixquich in mahuizzochimalli
    in tlatoque intenemac catca: atle nemiuhqui mochi tlazoihhuitica
    tlapepecholli, tlatzacualli (toztica, tzinitzcantica
    tlatzacualli,) xiuhtototica huitzitziltica, tlauhquecholtica
    teocuitlatica icuilihhuic, icuiliuhqui, tlatlacuilolli,
    toztenoloyo, tentlapilollo, tlapiloltica tenchayahuac,
    cuammoloctica, quetzalpoztectica, zacuantica tlauhquecholtica
    yacachapollo in tlapilolli: .  they displayed well, they made
    attractive, the precious feathers, thereby preparing artistically
    all the splendid shields which were the gifts of the rulers;
    nothing common; all covered, pasted over, with precious feathers;
    [pasted with yellow parrot feathers, with trogonorus feathers];
    painted, decorated, designed with those of the blue cotinga, the
    hummingbird, the red spoonbill; with gold; tufted with parrot
    feathers on the border; rimmed with hanging ornaments; with
    pendants radiating from the [lower] rim; with eagle down, with
    quetzal feathers, with those of the troupial, with those of the
    red spoonbill; with grasshopper figures on the ends of the
    pendants. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.9 f.7 c.19 p.89)
47.  *nemiuhyan*.  za cahcactoc, za nemiuhyan: .  all was bare and
    laid waste. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
48.  *nemiuhyan*.  in nemiuhyan, zan tlallan caquia in itzontecon,
    iuhquin tlatetecuitztica tlallan, .  in desolate places it only
    puts its head into the ground; there is as it were a kicking din
    underground. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.10 c.5 p.92)
49.  *nemiuhyan*.  nemiuhyan. .  it is a desolate place. . <ne:m-v03a
    prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.112)
50.  *nemmanian*.  auh in ihcuac nemmanian, in amo ilhuitl, zan no
    yehhuatl in iczotilmaxixipetztli in quimolpiliaya, zan
    quinamictihuia in innetlalpilil: ipampa in cenca mimatia pipilti,
    cenca tlanemiliani catca. .  but in between, when it was not a
    feast day, they tied on only the finely woven yucca fiber capes,
    but they went on using the same method of tying, because the
    noblemen were very circumspect and punctilious. . <ne:m-mani-prt1
    ya:n +del.n> (b.9 f.1 c.2 p.7)
51.  *nemmaya*.  auh in zan nemmaya, in amo ilhuitl: in quimolpiliaya
    tilmatli, in pochtecatlatoque in tealtiani: auh in nahualoztomeca,
    in tecoanime, zan yehhuatl in iczotilmaxixipetztli, .  but when it
    was only in between, when it was not a feast day, the principal
    merchants, those who bathed slaves, and the disguised vanguard
    merchants, the slave dealers, put on only the finely woven yucca
    fiber cape. . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n> (b.9 f.1 c.2 p.7)
52.  *nemmayan*.  auh in icuac amo ilhuiuh, in zan nemmayan: oc no ce
    quixiptlayotiaya, quichichihuaya: .  and when it was not his feast
    day, in the intervening time, still another represented him; they
    arrayed him. . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n> (b.1 f.2 c.20 p.45)
53.  *nemon*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon, nentlacatl,
    nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-o:n--> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
54.  *nemontemi*.  auh in onquiz i, cempoalli izcalli, niman ye ic
    hualmotlalia in macuililhuitl in nemotemi, anozo nenontemi, .  and
    when the twenty [days] of izcalli had passed, thereupon were
    established the five days of nemontemi or nenontemi. . <ne:m-o:n
    temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
55.  *nemontemi*.  auh in nemontemi, huel imacaxoya, mauhcaittoya, .
    and the nemontemi were indeed feared; they were held in awe. .
    <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
56.  *nemontemi*.  niman hualmotlalia, hualmotema in nemontemi:
    macuililhuitl in aoctle itoca tonalli, in aocmo ompohui, in aocmo
    ompouhqui .  then were established, were set in the nemontemi,
    five days for which there were no day-names, which no longer
    belonged, which were no longer counted. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.2
    f.11 c.38 p.171)
57.  *nemontemi*.  ca temauhti in ipan opeuh ilhuitl nemontemi: .  for
    the time when the days of nemontemi began terrified one. . <ne:m
    o:n-temi> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.172)
58.  *nemontemi*.  niman ihcuac hualmotlalia macuililhuitl motenehua
    nemontemi: .  then at that time were set in five days called
    nemontemi. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.12 f.5 c.27 p.80)
59.  *nemontemi*.  nican in mochihua in nemontemi, macuililhuitl. .
    here happened the nemontemi: five days. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.12
    f.5 c.28 p.81)
60.  *nempanca*.  tel zan nempanca in ommotlalica, in oncan oc nen
    quitlalmomoztica: .  quite in vain was what had been set up; in
    vain had they made the earthen platform there. . <ne:m-pan-->
    (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.33)
61.  *nempehua*.  ihuan in aquin zan quipiqui, zan nempehua in
    matzicolihui, in tennecuilihui, in matzicolihui, icxiquicuecuetza:
    coni, .  and one who is sluggish, [who] starts in vain, whose arms
    become paralyzed, whose mouth becomes twisted, whose arms become
    paralyzed, [whose] legs wobble -- he drinks it. . <ne:m-pe:hua>
    (b.11 f.17 c.7 p.175)
62.  *nempolihui*.  atle nenquiza, atle nempolihui, .  nothing failed;
    nothing perished in vain. . <ne:m-polihui> (b.4 f.3 c.6 p.21)
63.  *nempolihui*.  auh in cihuatl, in mitoa oitlacauh icihuayo: in
    omocuep, momalacachiuh, in oncan motlalia in xinachtli, in zan
    nempolihui xinachtli. .  and [it is required by] the woman who, it
    is said, has damaged her vagina; when it is turned, twisted, there
    where the semen is placed; where the semen is just wasted. . <ne:m
    polihui> (b.11 f.18 c.7 p.185)
64.  *nempolihui*.  nenquiza, nempolihui, .  it is worked in vain; it
    fails. . <ne:m-polihui> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
65.  *nempoliuhqui*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <ne:m-polihui-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
66.  *nempoliuhtimani*.  nenquiztimani, nempoliuhtimani, .  it lies
    worthless, wasting. . <ne:m-polihui-prt1-ti1-mani aux04> (b.11
    f.25 c.12 p.263)
67.  *nempolollani*.  tetetemachia, amo nempolollani, .  he defrauds
    one; he claims not to spoil things. . <ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1-->
    (b.10 f.2 c.10 p.35)
68.  *nempotla*.  in amo cualli tlahquilqui xoxolotl, nempotla, .  the
    bad mason [is] feeble, stupid. . <ne:m-potla> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
69.  *nen*.  za aca, ahzo ce, ahzo ome, in oc nen tematitlampa quiza,
    yehuatl quihualnonotzaya in moteuczoma: ic oncan quimaca,
    caquilia, iapozonaltenteuh, .  [but if] anyone -- perhaps one,
    perhaps two -- escaped from enemy hands, he went to inform
    moctezuma, wherefore he then gave him, he let him insert his amber
    lip plug. . <ne:m> (b.1 f.2 c.19 p.42)
70.  *nen*.  amo zan nen ca oquimmotelchihuili in dios icel teotl: .
    not without cause doth god, the only god, abominate them. . <ne:m>
    (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.60)
71.  *nen*.  miec tlamantli inic quimahuiztiliaya, in zan nen, in zan
    innetlapololtilizpan. .  with many such acts they honored her; it
    was in vain, it was only their confusion. . <ne:m> (b.1 f.5 c.Ap
    p.71)
72.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualquizaya, amo zan nen cahualoya, .  not
    for nothing did he come out; not for nothing was he let free. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.1 c.21 p.50)
73.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualquizaya, amo zan nen cahualoya, .  not
    for nothing did he come out; not for nothing was he let free. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.1 c.21 p.50)
74.  *nen*.  tle nen totlaihiyohuiliz .  to what avail is our misery?
    . <ne:m> (b.2 f.5 c.27 p.98)
75.  *nen*.  auh ayac zan nen mocalhuiaya, can yehhuantin in imel, in
    tlaceliani, in tlamocuitlahuiani, in cochizani, in amo
    tlatlacanequini in imel. .  and no one just idly ate the maize
    toasted on the embers; only those who were diligent, acceptable,
    careful, wakeful, who trusted not [too much] their [own]
    diligence. . <ne:m> (b.2 f.7 c.31 p.127)
76.  *nen*.  in nen quintlamaca; .  these in vain offered them food. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.8 c.34 p.143)
77.  *nen*.  oc nen quihualoiuhtihuia oc nen quihualoyohuiaya,
    hualmochimalhuitectihuia, .  yet in vain they went crying out at
    him, yet in vain they cried out against him, yet in vain they went
    striking their shields. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.1 c.1 p.4)
78.  *nen*.  oc nen quihualoiuhtihuia oc nen quihualoyohuiaya,
    hualmochimalhuitectihuia, .  yet in vain they went crying out at
    him, yet in vain they cried out against him, yet in vain they went
    striking their shields. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.1 c.1 p.4)
79.  *nen*.  intla za nen quemman necia ahzo octli qui, ahzo
    cihuanotza, in anozo itla huei quichihua, niman quitzauctihuia, .
    if at times it appeared that one perhaps drank pulque, perhaps was
    given to women or committed a great [fault], then they went to
    apprehend him. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.4 c.ap8 p.66)
80.  *nen*.  zan nen huetzi in itlapalihuiz. .  unfortunate were his
    efforts. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.1 c.2 p.8)
81.  *nen*.  nelli mach in ixquich cahana, in imolicpi, itetepon,
    itlancua ic moquequetza, zan atleti, zan nen huetzi in iciahuiz,
    in itlapalihuiz .  indeed, in all the things which he undertook,
    though he went on elbow, shank, and knee, vain and fruitless were
    his efforts and fatigue. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
82.  *nen*.  zan no yeh coninailia, conicuanilia, tel amo zan nen
    ihcuac in ye atlamati, in ye cuecuenoti in aoc tle ipan tlatta,
    commixcahualtia, in imahcehual, ocatca, .  yet it was not without
    reason; when [the man] became vain and haughty, he disregarded and
    neglected what was his birthright. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
83.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen, ic mopatiznequi, ic mopayahualochtiznequi,
    inic amo miquiz, oc motlayecoltia, motonalanaznequi,
    motonallaliliznequi, oc nen itla quimocuicuicachihua,
    quimotlatlanehuia, ahzo atl, ahzo tletl, ahzo caxitl, in
    commotlanehuia ichan in oquipoloto, in ompa ocacique: .  and if in
    vain he tried to remedy, or, indirectly, to palliate [the
    situation], so that he might not die, still seeking to follow his
    work and control and establish his fate, in vain he contrived to
    take or borrow something -- perchance water or fire, or a bowl,
    which he borrowed from the house of the one he had gone forth to
    destroy, who had there seized him. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.11 p.43)
84.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen, ic mopatiznequi, ic mopayahualochtiznequi,
    inic amo miquiz, oc motlayecoltia, motonalanaznequi,
    motonallaliliznequi, oc nen itla quimocuicuicachihua,
    quimotlatlanehuia, ahzo atl, ahzo tletl, ahzo caxitl, in
    commotlanehuia ichan in oquipoloto, in ompa ocacique: .  and if in
    vain he tried to remedy, or, indirectly, to palliate [the
    situation], so that he might not die, still seeking to follow his
    work and control and establish his fate, in vain he contrived to
    take or borrow something -- perchance water or fire, or a bowl,
    which he borrowed from the house of the one he had gone forth to
    destroy, who had there seized him. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.11 p.43)
85.  *nen*.  ca ompa oc nen titlatemachia, .  for at this time, it was
    still vain to do it. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.13 p.50)
86.  *nen*.  intla nemiz, ahzo za nen itla imahcehualtitiuh, ca itla
    macehualiztica quimocuepililitiuh in itonal: .  if he were to
    live, it was not hopeless; something would become his lot; with
    his penance he would reverse his day sign. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.13
    p.50)
87.  *nen*.  auh in nen ic quicualtiaya, quicualtiliaya tonalpouhque,
    in iuhqui itonal ipan otlacat, .  and the readers of the day signs
    bettered and remedied the nature of the day sign on which the
    useless one was born. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.6 c.13 p.51)
88.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen ic quicualtiliaya tonalpouhque: .  but for
    him who yet lived, the readers of the day signs made it good. .
    <ne:m> (b.4 f.6 c.15 p.57)
89.  *nen*.  zan nen quipiqui, zan nempanca in motlanitoa, .  in vain
    he practised deceit; to no purpose he wagered. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.9
    c.27 p.94)
90.  *nen*.  auh inic amo za nen totlatlatozque: titlatolzacamozque, .
    and so we shall not repeat uselessly nor reopen the discussion. .
    <ne:m> (b.4 f.9 c.28 p.96)
91.  *nen*.  in amo zan tlatolxacualli, tlatolnechicolli, tlatolnenel,
    ilihuiztlatolli, zan nen tlatolli toconnemitizque,
    ticcueptinemizque .  not just mixed, twisted, disordered,
    unconsidered, and profitless discussion shall we make use of or
    continue to work over. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.9 c.28 p.96)
92.  *nen*.  que zan nel oc nen, .  verily, how could it be? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
93.  *nen*.  tle za nel nen, .  truly, of what profit was it? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
94.  *nen*.  tle za nen, .  of what profit was their work? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
95.  *nen*.  tle oc nen, .  what was left? . <ne:m> (b.4 f.10 c.32
    p.105)
96.  *nen*.  auh intla za oc nen tlalilo, nempancatlalilo,
    huecauhtica, yehuatica, zan oncan ilcahualo: .  and if one had
    been sitting to no purpose and in vain, [he was] only forgotten
    there for a long time, for a considerable time. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.12
    c.37 p.124)
97.  *nen*.  can nen ommanaz, can ommayahuiz, can ommazohuaz, .  where
    could he save himself, find repose, or extend his arm? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
98.  *nen*.  ipampa in za nica toconcemitotiquiza, inic amo za nen
    tictequipachozque tetlacaquiliz, titenacaztititzazque, za ilihuiz
    tlatoltica titetzontetilizque, titotzontetilizque,
    titzontetiezque, .  wherefore here we quickly come to agreement so
    that we shall not afflict one's ears without need, or trouble them
    with useless talk; nor be repulsive, opinionated, and headstrong.
    . <ne:m> (b.4 f.12 c.39 p.129)
99.  *nen*.  ca izca, za oc nen ic nimitzpantia, nimitzteteuhtia, ic
    nimitzpatia, ic nimitzpayahualochtia: .  for take care [lest] in
    vain I deck thee with flags and paper streamers, cure thee, and
    surround thee with medicines. . <ne:m> (b.5 f.1 c.1 p.152)
100.  *nen*.  ayocmo ihuiyan, in oc nen achi quitoca tlalli: .  no
    longer with calm, but vainly, did they a little way follow the
    land; . <ne:m> (b.5 f.1 c.2 p.155)
101.  *nen*.  campa zan ye nel nen onhuiloaz, .  where indeed is there
    to go, in vain? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.1 c.1 p.4)
102.  *nen*.  auh yequene manozo xicmonequilti, ma teixco nen in
    tlalticpac: .  and, furthermore, ordain that he belittle no one on
    earth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.2 c.4 p.19)
103.  *nen*.  auh in axcan tlacatle, totecue, tloquee, nahuaquee:
    manozo omitzmoteopohuili, manozo omixtzinco, mocpactzinco nen in
    macehualli: cuix ilotiz, cuix cuepiz in motlahueltzin, in
    mocualantzin: .  "and now, o master, o our lord, o lord of the
    near, of the nigh, as the commoner hath troubled thee, as he hath
    offended thee, will perhaps thy fury, thy anger, be placated, be
    turned?" . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
104.  *nen*.  ha ca choca, ca tlaocoya, ca iyollo concua in commati,
    inic omitzmoyolitlacalhui, inic omixtzinco, mocpactzinco nen, .
    he weepeth, he sorroweth, he eateth out his heart when he
    acknowledgeth how he hath offended thee, how he hath wronged thee.
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
105.  *nen*.  oc nen xommimattinemi. .  be ever cautious. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.33)
106.  *nen*.  auh in yolqui in ixochcohcoyohuan tloque nahuaque, za
    tlayayauh, za netotopanehualo, za nen in tlaixpapalolo tlalli: auh
    ye tla acuecuenocihui, atica .  and the animals, the four-footed
    ones of the lord of the near, of the nigh, just go here and there;
    they can scarcely rise; to no purpose is the ground licked; and
    they go crazed for water. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.8 p.36)
107.  *nen*.  quen nen: .  in what manner [would it be] to no purpose?
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.8 p.37)
108.  *nen*.  quen nen, quen nicnochihuiliz, .  to what purpose, in
    what manner shall I deal with the governed? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.4 c.9
    p.43)
109.  *nen*.  mach nen nozo tlahuanqui aoc quimati, in quitoa, in
    quitenehua: .  "they say also that to no purpose is the drunkard;
    no longer doth he know what he sayeth, what he divulgeth." .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.6 c.14 p.69)
110.  *nen*.  ahzo nen nohuic tihuallachiaz, .  "perhaps in vain thou
    wilt look, to me." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.6 c.14 p.72)
111.  *nen*.  quen zan nel oc nen? .  what can be done? is it yet in
    vain? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.84)
112.  *nen*.  ca nen tepaltzinco oammotlacatilique, .  to what purpose
    were ye born by one's grace? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.90)
113.  *nen*.  ma nen chico ticquetz in mocxi: .  let thy feet go not
    astray. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.91)
114.  *nen*.  auh ic titlazotiz, intla za nen ahneyocol, cana
    mitzmopohuili toteucyo: .  and thus thou wilt be loved, even if it
    is doubtful, undetermined where our lord assigneth thee. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.96)
115.  *nen*.  iz a za nen o, ahneyol, ayoc tlacatencopa, .  perhaps
    there will happen that which is not conceivable, that which is not
    expressible. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
116.  *nen*.  amo cenca nen tepaltzinco timotitimalotiez,
    timixpatlauhtiez, tahatlamattiez: .  to a purpose thou wilt
    glorify thyself by one's grace, thou wilt esteem  thyself, thou
    wilt be proud. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
117.  *nen*.  intla timonemitiz, intla achi tictocaz tlalticpac: ma
    nen cana ic ticniuhti in monacayotzin noxocoyouh conetzin,
    cocotzin, tepitzin, .  if thou art to live, if thou art to
    continue a little on earth, do not anywhere be friendly by means
    of thy body, my youngest one, child, dove, little one. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.9 c.19 p.102)
118.  *nen*.  auh nizca huel xiccaqui, huel xicpia, huel
    motepitznahuatil. intla ye cana tepaltzinco timoetztica: ma nen
    itla mitic tiquito, ma nen itla mitic ticyocox: .  and heed it
    well, guard it well as thy stern commandment: if somewhere thou
    art dependent upon one, see to it that thou do not presume in
    something, see to it that thou be not haughty. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9
    c.19 p.102)
119.  *nen*.  auh nizca huel xiccaqui, huel xicpia, huel
    motepitznahuatil. intla ye cana tepaltzinco timoetztica: ma nen
    itla mitic tiquito, ma nen itla mitic ticyocox: .  and heed it
    well, guard it well as thy stern commandment: if somewhere thou
    art dependent upon one, see to it that thou do not presume in
    something, see to it that thou be not haughty. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9
    c.19 p.102)
120.  *nen*.  ma oc ticahahuillacanec in moyollo, ma oc nen canapa
    itzcaliuh: .  let thyself not have allowed thy heart the evil of
    directing itself elsewhere. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9 c.19 p.102)
121.  *nen*.  ma nen ica, ma nen queman ipan tia, in iuh mitoa
    tlatolli: ma tictlaxin. .  never at any time, never ever betray
    him; as the saying is said, do not commit adultery. . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.19 p.102)
122.  *nen*.  ma nen ica, ma nen queman ipan tia, in iuh mitoa
    tlatolli: ma tictlaxin. .  never at any time, never ever betray
    him; as the saying is said, do not commit adultery. . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.19 p.102)
123.  *nen*.  at za nen o, itla huel timahailiz: .  perhaps it is to
    no purpose that thou wilt be able to do something? . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.20 p.110)
124.  *nen*.  amo zan nen o, nopiltze in cuezcomatl iixpan toco
    coconetzitzinti, in pipiltzitzinti: ca yehhuatl quinezcayotia in
    cualcan in yeccan hui: in ipampa in oc chalchiuhti, in oc
    maquizti, in oc huel motquiticate teoxiuhti. .  "it is not in
    vain, o my son, that children, babies are buried in front of the
    maize bin, for this signifieth that they go to a good place, a
    fine place, because they are still as precious green stones, still
    as precious bracelets; still pure, they become as precious
    turquoises." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.21 p.116)
125.  *nen*.  ach anozo nen mochihua tipaqui timomati, in
    ticmotequimaca in paquiztli: ca ye timomictia, ca timohuitilia: .
    perhaps otherwise to no avail it cometh to pass that thou thinkest
    to find pleasure when thou givest thyself excessively to pleasure,
    for already thou killest thyself, thou endangerest thyself. .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.21 p.117)
126.  *nen*.  cenca tle ticmati, cenca moyolic: ma nen tommixcueyoni.
    .  take good heed, take care; see to it that thine eyes are open.
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.123)
127.  *nen*.  a ca nelle axcan aiuhtlancayotl, popoloni, tzatzacui:
    aitlaliloyan nen tiuhque cententli, cencamatl toconquixtia in
    amixpantzinco: amonacazpantzinco toconehua. .  now, verily,
    unfinished stuttering, stammering, unsettled, useless are the word
    or two which we deliver in your presence, which we intone to your
    ears. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.136)
128.  *nen*.  aquin oc nen tlamahuizoani: .  who will be the one who
    marveleth? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.137)
129.  *nen*.  auh in axcan: za nen tiuhque, za nen tehhuan
    aiuhtlancayotl, aiuhquizqui popolonqui, tzatzacqui, aitlaliloya,
    aitenquixtiloyan: ic toconcuepa, toconilochia, in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin. .  but now, thus are we useless; useless are we;
    unfinished, incomplete, stuttering, stammering, unsettled,
    unpronounced is that with which we return, with which we respond
    to your discourse. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
130.  *nen*.  auh in axcan: za nen tiuhque, za nen tehhuan
    aiuhtlancayotl, aiuhquizqui popolonqui, tzatzacqui, aitlaliloya,
    aitenquixtiloyan: ic toconcuepa, toconilochia, in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin. .  but now, thus are we useless; useless are we;
    unfinished, incomplete, stuttering, stammering, unsettled,
    unpronounced is that with which we return, with which we respond
    to your discourse. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
131.  *nen*.  intla za nen itla tomacehual, intla tlalticpac quizaqui,
    in itlachihualtzin toteucyo: auh huallaelneliuhtiaz: .  if perhaps
    something is our merit, if the creation of our lord is born, it
    will be covered with filth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.143)
132.  *nen*.  ma oc nen amotentzin, ic xommoyetztiecan. .  "may you be
    here that your words [not] be in vain." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25
    p.144)
133.  *nen*.  mace iuhque in, mach ye ommozcalia, aoc nen quipiqui in
    nemi tlalticpac: .  though like these, perhaps they already think
    themselves discreet; they do not yet imagine that to no avail they
    live on earth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.145)
134.  *nen*.  oc ceppa ompa oc nen mochihua .  once again they worked
    there in vain. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.13 c.28 p.160)
135.  *nen*.  a mach nen nozo timomiquili, .  is it possible that thou
    diest without purpose? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.14 c.29 p.164)
136.  *nen*.  quen nen tiquitoani, .  in what manner might we speak? .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
137.  *nen*.  nen nehhuatl niccuepa, niquilochia in monayotzin, in
    motayotzin: .  useless am I as I return, as I respond to thy
    motherliness, to thy fatherliness. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.191)
138.  *nen*.  ma nen itla tichualnacacitta in mochan, in mocalitic: .
    see to it that thou lookest not longingly to thy home, to
    something within thy house. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.214)
139.  *nen*.  ximocotona, ximozquipilo: ma nen teuhtli, tlazolli
    tiquilnamic, ma tiquelehui: .  punish thyself, humble thyself
    thoroughly; do not think of vice and filth, do not covet [vice and
    filth]. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.215)
140.  *nen*.  cuix no nen nipatzactzintli. .  am I also perchance a
    useless, withered ear of maize? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.226)
141.  *nen*.  ihcuac mitoa: in amo cualli inemiliz intla no teachcauh
    tecoanotza, anozo itla quitemaca: auh no iuh nicchihuaznequi
    nitecoanotzaz, anozo itla nictemacaz: ic mitoa. cuix no
    nipatzactzintli, anozo. cuix no nen nipatzactzintli. .  it is said
    at this time: if one not of means, also if a captain invites one
    to a banquet, or gives him something, and likewise I wish to do
    the same, to invite him to a banquet or to give him something,
    then it is said: "am I also perchance a withered ear of maize?"
    or, "am I also a useless, withered ear of maize?" . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.18 c.41 p.227)
142.  *nen*.  ma mitzhuicacan in toyaohuan intla nen oc ceppa tepal
    xitlama .  let them take thee if, without profit, once more thou
    takest a captive with the aid of others. . <ne:m> (b.8 f.5 c.21
    p.75)
143.  *nen*.  ma nen ye no cuel tepal titlama za inca .  take care
    lest thou again take a captive with others' help. . <ne:m> (b.8
    f.5 c.21 p.75)
144.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualhuia: .  not purposelessly did they
    come. . <ne:m> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.31)
145.  *nen*.  auh intla icuitlapan icac in xochitl, icuitlapampa
    ommotlatlaza in tletlemaitl: auh intla za nen opanhuetz coxonqui
    ommopachoa. .  and if the hemorrhoids are in the rectum, [an
    infusion of] tletlemaitl is cast in the rectum; but if they appear
    only on the surface, they are covered with the pulverized [herb].
    . <ne:m> (b.10 f.9 c.28 p.156)
146.  *nen*.  auh in aquin aocmo quimati, inin patli, inezca ca ye
    ixquich, ca zan nen monoltitoc, in cocoxqui. .  and to him whom
    this medicine no longer cures, it is an indication that this is
    the end, that the patient is confined to bed to no avail. . <ne:m>
    (b.10 f.9 c.28 p.159)
147.  *nen*.  ic macuilli in quic, ic huel ihuintic, huel xocomic,
    aocmo quima in quenin nen: .  thus he drank five, with which he
    became well besotted, quite drunk; he no longer knew how he acted.
    . <ne:m> (b.10 f.12 c.29 p.193)
148.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen ipahyo in ipalehuiloca motlanoquilitinemi
    .  and since his medicating, his remedying, is yet in vain, he
    continually purges himself. . <ne:m> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.216)
149.  *nen*.  auh in oiuh quittaque in, in oiuh quicacque itlatol, oc
    nen itlan aqui, in quimocnotlatlauhtilia, .  and when they had
    thus seen this, when they had thus heard his words, yet to no
    purpose did they pay him attention when they humbly prayed to him.
    . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.33)
150.  *nen*.  tel zan nempanca in ommotlalica, in oncan oc nen
    quitlalmomoztica: .  quite in vain was what had been set up; in
    vain had they made the earthen platform there. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2
    c.13 p.33)
151.  *nen*.  tle zan nen in nican amicatihuitze .  why in vain have
    you come walking here? . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.34)
152.  *nen*.  quenzannel nen, .  what is to be done, in vain? . <ne:m>
    (b.12 f.3 c.13 p.35)
153.  *nen*.  auh in moteuczoma, oc nen tlanahuatica in
    quitzatzacuazque in otli, in ochpantli, .  and moctezuma yet in
    vain had commanded that the road, the highway, be closed off. .
    <ne:m> (b.12 f.3 c.14 p.35)
154.  *nen*.  auh in aca oc nen motlaloa in icuitlaxcol za quihuilana,
    iuhquin xoxoquiohua in momaquixtiznequi, .  and when in vain one
    would run, he would only drag his intestines like something raw as
    he tried to escape. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4 c.20 p.54)
155.  *nen*.  auh in aquique oc nen xonexcaya, tlamatzoaya,
    motlamacehuiaya, in ichtacatzin commacaya in tlacualtzintli: intla
    oittoque, intla oittaloque, niman oncan quimmictia, oncan
    quintlatlatia, .  and if any in vain should inform, should warn
    [them], should gain [their] favor who secretly might give them a
    little food, if they were seen, if they were espied, right there
    they slew them; there they did away with them. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4
    c.21 p.58)
156.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen momaquixtiznequi, in quintlatlauhtia .
    and he who in vain tried to escape besought them; . <ne:m> (b.12
    f.4 c.21 p.59)
157.  *nen*.  auh atle zan nen quiza in mitl, .  and not to no purpose
    did the bolt fly. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4 c.22 p.62)
158.  *nen*.  auh in tiacahuan oc nen hualmomamanaya in quihuallaza
    cuahuitl, in tomahuac ahuacuahuitl in impan espa¤oles: .  but to
    no purpose did the brave warriors mass themselves to cast the
    wood, the thick oak logs, upon the spaniards. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4
    c.22 p.62)
159.  *nen*.  auh in ye iuhqui in huehuei tiacahuan, oc nen
    quimototoctiticaca in tetlaquetzalli: .  and when this was done,
    the great brave warriors hid themselves in vain behind the stone
    columns. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.6 c.31 p.88)
160.  *nen*.  auh in icpac huitzilobochtli, oc nen tlapiaya, .  and at
    the summit of [the pyramid temple of] uitzilopochtli [the priests]
    watched in vain. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.6 c.31 p.88)
161.  *nen*.  in oc nen motlaloznequi za cuauhcamac actihuetzi, .
    those who would in vain have fled only fell into spaces [among]
    the beams. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38 p.115)
162.  *nen*.  auh in tiyacahuan, oc nen hualmomantihui .  and the
    brave warriors still in vain went holding themselves [against the
    spaniards]. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38 p.116)
163.  *nen*.  auh in tiyacauh tlacateccatl in temilotzin, oc nen
    quimmopachihuiaya, .  and the brave warrior, the tlacateccatl
    temilotzin, was watching them in vain. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38
    p.116)
164.  *nen^mehua*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m p54-e:hua> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
165.  *nencihuatl*.  auh intla cihuatl: nencihuatl. .  and if it were
    a woman, she was a profitless woman. . <ne:m-cihua:tl> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
166.  *nencochi*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-cochi> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
167.  *nenempotla*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <dupl-ne:m-potla> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
168.  *nenencolo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <p53-ne:m-coa-lo:2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
169.  *nenenencolo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-lo:2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
170.  *nenenquixtilo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <dupl-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-lo:2 +z>x> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
171.  *nenhuetzi*.  amo nenhuetzi, amo ahuetzi, in itlapalihuiz, .
    not vain nor futile was his work. . <ne:m-huetzi> (b.4 f.12 c.38
    p.125)
172.  *nenhuetzi*.  ye oncan inin quitta, in amo nenhuetzi, in
    iciahuiz, in inecohcol, .  after this, he witnessed the successful
    results of his fatigue and pains. . <ne:m-huetzi> (b.4 f.12 c.38
    p.128)
173.  *nenhuetzi*.  mitoa: amo nenquiza, amo nenhuetzi, in
    itlaminaliz: .  it was said that the passing of a shooting star
    rose and fell neither without purpose nor in vain. . <ne:m-huetzi>
    (b.7 f.1 c.4 p.13)
174.  *nenhuetziz*.  ihuan mochi neltiz, mochi onyehuatiz, in tlein
    maailia, atle nenquizaz, in iciahuiz, in itlapalihuiz, atle
    nenhuetziz, .  and all would be realized and come to pass that was
    undertaken; nothing would fail; of her fatigue and effort, nothing
    would be in vain. . <ne:m-huetzi-z> (b.4 f.1 c.1 p.2)
175.  *nenia*.  zan nenia motlatlamotla, zan nenia mocuauhtlaza, .  in
    vain did he cast and hurl himself against obstacles. . <ne:m-->
    (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
176.  *nenia*.  zan nenia motlatlamotla, zan nenia mocuauhtlaza, .  in
    vain did he cast and hurl himself against obstacles. . <ne:m-->
    (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
177.  *nennemi*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-nemi> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
178.  *nennemi*.  auh za nel cenca izca ca aocmo tlateomatini, ca
    aocmo chocani, ca aocmo tlaocoyani, ca aocmo elcicihuini: ca nel
    nozo oihuintic, oxocomic ca za nennemi, ca ohuellapolo, ca aocmo
    za niman quimati. .  and it is certainly noteworthy that he is no
    longer devout, no longer a weeper, no longer a sorrower, no longer
    a sigher, because he hath become drunk, hath become besotted, is a
    vagabond, is completely crazed; he no longer understandeth at all.
    . <ne:m-nemi> (b.6 f.2 c.6 p.26)
179.  *nenontemi*.  auh in onquiz i, cempoalli izcalli, niman ye ic
    hualmotlalia in macuililhuitl in nemotemi, anozo nenontemi, .  and
    when the twenty [days] of izcalli had passed, thereupon were
    established the five days of nemontemi or nenontemi. . <ne:m-o:n
    temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
180.  *nenoquich*.  nenoquich. .  he was a profitless man. . <ne:m
    oquichtli-trunc> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
181.  *nenquiza*.  atle nenquiza, atle nempolihui, .  nothing failed;
    nothing perished in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.4 f.3 c.6 p.21)
182.  *nenquiza*.  amo nenquiza in iatlamachiliz, imatlamatiliz: .
    not without result were his pride and presumption. . <ne:m-qui:za>
    (b.4 f.3 c.7 p.24)
183.  *nenquiza*.  auh in nel cenca iuh ommitoa, in iuh ommachizti,
    amo nentecahua, amo nenquiza, teca mahuiltitehua in iuh cochihua,
    necochitilo macehualpan pilcoatoc, oipantoatoc, teiicuania,
    tepapatla, .  and in very truth, so it is said and so it is known,
    they did not leave them having done nothing; nor, with no result,
    did they take their pleasure with them taking advantage of their
    sleep, of the sleep into which the common folk had been thrown, to
    hang on to [the women], line them up, rolling them aside and
    enjoying another's place. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.4 f.10 c.31 p.103)
184.  *nenquiza*.  cuix ye in nenquiza tlapalihuiztli: cuix
    ixquichtzin, atzintli, commopolhuiz in toteucyo .  perhaps already
    in vain was the nubility; our lord will destroy the babe, small as
    it is. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.181)
185.  *nenquiza*.  mitoa: amo nenquiza, amo nenhuetzi, in itlaminaliz:
    .  it was said that the passing of a shooting star rose and fell
    neither without purpose nor in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.7 f.1 c.4
    p.13)
186.  *nenquiza*.  nenquiza, tlanenquixtia .  she works to no avail;
    she squanders. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
187.  *nenquiza*.  nenquiza, nempolihui, .  it is worked in vain; it
    fails. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
188.  *nenquizaliztli*.  yehica ca atle oncan ca ilhuilli,
    mahcehualli, can oncan icnoyotl, netoliniliztli, nenquizcayotl,
    nenquizaliztli, ahonehuatinemiliztli. .  for indeed there was no
    desert there, no merit; there was only misery there, poverty,
    purposelessness, misfortune, a life of woe. . <ne:m-qui:za-liz>
    (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
189.  *nenquizaz*.  ihuan mochi neltiz, mochi onyehuatiz, in tlein
    maailia, atle nenquizaz, in iciahuiz, in itlapalihuiz, atle
    nenhuetziz, .  and all would be realized and come to pass that was
    undertaken; nothing would fail; of her fatigue and effort, nothing
    would be in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.4 f.1 c.1 p.2)
190.  *nenquizaz*.  in tlein maailiz, amo nenquizaz, .  what he might
    do would not fail. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.4 f.6 c.15 p.56)
191.  *nenquizaz*.  ic quinextia, quinezcayotia, ca tlamatiuh in yaoc,
    amo nenquizaz: .  thus these showed and made evident that he went
    skillfully to war, not going forth in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.5
    f.1 c.3 p.158)
192.  *nenquizcayotl*.  yehica ca atle oncan ca ilhuilli, mahcehualli,
    can oncan icnoyotl, netoliniliztli, nenquizcayotl, nenquizaliztli,
    ahonehuatinemiliztli. .  for indeed there was no desert there, no
    merit; there was only misery there, poverty, purposelessness,
    misfortune, a life of woe. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ca:5-yo:tl1> (b.2
    f.11 c.38 p.171)
193.  *nenquizqueh*.  ca zan nentlaca, nenquizque: .  they are only
    vain, worthless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-plur14> (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.55)
194.  *nenquizqui*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
195.  *nenquizqui*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him
    nemon, nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
196.  *nenquizqui*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
197.  *nenquizqui*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  it is thorny,
    worthless, useless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
198.  *nenquizqui*.  in atle imochiuhya, nenquizqui, atle inecoca. .
    it is the growing place of nothing -- useless, productive of
    nothing. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
199.  *nenquiztimani*.  atle ipan itto, nenquiztimani. .  it is
    abandoned; it lies useless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-mani aux04>
    (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
200.  *nenquiztimani*.  nenquiztimani, nempoliuhtimani, .  it lies
    worthless, wasting. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-mani aux04> (b.11 f.25
    c.12 p.263)
201.  *nenquiztinemi*.  izca in quichihua: ahantinemi, tochantinemi,
    tochtzopinitinemi, tlatochmatlahuitinemi, tlatochacahuitinemi,
    tlatochtapayolhuitinemi, zoltzonhuitinemi, tlatzonhuitinemi,
    tlatlapachihuazoitinemi, tlatlazalhuitinemi, mazamintinemi,
    mazamatlahuitinemi, tlatlahpehualhuitinemi, tlatlachictinemi,
    tlahuantinemi, tlatlapehuitinemi, oncan nenquiztinemi: .  behold
    what they did: they went catching [game], they went catching
    rabbits, spearing rabbits, snaring rabbits in nets, shooting
    rabbits with reed arrows, hunting rabbits with balls; they went
    catching quail with snares; they went catching game with snares,
    catching game with a throw-net, catching game with a lasso; they
    went shooting deer with arrows, catching deer in nets; they went
    setting traps; they went setting dead-falls; they went boring the
    maguey plant, becoming drunk; there they went whiling away their
    time. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-nemi aux01> (b.10 f.11 c.29 p.179)
202.  *nenti*.  zan onahuilpehua, zan oc pipiltotonti in
    quipehualtiaya in mochichicuayaotlaya, zan iuh nenti hueiya: .
    those who were yet small boys only began in fun when they began
    the mock-fighting with bags; only gradually it quickened. . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.2 f.10 c.36 p.157)
203.  *nenti*.  zan yeh in quimati, ic motequipachoa, quimmattinemi,
    in quemmach nenti onquizaz, contlalcahuiz inetequipachol, .  this
    same one, when he learned of it, became troubled and continued in
    fear that possibly his efforts would fail, pass away, or miscarry.
    . <ne:m-v01a> (b.4 f.11 c.37 p.122)
204.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia in
    titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
205.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia in
    titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
206.  *nenti*.  auh quen mach nenti in onopan ohualla in teuhtli, in
    tlazolli, .  and what will result when filth, when vice have come
    upon me? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
207.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in onictlazolmicti in atl, in tepetl:
    .  what will result when I have ruined the city? . <ne:m-v01a>
    (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
208.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in oniccochcauh, in onicpaccacauh in
    tlatquitl, in tlamamalli: .  what will result when I depart
    leaving the governed asleep, when I gladly leave them? . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
209.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in onicatoyahui, in onictepexihui in
    macehualli. .  what will result when I cast the common folk into
    the torrent; cast them from the crag? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9
    p.43)
210.  *nenti*.  quen nenti in omopan xitin tlatquitl, tlamamalli: .
    how will it be when in thy time the governed will scatter? . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
211.  *nenti*.  quen nenti in oinencauhyan mochiuhtiquiz in atl in
    tepetl: .  how will it be when the city will become, will be made
    his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
212.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in ye
    inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10
    p.50)
213.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in ye
    inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10
    p.50)
214.  *nenti*.  in nelli mach imolicpitzin, itetepontzin ic
    tlaczatinemi, in moca in mopampa, in quen nenti in macuil, in
    matlac in mitzotlatoctiz: auh quen cexiuh, quen oxiuh quen tamio,
    .  truly he goeth on elbow, on knee for thee, on thy behalf, [to
    know] how it will be in the brief time he will lead thee along the
    road, and what thy condition [will be] in one year, in two years;
    . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.81)
215.  *nenti*.  intlacatle hueli, quen nenti? .  if [thou art] unable
    in anything, how will it be? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
216.  *nenti*.  quen nenti otitlahuetzquiti, in otlacualoyan .  how
    hath it come about that thou hadst caused laughter at the place of
    eating? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.124)
217.  *nenti*.  oc cenca oc mocenyollocopa in xonelcicihui, quemmach
    nenti in macuil, in matlac: .  especially sigh with all thy might;
    [say]:  how will it be in a few days? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.12 c.25
    p.142)
218.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
219.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
220.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
221.  *nenti*.  ah in anquimococochmachititoque, in quemmach nenti in
    tlacotiz, in tequitiz in tonan in cihuapilli in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli, .  without sleep ye have remained awaiting if possibly
    our mother the noble woman ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
222.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in cacocuiz, in itlan aquiz in
    chimalli, in tehuehuelli, in amochpochtzin, in toconetzin, .  if
    possibly your daughter, our child, would take up, would use the
    shield, the small shield; . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
223.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in quimoquixtiliz, in quimotlaxiliz in
    ieticauh in tecococauh: ca miquiztequitiz, .  if possibly she
    would give off, would cast out, her heaviness, her pain; for it
    exacteth a tribute of death. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
224.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti teotl cualo, tlatlatzini otopan
    quihualmonequilti: ozan techommanililico in tlacatl toteucyo, .
    how will it be if the master, our lord, hath willed that upon us
    there be an eclipse, that there be thunder, that he hath only come
    to deprive us? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.186)
225.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti ochoquiztli, tlaocolli quimotemohuili
    in ipalnemoa. .  how will it be if he by whom we live bringeth
    down weeping, sorrow? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.186)
226.  *nenti*.  in quicuiznequi zan micuanitiuh, ompa quitocatiuh, zan
    iuh nenti, in ahuecatlan caxitia: .  when he wishes to take it, it
    only goes drifting away; he goes to follow it there; little by
    little it makes him reach for it in the depths of the water. .
    <ne:m-v01a> (b.11 f.9 c.5 p.86)
227.  *nenti*.  zan iuh nenti in achichiacpan mochihua, pinahua,
    canahua, iloti. .  gradually this becomes a spring; it is ashamed;
    it lessens; it abates. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.249)
228.  *nentlacah*.  ca zan nentlaca, nenquizque: .  they are only
    vain, worthless. . <ne:m-tla:catl-plur06> (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.55)
229.  *nentlacatl*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him
    nemon, nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.2 f.11 c.38
    p.171)
230.  *nentlacatl*.  zan nentlacatl, acan petzitl, .  he was a
    worthless person, who nowhere made an impression. . <ne:m
    tla:catl> (b.4 f.8 c.24 p.85)
231.  *nentlacatl*.  tlacatle totecue, ma oc yehhuatl xicmottili, in
    cuahuic onoc, in tlalli ixco ca, in aya quimomachitia: motolinia
    in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl, in aahuia, in ahuellamati: auh in
    aic totonia, in aic yamania: auh in aic huellamati, in iiomio, in
    inacayo: in zan cen tohtonehuatinemi, in za cen
    chichichinacatinemi in iyollo: .  "o master, o our lord, consider
    yet those who lie on the board, those who are on the ground, those
    who know nothing, the poor, the miserable, the useless, those who
    rejoice not, the discontented, those who never have the
    necessities of life, those never comfortable of bone, of flesh --
    those who all together live suffering great pain, great affliction
    of heart." . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.1 p.4)
232.  *nentlacatl*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
233.  *nentlacatl*.  in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl, in aahuia in
    ahuellamati, in cococ in teopohqui quimati: .  [they are] the
    poor, the useless, the unhappy, the discontented, the anguished. .
    <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.9)
234.  *nentlacatl*.  cuix ica timotlatemolia in macehualli, in amo
    tlacamati, in aompa ehehua: auh in aihihuia, in nentlacatl, in zan
    quipictinemi tlalticpac. .  wilt thou perhaps seek one wherewith
    [to replace] the commoner, the disobedient one who understandeth
    things backwards and who is impulsive, who is useless, who liveth
    in vain on earth? . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.2 c.4 p.18)
235.  *nentlacatl*.  macamo no quen quimochihuilican in xoxohuixtoc in
    cuahuitl, in metl, in nopalli in ixquich ixhuatoc: ca itlaanca ca
    iyolca in macehualli, ca inenca in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl in
    ayahuia in ahuellamati in tlacnocahualli, in ahualnecini in
    icochca in ineuhca in icoayoyotzin itech motetecatinemi in itech
    icoyocatinemi. .  may they also in no manner harm that which lieth
    green -- the trees, the maguey, the nopal, all which lieth
    germinating -- for they are the source, the life of the common
    folk, the support of the poor, the unhappy, the discontented, the
    forsaken, the useless, those whose sustenance appeareth not, whose
    intestines go stuck to their sides, go rumbling. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.6 f.4 c.8 p.40)
236.  *nentlacatl*.  in ahayahuia, in ahuellamati quitimaloa, in
    quimacehualtia, in quilhuiltia toteucyo: inic quitlamacehualtia,
    in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl in hayahuia, in ahuellamati, in
    tonehua, in chichinaca, .  the unhappy, the discontented, our lord
    honoreth with this, giveth as merit, giveth as one's lot, so that
    he causeth them to be the miserable, the useless, the unhappy, the
    discontented ones, to suffer tribulation, pain. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.123)
237.  *nentlacatl*.  in amo cualli moncolli, motolinia icnotlacatl,
    nentlacatl, .  the bad father of the parents-in-law [is] poor,
    miserable, useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10 f.1 c.2 p.7)
238.  *nentlacatl*.  motolinia, icnotlacatl nentlacatl, ahommonamiqui
    .  [he is] poor, miserable, useless, destitute. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.10 f.2 c.9 p.31)
239.  *nentlacatl*.  in ichtecqui motolinia icnotlacatl, nentlacatl,
    cococ, teopouhqui, cohcotoc, mohmotz, apiztli, icnoyotl,
    apizteotl, yollo itlacauhqui iztlaccomoc: .  the thief [is] poor,
    miserable, useless, full of affliction, undone, niggardly, hungry,
    miserable, gluttonous, corrupt, prying. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10
    f.2 c.11 p.39)
240.  *nentlacatl*.  in tlahueliloc teezyo, millacatic, itzcuintic,
    tequimillacatl, tequimacehualli, xixicuin, atlini tlacuani,
    tlacualxixicuin, xiuhnel, xihuixcol, atle hueli, nentlacatl,
    nenqui, tetl popoxiuhteuh. .  the bad noblewoman [is] like a field
    worker -- brutish, a great field worker, a great commoner; a
    glutton, a drinker, an eater -- a glutton, incapable, useless,
    time-wasting. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10 f.3 c.13 p.49)
241.  *nentlacatl*.  chichiltic, huel iuhqui in cacaloxochitl: zan
    nentlacatl, acan huelic, acan ahuiac, .  it is chili-red, just
    like the cacaloxochitl, but useless, without fragrance, without
    perfume. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
242.  *nentlacatl*.  amo ahuiac, nentlacatl, atle inecoca, atle
    inequizzo. .  they are not fragrant; they are useless, of no use,
    not required. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
243.  *nentlacatl*.  aiyac, ahuelic, nentlacatl: .  it has no aroma,
    no fragrance; it is useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.204)
244.  *nentlacatl*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, zazan ye xochitl, amo ihyac.
    .  it is prickly, useless -- an ordinary flower, with no aroma. .
    <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.210)
245.  *nentlacatl*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  it is thorny,
    worthless, useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
246.  *nentlacayotl*.  timalihui in icnopillotl, in icnotlacayotl, in
    nentlacayotl: .  poverty, misery, uselessness prevail. . <ne:m
    tla:catl-yo:tl1> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
247.  *nentlacayotl*.  cococ, teopouhqui quiquiztoc, timalihui in
    icnotlacayotl, in nentlacayotl: cococ, teopouhqui macho, timalihui
    in cuitlaxcolpitzactli, .  [all is] permeated by pain, by
    affliction; misery, inhumanity dominate; pain, affliction are
    known; starvation dominateth. . <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1> (b.6 f.9
    c.20 p.107)
248.  *nentlamacho*.  ic mitoaya: nohuiyan chialo, nohuiyan ihuicpa
    nentlamacho, tlaocoyalo, .  so was it said that everywhere he was
    awaited; everywhere there was humility and sorrow before him. .
    <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2 +t>ch> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
249.  *nentlamachohuaya*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2-hua2-ya:n +del.n> (b.11 f.11
    c.6 p.105)
250.  *nentlamati*.  in atle quitta octli, iuhquin nentlamati iyollo,
    iuhquin aco pilcac, iuhquin ahactihuetzi, iuhquin ahuic yauh. .
    when he found no wine, he seemed anguished of heart, as if he hung
    high, or tumbled into a pitfall, like a vagabond. . <ne:m-p51-mati
    +fusion> (b.4 f.2 c.4 p.12)
251.  *nentlamati*.  macayac tlaocoya, nentlamati in iyollo, .  let no
    one be sad or heavy of heart. . <ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.5 f.1
    c.2 p.154)
252.  *nentlamati*.  tlacatle totecue: yohualle, ehecatle, manozo
    tlacahua in moyollotzin, ma xicmocnoittili, ma xicmotlaocolili, ma
    xicmiximachili in momacehualtzin: motolinia in mohuictzinco
    elciciuhtinemi: in mitzmonochilia, in mitzmotzatzililia, in
    mitzmotemolia: in mohuictzinco nentlamati. .  "o master, o our
    lord, o night, o wind, grant perchance that thou mayest bless,
    have mercy, take compassion, acknowledge thy common folk, the
    poor, those who go sighing toward thee, who call out, who cry out
    to thee, who seek thee, who do what they can in thy sight. . <ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.8)
253.  *nentlamati*.  in ye ixquich nepapan cuauhtli ocelotl: in
    tonehua, in chichinaca in iyollo, in nentlamati in mitzmonochilia,
    in mitzmotzatzililia: in amo quitlazotla in itzontecon in
    ielchiquiuh, in teca quimotla, in teca quitepachoa in miquiznequi:
    manozo achitzin xicmottitili in quinequi, in quelehuia, in tizatl,
    in ihhuitl: .  all the different eagle warriors, the ocelot
    warriors, those who suffer pain, who suffer torment in their
    hearts, who are anguished, those who call upon thee, who cry out
    to thee, those who put no value upon their heads, upon their
    breasts, those who hurl missiles against, who press upon [the
    enemy] as they wish for death: concede them the little that they
    desire, that they long for, the chalk, the down feathers. . <ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.1 c.3 p.13)
254.  *nentlamati*.  in tlatoani in ihcuac quittaya, quimatia ca cenca
    nentlamati in cuitlapilli, atlapalli macehualli: niman
    tlanahuatiaya, inic ollamaloz, inic teellacuahuaya, inic
    tepaquiltiaya tlatoani: .  the ruler, when he beheld and knew that
    the common folk and vassals were very fretful, then commanded that
    the ball game be played, in order to animate the people and divert
    them. . <ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58)
255.  *nentlamati*.  auh in ihcuac in ye itlacauhtiuh in innemiliz: in
    aocmo cualli inyollo, in za iuhqui nentlamati, .  but when now
    they corrupted their way of life, when they no longer were of good
    heart, then he was as if saddened. . <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion> (b.9
    f.3 c.6 p.32)
256.  *nentlamatia*.  ic mochi tlacatl oncan tlatemachiaya,
    nentlamatia, tlaocoyaya, inic quicneliz: .  for everyone then
    showed devotion, was humbled, and sorrowed, in order that he
    should show them favor. . <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
257.  *nentlamatia*.  o yehhuatl in, in quinchoctiaya inic nentlamatia
    in pochteca huehuetque: cenca huel quinanahuatiaya, inic amo
    quitlaahuilquixtiliz, in amo quitlaahuilmachiliz toteucyo. .  with
    these [words] the old merchants brought [those who returned
    prosperous] to tears; they humbled them; they sternly admonished
    them not to disregard, not to neglect our lord. . <ne:m-p51-mati
    ya3  +fusion> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
258.  *nentlamatia*.  in zazo tlein quichihuaya, za iuhquin
    nentlamatia, .  whatsoever he did, it was as if he were in
    torment. . <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3> (b.12 f.1 c.6 p.17)
259.  *nentlamattinemi*.  ma oc xocomminecuiltili in maxcatzin, in
    mocococatzin, in motechcopatzinco huitz: in tzopelic, in ahuiac,
    in totonqui, in yamanqui, in motzmolinca in mocelica: in yehhua in
    icnotlacatl in. n. ca ye ixquich cahuitzintli, i, in
    mohuicpatzinco elciciuhtinemi, in nentlamattinemi in macehualli, .
    may thou yet let this humble person, n., smell thy property, thy
    treasure, which falleth from thee, that which is sweet, fragrant,
    the necessities of life, thy freshness, thy tenderness: for
    already, for some time, the common folk go sighing unto thee, go
    in affliction. . <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-nemi aux01 +fusion> (b.6
    f.1 c.2 p.9)
260.  *nentlatlahtolli*.  aocmo monequi in za tlatolzolli, za
    nentlatlatolli, in omachcamatzopetziuh, omachtlatziuh tlatolli
    tiquitotinemizque: .  no longer is it necessary for us to continue
    repeating only worn-out, useless discussion, so much unfit talk,
    so many lazy words. . <ne:m-dupl-p51-ihtahui-caus06-l1> (b.4 f.9
    c.29 p.96)
261.  *nicnempolo*.  quitoaya, macamo nicnencua, macamo nicnempolo,
    macamo nicnixcahui, in nocneliloca: .  he said: "may I eat not in
    vain, may I consume not in vain may I use not for myself alone
    that which hath benefited me." . <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06-opt>
    (b.1 f.2 c.20 p.46)
262.  *nicnencua*.  quitoaya, macamo nicnencua, macamo nicnempolo,
    macamo nicnixcahui, in nocneliloca: .  he said: "may I eat not in
    vain, may I consume not in vain may I use not for myself alone
    that which hath benefited me." . <p11-p33-ne:m-cua:> (b.1 f.2 c.20
    p.46)
263.  *nictlanempolhuia*.  ca nican nictlanempolhuia,
    nictlaahuilquixtilia, in tloque, nahuaque, .  here I use vainly, I
    waste, [the gifts of] the protector of all. . <p11-p33-p51-ne:m
    polihui-caus06-ben> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
264.  *ninentlamati*.  ca mohuicpatzinco ninentlamati ca
    nimitznotemachilia, .  I do what I can for thee, I place my trust
    in thee. . <p11-ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
265.  *ninentlamati*.  ic nichoca ic nitlaocoya ic ninentlamati in
    niquilnamiqui ac ye in nomamiccatzin, ac ye in notenhuacauh. .
    thus I weep, I am saddened, I am discontent when I reflect upon
    which one is my sluggard, which one my incoherent one. . <p11-ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.87)
266.  *ninentlamati*.  yeh inic nichoca, yeh inic ninoteopoa, yeh inic
    nitlaocoya, inic ninentlamati in tlacoyohuan, in yohualli xelihui,
    .  for this I weep, for this I am anguished, for this I am
    saddened, for this I am unhappy at midnight, at the parting of the
    night. . <p11-ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.89)
267.  *oinencauhyan*.  quen nenti in oinencauhyan mochiuhtiquiz in atl
    in tepetl: .  how will it be when the city will become, will be
    made his place of desolation? . <o:-poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
268.  *ommonenencoa*.  zan iuh commauhcacahua, conciauhcahua,
    ommonenencoa. .  so he only let her alone, in terror; she tired
    him out; he was defrauded. . <o:n-p54-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.5 f.2 c.13
    p.179)
269.  *onen*.  auh quihualmonequiltiz, in quecin quihualmonequiltiz,
    commopolhuiz, commotlatiliz, commoxixiniliz, commomomoyahuiliz in
    tlalehualli, in acatzacualli, in tlachcuitetelli in onen
    ticzazalo. .  and he will determine in the manner he will desire;
    he will ruin, burn, break up, scatter the earthen structure, the
    reed enclosure, the mound of earth which in vain thou hast put
    together. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.33)
270.  *onen*.  onen oncatca. .  it was in vain . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.6
    f.18 c.41 p.225)
271.  *onen*.  ic mitoa: onen oncatca, anozo a onen oncatca. .  hence
    it is said. "it was in vain," or "it was not in vain." . <o:-ne:m>
    (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.225)
272.  *onen*.  ic mitoa: onen oncatca, anozo a onen oncatca. .  hence
    it is said. "it was in vain," or "it was not in vain." . <o:-ne:m>
    (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.225)
273.  *onen*.  colli acualli tlaahuilmatini, onen oyohuac, onen
    oncalac, in tonatiuh, atle iteyo atle itoca, .  the bad
    grandfather [is] negligent, of misspent days and nights; of no
    fame, of no renown. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.5)
274.  *onen*.  colli acualli tlaahuilmatini, onen oyohuac, onen
    oncalac, in tonatiuh, atle iteyo atle itoca, .  the bad
    grandfather [is] negligent, of misspent days and nights; of no
    fame, of no renown. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.5)
275.  *onenhuetz*.  onenhuetz in cemilhuitl, .  in misfortune hath the
    feast day come! . <o:-ne:m-huetzi-prt1> (b.2 f.5 c.27 p.98)
276.  *onentlamattinenca*.  ihcuac quicahua: ca nel oconittac in
    quitemoa iyollo, inic oelciciuhtinenca, onentlamattinenca. etc. .
    then he released it: for in truth he had realized what his heart
    sought -- for which he had lived sighing and in discontent, etc. .
    <o:-ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-nemi-prt1-ca10 aux01> (b.5 f.2 c.12
    p.178)
277.  *onnempoliuh*.  ic zan onnempoliuh in oc cequi in intenamic, in
    intetlapalol: .  thus there came only to nothing still another of
    their meetings, of their welcomings. . <o:n-ne:m-polihui-prt1>
    (b.12 f.2 c.12 p.32)
278.  *ononnentlamatticatca*.  ca ononnentlamatticatca in ye macuil in
    ye matlac, .  I have been afflicted for some time. . <o:-p11-o:n
    ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-ca:1a-ca10 aux11a> (b.12 f.3 c.16 p.44)
279.  *ontlanemiuhcantilihqueh*.  ontlanemiuhcantilique,
    oquimompetztoccauhque, .  they had caused ruin and left them bare.
    . <o:n-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n-v01a-caus04-prt1-plur01> (b.4 f.10
    c.32 p.105)
280.  *otictlanempolhuih*.  auh in ica in ipampa in otictlanempolhui
    toteucyo, in otictlanencuali: yeh in amatl in copalli in motequiuh
    in ticchihuaz, in ticmanaz.  .  "and because at some time thou
    hast depreciated the things of our lord, hast failed to provide
    food, thou wilt provide, wilt offer as thy duty, the paper, the
    incense." . <o:-p12-p33-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-ben-prt1> (b.6 f.3
    c.7 p.33)
281.  *otlanemiuhyantilih*.  ca otlanemiuhyantili in toteucyo, ca
    oyaque in monanhua in motahua, in huel quitenehuaya in huel
    quipoaya inchoquizyo, in ixayoyotlatolli. .  our lord hath
    destroyed it; thy fathers, thy mothers have gone, they who could
    pronounce, who could recount the weeping, the tearful words. . <o:
    p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-prt1> (b.3 f.3 c.ap1 p.42)
282.  *quimonenquixtilia*.  ca ayac quimonenquixtilia in toteucyo. .
    for our lord faileth no one. . <p33-p54-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ben
    +z>x> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.217)
283.  *quinemia*.  amo zan quinencuaya, amo za quinemia, in atl, in
    tlacualli: .  not without purpose did they eat [and] drink. . <p33
    ne:m-i:1-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
284.  *quinencuaya*.  amo zan quinencuaya, amo za quinemia, in atl, in
    tlacualli: .  not without purpose did they eat [and] drink. . <p33
    ne:m-cua:-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
285.  *quinencui*.  auh amo zan quinencui, cahcui, amo zan ixpanhuetzi
    in inecuiltonol, .  but his wealth he did not just appropriate
    without purpose, nor fail to take; neither did it just fall to
    him. . <p33-ne:m-cui> (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
286.  *quinencuiqueh*.  inic amo oquitlazotlaque in intzontecon, in
    imelchiquiuh, ca amo cacuique quinencuique inic oquittaque in
    tachcauhyotl, in huehueyotl, inic ye petlati, ye icpalti, inic ye
    contlanehui in impetl, in imicpal in pochteca. .  for not without
    reason did the merchants take and find leadership and the wisdom
    of old age, become leaders, and receive their authority in
    exchange. . <p33-ne:m-cui-plur01> (b.4 f.7 c.17 p.62)
287.  *quinenquixtia*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.1
    c.2 p.7)
288.  *quinnentlamati*.  aocmo huel quicua, in nellimach
    quincuitlahuiltia, za iuh quinnentlamati in yollo, .  no more
    could they eat, although strongly did they urge them; it was as if
    they were anguished in spirit; . <p43-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.9 f.5 c.14
    p.64)
289.  *quitenemmacaya*.  amo quitenemmacaya in huehuetque, in
    ilamatque, in manel cententli cencamatl intlatol: .  the old men
    [and] the old women did not offer them purposelessly, even if
    their utterance was [only] one word, one syllable. . <p33-p52-ne:m
    maca-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
290.  *tenenco*.  in amo cualli tlacuillo: yolloquiquimil, tecualani,
    texiuhtlati, tenenco, tenenenco, .  the bad scribe [is] dull,
    detestable, irritating -- a fraud, a cheat. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>
    (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
291.  *tenencoa*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-ne:m-coa> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
292.  *tenencoh*.  in amo cualli tlacualnamacac: in quinamaca
    tamaltzocuitlatl, tamalpinetli, papayaxtli, acecec, acecepatic,
    tenencuacua, tenentlamachti, tenenco, polocatamalli,
    cecepoltamalli, tamalpalan, tamaliyac, zazalic, zazaltic,
    tamalzolli, tamalcecec, cuitlaxococ xocopatic, xocopetzcuahuitl,
    iyatatl. .  the bad food seller [is] he who sells filthy tamales,
    discolored tamales -- broken, tasteless, quite tasteless,
    inedible, frightening, deceiving; tamales made of chaff, swollen
    tamales, spoiled tamales, foul tamales -- sticky, gummy; old
    tamales, cold tamales -- dirty and sour, very sour, exceedingly
    sour, stinking. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.10 f.4 c.19 p.69)
293.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco .  it disappoints one, it
    constantly disappoints one. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.12 c.6
    p.122)
294.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
295.  *tenencoh*.  pipiaztic, memelactic in iquillo: chichiltic in
    ixochio; tenenco. .  its stems are slender, straight; its blossom
    is chili-red; [its odor] disappoints one. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>
    (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
296.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenenentlamachti. .  they
    disappoint one, constantly disappoint one; they are sorry things.
    . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
297.  *tenencuacua*.  in amo cualli tlacualnamacac: in quinamaca
    tamaltzocuitlatl, tamalpinetli, papayaxtli, acecec, acecepatic,
    tenencuacua, tenentlamachti, tenenco, polocatamalli,
    cecepoltamalli, tamalpalan, tamaliyac, zazalic, zazaltic,
    tamalzolli, tamalcecec, cuitlaxococ xocopatic, xocopetzcuahuitl,
    iyatatl. .  the bad food seller [is] he who sells filthy tamales,
    discolored tamales -- broken, tasteless, quite tasteless,
    inedible, frightening, deceiving; tamales made of chaff, swollen
    tamales, spoiled tamales, foul tamales -- sticky, gummy; old
    tamales, cold tamales -- dirty and sour, very sour, exceedingly
    sour, stinking. . <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.10 f.4 c.19 p.69)
298.  *tenencuacua*.  tenencuacua. .  it pricks one to no purpose. .
    <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.211)
299.  *tenencuacua*.  tenencuacua: .  it pricks one to no purpose. .
    <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
300.  *tenenenco*.  in amo cualli tlacuillo: yolloquiquimil,
    tecualani, texiuhtlati, tenenco, tenenenco, .  the bad scribe [is]
    dull, detestable, irritating -- a fraud, a cheat. . <p52-dupl-ne:m
    coa-prt1> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
301.  *tenenencoa*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
302.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco .  it disappoints one, it
    constantly disappoints one. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.12
    c.6 p.122)
303.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
304.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenenentlamachti. .  they
    disappoint one, constantly disappoint one; they are sorry things.
    . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
305.  *tenentlamachtican*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <p52-ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.105)
306.  *tenentlamachtican*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <p52-ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.105)
307.  *ticnenquixti*.  ma ticnenquixti, in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in
    mache totech monequi, in tomio, in tonacayo, in tochicahuaca in
    tonacayotl .  do not waste the night, the day; they are necessary
    for us even as our bones, our flesh, our strength, our sustenance.
    . <p12-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-opt  +z>x> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.92)
308.  *tictonempiquilia*.  ha nelli mach, in tictonempiquilia in
    timacehualti, .  "verily, we common folk imagine it in vain." .
    <p21-p33-p54-ne:m-pi:qui1-ben> (b.3 f.4 c.ap4 p.52)
309.  *timonemma*.  ma timonemma, ma timonencauh: auh ma timoxiccauh,
    .  take care not to fail to know, not to lose through neglect, not
    to lose through carelessness. . <p12-p54-ne:m-mati-opt> (b.6 f.8
    c.18 p.96)
310.  *timonencauh*.  ma timonemma, ma timonencauh: auh ma
    timoxiccauh, .  take care not to fail to know, not to lose through
    neglect, not to lose through carelessness. . <p12-p54-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-opt> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.96)
311.  *tinentlacatl*.  amo za tinentlacatl: auh aza cuel
    moyacacuitlapil pilcatinemi, titlampixquitinemiz, tixonauhtinemiz,
    tipinehuatinemiz. .  not only art thou useless, but soon thy nasal
    mucus goeth hanging; thou wilt go toothless, thou wilt go on hand
    and knees, thou wilt go pale . <p12-ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.10 c.21
    p.118)
312.  *tinentlamati*.  ha nelli mach in tinentlamati in timacehualti,
    .  indeed, we do our best, we common folk. . <p12-ne:m-p51-mati>
    (b.3 f.4 c.ap4 p.52)
313.  *tinentlamati*.  ca izcatqui tiquitoa, ic tinentlamati
    motechcopa: .  behold, we talk because we are concerned regarding
    thee. . <p12-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.6 f.11 c.23 p.127)
314.  *titlanempoloa*.  nican titlanenquixtia, nican titlanempoloa: .
    here we neglect things, here we ruin things. . <p21-p51-ne:m
    polihui-caus06> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
315.  *titlanempoloa*.  mazo cana tocontlatlazti, mazo
    tictlachitoniliti in toteucyo: nican tontlanenquixtia, nican
    titlanenpoloa. .  may we not cast somewhere aside, reject, the
    things of our lord; [for] here we neglect, here we depreciate
    things. . <p21-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.6 f.15 c.35 p.191)
316.  *titlanenquixtia*.  nican titlanenquixtia, nican titlanempoloa:
    .  here we neglect things, here we ruin things. . <p21-p51-ne:m
    qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
317.  *titlanenquixticahua*.  za tehhuan, in: auh za tiuhque in, in
    titlatlacocahuan toteucyo, in titlanenquixticahua: .  we are
    these, and we are such as these, we the spoilers of our lord, we
    the neglecters. . <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ca:5-- +z>x> (b.6
    f.11 c.24 p.137)
318.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  auh inic otlatoca, inic nenemi amo huel yauh
    in tlalnemiuhyan: hueli patlania in zacatl, in tlacotl, in tlein
    huapahuac. .  and thus it advances, thus it travels: it cannot go
    on bare ground; it can fly on grass, on shrubs, on anything rough.
    . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.8 c.5 p.76)
319.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  in tlalnemiuhyan moquetztiuh, zan icuitlapil
    inic tlaczatiuh; iuhquimma patlantiuh. .  on level land, it goes
    standing on the end of its tail; it is as if it went flying along.
    . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.9 c.5 p.83)
320.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  auh intlacatle ipan aci: in canin poctontli
    moquetza, intla zan tlalnemiuhyan, ic quimati ca oncan tlallan ca
    in tlazotli in tetl: .  and if they are not successful, if it is
    only barren where the little [column of] smoke stands, thus they
    know that the precious stone is there in the earth. . <tla:lli
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.22 c.8 p.221)
321.  *tlanemmatini*.  in teta tlahueliloc, tlatziuhqui amo
    moyolitlacoani, tlanemmatini, tlaxiccahuani, .  one's bad father
    [is] lazy, incompassionate, negligent, unreliable. . <p51-ne:m
    mati-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.1)
322.  *tlanempoloa*.  atle hueli, tlatlacoa, tlahitlacoa tlanempoloa .
    he can do nothing; he harms, damages, wastes [feathers]. . <p51
    ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10 f.2 c.7 p.25)
323.  *tlanempoloa*.  tlanempoloa, tlaixpoloa .  he squanders, he
    wastes. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.27)
324.  *tlanempoloa*.  tlanenquixtia, tlanempoloa, tlaahuilquixtia,
    tlaahuilicitta, .  he squanders, he wastes; he squanders his
    possessions, he dissipates them. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10
    f.3 c.12 p.41)
325.  *tlanempoloani*.  in acualli tlaxinqui tlapapayaxoani,
    tlatetecuitzoani, tlaquelchihuani, teca mocayahuani, teca
    mocuahuitequini, tlaixpoloani, tlanempoloani .  the bad carpenter
    [is] one who breaks [the work] into pieces, who raises a
    clattering din; who is a nonchalant worker, a mocker;
    uncooperative, wasteful, squandering. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06
    ni1> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.27)
326.  *tlanempoloani*.  in amo cualli, in tlahueliloc mocuiltonoa,
    tlaahuilpoloani, tlaahuilquixtiani, tlanempoloani,
    tlanenquixtiani, tlaahuilicittani, .  the bad, the evil rich man
    [is] a waster of his possessions, a prodigal, a spendthrift, a
    squanderer, a dissipator of his possessions. . <p51-ne:m-polihui
    caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
327.  *tlanempopoloani*.  in tenan tlahueliloc, in amo cualli,
    tlacanexquimilli, xolopitli, tonalcochqui, maxixilopahuax,
    tlanempopoloani, tetlaixpachilhuiani, tetlanahualchichihuiliani,
    tetlanahualpolhuiani, .  one's bad mother [is] evil, dull, stupid,
    sleepy, lazy; [she is] a squanderer, a petty thief, a deceiver, a
    fraud. . <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.2)
328.  *tlanempopoloani*.  in ixhuiuhtli tlahueliloc tlaahuilquixtiani
    tlanempopoloani tlaixpoloani, tlateuhyotiani, tlatlazollotiani,
    tlacamicqui, ii$ellelacic iyolacic, quimaxilti tlahueliloc, .  the
    bad grandchild [is] a prodigal, a spendthrift, a squanderer -- a
    tarnisher, a besmircher of the honor of his own; perverse,
    dejected, miserable; a yielder before evil. . <p51-ne:m-dupl
    polihui-caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.6)
329.  *tlanenquixtia*.  nenquiza, tlanenquixtia .  she works to no
    avail; she squanders. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02  +z>x> (b.10 f.1
    c.3 p.12)
330.  *tlanenquixtia*.  tlanenquixtia, tlanempoloa, tlaahuilquixtia,
    tlaahuilicitta, .  he squanders, he wastes; he squanders his
    possessions, he dissipates them. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02  +z>x>
    (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
331.  *tlanenquixtiani*.  in amo cualli, in tlahueliloc mocuiltonoa,
    tlaahuilpoloani, tlaahuilquixtiani, tlanempoloani,
    tlanenquixtiani, tlaahuilicittani, .  the bad, the evil rich man
    [is] a waster of his possessions, a prodigal, a spendthrift, a
    squanderer, a dissipator of his possessions. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za
    caus02-ni1  +z>x> (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
332.  *tontlanenquixtia*.  mazo cana tocontlatlazti, mazo
    tictlachitoniliti in toteucyo: nican tontlanenquixtia, nican
    titlanenpoloa. .  may we not cast somewhere aside, reject, the
    things of our lord; [for] here we neglect, here we depreciate
    things. . <p21-o:n-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.15 c.35
    p.191)
333.  *ximonenencahua*.  maca ximonenencahua. .  do not be wasteful. .
    <p6-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.92)









_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 02:37:10 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:37:10 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.223710.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

*ne:m ***
  ahahuializtli     ahauiallztli for ‡annen ahauializtli: 55m].  gloria vana. <zan ne:m
    dupl-a:huiya-liz +del.y>. 55m-10|
  ahahuializtli     +del.y>. 71m1-12|
  ahnencoa     ne:m-coa +mis_analysis.x>. 71m1-16|
  choquiznemmictia     miqui-caus02>. 55m-12|
  choquiznemmictia     dandose golpes y^messandose. &c. <p11-p54-cho:ca-lizb-ne:m-miqui-
    caus02>. 71m2-4|
  cualaniliztli ªnnen.  sa¤a con causa. <ah1-mo: zan-ne:m
    cuala:ni-liz>. 55m-18|
  cualaniliztli ªn nen.  sa¤a con causa y ocasion. <ah1-mo: zan
    ne:m cuala:ni-liz>. 71m1-19|
  cualaniliztontli ªnnen.  sa¤a tal peque¤a  (tal is sa¤a con
    causa). <ah1-mo: zan-ne:m cuala:ni-liz-to:n-tl>. 55m-18|
  cualaniliztontli ªn nen.  sa¤a tal peque¤a  (tal is sa¤a con
    causa y ocasion). <ah1-mo: zan ne:m cuala:ni-liz-to:n-tl>. 71m1-19|
  hualla     que auia venido. <zan ne:m in o:-p11-hua:l-yauh1 +ly>ll>. 71m1-20|
  hueli ¬ nen.  no puedo ya con ello, o no lo puedo ya sufrir. <ah1-
    oc ne:m-huel1?>. 71m2-1|
  huetzi ®n.  no sin prouecho. <ah1-ne:m huetzi>. 71m1-16|
  huetzi     huetzi>. 71m1-10|
  huetzi     71m2-3|
  huetzico     auia venido. <o:-ne:m p11-huetzi-dir1b>. 71m1-20|
  ihtoa     caus06>. 55m-4|
  ihtoa     de^palabra. <zan ne:m p33-ihtahui-caus06>. 55m-4|
  ihtoani     ihtahui-caus06-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ihtoani     <zan ne:m p33-ihtahui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-6|
  ihtoani     caus06-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ihtoliztli     palabra). <zan ne:m-- ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-4|
  ihtoliztli     <zan ne:m-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-4|
  ilhuia     ilhuia:>. 55m-4|
  ilhuia     de^palabra. <zan ne:m p11-p33-p52-ilhuia:>. 71m2-3|
  ilhuia     ilhuia:>. 71m1-6|
  ilhuiani     is cumplir de palabra). <zan ne:m p33-p52-ilhuia:-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ilhuiliztli     palabra). <zan ne:m p52-ilhuia:-liz>. 55m-4|
  ixnempehua     pe:hua>. 71m2-8|
  ixnempehualtia , m[o]-.  . <p54-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01 +prob>. b.9
    f.6 p.73|
  ixnempehualtia     tratar mal a otro sin auer razon y^sin^proposito. <p11-p52-i:xtli-
    ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 55m-00|
  ixnempehualtia     sin causa. <p11-p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m2-8|
  ixnempehualtiani     razon); el que se enoja y ri¤e; o maltrata a otro sin razon. <p52-
    i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-ni1>. 71m1-1|
  ixnempehualtih     razon. <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-prt1>. 71m2-16|
  ixnempehualtiliztica     manera is el que se enoja y ri¤e, o maltrata a otro sin razon). <p52-
    i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-liz-ti1-ca2>. 71m2-16|
  ixnempehualtiliztli     acometer a otros sin razon); maltratamiento tal  (tal is el que se
    enoja y ri¤e; o maltrata a otro sin razon). <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01-liz>. 55m-00|
  ixnempehualtilli     manera is acometer a otros sin razon); reprehendido y maltratado sin
    razon alguna. <p51-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-l1>. 55m-00|
  manen.  mirad que no. s. se haga tal cosa, aduertiendo. vel. mirad
    bien y aduertid. <-ma:2-ne:m>. 71m2-9|
  ne , ah-.  not in vain. <ah1-ne:m +del.n>. b.2 f.14 p.219|
  necemilhuitl.  dia aziago y sin prouecho, o desaprouechado. <ne:m-cem-
    ilhuitl>. 71m2-11|
  nehuetzi ¬osa vtil y prouechosa. <ah1-ne:m-huetzi +del.n>. 71m2-
    1|
  nehuetzi     71m2-12|
  nem papaquiliztli     12|
  nemia , qui-.  they drank it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-i:1-ya3>. b.9
    f.3 p.30|
  nemihquitqui.  poorly woven. <ne:m-ihquiti-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.11 p.180|
  nemiliztli     7|
  nemiuhcan , ah-.  uninhabitable place. <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n>. b.6
    f.3 p.30|
  nemiuhcantilihqueh , ontla-.  they caused ruin. <o:n-p51-ne:m-v03a-
    prt1-ca:n-v01a-caus04-prt1-plur01>. b.4 f.10 p.105|
  nemiuhqui.  . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>. b.9 f.7 p.89|
  nemiuhqui , ah-.  incomparable. <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>. b.6 f.1
    p.11|
  nemiuhya     5|
  nemiuhya     +del.n>. 55m-5|
  nemiuhyan.  . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.4 f.10 p.105|
  nemiuhyan.  vazia cosa. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. 55m-19|
  nemiuhyan   nemiuhyan     +prob>. 71m1-7|
  nemiuhyan.  desolate place. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.11 f.10 p.92|
  nemiuhyanti     despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o guerra. <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-v01a>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyanti     con mortandad y pestilencia. <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a>. 71m2-
    22|
  nemiuhyantilia     pueblo; destruir patrimonio. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-
    caus04>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantilia     la hazienda. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04>. 71m2-12|
  nemiuhyantiliani     patrimonio); assolador tal  (tal is assolar o destruyr pueblo);
    destruidor tal  (tal is destruir patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-v01a-caus04-ni1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantilih , otla-.  . <o:-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    prt1>. b.3 f.3 p.42|
  nemiuhyantililia , motla-.  . <p54-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    ben H1>. b.6 f.16 p.191|
  nemiuhyantililli     patrimonio); assolado pueblo. <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    l1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantiliztli.  desembarazo  {??printing error: desambara‡o for
    desembara‡o}; desembarazo. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-liz>. 55m-5|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     pueblo por enfermedad o guerra); destruicion tal  (tal is destruir
    el patrimonio); assolamiento de pueblo. <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-
    v01a-liz +min>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     form derived from a transitive verb that undergoes haplology: 71m1].
    despoblacion tal  (tal is despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o
    guerra). <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-liz +min>. 71m1-8|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04
plo
    +min>. 71m1-8|
  nemiuhyantilli     por enfermedad o guerra); despoblado pueblo assi  (assi is
    despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o guerra). <tla6-ne:m-v03a-
    prt1-ya:n-v01a-l1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantlalia     <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-tla:lia:>. 71m1-20|
  nemiuhyantlalia     talar montes. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-tla:lia:>. 71m2-12|
  nemiuhyanyotl.  vaziedad assi  (assi is vazia cosa). <ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-yo:tl1>. 55m-19|
  nemma , timo-.  . <p12-p54-ne:m-mati-opt>. b.6 f.8 p.96|
  nemmaca , mote-.  . <p54-p52-ne:m-maca>. b.4 f.6 p.57|
  nemmaca     alguna cosa; debalde o graciosamente dar algo. <p11-p33-p52-ne:m-
    maca>. 55m-4|
  nemmaca     prouecho ni razon. <p11-p33-p52-ne:m-maca>. 71m2-12|
  nemmaca     maca>. 71m1-8|
  nemmaca     graciosamente dar algo. <zan p11-p33-p52-ne:m-maca>. 55m-4|
  nemmacani     tal  (tal is donar; dar de gracia o debalde); gracioso dador de
    balde. <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-ni1>. 55m-6|
  nemmacaya , quite-.  they offered it purposelessly. <p33-p52-ne:m-maca-
    ya3>. b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nemmactli     is donar; dar de gracia o debalde). <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-l2>. 71m2-
    18|
  nemmanian.  non-festival time, useless time. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n
    +del.n>. b.9 f.1 p.7|
  nemmanya.  dia de labor. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. 55m-6|
  nemmaquiliztli     dadiua; o donacion. <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-liz +a>i>. 55m-6|
  nemmatini , tla-.  negligent. <p51-ne:m-mati-ni1>. b.10 f.1 p.1|
  nemmauhtia   nemmauhtia     proposito ni razon. <p11-p54-ne:m-mahui-caus02>. 71m2-12|
  nemmauhtia     55m-9|
  nemmauhtia     ne:m-mahui-caus02>. 71m2-12|
  nemmauhtih     poner for pone}; espantable cosa que pone gran temor. <p52-ne:m-
    mahui-caus02-prt1>. 55m-9|
  nemmauhtiliztli     amedrentar y^espantar vno a otro. <p52-ne:m-mahui-caus02-liz>. 55m-
    9|
  nemmauhtilli     <p51-ne:m-mahui-caus02-l1>. 71m1-11|
  nemmaya.  non-festival time, useless time. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n
    +del.n>. b.9 f.1 p.7|
  nemmayan.  . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. b.1 f.2 p.45|
  nemmayan.  dia de labor. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. 71m1-8|
  nemmictiliztli   nemon.  . <ne:m-o:n-->. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nemontemi.  . <ne:m-o:n-temi>. b.2 f.10 p.162|
  nempanca.  . <ne:m-pan-->. b.12 f.2 p.33|
  nempanca.  cosa sin prouecho, o por demas. <ne:m-pan-ca1 +prob>. 71m2-
    12|
  nempanca     3|
  nempapaquiliztli     10|
  nempehua.  he starts in vain. <ne:m-pe:hua>. b.11 f.17 p.175|
  nempehualtia ªn nic.  castigar justamente y con razon. <ah1-mo:
    zan p11-p33-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m1-5|
  nempehualtia     nempehaltia: 55m].  acometer sin razon. <p11-p52-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtia     caus01>. 71m1-1|
  nempehualtia     p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m2-12|
  nempehualtiani     otros sin razon); renzilloso que se ensa¤a y ri¤e sin causa ni
    razon. <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-ni1>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtih     <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus02-prt1>. 71m2-17|
  nempehualtihqui     razon. <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-prt1-qui1>. 71m2-17|
  nempehualtiliztli     acometer a otros sin razon). <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-liz>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtilli     is acometer a otros sin razon); el que es maltratado de otroy
    prouocado a^yra; sin causa ni razon alguna. <p51-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-
    l1>. 55m-00|
  nempiquilia , ticto-.  . <p21-p33-p54-ne:m-pi:qui1-ben>. b.3 f.4
    p.52|
  nempolhuia , nictla-.  I use it in vain. <p11-p33-p51-ne:m-polihui-
    caus06-ben>. b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nempolhuih , otictla-.  you depreciated it. <o:-p12-p33-p51-ne:m-
    polihui-caus06-ben-prt1>. b.6 f.3 p.33|
  nempolihui.  desperdiciarse. <ne:m-polihui>. 71m1-8|
  nempolihui     12|
  nempolihui.  it is wasted; it is in vain; it perishes in vain. <ne:m-
    polihui>. b.11 f.18 p.185|
  nempoliuh , on-.  it came to nothing. <o:n-ne:m-polihui-prt1>. b.12
    f.2 p.32|
  nempoliuhqui.  useless, worthless. <ne:m-polihui-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.1
    p.12|
  nempoliuhtimani.  it lies wasting. <ne:m-polihui-prt1-ti1-mani aux04>.
    b.11 f.25 p.263|
  nempolo , nic-.  . <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06-opt>. b.1 f.2 p.46|
  nempoloa , titla-.  we ruin things; we depreciate something. <p21-p51-
    ne:m-polihui-caus06>. b.6 f.11 p.138|
  nempoloa , tla-.  he squanders; he wastes things; he wastes. <p51-ne:m-
    polihui-caus06>. b.10 f.2 p.27|
  nempoloa     polihui-caus06>. 55m-15|
  nempoloa     percudir. <p11-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06>. 71m1-8|
  nempoloa     cosa. <p11-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nempoloa icemilhuitl     en vano o sin prouecho. <ne:m-polihui-caus06 in cem-ilhuitl +del.n>.
    71m2-12|
  nempoloa icemilhuitl iceyohual     (assi is gastar todo el dia en vano o sin prouecho). <ne:m-polihui-
    caus06 in cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1 +del.n>. 71m2-12|
  nempoloa in cemilhuitl     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06 in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m2-
    12|
  nempoloa incemilhuitl     ne:m-polihui in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m1-16|
  nempoloani , tla-.  one who squanders; one who is a spendthrift. <p51-
    ne:m-polihui-caus06-ni1>. b.10 f.2 p.27|
  nempoloani     hazienda. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 55m-9|
  nempololiliztli     for tlanempopololiztli?: 55m].  destruicion tal  (tal is destruir el
    patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06--liz>. 55m-6|
  nempololiztica     gastador y desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-liz-
    ti1-ca2>. 71m2-22|
  nempololiztli     desperdiciar la hazienda  (tal is prodigo, gastador y desperdiciador
    de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-liz>. 71m2-22|
  nempolollani.  . <ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1-->. b.10 f.2 p.35|
  nempololli     ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m1-8|
  nempololli     tlanempololli: 55m].  estragado. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 55m-
    9|
  nempololli     gastada. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m1-11|
  nempopoloa     en mal. <p11-p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06>. 55m-6|
  nempopoloa     <p11-p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nempopoloani , tla-.  squanderer; one who is a spendthift. <p51-ne:m-
    dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. b.10 f.1 p.2|
  nempopoloani     destruidor tal  (tal is destruir el patrimonio); destruidor tal
    (tal is destruir patrimonio); gastador en mal. <p51-ne:m-dupl-
    polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m2-22|
  nempopoloani     tlanempopolani for tlanempopoloani: 71m1].  gastador en mal. <p51-
    ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-12|
  nempopoloani     ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-17|
  nempopololiztica     tlanempololiztica> (assi is prodigo; gastador y desperdiciador de
    hazienda). <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-6|
  nempopololiztli     prodigalidad; destruicion tal  (tal is destruir patrimonio);  <lo
    mesmo es que tlanempololiztli> (tal is prodigo; gastador y
    desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-liz>. 55m-
    6|
  nempopololli     cosa; destruido assi  (assi is destruir el patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-
    dupl-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m2-22|
  nempotla.  . <ne:m-potla>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nen.  . <ne:m>. b.1 f.2 p.42|
  nen.  en vano, por demas, o sin prouecho. aduerbio; en^vano; sin
    porque; sin proposito; sin prouecho ni vtilidad; o en vano. <ne:m>.
    71m2-12|
  nen , o-.  in vain, fruitless. <o:-ne:m +min>. b.10 f.1 p.5|
  nen ªn.  no en vano, o no sin razon. <ah1-mo: zan ne:m>. 71m2-
    1|
  nen     graciosamente assi  (assi is gracioso dador de balde); por de mas; o
    demasiado; por demas; simuladamente; sin porque; sin proposito; sin
    prouecho ni vtilidad; o en vano; socolor; superfluamente. <zan
    ne:m>. 55m-8|
  nen   nen.  in vain, vainly; to no purpose. <ne:m>. b.12 f.8 p.116|
  nen temictli   nen titlantli     13|
  nen tlacatl   nen.  to no purpose; useless. <ne:m>. b.6 f.3 p.36|
  nen^mehua.  he arises in vain. <ne:m p54-e:hua>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nenca     ca:1a>. 71m2-12|
  nenca     no necessaria; sin porque; sin proposito. <zan ne:m-ca:1a>. 71m2-3|
  nencahua , mo-.  he loafs. <p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. b.10 f.1 p.1|
  nencahua     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 55m-15|
  nencahua     caus09>. 55m-8|
  nencahua     enga¤arse o hallarse burlado. <p11-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 71m1-
    10|
  nencahua     alguno. <p11-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 55m-11|
  nencahua     caus09>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua     negligencia, o dexar de castigar algun delicto. <zan p11-p33-ne:m-
    ca:hui-caus09>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua icemilhuitl iceyoal     la noche  (assi is gastar todo el dia en vano o sin prouecho). <p11-
    p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09 in cem-ilhuitl in cem-yohua-l1>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua in cemilhuitl     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09 in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m2-
    12|
  nencahualiztli     enga¤o assi  (assi is enga¤arse o hallarse burlado). <p53-ne:m-
    ca:hui-caus09-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nencauh , timo-.  . <p12-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-opt>. b.6 f.8 p.96|
  nencauhyan , i-.  ; his place of desolation; his place of abandonment;
    its place of desolation. <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n>. b.6
    f.4 p.43|
  nencauhyan , oi-.  his place of desolation. <o:-poss-ne:m-ca:hui-
    caus09-prt1-ya:n>. b.6 f.4 p.50|
  nencemilhuitl.  aziago dia; dia aziago o desaprouechado. <ne:m-cem-
    ilhuitl>. 55m-1|
  nenchihua     alguno. <p11-p51-ne:m-chi:hua>. 55m-11|
  nenchihua     prouecho. <p11-p51-ne:m-chi:hua>. 71m2-12|
  nencihuatl.  profitless woman. <ne:m-cihua:tl>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenco , te-.  . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nencoa , te-.  it disappoints one. <p52-ne:m-coa>. b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nencoa     prouecho alguno; hazer en vano. <p11-p54-ne:m-coa>. 55m-8|
  nencoa     pretendia alcanzar. <p11-p54-ne:m-coa>. 71m2-12|
  nencoa     le di#eran; burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que
    le  auian de dar; cortamente hazer algo; cortamente hazer algo con
    alguno. <p11-p52-ne:m-coa>. 55m-2|
  nencoa     dicha, o hallarse defraudado delo que pretendia alcanzar). <p11-p52-
    ne:m-coa>. 71m2-12|
  nencoani     lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlador tal  (tal is burlar a
    alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le  auian de dar);
    burlador; o enga¤ador. <p52-ne:m-coa-ni1>. 55m-2|
  nencochi.  he sleeps to no avail. <ne:m-cochi>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nencoco     venido. <o:-p11-p54-ne:m-coa-dir1b>. 71m1-20|
  nencoh , te-.  ; it disappointed one; it disappoints one. <p52-ne:m-
    coa-prt1>. b.10 f.4 p.69|
  nencoliztica     alguno no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlando
    assi  (assi is burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua
    que le  auian de dar); burlando; o enga¤ando a otros. <p52-ne:m-coa-
    liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-2|
  nencoliztli     <p53-ne:m-coa-liz>. 55m-8|
  nencoliztli     todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burla assi  (assi is burlar a
    alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le  auian de dar);
    burla; o enga¤o hecho a otro; cortedad de cumplimiento. <p52-ne:m-
    coa-liz>. 55m-2|
  nencolli     no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlado desta
    manera  (desta manera is burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el
    pensaua que le  auian de dar); el que es defraudado; delo que
    pretendia y deseaua. <p51-ne:m-coa-l1>. 55m-2|
  nencolo , ne-.  . <p53-ne:m-coa-lo:2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nencua , nic-.  I eat it in vain. <p11-p33-ne:m-cua:>. b.1 f.2 p.46|
  nencuacua , te-.  inedible; it pricks someone for no purpose. <p52-
    ne:m-dupl-cua:>. b.10 f.4 p.69|
  nencuaya , qui-.  they ate it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-cua:-ya3>.
    b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nencui , qui-.  he appropriates it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-cui>.
    b.4 f.12 p.125|
  nencui     <p11-p51-ne:m-cui>. 71m2-12|
  nencuiqueh , qui-.  . <p33-ne:m-cui-plur01>. b.4 f.7 p.62|
  nenemi   nenemmauhtilli     espantado de improuiso y subitamente. <p51-p53-ne:m-mahui-caus02-
    l1>. 55m-9|
  nenempochtlahtoa.  ceceoso. <dupl-ne:m-potla-l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06>.
    55m-4|
  nenempochtlahtoa     caus06>. 55m-4|
  nenempochtlahtoa     l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nenempochtlahtoani.  ceceoso. <dupl-ne:m-potla-l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    ni1>. 71m2-12|
  nenempotla.  . <dupl-ne:m-potla>. b.10 f.1 p.12|
  nenencahua , ahmo-.  . <ah1-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. b.4 f.12
    p.125|
  nenencahua , ximo-.  be wasteful [command]. <p6-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-
    caus09>. b.6 f.8 p.92|
  nenenco , te-.  . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nenencoa , mo-.  ; he frustrates himself. <p54-dupl-ne:m-coa>. b.4 f.1
    p.8|
  nenencoa , ommo-.  . <o:n-p54-dupl-ne:m-coa>. b.5 f.2 p.179|
  nenencoa , te-.  it repeatedly disappoints one. <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa>.
    b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nenencoh , te-.  ; it repeatedly disappointed one; it repeatedly
    disappoints one. <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.11 f.12 p.122|
  nenencoliztli     fraudado de su deseo). <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nenencolo , ne-.  . <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-lo:2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenenquixtilo.  . <dupl-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-lo:2 +z>x>. b.2 f.11
    p.171|
  nenenquizan , hual-.  . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-->. b.4 f.3 p.21|
  nenenquizaya , hual-.  . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-ya3>. b.4 f.5 p.48|
  nenentlamati     2|
  nenhuehuetlalia     p52-ne:m-hue:hueh-tla:lia:>. 71m1-6|
  nenhuehuetlalia     honroso alque no tiene partes para el. <p11-p52-ne:m-hue:hueh-
    tla:lia:>. 71m2-12|
  nenhuetz , o-.  it came in misfortune. <o:-ne:m-huetzi-prt1>. b.2 f.5
    p.98|
  nenhuetzi.  ; it is in vain. <ne:m-huetzi>. b.7 f.1 p.13|
  nenhuetziliztica.  desdichadamente; o en vano. <ne:m-huetzi-liz-ti1-
    ca2>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetziliztli.  desdicha. <ne:m-huetzi-liz>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetzini.  desdichado. <ne:m-huetzi-ni1>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetziz.  it will be in vain. <ne:m-huetzi-z>. b.4 f.1 p.2|
  nenia.  . <ne:m-->. b.4 f.2 p.17|
  nennanyotl, nentahyotl.  descuido de padres, y madres que no tienen
    cuydado de sus hijos y dan en esto mal exemplo. <ne:m-na:ntli-yo:tl1
    ne:m-tahtli-yo:tl1 +kin>. 71m2-12|
  nennemi.  . <ne:m-nemi>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nennemi   nennemi     71m1].  andar vagueando. <p11-ne:m-nemi>. 71m1-2|
  nennemi     12|
  nennemi     10|
  nennemi     ne:m-nemi>. 55m-00|
  nennemi     nemi>. 71m2-3|
  nennemiliztli     desaprouechada. <zan ne:m-nemi-liz>. 55m-5|
  nennemilizzotl     nemi-liz-yo:tl1>. 55m-11|
  nennemilizzotl     ne:m-nemi-liz-yo:tl1 +zy>zz>. 71m1-13|
  nennemini     zannennemini: 71m2].  vagamundo. <zan ne:m-nemi-ni1>. 71m2-3|
  nennenemi     nennenemi; redo this: 55m].  mostrenco. <zan ne:m-dupl-nemi>. 55m-
    14|
  nennenemi   nennenqui     desaprouechar). <zan ne:m-nemi-prt1-qui1>. 71m2-3|
  nenontemi.  . <ne:m-o:n-temi>. b.2 f.10 p.162|
  nenoquich.  profitless man. <ne:m-oquichtli-trunc>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenqueloliztli     v03a-caus06-liz +out.rig>. 71m1-10|
  nenqui     vagamundo. <zan ne:m nemi-prt1-c2>. 71m1-7|
  nenquixti , tic-.  . <p12-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-opt  +z>x>. b.6 f.8
    p.92|
  nenquixtia , qui-.  they waste it. <p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x>. b.6
    f.1 p.7|
  nenquixtia , titla-.  we neglect things. <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02
    +z>x>. b.6 f.11 p.138|
  nenquixtia , tla-.  he squanders; she squanders. <p51-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02  +z>x>. b.10 f.3 p.41|
  nenquixtia , tontla-.  we neglect something. <p21-o:n-p51-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02 +z>x>. b.6 f.15 p.191|
  nenquixtia ¬.  tirar certero. <ah1-mo: p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02 +z>x>. 55m-19|
  nenquixtia     55m-10|
  nenquixtia     provecho, o en vano, o no acertar ala que tiraua. <p11-p51-ne:m-
    qui:za-caus02 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia icemilhuitl iceyoal     la noche desaprouechadamente. <p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 cem-
    ilhuitl cem-yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl     prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl +z>x>. 55m-15|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl in ceyohual     p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl in cem yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m1-
    12|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl in ceyoal     ceyoal.  gastar el dia y la noche en vano y sin prouecho. <p11-p33-
    ne:m-qui:za-caus02-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia incemilhuitl     p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl +z>x>. 71m1-16|
  nenquixtiani , tla-.  one who is a squanderer. <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-
    ni1  +z>x>. b.10 f.3 p.41|
  nenquixtiani     ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ni1 +z>x>. 71m2-22|
  nenquixticahua , titla-.  . <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ca:5-- +z>x>.
    b.6 f.11 p.137|
  nenquixtilia , quimo-.  he [H.] fails him. <p33-p54-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-
    ben +z>x>. b.6 f.17 p.217|
  nenquixtiliztli     desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-liz +z>x>. 55m-
    10|
  nenquixtilli     +z>x>. 71m2-22|
  nenquiza.  . <ne:m-qui:za>. b.4 f.3 p.21|
  nenquiza     qui:za>. 71m2-12|
  nenquiza     vano. <p11-ne:m-qui:za>. 71m1-12|
  nenquiza     ne:m-qui:za>. 71m2-12|
  nenquiza     qui:za>. 71m2-3|
  nenquiza   nenquiza.  it comes to nothing, it is in vain; she works in vain.
    <ne:m-qui:za>. b.11 f.24 p.254|
  nenquizaliztica.  desdichadamente. <ne:m-qui:za-liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaliztli.  . <ne:m-qui:za-liz>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizaliztli.  desdicha; miseria contraria de dicha. <ne:m-qui:za-
    liz>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaliztli     liz>. 55m-5|
  nenquizani.  desdichado. <ne:m-qui:za-ni1>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaz.  he will go forth in vain; it will fail. <ne:m-qui:za-z>.
    b.5 f.1 p.158|
  nenquizcatlamatiliztli.  sciencia vana y sin prouecho. <ne:m-qui:za-
    ca:6-p51-mati-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nenquizcayotl.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ca:5-yo:tl1>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizqueh.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-plur14>. b.1 f.3 p.55|
  nenquizqui.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizqui ¬osa vtil y prouechosa; no sin prouecho. <ah1-ne:m-
    qui:za-prt1-c2>. 71m2-1|
  nenquizqui     ne:m-qui:za-prt1-qui1>. 55m-5|
  nenquizqui.  useless; worthless. <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.1
    p.12|
  nenquiztimani.  it lies useless; it lies worthless. <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-
    ti1-mani aux04>. b.11 f.24 p.254|
  nenquiztinemi.  they go along whiling away their time. <ne:m-qui:za-
    prt1-ti1-nemi aux01>. b.10 f.11 p.179|
  nentahyotl, nennayotl.   <lo mesmo es que nennayotl>. <ne:m-tahtli-
    yo:tl1 ne:m-na:ntli-yo:tl1 +del.n +kin>. 71m2-12|
  nentetlauhtiani.  gracioso dador de balde; prodigo y liberal. <ne:m-
    p52-tlauhtia:-ni1>. 55m-10|
  nenti.  ; he fails; it is in vain; it is useless. <ne:m-v01a>. b.2
    f.10 p.157|
  nentlacah.  worthless people. <ne:m-tla:catl-plur06>. b.1 f.3 p.55|
  nentlacatl.  . <ne:m-tla:catl>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nentlacatl.  ciuil o apocado; cuitado miserable; desalmado floxo;
    desuenturado; haragan. <ne:m-tla:catl>. 71m1-6|
  nentlacatl , ti-.  you are a useless person. <p12-ne:m-tla:catl>. b.6
    f.10 p.118|
  nentlacatl   nentlacatl   nentlacatl.  useless; useless person; useless man; worthless;
    worthless person. <ne:m-tla:catl>. b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nentlacayotl.  . <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1>. b.6 f.9 p.107|
  nentlacayotl     tla:catl-yo:tl1>. 55m-11|
  nentlacayotl     tla:catl-yo:tl1>. 71m1-13|
  nentlacayotl.  uselessness. <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nentlachiuhtli     chi:hua-l2>. 55m-8|
  nentlahmachtiani     v04-caus08-ni1 +t>ch>. 71m2-17|
  nentlahmachtiliztli     mati-l2-v04-caus08
h>. 71m2-17|
  nentlahmachtilli     ih2-mati-l2-verb-l1 +t>ch>. 71m2-22|
  nentlahtoani.  hablador vano; parlon vano. <ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    ni1>. 55m-10|
  nentlahtoani     55m-10|
  nentlahtoliztli.  habla en esta manera  (en esta manera is hablador
    vano). <ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  nentlahtoliztli     hablador vano). <zan ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  nentlamachiliz , i-.  his anguish, his torment; his affliction. <poss-
    ne:m-p51-mati-liz +t>ch>. b.1 f.1 p.25|
  nentlamachiliztica.  solicitamente y con congoxa; congoxosamente; o
    con aflicion y angustia. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz-ti1-ca2 +t>ch>. 55m-18|
  nentlamachiliztli.  angustia; congoxa; o aflicion. <ne:m-p51-mati-
    caus02-liz +t>ch>. 55m-00|
  nentlamachiliztli     compassion que se tiene de otros. <poss-ca2 ne:m-p51-mati-liz +t>ch
    +out.rig>. 55m-3|
  nentlamachitia , ammo-.  you [pl., H.] are anguished. <p22-p54-ne:m-
    p51-mati-caus03 H3 +t>ch>. b.3 f.4 p.62|
  nentlamachitia , amo-.  you [pl.] suffer affliction. <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-
    mati-caus03 +t>ch>. b.6 f.11 p.127|
  nentlamacho.  there is humility, there is anguish. <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2
    +t>ch>. b.4 f.4 p.33|
  nentlamachohuaya.  place of affliction, place of anguish. <ne:m-p51-
    mati-lo:2-hua2-ya:n +del.n>. b.11 f.11 p.105|
  nentlamachtia     cosa. <ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtia     p54-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtia     descontentar y dar pena a otro; desplazer; entristecer a otro. <p11-
    p52-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 55m-00|
  nentlamachtia     (desta manera is afligir me otro, o alguna cosa). <p11-p52-ne:m-p51-
    mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtiani     caus02-ni1 +t>ch>. 55m-8|
  nentlamachtican , te-.  place of affliction, place of anguish. <p52-
    ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n>. b.11 f.11 p.105|
  nentlamachtiliztli     dar pena a otro); entristecimiento. <p52-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02-liz
    +t>ch>. 71m1-7|
  nentlamachtilli     +t>ch>. 71m1-10|
  nentlamati.  angustiado; mustia persona. <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 71m1-
    2|
  nentlamati , an-.  you [pl.] are anguished. <p22-ne:m-p51-mati>. b.6
    f.13 p.153|
  nentlamati , ni-.  ; I am discontent; I am unhappy. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati
    +fusion>. b.6 f.4 p.43|
  nentlamati , quin-.  . <p43-ne:m-p51-mati>. b.9 f.5 p.64|
  nentlamati , ti-.  ; we are concerned; we are not discontent. <p12-
    ne:m-p51-mati>. b.3 f.4 p.52|
  nentlamati ¬itlaic ti.  tienes pena de algo?. <ah1-zo2-itlah-i:c1
    p12-ne:m-p51-mati>. 71m2-1|
  nentlamati     entristecerse; fatiga tener assi  (assi is fatiga del anima);
    solicito estar y congoxojo. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 55m-00|
  nentlamati     que es ensi en algun negocio. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamati     ca2 p11-ne:m-p51-mati +out.rig>. 55m-3|
  nentlamati     <poss-ca2 p11-ne:m-p51-mati +out.rig>. 71m2-15|
  nentlamati.  he is saddened; he is anguished; he is discontent; they
    are anguished. <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. b.9 f.3 p.32|
  nentlamatia , mo-.  . <ne:m-p51-mati-->. b.4 f.7 p.63|
  nentlamatia.  he felt humble; he was in torment; he was in distress;
    they were anguished. <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3>. b.4 f.4 p.33|
  nentlamatiliztica.  congoxosamente, o con aflicion. &c; solicitamente
    y con congoxa. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz-ti1-ca2 +fusion>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamatiliztli.  angustia; descontentamiento assi o descontento
    (assi is descontentar a otro); descontento aflicion; o angustia;
    fatiga del anima; passion congoxosa; tribulacion. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz
    +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatiliztli     mati-liz +out.rig>. 55m-13|
  nentlamatini.  angustiado; angustiado. &c; solicita cosa con congoxa.
    <ne:m-p51-mati-ni1 +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatqui.  angustiado; angustiado. &c. <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-c2
    +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatticatca , onon-.  I had been afflicted. <o:-p11-o:n-ne:m-p51-
    mati-prt1-ti1-ca:1a-ca10 aux11a>. b.12 f.3 p.44|
  nentlamattinemi.  they go along in anguish. <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-
    nemi aux01 +fusion>. b.6 f.1 p.9|
  nentlamattinenca , o-.  he had lived in discontent. <o:-ne:m-p51-mati-
    prt1-ti1-nemi-prt1-ca10 aux01>. b.5 f.2 p.178|
  nentlamia     55m-10|
  nentlamia     prouecho alguna cosa. <p11-p51-ne:m-tlami-caus08>. 71m2-12|
  nentlan     aprouechar nada. <o:-p51-ne:m-tlami-prt1>. 71m2-13|
  nentlatlahtolli.  useless discussion. <ne:m-dupl-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    l1>. b.4 f.9 p.96|
  nentlaza     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-tla:za>. 55m-15|
  nentlaza icemilhuitl iceyoal     noche desaprouechadamente. <ne:m-tla:za-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-
    l1>. 71m2-12|
  nentlaza in cemilhuitl     tla:za in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m1-12|
  nentlaza incemilhuitl inceyoal     ceyoal.   <lo mesmo es que nenquixtia yncemilhuitl. &c>. <p11-p33-
    ne:m-tla:za-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1>. 71m2-12|
  nentoco   nentoco     toca2-lo:1>. 71m2-12|
  nenyeni   nenyo     yo:tl1>. 71m2-3|
  nenyotl   onen.  in vain, fruitless. <o:-ne:m +min>. b.10 f.1 p.5|
  pic zan nen     11|
  polihuiz ªnnen.  no se desperdiciara. <ah1-mo: zan ne:m polihui-
    z>. 71m2-1|
  quiza     qui:za>. 71m1-10|
  quizaliztli     7|
  quizqui     ne:m qui:za-prt1-c2>. 71m1-7|
  teixnempehualtiani [scribal error: ??printing error: teixnemualtiani
    for teixnempeualtiani: 55m].  acometedor. <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01-ni1>. 55m-00|
  temictli   tetolinia     agrauiador. <zan ne:m p52-toli:nia:>. 71m1-1|
  timaloliztli     v03a-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  tlachiuhtli     chi:hua-l2>. 71m1-11|
  tlahtoani     71m1-12|
  tlahtoliztli     hablador vano). <zan ne:m p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 71m1-12|
  tlalnemiuhyan.  . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.11 f.9 p.83|
  tlalnemiuhyan     tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. 71m1-20|
  tlalnemiuhyan.  bare ground; barren ground. <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n>. b.11 f.8 p.76|
  tlanemmaca     6|
  tleh zannen.  que prouecho se sigue? o que aprouecho. s. lo que sea
    trabajado?. <tleh zan-ne:m>. 71m2-25|
  tolinia     +mis_analysis.x>. 71m1-1|
  toliniliztica     liz-ti1-ca2>. 71m1-1|
  toliniliztli     1|
  tolinilli     1|
  yaliztica     14|
  yauh     <zan ne:m p11-o:n-yauh1>. 55m-6|
  yauh     yauh1>. 71m2-3|
  yeliztli   yeni   zannen ª sin prouecho o sin razon. s. heziste algo. <ah1-
    zo2 zan-ne:m>. 71m2-1|
  zannen   zannentitlantli.  mensajero de vanidad. <zan-ne:m-ti:tlani-l2>. 71m1-
    15|






_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 08:08:15 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (brokaw at buffalo.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:08:15 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.040815.0400.>

&��b��{ejv�����ݲ������X���#�������r��bu�����+*��-���z��j\�j���!zr(�("��eɫ$y��z�Z��趉��b���'!‹�u�i�����r��v����ح�{ay�܆+���!��]��ޭ鞙��y�a����+!!�.���jg���ځ����'j|�j��m���(��'y�lz�"��"���������ם��%j����&z�b���*kz���ɞ�Ơ{�&��h��謈.z�&���^�br�Š�{������aj�ay��yֲv'�z���&�j�ay�ݡ�a{'��+)��nq�[��^v'�z��q�޷���^��Z�'���ݶ��O�k'2rW���nq�[��^r���v����~�^�GZ��"�{��w��z��9�(����b��&n)ڶ*'���Ǭi̜��ۭk+���w�OӅ���̜�謦��ǝo+azǫ��(_&�{a�������ֲ�朇�!��\�g�����ֲ����^~+�u����ޚ��zh�y�h����&�W�z�^��Z�'�����Z���jW�:t�N?���������&�������&��q��m���wbjv�y۬z{���ݖ)��r���^��#������ࢇj��-������zj'���ǫ����(��azX��謶'�-�������~���+aj{a{��j\��������^���nW�����X"��^��!jجj�h���o�Z��a�y"��h�ț��(��b�v�u�&y���V�z�"�����j׫�����-�)���+bjW�zg�����騞צ�����j�brW��w����v�^��-��a{�a���+���{���������g�����^��������+ez��jwn�楗+!�.�������ȧq���iy�욊ޡ�^�������{(����Z���������������)ޞ��ͯ�}����!j���������핧�_�a��,����z{ei�b�e���w�z��+a�x���\�����a�y-���Ǩ�ޚ��zh����z�Z�ǚ�X����k�a����ޞ��zh��+n��^��r~)e��a�Ǟ��r~+�u�����j���wl�{az�i��j��jz'�j�'���������zz'��+,��-�����Yޞ��zh���ަ笶�bk���Y[y���V�z������к�b�
���������F��������������8b�+���笶*'���m觵�޲ם�ڟ*޲�'�����������h���+����ך��y�h��b���"Ǟ��+zg�m����-�x-�+,jg���-����^�+-j{�m�����j���ۺ��r��v�~)݊ا����b��Ȟl���"n\�}�lzg����~�Z���z��!�'��a�y��Z�/�z�h������zǞ�ǯz��v'�z���)�z�kz֭�����騮�h��2��a����jYhbrzg����m�v��z�����z{b(��ǫ�����^�����&��azg��+a��^ƙZ�x���+ji��'�\��a{,(�O�����wm�욖�(~ק}�����r����譩e��azj+�%����a�y-��ڶ*'jW�z�u�Z�h���Z�+��槳�!j�Z�����b�����(��^��ⱶ�y�'��i������z��)��a{
+w���w��br�[-�h�w�ޚ/���b���jwm��Z��Z�ج��^�/�'!�槳�h~)e����m��୩�j؜jX��X�jب���+���醉h�'�)�z�kz֭����Z�*.���k�ޭ��z�ܢjh�w���^�ț�(�w�o+ayثy�b�v�����^��'���z��nW���aj��v����b�L���j|���{��W���a���wh~�k��n�������aj��׫����x-���zh����������[��+����˥j�rj�ki�b��������ʋ������^Šݭ�ޮ�h��~+�u��z��v)�����j��������^��Z�'�����秶�zwh~�^߭�s'%z���ֲ�('�����fޮƧv�^m�"�x������{(���y��J��zh������֢��(�����z)텫m���z��v�0�'!�w��{^�/�y����.�����'q�y�j�ay��{�Z��ޙ��u��y�h��߮����(��^�*'��a{���ݮ'�̜����%�)���f❫b�z���ֲ�('���w]�fޮ��'!����m���[���^v'�z��q��z�z{aj����Z�̜��v�^�~��ֲ��Z�'���0��n��ʋ���Z�Z�l�������V����j�^��l������Ǩ~�^��^��^����Ӆ욭�k����'ڊ�r���j|�k/Ȟ�^zw��.��r��v��������ְk+h�����~�ږZ���鞞�(~�^Š݊v������p��]j[(m�୩�j؜jYrr���^��ș��zh��)���&z�b�
�*.��{�톋���#�������z�z�$y�b�h�w�aj�ayƥzwZ��k�ޯ)h�kiح���jwm��Z�權x^�+^v+�~�&��^�
躛�J���^�i���ޞ�z��)ږ\�z��y��o�g�����๨���z���栢�g�fޮ�����醉h�'��n�9^��+���G��+��sZ�歗��l���޲Ȩ�+-��kzV������)y�"�a{&�y������Z��pk+y�좻h~˫����x-�g�#�Z�歅�+ɦ��!��a�Ȭ��j��n�H‰��˛��-ʋ��+�j�a��h�{����jW��$k�������qͰ��^���"v�j(��.�ם�ƭy�h;^q֧q����,ka�����¢{��.z�ڕ��_�ÍLC�槳��aj��zyb�����(��^������������q�ڟ*'zץ�g���m����ږ\�i��ם�槊x(~�b�
+w����v0iן�x��ب����v����y��r��u��y�ڳ����!j�Z����X�y���(��^�������������8Z�K"��ojww�������������Ȗ+�~��y�(���zyb�^�������ۚ�+r�����ӕ�q�b�X���ڞ���'Zw��k?�������*�.�V���C�����{�k*-��+�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Z�歖f��)�+-���j�����+-��ښ������m�����}����+����Y���b�ا~��j��_������������������������������������������Z�歖f��)�+-��Z����_��l����/������0��ښ����?�������+-�w��v���e������������������������������������������5�nj�fj)b�	b��Z�歗�b���}����+�m�����}����+����Y���b�ا~��j�


From lovegren at buffalo.edu  Thu Apr 23 21:02:46 2009
From: lovegren at buffalo.edu (Jesse Lovegren)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:02:46 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0AEEB.8050107@cox.net>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.170246.0400.LOVEGREN@BUFFALO.EDU>

Servant à désigner les cinq jours complémentaires de l'année (Clav., Sah.).

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:09 PM, micc2 <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:

>  In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat
> l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>
> *
>
> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word is,
> and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as **"what
> has been lived, to complete"?
> *
>
> *
> Thanks in advanced!***
>
> --
>
> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>
> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>
>
> Mario E. Aguilar, PhDwww.mexicayotl.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Jesse Lovegren
Department of Linguistics
645 Baldy Hall
office +1 716 645 0136
cell +1 512 584 5468
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/1ac24037/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 13:37:40 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:37:40 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <20090423193755.5l1eej7ccoko4sw0@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.093740.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

Evidently, my message last night, or early this morning rather, went 
through garbled. Here it is again.
Galen

Joe,
Your explanation sounds very familiar. So I'm sure that you did answer this
question several years ago when I originally asked, perhaps not on the list,
which would explain why I couldn’t find it in the archive. I should have
remembered this. I wish I could blame it on age. :-)
In any case, before someone else points it out, I also wanted to clarify
something in my previous message. I mispoke, or I guess mis-wrote, which is
worse, in saying that the five day differential at the end of the year is
produced by the difference between the solar year and the 360-day cycle 
produced
by the combination of the 20 days signs and 13 numbers. Of course, this
combination produces a cycle of 260 days, not 360. The 360 cycle is 
produced by
the series of 18 months of twenty days each, which comes to 360 days 
with the
five days of nemontemi left over to complete the solar year of 365 days.

Galen



Campbell, R. Joe wrote:
> I'd like to second Galen's judgement of "good question". "nemontemi" 
> certainly gets the linguistic cogs turning in more frenzy than the 
> analysis of some other problems. I'll give here what is a short form 
> of what I think is a possible solution and come back later with more 
> material.
>
> I think the initial element of "nemontemi" is the particle "ne:m" and 
> the rest of the "phrase" is "on-te:mi". "ne:m" means "useless, in 
> vain, fruitless" and usually shows up as "nen", since it appears more 
> often before consonants than before vowels (e.g., "ninenquiza (I fail 
> to have success), nentlacatl (worthless person, nentlachiuhtli 
> (unnecessary thing), etc.).
>
> I think the sense of "nemontemi" (or perhaps earlier, as a phrase, 
> "nen ontemi": it uselessly fills (those empty five days)
>
> Mary finds in the vocabulario anonimo (Ayer ms. 1478):
>
> nenontemi Bissiesto
>
> ilhuitl nenontemi entrepuesto dia
>
> I'll be back later,
>
> Joe
>
>
> Quoting Galen Brokaw <brokaw at buffalo.edu>:
>
>> This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I
>> puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember
>> posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I
>> couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that
>> query, I don't think I got any response.
>> I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this
>> word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain
>> elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work
>> together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology.
>> I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been
>> lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word
>> is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is
>> 'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this
>> morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound
>> ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that
>> I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure.
>> Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is
>> particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the
>> five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the
>> end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of
>> the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the
>> period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day
>> remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle
>> involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is
>> used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the
>> 365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative
>> attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly
>> obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to
>> account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be
>> grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here,
>> though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a
>> very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So
>> the term may even have originally derived from some other language.
>> There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this
>> in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few.
>> This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why
>> this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.
>>
>> Galen Brokaw
>>
>>
>>
>> micc2 wrote:
>>> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:
>>> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to 
>>> complete"
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word
>>> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as
>>> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>> Thanks in advanced!***
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>>>
>>> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>>>
>>>
>>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nahuatl mailing list
>>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Fri Apr 24 14:22:44 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:22:44 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1C0A4.7050406@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.102244.0400.>


�jY�a��߭1������y��yֲ���"�.�Ƞ���|�ޙ�z��zw��{���{ڊ���ޢ�^���V'-����إ��Zu�ڮ؜���nv*,u஖۫h֡��ejZ'�ئy�(�br^��d����az��nW����������$y�m�����j������ئ{���+�˥��ڕ̜����h��b��.���v���w���םk�����u�������^���{^�h��-�:'j�Z���)��^�葬�n�$k۹�ږ��v���K�u��/��g�����-�(!��+y����b�j+�)୫az��z{���`j��y��z���+�����������(����V�jب��.��/z��jh����J���˫z�Z�*.v'Z����b���z�b�{��ڗ'��Ơ�^��+��jYrj�w�^���z-�{azX����'!‹�u�i�����r��v����ح�{ay�܆+���!��]������zfޭ�m�+�#���(�W[�����'j����"v��Ƭ{��~�޲���w��ǩ�)�+h���j[(���y�hrV����������)�ʚ޾*.�g��������${�+"��ɢ��+������+�Š�{������aj�ay��yֲv'�z���&�j�ay�ݡ�a{'��+����ǝo+ay؟}�ޝǛz�z{az�%j��j��v�^߭�u����^���v�w����f❫b�z���ֲ�Ƞ�Ƨw]�fޮ��}�.�������&n)ڶ*'���Ǭi̜��ۭk+���w�OӅ���̜�����v�u����z������j'�(~��ܝk+i������&z�h߭k+��+a��~+�u����ޚ��zh�y�h����&�W�z�^��Z�'�����Z����f�z��𚚖ޖ_���º-{��#�e�G��ǜ�wFjW����v�z{h�(�ڮz�b���w��{^�/��ǫ����(��azX��謶'�-�������~���+aj{a{�ڝ�r�+(~�&z�az�k��^����Y`���z����b��!��_������H���+��,��^��n�*'jw\�g�i�%j׫�+a���������j_���ȶ���^�x���^�鞞��w��{^�/��^����^�w����w���޲����ڱ���'����/��w����j{��ǥz�����������^��ڝ۬��e��h�˩j��z��)�z+Z����ɨ�����^�������{(����Z���������������)ޞ��ͯ�}����h��޲�z���w��V�j��Š�W���������핧!��m�/����yǬ������޵�������a�y-���Ǩ�ޚ��zh����z�Z�ǚ�X����j�kj�����zz'������ǥz�%�����톋zjm���yֲ������'��"��^��n�Z�*��⚏�����x���������צ���'��������譖w��{^�'������-�ؚ���#�em��rIZ������&��������)��^�葬�n�$k۹�ږ��v������8b�+���笶*'���m觵�޲ם�v�ʷ����zƬ��e�������W������~��+^kb�止w��g�"Ǟ��+zg�m����h�ا��b�Ʀz���ب��-��b�֧�fޮ��y��j
�n�H��ܢ�]��_�wb�)��r�{�'�*h�ț�'ږǦzj+ʇ텫����z��!�'��a�y��Z�*޲�'��������z{��ڕ؟}�ޞا����Z�*'���騮�h��2��a����
+w�����'!��y�hm�ڱ�h�g�z\�u������֢���zW�z{ljɨ��^��0��h�ױ�V��)�����bq�e�0��Š��������wm�욖�(~ק}�����r����+jYh~�^��醉h�/���-�)��jب��^m�b��%j)��ajح�槳�!j�Z�������+�w�hr����^�+jǝ�{ay����Z��^m�"�x�����(����+�������ƥ��h�)��w����X�{��v�^��-�������^�/�'!�槳�h~)e����m��+ji��'�)��'�*'��a����j+�%��jX�����Z�*'��ajܨ��y�ޭ��z�ܢjh�w���,��쉹r���y�������*'jZZ�؜����Ӆ�k��^�+-����������j���*-���ũ���(~�b�H�v�춻�����������aj��׫����x-���zh����j��������������'.���ɫm��-������˫{*.�z0��^Šݭ�ޮ�h������Zʗ���b��^q�^�֫j�ay�ݡ�az�%j��j�޷���^��ޝ����O���^���u���	�jwu�{�m��jwm��ނ)�x(����{(���y��J��zh������֢��+���z{�{aj�a{������h����ޚ��zh���ޮ�(�W[y�'q�y�j�ay��{�Z����隊w^�W���ޭ���^r����b�z��jW�v��jW2rW������o�x-��(���jب����u���	�jwu�{�m���br�����m���[���^v'�z��q�޷���Z�~��ֲs'%y�ݶ������Z��%j��j��‰���+{*.�+ajYh~l�������V��������驶�h�����z���-��ޕ鞞��N�j�����n\�j*���������,��'����톋�����]��_��z��k���������~�ږZ���鞞�(~�^Š݊v�k+aj�(�WZ��{�������bq�e��'�+-z{�"f�m颲ȧ��&z�b�
�*.��{����h��!���z-��^��j���G��)�wm��m�����j�Zu������Z'���v+b�ڝ�ax֡��"���ם���j-��஋�������^�i���ޞ�z��)ږ\�z��y��k(��-���jx.j���Ӆ��j������z���^�j+�%��jZn�9^��+���G��+����5�nj��n�f�)���,����Z���jدz\��椊x-�욭������8b��j\���z{(�����+"�h��ȅ��j�^���n������a�Ȭ��j��n�H‰��˛��-ʋ��+Z��b��"�������f�zpk�F�����������'�
�����ȝ���� ���u�bq�^v
��Š������ڝ�h��^~)�+b�z������y��r��u��y�ڳ���������y�������jez����������������Ӆ��)�v��q�������������������b��讷����w���(!���v�b�+njX���������ӕ�q�b�X���ڞ���'Zw�Z����������ƫ�������>������{�k*-��+������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5�nj�fj)b�	b�����Z�歗�b���}����+����m�����}����+����Y���b�ا~��j��_���������������������������������������������Z�歖f��)�+-���j��_��l����/���m�����}����+����Y���b�ا~��j��_����������������������������������������������j��Y��X��X���Z�歗�b���}����+��m����0����/��j)fj��b��?��nj����h��ajp�h��8�y�h���'(��+��
ښ�ȝؠzz.�����z�^��r~)bj���m���


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 15:15:42 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:15:42 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <20090424102244.fknitu92u8ok0wog@www.mail.yale.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.111542.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

"h��ajȶ���^�)�j)�����azg��)��-��0��m��)yȚ��Z��(~�^��Z���'!"��z�-jwpz���{"u��vH�v��jx��������$��n��^�騞צ�ֲ�
.��Z��h��ޅ�]k+"�{����'�fޮ�ȶ+#��m��m��~+�u���+a���ֲ�('�؝��[zZ'��(����z�j����l���읉����zȠ������ڙ���y��m�u譅���^�('��azV�������]k*��y��‹�u�pk+z�^����8h����Z�ƫz�^�欢{aj�azv�z���y��r���w�zX��ם��躿�*.���ʋ���i�^��^�('jwm�����ay����Zʇ��j�ߢ��jje{�������m��2rW�~��ܬ�	�z(!�秶)���ޮ�^r������y����ʋ�j������Z����zj'���*-����]k*��zj'�颊�ay���y�
jz-�����^��az��ܝk+"�{�N��槲�Z��^~*�ֲ��azw��{^�,"�XZ��azƦyֲ�('j�ay����Zʇ텫ry�����g���aj�ay����Zʇ�����(���y��Y[z�^�,m�Ƞ�)����q���Zɧ�z�ay��yֲ�Ƞ����zj'����'v�^~*�ֲ��ay�%��"��j�"�V޶���l�	��^��zw��^��^�,my����v�^��^~*쵨�Ȟ�az�(�����jg���a{'����G��̜�)��m�+����('��zw�8^r��{��2rW�~�b�מ�{�m�����\��.��-���('�
+��.��-��b~�^��z�(�����݊x-��^~*�ֲ��ay���ܞj����az{az{�m��~�^~*�ֲ��azw��'��������ݲ�'�	ݶ��f❫b�z����^��躼�j�,�	��+a���*�y��fޮȬ�����Ǭ���'��Ǭ����'���۫����]�o�!�azv�z���j��m�v���Z��Zʇ��j��
+��azƦ{����j�j|����q�^���q�]k*j|�������)em�~ǭo'��"�{��'z{�m�߮����(�����݊xk*��������az˛��z{ry���f�zx蝫ajښ+a�&�{���
������a|�����������������������������?��������������������������������������������������o����_���������?�������������[��������������������������������o���������������������������O����������������������������g������������������������o������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������O������������{���������������������������������������������������?��������������������������������������������������_��?�����������������8��������������������������������������������������������?��?����������������������{�������������������������ۯ�����������������������o��������������������������������������������������[���������������������������o�����������������������������������_�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������O����������������������������o���?ۍ_������������������������������������������������r���������������������k�������������������������������������k���������<.�������������������������������������������z������������������������������ڵ����������������������������������������������������g���������������������������������������������������������8�����������������������������������������������������������6�����������������������������������������������?�������������������������������������������������������������������������������g���������������������������������O�����������������?������������������o����������������������������������������������������������������k������������������������������8����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������b��������������������������������������������/��������������������������?��L��������?��������������������������������������������������������������������������/����������������������������������������������������������������?��������<������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3��������3����������������������/�������������������������������������������������o������������������
�����������������������������������������k���������������?���������������������������������������������������������o�������������������������������������������o��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������o����������������������������؇�ۯ�����������o��������?�����������������������������������������������������������������������6+���������������������������k��������������������������������������������������������������������������g������������������������������/�����������������o���������������ڏ��k/����������������������������������������������������������������������������������/�������������������������������������������k�����������������o��������������������������g����������������������������������������������������?����������������������g������������������/���������������������������������������������������������������������8����������������������n��������������������������������������L����������������������������������������k/�������������������������������������������������������<.����������������������������������������'��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������g���������������?�������������������������������������������������������������������������������g����������������������������������'�������������������������������������������<&���������������g�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Z��������O������������������������������������������o�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������/�����������������������������������������f���������/�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������/��������������������?������������������������������������������������������������������������������z����������������������g���������?�������������������������������������������������������������������������������
k���������?�����������������������������o������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������u�����������g�����������/�����������������������������������������������������������������������"��������������������������������������������������������������������������<�������������������������������������������o���x������Y���������������������f��������������g������������O�����������x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���������������������������������������������������������������/����������������������������[���������������������������������������o��������������������o��������������������������������������������8�������������V?��������2����������������������������?����o��o��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������j��Y��X��X��֡��e�X����jk"����i�����jk"����f��f��X��)ߣ�چ�


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Fri Apr 24 15:43:35 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:43:35 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1D79E.8090002@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.114335.0400.>

a���^��r���쨹�ޮ(!���{����z�ay�]yݺ�ֲ��2rW�N�%�x0��h��h�H���\jW�u�����)��^�葬�n�$k۹�ږ��v���x��v������-�)���{ڊ�j�h~�^�槊x!j�hv�"�az�^r&���Z��(~�^��Z���'!"��z�-jwpz���{"u��vH�v��u��z�.���[��/���azw��{^�'Z��(�Waj����z��ֲ�('��0zYZ�{�m����b�;���Z��^����Z��"���u���	�v'g��ޖ�ඊ'z���ނ�Z�j'��!�a{/݉����zȠ������ڙ���y��m�u譅���^�Ƞ����Z��+����-u��~�^���
.�֥���m�a{���ӆ�~+�u��j�����j�'����jg���a{'���܅��y����ޖ)���m��.��ʋ�jg����y��~׫���	�jwm�����ay����Zʇ��j�ߢ��jje{�������k��!����^��pz{r�('�蠆מ�ئz�/z�ay�.�Ǩ�a{'���az|���z�^~+�u����azw��{^�/Ң�^~*��Zʇ��ޚ��zh���^m�"�x���ڞ�az�2rW�~�^���/�k+"�{�N��槲�Z��^~*�ֲ��azw��{^�,"�XZ������Z�Ƞ��-����]k*�����br�j{-��m��ߊ�-u��~�^��m��Z�'��������"��l�	��^�Ǫ���{�ayֲi�^��^~+�u���('����ޚ��zh��	ݶ�~*�ֲ��ay�%��"��j�"�V޶���l�	��^�Ǫ���{�az{azȱ�秶ڝ�az{ay���֠j)�"z-���Šݳ�azv�z���y��Ydy�\��b�a�����b��.��"��z�����N��{b�见̜�����秞�z�-��fj�!z˩�����('�
+��.��-��b~�^��z�(�����݊x-��^�����Zʇ����ry��_�������ay����Zʇ���{ry��Y[{oڝ�(����ay�&n)ڶ*'��ay̜���}�.�'���"�{0��m��a��^zy��+0��i��nq�-��v�'��Ǭ����'���۫����]�o�!�azv�z���j�����y�'��j�]k*��y����(�K-�������q��y����zw��ݮ'�ֲ�����z|�j�"�Vޡ��z��~+޲('���v�ޞ�z��kay�+��)�wb�Zʇ��kz���Ƨv�^�˛��z{ry�����jW���������ڶ������jW�y۰��^������_?����������������������g�����������������������������������������������?�������[�����������������o��g���?�����������������������������������������������������������o��������������������������?�����<������������������������o������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������O������������{���������������������������������������������������?��������������������������������������������������_��?�����������������8��������������������������������������������������������?��?����������������������{�������������������������ۯ�����������������������o��������������������������������������������������[���������������������������o�����������������������������������_�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������O����������������������������o���?ۍ_������������������������������������������������r���������������������k�������������������������������������k���������<.�������������������������������������������z������������������������������ڵ����������������������������������������������������g���������������������������������������������������������8�����������������������������������������������������������6�����������������������������������������������?�������������������������������������������������������������������������������g���������������������������������O�����������������?������������������o����������������������������������������������������������������k������������������������������8����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������b��������������������������������������������/��������������������������?��L������
��?��������������������������������������������������������������������������/����������������������������������������������������������������?��������<������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3��������3����������������������/�������������������������������������������������o�����������������������������������������������������������k���������������?���������������������������������������������������������o�������������������������������������������o��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������o����������������������������؇�ۯ�����������o��������?�����������������������������������������������������������������������6+���������������������������k�����������������������������������������������������k������������o��?����������������g������������������������������������������������������������������/������������������������������������������o������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������?�������������������������������������������n���������������������������������-3������������������������������������O����������������������������������������?����������b������ۯ��g������������������������=�����������/������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������<&����������������������_��������������������������?��������������������������������������������?��������o����������������������������?����������������k/�����o������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������	�������������������������������������������{������������������������������_��������������������������������������������/��������������������������������<&��������������փ����������b��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������/�����������������������������������������f���������/�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������/��������������������?������������������������������������������������������������������������������z����������������������g���������?�������������������������������������������������������������������������������k���������?�����������������������������o����������������������������������������������o�������g������������������������������������/�����������?������������������k����������������?�����������o�����������������������������������������/�����������������������������������������;��������������������������������������������������������������/�����������������������������������������������o���������������g������������O�����������x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���x�������������g������������������o������������������������������������������������{���������������������������������������������������������������/�����������������������������o����������#����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9��������������o������L���s��������������������������~?�������������������������������������9�����������������������������������������h��ajp�h��8�y�h���'(��+��
ښ�ȝؠzz.�����z�^��r~)bj���m���


From randa at armory.com  Fri Apr 24 16:46:22 2009
From: randa at armory.com (Randa Marhenke)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:46:22 -0700
Subject: Mappe Quinatzin leaf 3
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.094622.0700.RANDA@ARMORY.COM>

For anyone who may not have a library card, leaf 3 of  Mappe Quinatzin, or a
drawing thereof, can be seen on thumbnail page 209 of a Doctoral Thesis
written by Luz Maria Mohar Betancourt, called "El Mapa Quinazin. ...". It is
obtainable by just going to:

http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/FichaAutor.html?Ref=3463

or

http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/FichaObra.html?Ref=4030&ext=pdf&portal=0

Happy Hunting!
Randa (Marhenke)
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Fri Apr 24 17:46:50 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:46:50 -0400
Subject: Character sets
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.134650.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

Please DO NOT post messages to the entire list telling us that certain 
messages come to you in unreadable characters.  It only causes 
everyone's mailbox to fill.  Those involved are aware of the problem and 
are working to fix it.

J. F. Schwaller,
Moderator, Nahuatl

-- 
*****************************
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY - Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676
Tel. 315-267-2100
FAX 315-267-2496

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 19:14:05 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:14:05 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.151405.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

Fritz tells me that several of the messages subsequent to my email last 
night have been garbled, including Jonathan's first message, my reply 
and then his reply. For some reason, most of these have come through 
just fine for me. I suspect that maybe my message from early this 
morning may have caused all the problems. I wrote that message from an 
old laptop that I don't use very much and from a webmail program that I 
believe has caused similar problems with messages to this list in the 
past. I think that program has a default character set that must cause 
problems with the list server. So my apologies. I'm writing this message 
from scratch from my regular computer without hitting 'reply' to any of 
the other messages in this thread. Hopefully that will take care of the 
problem. Anyway, Jonathan's original message said something about the 
relationship between the meaning of "nen" ("in vain") and the five-days 
of the nemontemi period, and I responded as follows:
***
Hi Jonathan,
I think the "in vain" part of the meaning has to do with the special 
status of these days, which I understand were considered kind of 
dangerous or unlucky. But the nemontemi days would have to have had day 
signs as well as numbers. It is just that these five days with their day 
signs did not belong to one of the regular months. If they didn't have 
signs, then the name of the year, based either on the sign of the last 
or the first day of the year, would always be the same. Those five days 
are the reason that the names of the years change and were limited to 
four. If you name your year after the sign and the number of the first 
day of the year, for example, you run through the cycle of twenty signs 
eighteen times over the course of the year, then you have the five days 
of the nemontemi. So the first day of the nemontemi is the beginning of 
another cycle of the twenty day signs. This means that the first day of 
the nemontemi will have the same day sign as the first day of that year, 
which means that the first day of the next solar year will be the sixth 
sign in the sequence (the day after the five day-signs of the 
nemontemi). And the first day of the following year will be the 11th 
sign in the sequence, then the sixteenth, and then the first again. In 
other words, the names of the year will keep cycling through this 
four-sign sequence. The continuing cycle of thirteen numbers that 
matches up to these signs works out so that if the number corresponding 
to the first day of the first year is 1, then the number of the first 
day of the next year will be 2, and so on. And the combination of the 
cycle of four years signs with the thirteen numbers is what produces the 
52 year Mesoamerican "century" (4 x 13 = 52). If the name of the year is 
based on the last day of the year, it works the same way, because any 
given calendrical day of any given year will be offset by five signs and 
one number from the corresponding day of the previous and the subsequent 
years.
Galen
***
Then Jonathan pointed out that all of the nemontemi days of all of the 
years of the 52 year cycle (5 x 52) is equal to 260 days, which is 
equivalent to the 260 day cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers. The 
upshot of all this is that the end of all of the interrelated cycles of 
the calender converge at precisely the end of the 52 year "century." So 
each 52 year period would start with the same day-sign and number. And 
the cycle would start again.

So assuming this message goes through, that should catch you up if you 
got the garbled messages.

Galen


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 19:24:25 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:24:25 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1C0A4.7050406@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.152425.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

   I forgot to mention one important point about "ne:m" -- the 
phonological identity of its final segment.  It occurs most often as 
[n], but, as we know,
nasal consonants in many languages assimilate to the point of 
articulation of the following consonant and, further, in word final 
position, show no contrast in point of articulation (e.g., only [m] or 
[n] may occur).  So since its pronunciation as [n] is *determined*, it 
is not relevant in revealing whether it is really /m/ or /n/.

   But a few examples of "ne:m" before vowels reveal that the final 
consonant is /m/:

   quinemia       qui-nem-i-[y]a      he drank it in vain

   nemihquitqui   nem-ihquit[i]-qui   poorly woven


...............

   I referred to Ayer 1478 mistakenly as "Vocabulario anonimo";  it 
*is* anonimo, but it is referred to as: Vocabulario trilingue.

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Tue Apr 28 22:07:19 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:07:19 +0200
Subject: The Tonatiuh
Message-ID: <WED.29.APR.2009.000719.0200.>

The Tonatiuh.

According to the "Leylenda del los Soles" the cycle of the 4 Suns, or the
Tonatiuh, should begin on 955 BC., and end on 1073 AD.

So it is said that the 1st Sun should begin on 1 Acatl 4 Ocelotl, "It was
the year 1 Reed, and on a day called 4 Tiger".

The 2nd Sun began on 279 BC, or on 1 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl, "The year of this
Sun was 1 Flint, and was known as 4 Wind".

The 3rd Sun began on 85 AD, or 1 Tecpatl 4 Quiahuitl, "The year was 1 Flint
and the day 4 Rain".

The 4th Sun began on 397 AD, or 1 Calli 4 Atl, "The year was 1 House and the
day 4 Water".

The references to the yeardates are in fact not very right, according to the
current counting of the days.

The 1st Sun should began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Ocelotl, or 8 July 955BC., or
JD1372837.

After 676 years, or 246688 days, the 2nd Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl,
or 1 March 279BC., or JD1619525.

After 364 years, or 132717 days, the 3rd Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Quiahuitl,
or 16 May 85 AD., JD1752242.

After 312 years, or 114010 days, the 4th Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Atl, or 10
July 397AD., JD1866252. This Sun lasted 676 years, or 246948 days, and ended
on 23 August 1073.

This cycle of 4 Suns lasted from 955 BC. till 1073 AD, or 2028 years. The
first and the last Sun lasted 676 years, while the second lasted 364 years
and the third 312 years. The second and the third Sun together is equal
again to 676 years.

The elements of the ancient legend of the 4 Suns are depicted, or sculpted
in the middle of the Sun Stone, which was placed upon the Temple of the Sun
just after the Tizoc stone.

It has been said that the Sun Stone shows us the beginning of the 5th Sun,
the Macuilli Tonatiuh, with the sign of 13 Acatl, 13 Reed, on the top and
the sign of Nahui Olin in the middle, or the completation of the 4 Suns.
Therefore 13 Acatl 4 Olin was linked to the inauguration of the Stone on the
27th May 1479 BC. and to the beginning of the 5th Sun.

At one time it was thought that the glyph of 13 Acatl meant the beginning of
the Creation of the 4 Suns.

However that is all not right.

The sign of 13 Acatl, which is on the top of the Stone, between the tails of
the Serpent, on the Ring of Flames may be in connection with the Sun's Great
Cycle of 26000 years, which should begin and end on 13 Acatl. If we assign a
value of 1300 years (a fractal of 13) to each of the 20 day-glyphs, that
makes a total of 26000 years.

The exact date however of the beginning of the so called 5th Sun was in fact
10 Calli 4 Olin, or 23 August 1073 AD, jD2113200.

In fact the 5th Sun is the first Sun of a new cycle of 4 Suns of 2028 years.

As the first Sun, 10 Calli 4 Olin, 23 August 1073 AD, jD2113200, was the
beginning of a new cycle that lasted 676 years or 246688 days. That brings
us to the date of 19 January 1749, JD 2359888, which was the beginning of
the second Sun of the new cycle, 10 Calli 4 Coatl. This second Sun lasts
from 1749 AD till 2112 AD., or 364 years, or 132717 days.

The third Sun should begin on 2 June 2112, or 9 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl,
JD2492605. This Sun should last again 312 years, or 114010 days, to 2424 AD.

That brings us to the beginning of the fourth Sun on 26 July 2424,
JD2606615, or 10 Calli 4 Malinalli. This fourth Sun should last again 676
years, or 246948 days, till 3100 AD.

And that brings us again to a third new cycle of 4 Suns, beginning on 9
September 3100 AD, JD2853563, with the first cycle of this third cycle, 10
Calli 4 Xochitl...

As you can see all this cycles begin with a day 4, and are under the
influence of the numbers 676 and 2028. The yeardate switches from 9 Tecpatl
to 10 Calli, the 23rd and 24th year in the bundle of 52.  

Lahun Ik 62

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090429/965816ba/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com  Sat Apr  4 07:09:20 2009
From: HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com (HJVsqzIMIS at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 03:09:20 EDT
Subject: Mesoamerican Musical Workshop
Message-ID: <SAT.4.APR.2009.030920.EDT.>

Greetings Listeros,

     My friends of the musical group TRIBU who specialize in Mesoamerican 
music and instruments will put on a workshop free to the public from April 13 to 
april 16, 2009. The title of the workshop will be presented in Spanish at the 
historic "H?roes de Nacozari" Center in Quer?tero, Quer?tero, Mexico. The 
title of the workshop is "La m?sica en Mesoam?rica". TRIBU asked me to share this 
announcement with all people interested in indigenous culture. There is a 
flyer that I include as an attachment. If it does not come through on the list 
serve please e-mail me in the next few days and I will send it to you as a 
separate e-mail.

Sincerely,
Henry V?squez



 


**************
Hurry! April 15th is almost here. File your Federal taxes FREE 
with TaxACT. 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220239440x1201335902/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.taxact.com%2F08tax.asp%3Fsc%3D084102950001%26p%3D82)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090404/7144946e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TallerenQuer?taro.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 312320 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090404/7144946e/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Mon Apr  6 12:25:02 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:25:02 -0400
Subject: Wired Humanities Project
Message-ID: <MON.6.APR.2009.082502.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

From: "Robert Haskett" <rhaskett at uoregon.edu>
Date: April 6, 2009


Dear national and international colleagues,

(Please excuse any duplication.) I am writing to alert the Mesoamericanist
community to a situation at the University of Oregon that threatens the integrity, and perhaps the survival, of the Wired Humanities Project. At risk are not only WHPs digital Mesoamerican projects, such as the Mapas Project close study of indigenous pictorial manuscripts; http://mapas.uoregon.edu/), the Virtual Mesoamerican Archive finding aid (http://vma.uoregon.edu/), and the online Nahuatl Vocabulary (http://whp.uoregon.edu/NahVocab/), but WHP is currently in the process of adding six sixteenth-century manuscripts to the Mapas Project.  WHP wwas also just beginning to clone and adapt these Mesoamerican projects for use in studies about Asia, medieval Europe, and indigenous cultures of the U.S.  Despite the success of WHP and its ability to win significant grants from agencies such as the NEH and NSF (almost $750,000 since 2006), internal university support is on the brink of disappearing, or at least of being reduced to a level that would make the survival of WHP problem!
 atic.  This situation is not merely monetary in nature (a forced retirement, 100% reduction in support to a technical assistant, more than 50% cuts to graduate students, slashing of office space, etc.), but stems as well from a drive to subordinate WHP to a campus unit whose leadership intends to radically alter its mission, rather than to nurture its successes. If you are willing to make a statement in support of the broader importance of the online resources or in support of the continued leadership and vision of Stephanie Wood at WHP, this would be very helpful.  It is my goal to get these comments to the Vice President for Research, who may be able to reverse the cuts. Here is the link for making your comments: 
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=3DYfayu7axnjRf5AZ23wrUnA_3d_3d

Thank you so much for considering this.
Robert Haskett
Professor of History
University of Oregon
rhaskett at uoregon.edu



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr  8 14:19:17 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 10:19:17 -0400
Subject: Moctezuma exhibit at British Museum
Message-ID: <WED.8.APR.2009.101917.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Date: 7 Apr 2009
From: "michael ruggeri" <michaelruggeri at mac.com>

Listeros,

Erik Boot has an extensive posting on the Moctezuma exhibit opening at  
the British Museum in September. I am reproducing his posts for you  
here;

Ancient MesoAmerica News Updates 2009, No. 8: London, England - More  
Information on the Upcoming Exhibition "Moctezuma" at The British Museum
Today, Tuesday April 7, 2009, the online edition of the daily British  
newspaper The Telegraph posted an extensive note on the upcoming  
exhibition entitled "Moctezuma: Aztec Ruler" at The British Museum.  
The exhibition will be shown at the museum from September 25, 2009, to  
January 24, 2010. It will feature an alternative rendering of the  
final moments in the life of Moctezuma, supported by two small images  
from 16th century manuscripts: He was killed by the Spaniards, not his  
own people (edited by AMaNU) (photo: The Telegraph/AP: Aztec mosaic  
mask, probably a potrait of Xiuhtecuhtli):
Moctezuma, last Aztec ruler 'was no traitor', British Museum  
exhibition to claim - Moctezuma, the last ruler of the Aztec empire,  
was not a traitor who sold out to the Spanish conquistadors, a new  
British Museum exhibition will claim later this year. To date, history  
has cast him as the man who ceded his empire to the Spanish in 1520  
largely without a fight. However, evidence never before presented in  
public in Britain will show that he was humiliated before his people  
by being paraded in chains, supporting an alternative theory that  
power was wrested from his grasp.
Two portraits from the 1560s will show that he was bound in chains and  
rope before being paraded on a balcony. Colin McEwan, curator at the  
British Museum, said it was likely that the conventional picture of  
Moctezuma as a willing agent of colonial rule had been painted by the  
Spanish victors.
He thought the version of events indicated by the 1560s manuscripts ?  
which were produced by indigenous scribes under Spanish patronage ?  
was "probably closer to what actually happened".
He argued: "Is it likely that a feared military ruler just completely  
changes his complexion and weakly and willingly subjects himself to  
ceding his empire to the Spanish? Is that plausible?"
Moctezuma came to power in 1502, ruling over one of the day's largest  
and most advanced civilisations, which straddled much of Central  
America from the Caribbean to the Pacific. While the Aztec empire was  
at its zenith, its politics were fragile. Moctezuma consolidated power  
by heavily taxing his subjects, in the form of raw materials or  
precious art works. One such object is thought to be the turquoise,  
gold foil and mother of pearl mask that will go on display in the  
exhibition.
Consequently the Spanish found it easy to find high-powered enemies of  
the emperor among his ranks, said Neil MacGregor, director of the  
British Museum. He said: "What is so interesting is that this is an  
empire that is at the top of its form when it falls. The way it was  
constructed made it vulnerable because it made it easy for the Spanish  
to recruit disaffected allies." Ironically, the lasting picture of  
Moctezuma as a turncoat meant he has become more celebrated more in  
Europe than in Mexico, noted Mr McEwan.
Moctezuma: Aztec Ruler, which opens in September, is the fourth and  
last exhibition in a British Museum series about great historical  
rulers. It began two years ago with The First Emperor, which brought a  
small selection of China's Terracotta Army to London. That coup earned  
the museum 850,000 visitors over seven months. Last summer Hadrian:  
Empire and Conflict attracted 244,000 over three months while 50,000  
have seen the third, about the Iranian ruler Shah Abbas, since it  
opened in February (written by Stephen Adams; source Telegraph).
The British Museum now has a special website on which further  
information, relevant to the exhibition, can be found: Moctezuma:  
Aztec Ruler. It features, for instance, a link to the full press  
release.
Another British newspaper, The Guardian, provided the following online  
report on the upcoming exhibition (edited by AMaNU) (photo: The  
Guardian/Museo de America, Madrid: Detail from Enconchado 16, by Juan  
y Miguel Gonzalez, A.D. 1698, Moctezuma shown on the balcony):

New exhibition challenges view of Aztec emperor Moctezuma as traitor -  
Contrary to popular belief, the Aztec emperor Moctezuma was murdered  
by his Spanish captors and not by his own people, the British Museum  
will argue in a new exhibition that will try to rehabilitate the  
emperor's image as a traitor.
The exhibition will bring together spectacular loans from Europe,  
where the Spanish conquistadors brought many of the Aztecs' greatest  
treasures, and from Mexico, where recently excavated relics from the  
lost civilisation continue to be found under its modern capital,  
Mexico City. Scientific tests on objects including a spectacular  
turquoise mask, from the British Museum's own collection, show that in  
a single piece, the gold, precious stone and feather decorations were  
drawn from many different places. "What we are trying to do is look at  
an absolutely key moment in the history of the world through the  
filter of one man," museum director Neil MacGregor said. "There has  
never been an exhibition on this man, a great emperor of an extremely  
sophisticated empire in ways which seemed very strange to European  
eyes."
The traditional account of the death of Moctezuma ? the museum has  
adopted the spelling as closer to his name in his own Nahuatl language  
than the more common Montezuma ? is that having been taken a willing  
hostage by Hern?n Cort?s and the conquistadors, he was killed by his  
own outraged people.
According to several versions of the story, in 1520, the Spanish  
brought him out onto a balcony of his own palace to try and calm the  
riotous mob, but he was pelted with stones and killed. One Spanish  
account, written years later, even insists that he refused medical  
help and food from his Spanish captors, who "spoke very kindly to  
him", before suddenly dying.
However, the exhibition will include two small images from later  
manuscripts, one now in Glasgow, one in Mexico, both probably made by  
Aztecs working for Spanish patrons, which show the leader distinctly  
less kindly treated, brought out with a rope around his neck, or  
shackled. Once the Aztecs began to revolt against the presence of the  
Spanish in their capital city, Tenochtitlan, this version suggests,  
Moctezuma was useless to them, so they killed him before just managing  
to escape with their lives.
"Moctezuma is the last in our series on great rulers and their  
legacies and presents perhaps one of the most fascinating examples of  
implosion of power and the clash of civilisations," MacGregor said.  
The series included China's first emperor, Qin, the Roman emperor  
Hadrian, the wall builder, and the 16th-century Iranian ruler Shah  
Abbas. While there were writings by, and many contemporary accounts  
of, the characters, curator Colin McEwan admitted that authentic  
personal details about Moctezuma are so scarce that one academic he  
consulted said he thought the exhibition would be impossible.
"We will raise many questions but we may not succeed in answering them  
all," Mc Ewan said. The exhibition, with a related show of 20th- 
century revolutionary posters and images opening in October, with both  
running into next year, will mark both the bicentenary of Mexico's  
declaration of independence from Spain in 1810, and of the Mexican  
Revolution 100 years later (written by Maev Kennedy; sourceThe  
Guardian).

Mike Ruggeri

The British Museum Link on the Exhibit;

http://www.britishmuseum.org/whats_on/future_exhibitions/moctezuma.aspx


Erik Boot's Ancient  Mesoamerican News Updates
http://ancient-mesoamerica-news-updates.blogspot.com/

Mike Ruggeri's Ancient America Museum Exhibitions, Conferences and  
Lectures
http://tinyurl.com/c9mlao

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr  8 19:11:20 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 15:11:20 -0400
Subject: Readings on Moctezuma
Message-ID: <WED.8.APR.2009.151120.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Date: 8 Apr 2009
From: "Michael Smith" <Michael.E.Smith.2 at asu.edu>

I haven't seen the new Moctezuma exhibit, but readers who want to read 
some of the recent "revisionist" scholarship on the Mexica king can look 
at some of the following works:

Burkhart, Louise M.
2008 Meeting the Enemy: Moteuczoma and Cort?s, Herod and the Magi. In 
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the 
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A. 
Jackson, pp. 11-24. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Fern?ndez-Armesto, Felipe
1992 "Aztec" Auguries and Memories of the Conquest of Mexico. 
Renaissance Studies 6:287-305.

Gillespie, Susan D.
2008 Blaming Moteuczoma: Anthropomorphizing the Aztec Conquest. In 
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the 
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A. 
Jackson, pp. 25-56. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Smith, Michael E.
2005 Motecuhzoma II. In Berkshire Encyclopedia of World History, edited 
by William H. McNeill, pp. 1302-1303, vol. 3. Berkshire Publishing, 
Great Barrington, MA. Available at:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-05-MoctEncyc.pdf

Townsend, Camilla
2003 Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico. 
American Historical Review 108:659-687.

Townsend, Camilla
2003 No One Said it was Quetzalcoatl: Listening to the Indians in the 
Conquest of Mexico. History Compass 1:1-14.

Mike

Dr. Michael E. Smith
Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Arizona State University
www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Fri Apr 10 12:09:08 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:09:08 -0400
Subject: Translation request
Message-ID: <FRI.10.APR.2009.080908.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>


*From:* ripken1 at gmail.com
Date: April 10, 2009

All,
I have a very interesting Nahuatl broadside printed in 1766 in Mexico that I
need translated. It is one page. If you are qualified, please contact me 
off line.
Thanks.
Brian Murphy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090410/d8e5f89a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Sat Apr 11 00:49:23 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:49:23 +0200
Subject: Atotoztli
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.024923.0200.>

Who was Atotoztli?

According to Wikipedia, she was the daughter of Nauhyotzin, tlahtoani of
Colhuacan from 1377, or 2 Calli. (Lehmann 1938, p.173).

Other sources, like Clavigero, mentioned her as daughter of Achitometl, the
last tlahtoani of Colhuacan, who became that in 1336, or 13 Tecpatl, after
murdering Acamapichtli the Old.

Chimalpahin, on the other hand, pretended that she was the daughter of
Coxcoxtli, tlahtoani of Colhuacan in 1281, or 10 calli (Chim.3, 38f,76r.).

Apparently (cfr.Wikipedia) she was was the wife of Opochtli Iztahuatzin, a
Mexicah chief, the so called father of the first tlahtoani of Tenochtitlan,
Acamapichtli Itzpapolotl, but in the Anales of Tlatelolco she was mentioned
as the wife of Acamapichtli the Old, tlahtoani of Colhuacan. 

I know that the tlahtoani of both cities sometimes had many wifes but that
is a little bit to confusing I think.

Lahun Ik 62 

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/1ab6956f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 11 05:07:11 2009
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:07:11 +0000
Subject: Atotoztli
In-Reply-To: <CF33EDDD9A024B14919755528ADD7024@baert>
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.050711.0000.>

--- On Sat, 11/4/09, lahunik.62 at skynet.be <lahunik.62 at skynet.be> wrote:
> Who was Atotoztli? According to Wikipedia, ...

Etymology: "Atotoztli" seems to look like [a_tl] = "water" + [toto_tz(a)] = "to hurry (something) along".

Perhaps more than one person was named Atototzli.

Citlalyani

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/9e3c17fa/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From macehual08 at gmail.com  Sat Apr 11 06:29:45 2009
From: macehual08 at gmail.com (macehual08 at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:29:45 -0400
Subject: studies of "olin"
Message-ID: <SAT.11.APR.2009.022945.0400.MACEHUAL08@GMAIL.COM>

Could anyone point me in a direction toward information about "olin" (as a
concept, a glyph, a word, etc.) I would be interested in any material,
linguistic, philosophical approach to olin.
I'd appreciate any titles of books or articles (in Spanish, French or
English)--or even suggestions for researching the topic. You may e-mail me
directly with any hunches.

Thanks!
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090411/7cfd8073/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From gwhitta at gwdg.de  Mon Apr 13 08:04:43 2009
From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:04:43 +0200
Subject: Olin
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1239555601.11481.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <MON.13.APR.2009.100443.0200.GWHITTA@GWDG.DE>

Dear Paul,

A paper devoted entirely to Olin (but focused on the aspect related to
earthquakes) has been published recently in the journal Indiana and can be
downloaded at:
<http://www.iai.spk-berlin.de/publikationen/indiana/bisherige-ausgaben/indiana-23.html>.

It's in German, but this is a hurdle to be overcome if you need
information on Olin for academic purposes.

Here are the refs.:

Thiemer-Sachse, Ursula
Olin. Zur Bedeutung von Erdbeben und deren Registrierung bei den Azteken.
Indiana 23 (2006): 309-344.

It is the most detailed study of Olin available, as far as I am aware.
However, the definitive study of the subject, which would require a
thorough command of Nahuatl and of Nahuatl writing and iconography, has
yet to be written.

I hope this helps.

Best,
Gordon


> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:29:45 -0400
> From: "macehual08 at gmail.com" <macehual08 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] studies of "olin"
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>
> Could anyone point me in a direction toward information about "olin" (as a
> concept, a glyph, a word, etc.) I would be interested in any material,
> linguistic, philosophical approach to olin.
> I'd appreciate any titles of books or articles (in Spanish, French or
> English)--or even suggestions for researching the topic. You may e-mail me
> directly with any hunches.
>
> Thanks!
> Paul


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gordon Whittaker
Professor
Linguistische Anthropologie und Altamerikanistik
Seminar fuer Romanische Philologie
Universitaet Goettingen
Humboldtallee 19
37073 Goettingen
Germany
tel./fax (priv.): ++49-5594-89333
tel. (office): ++49-551-394188
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Mon Apr 13 19:56:13 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:56:13 -0400
Subject: [Aztlan] Ball game question
Message-ID: <MON.13.APR.2009.155613.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Dear Pedro,

   Frank is right about the root for "tlachco" being <tlach> -- that's 
implied in my notation in a prior message: "tlach(tli)".  Sometimes I 
forget to repeat that I refer to noun stems in Nahuatl with their 
absolutive suffixes attached -- I think that makes them more quickly 
recognizable.  On the other hand, "tlachtli" has no linguistic relation 
to 'rubber'.  Further, roots don't 'produce' words with another meaning 
by the addition of the absolutive suffix.

   With regard to the claimed relationship between "tlachia" and 
"chia", there are two schools of thought.  "Chia" means 'wait for' and 
some people believe that the "tla-" prefix fused onto it, producing an 
intransitive stem: "tlachia" ('to look, gaze). Some other people 
believe that "chia" and "tlachia" are simply independent stems/roots.
   In any case, "chia" has nothing to do with 'to make' -- that's the 
job of "chihua" (where there is a /w/ in the  i_a  slot).  Actually, 
when I say 'nothing to do with', that's not fair to the dialect of 
Nahuatl spoken along the coast in Michoacan -- it has forms of <chiwa / 
chihua> in which there is homophony with forms of <chia>.

   Your remark about "tlachiaya" and "coa" / "cohua" points to a need 
to clarify what is going on with "ia" vs. "iya" and "oa" vs. "ohua".  
In both "older" Nahuatl and in modern Nahuatl, there is no phonetic 
(i.e., pronunciation) distinction between these pairs.  In the well 
known modern dialects and in the Nahuatl contained in the works of 
Molina and Sahagun, "y" is deleted after "i" when another vowel 
follows, just as "w" (spelled "hu") is deleted after "o" when another 
vowel follows.  On the other hand, some dialect *insert* "y" after "i" 
and "w" ("hu") after "o" in these sequences.
   So it seem that sequences like "ia" and "iya" (like "oa" and "ohua") 
cannot be distinguished...?  But it *is* possible if we look at the 
variable behavior of relevant stems:

   nitlachia  I gaze         ninihtotia    I dance
  onitlachix  I gazed        oninihtotih   I danced

   niccoa     I buy it       nitlahcuiloa  I write
  oniccouh    I bought it   onitlahcuiloh  I wrote

   The appearance of final "x" ("sh") and "uh" ("w") in "chia" and 
"cohua" betrays the presence of a "y" and "w", respectively, in 
"tlachia" and "coa", whereas "ihtotia" and "tlahcuiloa" behave 
otherwise, simple dropping their "a" and adding "-h".  In other words, 
"ihtotia" and "tlahcuiloa" really do end in a sequence of two vowels, 
but "tlachia" and "niccoa" have a surreptitious consonant before their 
final vowel!!

All the best,

Joe

p.s.  I brought our discussion back to Nahuat-l, since I thought it was 
of general interest.


Dear Professor Campbell

I spoke to my nawatl teacher Frank Diaz, the root for Tlachko is Tlach, it
produces the noun Tlachtli "Rubber" , in the other hand the word Tlachia
observe comes form the word Chia to make and when we add Tla as an
acentuation is tranformed to Tlachia observe, to see with atention.
Tlachiaya is a derivation like koa produces kowa in certain areas.

good day

Pedro


----- Original Message -----
From: "Campbell, R. Joe" <campbel at indiana.edu>
To: "John F. Schwaller" <schwallr at potsdam.edu>
Cc: "Pedro de Eguiluz" <temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org>;
<aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Aztlan] Ball game question


>  Further, the verb "tlachiya" (or, in its frequent spelling, "tlachia") is
> not related to the noun "tlachtli".  Word pieces are assumed to be the
> 'same' piece (morphemes) when they share enough in both form (phonological
> composition) and content (meaning).  A proposed relationship should also
> be credible within observed formal variations of both members of a
> morpheme.
>
>  "tlachiya" never loses enough of its basic shape to allow us to identify
> it with "tlach(tli)".  While it *does* lose the /y/ segment in most
> Nahuatl dialects (after /i/ -- just as /w/ is lost after /o/) and the /a/
> sometimes lost, the /i/ is never lost (i.e., the stem never shortens to
> "tlach...".
> The fact that "tlachiya" actually *does* have an underlying /y/ is obvious
> in the preterite where the /y/ shows up as 'x' "(o)nitlachix" 'I saw' and
> the nominal derivation "tlachixqui" 'sentinel', where the /y/ undergoes a
> general syllable-final change to 'x' (pronounced sh).
>
>  This fact about the form of "tlachiya" is fatal to its proposed
> relationship with "tlachtli", but on the semantic/content side, it would
> also fail.  Where could we find evidence for the relationship between
> 'seeing' and 'contest'?
> Obviously, in modern cultures, 'spectators' are tightly associated with
> 'games'.
> There wouldn't be nearly as many contestants as there are in all our
> modern contests if the pool of spectators disappeared.  But that's not the
> point --
> the question is whether we can identify a relationship between 'seeing'
> and 'contest' in the community where "tlachiya" might have given rise to
> "tlachtli'.
>
> Iztayohmeh,
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> Quoting "John F. Schwaller" <schwallr at potsdam.edu>:
>
>> You have the words somewhat reversed:
>>
>> Tlachtli is the ball game
>>
>> Tlachco is the place where it is played.
>>
>>
>>
>> Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
>>> Ball Game in classic nawatl is Tlachko, in the middle of
>>> Tenochtitlan there was one called Teotlachko "Divine Game court".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the clues that lead us to the origins of this game being
>>> astronomic observation, comes from the verbal form of the word
>>> Tlachtli "Ball game", Tlachia "Observe, see". It was used to say
>>> Ilwikakpa nitlachia "I look at the sky". "Observation post" was
>>> Tlachialoyan.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pedro
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Aztlan mailing list
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
>>> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
>>> Click to view Calendar of Events
>>> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> John F. Schwaller
>> President
>> SUNY - Potsdam
>> 44 Pierrepont Ave.
>> Potsdam, NY  13676
>> Tel. 315-267-2100
>> FAX 315-267-2496
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aztlan mailing list
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
>> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
>> Click to view Calendar of Events
>> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



----- End forwarded message -----


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Tue Apr 14 17:16:48 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:16:48 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 123, Issue 5
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2.1239469202.6503.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <TUE.14.APR.2009.121648.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

For a great interpretation of the interrelation of the different accounts of
the identity of Atotoztli I would reccommend reading Susan Gillespies "The
Aztec Kings". In chapter 3 she describes how the name of Atotoztli was
apparently frequently used for examples of a dynasty founding queen in
central mexican nahua myth-history.


Magnus Pharao Hansen
Cuernavaca


>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Atotoztli (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
>   2. Re: Atotoztli (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: <lahunik.62 at skynet.be>
> To: "Aztlan" <aztlan at lists.famsi.org>, "Nahuatl List" <
> nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:49:23 +0200
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Atotoztli
>
> *Who was Atotoztli?*
>
> *According to Wikipedia, she was the daughter of Nauhyotzin, tlahtoani of
> Colhuacan from 1377, or 2 Calli. (Lehmann 1938, p.173).*
>
> *Other sources, like Clavigero, mentioned her as daughter of Achitometl,
> the last tlahtoani of Colhuacan, who became that in 1336, or 13 Tecpatl,
> after murdering Acamapichtli the Old.*
>
> *Chimalpahin, on the other hand, pretended that she was the daughter of
> Coxcoxtli, tlahtoani of Colhuacan in 1281, or 10 calli (Chim.3, 38f,76r.).
> *
>
> *Apparently (cfr.Wikipedia) she was was the wife of Opochtli Iztahuatzin,
> a Mexicah chief, the so called father of the first tlahtoani of **
> Tenochtitlan**, Acamapichtli Itzpapolotl, but in the Anales of Tlatelolco
> she was mentioned as the wife of Acamapichtli the Old, tlahtoani of
> Colhuacan. *
>
> *I know that the tlahtoani of both cities sometimes had many wifes but
> that is a little bit to confusing I think.*
>
> *Lahun Ik 62 *
>
> *Baert Georges*
>
> *Flanders** Fields*
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: ANTHONY APPLEYARD <a.appleyard at btinternet.com>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:07:11 +0000 (GMT)
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Atotoztli
> --- On Sat, 11/4/09, lahunik.62 at skynet.be <lahunik.62 at skynet.be> wrote:
> > Who was Atotoztli? According to Wikipedia, ...
>
> Etymology: "Atotoztli" seems to look like [a_tl] = "water" + [toto_tz(a)] =
> "to hurry (something) along".
>
> Perhaps more than one person was named Atototzli.
>
> Citlalyani
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090414/248ee821/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Wed Apr 15 19:05:02 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:05:02 +0200
Subject: Codex Mendoza
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.210502.0200.>

I want to thank everyone who gave me information about Atotoztli, a name
given to many wives in the Mexicah history.

Could anyone give me the name of a website where one could download all the
pages or the folios of the Codex Mendoza.

Thanks anyway.  

Lahun Ik 62

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090415/b5f815e8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Wed Apr 15 19:28:29 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:28:29 -0400
Subject: Codex Mendoza
In-Reply-To: <061F8B890A894B12A81F109062B41E91@baert>
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.152829.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

I do not know about online.  The full codex is available in print from 
the University of California Press, edited by Frances Berdan and 
Patricia Anawalt.  There is also an economy paperback edition which has 
most of the illustrations, but not all.



lahunik.62 at skynet.be wrote:
>
> /I want to thank everyone who gave me information about Atotoztli, a 
> name given to many wives in the Mexicah history./
>
> /Could anyone give me the name of a website where one could download 
> all the pages or the folios of the Codex //Mendoza//./
>
> /Thanks anyway.  /
>
> /Lahun Ik 62/
>
> /Baert Georges/
>
> /Flanders// Fields/
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   


-- 
*****************************
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY - Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676
Tel. 315-267-2100
FAX 315-267-2496

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090415/734fc69e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From bortiz at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 15 21:09:52 2009
From: bortiz at earthlink.net (Bernard Ortiz de Montellano)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:09:52 -0500
Subject: e-mail change
Message-ID: <WED.15.APR.2009.160952.0500.BORTIZ@EARTHLINK.NET>

Dear Sirs please change my e-mail from bortiz at earthlink.net to bortizdem at gmail.com

Thanks

Bernard Ortiz de Montellano
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Thu Apr 16 17:45:47 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:45:47 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <THU.16.APR.2009.124547.0500.>

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee?s recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  
 
Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below?
 
http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
  
 
Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content of the Mappe Quinatzin.
 
1.  Lee states:  ?According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl.?  Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to reconcile the various reports of the tribute and service system of Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns. 
 
2. Lee tells us:  ?Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2 appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl established.?   Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59) carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of Teotihuacan. 
 
To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as evident and important as someone writing about ?the eleven apostles? and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001. Lee?s investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We therefore cannot rely on Lee?s description of the content of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources or on Lee?s reporting on more than a century of later, better investigations.
 
Lee is not entitled to his own set of ?facts.?  He has set the clock back on interpretation of this document more than a century and presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political structure.
 
Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 will be pointed out in a subsequent post.



Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090416/3755d8b2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Apr 16 19:23:40 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:23:40 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094416174547531@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <THU.16.APR.2009.152340.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Mr. Offner:

I can't speak for the rest of this list, but I've found your critiques 
of Lee's work on Nezahualcoyotl way beyond the pale. I don't quite get 
it, don't quite get all this jumping and screaming. I find it 
suspicious, in fact.

You made your point in your first posting on this topic, and that was 
sufficient. I'm interested in the topic, but no longer interested in 
anything you have to say on it.

The next time your name pops up on my screen, off it goes.

Cualli ohtli,

Michael McCaffertyu


Quoting Jerry Offner <ixtlil at earthlink.net>:

> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee?s recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> Nahuatl.
>
> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below?
>
> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>
>
> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>
> 1.  Lee states:  ?According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl.?  Everyone else who
> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> reconcile the various reports of the tribute and service system of
> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>
> 2. Lee tells us:  ?Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> established.?   Everyone else who has examined this document,
> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> Teotihuacan.
>
> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> evident and important as someone writing about ?the eleven apostles?
> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> Lee?s investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
> therefore cannot rely on Lee?s description of the content of the
> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> or on Lee?s reporting on more than a century of later, better
> investigations.
>
> Lee is not entitled to his own set of ?facts.?  He has set the clock
> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> structure.
>
> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>
>
>
> Jerry Offner
> ixtlil at earthlink.net




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Fri Apr 17 17:24:40 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:24:40 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122440.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

Dear List

Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final "e", for example two stones is Ontetl. 

 

With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.

 

In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read ".the first cause, called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three dignities"



This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few people in the world undestand it, if any.



Regards



Pedro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/9a92030f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 17:53:19 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:53:19 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <1E70F0C418A743EA9EC3FAB45AA6725D@eguiluz>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.105319.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

Dear Pedro,

While it would seem that this analysis could be valid, there are  
examples of where the numerical is not treated to the loss of the final 
part:

nahuiollin or nahui ollin.

perhaps out of convention or style the name ome teotl became one word?

What do you have as proof of ....."This conception of this trinity an[d] 
the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica"?

I have seen one, two, four, eight, 13, 52, etc., spoken of as being 
significant often,  but I cannot remember any pre-conquest allusions to 
a "trinity"

Duality (twins, life, death...) yes.... trinity... I have not seen it

Please let me know your citations.

If there are post-conquest allusions to a trinity,  I believe that that 
would be a negotiation of theology by the indigenous people to

conform their world view to a Christian view imposed by the Spanish.

When we look at post-conquest writings (especially 1530-1690) we need to 
look for resilient negotiation and bicultural meaning when indigenous
informants speak of the divine.


respectfully,

Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org




Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
> Dear List
>  
>
> Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we 
> join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final 
> "e", for example two stones is Ontetl.
>
>  
>
> With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it 
> looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it 
> looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and 
> teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.
>
>  
>
> In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read "...the first cause, 
> called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three 
> dignities"
>
>  
>
> This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all 
> the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived 
> with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and 
> destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher 
> conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few 
> people in the world undestand it, if any.
>
>  
>
> Regards
>
>  
>
> Pedro
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/56173cd7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From ipedrozar at gmail.com  Fri Apr 17 18:11:17 2009
From: ipedrozar at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Iv=E1n_Pedroza?=)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:11:17 -0600
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <49E8C20F.90506@cox.net>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.121117.0600.IPEDROZAR@GMAIL.COM>

I agree with Mario. All symbols are  conceived as dual: Tonacatecuhtli,
Tonacacihuatl; Tlaloctlamacazqui, Chalchiuhtlicue; Mictecacihuatl,
Mictlatecuhtli and a long etcetera... I don't think we have much valid
evidence on such thing as "trinity"...

Besides, ome doesn't lose the E when composed with a suffix beginning with T
(as well as other letters), as in Ometepec...

And yet, yei-eyi is composed mostly (but not only) as "ex" like in expa,
excan...

I recommend Salvador D?az S?ntora's book *Meses y cielos
*where you can find a brilliant discussion about the meaning of numbers for
nahuatl philosophy..

Titottazqueh,

Iv?n Pedroza
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/73ffce86/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 19:20:02 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:20:02 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <1dde854d0904171206vbbdd9f0t5892959710bb956f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122002.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

Forgive my error of semantics,  I should have said: 

"Please let me know your references/sources"


cuix.......Somethings are incomprehensible because we attach our own values to them, and they do not fit what is out there.



Mario

Owen Thomas wrote:
> PEDRO the scholar; and those who read his comments
> Proof by references is a very European concept. I prefer to follow the
> concept of scholarly study of all sources and also follow the Nahuatl
> way of accepting all as equal. Indepemdent, dependent on one other,
> dependent on three, or all equal in Mexico. I respect all attempts to
> understand the incomprehensible.
>
> On 4/17/09, micc2 <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:
>   
>> Dear Pedro,
>>
>> While it would seem that this analysis could be valid, there are
>> examples of where the numerical is not treated to the loss of the final
>> part:
>>
>> nahuiollin or nahui ollin.
>>
>> perhaps out of convention or style the name ome teotl became one word?
>>
>> What do you have as proof of ....."This conception of this trinity an[d]
>> the union of it, was shared by all the people of Mesoamerica"?
>>
>> I have seen one, two, four, eight, 13, 52, etc., spoken of as being
>> significant often,  but I cannot remember any pre-conquest allusions to
>> a "trinity"
>>
>> Duality (twins, life, death...) yes.... trinity... I have not seen it
>>
>> Please let me know your citations.
>>
>> If there are post-conquest allusions to a trinity,  I believe that that
>> would be a negotiation of theology by the indigenous people to
>>
>> conform their world view to a Christian view imposed by the Spanish.
>>
>> When we look at post-conquest writings (especially 1530-1690) we need to
>> look for resilient negotiation and bicultural meaning when indigenous
>> informants speak of the divine.
>>
>>
>> respectfully,
>>
>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Pedro de Eguiluz wrote:
>>     
>>> Dear List
>>>
>>>
>>> Ometeotl is usually translated as "Divine two", but in Nawatl when we
>>> join the word Ome "two" to another word (root) it looses the final
>>> "e", for example two stones is Ontetl.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With Yei "three" happens similar when we join it to another word it
>>> looses the final "i" and when we put it in the middle of two words it
>>> looses also the "Y".  So in Ometeotl we have Om "two", e "three" and
>>> teotl "divine". So the Ometeotl is Divine Two Three.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the Codex Vatican 3738, page 17, we can read "...the first cause,
>>> called by another name Ometekutli, that is the same as Lord of Three
>>> dignities"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This conception of this trinity an the union of it, was shared by all
>>> the people of Mesoamerica. Duality as we know it, good-bad arrived
>>> with Cortez and his army. This good-bad conception is very poor and
>>> destructive, compared to Ometeotl "Divine uni dual trinity", a higher
>>> conception that was not understood by the Europeans, even now very few
>>> people in the world undestand it, if any.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pedro
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nahuatl mailing list
>>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>>
>>>       
>
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/672b3cf1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Fri Apr 17 19:22:53 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:22:53 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <d9630e790904171111p9bee065g569e7572429ac6d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.122253.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>



Iv?n Pedroza wrote:
> I agree with Mario. All symbols are  conceived as dual: 
> Tonacatecuhtli, Tonacacihuatl; Tlaloctlamacazqui, Chalchiuhtlicue; 
> Mictecacihuatl, Mictlatecuhtli and a long etcetera... I don't think we 
> have much valid evidence on such thing as "trinity"...
>
> Besides, ome doesn't lose the E when composed with a suffix beginning 
> with T (as well as other letters), as in Ometepec...
This change of ending can also be seen with verbs like "piya" -to hold, 
carry, or guard...  

The preterit becomes "pix" as in "teopixqueh"  Those that 
carry/guard/hold the god/divine"


Mario




>
> And yet, yei-eyi is composed mostly (but not only) as "ex" like in 
> expa, excan...
>
> I recommend Salvador D?az S?ntora's book /Meses y cielos
> /where you can find a brilliant discussion about the meaning of 
> numbers for nahuatl philosophy..
>
> Titottazqueh,
>
> Iv?n Pedroza
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/63dcfbf7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mwswanton at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 17 21:07:52 2009
From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:07:52 -0700
Subject: Readings on Moctezuma
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.140752.0700.MWSWANTON@YAHOO.COM>





I would
suggest adding the work of Antonio Aimi to this useful list of ?revisionist?
scholarship on Moteuczoma.

?

Aimi, Antonio. 2002. La ?vera? visione dei vinti: la Conquista
del Messico nelle fonti azteche. Roma: Bulzoni.

?

_____. 2001. Il retorno del Serpente Piumato: Cort?s inventa
il pi? ?famoso? dei miti aztetechi. Studi di letterature ispano-americane, 33:
7-43.

?

_____. 1996. I presagi della Conquista e la ?hybris? di
Motecuhzoma: la ?vera? visione dei vinti. Quaderni di letterature iberiche e
iberoamericane, 25: 23-64.

?



--- On Wed, 4/8/09, John F. Schwaller <schwallr at potsdam.edu> wrote:

From: John F. Schwaller <schwallr at potsdam.edu>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Readings on Moctezuma
To: "Nahuat-l ((messages))" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 3:11 PM

Date: 8 Apr 2009
From: "Michael Smith" <Michael.E.Smith.2 at asu.edu>

I haven't seen the new Moctezuma exhibit, but readers who want to read
some of the recent "revisionist" scholarship on the Mexica king can look
at some of the following works:

Burkhart, Louise M.
2008 Meeting the Enemy: Moteuczoma and Cort?s, Herod and the Magi. In
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A.
Jackson, pp. 11-24. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Fern?ndez-Armesto, Felipe
1992 "Aztec" Auguries and Memories of the Conquest of Mexico.
Renaissance Studies 6:287-305.

Gillespie, Susan D.
2008 Blaming Moteuczoma: Anthropomorphizing the Aztec Conquest. In
Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the
Conquest of Mexico, edited by Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A.
Jackson, pp. 25-56. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Smith, Michael E.
2005 Motecuhzoma II. In Berkshire Encyclopedia of World History, edited
by William H. McNeill, pp. 1302-1303, vol. 3. Berkshire Publishing,
Great Barrington, MA. Available at:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-05-MoctEncyc.pdf

Townsend, Camilla
2003 Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico.
American Historical Review 108:659-687.

Townsend, Camilla
2003 No One Said it was Quetzalcoatl: Listening to the Indians in the
Conquest of Mexico. History Compass 1:1-14.

Mike

Dr. Michael E. Smith
Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Arizona State University
www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090417/c1e64c0e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From campbel at indiana.edu  Sat Apr 18 03:21:36 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <d9630e790904171111p9bee065g569e7572429ac6d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.17.APR.2009.232136.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Pedro,

   Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
they were.  If they were, I might be a chemist.  But I'm glad I'm not.
I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.

   When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with.  If we are going to
entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
combination with others.

   An example:

   1) When I started the English translation and morphological
analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
in the future.
   I looked at Molina's entry:
     Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.

   The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
simple..." I thought).
  "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
'water-man, sailor'.
   But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
sailors?  And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
place less than pleased with their behavior.  That seemed like a
satisfactory semantic bridge to me.  So the behavior of water-persons
was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
behavior.

   Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
glottal stop as well --"ah-".  Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
human' = 'not human, bad'.  (It can be noted that I still don't
always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)


   The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
...and that there is always more to know.

................

   On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
be a single word, maybe a two word phrase.  There are other apparent
words might deceive us:

     coatlicue    name of a divinity
really: coatl i-cue  (her skirt is snakes)

     Coatlichan   name of a town
really  coatl i-chan (snake's house)

     Atlihuetzia  name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
really  atl i-huetziya(n)  (water's falling place -- waterfall)

.............................

   On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
before X" statement.

   "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc."   It happens too after the other
front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".

   As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):

   castolcan omexcan         in eighteen places
   cempoalpa omexpa.         twenty-three times
   chicuexpa.                eight times
   excampa nacaceh           triangular

   Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:

   epantli.                  three rows
   oc epoalcan               in another sixty places
   epoalilhuitl              sixty days


   Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi".  And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From rich_photos at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 18 20:42:22 2009
From: rich_photos at yahoo.com (rick dosan)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:42:22 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.134222.0700.RICHPHOTOS@YAHOO.COM>

There's an article by Richard Haly called "Bare Bones: Rethinking Moesoamerican Divinity" in which he suggests that Ometeotl is a God of Bones.?? And an article by Una Canger and Karen Dakin from Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl, Oct. 1985, that says that according to the region, the word Bone could be Ometl, or Omitl.?

--- On Fri, 4/17/09, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:


From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
To: "Iv?n Pedroza" <ipedrozar at gmail.com>
Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 8:21 PM


Pedro,

???Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
they were.? If they were, I might be a chemist.? But I'm glad I'm not.
I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.

???When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with.? If we are going to
entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
combination with others.

???An example:

???1) When I started the English translation and morphological
analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
in the future.
???I looked at Molina's entry:
? ???Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.

???The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
simple..." I thought).
? "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
'water-man, sailor'.
???But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
sailors?? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
place less than pleased with their behavior.? That seemed like a
satisfactory semantic bridge to me.? So the behavior of water-persons
was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
behavior.

???Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
glottal stop as well --"ah-".? Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
human' = 'not human, bad'.? (It can be noted that I still don't
always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)


???The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
...and that there is always more to know.

................

???On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
be a single word, maybe a two word phrase.? There are other apparent
words might deceive us:

? ???coatlicue? ? name of a divinity
really: coatl i-cue? (her skirt is snakes)

? ???Coatlichan???name of a town
really? coatl i-chan (snake's house)

? ???Atlihuetzia? name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
really? atl i-huetziya(n)? (water's falling place -- waterfall)

.............................

???On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
before X" statement.

???"e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc."???It happens too after the other
front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".

???As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):

???castolcan omexcan? ? ? ???in eighteen places
???cempoalpa omexpa.? ? ? ???twenty-three times
???chicuexpa.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? eight times
???excampa nacaceh? ? ? ? ???triangular

???Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:

???epantli.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? three rows
???oc epoalcan? ? ? ? ? ? ???in another sixty places
???epoalilhuitl? ? ? ? ? ? ? sixty days


???Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi".? And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/d86853a2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From david_becraft at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 19 05:35:18 2009
From: david_becraft at hotmail.com (David Becraft)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:35:18 -0700
Subject: Ometeotl=tloque nahuaque
In-Reply-To: <20090417232136.3tp9d4ylz144c8os@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.223518.0700.DAVIDBECRAFT@HOTMAIL.COM>


Cuachitin,

 

All sources that I have seen have related Ometeotl as being the same "person(s)" as Tloque Nahuaque, Yohualli-Ehecatl, Quetzalcoatl (Quetzalcuate?), and Moyocoyani.  Different names relating to different attributes of one divine god, who being invisible (yohualli-ehecatl) is also everywhere near us (tloque nahuaque) and is also the creator of humanity (quetzalcoatl), yet is the creator of him/herself (moyocoyani), yet, it is one divine being (ometeotl).  Due to these theological perspectives on Nahua though, I would translate Ometeotl as a metaphorical translation: " plurality of divine persons", or "god of plurality".

 

timota,

 

Pancho


 
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
> From: campbel at indiana.edu
> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
> 
> Pedro,
> 
> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
> 
> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
> combination with others.
> 
> An example:
> 
> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
> in the future.
> I looked at Molina's entry:
> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
> 
> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
> simple..." I thought).
> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
> 'water-man, sailor'.
> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
> behavior.
> 
> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
> 
> 
> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
> ...and that there is always more to know.
> 
> ................
> 
> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
> words might deceive us:
> 
> coatlicue name of a divinity
> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
> 
> Coatlichan name of a town
> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
> 
> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
> 
> .............................
> 
> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
> before X" statement.
> 
> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
> 
> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
> 
> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
> chicuexpa. eight times
> excampa nacaceh triangular
> 
> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
> 
> epantli. three rows
> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
> epoalilhuitl sixty days
> 
> 
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
> 
> Iztayomeh,
> 
> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_042009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/52a53ed2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From oudyk at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 19 12:57:49 2009
From: oudyk at hotmail.com (Michel Oudijk)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:57:49 +0000
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <20090417232136.3tp9d4ylz144c8os@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.125749.0000.OUDYK@HOTMAIL.COM>


Dear Listeros,

 

Joe's words are wise one:

 

Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
"e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.


His very specific example has consequences on broad levels of our respective disciplines. Scholars apply certain analyses and then use their results to make statements about indigenous societies. After all, that's what we do. But there are dangerous pitfalls there and the discussion on Ometeotl is a good one as far as that's concerned. In the literature Ometeuctli is too often regarded as the god of duality intimately related with the "Mesoamerican concept of duality", while the first question is if Ometeuctli can be regarded as a god of duality at all. And I'm not speaking in favor or against here. Several authors have suggested that 'ome' actually may refer to 'bones' with, therefore, no reason whatsoever to see any duality in it. But even if we would agree that 'ome' refers to 'two', how do we get to duality? Two automatically means duality? And what does duality mean? In many publications 'duality' is regarded as typical Mesoamerican but if 'duality' is regarded as it used to be (or still is) regarded in (sixteenth-seventeenth century) Europe, than I would have serious arguments against such an existense in Mesoamerica. Many authors have tried to get out of the 'duality' problem and refer to many Mesoamerican concepts as 'oppositional', 'complementary', 'part of dichotomy', etc, etc. But this doesn't get us any further if we are not specific about what we mean when we use such terminology. Even though 'duality' is considered an essential part of Mesoamerican cultures by many if not the majority of scholars, this doesn't necessarilly mean that this is actually the case. But more importantly, and to come back to Joe's words, we have to be aware what is hard data and what is our interpretation in the literature.

 

On top of all this we also have to be very careful in our use of sources. The 'trinity' issue related with Ometeuctli come straight out of the Italian commentary to the pictography of the Codex Vaticano A. We have to be extremely careful with such commentaries as these are European colonialist views on Mesoamerican religion and society. Several authors have faced the problems of glosses in Mesoamerican codices and there shouldn't be any reason for using these sources without any critical analysis.

 

Un abrazo,

 

Michel


 
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
> From: campbel at indiana.edu
> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
> 
> Pedro,
> 
> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
> 
> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
> combination with others.
> 
> An example:
> 
> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
> in the future.
> I looked at Molina's entry:
> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
> 
> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
> simple..." I thought).
> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
> 'water-man, sailor'.
> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
> behavior.
> 
> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
> 
> 
> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
> ...and that there is always more to know.
> 
> ................
> 
> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
> words might deceive us:
> 
> coatlicue name of a divinity
> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
> 
> Coatlichan name of a town
> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
> 
> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
> 
> .............................
> 
> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
> before X" statement.
> 
> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
> 
> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
> 
> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
> chicuexpa. eight times
> excampa nacaceh triangular
> 
> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
> 
> epantli. three rows
> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
> epoalilhuitl sixty days
> 
> 
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
> 
> Iztayomeh,
> 
> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090419/b3773a69/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Sat Apr 18 16:01:24 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:01:24 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SAT.18.APR.2009.110124.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

Dear Listeros

The name Ometeotl can be analize lingisticly as as frase Ome-teotl "2 Divinity" or as Ometeotl "2 3 Divinity". So in order for us to find the truth we have to look in the cosmovisi?n, and find the answer there. Here you have 5 evidence of primary sources whre we find the maximum divinity express as 3:

"Omeyocan: este es como si dij?semos la causa primera, por otro nombre llamado Ometeotl, que es tanto como Se?or de Tres Dignidades... (cuyos aspectos son) Olomris, Hivenavi y Nipaniuhca" (C?dice Vaticano 3738 f. 17). 
  a.. Olomris (Oloni), de quien mana la existencia. 
  b.. Hivenavi o Iwinawi, el dispensador de dicha. 
  c.. Nipaniuhca o Nepaniu'ka, el que media o sintetiza. 

"Cuando los dioses quisieron hacer el Sol, hicieron penitencias para merecerlo, ofreciendo a los Tres Grandes perlas preciosas, incienso y otras cosas muy ricas" (Teogon?a e Historia de los Mexicanos).

"Toda sangre (generaci?n humana) llega al lugar de su reposo, como lleg? a su poder y a su trono. Medido esta el tiempo en que podamos alabar la magnificencia de Los Tres, y medido el que encontremos la protecci?n del Sol." (Chilam Balam de Chumayel) 

"He aqu? c?mo exist?a el Cielo y el Coraz?n del Cielo, que tal es el nombre de Dios. Estaba cubierto de plumas verdes y azules, por eso se le llama Serpiente Emplumada. Su primer nombre es Rel?mpago, el segundo Huella Sutil del Rel?mpago, y el tercero, Rayo que Golpea. Los tres son el Coraz?n del Cielo" (Popol Vuh I.1,2).

"?Grande era su triple naturaleza! En verdad, Tohil es el mismo dios de los yaquis, cuyo nombre es Yolcuat Quizalcuat ('serpiente oscura y serpiente emplumada')." (Popol Vuh III.4,9)

This investigation was made by F. Diaz.

Does anybody has evidence like above, stating that Ometeotl is Duality?

To translate correctly some of the nahuatl words, we need a deep knowledge of mesomericna cosmovisi?n. This cosmovisi?n has diferent ways of undestanding the maximun divinity as:

Unity - Senteotl

Duality - Ometekutli / Omesiwa 

Ometeotl - Uni Dual trinity Divinity http://www.templotolteca.com/tse/imagenes/ometeotl3.JPG

5 Tezkatlipoka http://mexicoantiguo.org/imagenes/Tonaleque.gif

There are other divisi?ns, but the interesting isuee is that they where not politeist, as we can read in the Huehuetlatillis: "kisemmatia inkinotsaia inkitlatlau'tiaia
initoka Ketsalkoatl". They just had one god, to whom they pray.His name is Feathered Serpent.

On our modern cristianity culture we say it has just one God, but we pray to many saints, vigins, angels etc. Mesoamericans had a more complex cosmovision than our own, when we see just duality as a posibility for Ometeotl, is a proyection of our modern culture limited by good-bad paradigma. When we have a third point, we have more information to act wiser.

There is more evidence about Ometeotl being 2 3 Divinity, but if you already know this is wrong, they won?t help to clarify it.

I respect that most people will see it diferent, I am not interested in convincing anyone. I just want to share this with you.

Have a good day.

Pedro









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090418/19ad080c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Sun Apr 19 15:33:14 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:33:14 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <BAY138-W55D80A587A0B3DD8D953CCA3790@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.113314.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Michel and los otros listeros,

The founder of analytical psychology James Hillman in the conclusion to 
his book titled _Anima_ proposes that the use of the concept "tandem" 
can be of more benefit than the use of "duality" or "opposite". Perhaps 
this is something that can be worked into the study of ancient 
Mesoamerica.

Bien a vous,

Michael


Quoting Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com>:

>
> Dear Listeros,
>
>
>
> Joe's words are wise one:
>
>
>
> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
>
>
> His very specific example has consequences on broad levels of our
> respective disciplines. Scholars apply certain analyses and then use
> their results to make statements about indigenous societies. After
> all, that's what we do. But there are dangerous pitfalls there and
> the discussion on Ometeotl is a good one as far as that's concerned.
> In the literature Ometeuctli is too often regarded as the god of
> duality intimately related with the "Mesoamerican concept of
> duality", while the first question is if Ometeuctli can be regarded
> as a god of duality at all. And I'm not speaking in favor or against
> here. Several authors have suggested that 'ome' actually may refer to
> 'bones' with, therefore, no reason whatsoever to see any duality in
> it. But even if we would agree that 'ome' refers to 'two', how do we
> get to duality? Two automatically means duality? And what does
> duality mean? In many publications 'duality' is regarded as typical
> Mesoamerican but if 'duality' is regarded as it used to be (or still
> is) regarded in (sixteenth-seventeenth century) Europe, than I would
> have serious arguments against such an existense in Mesoamerica. Many
> authors have tried to get out of the 'duality' problem and refer to
> many Mesoamerican concepts as 'oppositional', 'complementary', 'part
> of dichotomy', etc, etc. But this doesn't get us any further if we
> are not specific about what we mean when we use such terminology.
> Even though 'duality' is considered an essential part of Mesoamerican
> cultures by many if not the majority of scholars, this doesn't
> necessarilly mean that this is actually the case. But more
> importantly, and to come back to Joe's words, we have to be aware
> what is hard data and what is our interpretation in the literature.
>
>
>
> On top of all this we also have to be very careful in our use of
> sources. The 'trinity' issue related with Ometeuctli come straight
> out of the Italian commentary to the pictography of the Codex
> Vaticano A. We have to be extremely careful with such commentaries as
> these are European colonialist views on Mesoamerican religion and
> society. Several authors have faced the problems of glosses in
> Mesoamerican codices and there shouldn't be any reason for using
> these sources without any critical analysis.
>
>
>
> Un abrazo,
>
>
>
> Michel
>
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:36 -0400
>> From: campbel at indiana.edu
>> To: ipedrozar at gmail.com
>> CC: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Ometeotl
>>
>> Pedro,
>>
>> Things are frequently not as simple as we think they are... or wish
>> they were. If they were, I might be a chemist. But I'm glad I'm not.
>> I wouldn't have missed Nahuatl (and Nahuat-l) for anything.
>>
>> When we find that morphemes have variant forms, it is natural to
>> wonder if a particular form isn't connected with a particular "meaning
>> unit" (i.e., morpheme) that we are familiar with. If we are going to
>> entertain the possibility of that connection, we are frequently faced
>> the necessity of building "semantic bridges" between the basic
>> meanings of forms and the meanings of other forms (usually in
>> combination with others.
>>
>> An example:
>>
>> 1) When I started the English translation and morphological
>> analysis of Molina's 1571 Nahuatl-Spanish dictionary in about 1970, I
>> hadn't read Carochi -- and Andrews' and Karttunen's works were still
>> in the future.
>> I looked at Molina's entry:
>> Atlacatl. marinero , o mal hombre.
>>
>> The first part looked obvious... ("if Nahuatl morphology is *this*
>> simple..." I thought).
>> "a(tl)" = 'water' + "tlaca(tl)" = 'person, man' == "a-tlaca(tl)" --
>> 'water-man, sailor'.
>> But the second Spanish gloss made me pause -- what was bad about
>> sailors? And then I remembered reading that the people who took their
>> dugout canoes around the canals of central Mexico, peddling fruit,
>> vegetables, and game, sometimes left the people at their stopping
>> place less than pleased with their behavior. That seemed like a
>> satisfactory semantic bridge to me. So the behavior of water-persons
>> was a likely explanation for the extended meaning, even though there
>> is nothing inherent in 'water' or "atl" that hints at evil or bad
>> behavior.
>>
>> Years later, I benefitted from Carochi, Andrews, and Karttunen,
>> and learned that "a:tl" has a long vowel, and that the initial
>> element of "the other meaning" not only has a short vowel, but a
>> glottal stop as well --"ah-". Or, "ah-" 'not' + "tlacatl" 'person,
>> human' = 'not human, bad'. (It can be noted that I still don't
>> always write vowel length, but at least now, I admit it.)
>>
>>
>> The moral of the story is that all that seems simple may not be.
>> ...and that there is always more to know.
>>
>> ................
>>
>> On the issue of "ometeotl", I would first suggest that it may not
>> be a single word, maybe a two word phrase. There are other apparent
>> words might deceive us:
>>
>> coatlicue name of a divinity
>> really: coatl i-cue (her skirt is snakes)
>>
>> Coatlichan name of a town
>> really coatl i-chan (snake's house)
>>
>> Atlihuetzia name of a town (in Tlaxcala)
>> really atl i-huetziya(n) (water's falling place -- waterfall)
>>
>> .............................
>>
>> On the issue of the vowel dropping behavior of "o:me" and "e:yi",
>> the facts just don't support a simple "they drop their final vowels
>> before X" statement.
>>
>> "e:yi" obeys the general rule that "y" usually drops in direct
>> contact with "i", as in "ayi, celiya, chichiya, chiya,
>> ciyacatl, ihcuiya, piya, etc." It happens too after the other
>> front vowel "e", but not with such regularity: "ceya, meya".
>> So "eyi" shows up frequently as "ei".
>>
>> As Ivan and Mario recently pointed out, when "y" occurs in final
>> position, it changes to "x" ('sh'):
>>
>> castolcan omexcan in eighteen places
>> cempoalpa omexpa. twenty-three times
>> chicuexpa. eight times
>> excampa nacaceh triangular
>>
>> Sometimes "yi" deletes and leaves only the "e" segment:
>>
>> epantli. three rows
>> oc epoalcan in another sixty places
>> epoalilhuitl sixty days
>>
>>
>> Given this kind of variation, I would hesitate to identify any
>> "e", "ex", or "ei" as a token of "eyi". And even more, I would walk
>> with great trepidation with regard to making a statement about the
>> worldview of a culture on the basis of such an identification.
>>
>> Iztayomeh,
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Sun Apr 19 17:02:00 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:02:00 -0400
Subject: Ometeotl
In-Reply-To: <0F457B754F7F441D803C1E844D50872B@eguiluz>
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.130200.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting Pedro de Eguiluz <temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org>:

> Dear Profesor Campbell
>
> Thanks for tyour answer, enclosed a link in spanish where frank Diaz
> explains the Ometeotl concept
>
> http://www.templotolteca.com/tse/articulos/ometeotl.html
>
> The idea of Ometeotl being 2 3 divinity is not just from a Language
> point of view, more from a comsovisi?n view. As we can see the
> vertical space divided in three infraworld-earth- heaven.
>
> All the best
>
> Pedro
>
>

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

(I am bringing this discussion back to Nahuat-l since I believe it to 
be of general interest to members of the list and should not be a 
private communication.)

Pedro,
     Since I have no expertise in cosmology, I will not address those issues.
But as a long-time linguist and Nahuatlahtoh (since 1962) I can tell you
unequivocally that the linguistic argument fails. I have been studying
Molina's dictionary closely and analyzing it morphologically since 1970. In
about 1979 I began to add Sahagun's Florentine Codex to my morphological data.
So I feel fairly confident in discussing Nahuatl morphology (the study of
meaningful word-pieces).
     The word "ome" does NOT have two analyses. "ome" means 'two' and it
cannot be further divided. The 'e' part is not a separate morpheme (meaningful
word piece). It can be deleted in certain circumstances, primarily before
count-words such as -tetl, -tzontli, etc., but it has no meaning in itself.

     Consider the following:
     1) the word for three is "e:yi" or "e:i". It has a long vowel. "o:me" has
a short "e". Vowel length is distinctive in Nahuatl. That is, words can be
differentiated merely by the length of a vowel. This shows that the "e" in
"o:me" cannot be part of the word "e:yi". The "e:" in "e:yi" is not the same
vowel from the classical Nahuatl perspective. See Fran Karttunen's dictionary
and J. Richard Andrews' books.
     2) Even if it were possible to relate the two e's, Nahuatl numbers do not
compound by just butting up against each other except in the cases of the
numbers involving "chiuc" "five" in combination: "six" "chicuace:", "seven"
"chico:me", "eight" "chicue:i", "nine" "chiucna:hui". "two-three" just isn't a
possible Nahuatl combination.
     3) Aside from your assertion concerning "ometeotl", there are NO
instances of a word with the morpheme variants "o:me, o:m, o:n" meaning "two-
three". I am looking at 1,389 examples from the Molina and Sahagun data.
     4) Consider some examples from Molina's dictionaries:
        ometica "son dos" 71m2
        ometlacatl ititlan "mensajero entre dos" 55m
        omilhuitl "dos dias" 55m
In no such cases does he define these words with "dos-tres" or "dos o tres".
        Also, he defines "la trinidad de dios" as "yeitilitzin dios". Molina
was apparently a semi-native speaker of Nahuatl, having lived with the
language since childhood. He and the other friar missionaries used native
concepts whenever they could, but I've never seen anything involving "trinity"
and "ome".

All the best,

Joe


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org  Mon Apr 20 03:12:18 2009
From: temazkal at mexicoantiguo.org (Pedro de Eguiluz)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:12:18 -0500
Subject: Ometeotl
Message-ID: <SUN.19.APR.2009.221218.0500.TEMAZKAL@MEXICOANTIGUO.ORG>

I belive Ometeotl to be a protonawatl Word, so probably it does not apply the same structure as XVI century classic nawatl.

I deeply respect your information and opinions, thanks for all you responses, I will try to learn from all of them.

I would like to share a final link to a translation of the Huehuetlatollis http://mexicoantiguo.org/huehuetlatolli.htm

If we still breath, everything is fine.

Pedro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090419/26738fc7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From joslee at unt.edu  Mon Apr 20 20:07:59 2009
From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:07:59 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094416174547531@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <MON.20.APR.2009.150759.0500.JOSLEE@UNT.EDU>

Dear listeros,

I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the long message below. I will begin my response with the background behind this debate.

Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars, including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be understood in the broader context of this dispute.

With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source, it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl as a great warrior king.

Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system. To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which Offner ascribes.

Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together with Offner's critique.

I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example, Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work, but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.

Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.

Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.

Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research, including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more compelling.

I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.

Best,

Jongsoo


From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
To: Nahuat-L
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.

Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-

http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg


Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content of the Mappe Quinatzin.

1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.

2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2 appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl established."   Everyone else who has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59) carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of Teotihuacan.

To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles" and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001. Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better investigations.

Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock back on interpretation of this document more than a century and presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political structure.

Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 will be pointed out in a subsequent post.



Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090420/cedf2634/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 11:55:49 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <71051540B09FC644A84053884764774A6FEB1EB3A0@GABMB03.ad.unt.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.075549.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Dear Dr. Lee:

Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
I plan to get your book this week.

These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
seeing it.

Michael


Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:

> Dear listeros,
>
> I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> behind this debate.
>
> Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> understood in the broader context of this dispute.
>
> With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> as a great warrior king.
>
> Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> Offner ascribes.
>
> Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> with Offner's critique.
>
> I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
>
> Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
>
> Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
>
> Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> compelling.
>
> I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
>
> Best,
>
> Jongsoo
>
>
> From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> To: Nahuat-L
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
>
> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> Nahuatl.
>
> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
>
> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>
>
> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>
> 1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who
> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>
> 2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> established."   Everyone else who has examined this document,
> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> Teotihuacan.
>
> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
> therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> investigations.
>
> Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock
> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> structure.
>
> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>
>
>
> Jerry Offner
> ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
>
>
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From oudyk at hotmail.com  Tue Apr 21 14:19:01 2009
From: oudyk at hotmail.com (Michel Oudijk)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:19:01 +0000
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <20090421075549.dmmvfpm5wcgskswg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.141901.0000.OUDYK@HOTMAIL.COM>


Hey Michael,

 

I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....

 

I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation. Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a different tone). I personally appreciate the efforts of all these people, although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route, cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who agree with each other.

 

I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".


Un abrazo,

 

Michel

 

 
> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> 
> Dear Dr. Lee:
> 
> Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
> I plan to get your book this week.
> 
> These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
> that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
> such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
> smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
> details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
> whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
> seeing it.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
> 
> > Dear listeros,
> >
> > I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> > feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> > long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> > behind this debate.
> >
> > Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> > of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> > including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> > political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> > Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> > proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> > demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> > to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> > of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> > relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> > the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> > disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> > understood in the broader context of this dispute.
> >
> > With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> > earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> > one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> > interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> > Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> > demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> > one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> > that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> > kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> > identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> > debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> > which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> > whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> > responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> > it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> > other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> > as a great warrior king.
> >
> > Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> > cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> > to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> > but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> > there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> > honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> > Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> > discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> > Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> > courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> > which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> > tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> > believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> > included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> > argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> > (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> > as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> > system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> > of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> > To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> > tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> > Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> > secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> > is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> > supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> > Offner ascribes.
> >
> > Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> > with Offner's critique.
> >
> > I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> > listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> > English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> > scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> > this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> > lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> > Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> > works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> > Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> > were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> > Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> > does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> > the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> > disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> > but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> > critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> > interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
> >
> > Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> > always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> > with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> > than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> > dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> > claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> > point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> > general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> > upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> > Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> > my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> > Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> > the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> > scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> > its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
> >
> > Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> > between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> > relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> > the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> > not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> > and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> > other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> > Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> > own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> > were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> > historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> > Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> > perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> > Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> > between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> > misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> > interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> > substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
> >
> > Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> > Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> > emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> > larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> > source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> > an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> > similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> > against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> > course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> > which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> > listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> > including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> > based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> > compelling.
> >
> > I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> > much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> > listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> > read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jongsoo
> >
> >
> > From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> > [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> > To: Nahuat-L
> > Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> >
> > Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> > two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> > Nahuatl.
> >
> > Note: Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> > Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
> >
> > http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
> >
> >
> > Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> > of the Mappe Quinatzin.
> >
> > 1. Lee states: "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> > cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> > they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl." Everyone else who
> > has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> > cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> > Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> > with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> > Texcoco. See also Lesbre in the latest ECN. Many writers, beginning
> > with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> > reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> > Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
> >
> > 2. Lee tells us: "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> > appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> > established." Everyone else who has examined this document,
> > including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> > cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers. Lee
> > omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> > carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> > Teotihuacan.
> >
> > To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> > evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> > and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> > relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> > expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> > by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> > Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> > structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient. We
> > therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> > Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> > or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> > investigations.
> >
> > Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts." He has set the clock
> > back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> > presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> > structure.
> >
> > Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> > will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jerry Offner
> > ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

_________________________________________________________________
See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/0a319d5d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 16:12:20 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:12:20 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <20090421075549.dmmvfpm5wcgskswg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.121220.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Honesty has nothing to do with disagreement. Disagreement is good. 
Dishonesty is kinda not good, nicht wahr?


> :-)

Michael


Quoting Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>:

> Dear Dr. Lee:
>
> Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And
> I plan to get your book this week.
>
> These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me
> that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars"
> such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the
> smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor
> details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among
> whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to
> seeing it.
>
> Michael
>
>
> Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
>
>> Dear listeros,
>>
>> I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
>> feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
>> long message below. I will begin my response with the background
>> behind this debate.
>>
>> Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
>> of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
>> including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
>> political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
>> Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
>> proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
>> demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
>> to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
>> of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
>> relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
>> the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
>> disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
>> understood in the broader context of this dispute.
>>
>> With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
>> earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
>> one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
>> interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
>> Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
>> demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
>> one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
>> that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
>> kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
>> identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
>> debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
>> which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
>> whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
>> responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
>> it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
>> other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
>> as a great warrior king.
>>
>> Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
>> cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
>> to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
>> but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
>> there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
>> honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
>> Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
>> discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
>> Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
>> courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
>> which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
>> tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
>> believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
>> included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
>> argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
>> (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
>> as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
>> system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
>> of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
>> To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
>> tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
>> Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
>> secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
>> is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
>> supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
>> Offner ascribes.
>>
>> Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
>> with Offner's critique.
>>
>> I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
>> listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
>> English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
>> scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
>> this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
>> lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
>> Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
>> works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
>> Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
>> were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
>> Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
>> does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
>> the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
>> disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
>> but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
>> critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
>> interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
>>
>> Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
>> always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
>> with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
>> than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
>> dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
>> claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
>> point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
>> general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
>> upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
>> Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
>> my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
>> Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
>> the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
>> scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
>> its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
>>
>> Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
>> between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
>> relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
>> the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
>> not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
>> and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
>> other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
>> Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
>> own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
>> were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
>> historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
>> Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
>> perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
>> Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
>> between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
>> misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
>> interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
>> substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
>>
>> Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
>> Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
>> emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
>> larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
>> source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
>> an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
>> similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
>> against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
>> course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
>> which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
>> listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
>> including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
>> based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
>> compelling.
>>
>> I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
>> much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
>> listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
>> read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jongsoo
>>
>>
>> From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
>> [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
>> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
>> To: Nahuat-L
>> Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
>>
>> Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
>> two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
>> Nahuatl.
>>
>> Note:  Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
>> Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
>>
>> http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
>>
>>
>> Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
>> of the Mappe Quinatzin.
>>
>> 1.  Lee states:  "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
>> cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
>> they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl."  Everyone else who
>> has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
>> cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
>> Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
>> with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
>> Texcoco.  See also Lesbre in the latest ECN.  Many writers, beginning
>> with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
>> reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
>> Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
>>
>> 2. Lee tells us:  "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
>> appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
>> established."   Everyone else who has examined this document,
>> including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
>> cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers.  Lee
>> omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
>> carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
>> Teotihuacan.
>>
>> To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
>> evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
>> and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
>> relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
>> expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
>> by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
>> Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
>> structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient.  We
>> therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
>> Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
>> or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
>> investigations.
>>
>> Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts."  He has set the clock
>> back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
>> presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
>> structure.
>>
>> Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
>> will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jerry Offner
>> ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From micc2 at cox.net  Tue Apr 21 16:44:08 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2 at cox.net)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:44:08 -0400
Subject: 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.124408.0400.>

One of the great advantages (and thus great disadvantages) of  working with Mesoamerican culture, language and, thought is that there is great leeway in
intellectualizing what WAS, what IS, and WHY.

The disadvantage lies in that since none of us were "there"  all conjecture must rest on either of the following:

1. empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data (carbon-14, archaeologically correct field methods, and newer computational processes). These must then be analyzed in a fashion that gives us a HUMAN picture of the indigenous ancestors of the Modern Mexcoehuani (those that have risen out of Mexico). 
Most members of these spaces are of the above tribe....

OR

2. One can SELECTIVELY take empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data AND CREATE suspicious "truths" (according to ones ideological, religious, or political needs) a SUPRA-HUMAN picture of the "grandfathers" how then give the evaluator a sense of superiority.

 I call this "selective memory of the greater past."  I think this is what is meant by 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'...

These gentle folks have a large Internet based system that provides a feedback loop that re-enforces their claims, and their distaste of the "scientific" revisionists. A small case in point is the great lofe affair with the end of the world in 2012........ enough said.

 In some of the most extreme cases of selective memory,  this superiority becomes outright racism and a longing for an ethnic cleansing of _____ (please feel free to place our favorite homeland/ancestral land name in whichever indigenous language your prefer).

I believe that spaces such as the Nahuat-l, Aztlan, and other means of communication (Nahuatl-Twtter?) are important in allowing persons who are sincere in their desire to better understand the underpinnings of modern indigenous reality, to see a sober discussion between those that want to look at empirical data, and those that want to look for mythological validation of their personal "-isms"

It may not be pretty, and many times the discussion  may be outlandish and painful....(you really believe WHAT???), but in the long run, these spaces can give sincere learners the facts necessary to look at the rich and majestic past, present, and future of Mexico and Central America without the need for 3D-glasses, Surround sound special effects, or a host of precolumbian deities dancing on the head of a  sting ray's needle.

Respectfully,

Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org






---- Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> Hey Michael,
> 
>  
> 
> I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....
> 
>  
> 
> I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation. Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a different tone). I !
 personally appreciate the efforts of all these people, although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route, cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who agree with each other.
> 
>  
> 
> I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".
> 
> 
> Un abrazo,
> 
>  
> 
> Michel
> 
>  
> 
>  
> > Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> > From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> > To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> > 
> > Dear Dr. Lee:
> > 
> > Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And 
> > I plan to get your book this week.
> > 
> > These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me 
> > that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars" 
> > such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the 
> > smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor 
> > details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among 
> > whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to 
> > seeing it.
> > 
> > Michael
> > 
> >

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From cberry at cine.net  Tue Apr 21 18:49:19 2009
From: cberry at cine.net (Craig Berry)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:49:19 -0700
Subject: 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types'
In-Reply-To: <20090421124408.9RCTK.696148.imail@fed1rmwml36>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.114919.0700.>

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:44,  <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:

> 2. One can SELECTIVELY take empirical evidence, gathered from contemporary sources, modern oral traditions, or scientifically deduced data AND CREATE suspicious "truths" (according to ones ideological, religious, or political needs) a SUPRA-HUMAN picture of the "grandfathers" how then give the evaluator a sense of superiority.

It should be noted that this tendency exists in all ages and cultures.
 Notably, the Aztec-period Nahua themselves mythologized the Toltec
golden age and made themselves its heirs.  As long as the scientific
and cultural stances on history are kept carefully distinct, I see no
problem in their existing side by side.  They serve different
purposes.

-- 
Craig Berry - http://www.cine.net/~cberry/
"Lots of things in the universe don?t solve any problems, and
nevertheless exist."  -- Sean Carroll

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ipedrozar at gmail.com  Tue Apr 21 15:58:03 2009
From: ipedrozar at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Iv=E1n_Pedroza?=)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 09:58:03 -0600
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <BAY138-W179DE4B4C4D94DB37E14FCA3770@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.095803.0600.IPEDROZAR@GMAIL.COM>

I agree with Michel... Michael, have you ever thought that such haughtiness
might severly disable your skills for understaning an indigenous culture?
Moreover, this attitude which tends to stick labels on people is the basis
for many forms of discrimination, which is a social problematique that we, *
nahuanemachtianimeh*, always have to deal with...

Without empathy, any witty scholar will end up *haci?ndose s?lo chaquetas
mentales*.

Excuse all of us the *sine nobilitate*, crackpot philosophers. Make your own
mailing list with the people you think it's worth discussing with.

Iv?n Pedroza


2009/4/21 Michel Oudijk <oudyk at hotmail.com>

>  Hey Michael,
>
> I wonder in which group you would situate yourself....
>
> I think it's important to remember that the point of a discussion is not
> necessarily to reach an agreement. In my view, a discussion is to clarify
> the different possible positions and possibilities of an argumentation.
> Through this interchange of opinions we may reach a better understanding of
> the issue under discussion (or maybe not). But we should be free to disagree
> and put forth arguments against one's position. One may disagree with the
> tone or line of argumentation, but the other can always respond. Offner's
> argumentation may be regarded as harsh or even unfair, but Lee has responded
> to it. It's up to us and the discussants to use these arguments to reach a
> better understanding of the discussion and the issues at play. As scholars
> our instruments are research, discussion and reflection. Based on these
> instruments Offner has put forth arguments against Lee's and he responded to
> them, very much like the previous discussion on Ometeotl (although in a
> different tone). I personally appreciate the efforts of all these people,
> although I may agree more with one or the other. Rather than classifying
> people and therewith disqualifying (some of) them, it seems to me it is more
> worthwhile to look at arguments each time they are put forth by who ever. We
> may learn something along the way. The Nahuatl list is an important portal
> for discussion, but if we're to clamp down on a discussion by disqualifying
> people as 'crackpots' or 'smoke-and-mirror types' we're on a dubious route,
> cause in the end it will only be a conversation between 'honest types' who
> agree with each other.
>
> I don't see a problem in fiercely disagreeing with somebody, have a harsh
> discussion about it, and in the end drink a (virtual) beer together and
> walk out the door side by side. In fact, I prefer that ten times to a
> conversation in which all my arguments are "interesting points of view".
>
> Un abrazo,
>
> Michel
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:55:49 -0400
> > From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu
> > To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf
> 3
>
> >
> > Dear Dr. Lee:
> >
> > Thank you for your very informative message. I now get the picture. And
> > I plan to get your book this week.
> >
> > These last couple of weeks of nahuat-l has driven home the fact for me
> > that we find here in this on-line discussion group crackpot "scholars"
> > such as the "Ometeotl" guy and the guy he channels, the
> > smoke-and-mirror types (Tezcatlipoca!) who take issue with minor
> > details but avoid the substantive issues, and the honest types, among
> > whom I count you. Best wishes in your future work. I look forward to
> > seeing it.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > Quoting "Lee, Jongsoo" <joslee at unt.edu>:
> >
> > > Dear listeros,
> > >
> > > I am aware that many listeros see this debate as bothersome, but I
> > > feel obligated to respond to Offner's message. I apologize for the
> > > long message below. I will begin my response with the background
> > > behind this debate.
> > >
> > > Some of you may already know that Offner and I have different points
> > > of view regarding Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco. Many scholars,
> > > including Offner, argue that Texcoco maintained a highly civilized
> > > political and legal system quite different from that of Mexico
> > > Tenochtitlan. My article published in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl
> > > proposes a different view of Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco by
> > > demonstrating that Nezahualcoyotl's Texcoco was actually very similar
> > > to Mexico Tenochtitlan. I divided my article into four sections each
> > > of which deals with a different aspect of Nezahualcoyotl's close
> > > relationship to the Mexica: politics, conquests, tribute, and finally
> > > the legal system. In making this argument, I am essentially
> > > disagreeing with scholars such as Offner, and his comments must be
> > > understood in the broader context of this dispute.
> > >
> > > With regard to the substance of Offner's critique, in one of his
> > > earlier messages, he says that I erroneously included Xicotepec as
> > > one of Nezahuacloytl's conquests, because I blindly followed the
> > > interpretation of the editor, Guy Stresser-Pean, and did not consult
> > > Lesbre's review. I cited this conquest as part of the evidence that
> > > demonstrates that Nezahualcoyotl was not a peaceful king, which is
> > > one of the established views that I challenge in my article. I argue
> > > that Nezahualcoyotl conducted many conquests both with the Mexica
> > > kings as well as by himself. It is true that in this text the
> > > identification of the figure in question as Nezahualcoyotl is
> > > debatable. But I also present similar evidence from other texts in
> > > which the identity of Nezahualcoyotl is not contested. Regardless of
> > > whether or not Lesbre is correct about the identity of the individual
> > > responsible for the conquest of Xicotepec in this particular source,
> > > it does not undermine my larger argument, because there are so many
> > > other examples presented in the article to demonstrate Nezahualcoyotl
> > > as a great warrior king.
> > >
> > > Offner also indicates that I miscalculated Nezahualcoyotl's tributary
> > > cities in Mapa Quinatzin. My article mentions 13 while Offner refers
> > > to 26. But I am not referring to all of the cities listed on the map
> > > but rather only those that appear in the Texcocan courtyard. Even
> > > there, I did miscalculate: there are 14 rather than 13. This was an
> > > honest mistake that I corrected in my book, The Allure of
> > > Nezahualcoyotl (University of New Mexico Press, 2008, p.115). My
> > > discussion focuses on the major tributary cities described inside the
> > > Texcocan courtyard, not including those cities depicted outside the
> > > courtyard. Again, I would point to the third section of my article in
> > > which I mention those cities in order to examine Nezahualcoyotl's
> > > tribute system. Alva Ixtlilxochitl and some modern scholars after him
> > > believe that Texcoco maintained the best ruling system, which
> > > included tribute collection, and that Tenochtitlan emulated it. I
> > > argue to the contrary that Texcoco during Nezahualcoyotl's reign
> > > (having been crowned, by the way, by his Mexica uncle) did not have
> > > as many tributaries as Tenochtitlan. Thus, the Texcocan tribute
> > > system that Ixtlixlochitl eulogizes didn't have much impact on that
> > > of Tenochtitlan but rather depended on its larger tributary system.
> > > To support my argument, I demonstrate that most of the major Texcocan
> > > tributary cities depicted inside the courtyard also paid tribute to
> > > Tenochtitlan. In this context, I didn't need to focus on the
> > > secondary Texcocan tributaries depicted outside the courtyard. This
> > > is certainly something that can be disputed. I think the evidence
> > > supports my interpretation more than the traditional one to which
> > > Offner ascribes.
> > >
> > > Again, I would urge anyone interested to read my article together
> > > with Offner's critique.
> > >
> > > I would also refer back to the beginning of this debate. Some
> > > listeros initiated a discussion about how scholars in the
> > > English-speaking world need to pay more attention to the works of
> > > scholars from other countries who may publish in other languages. In
> > > this context, Offner began to mention some works including mine as
> > > lacking in scholarship, because I didn't cite the French scholar
> > > Lesbre's works. I would just point out that Lesbre didn't cite major
> > > works in English about Texcoco in his works either. For example,
> > > Offner's major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco, and others
> > > were not even mentioned there. Offner does not seem to consider
> > > Lesbre's works useless due to the lack of English references as he
> > > does research that fails to cite French references. I'm not sure what
> > > the difference is here, except that he agrees with Lesbre, and he
> > > disagrees with me. This is not meant as a critique of Lesbre's work,
> > > but rather merely to point out the personal nature of Offner's
> > > critique, which focuses primarily on debatable points of
> > > interpretation without addressing my larger arguments.
> > >
> > > Let me say that I welcome critique and scholarly dialogue, and I am
> > > always happy to reassess my views. I suspect that Offner's problem
> > > with my work has more to do with the fact that I disagree with him
> > > than it does with real substantive issues. Offner is attempting to
> > > dismiss my work by emphasizing a relatively minor issue and by
> > > claiming that I am creating my own facts. You will notice that at no
> > > point has he addressed the substance of my actual argument. His most
> > > general and sweeping criticism is that my article cannot be relied
> > > upon for an accurate description of the "scale and structure of the
> > > Texcocan political entity." The implication of this statement is that
> > > my article sets out to describe the "scale and structure of the
> > > Texcocan political entity," but this is not the case. That was not
> > > the purpose nor the focus of my article. My article is not about the
> > > scale and structure of the Texcocan political entity but rather about
> > > its qualitative nature. And nothing he has said refutes this argument.
> > >
> > > Finally, Offner claims that I do not understand the relationship
> > > between Mapa Quinatzin and alphabetic sources. Actually, the
> > > relationship between pictographic sources and alphabetic texts from
> > > the colonial period is part of the problem. The colonial sources are
> > > not always faithful to the original texts; they exhibit a European
> > > and Christian influence derived from the colonial context. As in
> > > other areas, the Spaniards were looking for some kind of precursor to
> > > Christianity, some link between the indigenous tradition and their
> > > own. They fabricated this link in Nezahualcoyotl, and the Texcocans
> > > were more than happy to facilitate a misinterpretation of the
> > > historical record in order to gain the prestige associated with a
> > > Mesoamerican precursor to Christianity. Most modern scholars have
> > > perpetuated this misinterpretation by doing precisely that of which
> > > Offner is accusing me: they do not understand the relationship
> > > between the original pictographic source and the colonial texts that
> > > misinterpret them. Here again, this is a debatable point of
> > > interpretation, but to refute it you have to engage with the
> > > substance of my argument rather than a few of the isolated details.
> > >
> > > Offner promised that he would send another message regarding Mapa
> > > Quinatzin, leaf 3. If the previous message is any indication, he will
> > > emphasize some part of my interpretation without addressing the
> > > larger argument. In the section of my article dealing with this
> > > source, I argue that it actually reveals that Nezahualcoyotl was not
> > > an enlightened legislator and that his legal practices were very
> > > similar to those of Tenochtitlan. Here again, this goes directly
> > > against arguments that Offner has put forward in his own work. Of
> > > course, some of the details of the interpretation of the texts upon
> > > which my argument is based are debatable. Again, I would urge
> > > listeros interested in the topic to read all the relevant research,
> > > including Offner's very valuable work, and make their own judgments
> > > based on all of the evidence and whose interpretation they find more
> > > compelling.
> > >
> > > I don't plan on responding to Offner's next message. I doubt there is
> > > much else that I could add other than what I have written here. Any
> > > listeros who are no automatically deleting these messages, should
> > > read Offners next critique it in light of my explanation.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jongsoo
> > >
> > >
> > > From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org
> > > [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 12:46 PM
> > > To: Nahuat-L
> > > Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
> > >
> > > Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just
> > > two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura
> > > Nahuatl.
> > >
> > > Note: Here is one of several links to an on-line image of the Mappe
> > > Quinatzin, leaf 2, discussed below-
> > >
> > > http://www.mexicolore.co.uk/uploadimages/ans_24_03_2.jpg
> > >
> > >
> > > Here are errors in the paragraph on page 243 reporting on the content
> > > of the Mappe Quinatzin.
> > >
> > > 1. Lee states: "According to the Mapa Quinatzin, there are thirteen
> > > cities assigned to maintain the Texcocan court, which suggests that
> > > they were under the control of Nezahualcoyotl." Everyone else who
> > > has examined this document, including the antiquated source that Lee
> > > cites (1886:354-355) and other sources he cites (Carrasco 1999 and
> > > Offner 1983) analyze the document correctly to show that it deals
> > > with 26 cities involved with tribute and service obligations to
> > > Texcoco. See also Lesbre in the latest ECN. Many writers, beginning
> > > with the 1886 article, have in fact used this document to attempt to
> > > reconcile the various reports of the! tribute and service system of
> > > Texcoco that involved more than 26 towns.
> > >
> > > 2. Lee tells us: "Below Nezahualcoyotl and Nezahualpilli on leaf 2
> > > appear the rulers of thirteen cities that Nezahualcoyotl
> > > established." Everyone else who has examined this document,
> > > including the antiquated source that Lee cites and other sources he
> > > cites (Carrasco 1999 and Offner 1983) report fourteen rulers. Lee
> > > omits the ruler of Teotihuacan even though his 1886 source (358-59)
> > > carefully lists and comments on each ruler, including the ruler of
> > > Teotihuacan.
> > >
> > > To a Texcocan specialist, these errors in interpreting leaf 2 are as
> > > evident and important as someone writing about "the eleven apostles"
> > > and betray a substandard investigation of this document and its
> > > relationship to the alphabetic sources--which relationship was
> > > expertly discussed as early as 1956 by Charles Gibson and repeatedly
> > > by others, including sources Lee cites, prior to and after 2001.
> > > Lee's investigation, understanding and reporting of the scale and
> > > structure of the Texcocan political entity is deficient. We
> > > therefore cannot rely on Lee's description of the content of the
> > > Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 or its relationship to the alphabetic sources
> > > or on Lee's reporting on more than a century of later, better
> > > investigations.
> > >
> > > Lee is not entitled to his own set of "facts." He has set the clock
> > > back on interpretation of this document more than a century and
> > > presents a diminished and misshapen portrait of Texcocan political
> > > structure.
> > >
> > > Errors in the other paragraph, which concern Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3
> > > will be pointed out in a subsequent post.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jerry Offner
> > > ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nahuatl mailing list
> > Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> ------------------------------
> See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> N <Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/42c33435/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 21 19:30:31 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:30:31 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.143031.0500.>

Jongsoo Lee?s attempt at a preemptory and dismissive post is well-timed and opens the door to allow me to speak briefly of generalities and to make some items clear.  As this post deals with generalities, it is easier to read, much less intense in focus and less compressed into journalese.  Perhaps these comments will relieve some anxieties, perhaps not.  First, I have stayed close to the facts in the sources and Lee?s handling of those facts.  This allows me to know and show precisely what Lee knows and does not know and what he does and does not do while performing the basic functions of Nahua research.  I have deliberately avoided the generalities that allow for loose argumentation and shifting frames of reference because I wanted to stick to the facts rather than jump to a useless and undisciplined discussion of what I maintain are faulty conclusions based on faulty facts.  In my view, it is the construction of any work from the ground up that requires examination and de!
 termines whether or not it is quality work.  
 
Second, if a person sets out to gore the sole pre-conquest Mexican national icon of law, he should at least have some knowledge of comparative law and legal anthropology and he should be prepared for a response or two.  The best I can determine is that Lee?s overall agenda is to show Nezahualcoyotl as somehow unoriginal in literary matters and so he has wandered into the legal realm and seeks ?authorship? of a fresh and original set of legal rules concerning crimes and punishments by Nezahualcoyotl, even seeming to demand some certain mark of authorship on each item later in the article.  Leaving aside the fact that a fresh and original set of rules would have had scant chance of popular acceptance and would never have been attempted by a wise legal thinker, Lee should know that legal anthropologists emphatically dismiss lists of legal rules as important in favor of the flow of cases and decisions emanating from a legal system.  A few surviving legal rules are not a legal sy!
 stem.  Nor should the criminal justice system be mistaken for the entire legal system.  And one does not simply promulgate a list of rules into a vacuum that are then obeyed.  Nor can rules cover more than a small portion of human conduct, disagreement and conflict; it is for this reason that the great majority of legal systems in world history have not been rules oriented and extremely few have been legalistic in the sense of applying rules strictly to cases wherever possible.   Concepts of precedent and equity have to come into play, even if some behavior can be covered by rules.  And it is probably necessary to mention here some basic tenets of comparative law: that a legal system that has a legal code is not better (or more civilized, etc.) than one that doesn?t, and that a legal system that applies its legal rules strictly is not better than one that does not, and that a legal system that is more sophisticated is not better than one that is not (cf. our U.S. legal syst!
 em).  Legal systems are like people?there is little agreement about wh

at they are for or should be for.  Lee should read my prior post on this in Aztlan-l (Wed Jan 14 21:42:16 CST 2009)
 
 (http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/aztlan/2009-January/005515.html)
 
especially regarding the matter of comparing Nahua legal systems.  
 
It is important as a researcher to maintain a little humility.  In the sense that an orange expanded to the size of the earth would allow us to see its constituent atoms as the size of cherries, if we were able to observe the Texcocan legal system in operation in 1460, it would take a half dozen trained ethnographers two or three years to capture a synchronic slice of it with some diachronic depth.  In the same way, even in this arrogant age of revisionism, we have to realize we know only a very tiny part of the content of the system and have to be extremely circumspect about what we say about it.  That is why I rely on the opinion of the people on the ground at the time, Duran and Motolinia far more than others.  They, Pomar and Ixtlilxochitl, in addition to mentioning Nezahualcoyotl?s legislative activity, praise the entire legal construction and accomplishment of Nezahualcoyotl which involved the conception, negotiation among power and ethnic blocs, design, staffing and d!
 ay to day management of a system that was going strong past the time of the Spanish conquest for about a century from 1431.
 
Lee?s claim that Nezahualcoyotl was not an original legislator and did not legislate many legal rules is, simply put, feckless.  To legislate after all means ?to create, provide or control by legislation,? with legislation meaning ?the act of making or enacting laws.? And even these definitions are infused with a modern Western emphasis on rules found in few systems in world history.   The creation of the legal system and its maintenance necessarily involves initial and ongoing legislation and management of cases and decisions that might serve as future precedents or even legal rules. Legal systems need consistency to maintain public acceptance and just the management of determining and applying precedents in decisions and incorporating them or not incorporating them into a legal code in this or that area of their small empire, would have been a huge task, especially over Nezahualcoyotl?s reign from 1431-1472.  Lee needs to read up on the elaboration, complexity and expertis!
 e to be found in so many legal systems among all different sorts of societies to understand that the data we have on the Aztec system is most inadequate to appreciate its true level of sophisitication and complexity. Just unpacking the expertise in a single Aztec judge of the time would constitute a substantial part of a career for a legal anthropologist.  Overall, by searching in the forest for a piece of paper containing an initial, original list of rules regarding a limited number of crimes and punishments, Lee misses the trees and then disagrees with the people on the ground at the time about the nature of the forest.    
 
Third, the same pattern that initially caught my interest in Jongsoo Lee?s article, recurs in his most recent comments and I am going to point it out before sending on my, by now, third post on this matter.  One of his comments is not fair to Patrick Lesbre.  The pattern to which I object involves inaccurate facts, false claims and damage to others? perceptions of other people?s work, whether Nezahualcoyotl, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl or people from our time.  In this instance, Lee states: ?I would just point out that Lesbre didn?t cite major works in English about Texcoco in his works either.  For example, Offner?s major work, Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco and others were not even mentioned there.?  I am not sure of Lee?s frame of reference when he says ?there? and ?his works??the mere three works of Lesbre that I specifically cited, his entire output through 2001 or perhaps even until today--but this certainly is a false claim and I would think it is fair to consi!
 der at least his work to 2001 and then consider his latest work.  I should mention that Lesbre publishes in French and in Spanish, so why limit the publications of native speakers of English to those in English; why not extend the criteria to such people writing in Spanish?  But even that is not necessary.  Leaving aside Dibble?s indispensable work on the Codex Xolotl (in Spanish), I can note that in the 1998 article on the Mappe Quinatzin, Manumission d'esclave dans la Mappe Quinatzin ? Lesbre cites my 1983 work.  In the Coyohua Itlatollo work (on my short list) he cites Bierhorst?s 1992 History and Mythology of the Aztec: The Codex Chimalpopoca.  In Oublis et Censures, also on my short list, he cites Bierhorst (in English) and Gillespie (in Spanish).   In his 1998 Nezahualcoyotl entre historia, leyenda y divinizacion, El h?roe entre el mito y la historia, also on my short list, he cites Bierhorst (in English) as well as Barlow (in English). 
 
Lesbre?s 1998 Historiografia acolhua : seudo-rebelion e intereses coloniales (Ixtlilxochitl) cites Bierhorst, Codex Chimalpahin and a major Texcocan expert, Fred Hicks, all in English.  In his 2000 "Onomastique indiennes coloniale (Tezcoco, XVIe si?cle)? he cites Gillespie (in Spanish), Hewitt (in English), Lockhart (in English), and Barbara Williams (in English).  He also cites the U of Oklahoma Press Codex Chimalpahin by Anderson and Schroeder. Lesbre?s Mapas de Tepetlaoztoc (f. 208r, 209r). Cartografia indigena colonial temprana (M?xico Central, 1554) from 2001 cites Breton, Brotherston, Coy, Guzman, Leibsohn, Lockhart, Mundy, Offner, Robertson, Williams and Herb Harvey, all in English.  Skipping forward to his 2007 ECN article, he cites Berdan and Anawalt, Boone, Douglas, Lockhart, Offner and Robertson.  And this list in not exhaustive, being drawn only from the selection of articles that I have immediately at hand.  Is there a problem here with Lesbre?s knowledge of the!
  literature generated by Americans, British or anyone else writing in English before or after 2001, especially given the scant English language offerings on the subjects on which he wrote regarding Texcoco?  Thus, Lee?s related ad hominem comment that I seek to personalize these issues falls rather flat.  It is not one person?s work I prefer above another?s, but the quality.  But perhaps I  have misunderstood what Lee really meant to say and that he is not saying Lesbre is not knowledgeable on English language research.  
 
 
I can only observe that Lee?s understanding of the concept of ?historical fact? continues to appear different from mine and I hope he masters the indiscipline that permits him to come out with such false and damaging claims as when he states in his article that I am among a rather ill-defined group of people with birth years (as far as I can determine from the Library of Congress) ranging from 1819 to 1950 who ?bring into relief the peaceful and civilized image of Nezahualcoyotl as well as his anti-Mexican ideology.?  I have never imbued Nezahualcoyotl with anti-Mexican ideology, but I?ve got no problems with having portrayed him as ?civilized.? A major part of my effort was to produce a clear portrait of something that could be easily understood by people outside of Aztec studies?Aztec law?that would offset the perpetual Aztec ?apocalypto? to which they are always subjected.  The expression ?bring into relief? is imprecise, but I suppose it was for nothing that I wrote many!
  pages in 1983 that recounted the (non-peaceful) wars of Nezahualcoyotl and his cooperation with the Mexica during them and after them.  I also wrote about the Mexica ruler Itzcoatl?s early activities and holdings near Tollantzinco (follow the obsidian?), on interlocking land holdings and on tribute being paid by towns and other entities to more than one entity, and on Texcoco rapidly losing power to Tenochtitlan, and I wrote an entire article on human sacrifice, prisoner capture and how they related to the ideology involved in Texcocan political divisions in 1979.    These ideas were common knowledge in the discipline by that time, in the same way it was understood Nezahualcoyotl was not against human sacrifice.  (OK, the jury was still officially out on the otiose high god, monotheism issue, but most people did not take it too seriously by that time and my interest in religious affairs has always been peripheral).  I have trouble seeing the novelty in Lee?s work other tha!
 n this insistence on authoring legal rules when the various dots are c

onnected and this counter-productive research strategy of overemphasizing the limited similarities in the few reports of legal rules.  Legal anthropologists would be urging us to look elsewhere to understand what was really going on in Nahua law.  
 
And by the way, an observation in that article on prisoner capture is part of the confirmation of the identity of Nezahualcoyotl in the Codex de Xicotepec.  The most honorable captor position was the first position.  The person Lee mistakes for Nezahualcoyotl in Section 10 is only in fourth position in the prisoner capture scene and his son is in fifth position?hardly fitting for an overlord.  Instead, the principal captor is the town founder of Cuauchinanco from Section 9, followed by his sons in second and third position.  The person that Lee mistakes for Nezahuacoyotl is instead the town founder of Xicotepec.  In addition, it is Thouvenot?s determination, not mine, that the glyph in Section 10 is not a coyo-based glyph but a xolo-based glyph and therefore not Nezahualcoyotl?s and he speaks with rather more authority on glyphs than Lee or me.  The irony is that when Nezahualcoyotl does show up in the Section 16 of the Codex de Xicotepec, he is on a peaceful trip bringing a!
  wife or wives for the local ruler or rulers and assigning tequitl or domestic service to support them, assuring the local rulers? place in the new world order.  Evidently, he was remembered in such a happy, peaceful light by the ruling people in Xicotepec in the mid-sixteenth century, but I can note, he does come wearing the Tenochcan or Triple Alliance hegemonic warrior hairdo at the same time.  (This article is in press and my presentation on it is scheduled for the ICA this Summer in Mexico).   The avenues for argument about this issue are closing down, although one can argue about anything I suppose ? It is interesting that the codex does exhibit a two tier system a bit like the Tira de Tepechpan  in many of its sections, especially towards the end, with Cuauhchinanco's affairs at the top and Xicotepec's at the bottom.   
 
My concern, however, is centrally with Nezahualcoyotl and his city of Texcoco and false claims made about them and it is for that reason that I am going to pursue the matter on a fact-level basis in the next post.  It will be focused and in journalese.   
 
Finally?what?s my motivation?  Principally, it is keeping the Western perception of this important legal figure on track.  I have worked in private industry for nearly three decades and plan to stay there.  I had dropped out of active study due to my clients? needs until Stresser-Pean published the Codex de Xicotepec.  Being at the time one of about a dozen people who might have more to say about this document, and not seeing anyone saying much, I started looking at it every night.  After about two years, I stumbled on Lesbre?s review of it and was shocked (?yes, shocked?) to see how far ahead his analysis had gotten in similar time, without him even actively pursuing it.  I decided I needed to raise my game and contacted him.  He required me to study Thouvenot, and some people in the field whom I had never met arranged a visit to the Stresser-Peans in Mexico a few years ago.  And Marc Thouvenot has been astonishingly generous with his time during recent trips to Paris and t!
 he south of France, with help in one instance from the very sharp Sybille de Pury. 
 
Now I remain ?in it? for the puzzles and the opportunity to find out more about the small empire that Texcoco had to the east of the Basin of Mexico.  It is a structured, dependable diversion from work. There are several areas in Aztec law that still beg addressing?one of which is an intensive effort to understand the legal system in Tenochtitlan.  Sylvie Peperstraete, in her most excellent study of the Cronica X has just made this even more difficult by pointing out that there is a very good chance that the legal reforms ascribed to Moteuczoma I, which were mostly concerned with palace or household law in any event, were thrust back in time from Moteuczoma II?s period.  Another project would be to study the ethnoscience or ethnojurisprudence of some Nahua legal terms and concepts.  What were or are the Nahua words, for example, for illegal taking and what do they tell us about Nahua culture and jurisprudence?  Still another would be to gather and try to understand the addit!
 ional Nahua land tenure terms that colonial researchers have been turning up at a pretty good rate.  Still another is to study the scant and scattered indigenous legal system information in the RG?s from Central Mexico to see if anything interesting ?falls out.? 
 
So there it is, that?s my motivation.


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/541fa85d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From PGarcia at anselm.edu  Tue Apr 21 20:39:32 2009
From: PGarcia at anselm.edu (Pablo Garcia)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:39:32 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.163932.0400.PGARCIA@ANSELM.EDU>

Listeros,

 

Generally, I enjoy the back and forth on this list. However, this latest thread must have taken a wrong turn in Albuquerque. 

 

I don't think I need to defend Michael's character--nobody should be judged, much less condemned, by a couple of e-mails, a medium which lacks all the subtleties of live communication such as tone and gestures which may, for instance, indicate humor or irony. If nothing else, the current conversation has highlighted the importance of having as much context as possible before risking an interpretation.  

 

I would simply suggest we stop nursing our respective sensibilities, cease the personal attacks and refocus the conversation on Nahua language and culture. 

 

Respetuosamente,

Pablo 

 

PS: I will preemptively say that I do think some of the issues raised regarding scholarship are important and should be discussed, but I certainly find the tone, and perhaps the venue, inappropriate. 

 

"Let the honest scholar who has never concocted a crackpot theory cast his reflection in the smoking mirror."

 

Pablo Garc?a

Assistant Professor

Modern Languages and Literatures

Saint Anselm College

pgarcia at anselm.edu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/789d14f2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Apr 21 21:14:31 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:14:31 -0400
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <0A691D909A42D849BE5A4061F1EE287A02D78F2D@exchange01.anselm.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.171431.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

En vrai, Pablo, i didn't read anything that came in today beside Mario 
Aguilar's posting, which looked like it had some substance, which of 
course it did.

En vrai, until the "Ometeotl" tlamantli appeared, i wasn't aware that 
contributors to Nahuat-l were other than serious *linguistic* scholars.

Mr. Offner today has provided what appears at first glance some 
substance to his earlier critiques of Dr. Lee's work. Not that he's 
necessarily right. The substance simply wasn't there before. And his 
intentions were not clear, either.

axcan yocoxca, ihuian,

Michael







Quoting Pablo Garcia <PGarcia at anselm.edu>:

> Listeros,
>
>
>
> Generally, I enjoy the back and forth on this list. However, this
> latest thread must have taken a wrong turn in Albuquerque.
>
>
>
> I don't think I need to defend Michael's character--nobody should be
> judged, much less condemned, by a couple of e-mails, a medium which
> lacks all the subtleties of live communication such as tone and
> gestures which may, for instance, indicate humor or irony. If nothing
> else, the current conversation has highlighted the importance of
> having as much context as possible before risking an interpretation.
>
>
>
> I would simply suggest we stop nursing our respective sensibilities,
> cease the personal attacks and refocus the conversation on Nahua
> language and culture.
>
>
>
> Respetuosamente,
>
> Pablo
>
>
>
> PS: I will preemptively say that I do think some of the issues raised
> regarding scholarship are important and should be discussed, but I
> certainly find the tone, and perhaps the venue, inappropriate.
>
>
>
> "Let the honest scholar who has never concocted a crackpot theory
> cast his reflection in the smoking mirror."
>
>
>
> Pablo Garc?a
>
> Assistant Professor
>
> Modern Languages and Literatures
>
> Saint Anselm College
>
> pgarcia at anselm.edu
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 00:19:07 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:19:07 -0400
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.201907.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Why are people using the Germanic graphemes k and w for writing Nahuatl?

This appears not to be a choice based on phonology since the same 
spellings that contain k and w do not mark vowel length.

What is behind this?

Whenever I see, for example "Nawatl" for "Nahuatl" or "temazkalli" for 
"temazcalli," I see Goethe, or much worse.

tlazohkamati wel miak, ;-)

Michael



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 21 19:58:26 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:58:26 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
Message-ID: <TUE.21.APR.2009.145826.0500.>

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee?s recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  Here is the second post.   
 
Note:  Robert Barlow?s article on Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 can be found at this location, although, unfortunately the overall photo and line drawing have been obscured.  
 
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384#
 
A quick search has found no other free-access on-line images of leaf 3, although those with on-line journal access?increasingly available with a public library card--can use the excellent illustration on the first page of Douglas?s discerning article in The Art Bulletin cited below).
 
Here are errors in the paragraph on the Mappe Quinatzin that spans pages 246-247.
 
1. Lee relates: ?Regarding adultery, the Mapa Quinatzin describes three types of adultery and their punishments.?  This is not true.  It depicts three punishments for adultery dictated by only two separate fact sets of a given case, or in Lee?s terms, only two types of adultery and their punishments. These are shown in only two of the three rows of the third column of leaf 3.  The second row shows that in the case of ?los ad?lteros que mataban el adulterado? (Ixtlilxochitl?s explanation [1975:II,102]; the glosses on the codex offer no help), the man was roasted alive with water and salt (1975:II,102) splashed on him while the woman was executed by some form of strangulation. In the third row, adulterers are shown being stoned to death. The first row is not a crime and punishment vignette at all but instead deals with legal process?temporary imprisonment before the accused could be investigated and tried.  
   
2.  Lee then attributes his own false interpretation of the third column, row one to Ixtlilxochitl. ?According to Ixtlilxochitl?s interpretation, adulterers were flattened by a large and heavy stone, or were stoned in the tianguis (market); or if the adulterers had killed their spouses, then the male was burned to death and the female was hanged.?  This is not Ixtlilxochitl?s interpretation.  I spend many pages discussing adultery legal rules in 1983 (257-266) and point out where Ixtlilxochitl?s descriptions do not resemble this column and the one instance where they do resemble it most closely (1983:258-59; Ixtlilxochitl 1975: II,101-102) and in this instance, Ixtlilxochitl does not mention head crushing by stones at all but instead describes the contents of column 3, rows two and three only.  What is clear is that Ixtlilxochitl does not confuse the first row of column 3 with being crushed by stones.  Lee must instead be the confused party, because he speaks of the Mappe Qu!
 inatzin describing ?three types of adultery and their punishments? and then proceeds to describe rows two and three but also volunteers his own false description for the first row.  This is a fundamental error in pictorial interpretation contravened by plainly visible evidence and all other interpretations (except for Mohar Betancourt?s post-2001 confusion regarding this scene pointed out in my reviews recently in Ethnohistory [English] and ECN [Spanish, with additions] of her book on the Mappe Quinatzin).  
 
The scene in the first row of column 3 is not a legal rule and punishment, as is clear from Barlow?s article in 1950 and from my work in 1983.  My 34 year old photocopy of Barlow?s article (Journal de Ia Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, n.s., 39 [1950]: 111-24), which Lee cites, clearly shows the Nahuatl gloss describing the scene in the first row as a wooden structure or jail where people are put and Barlow correctly translates it and describes it as a wooden jail and surmises correctly that it contains an adulterous pair.  Barlow (1950:120) reports and interprets the large and bold Nahuatl gloss as ?coauhcalco tetlaliloya? ?lugar de la casa de madera, lugar donde se pone a la gente? (cf. very similar paleography and translation in Mohar Betancourt 2004:307).  In addition, Motolinia describes exactly this sort of holding cell and its general role in legal process (1971:359).  Chimalpopoca is shown in one in the Codex Xolotl prior to his death (X.080.J, using Thouvenot?s modern, s!
 tandard reference system).  
 
3.  Before these errors, Lee makes the claim that ?The majority of the crimes and punishments that appear in Ixtlilxochitl?s texts are clearly depicted in leaf 3 of this map.?  This is a false claim. There are indeed eleven legal vignettes on this leaf, showing ten crime and punishment pairs, although Lee would probably only count eight because he prefers not to understand the content of the fourth column as I explained it in 1982 and in 1983 (confirmed by Eduardo Douglas in 2003; Art Bulletin, LXXXV, no. 2 [June 2003]:  281-309; Mohar Betancourt also largely mishandles this column; both Lee and Mohar Betancourt falter where legal process, as opposed to mere legal rules, is depicted).
 
In column 1, there are three forms of one crime, theft, each with the same punishment.  In column 2 are two forms of offenses against the state with their punishments, one of which is the same as in column 1, and in column 3, there are three punishments (two of which are new) for one crime: adultery.  The fourth column depicts no new punishments but it does record two crimes of judicial corruption, at least one of which we know was a violation of a legal rule or became the case basis (or precedent) for a legal rule.  One vignette is in the time of Nezahualcoyotl and the other during the reign of Nezahualpilli, whose elaborately drawn glyphs respectively appear in each scene.  (A third scene in this column is cut off and only partly decipherable but a gloss seems to name Nezahualpilli).  In all, four separate kinds of punishment are shown.  Lee would evidently count five kinds of punishment (to include heads being crushed by stones) and four types of crimes or even eight if h!
 e wishes to consider each form of theft and adultery (i.e. the three he mistakenly describes) a separate crime. 
 
Lee himself cites a group of legal rules found in Ixtlilxochitl (1975:I, 385-386) earlier in this same paragraph.  These rules are considered without hesitation by O?Gorman to be his work (1975:I, 199), and contain at least seventeen additional offenses and three additional punishments?most of the time it does not define the exact punishment involved.  And there are a good number of other legal rules dealing with (additional) crime and (additional) punishment pairs in other places in Ixtlilxochitl, not to mention other sources with close ties to Texcoco. Lee?s mathematics is incorrect.  
 
4. Lee states:  ?His (Ixtlilxochitl?s) alphabetic texts are supported by a pictorial source, the Mapa Quinatzin.?  This assertion of ?a source? is a very weak argument from absence.  Lee cannot be sure this was the sole pictorial source and he would be clearly wrong if he is implying it was his sole source (see below).    Lee goes on to say:  ?A comparison between the description of the crimes and punishments and the third part of the map reveals that the alphabetic texts are exact transcriptions/translations of the map.?  This is another false claim, and on two counts.
 
First, as can be seen by the variety of reports of legal rules in Ixtlilxochitl that are presented in my book from 1983, the simple reason that the alphabetic texts are not  ?exact transcriptions/translations of the map? is that the very great majority of legal rules reported in the alphabetic texts are not shown on the Mappe Quinatzin at all. Second, Ixtlilxochitl provides information that is not found on the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 itself.  For example, without Ixtlilxochitl?s additional information, we would not know why there are differing punishments for the adulterous man and woman in column 3, row 2, nor would we know the details of the case of judicial corruption in column 4, row 2, and we would only have Vetancurt?s creative narrative transformation (or perhaps only defective explanation) of column 2, row 2, cited by Lee later in the article.  A careful consideration of the content of the alphabetic sources in comparison with the content of the Mappe Quinatzin shows!
  that the Mappe Quinatzin was not Ixtlilxochitl?s principal source of information on Texcocan law.  
 
5.  Having misinterpreted and misrepresented the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 and its role in Ixtlilxochitl?s work, Lee closes the paragraph with a singular misrepresentation of the work of Ixtlilxochitl:  ?Based on his [actually, Lee?s erroneous perception and presentation of Ixtlilxochitl?s] reading of the Mapa Quinatzin, therefore, Ixtlilxochitl sees Nezahualcoyotl as the greatest lawmaker in all of Anahuac.?  Ixtlilxochitl, thoroughly bilingual beyond Lee?s or any modern person?s abilities, and with decades of intelligent fieldwork exploring Texcocan history and culture, with Texcocan and many other informants from the sixteenth century with whom any one of us would pay a great price to spend a single hour, and with access to many documents now lost to us, based his opinion on a rather broader set of evidence than Lee wishes to admit or advise the reader to perceive.  Lee consistently writes to diminish what evidence there is and thereby diminish and demean the judgment of pe!
 ople such as Ixtlilxochitl, Motolinia and Duran who knew more about Nahua culture and history than Lee or any of us can imagine.  
 
It is important to note that these errors are not differences in interpretation or differences in opinion.  They are serious mistakes in interpreting the central pictorial documents of Texcocan political and legal administration and history and relating them to the alphabetic texts.  Barlow, Dibble, Gibson and others were modern pioneers in the correct interpretation of such materials and their links to the alphabetic texts.  With regard to proper understanding of leaf 3 of the Mappe Quinatzin, first recognized by Barlow and published in 1950, Lee has set the clock back by more than half a century.  
 
Ethnohistorians take on a special burden in understanding a dead culture and must struggle to acculturate themselves into that culture through years of dedicated practice with the scant information available.  Lee is not well along in this process.  
 
For me it boils down to this:  what evidence is more credible:  (1) the opinions of people such as Duran and Motolinia, who lived and worked with the people on the ground in the early colonial period, regarding the origin, history, quality and relative reputation of the Texcocan legal system, or (2) the opinion of a literary critic well over four centuries later who wishes to expose such sources as somehow gullible or incompetent but who cannot interpret the scant available basic legal and political pictorial information accurately, relate it to the alphabetic texts correctly and report it accurately?  Careful and well-reasoned criticism of sixteenth century sources is valuable, but only when it is carried out without such basic errors involved. 
 
I am glad to hear that at least one of these errors in the ECN article was revised out by Lee and expunged during the peer review of the manuscript for Lee?s recent book. Hopefully, enough were caught so the trajectory of argumentation was significantly changed, but perhaps instead, blindered and boxed-in by this early demonstrably poor basic research, it has persisted unrevised.  If so, then this misrepresentation and disfigurement of Nezahualcoyotl, Texcoco, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl and others will simply expand.
 
It is time to set limits on such involuntary masquerades for the dead, arranged and conducted by practitioners proclaiming their superior critical abilities and going out of their way to demean those of others, while thrusting false masks in the face of the far more accomplished dead. This overconfidence in the discipline and the subsequent objectification and excessive and faulty criticism of these worthy sources need study and the resulting problems require correction. 
 
Can sources be effectively and critically handled within the limits of our current knowledge?  The answer of course is yes, with the best recent example being Sylvie Peperstraete?s La Chronique X : Reconstitution Et Analyse D'une Source Perdue Fondamentale Sur La Civilisation Azteque, D'apres L'Historia De Las Indias De Nueva Espana De D. Duran (1581) Et La Cronica Mexicana De F.A. Tezozomoc (Ca. 1598).  It is published by Archaeopress and is available through their US distributor at this address:   http://www.oxbowbooks.com/results.cfm/q/peperstraete/qt/All/ST/QS/StartRow/1
Upon finishing the book, the reader will understand as never before the limitations on the accuracy of this Tenochcan source and its two dependent sources, Duran and Tezozomoc, but, because of the author?s discerning, patient and perspicacious approach, the reader will also be part of a process of unlocking and understanding much additional information within these sources.  


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090421/9ab4ef77/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Wed Apr 22 04:30:03 2009
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:30:03 +0000
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <20090421201907.1w596366o84k00cg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.043003.0000.>

Both are clearer than the Spanish-based spelling:
* One letter instead of alternating between "uh" and "hu", and confusion in recording dalect forms where the vowel U occurs.
* One letter each for the K and S sounds instead of imitating the result of Latin C (originally pronounced K everywhere) softening before front vowels and Y in Spanish, a sound change that never happened in Nahuatl.

Citlalyani.

--- On Wed, 22/4/09, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] graphemes
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Date: Wednesday, 22 April, 2009, 1:19 AM

Why are people using the Germanic graphemes k and w for writing Nahuatl?

This appears not to be a choice based on phonology since the same 
spellings that contain k and w do not mark vowel length.

What is behind this?

Whenever I see, for example "Nawatl" for "Nahuatl" or
"temazkalli" for 
"temazcalli," I see Goethe, or much worse.

tlazohkamati wel miak, ;-)

Michael



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/c4f3963d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Apr 22 07:35:54 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 02:35:54 -0500
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.023554.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Dear Michael

I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any established
orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length when it is practical
(i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been ridiculed for it before on
this list.

I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single letter
(h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and k, q for writing
kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s and ts, ) - and to help
(english speaking) lay persons achieve a better pronunciation and for
example say ['na.watl] in stead of [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because
some native speakers (like Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it
because they find that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives
more of a separate identity to their language.

Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen kaxtillan?"

And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?

Magnus Pharao Hansen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/f8401223/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From budelberger.richard at wanadoo.fr  Wed Apr 22 11:22:00 2009
From: budelberger.richard at wanadoo.fr (Budelberger, Richard)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:22:00 +0200
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.132200.0200.BUDELBERGER.RICHARD@WANADOO.FR>

3 flor?al an CCXVII (le 22 avril 2009 d. c.-d. c. g.), 13 h 13 : 18,4 ?C...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: ANTHONY APPLEYARD
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] graphemes

> Both are clearer than the Spanish-based spelling:

    Is nothing clearer for your native language -- anglosaxon ? -- spelling ?...
Nahuatl has a wonderful *orthography*, so WE (?) use it !

> * One letter instead of alternating between "uh" and "hu",
> and confusion in recording dalect forms where the vowel U occurs.
> * One letter each for the K and S sounds instead of imitating
> the result of Latin C (originally pronounced K everywhere)
> softening before front vowels and Y in Spanish, a sound
> change that never happened in Nahuatl.

    One letter for /k^w/ ? for long vowels ? for ? ch ?, ? tl ? ?
How many for /saltillo/ ?...

    Nahuatl has a 500 year spelling, We (?)  love it.

> Citlalyani.

    Budelberger, Richard.

1. Carochi, Launey... and Ignoramus (?)... ; not Wimmer...
Durand-Forest, Dehouve, Roulet... and Foreigners...

2.    Me !


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From idiez at me.com  Wed Apr 22 09:45:01 2009
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan, Ph.D.)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:45:01 -0500
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220035q58f77ed3i968beb054cb77f40@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.044501.0500.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Listeros,
	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and  
spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will eventually  
have to create separate systems for each town, and as science  
progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This is fine  
for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language if you've  
decided to eliminate the possibility of using native speakers as  
instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using writing as a  
means of communication for native speakers. And this is fine if your  
goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In  
Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their  
use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who  
created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the  
Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great  
lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural  
legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by  
using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity. He  
obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm  
between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If  
so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced  
nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the  
"n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in "tonal"  
and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent the  
devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart from  
tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your mouth is.  
Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible English  
spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would be that  
from now on, no native speaker would be able to read Shakespeare, Walt  
Witman or Gloria Anzald?a. Second, your first task would be to  
dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need a team to  
continue after your death) writing a dictionary (preferably  
monolingual) that applies your new system to every word in the  
language. Because spelling systems are not codified by government  
decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by dictionaries.
	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".  
Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in the  
long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually have  
dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making dictionaries. And  
when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary" or "vocabulary",  
because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon, Campbell and  
Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants who build on  
the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to continue the  
tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start making one. And  
if you want to break with tradition, then sit down and get to work on  
your dictionary.
	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is  
that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been  
invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work  
(dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for  
use in the system?
John

John Sullivan, Ph.D.
Professor of Nahua language and culture
Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
Tacuba 152, int. 43
Centro Hist?rico
Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
Mexico
Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
idiez at me.com

On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:

> Dear Michael
>
> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any  
> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length  
> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been  
> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>
> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single  
> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and  
> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s  
> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a  
> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of  
> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like  
> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find  
> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a  
> separate identity to their language.
>
> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl  
> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen  
> kaxtillan?"
>
> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/939d53f7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Apr 22 13:43:30 2009
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (magnus hansen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:43:30 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <mailman.421.1240405393.21905.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.084330.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Dear Dr. Sullivan

I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
unstandardized manner.

 It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.

The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
systemme.

As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
was the opposite.

Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
towards its extinction.

Magnus Pharao Hansen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/20bc8005/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:13:48 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:13:48 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <002c01c9c33c$9c081800$30de7253@q8u7w0>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.101348.0400.>

Dear Listeros,

The debate on Nahuatl standardization is quite interesting. I am working on a
presentation / paper and, given the discussion so far, thought I would include
the first 10 or so pages. Obviously missing is the section on Nahuatl
lexicosemantics and morphosyntax; and it is in discussing these realms of
linguistic communication that the chasms between variants becomes most clear.

I have taken the liberty of attaching the first half draft; by the time 
I finish
undoubtedly the discussion will have moved on (or back) to other themes.

Best, jonathan



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Amith-Nahuatl-standardization.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 129024 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/9958c94e/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:29:21 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:29:21 -0400
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220643v131e97a3vd9e0d609e7c13c2e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.102921.0400.>

Dear all,

There is an excellent article by Keith Thomas. I don't have it at hand, but I
believe it is

Keith Thomas, "The Meaning of Literacy in Early Modern England," The Written
Word: Literacy in Transition, ed. Gerd Baumann (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986)

that makes points very similar to Magnus (with whom I wholeheartedly agree, as
should be clear from the half-finished paper), for early modern reading.

Best, Jonathan


Quoting magnus hansen <magnuspharao at gmail.com>:

> Dear Dr. Sullivan
>
> I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
> non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
> disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
> overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
> have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
> evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
> literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
> French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
> any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
> taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
> really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
> unstandardized manner.
>
> It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
> language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
> that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
> quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
> different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
> used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
> of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
> orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.
>
> The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
> taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
> that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
> Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
> Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
> systemme.
>
> As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
> meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
> consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
> reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
> dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
> Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
> that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
> was the opposite.
>
> Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
> proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
> k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
> the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
> towards its extinction.
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 14:55:26 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:55:26 -0400
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 125, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <e03a2ea10904220643v131e97a3vd9e0d609e7c13c2e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.105526.0400.>

Dear listeros,

John F. Schwaller has informed me that attachments often don't go through on a
listserve. For those who are interested in the thoughts on standardization, I
have put the first part of my essay up at
http://www.balsas-nahuatl.org/standardization

Comments are welcome, here on offlist.

Best, Jonathan

Quoting magnus hansen <magnuspharao at gmail.com>:

> Dear Dr. Sullivan
>
> I do believe you are being overly dramatic when you accuse the use of
> non-spanish graphemes of being the straight way towards language death and
> disolution of nahua culture.  This I think, comes from greatly
> overestimating the value of a unified spelling system as the only means to
> have unified language and culture. I don't think there is any empirical
> evidence to back up that assumption. Many languages have had flourishing
> literary traditions without a unified spelling system - among them English,
> French, Spanish and Nahuatl. As I know you know classical texts do not show
> any uniform spelling at all, only in the works of grammarians there are
> taken steps towards developing standard orthographies - but this never
> really made it out to the Nahua masses who kept writing their language in an
> unstandardized manner.
>
> It seems that you believe that humans are not able to cope with the same
> language being written in different ways - I don't know what would give you
> that impression - all the Nahuatl speakers I have worked with have shown
> quite impressive abilities to read texts from different dialects written in
> different orthographies - often they don't even notice the orthography being
> used when they read.  This of course is because they are completely unaware
> of Molinas, Carochis and Karttunens valuable efforts towards standardizing
> orthograhies and they simply read what the texts say.
>
> The same is true for any number of languages in which spelling reforms have
> taken place -  people are quite able to manage two different orthographies -
> that is why i can read Danish texts written both before and after 1948, and
> Greenlandic written both before and after 1973. And the reeson I kan reede
> Chaucer and Shackespere who wrote before English hath a unifyed spellinge
> systemme.
>
> As for Barrios he studied linguistics with Barlow and his orthography is
> meant to be phonemic not phonetic. That is reason he don't write devoiced
> consonants, why he writes the geminate l in with two l's kaxtillan. And the
> reason he doesn't write a devoiced w after possessed tonalama is that his
> dialect doesn't have any such final w's. I find it quite unfair to accuse
> Barrios of "widening the chasm" - for the reasons stated above - no one says
> that people can't deal with two writing systems, and if anything his purpose
> was the opposite.
>
> Nobody accuses Mayan language writers using the standard orthographies
> proposed by the the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala  that use both w,
> k and s of widening the chasm between maya peoples and their past or accuse
> the academys spelling systems of fragmentarizing maya culture or leading it
> towards its extinction.
>
> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 16:51:30 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:51:30 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <CC5B273B-8FEF-4E46-8511-64CEC2408717@me.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.125130.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Thank you, John, for this very interesting message. Dr. Karttunen wrote 
to me off-list to explain the origin of the k/w spelling.

All best,

Michael



Quoting "John Sullivan, Ph.D." <idiez at me.com>:

> Listeros,
> 	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and
> spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will
> eventually  have to create separate systems for each town, and as
> science  progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This
> is fine  for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language
> if you've  decided to eliminate the possibility of using native
> speakers as  instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using
> writing as a  means of communication for native speakers. And this is
> fine if your  goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
> 	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In
> Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their
>  use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who
> created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the
> Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great
> lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural
> legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by
> using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity.
> He  obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm
>  between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
> 	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If
> so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced
> nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the
> "n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in
> "tonal"  and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent
> the  devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart
> from  tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your
> mouth is.  Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible
> English  spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would
> be that  from now on, no native speaker would be able to read
> Shakespeare, Walt  Witman or Gloria Anzald?a. Second, your first task
> would be to  dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need
> a team to  continue after your death) writing a dictionary
> (preferably  monolingual) that applies your new system to every word
> in the  language. Because spelling systems are not codified by
> government  decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by
> dictionaries.
> 	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".
> Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in
> the  long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually
> have  dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making
> dictionaries. And  when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary"
> or "vocabulary",  because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon,
> Campbell and  Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants
> who build on  the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to
> continue the  tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start
> making one. And  if you want to break with tradition, then sit down
> and get to work on  your dictionary.
> 	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is
> that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been
> invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work
>  (dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for
>  use in the system?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Tacuba 152, int. 43
> Centro Hist?rico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
> idiez at me.com
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael
>>
>> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any
>> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length
>> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been
>> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>>
>> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single
>> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and
>> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s
>> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a
>> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of
>> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like
>> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find
>> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a
>> separate identity to their language.
>>
>> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
>> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen
>> kaxtillan?"
>>
>> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>>
>> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 17:03:41 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:03:41 -0400
Subject: graphemes
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.130341.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

http://rhettdashwood.com.au/#16575

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From karttu at nantucket.net  Wed Apr 22 17:54:13 2009
From: karttu at nantucket.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:54:13 -0400
Subject: 20th-century Nahuatl orthography
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.135413.0400.KARTTU@NANTUCKET.NET>

> In 1940 a meeting known as the First Aztec Congress was held in Milpa
>  Alta.  Among its several aims was the goal of establishing an
> orthography for modern Nahuatl.
>
> It was decided to eschew the Spanish look of the traditional
> orthography.  The letters k and w were preferred over c/qu and hu/uh,
>  but other digraphs such as tl and ch were retained.  Contrastive
> vowel length was not marked.
>
> For more about the First Aztec Congress, see Between Worlds:
> Interpreters, Guides, and Survivors, pp. 205-211.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/ec859576/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Wed Apr 22 18:20:45 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:20:45 -0400
Subject: 20th-century Nahuatl orthography
In-Reply-To: <5C53AB72-1385-4627-93C9-1A54AD922FF8@nantucket.net>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.142045.0400.>

Thanks so much Frances. I'll change my paper accordingly.

Jonathan
Quoting Frances Karttunen <karttu at nantucket.net>:

>> In 1940 a meeting known as the First Aztec Congress was held in Milpa
>>  Alta.  Among its several aims was the goal of establishing an
>> orthography for modern Nahuatl.
>>
>> It was decided to eschew the Spanish look of the traditional
>> orthography.  The letters k and w were preferred over c/qu and hu/uh,
>>  but other digraphs such as tl and ch were retained.  Contrastive
>> vowel length was not marked.
>>
>> For more about the First Aztec Congress, see Between Worlds:
>> Interpreters, Guides, and Survivors, pp. 205-211.
>>
>



-- 
Jonathan D. Amith
Director: Mexico-North Program on Indigenous Languages
Research Affiliate: Gettysburg College; Yale University; University of Chicago
(O) 717-337-6795
(H) 717-338-1255
Mail to:
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology
Gettysburg College
Campus Box 412
300 N. Washington Street
Gettysburg, PA  17325
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From joslee at unt.edu  Wed Apr 22 20:43:18 2009
From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:43:18 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3
In-Reply-To: <380-220094221195826109@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.154318.0500.JOSLEE@UNT.EDU>

Hi all,

I am pleased to see Offner demonstrated a clear difference between our respective views on Nezahualcoyotl and his Texcoco.  At the same time, I am very much disappointed by the fact that he continues to misunderstand or ignore the main point of my argument. Please see the following quote from Offner's book:

"I selected the Texcocan empire for investigation because its political structure is significantly different from that of Tenochtitlan and because its legal systems are the best reported of all of the Aztec legal systems" (xiii).

One of the main arguments of my article was to show that there was no significant difference between the systems of Texcoco and Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Offner's points on legal anthropology are well taken, but I am not trying to reconstruct the legal systems. And my argument makes no value judgment about such systems. I am more interested in the representation of these systems and the value judgments made by colonial writers. I should say that I appreciate the substantive critique that Offner has provided in his last two posts, and I will certain look closely at them. It may be that I need to reassess some of the details of my interpretation of the pictographic sources that I analyze. I'm sure I will learn from his critique as I have learned from his published work. However, I still see nothing that refutes my central argument. Aside from the issue of whether I have committed errors in some of the details of my interpretation of the pictographic sources, one of the main issues here has to do with our views of colonial texts such as those of Ixtlilxochitl, Duran, and Motolinia. Although I recognize that these and other writers had extensive knowledge of indigenous culture and history, this does not mean that they were completely objective in their writings. From what he says, Offner essentially wants to defer to them. It turns out that this uncritical reliance upon colonial sources was already pointed out by Pedro Carrasco's review of Offner's book (American Ethnologist, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1985: pp. 803-805). For more information on the methodological problems of Offner's approach to the Texcocan legal system, see Elizabeth Brumfiel's review of Offner's Book (Ethnohistory, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1985: pp. 187-188).

My argument does not deny that colonial Spanish and Texcocan writers had more knowledge about indigenous culture and history than we do today. Rather, I argue that their works willfully transform and misinterpret certain aspects of that culture and history to serve their ideological ends derived from the colonial context in which they were writing. It seems clear that this approach offends Offner as he names it "arrogant revisionism," because it runs contrary to his own views. While it is true that my argument maintains that Offner and others have not been sufficiently critical of colonial sources, I have attempted to be as respectful as possible in this critique.  My work is certainly revisionist, and I suppose that in a way any revisionist work may seem to have an inherent arrogance. But I hope that such arrogance is limited to the inherent nature of the revisionist project. Although it seems that Offner has taken my respectful critique personally, I do not take offense at the substance of his critique of my work. As I said, I'm sure I will learn from it. In a way I am flattered that Offner attributes such influence to my work that he fears it will change everyone's mind about Nezahualcoyotl. Although I am sure that I may have made some errors of interpretation (who hasn't?), I think my general argument is correct, so I hope it does change everyone's mind. But that is not the way scholarship works. Offner himself will be championing his views as will others with the same perspective. I'm sure that many people will agree with him. And as is evident from the reviews I cited above, others may agree more with me, although perhaps not in all the details. This is the way things work. As I said before, I hope people interested in the topic will actually read all the relevant research, look at the original sources, draw their own conclusions, and perhaps make their own contributions. And afterward we can all go out for that virtual beer that Michel mentioned.

Best,

Jongsoo


From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:58 PM
To: Nahuat-L
Subject: [Nahuat-l] Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3

Recently, I said I would point out basic and serious errors in just two paragraphs of Jongsoo Lee's recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl.  Here is the second post.

Note:  Robert Barlow's article on Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 can be found at this location, although, unfortunately the overall photo and line drawing have been obscured.

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384#<http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1950_num_39_1_2384>

A quick search has found no other free-access on-line images of leaf 3, although those with on-line journal access-increasingly available with a public library card--can use the excellent illustration on the first page of Douglas's discerning article in The Art Bulletin cited below).

Here are errors in the paragraph on the Mappe Quinatzin that spans pages 246-247.

1. Lee relates: "Regarding adultery, the Mapa Quinatzin describes three types of adultery and their punishments."  This is not true.  It depicts three punishments for adultery dictated by only two separate fact sets of a given case, or in Lee's terms, only two types of adultery and their punishments. These are shown in only two of the three rows of the third column of leaf 3.  The second row shows that in the case of "los ad?lteros que mataban el adulterado" (Ixtlilxochitl's explanation [1975:II,102]; the glosses on the codex offer no help), the man was roasted alive with water and salt (1975:II,102) splashed on him while the woman was executed by some form of strangulation. In the third row, adulterers are shown being stoned to death. The first row is not a c! rime and punishment vignette at all but instead deals with legal process-temporary imprisonment before the accused could be investigated and tried.

2.  Lee then attributes his own false interpretation of the third column, row one to Ixtlilxochitl. "According to Ixtlilxochitl's interpretation, adulterers were flattened by a large and heavy stone, or were stoned in the tianguis (market); or if the adulterers had killed their spouses, then the male was burned to death and the female was hanged."  This is not Ixtlilxochitl's interpretation.  I spend many pages discussing adultery legal rules in 1983 (257-266) and point out where Ixtlilxochitl's descriptions do not resemble this column and the one instance where they do resemble it most closely (1983:258-59; Ixtlilxochitl 1975: II,101-102) and in this instance, Ixtlilxochitl does not mention head crushing by stones at all but instead describes the contents of ! column 3, rows two and three only.  What is clear is that Ixtlilxochitl does not confuse the first row of column 3 with being crushed by stones.  Lee must instead be the confused party, because he speaks of the Mappe Quinatzin describing "three types of adultery and their punishments" and then proceeds to describe rows two and three but also volunteers his own false description for the first row.  This is a fundamental error in pictorial interpretation contravened by plainly visible evidence and all other interpretations (except for Mohar Betancourt's post-2001 confusion regarding this scene pointed out in my reviews recently in Ethnohistory [English] and ECN [Spanish, with additions] of her book on the Mappe Quina! tzin).

The scene in the first row of column 3 is not a legal rule and punishment, as is clear from Barlow's article in 1950 and from my work in 1983.  My 34 year old photocopy of Barlow's article (Journal de Ia Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, n.s., 39 [1950]! : 111-24), which Lee cites, clearly shows the Nahuatl gloss describing the scene in the first row as a wooden structure or jail where people are put and Barlow correctly translates it and describes it as a wooden jail and surmises correctly that it contains an adulterous pair.  Barlow (1950:120) reports and interprets the large and bold Nahuatl gloss as "coauhcalco tetlaliloya" "lugar de la casa de madera, lugar donde se pone a la gente" (cf. very similar paleography and translation in Mohar Betancourt 2004:307).  In addition, Motolinia describes exactly this sort of holding cell and its general role in legal process (1971:359).  Chimalpopoca i! s shown in one in the Codex Xol otl prior to his death (X.080.J, using Thouvenot's modern, standard reference system).

3.  Before these errors, Lee makes the claim that "The majority of the crimes and punishments that appear in Ixtlilxochitl's texts are clearly depicted in leaf 3 of this map."  This is a false claim. There are indeed eleven legal vignettes on this leaf, showing ten crime and punishment pairs, although Lee would probably only count eight because he prefers not to understand the content of the fourth column as I explained it in 1982 and in 1983 (confirmed by Eduardo Douglas in 2003; Art Bulletin, LXXXV, no. 2 [June 2003]:  281-309; Mohar Betancourt also largely mishandles this column; both Lee and Mohar Betancourt falter where legal process, as opposed to mere legal rules, is depicted).

In column 1, there are three forms of one crime, theft, each with the same punishment.  In column 2 are two forms of offenses against the state with their punishments, one of which is the same as in column 1, and in column 3, there are three punishments (two of which are new) for one crime: adultery.  The fourth column depicts no new punishments but it does record two crimes of judicial corruption, at least one of which we know was a violation of a legal rule or became the case basis (or precedent) for a legal rule.  One vignette is in the time of Nezahualcoyotl and the other during the reign of Nezahualpilli, whose elaborately drawn glyphs respectively appear in each scene.  (A third scene in this column is cut off and onl! y partly decipherable but a gloss seems to name Nezahualpilli).  In all, four separate kinds of punishment are shown.  Lee would evidently count five kinds of punishment (to include heads being crushed by stones) and four types of crimes or even eight if he wishes to consider each form of theft and adultery (i.e. the three he mistakenly describes) a separate crime.

Lee himself cites a group of legal rules found in Ixtlilxochitl (1975:I, 385-386) earlier in this same paragraph.  These rules are considered without hesitation by O'Gorman to be his work (1975:I, 199), and contain at least seventeen additional offenses and three additional punishments-most of the time it does not define the exact punishment involved.  And there are a good number of other legal rules dealing with (additional) crime and (additional) punishment pairs in other places in Ixtlilxochitl, not to mention other sources with close ties to Texcoco. Lee's mathematics is incorrect.

4. Lee states:  "His (Ixtlilxochitl's) alphabetic texts are supported by a pictorial source, the Mapa Quinatzin."  This assertion of "a source" is a very weak argument from absence.  Lee cannot be sure this was the sole pictorial source and he would be clearly wrong if he is implying it was his sole source (see below).    Lee goes on to say:  "A comparison between the description of the crimes and punishments and the third part of the map reveals that the alphabetic texts are exact transcriptions/translations of the map."  This is another false claim, and on two counts.

First, as can be seen by the variety of reports of legal rules in Ixtlilxochitl that are presented in my book from 1983, the simple reason that the alphabetic texts are not  "exact transcriptions/translations of the map" is that the very great majority of legal rules reported in the alphabetic texts are not shown on the Mappe Quinatzin at all. Second, Ixtlilxochitl provides information that is not found on the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 itself.  For example, without Ixtlilxochitl's additional information, we would not know why there are differing punishments for the adulterous man and woman in column 3, row 2, nor would we know the details of the case of judicial corruption in column 4, row 2, and we would only have Vetancurt's creative narrative tran! sformation (or perhaps only defective explanation) of column 2, row 2, cited by Lee later in the article.  A careful consideration of the content of the alphabetic sources in comparison with the content of the Mappe Quinatzin shows that the Mappe Quinatzin was not Ixtlilxochitl's principal source of information on Texcocan law.

5.  Having misinterpreted and misrepresented the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 and its role in Ixtlilxochitl's work, Lee closes the paragraph with a singular misrepresentation of the work of Ixtlilxochitl:  "Based on his [actually, Lee's erroneous perception and presentation of Ixtlilxochitl's] reading of the Mapa Quinatzin, therefore, Ixtlilxochitl sees Nezahualcoyotl as the greatest lawmaker in all of Anahuac."  Ixtlilxochitl, thoroughly bilingual beyond Lee's or any modern person's abilities, and with decades of intelligent fieldwork exploring Texcocan history and culture, with Texcocan and many other informants from the sixteenth century with whom any one of us would pay a great price to spend a single hour, and with ac! cess to many documents now lost to us, based his opinion on a rather broader set of evidence than Lee wishes to admit or advise the reader to perceive.  Lee consistently writes to diminish what evidence there is and thereby diminish and demean the judgment of people such as Ixtlilxochitl, Motolinia and Duran who knew more about Nahua culture and history than Lee or any of us can imagine.

It is important to note that these errors are not differences in interpretation or differences in opinion.  They are serious mistakes in interpreting the central pictorial documents of Texcocan political and legal administration and history and relating them to the alphabetic texts.  Barlow, Dibble, Gibson and others were modern pioneers in the correct interpretation of such materials and their links to the alphabetic texts.  With regard to proper understanding of leaf 3 of the Mappe Quinatzin, first recognized by Barlow and published in 1950, Lee has set the clock back by more than half a century.

Ethnohistorians take on a special burden in understanding a dead culture and must struggle to acculturate themselves into that culture through years of dedicated practice with the scant information available.  Lee is not well along in this process.

For me it boils down to this:  what evidence is more credible:  (1) the opinions of people such as Duran and Motolinia, who lived and worked with the people on the ground in the early colonial period, regarding the origin, history, quality and relative reputation of the Texcocan legal system, or (2) the opinion of a literary critic well over four centuries later who wishes to expose such sources as somehow gullible or incompetent but who cannot interpret the scant available basic legal and political pictorial information accurately, relate it to the alphabetic texts correctly and report it accurately?  Careful and well-reasoned criticism of sixteenth century sources is valuable, but only when it is carried out without such basic errors involved.

I am glad to hear that at least one of these errors in the ECN article was revised out by Lee and expunged during the peer review of the manuscript for Lee's recent book. Hopefully, enough were caught so the trajectory of argumentation was significantly changed, but perhaps instead, blindered and boxed-in by this early demonstrably poor basic research, it has persisted unrevised.  If so, then this misrepresentation and disfigurement of Nezahualcoyotl, Texcoco, Duran, Motolinia, Ixtlilxochitl and others will simply expand.

It is time to set limits on such involuntary masquerades for the dead, arranged and conducted by practitioners proclaiming their superior critical abilities and going out of their way to demean those of others, while thrusting false masks in the face of the far more accomplished dead. This overconfidence in the discipline and the subsequent objectification and excessive and faulty criticism of these worthy sources need study and the resulting problems require correction.

Can sources be effectively and critically handled within the limits of our current knowledge?  The answer of course is yes, with the best recent example being Sylvie Peperstraete's La Chronique X : Reconstitution Et Analyse D'une Source Perdue Fondamentale Sur La Civilisation Azteque, D'apres L'Historia De Las Indias De Nueva Espana De D. Duran (1581) Et La Cronica Mexicana De F.A. Tezozomoc (Ca. 1598).  It is published by Archaeopress and is available through their US distributor at this address:   http://www.oxbowbooks.com/results.cfm/q/peperstraete/qt/All/ST/QS/StartRow/1
Upon finishing the book, the reader will understand as never before the limitations on the accuracy of this Tenochcan source and its two dependent sources, Duran and Tezozomoc, but, because of the author's discerning, patient and perspicacious approach, the reader will also be part of a process of unlocking and understanding much additional information within these sources.


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net<mailto:ixtlil at earthlink.net>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/b321b778/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Apr 22 21:06:22 2009
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:06:22 -0400
Subject: graphemes
In-Reply-To: <CC5B273B-8FEF-4E46-8511-64CEC2408717@me.com>
Message-ID: <WED.22.APR.2009.170622.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Just wanted to add that none of my students here at I.U. had any 
trouble with the hu them...English majors, business majors...you name it.

Wild and whacky English orthography has been quite standardized, 
probably since Samuel Johnston's dictionary came out in the 1750s, 
right? There was an attempt, wasn't there?, in the 1960s or 70s to 
simplify the orthography so that kids could learn to read more easily, 
and that was shot down quite readily, owing to the fear, as John has 
mentioned in reference to Nahuatl, that the body of English literature 
would be inaccessible to children versed in the new orthography. 
Perhaps the folks in Mexico teaching k and c and the like aren't 
concerned whether native speakers' have access to "classic" Nahuatl. 
That may not be an issue either in literacy or language revitalization.

Personally speaking, I find it takes me longer--and two steps--to read 
this "modernized" Nahuatl orthography. This is because I "sight-read" 
so much of it with ease. This is not a great example, but a phrase such 
as "Iuhqui in mah miequintin totomeh ic tlahtoa" can go right in. With 
something as moderately modified as "Iwki in mah miekintin totomeh ik 
tlahtoa," I have to sound it out as I read it, although I first start 
out by saying "What the heck is 'iwki'? A misplaced kiwi fruit?"

I guess it's a matter of getting acclimatized.

Michael





Quoting "John Sullivan, Ph.D." <idiez at me.com>:

> Listeros,
> 	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and
> spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will
> eventually  have to create separate systems for each town, and as
> science  progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This
> is fine  for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language
> if you've  decided to eliminate the possibility of using native
> speakers as  instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using
> writing as a  means of communication for native speakers. And this is
> fine if your  goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
> 	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In
> Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their
>  use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who
> created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the
> Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great
> lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural
> legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by
> using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity.
> He  obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm
>  between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
> 	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If
> so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced
> nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the
> "n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in
> "tonal"  and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent
> the  devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart
> from  tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your
> mouth is.  Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible
> English  spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would
> be that  from now on, no native speaker would be able to read
> Shakespeare, Walt  Witman or Gloria Anzald?a. Second, your first task
> would be to  dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need
> a team to  continue after your death) writing a dictionary
> (preferably  monolingual) that applies your new system to every word
> in the  language. Because spelling systems are not codified by
> government  decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by
> dictionaries.
> 	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".
> Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in
> the  long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually
> have  dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making
> dictionaries. And  when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary"
> or "vocabulary",  because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon,
> Campbell and  Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants
> who build on  the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to
> continue the  tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start
> making one. And  if you want to break with tradition, then sit down
> and get to work on  your dictionary.
> 	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is
> that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been
> invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work
>  (dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for
>  use in the system?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Tacuba 152, int. 43
> Centro Hist?rico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
> idiez at me.com
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael
>>
>> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any
>> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length
>> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been
>> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>>
>> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single
>> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and
>> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s
>> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a
>> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of
>> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like
>> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find
>> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a
>> separate identity to their language.
>>
>> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
>> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen
>> kaxtillan?"
>>
>> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>>
>> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From ixtlil at earthlink.net  Thu Apr 23 06:20:10 2009
From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:20:10 -0500
Subject: Interpreting the Mappe Quinatzin, leafs 2 and 3
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.012010.0500.>

I like Jongsoo Lee?s post for a variety of reasons and have a proposal for joint effective action at the end of this post.  
 
Lee?s quote from my book?s introduction is a good, basic starting place.  Certainly, regarding political systems, in the early 1980s, there was further development of the idea of Tenochtitlan?s dual (maybe tandem) cihua:co:a:tl/tlahtoa:ni  internal/external governmental structure and process, especially as described by Hr. Dr. R.A.M. van Zantwijk (pardon my orthography if necessary; I can?t tell what is approved and disapproved after the last few days and this after I had just decided to follow Karttunen strictly in the last several months).  There is no evidence for a cihua:co:a:tl with any significant power at Texcoco.  In addition, the Mexica empire grew rapidly; its urban core ballooned in size and diversity; its economy intensified; and it had a more rapid turnover of rulers while the Texcocan empire maintained its traditional conformation, with a foothold in the Basin and control of the ancient and lucrative trade route through Cuauhchinanco and Xicotepec at least unti!
 l Ahuitzotl?s time (there?s interesting evidence in the Codex de Xicotepec on this).   From 1431 to 1515, there were only two long-lived Texcocan rulers who seemed to have had great, enjoyable, perhaps more slow paced lives.  Also, Torquemada tells us that the ruler was not the head of the legal hierarchy in Tenochtitlan, while in Texcoco the ruler was.  So, I am quite comfortable about maintaining there were importance political system differences on the macro level as well as below.  
 
On the other hand, the last time I saw Fred Hicks he gave his customary well-crafted paper on similarities between the noble houses of the Nahua both inside and outside of the Basin of Mexico in a session I co-chaired at the 2005 Ethnohistory meetings in Santa Fe.  There were only so many ways to collect tribute and recruit labor in those days.  So, similarities and differences there were of course at the same time.  It is perhaps going to prove best at some time in the future for Jongsoo Lee and me to list these items and discuss them and their degrees of difference and similarity, rather than just say things overall were more or less the same or different.  The same goes for a thorough study of the events of the period from about 1400 to 1440.  These remain in many instances unnecessarily unresolved.
 
You can also note from the quote that I believe the jury was still out on the legal differences and similarities between Tenochtitlan and Texcoco because of the scarcity of evidence for Tenochtitlan.  A bit more basic research by those who control the Tenochcan sources better may turn up facts to decide the matter more clearly?I have remained optimistic about this for thirty years but haven?t put sufficient priority on this project.  The nature of the more urban Tenochtitlan may well have led to the development of a different legal approach and jurisprudence.  It would be surprising if it had not.  The list of legal rules in the Historia ? por sus pinturas seems a bit more commercially minded and I have often thought it might have come from Tlatelolco via Azcapotzalco and, speculating on the fringe here, if Azcapotzalco is as old and continuous as some think, perhaps from the jurisprudence of Classic Teotihuacan  (there are some continuities or apparent continuities in other!
  cultural areas and morality and jurisprudence tend to be conservative cultural subsystems).  Another approach is to observe that after the recitation of some legal cases (as opposed to legal rules) from Tenochtitlan, the document mentions cases at Tenayuca and Cuauhtitlan and only then transitions into a list of legal rules.  This may indicate the rules are not from Tenochtitlan but instead from the fairly well documented Cuauhtitlan.  This would make the task of understanding what was going on in Tenochtitlan that much more difficult.   It would be unfortunate if we can?t do the extra work to investigate this further.  
 
Jongsoo Lee did not come up with the most critical and interesting of the reviews my book received a quarter of a century ago.  I think it was by Jane Collier and the part that was not consumed in a sidebar with my advisor Leo Pospisil, had good ideas on the need to study other than mere legal rules, some of which have stayed with me and helped lead to what I recently presented?the worst reviews tend to be the best.  Unfortunately rules are mostly what we have left so we can never act fully on such criticisms.  (I could not search this on-line quickly, my apologies to her if she was not the reviewer).    Laura Nader also wrote an interesting review although with some sidebar with Pospisil and also expressing reservations regarding rules.  I think Pedro Carrasco was still distracted by our dispute in American Antiquity in 1981 over ?doctrinal issues? when he wrote his review.  In that dispute, I advanced the scandalous notion (at the time) that the case in favor of the Aztec !
 economy being almost entirely redistributive was not closed and that it was necessary to pursue research into the market sector of the economy.  Others, doubtless on their own trajectories beforehand, have pursued that line of argument very successfully in the last three decades.  Nevertheless, those who follow Polanyi in their research will probably never forget.  My favorite review is by another person, Brumfiel, still strongly influenced by Polanyi, because I gave her most of the criticisms she makes during a phone call she initiated one Saturday about noon, saying she had her tape recorder running to take notes, while I lived in San Antonio, Texas and was making the index for my book.  By that time, I was irretrievably captured by the remuneration levels in the private sector and at the end of the conversation, I gave her complete freedom to acknowledge or not acknowledge the source of the comments.  Maybe this was why the French researcher Durand-Forest?s favorable rev!
 iew of my book criticized the quality of its index.  In addition, it w

as an entertaining review because she assumed I was a na?ve American because I emphasized that it was important to note that the state assumed the right to punish adulterers and would not allow the aggrieved party to do it.  Herb Harvey, directly active in Texcocan history and about to make some significant discoveries on Aztec mathematics and surveying with Barbara Williams, had no axes to grind and gave it a very good review.  In the end the book was the co-winner of the 1985 Cline Prize from the Council of Latin American History (CLAH).  My calligraphed prize certificate arrived with the title of the book misspelled (cf. my misspelling of their name above) and a request to get it corrected was never answered.  I also remember a review from Scandinavia where the reviewer did not seem to realize that my description of early Texcocan history was merely a report of the version in the sources, rather than some definitive analysis and report on my part.  He did seem taken by my!
  work on political numerology and divisions, which I have always considered one of the most speculative parts of the book.   I think the best comment on all this reviewing was made by my colleague at the time, Russ Ciochon, still a physical anthropology professor today.  ?Jerry,? he said, ?this is the same book and look at all these reviews.  How can you call Social and Cultural Anthropology a science??  I have never been able to answer him.  Jongsoo Lee will go through a similar process.
 
Overall, this on-line disputation process has not been unlike my day-to-day job where I arrange practical, ongoing solutions between three and sometimes four parties by establishing the basic facts with great accuracy, identifying and outlining differences and reaching a durable solution that contains no errors?these would lead to catastrophic or at least extremely expensive problems down the road.  One gets inured so that any level of conflict becomes routine, so my everyday focus and manner of doing things which doesn?t strike people in my work as intense or aggressive--to the contrary, I am seen as some mild-mannered ex-egghead--may have been carried over inadvertently to this discussion.  (?It?s what I do and it hasn?t gotten to me in years.?)  
 
Nevertheless, I think well-refereed online disputation can move issues along quickly and accurately in this very slow moving discipline?no wonder that museum or university administrators or even worse, outsiders, sometimes get impatient or crossways with researchers and want to question the resources they consume and the quantity and nature of the product they produce.  Changes to working conditions for those in universities are going to accelerate further.  No matter how I try to explain things, the people I work with and meet everyday just don?t understand the value of very much of the enterprise at all and think I am quaint at best, stupid at worst, for spending my time on such things when I should be out playing golf or some such.  Maybe our moderator and others can devise some rules and a forum to faciliate the process.  Otherwise, it would take years to get a reply in a journal and then there would be an answer, etc.  
 
I do think that this process is too dangerous for untenured people, who must avoid essentially all risk for many years, but my understanding has been that Lee is tenured.  And as I have seen before, American academics prove more averse to conflict that others, with Europeans tending to rather enjoy it.  Careful reading of the posts already reveals each of us declaring what is and is not really important to us and where there are no important differences, so my experience tells me we have the beginnings of a working arrangement.
 
I suppose my remaining gripe with Lee is that he needs for generational reasons to label me as ?old school? and not a new and true critical reader of sources.  Certainly, I am not a new reader, but anyone with doubts about critical should read my 1979 Ethnohistory article on Techotlalatzin where I very delicately and without objectifying and damaging the objects of study, work close to the facts in the Codex Xolotl to show that Torquemada?s (and the Anonimo Mexicano?s) version of events is not as accurate as Ixtlilxochitl?s description.   I recall seeing Brumfiel making good use of this article in years past.  (There is one small error in my article, hiding like Waldo, who will find it?)  Still, the old (all of 58 in my case) must eventually make way for the new and there is a pleasing symmetry with the timing of my disagreement with Pedro Carrasco when he was at an age very similar to mine now when I have had to respond to both Lee and Luz Maria Mohar Betancourt.  This must!
  be the life cycle of ideas in this field, but it needs speeding up, perhaps by as much as an order of magnitude or the rest of the world is going to lose interest, patience and eventually respect.  That process is already well under way; the situation is not good.    
 
As for my proposal mentioned at the beginning, I find that a virtual beer is not sufficient.  Instead, I propose that Lee and I co-chair a session at the upcoming Ethnohistory meeting in New Orleans (or at another meeting soon).  The airfare is low from Houston, Denton and also from Mexico City and hotels remain inexpensive.   The session proposal would have to go in by May 15.   The only ground rules would be that participants eschew reviews of prior work and instead develop new research on Aztec/Central Mexican law and perhaps the closely related field of morals and that neither I nor Lee would serve as discussant.  Topics for short, feasible projects would be easy to generate.  Lee can decline if he wishes and I will not pursue it independently, although I would continue to work toward some sessions on Aztec law fairly soon.  I do think it would be the start of hammering out a joint position with residual differences so the two squabbling people from North America can qui!
 t messing with Nezahualcoyotl and quit blocking the view.  
 
I also want to acknowledge our moderator?s steadfastness in allowing this debate to continue and to thank those who emphasized the standard bounds and rules of the arena.  I hope serious disputation will continue here, such as in the last 48 hours over orthography.  That also got a bit heated, but the stakes involving a living culture and people were quite a bit higher. 
 
Finally, if there is any lingering resentment I invite people to read my upcoming publication on the Codex de Xicotepec.  It has been possible to interpret some of the document very well; some other parts are damaged and obscure but I have, like Guy Stresser-Pean, put up my best current tentative (i.e. lower probability) interpretations for them precisely so that others can disagree, expose bad readings and propose better wholly or partly-formed alternatives.  The Stresser-Peans told me a few years ago that they had done their best in the time they had away from their planned publication schedule and strongly wanted to see more research into the document.  Its coming to light was a most unlikely event. This is no "one person" project, so, as no one can deny me tenure or limit my raise and so forth, I decided to put myself up for ?arrow sacrifice? to jumpstart a new wave of study of this very interesting document and to further research into the nearby Map of Metlatoyuca, the!
  Papers of Itzcuintepec, and the very enigmatic reverse of the Codice de Chiconquiaco, recently published and available for purchase from the FCE Mexico website (about $12 plus shipping--only $17, so order more than one title).  
 
Jerry Offner 


Jerry Offner
ixtlil at earthlink.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/0dc5098a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From micc2 at cox.net  Thu Apr 23 18:09:47 2009
From: micc2 at cox.net (micc2)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:09:47 -0700
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.110947.0700.MICC2@COX.NET>

In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  
*[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"

*

*can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word is, 
and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as **"what 
has been lived, to complete"?
*

*
Thanks in advanced!***

-- 

I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:

"Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz


Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
www.mexicayotl.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/902b77ed/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Thu Apr 23 20:27:26 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:27:26 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0AEEB.8050107@cox.net>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.162726.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I 
puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember 
posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I 
couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that 
query, I don't think I got any response.
I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this 
word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain 
elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work 
together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology. 
I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been 
lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word 
is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is 
'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this 
morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound 
ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that 
I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure. 
Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is 
particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the 
five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the 
end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of 
the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the 
period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day 
remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle 
involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is 
used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the 
365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative 
attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly 
obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to 
account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be 
grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here, 
though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a 
very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So 
the term may even have originally derived from some other language. 
There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this 
in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few. 
This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why 
this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.

Galen Brokaw



micc2 wrote:
> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  
> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>
> *
>
> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word 
> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as 
> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
> *
>
> *
> Thanks in advanced!***
>
> -- 
>
> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>
> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>
>
> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
> www.mexicayotl.org
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>   

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Thu Apr 23 23:37:55 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:37:55 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.193755.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

I'd like to second Galen's judgement of "good question".  "nemontemi" 
certainly gets the linguistic cogs turning in more frenzy than the 
analysis of some other problems.  I'll give here what is a short form 
of what I think is a possible solution and come back later with more 
material.

   I think the initial element of "nemontemi" is the particle "ne:m" 
and the rest of the "phrase" is "on-te:mi".  "ne:m" means "useless, in 
vain, fruitless" and usually shows up as "nen", since it appears more 
often before consonants than before vowels (e.g., "ninenquiza (I fail 
to have success), nentlacatl (worthless person, nentlachiuhtli 
(unnecessary thing), etc.).

   I think the sense of "nemontemi" (or perhaps earlier, as a phrase, 
"nen ontemi": it uselessly fills (those empty five days)

   Mary finds in the vocabulario anonimo (Ayer ms. 1478):

  nenontemi             Bissiesto

  ilhuitl nenontemi     entrepuesto dia

I'll be back later,

Joe


Quoting Galen Brokaw <brokaw at buffalo.edu>:

> This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I
> puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember
> posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I
> couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that
> query, I don't think I got any response.
> I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this
> word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain
> elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work
> together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology.
> I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been
> lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word
> is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is
> 'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this
> morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound
> ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that
> I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure.
> Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is
> particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the
> five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the
> end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of
> the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the
> period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day
> remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle
> involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is
> used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the
> 365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative
> attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly
> obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to
> account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be
> grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here,
> though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a
> very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So
> the term may even have originally derived from some other language.
> There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this
> in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few.
> This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why
> this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.
>
> Galen Brokaw
>
>
>
> micc2 wrote:
>> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:
>> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>>
>> *
>>
>> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word
>> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as
>> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
>> *
>>
>> *
>> Thanks in advanced!***
>>
>> --
>>
>> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>>
>> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>>
>>
>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 02:30:52 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:30:52 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.223052.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

This is a "morpheme concordance" of 'ne:m' in the Florentine Codex -- 
that is all the sentence contexts for the ne:m's that I could identify.

In a separate e-mail I'll send a morpheme index of all words containing 
"ne:m" in the Florentine and in Molina's dictionaries.

Iztayomeh,

Joe

p.s. ...and when you go out to eat, order the Chicken Florentine!




ne:m
1.  *ahmonenencahua*.  niman ahmonenencahua, ahmoxixiccahua, huel
    nohuiyampa mixpetzoa, mixpepetztza, tlacentoca, tlacencoltoca .
    never suffering from being defrauded, not losing anything through
    mismanagement, he sought diligently in all parts for advantageous
    dealings and continued to seek them out. . <ah1-p54-dupl-ne:m
    ca:hui-caus09> (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
2.  *ahne*.  ane nicuic tociquemitla, .  not in vain I take the yellow
    feathered cape; . <ah1-ne:m +del.n> (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.219)
3.  *ahnemiuhcan*.  quinotza in tlapouhqui, in teyolmelauhqui: in
    omoyolmelauh, quilhuia ha ca nican, tihuallatia, timoquetzaco
    tiquizaco, in anemiuhcan, in temamauhtican: in oncan iicac in
    atoyatl, in tepexitl .  the soothsayer, the confessor, addressed
    the one who confessed; he said to him: "here thou dost hide, thou
    hast come to place thyself, thou hast come to pass the
    uninhabitable place, the place of fright, where stand the torrent,
    the crag." . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
4.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  a ca camachaloa, ca tentlapani in tlalteuctli: auh
    ca hualmomana in cuauhxicalli, in cuappiaztli in tlapotonilli in
    anemiuhqui: .  for tlaltecutli openeth his mouth, parteth his
    lips, and there appear the eagle vessel, the reed tube, the ritual
    feathering, the incomparable. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.1
    c.3 p.11)
5.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  o ye tlacauhqui in moyollotzin, in monacayotzin:
    ca nican nicana, nican niccui in anemiuhqui in tlazotli in
    chalchiuhtic, in teoxiuhtic: in nayotl in tayotl in atemaconi, in
    ateilhuiloni in nelpilli: .  already thou hast inclined thy heart,
    thy body; for here i take, I grasp, the incomparable, the
    precious; that which is like a precious green stone, that which is
    like a precious turquoise; the [words of] motherhood, of
    fatherhood; that which cannot be given, cannot be repeated; that
    which is bound. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.12 p.61)
6.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tle ticmomachiltia, a ca nican ticmoquixtilia, in
    cententli, in cencamatl in anemiuhqui in a cacauhtihui, in ipan
    molpilitihui in amotechiuhcahuan: in ye nachca ommantihui in
    nayotl, in tayotl, in tlazotic, in chalchiuhtic in teoxiuhtic, in
    maquiztic. .  "be welcomed, for here thou hast brought forth a
    word or two, the incomparable [words] which your progenitors,
    those who have gone on to remain beyond, who went having
    treasured, who went having cherished the motherhood, the
    fatherhood, the precious, that which was like a precious green
    stone, like a precious turquoise, like a bracelet. . <ah1-ne:m
    v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.13 p.63)
7.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  auh inin, in ticmoquixtilia in anemiuhqui in
    tlazotli, in cuihuani, in pialoni, in neyollotiloni in ihiyotl, in
    tlatolli: ahzo cana contlazaz, ahzo compoloz, ahzo conilcahuaz: .
    and this which thou hast brought forth, the incomparable, the
    precious--that which can be taken, guarded, remembered: the
    spirit, the word--perhaps he will cast it away, perhaps destroy
    it, perhaps forget it. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.5 c.13
    p.63)
8.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  in mitznotza, in mitztzatzilia, inomatca in
    mitzmaca, in mixpan quitlalia, in mixpan quichayahua in
    chalchiuhtli, in teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui, in atemaconi, in
    ateilhuiloni: in ipan molpilitoque in toteucyohuan in teteuctin,
    in tlatoque, in apixque, in tepepixque: in yehhuantin inca mani
    tlalli, .  he speaketh to thee, crieth out to thee, personally
    giveth thee, placeth before thee, scattereth before thee the
    precious green stones, the precious turquoise, the incomparable,
    the unofferable, the unsayable which our lords, the lords, the
    rulers, the guardians of the city, those by whom the earth
    existeth, took unto themselves. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7
    c.15 p.79)
9.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  mixpan chayahui in cozcatl, in quetzalli, in
    chalchiuhtli, in teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui. .  before thee are
    scattered the precious necklace, the precious feathers, the
    precious green stones, the precious turquoises, the incomparable
    ones. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.80)
10.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  in nican tictlapoa in toptli, petlacalli in
    mixpan chayahui, in ticcecemmana, in ticmomoyahua in cozcatl, in
    quetzalli, in tlazotli, in maquiztli, in chalchiuhtli, in
    teoxiuhtli, in anemiuhqui in atemaconi in ateilhuiloni, in intop,
    in impetlacal in toteucyohuan, in huel innelpil, in impial. .
    here we open the coffer, the reed chest; before thee are scattered
    what we have spread, what we have strewn about: the precious
    necklace, the precious things; the precious bracelet, the precious
    green stones, the precious turquoises; the incomparable, the
    ungivable, the unsayable, the treasures of our lords, their very
    possessions, their very stores. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7
    c.15 p.81)
11.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  a in mitzmomaquili, in mitic quimaquili in
    toteucyo, in tlazotli, in mahuiztic, in anemiuhqui in
    moxillantzinco, in motozcatlantzinco in cepoatoc, in
    cuelpachiuhtoc. .  that which our lord gave thee, which he placed
    within thee: the precious, the wonderful, the incomparable, which
    lieth inert, lieth folded in thy lap, within thy breast. . <ah1
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.83)
12.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  auh ca ohuel quicuic, quicac, ca oquimoyolloti,
    ca oquimopialti: auh ca oquimonemilizti in tlazotli, in anemiuhqui
    in oquiz in cententzin, in cencamatzin, in achitzin in mihiyotzin:
    .  and well he took, heard, took to heart, guarded unto himself,
    and put into practise the precious, the incomparable which came
    forth, the word or two, the little of thy spirit. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.84)
13.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tlazotitlacatle, totecue: ca oquiz, ca hualchiton
    ca oquicacque in tlatconi, in tlamamaloni, in tlazotli, in
    mahuiztic in anemiuhqui, in quipialia in quitquilitoque in atl, in
    tepetl. .  "o precious person, o our lord, it hath come forth, it
    hath sparked forth; the governed have heard it -- the precious
    thing, the marvelous thing, the incomparable thing which the city
    guardeth, which [the citizens] take with them." . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.85)
14.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  otoconcuic in anemiuhqui, in atemaconi, in
    ixillantzinco, in itozcatlantzinco cepoatoc, cuelpachiuhtoc: .
    thou hast taken the incomparable, the ungivable, which lieth
    inert, which lieth folded on his lap, in his breast. . <ah1-ne:m
    v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.8 c.19 p.99)
15.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  mac itla namechnolcahualtili: a ca ye nican
    oninonocuiltono, oninotlamachti: ca onoconan in anemiuhqui in
    amonayotzin, in amotayotzin, in cepoatoc, in cuelpachiuhtoc, in
    amoxillantzinco, in amotozcatlantzinco mahuiztic in tlazotli: .
    no little thing have I caused you to forget, for already here I
    have rejoiced exceedingly, have enjoyed pleasure, for I have taken
    your motherhood, your fatherhood, the incomparable in your
    breasts, the wonderful, the precious. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>
    (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.146)
16.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ah nican amoquechtlan, amotozcatlan, amomac
    quimotlalilia in cozcatl, in quetzalli, in anemiuhqui in
    mahuiztic, in tlazotli, in anecohuiloni, in acan ca: .  here on
    your neck, in your bosoms, in your hands he placeth a precious
    necklace, a precious feather, the incomparable, the wonderful, the
    precious, the priceless, the rare. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6
    f.15 c.33 p.181)
17.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  quitoa: oticmihiyohuilti, oticmociahuilti
    nopiltzintzine: ca nican tlacahua in moyollotzin, in monacayotzin:
    ticmocahuilia in monanyotzin, in motayotzin: in
    amechmocahuililitiaque, in amechmomaquilitiaque in huehuetque, in
    ilamatque, in moxillantzinco in motozcatlantzinco in
    cuelpachiuhtoc, ih cepoatoc in anemiuhqui: .  he said: "thou hast
    suffered pain, thou hast endured fatigue, o my son, for here thou
    hast inclined thy heart, thy body; thou hast delivered thy
    motherliness, thy fatherliness which the old men, the old women
    caused to be left to you, caused to be given to you; that which
    lieth folded, that which resteth inert in thy bosom, in thy
    breast: an incomparable thing. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15
    c.35 p.190)
18.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  onican tocohcencuique in anemiuhqui, in
    mahuiztic, in tlazotli, in monayotzin, in motayotzin: .  here we
    have taken all the incomparable, the wonderful, the precious
    [words] of thy motherliness, thy fatherliness. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a
    prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15 c.35 p.191)
19.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ohualquiz, ohualchayahuac: otococecemmanque in
    anemiuhqui, in mitictzinco caqui, quitlali in toteucyo, in
    mitzmoyollotili: .  the incomparable hath come forth, hath spread
    out; we have scattered it about; that which our lord hath
    inserted, that which he hath placed within thee, that with which
    he hath inspired thee. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.15 c.35
    p.191)
20.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  tichualmomapiquilitia in anemiuhqui, in
    tlazoquizqui: in acan ca iceyo, ih cenquiztica chalchihuitl,
    teoxihuitl, inic motlatlatlauhtitzinoa in toteucyohuan in
    teteuctin, in tlatoque: inic ica, in ipampa ih ce cozcatl, ih ce
    quetzalli in oquimomacahuili in toteucyo: .  thou clutchest in thy
    hand the incomparable, the perfectly formed [words, like] the
    unshadowed, the perfect precious green stone, the precious
    turquoise with which are entreated our lords, the lords, the
    rulers, in behalf of, as a result of, a precious necklace, a
    precious feather which our lord hath given. . <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1
    c2> (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.192)
21.  *ahnemiuhqui*.  ca omitzommomaquilique in anemiuhqui in tlazotic,
    in maquiztic, in chalchiuhtic in cuecueyoca: auh in iuhqui in
    quetzalli in xopalehuac, in patlahuac, in huel yaque, in
    inxillantzinco, in intozcatlantzinco, in cepoatoc, in
    cuelpachiuhtoc. .  they have given thee the incomparable [words],
    like precious things, like bracelets, like precious green stones,
    resplendent like precious feathers, deep green, wide, perfect,
    which lie inert, lie folded in their bosoms, in their laps. . <ah1
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.216)
22.  *ammonentlamachitia*.  in nican hualquiza in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin inic ica, inic ipampa, ammonentlamachitia, in
    amocozqui, in amoquetzal, .  here your breath, your words come
    forth [telling] how because of, for the sake of your jewel, your
    precious feather, you are in torment. . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati
    caus03 H3 +t>ch> (b.3 f.4 c.ap7 p.62)
23.  *ammonentlamachitia*.  auh mazo namantecatl, cuix nehhuatl itlan
    naquiz in ichimal, in itehuehuel, in nochpochtzin, in noxocoyouh,
    in nican ommehuiltitica: in ica ammonentlamachitia: .  and
    although I am a skillful practitioner, will I perchance be
    diligent in the matter of the shield, the small shield of my
    daughter, of my youngest daughter, who is here seated, for whom ye
    suffer affliction? . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati-caus03 H3 +t>ch> (b.6
    f.13 c.27 p.154)
24.  *amonentlamachitia*.  oannechmocnelilique, otlacauhqui in
    amoyollotzin, in noca ammotequipachihuitia, in noca in
    amonentlamachitia: .  in my behalf ye have suffered anguish, in my
    behalf ye have suffered affliction. . <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-mati
    caus03 +t>ch> (b.6 f.11 c.23 p.127)
25.  *annentlamati*.  ca noconana, ca noconcui in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin: auh in amochoquiz, in amotlaocol, inic ica anchoca,
    antlaocoya, inic ica annentlamati in amocozqui, in amoquetzal in
    cihuatzintli, in at amotlacoyehuauh, in at amotiacapan, in at nozo
    amoxocoyouh. .  verily I grasp, I accept your spirit, your words,
    and your weeping, your compassion with which ye weep, ye feel
    compassion; with which ye are anguished for the sake of your
    precious necklace, your precious feather, the little woman who is
    perhaps your second child, perhaps your eldest, or perhaps your
    youngest. . <p22-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.6 f.13 c.27 p.153)
26.  *hualnenenquizan*.  zan hualnenenquizan tlalticpac: .  he was
    quite purposeless on earth. . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za--> (b.4 f.3
    c.6 p.21)
27.  *hualnenenquizaya*.  zan hualnenenquizaya, motquitica
    netoliniliztli, in ilhuil, in imahcehual, inemac, .  he labored
    only in vain; his fate, deserts, and gifts were full of misery. .
    <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-ya3> (b.4 f.5 c.13 p.48)
28.  *inencauhyan*.  ca inencauhyan ticmochihuilia tlacatle totecue. .
    for thou, o master, o our lord, makest it his place of desolation.
    . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.2 c.5 p.23)
29.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan ticmochihuiliz: .  wilt thou
    make it his place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.2 c.5 p.23)
30.  *inencauhyan*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia
    in titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n>
    (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
31.  *inencauhyan*.  a mach oc quihualmati in imauh in intepeuh, in ye
    cactimani, in ye yohuatimani in ye inencauhyan quimochihuilia
    toteucyo: .  "do they still know of their city, which already
    lieth abandoned, which already lieth darkened, which our lord hath
    already made his place of desolation?" . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09
    prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.47)
32.  *inencauhyan*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in
    ye inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
33.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan momantiquizaz: .  will it
    perhaps result as a place of desolation? . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.81)
34.  *inencauhyan*.  cuix inencauhyan momantiquizaz in atl, in tepetl:
    .  will the city perhaps result as a place of desolation? . <poss
    ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.82)
35.  *inencauhyan*.  ahzo iuh quimonequiltiz: at cauhtimaniz, at
    yohuatimaniz in atl, in tepetl: at inencauhyan quimochihuiliz in
    toteucyo. .  perhaps he will so determine that the city will
    remain desolate, will remain in darkness; perhaps our lord will
    cause it to become his place of abandonment. . <poss-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-prt1-ya:n> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.184)
36.  *inentlamachiliz*.  tlacatle, toteucyoe, tloquehe nahuaquehe,
    manozo xicmocuili, ma xicmocaquiti, in inentlamachiliz in
    macehualli. .  master, our lord of the near, the nigh, receive,
    hear the torment of this lowly one. . <poss-ne:m-p51-mati-liz
    +t>ch> (b.1 f.1 c.12 p.25)
37.  *inentlamachiliz*.  in tlatoani oc cenca quimocuitlahuiaya in
    tetlatzontequililiztli, quicaquia in ixquich in ineteilhuil: ihuan
    in ichoquiz, in inentlamachiliz in inetoliniliz in cuitlapilli,
    atlapalli in icnotlacatl, in motolinia in macehualli: .  the ruler
    watched especially over the trials; he heard all the accusations
    and the complaints, the afflictions, and the misery of the common
    folk, the orphans, the poor, and the vassals. . <poss-ne:m-p51
    mati-liz +t>ch> (b.8 f.3 c.17 p.54)
38.  *m[o]ixnempehualtia*.  zan mixnempehualtia, moyolcapehualtia in
    mocuicui, za mixhuia, moyolhuia, inic ipan quizaz, in zazo tlein
    mochihuaz, in ahzo cuextecatl, ahzo tohueyo, yacahuicole,
    yacacoyonqui, ixtlan mihua, motlaquicuilo itzcohuatica: .  [if] a
    good likeness, an animal, was started, [the core] was carved to
    correspond to the likeness, the form in nature [that] it imitated,
    so that from it would issue [in metal] whatsoever it was desired
    to make -- perhaps a huaxtec, perhaps a stranger, one with a
    pierced, perforated nose, an arrow across the face, painted
    [tattooed] upon the body with obsidian serpents. . <p54-i:xtli
    ne:m-pe:hua-caus01 +prob> (b.9 f.6 c.16 p.73)
39.  *monencahua*.  hatle quiyolitlacoa, tlatepotzcahua, tlaxiccahua,
    tlaquelmati, monencahua tlaquelyecoa .  he is unfeeling,
    neglectful of duty, untrustworthy; a shirker, a loafer, a sullen
    worker. . <p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.1)
40.  *monenencoa*.  zan nenia motlatlamota, monenencoa, mocuauhtlaza .
    to no purpose did he struggle; in vain did he travail. . <p54-dupl
    ne:m-coa> (b.4 f.1 c.2 p.8)
41.  *monenencoa*.  zan monenencoa. .  he only frustrated himself. .
    <p54-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
42.  *monentlamatia*.  quitoznequi: ac ahzo can tle huel ommochihuaz,
    ac ahzo can tle ommaquitiz in motiamic, in mocnopillo, in
    monentlamatia, .  that is to say, perchance it will not prosper;
    perhaps thy stock of goods, thy just deserts, thy dealings, will
    not result well. . <--ne:m-p51-mati--> (b.4 f.7 c.17 p.63)
43.  *motenemmaca*.  amo zan motenemmaca, amo zan teixpanhuetzi, in
    necuiltonolli, in netlamachtilli, in netlacamatiliztli, in
    netlacamachiliztli. .  to no purpose did he give or publicly
    display wealth and prosperity, and the joys and comforts of
    wealth. . <p54-p52-ne:m-maca> (b.4 f.6 c.16 p.57)
44.  *motlanemiuhyantililia*.  ca motlanemiuhyantililia in toteucyo:
    ca motlapilquixtilia. .  for our lord reduceth [one], maketh [one]
    as a child. . <p54-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-ben H1>
    (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.191)
45.  *nemihquitqui*.  quiquiti, in itichicoyo in yollo, in
    totolitipetlayo, in cacamoliuhqui, in ilacatziuhqui, in neniuhqui,
    in nemiquitqui, in ichpetztli, in ichtilmatli, in ce ichtli, in
    ayatl, in nopalayatl, in zanitli: .  they wove the diagonal
    central motive, the turkey with mat-designed interior, the violet
    colored, the cape of twisted weave, the good-for-nothing, the
    useless weave, the glossy maguey weave; the maguey fiber cape, the
    one of single maguey threads, the netlike cape, the netlike nopal
    cape, the netlike shift. . <ne:m-ihquiti-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.11 c.29
    p.180)
46.  *nemiuhqui*.  yehhuan huel quihuelnextiaya, quiyectlaliaya in
    tlazoihhuitl, inic tlatoltecatia, in ixquich in mahuizzochimalli
    in tlatoque intenemac catca: atle nemiuhqui mochi tlazoihhuitica
    tlapepecholli, tlatzacualli (toztica, tzinitzcantica
    tlatzacualli,) xiuhtototica huitzitziltica, tlauhquecholtica
    teocuitlatica icuilihhuic, icuiliuhqui, tlatlacuilolli,
    toztenoloyo, tentlapilollo, tlapiloltica tenchayahuac,
    cuammoloctica, quetzalpoztectica, zacuantica tlauhquecholtica
    yacachapollo in tlapilolli: .  they displayed well, they made
    attractive, the precious feathers, thereby preparing artistically
    all the splendid shields which were the gifts of the rulers;
    nothing common; all covered, pasted over, with precious feathers;
    [pasted with yellow parrot feathers, with trogonorus feathers];
    painted, decorated, designed with those of the blue cotinga, the
    hummingbird, the red spoonbill; with gold; tufted with parrot
    feathers on the border; rimmed with hanging ornaments; with
    pendants radiating from the [lower] rim; with eagle down, with
    quetzal feathers, with those of the troupial, with those of the
    red spoonbill; with grasshopper figures on the ends of the
    pendants. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2> (b.9 f.7 c.19 p.89)
47.  *nemiuhyan*.  za cahcactoc, za nemiuhyan: .  all was bare and
    laid waste. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
48.  *nemiuhyan*.  in nemiuhyan, zan tlallan caquia in itzontecon,
    iuhquin tlatetecuitztica tlallan, .  in desolate places it only
    puts its head into the ground; there is as it were a kicking din
    underground. . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.10 c.5 p.92)
49.  *nemiuhyan*.  nemiuhyan. .  it is a desolate place. . <ne:m-v03a
    prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.112)
50.  *nemmanian*.  auh in ihcuac nemmanian, in amo ilhuitl, zan no
    yehhuatl in iczotilmaxixipetztli in quimolpiliaya, zan
    quinamictihuia in innetlalpilil: ipampa in cenca mimatia pipilti,
    cenca tlanemiliani catca. .  but in between, when it was not a
    feast day, they tied on only the finely woven yucca fiber capes,
    but they went on using the same method of tying, because the
    noblemen were very circumspect and punctilious. . <ne:m-mani-prt1
    ya:n +del.n> (b.9 f.1 c.2 p.7)
51.  *nemmaya*.  auh in zan nemmaya, in amo ilhuitl: in quimolpiliaya
    tilmatli, in pochtecatlatoque in tealtiani: auh in nahualoztomeca,
    in tecoanime, zan yehhuatl in iczotilmaxixipetztli, .  but when it
    was only in between, when it was not a feast day, the principal
    merchants, those who bathed slaves, and the disguised vanguard
    merchants, the slave dealers, put on only the finely woven yucca
    fiber cape. . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n> (b.9 f.1 c.2 p.7)
52.  *nemmayan*.  auh in icuac amo ilhuiuh, in zan nemmayan: oc no ce
    quixiptlayotiaya, quichichihuaya: .  and when it was not his feast
    day, in the intervening time, still another represented him; they
    arrayed him. . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n> (b.1 f.2 c.20 p.45)
53.  *nemon*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon, nentlacatl,
    nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-o:n--> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
54.  *nemontemi*.  auh in onquiz i, cempoalli izcalli, niman ye ic
    hualmotlalia in macuililhuitl in nemotemi, anozo nenontemi, .  and
    when the twenty [days] of izcalli had passed, thereupon were
    established the five days of nemontemi or nenontemi. . <ne:m-o:n
    temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
55.  *nemontemi*.  auh in nemontemi, huel imacaxoya, mauhcaittoya, .
    and the nemontemi were indeed feared; they were held in awe. .
    <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
56.  *nemontemi*.  niman hualmotlalia, hualmotema in nemontemi:
    macuililhuitl in aoctle itoca tonalli, in aocmo ompohui, in aocmo
    ompouhqui .  then were established, were set in the nemontemi,
    five days for which there were no day-names, which no longer
    belonged, which were no longer counted. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.2
    f.11 c.38 p.171)
57.  *nemontemi*.  ca temauhti in ipan opeuh ilhuitl nemontemi: .  for
    the time when the days of nemontemi began terrified one. . <ne:m
    o:n-temi> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.172)
58.  *nemontemi*.  niman ihcuac hualmotlalia macuililhuitl motenehua
    nemontemi: .  then at that time were set in five days called
    nemontemi. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.12 f.5 c.27 p.80)
59.  *nemontemi*.  nican in mochihua in nemontemi, macuililhuitl. .
    here happened the nemontemi: five days. . <ne:m-o:n-temi> (b.12
    f.5 c.28 p.81)
60.  *nempanca*.  tel zan nempanca in ommotlalica, in oncan oc nen
    quitlalmomoztica: .  quite in vain was what had been set up; in
    vain had they made the earthen platform there. . <ne:m-pan-->
    (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.33)
61.  *nempehua*.  ihuan in aquin zan quipiqui, zan nempehua in
    matzicolihui, in tennecuilihui, in matzicolihui, icxiquicuecuetza:
    coni, .  and one who is sluggish, [who] starts in vain, whose arms
    become paralyzed, whose mouth becomes twisted, whose arms become
    paralyzed, [whose] legs wobble -- he drinks it. . <ne:m-pe:hua>
    (b.11 f.17 c.7 p.175)
62.  *nempolihui*.  atle nenquiza, atle nempolihui, .  nothing failed;
    nothing perished in vain. . <ne:m-polihui> (b.4 f.3 c.6 p.21)
63.  *nempolihui*.  auh in cihuatl, in mitoa oitlacauh icihuayo: in
    omocuep, momalacachiuh, in oncan motlalia in xinachtli, in zan
    nempolihui xinachtli. .  and [it is required by] the woman who, it
    is said, has damaged her vagina; when it is turned, twisted, there
    where the semen is placed; where the semen is just wasted. . <ne:m
    polihui> (b.11 f.18 c.7 p.185)
64.  *nempolihui*.  nenquiza, nempolihui, .  it is worked in vain; it
    fails. . <ne:m-polihui> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
65.  *nempoliuhqui*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <ne:m-polihui-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
66.  *nempoliuhtimani*.  nenquiztimani, nempoliuhtimani, .  it lies
    worthless, wasting. . <ne:m-polihui-prt1-ti1-mani aux04> (b.11
    f.25 c.12 p.263)
67.  *nempolollani*.  tetetemachia, amo nempolollani, .  he defrauds
    one; he claims not to spoil things. . <ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1-->
    (b.10 f.2 c.10 p.35)
68.  *nempotla*.  in amo cualli tlahquilqui xoxolotl, nempotla, .  the
    bad mason [is] feeble, stupid. . <ne:m-potla> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
69.  *nen*.  za aca, ahzo ce, ahzo ome, in oc nen tematitlampa quiza,
    yehuatl quihualnonotzaya in moteuczoma: ic oncan quimaca,
    caquilia, iapozonaltenteuh, .  [but if] anyone -- perhaps one,
    perhaps two -- escaped from enemy hands, he went to inform
    moctezuma, wherefore he then gave him, he let him insert his amber
    lip plug. . <ne:m> (b.1 f.2 c.19 p.42)
70.  *nen*.  amo zan nen ca oquimmotelchihuili in dios icel teotl: .
    not without cause doth god, the only god, abominate them. . <ne:m>
    (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.60)
71.  *nen*.  miec tlamantli inic quimahuiztiliaya, in zan nen, in zan
    innetlapololtilizpan. .  with many such acts they honored her; it
    was in vain, it was only their confusion. . <ne:m> (b.1 f.5 c.Ap
    p.71)
72.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualquizaya, amo zan nen cahualoya, .  not
    for nothing did he come out; not for nothing was he let free. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.1 c.21 p.50)
73.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualquizaya, amo zan nen cahualoya, .  not
    for nothing did he come out; not for nothing was he let free. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.1 c.21 p.50)
74.  *nen*.  tle nen totlaihiyohuiliz .  to what avail is our misery?
    . <ne:m> (b.2 f.5 c.27 p.98)
75.  *nen*.  auh ayac zan nen mocalhuiaya, can yehhuantin in imel, in
    tlaceliani, in tlamocuitlahuiani, in cochizani, in amo
    tlatlacanequini in imel. .  and no one just idly ate the maize
    toasted on the embers; only those who were diligent, acceptable,
    careful, wakeful, who trusted not [too much] their [own]
    diligence. . <ne:m> (b.2 f.7 c.31 p.127)
76.  *nen*.  in nen quintlamaca; .  these in vain offered them food. .
    <ne:m> (b.2 f.8 c.34 p.143)
77.  *nen*.  oc nen quihualoiuhtihuia oc nen quihualoyohuiaya,
    hualmochimalhuitectihuia, .  yet in vain they went crying out at
    him, yet in vain they cried out against him, yet in vain they went
    striking their shields. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.1 c.1 p.4)
78.  *nen*.  oc nen quihualoiuhtihuia oc nen quihualoyohuiaya,
    hualmochimalhuitectihuia, .  yet in vain they went crying out at
    him, yet in vain they cried out against him, yet in vain they went
    striking their shields. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.1 c.1 p.4)
79.  *nen*.  intla za nen quemman necia ahzo octli qui, ahzo
    cihuanotza, in anozo itla huei quichihua, niman quitzauctihuia, .
    if at times it appeared that one perhaps drank pulque, perhaps was
    given to women or committed a great [fault], then they went to
    apprehend him. . <ne:m> (b.3 f.4 c.ap8 p.66)
80.  *nen*.  zan nen huetzi in itlapalihuiz. .  unfortunate were his
    efforts. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.1 c.2 p.8)
81.  *nen*.  nelli mach in ixquich cahana, in imolicpi, itetepon,
    itlancua ic moquequetza, zan atleti, zan nen huetzi in iciahuiz,
    in itlapalihuiz .  indeed, in all the things which he undertook,
    though he went on elbow, shank, and knee, vain and fruitless were
    his efforts and fatigue. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
82.  *nen*.  zan no yeh coninailia, conicuanilia, tel amo zan nen
    ihcuac in ye atlamati, in ye cuecuenoti in aoc tle ipan tlatta,
    commixcahualtia, in imahcehual, ocatca, .  yet it was not without
    reason; when [the man] became vain and haughty, he disregarded and
    neglected what was his birthright. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
83.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen, ic mopatiznequi, ic mopayahualochtiznequi,
    inic amo miquiz, oc motlayecoltia, motonalanaznequi,
    motonallaliliznequi, oc nen itla quimocuicuicachihua,
    quimotlatlanehuia, ahzo atl, ahzo tletl, ahzo caxitl, in
    commotlanehuia ichan in oquipoloto, in ompa ocacique: .  and if in
    vain he tried to remedy, or, indirectly, to palliate [the
    situation], so that he might not die, still seeking to follow his
    work and control and establish his fate, in vain he contrived to
    take or borrow something -- perchance water or fire, or a bowl,
    which he borrowed from the house of the one he had gone forth to
    destroy, who had there seized him. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.11 p.43)
84.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen, ic mopatiznequi, ic mopayahualochtiznequi,
    inic amo miquiz, oc motlayecoltia, motonalanaznequi,
    motonallaliliznequi, oc nen itla quimocuicuicachihua,
    quimotlatlanehuia, ahzo atl, ahzo tletl, ahzo caxitl, in
    commotlanehuia ichan in oquipoloto, in ompa ocacique: .  and if in
    vain he tried to remedy, or, indirectly, to palliate [the
    situation], so that he might not die, still seeking to follow his
    work and control and establish his fate, in vain he contrived to
    take or borrow something -- perchance water or fire, or a bowl,
    which he borrowed from the house of the one he had gone forth to
    destroy, who had there seized him. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.11 p.43)
85.  *nen*.  ca ompa oc nen titlatemachia, .  for at this time, it was
    still vain to do it. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.13 p.50)
86.  *nen*.  intla nemiz, ahzo za nen itla imahcehualtitiuh, ca itla
    macehualiztica quimocuepililitiuh in itonal: .  if he were to
    live, it was not hopeless; something would become his lot; with
    his penance he would reverse his day sign. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.5 c.13
    p.50)
87.  *nen*.  auh in nen ic quicualtiaya, quicualtiliaya tonalpouhque,
    in iuhqui itonal ipan otlacat, .  and the readers of the day signs
    bettered and remedied the nature of the day sign on which the
    useless one was born. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.6 c.13 p.51)
88.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen ic quicualtiliaya tonalpouhque: .  but for
    him who yet lived, the readers of the day signs made it good. .
    <ne:m> (b.4 f.6 c.15 p.57)
89.  *nen*.  zan nen quipiqui, zan nempanca in motlanitoa, .  in vain
    he practised deceit; to no purpose he wagered. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.9
    c.27 p.94)
90.  *nen*.  auh inic amo za nen totlatlatozque: titlatolzacamozque, .
    and so we shall not repeat uselessly nor reopen the discussion. .
    <ne:m> (b.4 f.9 c.28 p.96)
91.  *nen*.  in amo zan tlatolxacualli, tlatolnechicolli, tlatolnenel,
    ilihuiztlatolli, zan nen tlatolli toconnemitizque,
    ticcueptinemizque .  not just mixed, twisted, disordered,
    unconsidered, and profitless discussion shall we make use of or
    continue to work over. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.9 c.28 p.96)
92.  *nen*.  que zan nel oc nen, .  verily, how could it be? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
93.  *nen*.  tle za nel nen, .  truly, of what profit was it? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
94.  *nen*.  tle za nen, .  of what profit was their work? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.10 c.32 p.105)
95.  *nen*.  tle oc nen, .  what was left? . <ne:m> (b.4 f.10 c.32
    p.105)
96.  *nen*.  auh intla za oc nen tlalilo, nempancatlalilo,
    huecauhtica, yehuatica, zan oncan ilcahualo: .  and if one had
    been sitting to no purpose and in vain, [he was] only forgotten
    there for a long time, for a considerable time. . <ne:m> (b.4 f.12
    c.37 p.124)
97.  *nen*.  can nen ommanaz, can ommayahuiz, can ommazohuaz, .  where
    could he save himself, find repose, or extend his arm? . <ne:m>
    (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
98.  *nen*.  ipampa in za nica toconcemitotiquiza, inic amo za nen
    tictequipachozque tetlacaquiliz, titenacaztititzazque, za ilihuiz
    tlatoltica titetzontetilizque, titotzontetilizque,
    titzontetiezque, .  wherefore here we quickly come to agreement so
    that we shall not afflict one's ears without need, or trouble them
    with useless talk; nor be repulsive, opinionated, and headstrong.
    . <ne:m> (b.4 f.12 c.39 p.129)
99.  *nen*.  ca izca, za oc nen ic nimitzpantia, nimitzteteuhtia, ic
    nimitzpatia, ic nimitzpayahualochtia: .  for take care [lest] in
    vain I deck thee with flags and paper streamers, cure thee, and
    surround thee with medicines. . <ne:m> (b.5 f.1 c.1 p.152)
100.  *nen*.  ayocmo ihuiyan, in oc nen achi quitoca tlalli: .  no
    longer with calm, but vainly, did they a little way follow the
    land; . <ne:m> (b.5 f.1 c.2 p.155)
101.  *nen*.  campa zan ye nel nen onhuiloaz, .  where indeed is there
    to go, in vain? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.1 c.1 p.4)
102.  *nen*.  auh yequene manozo xicmonequilti, ma teixco nen in
    tlalticpac: .  and, furthermore, ordain that he belittle no one on
    earth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.2 c.4 p.19)
103.  *nen*.  auh in axcan tlacatle, totecue, tloquee, nahuaquee:
    manozo omitzmoteopohuili, manozo omixtzinco, mocpactzinco nen in
    macehualli: cuix ilotiz, cuix cuepiz in motlahueltzin, in
    mocualantzin: .  "and now, o master, o our lord, o lord of the
    near, of the nigh, as the commoner hath troubled thee, as he hath
    offended thee, will perhaps thy fury, thy anger, be placated, be
    turned?" . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
104.  *nen*.  ha ca choca, ca tlaocoya, ca iyollo concua in commati,
    inic omitzmoyolitlacalhui, inic omixtzinco, mocpactzinco nen, .
    he weepeth, he sorroweth, he eateth out his heart when he
    acknowledgeth how he hath offended thee, how he hath wronged thee.
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.30)
105.  *nen*.  oc nen xommimattinemi. .  be ever cautious. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.33)
106.  *nen*.  auh in yolqui in ixochcohcoyohuan tloque nahuaque, za
    tlayayauh, za netotopanehualo, za nen in tlaixpapalolo tlalli: auh
    ye tla acuecuenocihui, atica .  and the animals, the four-footed
    ones of the lord of the near, of the nigh, just go here and there;
    they can scarcely rise; to no purpose is the ground licked; and
    they go crazed for water. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.8 p.36)
107.  *nen*.  quen nen: .  in what manner [would it be] to no purpose?
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.3 c.8 p.37)
108.  *nen*.  quen nen, quen nicnochihuiliz, .  to what purpose, in
    what manner shall I deal with the governed? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.4 c.9
    p.43)
109.  *nen*.  mach nen nozo tlahuanqui aoc quimati, in quitoa, in
    quitenehua: .  "they say also that to no purpose is the drunkard;
    no longer doth he know what he sayeth, what he divulgeth." .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.6 c.14 p.69)
110.  *nen*.  ahzo nen nohuic tihuallachiaz, .  "perhaps in vain thou
    wilt look, to me." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.6 c.14 p.72)
111.  *nen*.  quen zan nel oc nen? .  what can be done? is it yet in
    vain? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.7 c.16 p.84)
112.  *nen*.  ca nen tepaltzinco oammotlacatilique, .  to what purpose
    were ye born by one's grace? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.90)
113.  *nen*.  ma nen chico ticquetz in mocxi: .  let thy feet go not
    astray. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.91)
114.  *nen*.  auh ic titlazotiz, intla za nen ahneyocol, cana
    mitzmopohuili toteucyo: .  and thus thou wilt be loved, even if it
    is doubtful, undetermined where our lord assigneth thee. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.96)
115.  *nen*.  iz a za nen o, ahneyol, ayoc tlacatencopa, .  perhaps
    there will happen that which is not conceivable, that which is not
    expressible. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
116.  *nen*.  amo cenca nen tepaltzinco timotitimalotiez,
    timixpatlauhtiez, tahatlamattiez: .  to a purpose thou wilt
    glorify thyself by one's grace, thou wilt esteem  thyself, thou
    wilt be proud. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
117.  *nen*.  intla timonemitiz, intla achi tictocaz tlalticpac: ma
    nen cana ic ticniuhti in monacayotzin noxocoyouh conetzin,
    cocotzin, tepitzin, .  if thou art to live, if thou art to
    continue a little on earth, do not anywhere be friendly by means
    of thy body, my youngest one, child, dove, little one. . <ne:m>
    (b.6 f.9 c.19 p.102)
118.  *nen*.  auh nizca huel xiccaqui, huel xicpia, huel
    motepitznahuatil. intla ye cana tepaltzinco timoetztica: ma nen
    itla mitic tiquito, ma nen itla mitic ticyocox: .  and heed it
    well, guard it well as thy stern commandment: if somewhere thou
    art dependent upon one, see to it that thou do not presume in
    something, see to it that thou be not haughty. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9
    c.19 p.102)
119.  *nen*.  auh nizca huel xiccaqui, huel xicpia, huel
    motepitznahuatil. intla ye cana tepaltzinco timoetztica: ma nen
    itla mitic tiquito, ma nen itla mitic ticyocox: .  and heed it
    well, guard it well as thy stern commandment: if somewhere thou
    art dependent upon one, see to it that thou do not presume in
    something, see to it that thou be not haughty. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9
    c.19 p.102)
120.  *nen*.  ma oc ticahahuillacanec in moyollo, ma oc nen canapa
    itzcaliuh: .  let thyself not have allowed thy heart the evil of
    directing itself elsewhere. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.9 c.19 p.102)
121.  *nen*.  ma nen ica, ma nen queman ipan tia, in iuh mitoa
    tlatolli: ma tictlaxin. .  never at any time, never ever betray
    him; as the saying is said, do not commit adultery. . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.19 p.102)
122.  *nen*.  ma nen ica, ma nen queman ipan tia, in iuh mitoa
    tlatolli: ma tictlaxin. .  never at any time, never ever betray
    him; as the saying is said, do not commit adultery. . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.19 p.102)
123.  *nen*.  at za nen o, itla huel timahailiz: .  perhaps it is to
    no purpose that thou wilt be able to do something? . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.9 c.20 p.110)
124.  *nen*.  amo zan nen o, nopiltze in cuezcomatl iixpan toco
    coconetzitzinti, in pipiltzitzinti: ca yehhuatl quinezcayotia in
    cualcan in yeccan hui: in ipampa in oc chalchiuhti, in oc
    maquizti, in oc huel motquiticate teoxiuhti. .  "it is not in
    vain, o my son, that children, babies are buried in front of the
    maize bin, for this signifieth that they go to a good place, a
    fine place, because they are still as precious green stones, still
    as precious bracelets; still pure, they become as precious
    turquoises." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.21 p.116)
125.  *nen*.  ach anozo nen mochihua tipaqui timomati, in
    ticmotequimaca in paquiztli: ca ye timomictia, ca timohuitilia: .
    perhaps otherwise to no avail it cometh to pass that thou thinkest
    to find pleasure when thou givest thyself excessively to pleasure,
    for already thou killest thyself, thou endangerest thyself. .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.21 p.117)
126.  *nen*.  cenca tle ticmati, cenca moyolic: ma nen tommixcueyoni.
    .  take good heed, take care; see to it that thine eyes are open.
    . <ne:m> (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.123)
127.  *nen*.  a ca nelle axcan aiuhtlancayotl, popoloni, tzatzacui:
    aitlaliloyan nen tiuhque cententli, cencamatl toconquixtia in
    amixpantzinco: amonacazpantzinco toconehua. .  now, verily,
    unfinished stuttering, stammering, unsettled, useless are the word
    or two which we deliver in your presence, which we intone to your
    ears. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.136)
128.  *nen*.  aquin oc nen tlamahuizoani: .  who will be the one who
    marveleth? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.137)
129.  *nen*.  auh in axcan: za nen tiuhque, za nen tehhuan
    aiuhtlancayotl, aiuhquizqui popolonqui, tzatzacqui, aitlaliloya,
    aitenquixtiloyan: ic toconcuepa, toconilochia, in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin. .  but now, thus are we useless; useless are we;
    unfinished, incomplete, stuttering, stammering, unsettled,
    unpronounced is that with which we return, with which we respond
    to your discourse. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
130.  *nen*.  auh in axcan: za nen tiuhque, za nen tehhuan
    aiuhtlancayotl, aiuhquizqui popolonqui, tzatzacqui, aitlaliloya,
    aitenquixtiloyan: ic toconcuepa, toconilochia, in amihiyotzin, in
    amotlatoltzin. .  but now, thus are we useless; useless are we;
    unfinished, incomplete, stuttering, stammering, unsettled,
    unpronounced is that with which we return, with which we respond
    to your discourse. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
131.  *nen*.  intla za nen itla tomacehual, intla tlalticpac quizaqui,
    in itlachihualtzin toteucyo: auh huallaelneliuhtiaz: .  if perhaps
    something is our merit, if the creation of our lord is born, it
    will be covered with filth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.143)
132.  *nen*.  ma oc nen amotentzin, ic xommoyetztiecan. .  "may you be
    here that your words [not] be in vain." . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25
    p.144)
133.  *nen*.  mace iuhque in, mach ye ommozcalia, aoc nen quipiqui in
    nemi tlalticpac: .  though like these, perhaps they already think
    themselves discreet; they do not yet imagine that to no avail they
    live on earth. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.12 c.25 p.145)
134.  *nen*.  oc ceppa ompa oc nen mochihua .  once again they worked
    there in vain. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.13 c.28 p.160)
135.  *nen*.  a mach nen nozo timomiquili, .  is it possible that thou
    diest without purpose? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.14 c.29 p.164)
136.  *nen*.  quen nen tiquitoani, .  in what manner might we speak? .
    <ne:m> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
137.  *nen*.  nen nehhuatl niccuepa, niquilochia in monayotzin, in
    motayotzin: .  useless am I as I return, as I respond to thy
    motherliness, to thy fatherliness. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.16 c.35 p.191)
138.  *nen*.  ma nen itla tichualnacacitta in mochan, in mocalitic: .
    see to it that thou lookest not longingly to thy home, to
    something within thy house. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.214)
139.  *nen*.  ximocotona, ximozquipilo: ma nen teuhtli, tlazolli
    tiquilnamic, ma tiquelehui: .  punish thyself, humble thyself
    thoroughly; do not think of vice and filth, do not covet [vice and
    filth]. . <ne:m> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.215)
140.  *nen*.  cuix no nen nipatzactzintli. .  am I also perchance a
    useless, withered ear of maize? . <ne:m> (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.226)
141.  *nen*.  ihcuac mitoa: in amo cualli inemiliz intla no teachcauh
    tecoanotza, anozo itla quitemaca: auh no iuh nicchihuaznequi
    nitecoanotzaz, anozo itla nictemacaz: ic mitoa. cuix no
    nipatzactzintli, anozo. cuix no nen nipatzactzintli. .  it is said
    at this time: if one not of means, also if a captain invites one
    to a banquet, or gives him something, and likewise I wish to do
    the same, to invite him to a banquet or to give him something,
    then it is said: "am I also perchance a withered ear of maize?"
    or, "am I also a useless, withered ear of maize?" . <ne:m> (b.6
    f.18 c.41 p.227)
142.  *nen*.  ma mitzhuicacan in toyaohuan intla nen oc ceppa tepal
    xitlama .  let them take thee if, without profit, once more thou
    takest a captive with the aid of others. . <ne:m> (b.8 f.5 c.21
    p.75)
143.  *nen*.  ma nen ye no cuel tepal titlama za inca .  take care
    lest thou again take a captive with others' help. . <ne:m> (b.8
    f.5 c.21 p.75)
144.  *nen*.  amo zan nen hualhuia: .  not purposelessly did they
    come. . <ne:m> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.31)
145.  *nen*.  auh intla icuitlapan icac in xochitl, icuitlapampa
    ommotlatlaza in tletlemaitl: auh intla za nen opanhuetz coxonqui
    ommopachoa. .  and if the hemorrhoids are in the rectum, [an
    infusion of] tletlemaitl is cast in the rectum; but if they appear
    only on the surface, they are covered with the pulverized [herb].
    . <ne:m> (b.10 f.9 c.28 p.156)
146.  *nen*.  auh in aquin aocmo quimati, inin patli, inezca ca ye
    ixquich, ca zan nen monoltitoc, in cocoxqui. .  and to him whom
    this medicine no longer cures, it is an indication that this is
    the end, that the patient is confined to bed to no avail. . <ne:m>
    (b.10 f.9 c.28 p.159)
147.  *nen*.  ic macuilli in quic, ic huel ihuintic, huel xocomic,
    aocmo quima in quenin nen: .  thus he drank five, with which he
    became well besotted, quite drunk; he no longer knew how he acted.
    . <ne:m> (b.10 f.12 c.29 p.193)
148.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen ipahyo in ipalehuiloca motlanoquilitinemi
    .  and since his medicating, his remedying, is yet in vain, he
    continually purges himself. . <ne:m> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.216)
149.  *nen*.  auh in oiuh quittaque in, in oiuh quicacque itlatol, oc
    nen itlan aqui, in quimocnotlatlauhtilia, .  and when they had
    thus seen this, when they had thus heard his words, yet to no
    purpose did they pay him attention when they humbly prayed to him.
    . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.33)
150.  *nen*.  tel zan nempanca in ommotlalica, in oncan oc nen
    quitlalmomoztica: .  quite in vain was what had been set up; in
    vain had they made the earthen platform there. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2
    c.13 p.33)
151.  *nen*.  tle zan nen in nican amicatihuitze .  why in vain have
    you come walking here? . <ne:m> (b.12 f.2 c.13 p.34)
152.  *nen*.  quenzannel nen, .  what is to be done, in vain? . <ne:m>
    (b.12 f.3 c.13 p.35)
153.  *nen*.  auh in moteuczoma, oc nen tlanahuatica in
    quitzatzacuazque in otli, in ochpantli, .  and moctezuma yet in
    vain had commanded that the road, the highway, be closed off. .
    <ne:m> (b.12 f.3 c.14 p.35)
154.  *nen*.  auh in aca oc nen motlaloa in icuitlaxcol za quihuilana,
    iuhquin xoxoquiohua in momaquixtiznequi, .  and when in vain one
    would run, he would only drag his intestines like something raw as
    he tried to escape. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4 c.20 p.54)
155.  *nen*.  auh in aquique oc nen xonexcaya, tlamatzoaya,
    motlamacehuiaya, in ichtacatzin commacaya in tlacualtzintli: intla
    oittoque, intla oittaloque, niman oncan quimmictia, oncan
    quintlatlatia, .  and if any in vain should inform, should warn
    [them], should gain [their] favor who secretly might give them a
    little food, if they were seen, if they were espied, right there
    they slew them; there they did away with them. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4
    c.21 p.58)
156.  *nen*.  auh in oc nen momaquixtiznequi, in quintlatlauhtia .
    and he who in vain tried to escape besought them; . <ne:m> (b.12
    f.4 c.21 p.59)
157.  *nen*.  auh atle zan nen quiza in mitl, .  and not to no purpose
    did the bolt fly. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4 c.22 p.62)
158.  *nen*.  auh in tiacahuan oc nen hualmomamanaya in quihuallaza
    cuahuitl, in tomahuac ahuacuahuitl in impan espa?oles: .  but to
    no purpose did the brave warriors mass themselves to cast the
    wood, the thick oak logs, upon the spaniards. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.4
    c.22 p.62)
159.  *nen*.  auh in ye iuhqui in huehuei tiacahuan, oc nen
    quimototoctiticaca in tetlaquetzalli: .  and when this was done,
    the great brave warriors hid themselves in vain behind the stone
    columns. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.6 c.31 p.88)
160.  *nen*.  auh in icpac huitzilobochtli, oc nen tlapiaya, .  and at
    the summit of [the pyramid temple of] uitzilopochtli [the priests]
    watched in vain. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.6 c.31 p.88)
161.  *nen*.  in oc nen motlaloznequi za cuauhcamac actihuetzi, .
    those who would in vain have fled only fell into spaces [among]
    the beams. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38 p.115)
162.  *nen*.  auh in tiyacahuan, oc nen hualmomantihui .  and the
    brave warriors still in vain went holding themselves [against the
    spaniards]. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38 p.116)
163.  *nen*.  auh in tiyacauh tlacateccatl in temilotzin, oc nen
    quimmopachihuiaya, .  and the brave warrior, the tlacateccatl
    temilotzin, was watching them in vain. . <ne:m> (b.12 f.8 c.38
    p.116)
164.  *nen^mehua*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m p54-e:hua> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
165.  *nencihuatl*.  auh intla cihuatl: nencihuatl. .  and if it were
    a woman, she was a profitless woman. . <ne:m-cihua:tl> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
166.  *nencochi*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-cochi> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
167.  *nenempotla*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <dupl-ne:m-potla> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
168.  *nenencolo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <p53-ne:m-coa-lo:2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
169.  *nenenencolo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-lo:2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
170.  *nenenquixtilo*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <dupl-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-lo:2 +z>x> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
171.  *nenhuetzi*.  amo nenhuetzi, amo ahuetzi, in itlapalihuiz, .
    not vain nor futile was his work. . <ne:m-huetzi> (b.4 f.12 c.38
    p.125)
172.  *nenhuetzi*.  ye oncan inin quitta, in amo nenhuetzi, in
    iciahuiz, in inecohcol, .  after this, he witnessed the successful
    results of his fatigue and pains. . <ne:m-huetzi> (b.4 f.12 c.38
    p.128)
173.  *nenhuetzi*.  mitoa: amo nenquiza, amo nenhuetzi, in
    itlaminaliz: .  it was said that the passing of a shooting star
    rose and fell neither without purpose nor in vain. . <ne:m-huetzi>
    (b.7 f.1 c.4 p.13)
174.  *nenhuetziz*.  ihuan mochi neltiz, mochi onyehuatiz, in tlein
    maailia, atle nenquizaz, in iciahuiz, in itlapalihuiz, atle
    nenhuetziz, .  and all would be realized and come to pass that was
    undertaken; nothing would fail; of her fatigue and effort, nothing
    would be in vain. . <ne:m-huetzi-z> (b.4 f.1 c.1 p.2)
175.  *nenia*.  zan nenia motlatlamotla, zan nenia mocuauhtlaza, .  in
    vain did he cast and hurl himself against obstacles. . <ne:m-->
    (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
176.  *nenia*.  zan nenia motlatlamotla, zan nenia mocuauhtlaza, .  in
    vain did he cast and hurl himself against obstacles. . <ne:m-->
    (b.4 f.2 c.6 p.17)
177.  *nennemi*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-nemi> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
178.  *nennemi*.  auh za nel cenca izca ca aocmo tlateomatini, ca
    aocmo chocani, ca aocmo tlaocoyani, ca aocmo elcicihuini: ca nel
    nozo oihuintic, oxocomic ca za nennemi, ca ohuellapolo, ca aocmo
    za niman quimati. .  and it is certainly noteworthy that he is no
    longer devout, no longer a weeper, no longer a sorrower, no longer
    a sigher, because he hath become drunk, hath become besotted, is a
    vagabond, is completely crazed; he no longer understandeth at all.
    . <ne:m-nemi> (b.6 f.2 c.6 p.26)
179.  *nenontemi*.  auh in onquiz i, cempoalli izcalli, niman ye ic
    hualmotlalia in macuililhuitl in nemotemi, anozo nenontemi, .  and
    when the twenty [days] of izcalli had passed, thereupon were
    established the five days of nemontemi or nenontemi. . <ne:m-o:n
    temi> (b.2 f.10 c.37 p.162)
180.  *nenoquich*.  nenoquich. .  he was a profitless man. . <ne:m
    oquichtli-trunc> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
181.  *nenquiza*.  atle nenquiza, atle nempolihui, .  nothing failed;
    nothing perished in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.4 f.3 c.6 p.21)
182.  *nenquiza*.  amo nenquiza in iatlamachiliz, imatlamatiliz: .
    not without result were his pride and presumption. . <ne:m-qui:za>
    (b.4 f.3 c.7 p.24)
183.  *nenquiza*.  auh in nel cenca iuh ommitoa, in iuh ommachizti,
    amo nentecahua, amo nenquiza, teca mahuiltitehua in iuh cochihua,
    necochitilo macehualpan pilcoatoc, oipantoatoc, teiicuania,
    tepapatla, .  and in very truth, so it is said and so it is known,
    they did not leave them having done nothing; nor, with no result,
    did they take their pleasure with them taking advantage of their
    sleep, of the sleep into which the common folk had been thrown, to
    hang on to [the women], line them up, rolling them aside and
    enjoying another's place. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.4 f.10 c.31 p.103)
184.  *nenquiza*.  cuix ye in nenquiza tlapalihuiztli: cuix
    ixquichtzin, atzintli, commopolhuiz in toteucyo .  perhaps already
    in vain was the nubility; our lord will destroy the babe, small as
    it is. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.181)
185.  *nenquiza*.  mitoa: amo nenquiza, amo nenhuetzi, in itlaminaliz:
    .  it was said that the passing of a shooting star rose and fell
    neither without purpose nor in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.7 f.1 c.4
    p.13)
186.  *nenquiza*.  nenquiza, tlanenquixtia .  she works to no avail;
    she squanders. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
187.  *nenquiza*.  nenquiza, nempolihui, .  it is worked in vain; it
    fails. . <ne:m-qui:za> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
188.  *nenquizaliztli*.  yehica ca atle oncan ca ilhuilli,
    mahcehualli, can oncan icnoyotl, netoliniliztli, nenquizcayotl,
    nenquizaliztli, ahonehuatinemiliztli. .  for indeed there was no
    desert there, no merit; there was only misery there, poverty,
    purposelessness, misfortune, a life of woe. . <ne:m-qui:za-liz>
    (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
189.  *nenquizaz*.  ihuan mochi neltiz, mochi onyehuatiz, in tlein
    maailia, atle nenquizaz, in iciahuiz, in itlapalihuiz, atle
    nenhuetziz, .  and all would be realized and come to pass that was
    undertaken; nothing would fail; of her fatigue and effort, nothing
    would be in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.4 f.1 c.1 p.2)
190.  *nenquizaz*.  in tlein maailiz, amo nenquizaz, .  what he might
    do would not fail. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.4 f.6 c.15 p.56)
191.  *nenquizaz*.  ic quinextia, quinezcayotia, ca tlamatiuh in yaoc,
    amo nenquizaz: .  thus these showed and made evident that he went
    skillfully to war, not going forth in vain. . <ne:m-qui:za-z> (b.5
    f.1 c.3 p.158)
192.  *nenquizcayotl*.  yehica ca atle oncan ca ilhuilli, mahcehualli,
    can oncan icnoyotl, netoliniliztli, nenquizcayotl, nenquizaliztli,
    ahonehuatinemiliztli. .  for indeed there was no desert there, no
    merit; there was only misery there, poverty, purposelessness,
    misfortune, a life of woe. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ca:5-yo:tl1> (b.2
    f.11 c.38 p.171)
193.  *nenquizqueh*.  ca zan nentlaca, nenquizque: .  they are only
    vain, worthless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-plur14> (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.55)
194.  *nenquizqui*.  yehica ca zan nenquizqui, oncan nenenquixtilo,
    atle onquixoa, nenencolo, nenenencolo: .  for they were only
    unfortunate; there was no purpose there; nothing came forth; there
    was misfortune. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.171)
195.  *nenquizqui*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him
    nemon, nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.2 f.11
    c.38 p.171)
196.  *nenquizqui*.  in tlahueliloc iyolloco cihuatl, tlacaxolopitli,
    totompotla, nenquizqui, nempoliuhqui, nenempotla, .  the bad
    middle-aged woman [is] foolish, stupid, useless, worthless, dumb.
    . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.10 f.1 c.3 p.12)
197.  *nenquizqui*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  it is thorny,
    worthless, useless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
198.  *nenquizqui*.  in atle imochiuhya, nenquizqui, atle inecoca. .
    it is the growing place of nothing -- useless, productive of
    nothing. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
199.  *nenquiztimani*.  atle ipan itto, nenquiztimani. .  it is
    abandoned; it lies useless. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-mani aux04>
    (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.254)
200.  *nenquiztimani*.  nenquiztimani, nempoliuhtimani, .  it lies
    worthless, wasting. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-mani aux04> (b.11 f.25
    c.12 p.263)
201.  *nenquiztinemi*.  izca in quichihua: ahantinemi, tochantinemi,
    tochtzopinitinemi, tlatochmatlahuitinemi, tlatochacahuitinemi,
    tlatochtapayolhuitinemi, zoltzonhuitinemi, tlatzonhuitinemi,
    tlatlapachihuazoitinemi, tlatlazalhuitinemi, mazamintinemi,
    mazamatlahuitinemi, tlatlahpehualhuitinemi, tlatlachictinemi,
    tlahuantinemi, tlatlapehuitinemi, oncan nenquiztinemi: .  behold
    what they did: they went catching [game], they went catching
    rabbits, spearing rabbits, snaring rabbits in nets, shooting
    rabbits with reed arrows, hunting rabbits with balls; they went
    catching quail with snares; they went catching game with snares,
    catching game with a throw-net, catching game with a lasso; they
    went shooting deer with arrows, catching deer in nets; they went
    setting traps; they went setting dead-falls; they went boring the
    maguey plant, becoming drunk; there they went whiling away their
    time. . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ti1-nemi aux01> (b.10 f.11 c.29 p.179)
202.  *nenti*.  zan onahuilpehua, zan oc pipiltotonti in
    quipehualtiaya in mochichicuayaotlaya, zan iuh nenti hueiya: .
    those who were yet small boys only began in fun when they began
    the mock-fighting with bags; only gradually it quickened. . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.2 f.10 c.36 p.157)
203.  *nenti*.  zan yeh in quimati, ic motequipachoa, quimmattinemi,
    in quemmach nenti onquizaz, contlalcahuiz inetequipachol, .  this
    same one, when he learned of it, became troubled and continued in
    fear that possibly his efforts would fail, pass away, or miscarry.
    . <ne:m-v01a> (b.4 f.11 c.37 p.122)
204.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia in
    titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
205.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti, in ye inencauhyan ticmochihuilia in
    titloque, tinahuaque, quen mach nenti in ye cactimani, in ye
    yohuatimani in matzin, in motepetzin: .  what will result when
    already thou, lord of the near, of the nigh, makest thy city a
    place of desolation? what will result when already it lieth
    abandoned, lieth darkened? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
206.  *nenti*.  auh quen mach nenti in onopan ohualla in teuhtli, in
    tlazolli, .  and what will result when filth, when vice have come
    upon me? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
207.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in onictlazolmicti in atl, in tepetl:
    .  what will result when I have ruined the city? . <ne:m-v01a>
    (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
208.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in oniccochcauh, in onicpaccacauh in
    tlatquitl, in tlamamalli: .  what will result when I depart
    leaving the governed asleep, when I gladly leave them? . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
209.  *nenti*.  quen mach nenti in onicatoyahui, in onictepexihui in
    macehualli. .  what will result when I cast the common folk into
    the torrent; cast them from the crag? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.9
    p.43)
210.  *nenti*.  quen nenti in omopan xitin tlatquitl, tlamamalli: .
    how will it be when in thy time the governed will scatter? . <ne:m
    v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
211.  *nenti*.  quen nenti in oinencauhyan mochiuhtiquiz in atl in
    tepetl: .  how will it be when the city will become, will be made
    his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
212.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in ye
    inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10
    p.50)
213.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in ye yohuatimani, quen nenti in ye
    inencauhian. .  how will it be when it lieth already darkened,
    already his place of desolation? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.4 c.10
    p.50)
214.  *nenti*.  in nelli mach imolicpitzin, itetepontzin ic
    tlaczatinemi, in moca in mopampa, in quen nenti in macuil, in
    matlac in mitzotlatoctiz: auh quen cexiuh, quen oxiuh quen tamio,
    .  truly he goeth on elbow, on knee for thee, on thy behalf, [to
    know] how it will be in the brief time he will lead thee along the
    road, and what thy condition [will be] in one year, in two years;
    . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.7 c.15 p.81)
215.  *nenti*.  intlacatle hueli, quen nenti? .  if [thou art] unable
    in anything, how will it be? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.97)
216.  *nenti*.  quen nenti otitlahuetzquiti, in otlacualoyan .  how
    hath it come about that thou hadst caused laughter at the place of
    eating? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.124)
217.  *nenti*.  oc cenca oc mocenyollocopa in xonelcicihui, quemmach
    nenti in macuil, in matlac: .  especially sigh with all thy might;
    [say]:  how will it be in a few days? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.12 c.25
    p.142)
218.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
219.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
220.  *nenti*.  ahuiz in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in otocommattinenca:
    in quemmach nenti in tlacotiz, in tequitiz in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli: quemmach nenti, ah oic onicatia in iititzin in
    tochpochtzin, in toconetzin: quemmach nenti, oquimohuicalti in
    iititzin, .  and behold, for a night, a day we have been
    preoccupied if possibly ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; if possibly that which was within our daughter, our girl,
    had gone ahead [died]; if possibly she was to accompany that
    within her [to death]. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.14 c.33 p.180)
221.  *nenti*.  ah in anquimococochmachititoque, in quemmach nenti in
    tlacotiz, in tequitiz in tonan in cihuapilli in cihuacoatl, in
    quilaztli, .  without sleep ye have remained awaiting if possibly
    our mother the noble woman ciuacoatl, quilaztli would work, would
    labor; . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
222.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in cacocuiz, in itlan aquiz in
    chimalli, in tehuehuelli, in amochpochtzin, in toconetzin, .  if
    possibly your daughter, our child, would take up, would use the
    shield, the small shield; . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
223.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti in quimoquixtiliz, in quimotlaxiliz in
    ieticauh in tecococauh: ca miquiztequitiz, .  if possibly she
    would give off, would cast out, her heaviness, her pain; for it
    exacteth a tribute of death. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.33 p.180)
224.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti teotl cualo, tlatlatzini otopan
    quihualmonequilti: ozan techommanililico in tlacatl toteucyo, .
    how will it be if the master, our lord, hath willed that upon us
    there be an eclipse, that there be thunder, that he hath only come
    to deprive us? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.186)
225.  *nenti*.  quemmach nenti ochoquiztli, tlaocolli quimotemohuili
    in ipalnemoa. .  how will it be if he by whom we live bringeth
    down weeping, sorrow? . <ne:m-v01a> (b.6 f.15 c.34 p.186)
226.  *nenti*.  in quicuiznequi zan micuanitiuh, ompa quitocatiuh, zan
    iuh nenti, in ahuecatlan caxitia: .  when he wishes to take it, it
    only goes drifting away; he goes to follow it there; little by
    little it makes him reach for it in the depths of the water. .
    <ne:m-v01a> (b.11 f.9 c.5 p.86)
227.  *nenti*.  zan iuh nenti in achichiacpan mochihua, pinahua,
    canahua, iloti. .  gradually this becomes a spring; it is ashamed;
    it lessens; it abates. . <ne:m-v01a> (b.11 f.24 c.12 p.249)
228.  *nentlacah*.  ca zan nentlaca, nenquizque: .  they are only
    vain, worthless. . <ne:m-tla:catl-plur06> (b.1 f.3 c.Ap p.55)
229.  *nentlacatl*.  auh intla oquichtli quitocayotiaya nemon,
    nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  and if it were a man, they named him
    nemon, nentlacatl, nenquizqui. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.2 f.11 c.38
    p.171)
230.  *nentlacatl*.  zan nentlacatl, acan petzitl, .  he was a
    worthless person, who nowhere made an impression. . <ne:m
    tla:catl> (b.4 f.8 c.24 p.85)
231.  *nentlacatl*.  tlacatle totecue, ma oc yehhuatl xicmottili, in
    cuahuic onoc, in tlalli ixco ca, in aya quimomachitia: motolinia
    in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl, in aahuia, in ahuellamati: auh in
    aic totonia, in aic yamania: auh in aic huellamati, in iiomio, in
    inacayo: in zan cen tohtonehuatinemi, in za cen
    chichichinacatinemi in iyollo: .  "o master, o our lord, consider
    yet those who lie on the board, those who are on the ground, those
    who know nothing, the poor, the miserable, the useless, those who
    rejoice not, the discontented, those who never have the
    necessities of life, those never comfortable of bone, of flesh --
    those who all together live suffering great pain, great affliction
    of heart." . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.1 p.4)
232.  *nentlacatl*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
233.  *nentlacatl*.  in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl, in aahuia in
    ahuellamati, in cococ in teopohqui quimati: .  [they are] the
    poor, the useless, the unhappy, the discontented, the anguished. .
    <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.9)
234.  *nentlacatl*.  cuix ica timotlatemolia in macehualli, in amo
    tlacamati, in aompa ehehua: auh in aihihuia, in nentlacatl, in zan
    quipictinemi tlalticpac. .  wilt thou perhaps seek one wherewith
    [to replace] the commoner, the disobedient one who understandeth
    things backwards and who is impulsive, who is useless, who liveth
    in vain on earth? . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.2 c.4 p.18)
235.  *nentlacatl*.  macamo no quen quimochihuilican in xoxohuixtoc in
    cuahuitl, in metl, in nopalli in ixquich ixhuatoc: ca itlaanca ca
    iyolca in macehualli, ca inenca in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl in
    ayahuia in ahuellamati in tlacnocahualli, in ahualnecini in
    icochca in ineuhca in icoayoyotzin itech motetecatinemi in itech
    icoyocatinemi. .  may they also in no manner harm that which lieth
    green -- the trees, the maguey, the nopal, all which lieth
    germinating -- for they are the source, the life of the common
    folk, the support of the poor, the unhappy, the discontented, the
    forsaken, the useless, those whose sustenance appeareth not, whose
    intestines go stuck to their sides, go rumbling. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.6 f.4 c.8 p.40)
236.  *nentlacatl*.  in ahayahuia, in ahuellamati quitimaloa, in
    quimacehualtia, in quilhuiltia toteucyo: inic quitlamacehualtia,
    in icnotlacatl, in nentlacatl in hayahuia, in ahuellamati, in
    tonehua, in chichinaca, .  the unhappy, the discontented, our lord
    honoreth with this, giveth as merit, giveth as one's lot, so that
    he causeth them to be the miserable, the useless, the unhappy, the
    discontented ones, to suffer tribulation, pain. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.6 f.10 c.22 p.123)
237.  *nentlacatl*.  in amo cualli moncolli, motolinia icnotlacatl,
    nentlacatl, .  the bad father of the parents-in-law [is] poor,
    miserable, useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10 f.1 c.2 p.7)
238.  *nentlacatl*.  motolinia, icnotlacatl nentlacatl, ahommonamiqui
    .  [he is] poor, miserable, useless, destitute. . <ne:m-tla:catl>
    (b.10 f.2 c.9 p.31)
239.  *nentlacatl*.  in ichtecqui motolinia icnotlacatl, nentlacatl,
    cococ, teopouhqui, cohcotoc, mohmotz, apiztli, icnoyotl,
    apizteotl, yollo itlacauhqui iztlaccomoc: .  the thief [is] poor,
    miserable, useless, full of affliction, undone, niggardly, hungry,
    miserable, gluttonous, corrupt, prying. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10
    f.2 c.11 p.39)
240.  *nentlacatl*.  in tlahueliloc teezyo, millacatic, itzcuintic,
    tequimillacatl, tequimacehualli, xixicuin, atlini tlacuani,
    tlacualxixicuin, xiuhnel, xihuixcol, atle hueli, nentlacatl,
    nenqui, tetl popoxiuhteuh. .  the bad noblewoman [is] like a field
    worker -- brutish, a great field worker, a great commoner; a
    glutton, a drinker, an eater -- a glutton, incapable, useless,
    time-wasting. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.10 f.3 c.13 p.49)
241.  *nentlacatl*.  chichiltic, huel iuhqui in cacaloxochitl: zan
    nentlacatl, acan huelic, acan ahuiac, .  it is chili-red, just
    like the cacaloxochitl, but useless, without fragrance, without
    perfume. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
242.  *nentlacatl*.  amo ahuiac, nentlacatl, atle inecoca, atle
    inequizzo. .  they are not fragrant; they are useless, of no use,
    not required. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
243.  *nentlacatl*.  aiyac, ahuelic, nentlacatl: .  it has no aroma,
    no fragrance; it is useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.204)
244.  *nentlacatl*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, zazan ye xochitl, amo ihyac.
    .  it is prickly, useless -- an ordinary flower, with no aroma. .
    <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.210)
245.  *nentlacatl*.  ahuayo, nentlacatl, nenquizqui, .  it is thorny,
    worthless, useless. . <ne:m-tla:catl> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
246.  *nentlacayotl*.  timalihui in icnopillotl, in icnotlacayotl, in
    nentlacayotl: .  poverty, misery, uselessness prevail. . <ne:m
    tla:catl-yo:tl1> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.7)
247.  *nentlacayotl*.  cococ, teopouhqui quiquiztoc, timalihui in
    icnotlacayotl, in nentlacayotl: cococ, teopouhqui macho, timalihui
    in cuitlaxcolpitzactli, .  [all is] permeated by pain, by
    affliction; misery, inhumanity dominate; pain, affliction are
    known; starvation dominateth. . <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1> (b.6 f.9
    c.20 p.107)
248.  *nentlamacho*.  ic mitoaya: nohuiyan chialo, nohuiyan ihuicpa
    nentlamacho, tlaocoyalo, .  so was it said that everywhere he was
    awaited; everywhere there was humility and sorrow before him. .
    <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2 +t>ch> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
249.  *nentlamachohuaya*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2-hua2-ya:n +del.n> (b.11 f.11
    c.6 p.105)
250.  *nentlamati*.  in atle quitta octli, iuhquin nentlamati iyollo,
    iuhquin aco pilcac, iuhquin ahactihuetzi, iuhquin ahuic yauh. .
    when he found no wine, he seemed anguished of heart, as if he hung
    high, or tumbled into a pitfall, like a vagabond. . <ne:m-p51-mati
    +fusion> (b.4 f.2 c.4 p.12)
251.  *nentlamati*.  macayac tlaocoya, nentlamati in iyollo, .  let no
    one be sad or heavy of heart. . <ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.5 f.1
    c.2 p.154)
252.  *nentlamati*.  tlacatle totecue: yohualle, ehecatle, manozo
    tlacahua in moyollotzin, ma xicmocnoittili, ma xicmotlaocolili, ma
    xicmiximachili in momacehualtzin: motolinia in mohuictzinco
    elciciuhtinemi: in mitzmonochilia, in mitzmotzatzililia, in
    mitzmotemolia: in mohuictzinco nentlamati. .  "o master, o our
    lord, o night, o wind, grant perchance that thou mayest bless,
    have mercy, take compassion, acknowledge thy common folk, the
    poor, those who go sighing toward thee, who call out, who cry out
    to thee, who seek thee, who do what they can in thy sight. . <ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.1 c.2 p.8)
253.  *nentlamati*.  in ye ixquich nepapan cuauhtli ocelotl: in
    tonehua, in chichinaca in iyollo, in nentlamati in mitzmonochilia,
    in mitzmotzatzililia: in amo quitlazotla in itzontecon in
    ielchiquiuh, in teca quimotla, in teca quitepachoa in miquiznequi:
    manozo achitzin xicmottitili in quinequi, in quelehuia, in tizatl,
    in ihhuitl: .  all the different eagle warriors, the ocelot
    warriors, those who suffer pain, who suffer torment in their
    hearts, who are anguished, those who call upon thee, who cry out
    to thee, those who put no value upon their heads, upon their
    breasts, those who hurl missiles against, who press upon [the
    enemy] as they wish for death: concede them the little that they
    desire, that they long for, the chalk, the down feathers. . <ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.1 c.3 p.13)
254.  *nentlamati*.  in tlatoani in ihcuac quittaya, quimatia ca cenca
    nentlamati in cuitlapilli, atlapalli macehualli: niman
    tlanahuatiaya, inic ollamaloz, inic teellacuahuaya, inic
    tepaquiltiaya tlatoani: .  the ruler, when he beheld and knew that
    the common folk and vassals were very fretful, then commanded that
    the ball game be played, in order to animate the people and divert
    them. . <ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58)
255.  *nentlamati*.  auh in ihcuac in ye itlacauhtiuh in innemiliz: in
    aocmo cualli inyollo, in za iuhqui nentlamati, .  but when now
    they corrupted their way of life, when they no longer were of good
    heart, then he was as if saddened. . <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion> (b.9
    f.3 c.6 p.32)
256.  *nentlamatia*.  ic mochi tlacatl oncan tlatemachiaya,
    nentlamatia, tlaocoyaya, inic quicneliz: .  for everyone then
    showed devotion, was humbled, and sorrowed, in order that he
    should show them favor. . <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3> (b.4 f.4 c.9 p.33)
257.  *nentlamatia*.  o yehhuatl in, in quinchoctiaya inic nentlamatia
    in pochteca huehuetque: cenca huel quinanahuatiaya, inic amo
    quitlaahuilquixtiliz, in amo quitlaahuilmachiliz toteucyo. .  with
    these [words] the old merchants brought [those who returned
    prosperous] to tears; they humbled them; they sternly admonished
    them not to disregard, not to neglect our lord. . <ne:m-p51-mati
    ya3  +fusion> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
258.  *nentlamatia*.  in zazo tlein quichihuaya, za iuhquin
    nentlamatia, .  whatsoever he did, it was as if he were in
    torment. . <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3> (b.12 f.1 c.6 p.17)
259.  *nentlamattinemi*.  ma oc xocomminecuiltili in maxcatzin, in
    mocococatzin, in motechcopatzinco huitz: in tzopelic, in ahuiac,
    in totonqui, in yamanqui, in motzmolinca in mocelica: in yehhua in
    icnotlacatl in. n. ca ye ixquich cahuitzintli, i, in
    mohuicpatzinco elciciuhtinemi, in nentlamattinemi in macehualli, .
    may thou yet let this humble person, n., smell thy property, thy
    treasure, which falleth from thee, that which is sweet, fragrant,
    the necessities of life, thy freshness, thy tenderness: for
    already, for some time, the common folk go sighing unto thee, go
    in affliction. . <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-nemi aux01 +fusion> (b.6
    f.1 c.2 p.9)
260.  *nentlatlahtolli*.  aocmo monequi in za tlatolzolli, za
    nentlatlatolli, in omachcamatzopetziuh, omachtlatziuh tlatolli
    tiquitotinemizque: .  no longer is it necessary for us to continue
    repeating only worn-out, useless discussion, so much unfit talk,
    so many lazy words. . <ne:m-dupl-p51-ihtahui-caus06-l1> (b.4 f.9
    c.29 p.96)
261.  *nicnempolo*.  quitoaya, macamo nicnencua, macamo nicnempolo,
    macamo nicnixcahui, in nocneliloca: .  he said: "may I eat not in
    vain, may I consume not in vain may I use not for myself alone
    that which hath benefited me." . <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06-opt>
    (b.1 f.2 c.20 p.46)
262.  *nicnencua*.  quitoaya, macamo nicnencua, macamo nicnempolo,
    macamo nicnixcahui, in nocneliloca: .  he said: "may I eat not in
    vain, may I consume not in vain may I use not for myself alone
    that which hath benefited me." . <p11-p33-ne:m-cua:> (b.1 f.2 c.20
    p.46)
263.  *nictlanempolhuia*.  ca nican nictlanempolhuia,
    nictlaahuilquixtilia, in tloque, nahuaque, .  here I use vainly, I
    waste, [the gifts of] the protector of all. . <p11-p33-p51-ne:m
    polihui-caus06-ben> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
264.  *ninentlamati*.  ca mohuicpatzinco ninentlamati ca
    nimitznotemachilia, .  I do what I can for thee, I place my trust
    in thee. . <p11-ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.4 c.9 p.43)
265.  *ninentlamati*.  ic nichoca ic nitlaocoya ic ninentlamati in
    niquilnamiqui ac ye in nomamiccatzin, ac ye in notenhuacauh. .
    thus I weep, I am saddened, I am discontent when I reflect upon
    which one is my sluggard, which one my incoherent one. . <p11-ne:m
    p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.87)
266.  *ninentlamati*.  yeh inic nichoca, yeh inic ninoteopoa, yeh inic
    nitlaocoya, inic ninentlamati in tlacoyohuan, in yohualli xelihui,
    .  for this I weep, for this I am anguished, for this I am
    saddened, for this I am unhappy at midnight, at the parting of the
    night. . <p11-ne:m-p51-mati  +fusion> (b.6 f.7 c.17 p.89)
267.  *oinencauhyan*.  quen nenti in oinencauhyan mochiuhtiquiz in atl
    in tepetl: .  how will it be when the city will become, will be
    made his place of desolation? . <o:-poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1
    ya:n> (b.6 f.4 c.10 p.50)
268.  *ommonenencoa*.  zan iuh commauhcacahua, conciauhcahua,
    ommonenencoa. .  so he only let her alone, in terror; she tired
    him out; he was defrauded. . <o:n-p54-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.5 f.2 c.13
    p.179)
269.  *onen*.  auh quihualmonequiltiz, in quecin quihualmonequiltiz,
    commopolhuiz, commotlatiliz, commoxixiniliz, commomomoyahuiliz in
    tlalehualli, in acatzacualli, in tlachcuitetelli in onen
    ticzazalo. .  and he will determine in the manner he will desire;
    he will ruin, burn, break up, scatter the earthen structure, the
    reed enclosure, the mound of earth which in vain thou hast put
    together. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.6 f.3 c.7 p.33)
270.  *onen*.  onen oncatca. .  it was in vain . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.6
    f.18 c.41 p.225)
271.  *onen*.  ic mitoa: onen oncatca, anozo a onen oncatca. .  hence
    it is said. "it was in vain," or "it was not in vain." . <o:-ne:m>
    (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.225)
272.  *onen*.  ic mitoa: onen oncatca, anozo a onen oncatca. .  hence
    it is said. "it was in vain," or "it was not in vain." . <o:-ne:m>
    (b.6 f.18 c.41 p.225)
273.  *onen*.  colli acualli tlaahuilmatini, onen oyohuac, onen
    oncalac, in tonatiuh, atle iteyo atle itoca, .  the bad
    grandfather [is] negligent, of misspent days and nights; of no
    fame, of no renown. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.5)
274.  *onen*.  colli acualli tlaahuilmatini, onen oyohuac, onen
    oncalac, in tonatiuh, atle iteyo atle itoca, .  the bad
    grandfather [is] negligent, of misspent days and nights; of no
    fame, of no renown. . <o:-ne:m +min> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.5)
275.  *onenhuetz*.  onenhuetz in cemilhuitl, .  in misfortune hath the
    feast day come! . <o:-ne:m-huetzi-prt1> (b.2 f.5 c.27 p.98)
276.  *onentlamattinenca*.  ihcuac quicahua: ca nel oconittac in
    quitemoa iyollo, inic oelciciuhtinenca, onentlamattinenca. etc. .
    then he released it: for in truth he had realized what his heart
    sought -- for which he had lived sighing and in discontent, etc. .
    <o:-ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-nemi-prt1-ca10 aux01> (b.5 f.2 c.12
    p.178)
277.  *onnempoliuh*.  ic zan onnempoliuh in oc cequi in intenamic, in
    intetlapalol: .  thus there came only to nothing still another of
    their meetings, of their welcomings. . <o:n-ne:m-polihui-prt1>
    (b.12 f.2 c.12 p.32)
278.  *ononnentlamatticatca*.  ca ononnentlamatticatca in ye macuil in
    ye matlac, .  I have been afflicted for some time. . <o:-p11-o:n
    ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-ca:1a-ca10 aux11a> (b.12 f.3 c.16 p.44)
279.  *ontlanemiuhcantilihqueh*.  ontlanemiuhcantilique,
    oquimompetztoccauhque, .  they had caused ruin and left them bare.
    . <o:n-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n-v01a-caus04-prt1-plur01> (b.4 f.10
    c.32 p.105)
280.  *otictlanempolhuih*.  auh in ica in ipampa in otictlanempolhui
    toteucyo, in otictlanencuali: yeh in amatl in copalli in motequiuh
    in ticchihuaz, in ticmanaz.  .  "and because at some time thou
    hast depreciated the things of our lord, hast failed to provide
    food, thou wilt provide, wilt offer as thy duty, the paper, the
    incense." . <o:-p12-p33-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-ben-prt1> (b.6 f.3
    c.7 p.33)
281.  *otlanemiuhyantilih*.  ca otlanemiuhyantili in toteucyo, ca
    oyaque in monanhua in motahua, in huel quitenehuaya in huel
    quipoaya inchoquizyo, in ixayoyotlatolli. .  our lord hath
    destroyed it; thy fathers, thy mothers have gone, they who could
    pronounce, who could recount the weeping, the tearful words. . <o:
    p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-prt1> (b.3 f.3 c.ap1 p.42)
282.  *quimonenquixtilia*.  ca ayac quimonenquixtilia in toteucyo. .
    for our lord faileth no one. . <p33-p54-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ben
    +z>x> (b.6 f.17 c.40 p.217)
283.  *quinemia*.  amo zan quinencuaya, amo za quinemia, in atl, in
    tlacualli: .  not without purpose did they eat [and] drink. . <p33
    ne:m-i:1-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
284.  *quinencuaya*.  amo zan quinencuaya, amo za quinemia, in atl, in
    tlacualli: .  not without purpose did they eat [and] drink. . <p33
    ne:m-cua:-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
285.  *quinencui*.  auh amo zan quinencui, cahcui, amo zan ixpanhuetzi
    in inecuiltonol, .  but his wealth he did not just appropriate
    without purpose, nor fail to take; neither did it just fall to
    him. . <p33-ne:m-cui> (b.4 f.12 c.38 p.125)
286.  *quinencuiqueh*.  inic amo oquitlazotlaque in intzontecon, in
    imelchiquiuh, ca amo cacuique quinencuique inic oquittaque in
    tachcauhyotl, in huehueyotl, inic ye petlati, ye icpalti, inic ye
    contlanehui in impetl, in imicpal in pochteca. .  for not without
    reason did the merchants take and find leadership and the wisdom
    of old age, become leaders, and receive their authority in
    exchange. . <p33-ne:m-cui-plur01> (b.4 f.7 c.17 p.62)
287.  *quinenquixtia*.  cententica, ac cencamatica nimitznotza,
    nimitztzatzilia: in ica in ipampa, in cuitlapilli, in atlapalli:
    in nentlacatl in aquimatinemi, in nennemi, in nencochi, in
    nemmehua: in quinenquixtia in motlacatzin, in moyohualtzin: .  in
    one word, or two, I call to thee, I cry out to thee for -- on
    behalf of -- the vassals, the useless; the ignorant; the
    vagabonds; those who sleep, who arise to no purpose; those who
    waste thy day, thy night. . <p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.1
    c.2 p.7)
288.  *quinnentlamati*.  aocmo huel quicua, in nellimach
    quincuitlahuiltia, za iuh quinnentlamati in yollo, .  no more
    could they eat, although strongly did they urge them; it was as if
    they were anguished in spirit; . <p43-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.9 f.5 c.14
    p.64)
289.  *quitenemmacaya*.  amo quitenemmacaya in huehuetque, in
    ilamatque, in manel cententli cencamatl intlatol: .  the old men
    [and] the old women did not offer them purposelessly, even if
    their utterance was [only] one word, one syllable. . <p33-p52-ne:m
    maca-ya3> (b.9 f.3 c.6 p.30)
290.  *tenenco*.  in amo cualli tlacuillo: yolloquiquimil, tecualani,
    texiuhtlati, tenenco, tenenenco, .  the bad scribe [is] dull,
    detestable, irritating -- a fraud, a cheat. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>
    (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
291.  *tenencoa*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-ne:m-coa> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
292.  *tenencoh*.  in amo cualli tlacualnamacac: in quinamaca
    tamaltzocuitlatl, tamalpinetli, papayaxtli, acecec, acecepatic,
    tenencuacua, tenentlamachti, tenenco, polocatamalli,
    cecepoltamalli, tamalpalan, tamaliyac, zazalic, zazaltic,
    tamalzolli, tamalcecec, cuitlaxococ xocopatic, xocopetzcuahuitl,
    iyatatl. .  the bad food seller [is] he who sells filthy tamales,
    discolored tamales -- broken, tasteless, quite tasteless,
    inedible, frightening, deceiving; tamales made of chaff, swollen
    tamales, spoiled tamales, foul tamales -- sticky, gummy; old
    tamales, cold tamales -- dirty and sour, very sour, exceedingly
    sour, stinking. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.10 f.4 c.19 p.69)
293.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco .  it disappoints one, it
    constantly disappoints one. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.12 c.6
    p.122)
294.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
295.  *tenencoh*.  pipiaztic, memelactic in iquillo: chichiltic in
    ixochio; tenenco. .  its stems are slender, straight; its blossom
    is chili-red; [its odor] disappoints one. . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>
    (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.199)
296.  *tenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenenentlamachti. .  they
    disappoint one, constantly disappoint one; they are sorry things.
    . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
297.  *tenencuacua*.  in amo cualli tlacualnamacac: in quinamaca
    tamaltzocuitlatl, tamalpinetli, papayaxtli, acecec, acecepatic,
    tenencuacua, tenentlamachti, tenenco, polocatamalli,
    cecepoltamalli, tamalpalan, tamaliyac, zazalic, zazaltic,
    tamalzolli, tamalcecec, cuitlaxococ xocopatic, xocopetzcuahuitl,
    iyatatl. .  the bad food seller [is] he who sells filthy tamales,
    discolored tamales -- broken, tasteless, quite tasteless,
    inedible, frightening, deceiving; tamales made of chaff, swollen
    tamales, spoiled tamales, foul tamales -- sticky, gummy; old
    tamales, cold tamales -- dirty and sour, very sour, exceedingly
    sour, stinking. . <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.10 f.4 c.19 p.69)
298.  *tenencuacua*.  tenencuacua. .  it pricks one to no purpose. .
    <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.211)
299.  *tenencuacua*.  tenencuacua: .  it pricks one to no purpose. .
    <p52-ne:m-dupl-cua:> (b.11 f.21 c.7 p.213)
300.  *tenenenco*.  in amo cualli tlacuillo: yolloquiquimil,
    tecualani, texiuhtlati, tenenco, tenenenco, .  the bad scribe [is]
    dull, detestable, irritating -- a fraud, a cheat. . <p52-dupl-ne:m
    coa-prt1> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.28)
301.  *tenenencoa*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
302.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco .  it disappoints one, it
    constantly disappoints one. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.12
    c.6 p.122)
303.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenencoa, tenenencoa: .  it
    disappoints one, constantly disappoints one; one is frustrated,
    constantly frustrated. . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7
    p.199)
304.  *tenenencoh*.  tenenco, tenenenco, tenenentlamachti. .  they
    disappoint one, constantly disappoint one; they are sorry things.
    . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1> (b.11 f.20 c.7 p.204)
305.  *tenentlamachtican*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <p52-ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.105)
306.  *tenentlamachtican*.  icnoyotl iquiztoya, iyehuayan,
    nentlamachohuaya, tenentlamachtican, techoctican,
    tenentlamachtican chocohuayan tlaocoyaloya, tetlaocoltican,
    elciciuhuayan, teellelaxitican, tlacnomamancan: .  it is a place
    whence misery comes, where it exists; a place where there is
    affliction -- a place of affliction of lamentation, a place of
    affliction, of weeping; a place where there is sadness, a place of
    compassion, of sighing; a place which arouses sorrow, which
    spreads misery. . <p52-ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n> (b.11 f.11 c.6 p.105)
307.  *ticnenquixti*.  ma ticnenquixti, in ceyohual, in cemilhuitl, in
    mache totech monequi, in tomio, in tonacayo, in tochicahuaca in
    tonacayotl .  do not waste the night, the day; they are necessary
    for us even as our bones, our flesh, our strength, our sustenance.
    . <p12-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-opt  +z>x> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.92)
308.  *tictonempiquilia*.  ha nelli mach, in tictonempiquilia in
    timacehualti, .  "verily, we common folk imagine it in vain." .
    <p21-p33-p54-ne:m-pi:qui1-ben> (b.3 f.4 c.ap4 p.52)
309.  *timonemma*.  ma timonemma, ma timonencauh: auh ma timoxiccauh,
    .  take care not to fail to know, not to lose through neglect, not
    to lose through carelessness. . <p12-p54-ne:m-mati-opt> (b.6 f.8
    c.18 p.96)
310.  *timonencauh*.  ma timonemma, ma timonencauh: auh ma
    timoxiccauh, .  take care not to fail to know, not to lose through
    neglect, not to lose through carelessness. . <p12-p54-ne:m-ca:hui
    caus09-opt> (b.6 f.8 c.18 p.96)
311.  *tinentlacatl*.  amo za tinentlacatl: auh aza cuel
    moyacacuitlapil pilcatinemi, titlampixquitinemiz, tixonauhtinemiz,
    tipinehuatinemiz. .  not only art thou useless, but soon thy nasal
    mucus goeth hanging; thou wilt go toothless, thou wilt go on hand
    and knees, thou wilt go pale . <p12-ne:m-tla:catl> (b.6 f.10 c.21
    p.118)
312.  *tinentlamati*.  ha nelli mach in tinentlamati in timacehualti,
    .  indeed, we do our best, we common folk. . <p12-ne:m-p51-mati>
    (b.3 f.4 c.ap4 p.52)
313.  *tinentlamati*.  ca izcatqui tiquitoa, ic tinentlamati
    motechcopa: .  behold, we talk because we are concerned regarding
    thee. . <p12-ne:m-p51-mati> (b.6 f.11 c.23 p.127)
314.  *titlanempoloa*.  nican titlanenquixtia, nican titlanempoloa: .
    here we neglect things, here we ruin things. . <p21-p51-ne:m
    polihui-caus06> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
315.  *titlanempoloa*.  mazo cana tocontlatlazti, mazo
    tictlachitoniliti in toteucyo: nican tontlanenquixtia, nican
    titlanenpoloa. .  may we not cast somewhere aside, reject, the
    things of our lord; [for] here we neglect, here we depreciate
    things. . <p21-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.6 f.15 c.35 p.191)
316.  *titlanenquixtia*.  nican titlanenquixtia, nican titlanempoloa:
    .  here we neglect things, here we ruin things. . <p21-p51-ne:m
    qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.11 c.24 p.138)
317.  *titlanenquixticahua*.  za tehhuan, in: auh za tiuhque in, in
    titlatlacocahuan toteucyo, in titlanenquixticahua: .  we are
    these, and we are such as these, we the spoilers of our lord, we
    the neglecters. . <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ca:5-- +z>x> (b.6
    f.11 c.24 p.137)
318.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  auh inic otlatoca, inic nenemi amo huel yauh
    in tlalnemiuhyan: hueli patlania in zacatl, in tlacotl, in tlein
    huapahuac. .  and thus it advances, thus it travels: it cannot go
    on bare ground; it can fly on grass, on shrubs, on anything rough.
    . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.8 c.5 p.76)
319.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  in tlalnemiuhyan moquetztiuh, zan icuitlapil
    inic tlaczatiuh; iuhquimma patlantiuh. .  on level land, it goes
    standing on the end of its tail; it is as if it went flying along.
    . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.9 c.5 p.83)
320.  *tlalnemiuhyan*.  auh intlacatle ipan aci: in canin poctontli
    moquetza, intla zan tlalnemiuhyan, ic quimati ca oncan tlallan ca
    in tlazotli in tetl: .  and if they are not successful, if it is
    only barren where the little [column of] smoke stands, thus they
    know that the precious stone is there in the earth. . <tla:lli
    ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n> (b.11 f.22 c.8 p.221)
321.  *tlanemmatini*.  in teta tlahueliloc, tlatziuhqui amo
    moyolitlacoani, tlanemmatini, tlaxiccahuani, .  one's bad father
    [is] lazy, incompassionate, negligent, unreliable. . <p51-ne:m
    mati-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.1)
322.  *tlanempoloa*.  atle hueli, tlatlacoa, tlahitlacoa tlanempoloa .
    he can do nothing; he harms, damages, wastes [feathers]. . <p51
    ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10 f.2 c.7 p.25)
323.  *tlanempoloa*.  tlanempoloa, tlaixpoloa .  he squanders, he
    wastes. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.27)
324.  *tlanempoloa*.  tlanenquixtia, tlanempoloa, tlaahuilquixtia,
    tlaahuilicitta, .  he squanders, he wastes; he squanders his
    possessions, he dissipates them. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06> (b.10
    f.3 c.12 p.41)
325.  *tlanempoloani*.  in acualli tlaxinqui tlapapayaxoani,
    tlatetecuitzoani, tlaquelchihuani, teca mocayahuani, teca
    mocuahuitequini, tlaixpoloani, tlanempoloani .  the bad carpenter
    [is] one who breaks [the work] into pieces, who raises a
    clattering din; who is a nonchalant worker, a mocker;
    uncooperative, wasteful, squandering. . <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06
    ni1> (b.10 f.2 c.8 p.27)
326.  *tlanempoloani*.  in amo cualli, in tlahueliloc mocuiltonoa,
    tlaahuilpoloani, tlaahuilquixtiani, tlanempoloani,
    tlanenquixtiani, tlaahuilicittani, .  the bad, the evil rich man
    [is] a waster of his possessions, a prodigal, a spendthrift, a
    squanderer, a dissipator of his possessions. . <p51-ne:m-polihui
    caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
327.  *tlanempopoloani*.  in tenan tlahueliloc, in amo cualli,
    tlacanexquimilli, xolopitli, tonalcochqui, maxixilopahuax,
    tlanempopoloani, tetlaixpachilhuiani, tetlanahualchichihuiliani,
    tetlanahualpolhuiani, .  one's bad mother [is] evil, dull, stupid,
    sleepy, lazy; [she is] a squanderer, a petty thief, a deceiver, a
    fraud. . <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.2)
328.  *tlanempopoloani*.  in ixhuiuhtli tlahueliloc tlaahuilquixtiani
    tlanempopoloani tlaixpoloani, tlateuhyotiani, tlatlazollotiani,
    tlacamicqui, ii$ellelacic iyolacic, quimaxilti tlahueliloc, .  the
    bad grandchild [is] a prodigal, a spendthrift, a squanderer -- a
    tarnisher, a besmircher of the honor of his own; perverse,
    dejected, miserable; a yielder before evil. . <p51-ne:m-dupl
    polihui-caus06-ni1> (b.10 f.1 c.1 p.6)
329.  *tlanenquixtia*.  nenquiza, tlanenquixtia .  she works to no
    avail; she squanders. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02  +z>x> (b.10 f.1
    c.3 p.12)
330.  *tlanenquixtia*.  tlanenquixtia, tlanempoloa, tlaahuilquixtia,
    tlaahuilicitta, .  he squanders, he wastes; he squanders his
    possessions, he dissipates them. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02  +z>x>
    (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
331.  *tlanenquixtiani*.  in amo cualli, in tlahueliloc mocuiltonoa,
    tlaahuilpoloani, tlaahuilquixtiani, tlanempoloani,
    tlanenquixtiani, tlaahuilicittani, .  the bad, the evil rich man
    [is] a waster of his possessions, a prodigal, a spendthrift, a
    squanderer, a dissipator of his possessions. . <p51-ne:m-qui:za
    caus02-ni1  +z>x> (b.10 f.3 c.12 p.41)
332.  *tontlanenquixtia*.  mazo cana tocontlatlazti, mazo
    tictlachitoniliti in toteucyo: nican tontlanenquixtia, nican
    titlanenpoloa. .  may we not cast somewhere aside, reject, the
    things of our lord; [for] here we neglect, here we depreciate
    things. . <p21-o:n-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x> (b.6 f.15 c.35
    p.191)
333.  *ximonenencahua*.  maca ximonenencahua. .  do not be wasteful. .
    <p6-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09> (b.6 f.8 c.17 p.92)









_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 02:37:10 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:37:10 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0CF2E.7010903@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.223710.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

*ne:m ***
  ahahuializtli     ahauiallztli for ?annen ahauializtli: 55m].  gloria vana. <zan ne:m
    dupl-a:huiya-liz +del.y>. 55m-10|
  ahahuializtli     +del.y>. 71m1-12|
  ahnencoa     ne:m-coa +mis_analysis.x>. 71m1-16|
  choquiznemmictia     miqui-caus02>. 55m-12|
  choquiznemmictia     dandose golpes y^messandose. &c. <p11-p54-cho:ca-lizb-ne:m-miqui-
    caus02>. 71m2-4|
  cualaniliztli ?nnen.  sa?a con causa. <ah1-mo: zan-ne:m
    cuala:ni-liz>. 55m-18|
  cualaniliztli ?n nen.  sa?a con causa y ocasion. <ah1-mo: zan
    ne:m cuala:ni-liz>. 71m1-19|
  cualaniliztontli ?nnen.  sa?a tal peque?a  (tal is sa?a con
    causa). <ah1-mo: zan-ne:m cuala:ni-liz-to:n-tl>. 55m-18|
  cualaniliztontli ?n nen.  sa?a tal peque?a  (tal is sa?a con
    causa y ocasion). <ah1-mo: zan ne:m cuala:ni-liz-to:n-tl>. 71m1-19|
  hualla     que auia venido. <zan ne:m in o:-p11-hua:l-yauh1 +ly>ll>. 71m1-20|
  hueli ? nen.  no puedo ya con ello, o no lo puedo ya sufrir. <ah1-
    oc ne:m-huel1?>. 71m2-1|
  huetzi ?n.  no sin prouecho. <ah1-ne:m huetzi>. 71m1-16|
  huetzi     huetzi>. 71m1-10|
  huetzi     71m2-3|
  huetzico     auia venido. <o:-ne:m p11-huetzi-dir1b>. 71m1-20|
  ihtoa     caus06>. 55m-4|
  ihtoa     de^palabra. <zan ne:m p33-ihtahui-caus06>. 55m-4|
  ihtoani     ihtahui-caus06-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ihtoani     <zan ne:m p33-ihtahui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-6|
  ihtoani     caus06-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ihtoliztli     palabra). <zan ne:m-- ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-4|
  ihtoliztli     <zan ne:m-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-4|
  ilhuia     ilhuia:>. 55m-4|
  ilhuia     de^palabra. <zan ne:m p11-p33-p52-ilhuia:>. 71m2-3|
  ilhuia     ilhuia:>. 71m1-6|
  ilhuiani     is cumplir de palabra). <zan ne:m p33-p52-ilhuia:-ni1>. 55m-4|
  ilhuiliztli     palabra). <zan ne:m p52-ilhuia:-liz>. 55m-4|
  ixnempehua     pe:hua>. 71m2-8|
  ixnempehualtia , m[o]-.  . <p54-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01 +prob>. b.9
    f.6 p.73|
  ixnempehualtia     tratar mal a otro sin auer razon y^sin^proposito. <p11-p52-i:xtli-
    ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 55m-00|
  ixnempehualtia     sin causa. <p11-p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m2-8|
  ixnempehualtiani     razon); el que se enoja y ri?e; o maltrata a otro sin razon. <p52-
    i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-ni1>. 71m1-1|
  ixnempehualtih     razon. <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-prt1>. 71m2-16|
  ixnempehualtiliztica     manera is el que se enoja y ri?e, o maltrata a otro sin razon). <p52-
    i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-liz-ti1-ca2>. 71m2-16|
  ixnempehualtiliztli     acometer a otros sin razon); maltratamiento tal  (tal is el que se
    enoja y ri?e; o maltrata a otro sin razon). <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01-liz>. 55m-00|
  ixnempehualtilli     manera is acometer a otros sin razon); reprehendido y maltratado sin
    razon alguna. <p51-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-l1>. 55m-00|
  manen.  mirad que no. s. se haga tal cosa, aduertiendo. vel. mirad
    bien y aduertid. <-ma:2-ne:m>. 71m2-9|
  ne , ah-.  not in vain. <ah1-ne:m +del.n>. b.2 f.14 p.219|
  necemilhuitl.  dia aziago y sin prouecho, o desaprouechado. <ne:m-cem-
    ilhuitl>. 71m2-11|
  nehuetzi ?osa vtil y prouechosa. <ah1-ne:m-huetzi +del.n>. 71m2-
    1|
  nehuetzi     71m2-12|
  nem papaquiliztli     12|
  nemia , qui-.  they drank it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-i:1-ya3>. b.9
    f.3 p.30|
  nemihquitqui.  poorly woven. <ne:m-ihquiti-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.11 p.180|
  nemiliztli     7|
  nemiuhcan , ah-.  uninhabitable place. <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ca:n>. b.6
    f.3 p.30|
  nemiuhcantilihqueh , ontla-.  they caused ruin. <o:n-p51-ne:m-v03a-
    prt1-ca:n-v01a-caus04-prt1-plur01>. b.4 f.10 p.105|
  nemiuhqui.  . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>. b.9 f.7 p.89|
  nemiuhqui , ah-.  incomparable. <ah1-ne:m-v03a-prt1-c2>. b.6 f.1
    p.11|
  nemiuhya     5|
  nemiuhya     +del.n>. 55m-5|
  nemiuhyan.  . <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.4 f.10 p.105|
  nemiuhyan.  vazia cosa. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. 55m-19|
  nemiuhyan   nemiuhyan     +prob>. 71m1-7|
  nemiuhyan.  desolate place. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.11 f.10 p.92|
  nemiuhyanti     despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o guerra. <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-v01a>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyanti     con mortandad y pestilencia. <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a>. 71m2-
    22|
  nemiuhyantilia     pueblo; destruir patrimonio. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-
    caus04>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantilia     la hazienda. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04>. 71m2-12|
  nemiuhyantiliani     patrimonio); assolador tal  (tal is assolar o destruyr pueblo);
    destruidor tal  (tal is destruir patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-v01a-caus04-ni1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantilih , otla-.  . <o:-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    prt1>. b.3 f.3 p.42|
  nemiuhyantililia , motla-.  . <p54-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    ben H1>. b.6 f.16 p.191|
  nemiuhyantililli     patrimonio); assolado pueblo. <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04-
    l1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantiliztli.  desembarazo  {??printing error: desambara?o for
    desembara?o}; desembarazo. <ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-liz>. 55m-5|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     pueblo por enfermedad o guerra); destruicion tal  (tal is destruir
    el patrimonio); assolamiento de pueblo. <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-
    v01a-liz +min>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     form derived from a transitive verb that undergoes haplology: 71m1].
    despoblacion tal  (tal is despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o
    guerra). <tla6-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-liz +min>. 71m1-8|
  nemiuhyantiliztli     patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-v01a-caus04
plo
    +min>. 71m1-8|
  nemiuhyantilli     por enfermedad o guerra); despoblado pueblo assi  (assi is
    despoblarse el pueblo por pestilencia o guerra). <tla6-ne:m-v03a-
    prt1-ya:n-v01a-l1>. 55m-6|
  nemiuhyantlalia     <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-tla:lia:>. 71m1-20|
  nemiuhyantlalia     talar montes. <p11-p51-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n-tla:lia:>. 71m2-12|
  nemiuhyanyotl.  vaziedad assi  (assi is vazia cosa). <ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n-yo:tl1>. 55m-19|
  nemma , timo-.  . <p12-p54-ne:m-mati-opt>. b.6 f.8 p.96|
  nemmaca , mote-.  . <p54-p52-ne:m-maca>. b.4 f.6 p.57|
  nemmaca     alguna cosa; debalde o graciosamente dar algo. <p11-p33-p52-ne:m-
    maca>. 55m-4|
  nemmaca     prouecho ni razon. <p11-p33-p52-ne:m-maca>. 71m2-12|
  nemmaca     maca>. 71m1-8|
  nemmaca     graciosamente dar algo. <zan p11-p33-p52-ne:m-maca>. 55m-4|
  nemmacani     tal  (tal is donar; dar de gracia o debalde); gracioso dador de
    balde. <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-ni1>. 55m-6|
  nemmacaya , quite-.  they offered it purposelessly. <p33-p52-ne:m-maca-
    ya3>. b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nemmactli     is donar; dar de gracia o debalde). <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-l2>. 71m2-
    18|
  nemmanian.  non-festival time, useless time. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n
    +del.n>. b.9 f.1 p.7|
  nemmanya.  dia de labor. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. 55m-6|
  nemmaquiliztli     dadiua; o donacion. <p52-p51-ne:m-maca-liz +a>i>. 55m-6|
  nemmatini , tla-.  negligent. <p51-ne:m-mati-ni1>. b.10 f.1 p.1|
  nemmauhtia   nemmauhtia     proposito ni razon. <p11-p54-ne:m-mahui-caus02>. 71m2-12|
  nemmauhtia     55m-9|
  nemmauhtia     ne:m-mahui-caus02>. 71m2-12|
  nemmauhtih     poner for pone}; espantable cosa que pone gran temor. <p52-ne:m-
    mahui-caus02-prt1>. 55m-9|
  nemmauhtiliztli     amedrentar y^espantar vno a otro. <p52-ne:m-mahui-caus02-liz>. 55m-
    9|
  nemmauhtilli     <p51-ne:m-mahui-caus02-l1>. 71m1-11|
  nemmaya.  non-festival time, useless time. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n
    +del.n>. b.9 f.1 p.7|
  nemmayan.  . <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. b.1 f.2 p.45|
  nemmayan.  dia de labor. <ne:m-mani-prt1-ya:n +del.n>. 71m1-8|
  nemmictiliztli   nemon.  . <ne:m-o:n-->. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nemontemi.  . <ne:m-o:n-temi>. b.2 f.10 p.162|
  nempanca.  . <ne:m-pan-->. b.12 f.2 p.33|
  nempanca.  cosa sin prouecho, o por demas. <ne:m-pan-ca1 +prob>. 71m2-
    12|
  nempanca     3|
  nempapaquiliztli     10|
  nempehua.  he starts in vain. <ne:m-pe:hua>. b.11 f.17 p.175|
  nempehualtia ?n nic.  castigar justamente y con razon. <ah1-mo:
    zan p11-p33-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m1-5|
  nempehualtia     nempehaltia: 55m].  acometer sin razon. <p11-p52-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtia     caus01>. 71m1-1|
  nempehualtia     p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01>. 71m2-12|
  nempehualtiani     otros sin razon); renzilloso que se ensa?a y ri?e sin causa ni
    razon. <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-ni1>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtih     <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus02-prt1>. 71m2-17|
  nempehualtihqui     razon. <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-prt1-qui1>. 71m2-17|
  nempehualtiliztli     acometer a otros sin razon). <p52-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-liz>. 55m-00|
  nempehualtilli     is acometer a otros sin razon); el que es maltratado de otroy
    prouocado a^yra; sin causa ni razon alguna. <p51-ne:m-pe:hua-caus01-
    l1>. 55m-00|
  nempiquilia , ticto-.  . <p21-p33-p54-ne:m-pi:qui1-ben>. b.3 f.4
    p.52|
  nempolhuia , nictla-.  I use it in vain. <p11-p33-p51-ne:m-polihui-
    caus06-ben>. b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nempolhuih , otictla-.  you depreciated it. <o:-p12-p33-p51-ne:m-
    polihui-caus06-ben-prt1>. b.6 f.3 p.33|
  nempolihui.  desperdiciarse. <ne:m-polihui>. 71m1-8|
  nempolihui     12|
  nempolihui.  it is wasted; it is in vain; it perishes in vain. <ne:m-
    polihui>. b.11 f.18 p.185|
  nempoliuh , on-.  it came to nothing. <o:n-ne:m-polihui-prt1>. b.12
    f.2 p.32|
  nempoliuhqui.  useless, worthless. <ne:m-polihui-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.1
    p.12|
  nempoliuhtimani.  it lies wasting. <ne:m-polihui-prt1-ti1-mani aux04>.
    b.11 f.25 p.263|
  nempolo , nic-.  . <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06-opt>. b.1 f.2 p.46|
  nempoloa , titla-.  we ruin things; we depreciate something. <p21-p51-
    ne:m-polihui-caus06>. b.6 f.11 p.138|
  nempoloa , tla-.  he squanders; he wastes things; he wastes. <p51-ne:m-
    polihui-caus06>. b.10 f.2 p.27|
  nempoloa     polihui-caus06>. 55m-15|
  nempoloa     percudir. <p11-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06>. 71m1-8|
  nempoloa     cosa. <p11-p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nempoloa icemilhuitl     en vano o sin prouecho. <ne:m-polihui-caus06 in cem-ilhuitl +del.n>.
    71m2-12|
  nempoloa icemilhuitl iceyohual     (assi is gastar todo el dia en vano o sin prouecho). <ne:m-polihui-
    caus06 in cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1 +del.n>. 71m2-12|
  nempoloa in cemilhuitl     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-polihui-caus06 in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m2-
    12|
  nempoloa incemilhuitl     ne:m-polihui in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m1-16|
  nempoloani , tla-.  one who squanders; one who is a spendthrift. <p51-
    ne:m-polihui-caus06-ni1>. b.10 f.2 p.27|
  nempoloani     hazienda. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 55m-9|
  nempololiliztli     for tlanempopololiztli?: 55m].  destruicion tal  (tal is destruir el
    patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06--liz>. 55m-6|
  nempololiztica     gastador y desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-liz-
    ti1-ca2>. 71m2-22|
  nempololiztli     desperdiciar la hazienda  (tal is prodigo, gastador y desperdiciador
    de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-liz>. 71m2-22|
  nempolollani.  . <ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1-->. b.10 f.2 p.35|
  nempololli     ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m1-8|
  nempololli     tlanempololli: 55m].  estragado. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 55m-
    9|
  nempololli     gastada. <p51-ne:m-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m1-11|
  nempopoloa     en mal. <p11-p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06>. 55m-6|
  nempopoloa     <p11-p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nempopoloani , tla-.  squanderer; one who is a spendthift. <p51-ne:m-
    dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. b.10 f.1 p.2|
  nempopoloani     destruidor tal  (tal is destruir el patrimonio); destruidor tal
    (tal is destruir patrimonio); gastador en mal. <p51-ne:m-dupl-
    polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m2-22|
  nempopoloani     tlanempopolani for tlanempopoloani: 71m1].  gastador en mal. <p51-
    ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-12|
  nempopoloani     ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-ni1>. 71m1-17|
  nempopololiztica     tlanempololiztica> (assi is prodigo; gastador y desperdiciador de
    hazienda). <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-6|
  nempopololiztli     prodigalidad; destruicion tal  (tal is destruir patrimonio);  <lo
    mesmo es que tlanempololiztli> (tal is prodigo; gastador y
    desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-dupl-polihui-caus06-liz>. 55m-
    6|
  nempopololli     cosa; destruido assi  (assi is destruir el patrimonio). <p51-ne:m-
    dupl-polihui-caus06-l1>. 71m2-22|
  nempotla.  . <ne:m-potla>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nen.  . <ne:m>. b.1 f.2 p.42|
  nen.  en vano, por demas, o sin prouecho. aduerbio; en^vano; sin
    porque; sin proposito; sin prouecho ni vtilidad; o en vano. <ne:m>.
    71m2-12|
  nen , o-.  in vain, fruitless. <o:-ne:m +min>. b.10 f.1 p.5|
  nen ?n.  no en vano, o no sin razon. <ah1-mo: zan ne:m>. 71m2-
    1|
  nen     graciosamente assi  (assi is gracioso dador de balde); por de mas; o
    demasiado; por demas; simuladamente; sin porque; sin proposito; sin
    prouecho ni vtilidad; o en vano; socolor; superfluamente. <zan
    ne:m>. 55m-8|
  nen   nen.  in vain, vainly; to no purpose. <ne:m>. b.12 f.8 p.116|
  nen temictli   nen titlantli     13|
  nen tlacatl   nen.  to no purpose; useless. <ne:m>. b.6 f.3 p.36|
  nen^mehua.  he arises in vain. <ne:m p54-e:hua>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nenca     ca:1a>. 71m2-12|
  nenca     no necessaria; sin porque; sin proposito. <zan ne:m-ca:1a>. 71m2-3|
  nencahua , mo-.  he loafs. <p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. b.10 f.1 p.1|
  nencahua     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 55m-15|
  nencahua     caus09>. 55m-8|
  nencahua     enga?arse o hallarse burlado. <p11-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 71m1-
    10|
  nencahua     alguno. <p11-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. 55m-11|
  nencahua     caus09>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua     negligencia, o dexar de castigar algun delicto. <zan p11-p33-ne:m-
    ca:hui-caus09>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua icemilhuitl iceyoal     la noche  (assi is gastar todo el dia en vano o sin prouecho). <p11-
    p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09 in cem-ilhuitl in cem-yohua-l1>. 71m2-12|
  nencahua in cemilhuitl     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09 in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m2-
    12|
  nencahualiztli     enga?o assi  (assi is enga?arse o hallarse burlado). <p53-ne:m-
    ca:hui-caus09-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nencauh , timo-.  . <p12-p54-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-opt>. b.6 f.8 p.96|
  nencauhyan , i-.  ; his place of desolation; his place of abandonment;
    its place of desolation. <poss-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09-prt1-ya:n>. b.6
    f.4 p.43|
  nencauhyan , oi-.  his place of desolation. <o:-poss-ne:m-ca:hui-
    caus09-prt1-ya:n>. b.6 f.4 p.50|
  nencemilhuitl.  aziago dia; dia aziago o desaprouechado. <ne:m-cem-
    ilhuitl>. 55m-1|
  nenchihua     alguno. <p11-p51-ne:m-chi:hua>. 55m-11|
  nenchihua     prouecho. <p11-p51-ne:m-chi:hua>. 71m2-12|
  nencihuatl.  profitless woman. <ne:m-cihua:tl>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenco , te-.  . <p52-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nencoa , te-.  it disappoints one. <p52-ne:m-coa>. b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nencoa     prouecho alguno; hazer en vano. <p11-p54-ne:m-coa>. 55m-8|
  nencoa     pretendia alcanzar. <p11-p54-ne:m-coa>. 71m2-12|
  nencoa     le di#eran; burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que
    le  auian de dar; cortamente hazer algo; cortamente hazer algo con
    alguno. <p11-p52-ne:m-coa>. 55m-2|
  nencoa     dicha, o hallarse defraudado delo que pretendia alcanzar). <p11-p52-
    ne:m-coa>. 71m2-12|
  nencoani     lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlador tal  (tal is burlar a
    alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le  auian de dar);
    burlador; o enga?ador. <p52-ne:m-coa-ni1>. 55m-2|
  nencochi.  he sleeps to no avail. <ne:m-cochi>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nencoco     venido. <o:-p11-p54-ne:m-coa-dir1b>. 71m1-20|
  nencoh , te-.  ; it disappointed one; it disappoints one. <p52-ne:m-
    coa-prt1>. b.10 f.4 p.69|
  nencoliztica     alguno no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlando
    assi  (assi is burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua
    que le  auian de dar); burlando; o enga?ando a otros. <p52-ne:m-coa-
    liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-2|
  nencoliztli     <p53-ne:m-coa-liz>. 55m-8|
  nencoliztli     todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burla assi  (assi is burlar a
    alguno; no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le  auian de dar);
    burla; o enga?o hecho a otro; cortedad de cumplimiento. <p52-ne:m-
    coa-liz>. 55m-2|
  nencolli     no le dando todo lo que el pensaua que le dieran); burlado desta
    manera  (desta manera is burlar a alguno; no le dando todo lo que el
    pensaua que le  auian de dar); el que es defraudado; delo que
    pretendia y deseaua. <p51-ne:m-coa-l1>. 55m-2|
  nencolo , ne-.  . <p53-ne:m-coa-lo:2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nencua , nic-.  I eat it in vain. <p11-p33-ne:m-cua:>. b.1 f.2 p.46|
  nencuacua , te-.  inedible; it pricks someone for no purpose. <p52-
    ne:m-dupl-cua:>. b.10 f.4 p.69|
  nencuaya , qui-.  they ate it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-cua:-ya3>.
    b.9 f.3 p.30|
  nencui , qui-.  he appropriates it without purpose. <p33-ne:m-cui>.
    b.4 f.12 p.125|
  nencui     <p11-p51-ne:m-cui>. 71m2-12|
  nencuiqueh , qui-.  . <p33-ne:m-cui-plur01>. b.4 f.7 p.62|
  nenemi   nenemmauhtilli     espantado de improuiso y subitamente. <p51-p53-ne:m-mahui-caus02-
    l1>. 55m-9|
  nenempochtlahtoa.  ceceoso. <dupl-ne:m-potla-l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06>.
    55m-4|
  nenempochtlahtoa     caus06>. 55m-4|
  nenempochtlahtoa     l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06>. 71m2-12|
  nenempochtlahtoani.  ceceoso. <dupl-ne:m-potla-l2-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    ni1>. 71m2-12|
  nenempotla.  . <dupl-ne:m-potla>. b.10 f.1 p.12|
  nenencahua , ahmo-.  . <ah1-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-caus09>. b.4 f.12
    p.125|
  nenencahua , ximo-.  be wasteful [command]. <p6-p54-dupl-ne:m-ca:hui-
    caus09>. b.6 f.8 p.92|
  nenenco , te-.  . <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.10 f.2 p.28|
  nenencoa , mo-.  ; he frustrates himself. <p54-dupl-ne:m-coa>. b.4 f.1
    p.8|
  nenencoa , ommo-.  . <o:n-p54-dupl-ne:m-coa>. b.5 f.2 p.179|
  nenencoa , te-.  it repeatedly disappoints one. <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa>.
    b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nenencoh , te-.  ; it repeatedly disappointed one; it repeatedly
    disappoints one. <p52-dupl-ne:m-coa-prt1>. b.11 f.12 p.122|
  nenencoliztli     fraudado de su deseo). <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nenencolo , ne-.  . <p53-dupl-ne:m-coa-lo:2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenenquixtilo.  . <dupl-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-lo:2 +z>x>. b.2 f.11
    p.171|
  nenenquizan , hual-.  . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-->. b.4 f.3 p.21|
  nenenquizaya , hual-.  . <hua:l-dupl-ne:m-qui:za-ya3>. b.4 f.5 p.48|
  nenentlamati     2|
  nenhuehuetlalia     p52-ne:m-hue:hueh-tla:lia:>. 71m1-6|
  nenhuehuetlalia     honroso alque no tiene partes para el. <p11-p52-ne:m-hue:hueh-
    tla:lia:>. 71m2-12|
  nenhuetz , o-.  it came in misfortune. <o:-ne:m-huetzi-prt1>. b.2 f.5
    p.98|
  nenhuetzi.  ; it is in vain. <ne:m-huetzi>. b.7 f.1 p.13|
  nenhuetziliztica.  desdichadamente; o en vano. <ne:m-huetzi-liz-ti1-
    ca2>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetziliztli.  desdicha. <ne:m-huetzi-liz>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetzini.  desdichado. <ne:m-huetzi-ni1>. 55m-5|
  nenhuetziz.  it will be in vain. <ne:m-huetzi-z>. b.4 f.1 p.2|
  nenia.  . <ne:m-->. b.4 f.2 p.17|
  nennanyotl, nentahyotl.  descuido de padres, y madres que no tienen
    cuydado de sus hijos y dan en esto mal exemplo. <ne:m-na:ntli-yo:tl1
    ne:m-tahtli-yo:tl1 +kin>. 71m2-12|
  nennemi.  . <ne:m-nemi>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nennemi   nennemi     71m1].  andar vagueando. <p11-ne:m-nemi>. 71m1-2|
  nennemi     12|
  nennemi     10|
  nennemi     ne:m-nemi>. 55m-00|
  nennemi     nemi>. 71m2-3|
  nennemiliztli     desaprouechada. <zan ne:m-nemi-liz>. 55m-5|
  nennemilizzotl     nemi-liz-yo:tl1>. 55m-11|
  nennemilizzotl     ne:m-nemi-liz-yo:tl1 +zy>zz>. 71m1-13|
  nennemini     zannennemini: 71m2].  vagamundo. <zan ne:m-nemi-ni1>. 71m2-3|
  nennenemi     nennenemi; redo this: 55m].  mostrenco. <zan ne:m-dupl-nemi>. 55m-
    14|
  nennenemi   nennenqui     desaprouechar). <zan ne:m-nemi-prt1-qui1>. 71m2-3|
  nenontemi.  . <ne:m-o:n-temi>. b.2 f.10 p.162|
  nenoquich.  profitless man. <ne:m-oquichtli-trunc>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenqueloliztli     v03a-caus06-liz +out.rig>. 71m1-10|
  nenqui     vagamundo. <zan ne:m nemi-prt1-c2>. 71m1-7|
  nenquixti , tic-.  . <p12-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-opt  +z>x>. b.6 f.8
    p.92|
  nenquixtia , qui-.  they waste it. <p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 +z>x>. b.6
    f.1 p.7|
  nenquixtia , titla-.  we neglect things. <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02
    +z>x>. b.6 f.11 p.138|
  nenquixtia , tla-.  he squanders; she squanders. <p51-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02  +z>x>. b.10 f.3 p.41|
  nenquixtia , tontla-.  we neglect something. <p21-o:n-p51-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02 +z>x>. b.6 f.15 p.191|
  nenquixtia ?.  tirar certero. <ah1-mo: p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-
    caus02 +z>x>. 55m-19|
  nenquixtia     55m-10|
  nenquixtia     provecho, o en vano, o no acertar ala que tiraua. <p11-p51-ne:m-
    qui:za-caus02 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia icemilhuitl iceyoal     la noche desaprouechadamente. <p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 cem-
    ilhuitl cem-yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl     prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl +z>x>. 55m-15|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl in ceyohual     p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl in cem yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m1-
    12|
  nenquixtia in cemilhuitl in ceyoal     ceyoal.  gastar el dia y la noche en vano y sin prouecho. <p11-p33-
    ne:m-qui:za-caus02-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1 +z>x>. 71m2-12|
  nenquixtia incemilhuitl     p33-ne:m-qui:za-caus02 in cem-ilhuitl +z>x>. 71m1-16|
  nenquixtiani , tla-.  one who is a squanderer. <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-
    ni1  +z>x>. b.10 f.3 p.41|
  nenquixtiani     ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ni1 +z>x>. 71m2-22|
  nenquixticahua , titla-.  . <p21-p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-ca:5-- +z>x>.
    b.6 f.11 p.137|
  nenquixtilia , quimo-.  he [H.] fails him. <p33-p54-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-
    ben +z>x>. b.6 f.17 p.217|
  nenquixtiliztli     desperdiciador de hazienda). <p51-ne:m-qui:za-caus02-liz +z>x>. 55m-
    10|
  nenquixtilli     +z>x>. 71m2-22|
  nenquiza.  . <ne:m-qui:za>. b.4 f.3 p.21|
  nenquiza     qui:za>. 71m2-12|
  nenquiza     vano. <p11-ne:m-qui:za>. 71m1-12|
  nenquiza     ne:m-qui:za>. 71m2-12|
  nenquiza     qui:za>. 71m2-3|
  nenquiza   nenquiza.  it comes to nothing, it is in vain; she works in vain.
    <ne:m-qui:za>. b.11 f.24 p.254|
  nenquizaliztica.  desdichadamente. <ne:m-qui:za-liz-ti1-ca2>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaliztli.  . <ne:m-qui:za-liz>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizaliztli.  desdicha; miseria contraria de dicha. <ne:m-qui:za-
    liz>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaliztli     liz>. 55m-5|
  nenquizani.  desdichado. <ne:m-qui:za-ni1>. 55m-5|
  nenquizaz.  he will go forth in vain; it will fail. <ne:m-qui:za-z>.
    b.5 f.1 p.158|
  nenquizcatlamatiliztli.  sciencia vana y sin prouecho. <ne:m-qui:za-
    ca:6-p51-mati-liz>. 71m2-12|
  nenquizcayotl.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-ca:5-yo:tl1>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizqueh.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-plur14>. b.1 f.3 p.55|
  nenquizqui.  . <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nenquizqui ?osa vtil y prouechosa; no sin prouecho. <ah1-ne:m-
    qui:za-prt1-c2>. 71m2-1|
  nenquizqui     ne:m-qui:za-prt1-qui1>. 55m-5|
  nenquizqui.  useless; worthless. <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-c2>. b.10 f.1
    p.12|
  nenquiztimani.  it lies useless; it lies worthless. <ne:m-qui:za-prt1-
    ti1-mani aux04>. b.11 f.24 p.254|
  nenquiztinemi.  they go along whiling away their time. <ne:m-qui:za-
    prt1-ti1-nemi aux01>. b.10 f.11 p.179|
  nentahyotl, nennayotl.   <lo mesmo es que nennayotl>. <ne:m-tahtli-
    yo:tl1 ne:m-na:ntli-yo:tl1 +del.n +kin>. 71m2-12|
  nentetlauhtiani.  gracioso dador de balde; prodigo y liberal. <ne:m-
    p52-tlauhtia:-ni1>. 55m-10|
  nenti.  ; he fails; it is in vain; it is useless. <ne:m-v01a>. b.2
    f.10 p.157|
  nentlacah.  worthless people. <ne:m-tla:catl-plur06>. b.1 f.3 p.55|
  nentlacatl.  . <ne:m-tla:catl>. b.2 f.11 p.171|
  nentlacatl.  ciuil o apocado; cuitado miserable; desalmado floxo;
    desuenturado; haragan. <ne:m-tla:catl>. 71m1-6|
  nentlacatl , ti-.  you are a useless person. <p12-ne:m-tla:catl>. b.6
    f.10 p.118|
  nentlacatl   nentlacatl   nentlacatl.  useless; useless person; useless man; worthless;
    worthless person. <ne:m-tla:catl>. b.11 f.20 p.199|
  nentlacayotl.  . <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1>. b.6 f.9 p.107|
  nentlacayotl     tla:catl-yo:tl1>. 55m-11|
  nentlacayotl     tla:catl-yo:tl1>. 71m1-13|
  nentlacayotl.  uselessness. <ne:m-tla:catl-yo:tl1>. b.6 f.1 p.7|
  nentlachiuhtli     chi:hua-l2>. 55m-8|
  nentlahmachtiani     v04-caus08-ni1 +t>ch>. 71m2-17|
  nentlahmachtiliztli     mati-l2-v04-caus08
h>. 71m2-17|
  nentlahmachtilli     ih2-mati-l2-verb-l1 +t>ch>. 71m2-22|
  nentlahtoani.  hablador vano; parlon vano. <ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    ni1>. 55m-10|
  nentlahtoani     55m-10|
  nentlahtoliztli.  habla en esta manera  (en esta manera is hablador
    vano). <ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  nentlahtoliztli     hablador vano). <zan ne:m-p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  nentlamachiliz , i-.  his anguish, his torment; his affliction. <poss-
    ne:m-p51-mati-liz +t>ch>. b.1 f.1 p.25|
  nentlamachiliztica.  solicitamente y con congoxa; congoxosamente; o
    con aflicion y angustia. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz-ti1-ca2 +t>ch>. 55m-18|
  nentlamachiliztli.  angustia; congoxa; o aflicion. <ne:m-p51-mati-
    caus02-liz +t>ch>. 55m-00|
  nentlamachiliztli     compassion que se tiene de otros. <poss-ca2 ne:m-p51-mati-liz +t>ch
    +out.rig>. 55m-3|
  nentlamachitia , ammo-.  you [pl., H.] are anguished. <p22-p54-ne:m-
    p51-mati-caus03 H3 +t>ch>. b.3 f.4 p.62|
  nentlamachitia , amo-.  you [pl.] suffer affliction. <p22-p54-ne:m-p51-
    mati-caus03 +t>ch>. b.6 f.11 p.127|
  nentlamacho.  there is humility, there is anguish. <ne:m-p51-mati-lo:2
    +t>ch>. b.4 f.4 p.33|
  nentlamachohuaya.  place of affliction, place of anguish. <ne:m-p51-
    mati-lo:2-hua2-ya:n +del.n>. b.11 f.11 p.105|
  nentlamachtia     cosa. <ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtia     p54-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtia     descontentar y dar pena a otro; desplazer; entristecer a otro. <p11-
    p52-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 55m-00|
  nentlamachtia     (desta manera is afligir me otro, o alguna cosa). <p11-p52-ne:m-p51-
    mati-caus02 +t>ch>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamachtiani     caus02-ni1 +t>ch>. 55m-8|
  nentlamachtican , te-.  place of affliction, place of anguish. <p52-
    ne:m-p51-mati--ca:n>. b.11 f.11 p.105|
  nentlamachtiliztli     dar pena a otro); entristecimiento. <p52-ne:m-p51-mati-caus02-liz
    +t>ch>. 71m1-7|
  nentlamachtilli     +t>ch>. 71m1-10|
  nentlamati.  angustiado; mustia persona. <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 71m1-
    2|
  nentlamati , an-.  you [pl.] are anguished. <p22-ne:m-p51-mati>. b.6
    f.13 p.153|
  nentlamati , ni-.  ; I am discontent; I am unhappy. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati
    +fusion>. b.6 f.4 p.43|
  nentlamati , quin-.  . <p43-ne:m-p51-mati>. b.9 f.5 p.64|
  nentlamati , ti-.  ; we are concerned; we are not discontent. <p12-
    ne:m-p51-mati>. b.3 f.4 p.52|
  nentlamati ?itlaic ti.  tienes pena de algo?. <ah1-zo2-itlah-i:c1
    p12-ne:m-p51-mati>. 71m2-1|
  nentlamati     entristecerse; fatiga tener assi  (assi is fatiga del anima);
    solicito estar y congoxojo. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 55m-00|
  nentlamati     que es ensi en algun negocio. <p11-ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamati     ca2 p11-ne:m-p51-mati +out.rig>. 55m-3|
  nentlamati     <poss-ca2 p11-ne:m-p51-mati +out.rig>. 71m2-15|
  nentlamati.  he is saddened; he is anguished; he is discontent; they
    are anguished. <ne:m-p51-mati +fusion>. b.9 f.3 p.32|
  nentlamatia , mo-.  . <ne:m-p51-mati-->. b.4 f.7 p.63|
  nentlamatia.  he felt humble; he was in torment; he was in distress;
    they were anguished. <ne:m-p51-mati-ya3>. b.4 f.4 p.33|
  nentlamatiliztica.  congoxosamente, o con aflicion. &c; solicitamente
    y con congoxa. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz-ti1-ca2 +fusion>. 71m2-12|
  nentlamatiliztli.  angustia; descontentamiento assi o descontento
    (assi is descontentar a otro); descontento aflicion; o angustia;
    fatiga del anima; passion congoxosa; tribulacion. <ne:m-p51-mati-liz
    +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatiliztli     mati-liz +out.rig>. 55m-13|
  nentlamatini.  angustiado; angustiado. &c; solicita cosa con congoxa.
    <ne:m-p51-mati-ni1 +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatqui.  angustiado; angustiado. &c. <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-c2
    +fusion>. 71m1-2|
  nentlamatticatca , onon-.  I had been afflicted. <o:-p11-o:n-ne:m-p51-
    mati-prt1-ti1-ca:1a-ca10 aux11a>. b.12 f.3 p.44|
  nentlamattinemi.  they go along in anguish. <ne:m-p51-mati-prt1-ti1-
    nemi aux01 +fusion>. b.6 f.1 p.9|
  nentlamattinenca , o-.  he had lived in discontent. <o:-ne:m-p51-mati-
    prt1-ti1-nemi-prt1-ca10 aux01>. b.5 f.2 p.178|
  nentlamia     55m-10|
  nentlamia     prouecho alguna cosa. <p11-p51-ne:m-tlami-caus08>. 71m2-12|
  nentlan     aprouechar nada. <o:-p51-ne:m-tlami-prt1>. 71m2-13|
  nentlatlahtolli.  useless discussion. <ne:m-dupl-p51-ihtahui-caus06-
    l1>. b.4 f.9 p.96|
  nentlaza     dia sin prouecho. <p11-p33-ne:m-tla:za>. 55m-15|
  nentlaza icemilhuitl iceyoal     noche desaprouechadamente. <ne:m-tla:za-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-
    l1>. 71m2-12|
  nentlaza in cemilhuitl     tla:za in cem-ilhuitl>. 71m1-12|
  nentlaza incemilhuitl inceyoal     ceyoal.   <lo mesmo es que nenquixtia yncemilhuitl. &c>. <p11-p33-
    ne:m-tla:za-in-cem-ilhuitl-in-cem-yohua-l1>. 71m2-12|
  nentoco   nentoco     toca2-lo:1>. 71m2-12|
  nenyeni   nenyo     yo:tl1>. 71m2-3|
  nenyotl   onen.  in vain, fruitless. <o:-ne:m +min>. b.10 f.1 p.5|
  pic zan nen     11|
  polihuiz ?nnen.  no se desperdiciara. <ah1-mo: zan ne:m polihui-
    z>. 71m2-1|
  quiza     qui:za>. 71m1-10|
  quizaliztli     7|
  quizqui     ne:m qui:za-prt1-c2>. 71m1-7|
  teixnempehualtiani [scribal error: ??printing error: teixnemualtiani
    for teixnempeualtiani: 55m].  acometedor. <p52-i:xtli-ne:m-pe:hua-
    caus01-ni1>. 55m-00|
  temictli   tetolinia     agrauiador. <zan ne:m p52-toli:nia:>. 71m1-1|
  timaloliztli     v03a-caus06-liz>. 55m-10|
  tlachiuhtli     chi:hua-l2>. 71m1-11|
  tlahtoani     71m1-12|
  tlahtoliztli     hablador vano). <zan ne:m p51-ihtahui-caus06-liz>. 71m1-12|
  tlalnemiuhyan.  . <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. b.11 f.9 p.83|
  tlalnemiuhyan     tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-ya:n>. 71m1-20|
  tlalnemiuhyan.  bare ground; barren ground. <tla:lli-ne:m-v03a-prt1-
    ya:n>. b.11 f.8 p.76|
  tlanemmaca     6|
  tleh zannen.  que prouecho se sigue? o que aprouecho. s. lo que sea
    trabajado?. <tleh zan-ne:m>. 71m2-25|
  tolinia     +mis_analysis.x>. 71m1-1|
  toliniliztica     liz-ti1-ca2>. 71m1-1|
  toliniliztli     1|
  tolinilli     1|
  yaliztica     14|
  yauh     <zan ne:m p11-o:n-yauh1>. 55m-6|
  yauh     yauh1>. 71m2-3|
  yeliztli   yeni   zannen ? sin prouecho o sin razon. s. heziste algo. <ah1-
    zo2 zan-ne:m>. 71m2-1|
  zannen   zannentitlantli.  mensajero de vanidad. <zan-ne:m-ti:tlani-l2>. 71m1-
    15|






_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 08:08:15 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (brokaw at buffalo.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:08:15 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.040815.0400.>

&??b??{ejv??????????????X????#???????r??bu??????+*??-???z??j\?j???!zr(?("??e??$y??z?Z????????b????'!???u?i?????r??v????????{ay???+???!??]?????????y?a????+!!?.???jg?????????'j|?j??m????(??'y?lz?"??"?????????????%j????&z?b???*kz????????{?&??h?????.z?&?????^?br????{??????aj?ay??y??v'?z???&?j?ay????a{'??+)??nq?[??^v'?z??q??????^??Z?'???????O?k'2rW???nq?[??^r???v????~?^?GZ??"?{??w???z??9?(????b??&n)??*'?????i??????k+???w?O???????????????o+az????(_&?{a??????????????!??\?g???????????^~+?u????????zh?y?h?????&?W?z?^??Z?'??????Z???jW?:t??N??????????&???????&??q??m???wbjv?y??z{?????)??r???^??#??????????j??-??????zj'??????????(??azX?????'?-????????~???+aj{a{??j\????????^???nW?????X"??^??!j??j?h????o?Z??a?y"??h?????(??b?v?u?&y???V?z?"?????j???????-?)????+bjW?zg???????????????j?brW??w????v?^??-??a{?a???+???{?????????g??????^??????????+ez??jwn????+!?.?????????q????iy???????^???????{(?????Z???????????????)???????}????!j?????????????_???a??,?????z{ei?b?e????w?z??+a?x???\?????a?y-??????????zh????z?Z????X????k?a????????zh??+n??^??r~)e??a?????r~+?u?????j???wl?{az?i??j??jz'?j?'??????????zz'???+,??-??????Y????zh?????????bk???Y[y???V?z?????????b?
??????????F??????????????8b?+??????*'???m???????????*???'????????????h????+????????y?h??b???"????+zg?m????-?x-?+,jg???-?????^?+-j{?m?????j???????r??v?~)????????b????l???"n\?}?lzg????~?Z???z??!?'??a?y??Z?/?z?h??????z?????z??v'?z???)?z?kz?????????????h??2??a??????jYhbrzg????m?v??z?????z{b(?????????^?????&??azg??+a??^??Z?x???+ji??'?\??a{,(?O??????wm?????(~??}?????r???????e??azj+?%????a?y-????*'jW?z?u?Z?h???Z?+??????!j?Z?????b?????(??^??????y?'??i??????z??)???a{
+w???w??br?[-?h?w???/???b???jwm??Z??Z?????^?/??'!?????h~)e????m??????j??jX??X?j??????+??????h?'?)?z?kz???????Z?*.???k?????z???jh?w???^????(??w?o+ay??y?b?v??????^??'???z??nW???aj??v????b?L???j|???{??W???a????wh~?k??n????????aj?????????x-???zh???????????[??+???????j?rj?ki?b?????????????????^????????h??~+?u??z??v)??????j????????^??Z?'?????????zwh~?^???s'%z??????('??????f????v?^m?"?x??????{(???y??J??zh??????????(?????z)???m???z??v?0?'!?w??{^?/?y????.?????'q??y?j?ay??{?Z??????u??y?h????????(??^?*'??a{?????'????????%?)????f???b?z??????('???w]??f?????'!?????m????[???^v'?z??q??z?z{aj????Z??????v?^?~??????Z?'???0??n???????Z?Z?l???????V????j?^??l????????~?^??^??^???????????k????'???r??????j|?k/???^zw??.??r??v??????????k+h?????~???Z???????(~?^????v??????p??]j[(m?????j??jYrr????^??????zh??)???&z?b?
?*.??{???????#????????z?z?$y?b?h?w?aj?ay??zwZ??k???)h?ki?????jwm??Z????x^?+^v+?~?&??^?
????J????^?i??????z???)??\?z??y???o??g???????????z???????g?f???????????h?'??n?9^??+????G??+??sZ???????l????????+-??kzV??????)y?"?a{&?y???????Z??pk+y????h~??????x-?g?#?Z?????+?????!??a?????j??n?H????????-????+?j?a??h?{????jW??$k???????q????^???"v?j(??.??????y?h;^q??q????,ka???????{??.z?????_???LC????????aj??zyb?????(??^????????????q???*'z???g???m??????\?i????????x(~?b?
+w?????v0i???x??????????v?????y??r??u??y???????!j?Z????X?y????(??^?????????????8Z?K"??ojww???????????????+?~??y?(???zyb?^??????????+r????????q?b?X????????'Zw??k????????*?.?V???C?????{?k*-??+?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Z????f??)??+-???j?????+-??????????m?????}????+????Y???b???~??j??_??????????????????????????????????????????Z????f??)??+-??Z????_???l????/????????0????????????????+-?w??v???e??????????????????????????????????????????5?nj?fj)b?	b??Z?????b???}????+?m?????}????+????Y???b???~??j?


From lovegren at buffalo.edu  Thu Apr 23 21:02:46 2009
From: lovegren at buffalo.edu (Jesse Lovegren)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:02:46 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F0AEEB.8050107@cox.net>
Message-ID: <THU.23.APR.2009.170246.0400.LOVEGREN@BUFFALO.EDU>

Servant ? d?signer les cinq jours compl?mentaires de l'ann?e (Clav., Sah.).

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:09 PM, micc2 <micc2 at cox.net> wrote:

>  In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:  *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat
> l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to complete"
>
> *
>
> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word is,
> and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as **"what
> has been lived, to complete"?
> *
>
> *
> Thanks in advanced!***
>
> --
>
> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>
> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>
>
> Mario E. Aguilar, PhDwww.mexicayotl.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Jesse Lovegren
Department of Linguistics
645 Baldy Hall
office +1 716 645 0136
cell +1 512 584 5468
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090423/1ac24037/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 13:37:40 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:37:40 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <20090423193755.5l1eej7ccoko4sw0@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.093740.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

Evidently, my message last night, or early this morning rather, went 
through garbled. Here it is again.
Galen

Joe,
Your explanation sounds very familiar. So I'm sure that you did answer this
question several years ago when I originally asked, perhaps not on the list,
which would explain why I couldn?t find it in the archive. I should have
remembered this. I wish I could blame it on age. :-)
In any case, before someone else points it out, I also wanted to clarify
something in my previous message. I mispoke, or I guess mis-wrote, which is
worse, in saying that the five day differential at the end of the year is
produced by the difference between the solar year and the 360-day cycle 
produced
by the combination of the 20 days signs and 13 numbers. Of course, this
combination produces a cycle of 260 days, not 360. The 360 cycle is 
produced by
the series of 18 months of twenty days each, which comes to 360 days 
with the
five days of nemontemi left over to complete the solar year of 365 days.

Galen



Campbell, R. Joe wrote:
> I'd like to second Galen's judgement of "good question". "nemontemi" 
> certainly gets the linguistic cogs turning in more frenzy than the 
> analysis of some other problems. I'll give here what is a short form 
> of what I think is a possible solution and come back later with more 
> material.
>
> I think the initial element of "nemontemi" is the particle "ne:m" and 
> the rest of the "phrase" is "on-te:mi". "ne:m" means "useless, in 
> vain, fruitless" and usually shows up as "nen", since it appears more 
> often before consonants than before vowels (e.g., "ninenquiza (I fail 
> to have success), nentlacatl (worthless person, nentlachiuhtli 
> (unnecessary thing), etc.).
>
> I think the sense of "nemontemi" (or perhaps earlier, as a phrase, 
> "nen ontemi": it uselessly fills (those empty five days)
>
> Mary finds in the vocabulario anonimo (Ayer ms. 1478):
>
> nenontemi Bissiesto
>
> ilhuitl nenontemi entrepuesto dia
>
> I'll be back later,
>
> Joe
>
>
> Quoting Galen Brokaw <brokaw at buffalo.edu>:
>
>> This is a good question. I'd be interested in any responses as well. I
>> puzzled over this for quite a while at one time. I seem to remember
>> posting this same question to the list a number of years ago, but I
>> couldn't find it in the archive. In my possibly false memory of that
>> query, I don't think I got any response.
>> I've seen several different interpretations of the morphology of this
>> word, all of which seemed to be based on merely identifying certain
>> elements as morphemes without explaining grammatically how they work
>> together. And they also often fail to account for all of the morphology.
>> I think the rationale behind claiming that it means "what has been
>> lived, to complete" is based on the fact that the beginning of the word
>> is 'nem' which calls to mind 'nemi' (to live) and the last part is
>> 'temi' which means 'to fill up.' But the grammatical implication of this
>> morphological interpretation is that you have a verb-verb compound
>> ostensibly joined by the directional particle 'on.' The problem is that
>> I don't think we have any other examples of this kind of structure.
>> Having said that, interpreting the 'temi' part as 'to fill up' is
>> particularly attractive. As I'm sure you know, the word refers to the
>> five day period in the calendar at the end of the solar year between the
>> end of the 360-cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers and the beginning of
>> the new solar year. So 'temi' makes a certain sort of sense in that the
>> period to which 'nemontemi' refers could be conceived of as the five-day
>> remainder left over from the completion of the calendrical cycle
>> involving the combination of the 20 day signs and 13 numbers, which is
>> used to "fill up" the difference between that 360-day cycle and the
>> 365-day solar year. I won't bore you with all of my other speculative
>> attempts to make sense of the other elements. They are probably fairly
>> obvious anyway. In the end, though, I couldn't figure out a way to
>> account for all of the elements of the word in a way that would also be
>> grammatically consistent. I may be missing something obvious here,
>> though. If I'm not, then we have to keep in mind that the calendar had a
>> very long tradition, and the Nahuas inherited it from other groups. So
>> the term may even have originally derived from some other language.
>> There are a good number of other morphological puzzles sort of like this
>> in Nahuatl, but my impression is that relatively speaking they are few.
>> This has always been sort of surprising to me. I have a theory about why
>> this is the case, but I won't subject you to it at this point.
>>
>> Galen Brokaw
>>
>>
>>
>> micc2 wrote:
>>> In a yahoo group dedicated to Aztec dancers, I saw this:
>>> *[ConsejoQuetzalcoat l] NEMONTEMI means "what has been lived, to 
>>> complete"
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> *can anyone tell me what the generally accepted meaning of this word
>>> is, and how a definitition of the end of the yeara could be seen as
>>> **"what has been lived, to complete"?
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>> Thanks in advanced!***
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> I live for reasoned, enlightened spirituality:
>>>
>>> "Tlacecelilli", tranquilidad, paz
>>>
>>>
>>> Mario E. Aguilar, PhD
>>> www.mexicayotl.org
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nahuatl mailing list
>>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Fri Apr 24 14:22:44 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:22:44 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1C0A4.7050406@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.102244.0400.>


??jY?a????1??????y??y?????"?.??????|?????z??zw??{???{????????^???V'-????????Zu?????????nv*,u?????h????ejZ'???y?(?br^??d?????az??nW????????????$y?m?????j????????{???+?????????????h??b??.???v???w?????k?????u???????^????{^?h??-?:'j?Z???)??^?????n?$k???????v???K?u???/??g?????-?(!??+y????b?j+?)???az??z{????`j??y??z???+?????????????(????V?j????.??/z??jh????J?????z?Z?*.v'Z????b???z?b?{????'?????^??+??jYrj?w?^???z-?{azX?????'!???u?i?????r??v????????{ay???+???!??]??????zf???m?+?#???(?W[?????'j????"v????{??~??????w?????)??+h???j[(???y?hrV??????????)?????*.?g????????${?+"??????+??????+????{??????aj?ay??y??v'?z???&?j?ay????a{'??+??????o+ay??}?????z?z{az?%j??j??v?^???u????^???v?w?????f???b?z???????????w]??f????}?.???????&n)??*'?????i??????k+???w?O?????????????v?u????z??????j'?(~????k+i??????&z?h??k+??+a??~+?u????????zh?y?h?????&?W?z?^??Z?'??????Z????f?z????????_?????-{??#?e?G?????wFjW????v?z{h?(???z?b???w??{^?/????????(??azX?????'?-????????~???+aj{a{????r?+(~?&z?az?k??^????Y`???z????b??!??_????????H???+??,??^??n?*'jw\?g?i?%j???+a?????????j_????????^?x???^??????w??{^?/???^?????^?w????w????????????????'????/??w????j{????z????????????^????????e??h???j??z??)?z+Z???????????^???????{(?????Z???????????????)???????}????h?????z???w??V?j??????W????????????!??m?/????y??????????????????a?y-??????????zh????z?Z????X????j?kj?????zz'?????????z?%????????zjm???y????????'???"??^??n?Z?*???????????x???????????????'???????????w??{^?'??????-??????#?em??rIZ??????&????????)??^?????n?$k???????v??????8b?+??????*'???m?????????v???????z????e???????W??????~???+^kb????w??g?"????+zg?m????h?????b???z???????-??b????f????y??j
?n?H?????]??_?wb?)????r?{?'?*h????'????zj+?????????z??!?'??a?y??Z?*???'????????z{??????}??????????Z?*'????????h??2??a????
+w??????'!???y?hm????h?g?z\?u????????????zW?z{lj????^??0??h????V??)??????bq?e?0?????????????wm?????(~??}?????r????+jYh~?^?????h?/???-?)???j????^m?b??%j)??aj???????!j?Z???????+?w?hr????^?+j???{ay????Z??^m?"?x??????(????+???????????h?)??w?????X?{??v?^??-????????^?/??'!?????h~)e????m??+ji??'?)??'?*'??a????j+?%??jX??????Z?*'??aj????y?????z???jh?w???,?????r???y????????*'jZZ???????????k??^?+-???????????j???*-????????(~?b?H?v????????????????aj?????????x-???zh????j???????????????'.?????m??-????????{*.?z0??^????????h???????Z?????b??^q?^???j?ay????az?%j??j??????^????????O???^???u???	?jwu?{?m??jwm????)??x(????{(???y??J??zh??????????+???z{?{aj?a{???????h????????zh??????(?W[y?'q??y?j?ay??{?Z???????w^?W?????????^r????b?z??jW?v??jW2rW??????o?x-??(???j????????u???	?jwu?{?m???br??????m????[???^v'?z??q??????Z?~????s'%y?????????Z??%j??j???????+{*.?+ajYh~l???????V????????????h?????z????-?????????N?j?????n\?j*??????????,??'????????????]??_??z??k?????????~???Z???????(~?^????v?k+aj?(?WZ??{???????bq?e??'?+-z{?"f?m???????&z?b?
?*.??{????h??!???z-??^??j???G??)??wm??m?????j?Zu??????Z'???v+b????ax????"?????????j-??????????????^?i??????z???)??\?z??y???k(??-???jx.j???????j???????z???^?j+?%??jZn?9^??+????G??+????5?nj??n?f?)???,?????Z???j??z\?????x-??????????8b??j\???z{(??????+"?h??????j?^???n??????a?????j??n?H????????-????+Z??b??"???????f?zpk?F???????????'?
???????????? ???u?bq?^v
?????????????h??^~)??+b?z??????y??r??u??y????????????y????????jez?????????????????????)?v??q???????????????????b?????????w???(!???v?b?+njX????????????q?b?X????????'Zw?Z???????????????????>??????{?k*-??+????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????5?nj?fj)b?	b?????Z?????b???}????+????m?????}????+????Y???b???~??j??_?????????????????????????????????????????????Z????f??)??+-???j??_???l????/????m?????}????+????Y???b???~??j??_??????????????????????????????????????????????j??Y??X??X???Z?????b???}????+??m????0????/???j)fj???b?????nj????h??ajp?h??8?y?h???'(??+???
???????zz.??????z?^???r~)bj???m???


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 15:15:42 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:15:42 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <20090424102244.fknitu92u8ok0wog@www.mail.yale.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.111542.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

"h??aj?????^?)?j)??????azg??)???-??0??m??)y????Z??(~?^??Z????'!"??z?-jwpz???{"u??vH?v??jx????????$??n??^??????????
.??Z??h?????]k+"?{????'?f?????+#??m??m??~+?u???+a??????('?????[zZ'??(????z?j????l???????????z???????????????y??m?u???????^?('??azV?????????]k*??y?????u?pk+z?^????8h?????Z???z?^????{aj?azv?z???y??r????w?zX??????????*.?????????i?^??^?('jwm????????ay????Z??????j?????jje{????????m??2rW?~?????	?z(!????)??????^r??????y???????j???????Z????zj'????*-?????]k*??zj'?????ay???y??
jz-?????^??az????k+"?{?N??????Z??^~*??????azw??{^?,"?XZ??az??y???('j?ay????Z?????ry?????g???aj?ay????Z????????(???y???Y[z?^?,m????)??????q????Z???z?ay??y?????????zj'?????'v?^~*??????ay?%??"??j?"?V?????l?	???^???zw??^??^?,my?????v?^??^~*???????az?(?????jg???a{'????G?????)????m?+????('???zw?8^r???{??2rW?~?b????{?m??????\??.??-???('?
+??.??-??b~?^???z?(???????x-??^~*??????ay?????j????az{az{?m??~?^~*??????azw??'???????????'?	????f???b?z????^??????j?,?	??+a???*?y???f??????????????'????????'?????????]?o?!?azv?z?????j??m?v????Z??Z??????j???
+??az??{????j?j|????q?^???q?]k*j|????????)em?~??o'???"?{??'z{?m???????(???????xk*?????????az?????z{ry???f?zx???aj??+a?&?{???
???????a|????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o????_???????????????????????[????????????????????????????????o???????????????????????????O????????????????????????????g????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????O????????????{??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????_????????????????????8??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????{??????????????????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????????????????????????????????????[???????????????????????????o???????????????????????????????????_???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????O????????????????????????????o??????_????????????????????????????????????????????????r?????????????????????k??????????????????????????????????????k?????????<.???????????????????????????????????????????z????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????8???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????6????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????O????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????k??????????????????????????????8????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????b????????????????????????????????????????????/?????????????????????????????L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????<??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????3????????3??????????????????????/?????????????????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????k??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o???????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????6+???????????????????????????k??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g??????????????????????????????/?????????????????o???????????????????k/??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/???????????????????????????????????????????k?????????????????o??????????????????????????g???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g??????????????????/?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????8??????????????????????n??????????????????????????????????????L????????????????????????????????????????k/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????<.?????????????????????????????????????????'??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g??????????????????????????????????'???????????????????????????????????????????<&???????????????g????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Z????????O???????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/??????????????????????????????????????????f?????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????z??????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
k???????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????u???????????g???????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????"???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????<???????????????????????????????????????????o???x??????Y?????????????????????f??????????????g????????????O???????????x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/????????????????????????????[???????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????8?????????????V?????????2?????????????????????????????????o??o??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????j??Y??X??X??????e?X????jk"?????i?????jk"????f??f??X??)???????


From jonathan.amith at yale.edu  Fri Apr 24 15:43:35 2009
From: jonathan.amith at yale.edu (jonathan.amith at yale.edu)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:43:35 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1D79E.8090002@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.114335.0400.>

a???^??r?????????(!???{????z?ay?]y???????2rW?N?%?x0??h??h?H???\jW?u?????)??^?????n?$k???????v???x??v??????-?)????{???j?h~?^????x!j?hv?"?az?^r&???Z??(~?^??Z????'!"??z?-jwpz???{"u??vH?v??u??z?.????[??/???azw??{^?'Z??(?Waj????z?????('??0zYZ?{?m????b?;???Z??^?????Z??"?????u???	?v'g????????'z???????Z?j'??!?a{/??????z???????????????y??m?u???????^????????Z??+????-u??~?^????
.??????m?a{??????~+?u??j?????j?'????jg???a{'???????y??????)???m??.?????jg????y??~?????	?jwm????????ay????Z??????j?????jje{???????k??!????^??pz{r?('?????????z?/z?ay?.????a{'???az|???z?^~+?u????azw??{^?/???^~*???Z?????????zh???^m?"?x??????az?2rW?~?^???/?k+"?{?N??????Z??^~*??????azw??{^?,"?XZ???????Z?????-?????]k*??????br?j{-??m?????-u??~?^??m??Z?'????????"??l?	???^??????{?ay??i?^??^~+?u???('?????????zh??	???~*??????ay?%??"??j?"?V?????l?	???^??????{?az{az?????????az{ay?????j)?"z-????????azv?z???y???Ydy?\??b?a?????b??.??"??z?????N??{b????????????????z?-??fj?!z????????('?
+??.??-??b~?^???z?(???????x-??^?????Z????????ry???_????????????ay????Z?????{ry???Y[{o???(????ay?&n)??*'??ay?????}?.?'???"?{0??m??a??^zy?????+0??i??nq?-??v?'????????'?????????]?o?!?azv?z?????j?????y?'??j?]k*??y????(?K-???????q??y????zw????'????????z|?j?"?V????z??~+??('???v?????z???kay?+??)?wb?Z?????kz?????v?^??????z{ry?????jW?????????????????jW?y????^??????_???????????????????????g???????????????????????????????????????????????????????[?????????????????o??g???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????<?????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????O????????????{??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????_????????????????????8??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????{??????????????????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????????????????????????????????????[???????????????????????????o???????????????????????????????????_???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????O????????????????????????????o??????_????????????????????????????????????????????????r?????????????????????k??????????????????????????????????????k?????????<.???????????????????????????????????????????z????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????8???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????6????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????O????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????k??????????????????????????????8????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????b????????????????????????????????????????????/?????????????????????????????L??????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????<??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????3????????3??????????????????????/?????????????????????????????????????????????????o???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????k??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o???????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????o????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????6+???????????????????????????k?????????????????????????????????????????????????????k????????????o???????????????????g??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/??????????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????n?????????????????????????????????-3?????????????????????????????????????O???????????????????????????????????????????????????b??????????g????????????????????????=???????????/????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????<&??????????????????????_????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????k/?????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????	???????????????????????????????????????????{??????????????????????????????_????????????????????????????????????????????/????????????????????????????????<&??????????????????????????b?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????/??????????????????????????????????????????f?????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????z??????????????????????g?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????k???????????????????????????????????????o??????????????????????????????????????????????o???????g????????????????????????????????????/??????????????????????????????k????????????????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????/?????????????????????????????????????????;??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/???????????????????????????????????????????????o???????????????g????????????O???????????x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???x?????????????g??????????????????o?????????????????????????????????????????????????{???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/?????????????????????????????o??????????#??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????9????????????????o??????L???s???????????????????????????~??????????????????????????????????????9?????????????????????????????????????????h??ajp?h??8?y?h???'(??+???
???????zz.??????z?^???r~)bj???m???


From randa at armory.com  Fri Apr 24 16:46:22 2009
From: randa at armory.com (Randa Marhenke)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:46:22 -0700
Subject: Mappe Quinatzin leaf 3
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.094622.0700.RANDA@ARMORY.COM>

For anyone who may not have a library card, leaf 3 of  Mappe Quinatzin, or a
drawing thereof, can be seen on thumbnail page 209 of a Doctoral Thesis
written by Luz Maria Mohar Betancourt, called "El Mapa Quinazin. ...". It is
obtainable by just going to:

http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/FichaAutor.html?Ref=3463

or

http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/FichaObra.html?Ref=4030&ext=pdf&portal=0

Happy Hunting!
Randa (Marhenke)
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Fri Apr 24 17:46:50 2009
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:46:50 -0400
Subject: Character sets
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.134650.0400.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

Please DO NOT post messages to the entire list telling us that certain 
messages come to you in unreadable characters.  It only causes 
everyone's mailbox to fill.  Those involved are aware of the problem and 
are working to fix it.

J. F. Schwaller,
Moderator, Nahuatl

-- 
*****************************
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY - Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676
Tel. 315-267-2100
FAX 315-267-2496

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From brokaw at buffalo.edu  Fri Apr 24 19:14:05 2009
From: brokaw at buffalo.edu (Galen Brokaw)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:14:05 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.151405.0400.BROKAW@BUFFALO.EDU>

Fritz tells me that several of the messages subsequent to my email last 
night have been garbled, including Jonathan's first message, my reply 
and then his reply. For some reason, most of these have come through 
just fine for me. I suspect that maybe my message from early this 
morning may have caused all the problems. I wrote that message from an 
old laptop that I don't use very much and from a webmail program that I 
believe has caused similar problems with messages to this list in the 
past. I think that program has a default character set that must cause 
problems with the list server. So my apologies. I'm writing this message 
from scratch from my regular computer without hitting 'reply' to any of 
the other messages in this thread. Hopefully that will take care of the 
problem. Anyway, Jonathan's original message said something about the 
relationship between the meaning of "nen" ("in vain") and the five-days 
of the nemontemi period, and I responded as follows:
***
Hi Jonathan,
I think the "in vain" part of the meaning has to do with the special 
status of these days, which I understand were considered kind of 
dangerous or unlucky. But the nemontemi days would have to have had day 
signs as well as numbers. It is just that these five days with their day 
signs did not belong to one of the regular months. If they didn't have 
signs, then the name of the year, based either on the sign of the last 
or the first day of the year, would always be the same. Those five days 
are the reason that the names of the years change and were limited to 
four. If you name your year after the sign and the number of the first 
day of the year, for example, you run through the cycle of twenty signs 
eighteen times over the course of the year, then you have the five days 
of the nemontemi. So the first day of the nemontemi is the beginning of 
another cycle of the twenty day signs. This means that the first day of 
the nemontemi will have the same day sign as the first day of that year, 
which means that the first day of the next solar year will be the sixth 
sign in the sequence (the day after the five day-signs of the 
nemontemi). And the first day of the following year will be the 11th 
sign in the sequence, then the sixteenth, and then the first again. In 
other words, the names of the year will keep cycling through this 
four-sign sequence. The continuing cycle of thirteen numbers that 
matches up to these signs works out so that if the number corresponding 
to the first day of the first year is 1, then the number of the first 
day of the next year will be 2, and so on. And the combination of the 
cycle of four years signs with the thirteen numbers is what produces the 
52 year Mesoamerican "century" (4 x 13 = 52). If the name of the year is 
based on the last day of the year, it works the same way, because any 
given calendrical day of any given year will be offset by five signs and 
one number from the corresponding day of the previous and the subsequent 
years.
Galen
***
Then Jonathan pointed out that all of the nemontemi days of all of the 
years of the 52 year cycle (5 x 52) is equal to 260 days, which is 
equivalent to the 260 day cycle of 20 day signs and 13 numbers. The 
upshot of all this is that the end of all of the interrelated cycles of 
the calender converge at precisely the end of the 52 year "century." So 
each 52 year period would start with the same day-sign and number. And 
the cycle would start again.

So assuming this message goes through, that should catch you up if you 
got the garbled messages.

Galen


_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From campbel at indiana.edu  Fri Apr 24 19:24:25 2009
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:24:25 -0400
Subject: Understanding of a folk etymology
In-Reply-To: <49F1C0A4.7050406@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.24.APR.2009.152425.0400.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

   I forgot to mention one important point about "ne:m" -- the 
phonological identity of its final segment.  It occurs most often as 
[n], but, as we know,
nasal consonants in many languages assimilate to the point of 
articulation of the following consonant and, further, in word final 
position, show no contrast in point of articulation (e.g., only [m] or 
[n] may occur).  So since its pronunciation as [n] is *determined*, it 
is not relevant in revealing whether it is really /m/ or /n/.

   But a few examples of "ne:m" before vowels reveal that the final 
consonant is /m/:

   quinemia       qui-nem-i-[y]a      he drank it in vain

   nemihquitqui   nem-ihquit[i]-qui   poorly woven


...............

   I referred to Ayer 1478 mistakenly as "Vocabulario anonimo";  it 
*is* anonimo, but it is referred to as: Vocabulario trilingue.

Joe

_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From lahunik.62 at skynet.be  Tue Apr 28 22:07:19 2009
From: lahunik.62 at skynet.be (lahunik.62 at skynet.be)
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:07:19 +0200
Subject: The Tonatiuh
Message-ID: <WED.29.APR.2009.000719.0200.>

The Tonatiuh.

According to the "Leylenda del los Soles" the cycle of the 4 Suns, or the
Tonatiuh, should begin on 955 BC., and end on 1073 AD.

So it is said that the 1st Sun should begin on 1 Acatl 4 Ocelotl, "It was
the year 1 Reed, and on a day called 4 Tiger".

The 2nd Sun began on 279 BC, or on 1 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl, "The year of this
Sun was 1 Flint, and was known as 4 Wind".

The 3rd Sun began on 85 AD, or 1 Tecpatl 4 Quiahuitl, "The year was 1 Flint
and the day 4 Rain".

The 4th Sun began on 397 AD, or 1 Calli 4 Atl, "The year was 1 House and the
day 4 Water".

The references to the yeardates are in fact not very right, according to the
current counting of the days.

The 1st Sun should began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Ocelotl, or 8 July 955BC., or
JD1372837.

After 676 years, or 246688 days, the 2nd Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl,
or 1 March 279BC., or JD1619525.

After 364 years, or 132717 days, the 3rd Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Quiahuitl,
or 16 May 85 AD., JD1752242.

After 312 years, or 114010 days, the 4th Sun began on 9 Tecpatl 4 Atl, or 10
July 397AD., JD1866252. This Sun lasted 676 years, or 246948 days, and ended
on 23 August 1073.

This cycle of 4 Suns lasted from 955 BC. till 1073 AD, or 2028 years. The
first and the last Sun lasted 676 years, while the second lasted 364 years
and the third 312 years. The second and the third Sun together is equal
again to 676 years.

The elements of the ancient legend of the 4 Suns are depicted, or sculpted
in the middle of the Sun Stone, which was placed upon the Temple of the Sun
just after the Tizoc stone.

It has been said that the Sun Stone shows us the beginning of the 5th Sun,
the Macuilli Tonatiuh, with the sign of 13 Acatl, 13 Reed, on the top and
the sign of Nahui Olin in the middle, or the completation of the 4 Suns.
Therefore 13 Acatl 4 Olin was linked to the inauguration of the Stone on the
27th May 1479 BC. and to the beginning of the 5th Sun.

At one time it was thought that the glyph of 13 Acatl meant the beginning of
the Creation of the 4 Suns.

However that is all not right.

The sign of 13 Acatl, which is on the top of the Stone, between the tails of
the Serpent, on the Ring of Flames may be in connection with the Sun's Great
Cycle of 26000 years, which should begin and end on 13 Acatl. If we assign a
value of 1300 years (a fractal of 13) to each of the 20 day-glyphs, that
makes a total of 26000 years.

The exact date however of the beginning of the so called 5th Sun was in fact
10 Calli 4 Olin, or 23 August 1073 AD, jD2113200.

In fact the 5th Sun is the first Sun of a new cycle of 4 Suns of 2028 years.

As the first Sun, 10 Calli 4 Olin, 23 August 1073 AD, jD2113200, was the
beginning of a new cycle that lasted 676 years or 246688 days. That brings
us to the date of 19 January 1749, JD 2359888, which was the beginning of
the second Sun of the new cycle, 10 Calli 4 Coatl. This second Sun lasts
from 1749 AD till 2112 AD., or 364 years, or 132717 days.

The third Sun should begin on 2 June 2112, or 9 Tecpatl 4 Ehecatl,
JD2492605. This Sun should last again 312 years, or 114010 days, to 2424 AD.

That brings us to the beginning of the fourth Sun on 26 July 2424,
JD2606615, or 10 Calli 4 Malinalli. This fourth Sun should last again 676
years, or 246948 days, till 3100 AD.

And that brings us again to a third new cycle of 4 Suns, beginning on 9
September 3100 AD, JD2853563, with the first cycle of this third cycle, 10
Calli 4 Xochitl...

As you can see all this cycles begin with a day 4, and are under the
influence of the numbers 676 and 2028. The yeardate switches from 9 Tecpatl
to 10 Calli, the 23rd and 24th year in the bundle of 52.  

Lahun Ik 62

Baert Georges

Flanders Fields

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090429/965816ba/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl