From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sun Mar 1 04:13:09 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 23:13:09 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research Message-ID: From: "Jerry Offner" Date: Sat, February 28, 2009 Recent comments on the list provide an opportunity to point out again the excellence and utility of the body of work assembled by French researchers on things Nahua or Aztec or whatever. For present purposes to avoid further controversy, let's call them "residents of what is now called part of Mexico before the Spanish invasion"--that's got a great commercial ring to it! I only wish we saw such energy invested in line by line understanding of the written sources and their relationships, and more importantly the written sources' relationships to the pictorial material. Instead, until recent times, we have seen so many resources, decade after decade, directed towards reclassifying Nahua culture and history to fit Western ideologies and related grand theoretical schemes. The results have proven better at exposing the explanatory inadequacy of these themes than in understanding the Nahua. The French, in the meantime, have been paying attention to the facts on the ground an! d trying to understand Nahua culture in its own terms and the results show it. There is no question that the work of the French is little regarded and little known. A recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl by Jongsoo Lee purports to provide a new and proper understanding at last of Texcoco and Nezahualcoyotl. It does not cite or discuss at all the work of Patrick Lesbre, available in both French and Spanish. Lesbre had covered this same ground years earlier, better, far more accurately and with far more insight, experience, appropriate restraint and subtlety. Had the author been aware of or read Lesbre's work, the publication might have been abandoned as inferior and superfluous. Neither is the work of Marc Thouvenot productively utilized, especially his lifetime of work on the Codex Xolotl. The lack of evidence presented from and evident lack of knowledge of the content of the Codex Xolotl invalidates the author's "telescoped history" attempts to discuss Tenochcan, Texcocan (and Azcapotzalcan) history and their interrelationships. A hund! red years of history comes across as flat as a printed page. You can't write about Aztecs and in particular you can't write about Texcoco without knowing the work of the French researchers over the past three decades. Recently, Lacandena published on Nahua writing, appearing to scold many, and I think quite inappropriately, for their perceived inadequacies in linguistic formalities and presentation methods without making more than a passing reference to Thouvenot's work--only his dissertation and not the body of programs--in French, Spanish and also usually English easily found on-line at: http://www.sup-infor.com/index.htm (At least one list member of these lists is a contributor. It is still fashionable in some shrinking enclaves to deride or dismiss on-line material but this, as is often the case, is of the highest quality and is in many ways better than printed material. A major DVD of the resources on line and new material is in press for those who prefer a material token or talisman for legitimacy). Marc's work is easily searched to form and investigate hypotheses on glyphs and their readings. For example, Lacandena does a good job of showing a particular kind of bird glyph can be read as huilo- as well as or instead of toto- (uh-oh, I hope I am not scolded for my presentation method in this instance, I took off those pesky -tl's but left the rest in lower case and did not use the canonic form, and did not indicate vowel length, but I think they're all long anyway...). A quick use of the program CEN from Thouvenot and his group automatically provides just over a dozen examples of glyphs with the huilo- element, easily allowing the user to pop up pictures of the glyphs and providing exact references as to their location. Experienced people working on glyphs in a document are going to be using Marc's program to investigate all types of birds that appear as candidates, although you can usually quickly rule in or out owls and other birds with distinctive appearances. Fo! r example, if you are trying to match toponymic glyphs in a pictorial document with colonial and modern lists of place names or with names on maps, you are going to investigate any possibility that comes to mind--and most of the time you still won't get a "hit" or you'll get too many--e.g. Coatepec, Huehuetepec, etc.. You will also be more efficient time if you are not using canonic forms. The same is true of types of trees and snakes. Lacadena's work does contain the promise of a deeper grammatical understanding of glyphic texts, except that there aren't any, other than a few strings in the Codex Xolotl that Dibble has published on years ago. Still, Lacandena does a good job of showing that the Codex de Xicotepec has strong relationships to the Texcocan school of tlacuilome. Perhaps some sort of non-prescriptive-laden bridge can be built between the two efforts of Lacandena and Thouvenot. Regarding the website mentioned above, can anyone cite instances of references to this on-line body of work in recent, non-French, non-Mexican published work? (There are some among the Mexican researchers that Marc has patiently trained, but any from the US? Getting a list of those works would very likely prove an efficient roadmap to good recent work). Other resources on the website produced by Marc and his collaborators include an on-line Nahuatl dictionary and a veritable Nahua encyclopedia placing individual glyphs in a natural science context or in a cultural context via references to Sahagun and other sources. All resources are linked, so that if your are investigating snakes, you might recognize, as Sybille de Pury did, at a glance, that the apparent Coatepec glyph in Section 5 of the Codex de Xicotepec is very likely not Coatepec but instead is more likely related to the snake teuctlacozauhqui. If you enter "TECUTLACOZAUHQUI" into the GDN program (yes, they know about teuc- and tecu- so let's skip all that...), you find: TECUTLACOZAUHQUI : "La amarilla gobernante" (Tecutlaco?auhquj) Ay en esta tierra una culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Dizen: es el principe, o princesa de todas las culebras, es gruessa, y larga: tiene eslabones en la cola, como vibora: tiene grande cabe?a, y gran boca tiene dientes; y la lengua orcaxada: tiene escamas gruessas, es de color amarillo de la color de la flor de la calaba?a: tiene unas manchas negras como las del tigre: los eslabones tienen pardillos, y duros: silva esta serpiente. Come conejos y liebres, y aves; come cualesqujer aves /o anjmales: y aunque tiene dientes no los masca, sino tragalos, y alla dentro los dixiere, o desmuele. Si alguna ave topa tragasela entera, y si estan encima de algun arbol arrojelos la pon?o?a con que los haze cayer muertos. Lib. 11, fol. 77, p. 229 r. y v. Esta serpiente siempre anda, acompa?ada, con su hembra; y la hembra con su macho: aunque siempre andan el uno apartado del otro y quando se qujeren juntar silva el uno, y luego viene el otro. y si alguno mata al uno dellos el otro persigue al que le mato hasta que le mata. En los eslabones se parece, si esta serpiente es de muchos a?os: porque cada a?o produce un eslabon esta culebra /o serpiente no puede andar por tierra rasa mas va por encima del heno y de las matas como volando, sino le hazen mal no hazen mal. Lib. 11, fol. 78, p. 230 r. y v. Ay otra culebra que se llama cincoatl, o cencoatl; es mediana, no tiene cascabeles, nj muerde es amarilla, y colorada, y parda escura, qujere parecer a la culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Lib. 11, fol. 87, p. 239 v. You then go back and look more closely at the Codex de Xicotepec glyph and you see it is composed of two facing yellow snakes with spots, forked tongues and (small) rattles. One of the most obvious Coatepec glyphs of all times then becomes most likely not a Coatepec glyph at all. And you broaden your search of place names well beyond Coatepec. Marc is extremely generous with his time and a researcher ignores his work at their peril. For example, his efforts, along with Sybille de Pury have helped me identify the second town in the Codex de Xicotepec as Cuauhchinanco and have helped me rule out any appearance of Nezahualcoyotl in that codex until Section 16 (rather than Section 9 as the author of the ECN article, uncritically following Stresser-Pean, supposes). And it was of course Lesbre in his review of Stresser-Pean's book long ago that initially suggested that Stresser-Pean's reading of the Nezahualcoyotl glyph in Section 9 was incorrect and that he appeared instead in the later section--where his glyph is quite clear but was misread by Stresser-Pean. And of course, the French Guy and Claude Stresser-Pean were the ones sufficiently trusted by the people of the small village of Cuaxicala to allow them to being their codex to the public. The French education system has had a way of producing people with finely tuned sensitivities to texts, pictorial as well as alphabetic--every detail is considered important, and Marc's, and his collaborators' and Patrick's work all show it. And leaving aside facility in reading French, which is often just a few sound changes away from Spanish and can be managed with a good (on-line or paper) dictionary, the French have been diligent in their efforts to publish in Spanish and they are enthusiastic in their efforts to communicate by e-mail in English or Spanish, finding French not sufficiently challenging). Why, then, their low profile in the US? Perhaps their empirical rather than ideological approach has kept them isolated? Although academic resources may be at an all-time low, albeit with some hope of improvement on the horizon, it would be good to get Thouvenot and his group and Lesbre over to the US to raise our game some. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Sun Mar 1 20:07:13 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:07:13 -0600 Subject: Aztecs and Nahuas Message-ID: Dear John F. Schwaller: "Postclassic Central Mexican Culture", for example, is a little better and harder to knock down than an anthropomorphic construction of the male gender filled with dry grain stalks! Peace, David Wright -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Mon Mar 2 00:06:44 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:06:44 -0600 Subject: Aztecs and Nahuas Message-ID: Dear John F. Schwaller: Sorry, my last message should have been a reply to Jerry Offner, whose name was way down at the bottom of the message! In fact, was replying as an afterthought, a few hours after reading the message. Peace, David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 10:25:34 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:25:34 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl intonation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Nahuatlatoque, I'm wondering if some kind soul can put me on the track of a good (or even middling) study or description of Nahuatl intonation, preferably in a dialect relatively close to the Valley of Mexico. It's sometimes been said that the lilting intonation of rural Mexican Spanish in the central area comes from Nahuatl, something that seems likely to me. But I've never seen a study of this, or, for that matter, a reconstruction of what Classical Nahuatl intonation might have been like (an impossible task, I suspect). I would be grateful to any of you who have worked with speakers of various dialects, if you could perhaps provide a few pointers on this matter -- given the fact that so little audio material is available freely online or elsewhere. Are there considerable differences between basic declarative and question patterns in, say, Guerrero and Puebla/Tlaxcala or Huaxteca Nahuatl? Are the patterns in Morelos similar to one, or several, of these? Thanks in advance! Best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 10:47:55 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:47:55 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl p ~ w alternation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Nahuatlatoque, I am rather curious about a consonant fluctuation in two Nahuatl terms -- pa:nitl 'banner' and copilli 'tapering cap'. Pa:nitl has the rare variant hua:nitl, seen in the name of a Postconquest ruler of Tenochtitlan. And Cohuil is a rare variant of Copil, the name of a migration-period leader, in the Cronica Mexicana. Both sources are impeccable, so there is no reason for us to assume scribal error. Do any of you know of other instances of such a fluctuation within a dialect, or of a p:w correspondence between dialects? Perhaps Fran and Joe have come across a further example or two in their databases. Thanks for any tips on this. Best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 11:28:40 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 12:28:40 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl p ~ w alternation: Addendum Message-ID: I forgot to mention that I am, of course, aware of the occasional w > p development in morpheme-final position (tla:uhcopa ~ tla:pcopa). Thanks again, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 Thu Mar 12 05:05:14 2009 From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:05:14 -0400 Subject: Revitalization in Nahuatl Message-ID: Listpohuanimeh, I received the following message and, after checking several sources, send an attempt at a helpful answer, as well as a disclaimer of expertise in the area of language revitalization. Then it occurred to me that maybe several of nocnihuan on this list might be willing to help out, possibly contributing items of interest to others on the list, and, certainly, to me. Tlazohcamati de antemano, Joe . . . . . . . . . My name is ..... ...., and I am a graduate student enrolled in ...... .....'s class on Language Revitalization. For my final paper, I chose to research the past and current situation of Nahuatl, focusing on language revitalization and maintenance efforts. A classmate of mine recommended I e-mail you for advice concerning my research, due to your expertise on Nahuatl. Could you give me an idea of where to look in order to find information on the past and present situation of Nahuatl? Thank you so much for your time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From joslee at unt.edu Thu Mar 12 15:27:58 2009 From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:27:58 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research In-Reply-To: <380-2200926282025478@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Dear listeros, A couple weeks ago, Professor Offner mentioned my article on Nezahualcoyotl published in Estudios de cultura nahuatl and presented it as lacking in scholarship because I didn't consult French scholars such as Professor Patrick Lesbre. I apologize for the delay, but I would just like to respond briefly. First, even though my article was recently published, I finished this piece in 2001. It is true that at that time I was unaware of Professor Lesbre's work. To a large extent this is a problem related to limitations of institutional resources and the dissemination of work published outside the US and in other languages. However, since that time, I have come across Professor Lesbre's work, and I have cited him in a subsequent publication. Even after reading Professor Lesbre's work, however, I don't feel that my article in Estudios de cultura nahuatl should be considered inferior or superfluous as Professor Offner suggests. Lesbre's work has a different focus, is based on different sources, and is informed by a different point of view. I believe that any prudent reader will easily see that professor Lesbre and I approach Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco in different ways and thus enrich the understanding of this important topic in different ways. I would urge those interested to read the respective arguments and make their own decisions. Best, Jongsoo Lee From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 2:03 PM To: Aztlan; Nahuat-L Subject: [Nahuat-l] Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research Recent comments on the list provide an opportunity to point out again the excellence and utility of the body of work assembled by French researchers on things Nahua or Aztec or whatever. For present purposes to avoid further controversy, let's call them "residents of what is now called part of Mexico before the Spanish invasion"--that's got a great commercial ring to it! I only wish we saw such energy invested in line by line understanding of the written sources and their relationships, and more importantly the written sources' relationships to the pictorial material. Instead, until recent times, we have seen so many resources, decade after decade, directed towards reclassifying Nahua culture and history to fit Western ideologies and related grand theoretical schemes. The results have proven better at exposing the explanatory inadequacy of these themes than in understanding the Nahua. The French, in the meantime, have been paying! attention to the facts on the ground and trying to understand Nahua culture in its own terms and the results show it. There is no question that the work of the French is little regarded and little known. A recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl by Jongsoo Lee purports to provide a new and proper understanding at last of Texcoco and Nezahualcoyotl. It does not cite or discuss at all the work of Patrick Lesbre, available in both French and Spanish. Lesbre had covered this same ground years earlier, better, far more accurately and with far more insight, experience, appropriate restraint and subtlety. Had the author been aware of or read Lesbre's work, the publication might have been abandoned as inferior and superfluous. Neither is the work of Marc Thouvenot productively utilized, especially his lifetime of work on the Codex Xolotl. The lack of evidence presented from and evident lack of knowledge of the content of the Codex Xolotl invalidates the author's "telescoped history" attempts to discuss Tenochcan, Texcocan (and Azcapotzalcan) ! history and their interrelationships. A hundred years of history comes across as flat as a printed page. You can't write about Aztecs and in particular you can't write about Texcoco without knowing the work of the French researchers over the past three decades. Recently, Lacandena published on Nahua writing, appearing to scold many, and I think quite inappropriately, for their perceived inadequacies in linguistic formalities and presentation methods without making more than a passing reference to Thouvenot's work--only his dissertation and not the body of programs--in French, Spanish and also usually English easily found on-line at: http://www.sup-infor.com/index.htm (At least one list member of these lists is a contributor. It is still fashionable in some shrinking enclaves to deride or dismiss on-line material but this, as is often the case, is of the highest quality and is in many ways better than printed material. A major DVD of the resources on line and new material is in press for those who prefer a material token or talisman for legitimacy). Marc's work is easily searched to form and investigate hypotheses on glyphs and their readings. For example, Lacandena does a good job of showing a particular kind of bird glyph can be read as huilo- as well as or instead of toto- (uh-oh, I hope I am not scolded for my presentation method in this instance, I took off those pesky -tl's but left the rest in lower case and did not use the canonic form, and did not indicate vowel length, but I think they're all long anyway...). A quick use of the program CEN from Thouvenot and his group! automatically provides just over a dozen examples of glyphs with the huilo- element, easily allowing the user to pop up pictures of the glyphs and providing exact references as to their location. Experienced people working on glyphs in a document are going to be using Marc's program to investigate all types of birds that appear as candidates, although you can usually quickly rule in or out owls and other birds with distinctive appearances. For example, if you are trying to match toponymic glyphs in a pictorial document with colonial and modern lists of place names or with names on maps, you are going to investigate any possibility that comes to mind--and most of the time you still won't get a "hit" or you'll get too many--e.g. Coatepec, Huehuetepec, etc.. You will also be more efficient time if you are not using canonic forms. The same is true of types of trees and snakes. Lacadena's work does contain the pro! mise of a deeper grammatical understanding of glyphic texts, exce pt that there aren't any, other than a few strings in the Codex Xolotl that Dibble has published on years ago. Still, Lacandena does a good job of showing that the Codex de Xicotepec has strong relationships to the Texcocan school of tlacuilome. Perhaps some sort of non-prescriptive-laden bridge can be built between the two efforts of Lacandena and Thouvenot. Regarding the website mentioned above, can anyone cite instances of references to this on-line body of work in recent, non-French, non-Mexican published work? (There are some among the Mexican researchers that Marc has patiently trained, but any from the US? Getting a list of those works would very likely prove an efficient roadmap to good recent work). Other resources on the website produced by Marc and his collaborators include an on-line Nahuatl dictionary and a veritable Nahua encyclopedia placing individual glyphs in a natural science context or in a cultural context via references to Sahagun and other sources. All resources are linked, so that if your are investigating snakes, you might recognize, as Sybille de Pury did, at a glance, that the apparent Coatepec glyph in Section 5 of the Codex de Xicotepec is very likely not Coatepec but instead is more likely related to th! e snake teuctlacozauhqui. If you enter "TECUTLACOZAUHQUI" into the GDN program (yes, they know about teuc- and tecu- so let's skip all that...), you find: TECUTLACOZAUHQUI : "La amarilla gobernante" (Tecutlacoçauhquj) Ay en esta tierra una culebra que se llama tecutlacoçauhquj. Dizen: es el principe, o princesa de todas las culebras, es gruessa, y larga: tiene eslabones en la cola, como vibora: tiene grande cabeça, y gran boca tiene dientes; y la lengua orcaxada: tiene escamas gruessas, es de color amarillo de la color de la flor de la calabaça: tiene unas manchas negras como las del tigre: los eslabones tienen pardillos, y duros: silva esta serpiente. Come conejos y liebres, y aves; come cualesqujer aves /o anjmales: y aunque tiene dientes no los masca, sino tragalos, y alla dentro los dixiere, o desmuele. Si alguna ave topa tragasela entera, y si estan encima de algun arbol arrojelos la ponçoña con que los haze cayer muertos. Lib. 11, fol. 77, p. 229 r. y v. Esta serpiente siempre anda, acompañada, con su hembra; y la hembra con su macho: aunque siempre andan el uno apartado del otro y quando se qujeren juntar silva el uno, y luego viene el otro. y si alguno mata al uno dellos el otro persigue al que le mato hasta que le mata. En los eslabones se parece, si esta serpiente es de muchos años: porque cada año produce un eslabon esta culebra /o serpiente no puede andar por tierra rasa mas va por encima del heno y de las matas como volando, sino le hazen mal no hazen mal. Lib. 11, fol. 78, p. 230 r. y v. Ay otra culebra que se llama cincoatl, o cencoatl; es mediana, no tiene cascabeles, nj muerde es amarilla, y colorada, y parda escura, qujere parecer a la culebra que se llama tecutlacoçauhquj. Lib. 11, fol. 87, p. 239 v. You then go back and look more closely at the Codex de Xicotepec glyph and you see it is composed of two facing yellow snakes with spots, forked tongues and (small) rattles. One of the most obvious Coatepec glyphs of all times then becomes most likely not a Coatepec glyph at all. And you broaden your search of place names well beyond Coatepec. Marc is extremely generous with his time and a researcher ignores his work at their peril. For example, his efforts, along with Sybille de Pury have helped me identify the second town in the Codex de Xicotepec as Cuauhchinanco and have helped me rule out any appearance of Nezahualcoyotl in that codex until Section 16 (rather than Section 9 as the author of the ECN article, uncritically following Stresser-Pean, supposes). And it was of course Lesbre in his review of Stresser-Pean's book long ago that initially suggested that St! resser-Pean's reading of the Nezahualcoyotl glyph in Section 9 was incorrect and that he appeared instead in the later section--where his glyph is quite clear but was misread by Stresser-Pean. And of course, the French Guy and Claude Stresser-Pean were the ones sufficiently trusted by the people of the small village of Cuaxicala to allow them to being their codex to the public. The French education system has had a way of producing people with finely tuned sensitivities to texts, pictorial as well as alphabetic--every detail is considered important, and Marc's, and his collaborators' and Patrick's work all show it. And leaving aside facility in reading French, which is often just a few sound changes away from Spanish and can be managed with a good (on-line or paper) dictionary, the French have been diligent in their efforts to publish in Spanish and they are enthusiastic in their efforts to communicate by e-mail! in English or Spanish, finding French not sufficiently challenging). Why, then, their low profile in the US? Perhaps their empirical rather than ideological approach has kept them isolated? Although academic resources may be at an all-time low, albeit with some hope of improvement on the horizon, it would be good to get Thouvenot and his group and Lesbre over to the US to raise our game some. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:26:26 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:26:26 -0700 Subject: Launey Message-ID: There seems to be some confusion between Michel Launey’s 1979 pedagogic grammar and his rarely cited, though extremely valuable 1986 thèse. The former grew out of his classes in the 70s in Paris VIII and was first published by L’Harmattan. The first volume of this was later translated (defectively) into Spanish and published by the UNAM in 1992. As Lindsay Sidders points out, an English version is currently being prepared. The thèse was never published in its entirety. An abridged, edited version was published in 1994 by the CNRS. Jonathan Amith has done the Nahuatl studies a tremendous favor by making this text available online (it is also available on the CNRS website as a series separate PDFs: http://www.vjf.cnrs.fr/celia/FichExt/Etudes/Launey/tm.htm). I would dare say that Monsieur Launey’s thèse is the single most comprehensive and philologically-grounded linguistic investigation of classical Nahuatl grammar of the 20th century. For those who don’t know his work on Nahuatl besides the pedagogic grammar, I append here Michel Launey’s other publications on this language (I exclude his work on Palikur). Launey, Michel. 1977. Le pluriel transcatégoriel /-ke’/ en nahuatl : contribution à l’étude de la relation ‘être/avoir’. Amerindia, 2 : 19-45. _____. 1978. Deux sources du passif d’après la morphologie nahuatl. Actes du XLIIe Congrès International des Américanistes: Congrès du Centenaire, Paris, 1976. IV: 471-484. Société des Américanistes, Paris. _____. 1979. Le datif dans une langue sans cas (Nahuatl classique). In : Relations prédicat-actant(s) dans des langues de types divers (C. Paris, éd.) vol. 2 : 29-70. SELAF, LACITO documents 2-3, Paris. _____. 1981a. Une intérpretation linguistique des schémas relationnels : passifs-impersonnels et causitifs en nahuatl classique. Amerindia, 6 : 17-58. _____. 1981b. Compte-rendu : ‘Five Studies Inspired by Nahuatl Verbs in –oa’ (Canger). Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 106: 312-313. _____. 1983. Concession de phrase et concession particulière en nahuatl classique. In : L’expression de la concession (Valentin, éd.) Université de Paris IV, Linguistica Palatina Colloquia I. _____. 1984. Fonctions et catégories dans l’opposition verbo-nominale : l’exemple du nahuatl. In : “L’opposition verbo-nominale dans diverses langues du monde” (Nicole Tersis-Surugue, éd) Modèles linguistiques, 6 : 133-148. _____. 1986. Catégories et opérations dans la grammaire nahuatl. Thèse d’Etat, Université de Paris IV. _____. 1988. Le linguiste et le funambule : réflexions sur l’universalité et la spécificité linguistiques et culturelles. Amerindia, 13 : 169-192. _____. 1991a. Compte rendus: ‘Gramática mazateca’ (Jamieson); ‘Xo-nitháán me’phaa’; ‘Registro de la variación fonológica en el náhuatl moderno’ (Monzón). Amerindia, 16: 223-25. _____. 1991b. In memoriam Carlos López Ávila. Amerindia, 16: 227. _____. 1992. Sortilèges des nuages et sorcelleries de la sarigue (à propos d'une traduction du Tratado de hechicerías d'Olmos). Amerindia, 17: 183-196. _____. 1994. Une grammaire omnipredicative : essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique. Collection Sciences du langage. CNRS Éditions, Paris. _____. 1995a. L’Arte de la lengua mexicana de Aldama y Guevara. Amerindia, 19-20: 237-244. _____. 1995b. Compte rendu : fray Andrés de Olmos Arte de la lengua mexicana Fac-similé. Introduction et transcription d’A. et M. León-Portilla. Journal de la Société des Américanistes, 81: 348-352. _____. 1996a. Retour au -tl aztèque. Amerindia, 21: 77-91. _____. 1996b. Compte rendu : ‘Mexikanische Grammatik’ (Humboldt). Amerindia, 21: 203-209. _____. 1997a. La elaboración de los conceptos de la diátesis en las primeras gramáticas del náhuatl. In: La descripción de las lenguas amerindias en la época colonial. Biblioteca Ibero-Americana, 63. (Klaus Zimmermann, ed) 21-41. Vervuert, Frankfurt am Main / Iberoamericana, Madrid. _____. 1997b. La distance intraduisable : Les préfixes directionnels du nahuatl. Amerindia, 22: 15-30. _____. 1999. Compound nouns vs. incorporation in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 52(3-4): 347-364. _____. 2002. On some causative doublets in Classical Nahuatl. In: The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation (Masayoshi Shibatani, ed): 301-317. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. _____. 2004. The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(1): 49-69. --- On Thu, 2/26/09, David Wright wrote: From: David Wright Subject: [Nahuat-l] Launey To: "Nahuat-l (messages)" Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 11:23 AM In reponse to Michael Swanton's recent post: Hi, Michael! I enjoyed seeing you again at the colloquium at the Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas a few months back. I hope all is well. There's a little mistake in your recent post that needs to be corrected. You state: "Not only is this work [Michel Launey's *Introduction à la langue et à la littérature aztèques*] not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies." Following is a paragraph from Wright Carr (2007: 43) (David Charles Wright Carr, *Lectura del náhuatl: fundamentos para la traducción de los textos en náhuatl del periodo Novohispano Temprano*, México, Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Indígenas, 2007): "La gramática del lingüista francés Michel Launey, Introduction à la langue et à la littérature aztèques (“Introducción a la lengua y a la literatura aztecas”), constituye una aportación relevante a la descripción del náhuatl novohispano. Consta de dos tomos: el primero es la gramática propiamente dicha, y en el segundo hay una serie de textos en náhuatl con comentarios. Fue publicada inicialmente en 1979 (el primer tomo) y 1980 (el segundo); hay una reimpresión de 1995 y una traducción al castellano del primer volumen —salpicada de errores de traducción, edición y/o imprenta—, impresa en 1992. Launey, a diferencia de los nahuatlatos de la escuela mexicana, hizo un estudio a fondo de la gramática de Horacio Carochi, lo que le permitió presentar una descripción más precisa del náhuatl novohispano. Registra el saltillo y las vocales largas mediante signos diacríticos, aprovechando para este propósito el sistema ortográfico de Carochi. Este libro es útil para el principiante, particularmente la edición francesa, para los que leen este idioma. Aparte de las virtudes ya mencionadas, presenta una gran claridad en la exposición de la gramática náhuatl, pues fue concebida como un método didáctico, más que una gramática a secas." So it is cited in Wright Carr, 2007! Granted, I got my hands on the French edition after having prepared most of the book, but it was used as a complementary source in some sections (see notes see footnotes 144, 165, 198, 213, 341, 362, 364, 365, 371, 376, 385, 602). No problem, my friend, I just thought I should set the record straight, since this is a public forum and our messages will be available in an on-line archive for years. Peace, David Wright _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:27:38 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:27:38 -0700 Subject: Aztlan-Chicomoztoc and the chronicles Message-ID: Speaking of the Crónica X, someone should point out that a detailed philological examination of the subject has recently been published: Peperstraete, Sylvie. 2007. La «Chronique X». Reconstitucion et analyse d’une source perdue fondamentale sur la civilisation Aztèque, d’après l’Historia de las Indias de Nueva España de D. Durán (1581) et la Crónica Mexicana de F.A. Tezozomoc (ca. 1598). BAR International Series 1630, Archaeopress, Oxford. --- On Sat, 2/28/09, Gordon Whittaker wrote: From: Gordon Whittaker Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Aztlan-Chicomoztoc and the chronicles To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org Date: Saturday, February 28, 2009, 6:16 PM Dear Maria, dear colleagues, Thanks so much for your contribution to the 2009 Great Aztlan Debate! It's much appreciated, since you've done a lot of work in this area. I fully agree with you (and Henry Nicholson) on the need to conduct a careful critical examination of the sources, one that includes, among other things, an exacting philological analysis of the texts and their affiliations. And you are perfectly right that one should be careful not to assume, just because a number of 16th- and 17th-century sources provide a particular piece of information, that that information is independent in each. As you point out, Motolinia was indeed a primary source for Lopez de Gomara, Zorita, Mendieta, Torquemada, and so on. But, unless I am very mistaken, no one has been suggesting so far that these sources are independent of each other. If I recall correctly, only Motolinia and Lopez de Gomara have been mentioned so far in the debate, and not in connection with Aztlan or a particular tradition. I had noted, in answer to a post from Roberto, that Miguel Leon-Portilla was incorrect in asserting, on the one hand, that Lopez de Gomara, following Cortes, only used 'los de Mexico' for the Mexica and, on the other hand, that the term 'mexicano/a(s)' first came into use after Diaz del Castillo made it popular. I mentioned in that context that Motolinia was already using the term by 1541 at the latest. I'm sure you will agree with me that this is not the same kind of thing as you were talking about. Cronica X is a fascinating subject! We still need a painstakingly thorough study and test of this hypothesis, as also of Cronica Y, and, of course, of the various other lost or presumed sources to which we could, perhaps, assign for convenience the other letters of the alphabet. Barlow set us on this path with his initial astute study, but a lot more needs to be done before we can confidently say that we have solved the puzzle. Duran's primary source, the Historia that he repeatedly mentions, may well be the Cronica X, or at least a close relative. As you (and I) have already said, there are a number of variants of the Aztlan cycle, and these can indeed be placed in different source groups. And, as you know, the specifics vary considerably -- e.g. as to how many calpoltin of the Azteca Mexitin there were and how Chicomoztoc and (Teo)colhuacan are treated geographically, geopolitically, and (if you'll excuse the coinage) geomythologically. For the sake of the discussion (since Susan Schroeder's extensive work on Chimalpahin had been brought up), and to avoid unnecessarily long documentation in what is just an exchange of ideas, I restricted myself in previous posts to the Nahuatl texts of the Codex Aubin and Chimalpahin (which includes passages adopted and adapted from Tezozomoc and Alonso Franco that have not survived independently). It is true, as you say, that Chimalpahin, like other sources of this early period, frequently mixed materials gleaned from a variety of sources. Ixtlilxochitl and Chimalpahin name quite a few of their primary informants and materials. We know from this that Chimalpahin consulted learned Mexica and Chalca nobles. The result is not a deliberate total synthesis (like Ixtlilxochitl's Historia Chichimeca in contrast to his Relaciones) but a series of related and overlapping accounts that are more or less faithful to their sources (to the extent that we can judge this), though refined and emended according to Chimalpahin's perception of things. Thus, he was certainly not averse to blending material from one source into another, as Schroeder and you have shown. What we should not forget, however, is that Chimalpahin, unlike Lopez de Gomara, to name but one example, was not simply consulting informants and documents. He was himself at least cursorily acquainted with the traditions as a result of his upbringing and heritage. He grew up surrounded by elders familiar with Aztec-period traditions, but, at the same time, he was versed in the methods of European scholarship. Ixtlilxochitl is sometimes lost at sea in his attempt to interpret unglossed pictorials, as we can see in his repeated attempts to read the same glyphs. Chimalpahin was either much more skilled at this, or had better consultants. Chimalpahin indeed makes good use of what you call the Cronica X and Y versions of the migration accounts. But BOTH versions (and Chimalpahin's own retelling) support points I was making: namely, (1) that Aztlan was generally understood in 16th-century Mexico, and probably earlier, to be more than just the island of this name, as many in the past have mistakenly assumed, and (2) that the Nahuatl ethnonym 'Azteca' included more than just the Mexitin, although they are paramount and, in some accounts, the only group explicitly named as such. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that Cronica X and Y are theoretical constructs that, if they ever existed as discrete works or traditions, may have included more -- or perhaps less -- than what we assume them to. If we say that Cronica X only contained what is found in similar form in all the extant works known to have used it, we adopt a minimalist approach with regard to this construct. If we say that Cronica X itself used and incorporated more than one traditional account (the norm in 16th-century historiography and mythography), based on additional elements found only in, say, two known sources, then we have a maximalist approach. Just as much as two authors can add to, or blend into, their common primary source the same secondary source independently of each other, so too can two authors leave out (again independently) a secondary strand contained in their primary source, in order to concentrate on a particular unitary narrative, one that may have been gaining currency at the time. There are arguments that can be made for each stance. We simply don't know for sure. But it sure is fun, and worthwhile, to consider and to debate the options! Maria, thanks again for your thought-provoking contribution. I'm really looking forward to your upcoming article on the Seven Caves. Your stimulating work in this area is something the 'Azteca', whoever they may (or may not) have been, would have been very proud of! All the best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:36:17 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:36:17 -0700 Subject: Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) Message-ID: At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I would like to clarify my previous comment about the possibility--normally unacceptable in my opinion--of language barriers in research and listservs such as this one. By its nature, academic work creates networks among people who share similar intellectual interests. These networks almost organically emerge through work, conferences, teacher-student relations, “fieldwork”, etc. For many researchers--certainly for me--this is what is most appreciated about academic investigation. However, I don’t think I’m saying anything new if I point out that such networks also run the risk of becoming closed circuits. This can be quite unconscious. I see this in my own work; it’s just easier to know the work of people I get along with, whose investigations have a similar orientation to mine, who I see regularly, etc. As is usually the case though, relevant work is often carried out outside our immediate networks and we are all going to miss relevant publications from time to time. But the goal should be to know as much as we can about what’s going on (and has gone on) in our field of inquiry. And fields of inquiry such as ours should not be arbitrarily circumscribed to literature in one particular language or another. Now, for those of us who study a language called Nahuatl it might appear that I am pushing an open door on this language issue. This is why I included a pair of examples in my earlier post. By no means was it intended to be a sophistic ad hominem reproach to those who cannot read French or German or whatever. (This latter would doubtlessly be counterproductive since when criticism is taken personally many of us often only retreat into our core network). Rather, my intention was to note the perils of an unjustified isomorphism between our academic networks and particular languages. It was in this sense that I opposed setting up any sort of language “netiquette” for this listserv. Our goal should be to use this space which, gratefully, has been made available to us to expand our networks about what’s going on in Nahuatl studies regardless of the language in which one most easily writes. --- On Wed, 2/25/09, Michael Swanton wrote: From: Michael Swanton Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) To: "Nahuat-L" Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 8:35 PM Thanks to Gordon and Michel for this interesting exchange. Having never investigated the earliest philological contexts where the word ‘Azteca’ occurs, I admit my surprise in seeing just how closely the term is associated with the Mexica. Lurking behind these exchanges is another issue which I believe is quite relevant to Nahuatl studies, namely the multilingualism that these studies require. First of all, I think it’s necessary to make a distinction between academics (highly trained professionals employed as specialists, often teachers, of particular fields of inquiry) and amateurs (individuals who, out of their own intellectual curiosity, engage in study of a particular subject). I recognize this distinction is not always clear-cut. And, I will be quick to point out that amateurs have carried out excellent investigations; indeed, some outshine their academic counterparts or have shown them the way. However, I believe the distinction is important for ethical reasons. Academics are granted--rightly or wrongly--a particular social status not given to amateurs. Academics have greater ease in teaching at universities, in publishing books in academic presses, in receiving publicly-supported grant monies, etc. For this reason, academics have a greater ethical obligation to their field of inquiry (and, I would also say, to the people whose culture/language they are studying). With this in mind, Michel is absolutely correct in stating that “ignorance of a language can never be an argument in academic discussion”. Let us suppose an academic’s line of investigation clearly leads him/her to studies or documentation written in some language L that is unknown to him/her. It would seem to me that the investigator has two acceptable options: (1) learn something of L, perhaps with help of colleagues, to be able to at least decipher the texts or (2) redirect his/her line of investigation. What is not acceptable is (3) to ignore the material, pretending that it is not relevant because the investigator doesn’t bother to read it. From my perspective, an academic who takes this unacceptable third option is simply demonstrating a lack of professional ethics and a sadly narrow, provincial view of academic investigation. Coming back to Nahuatl studies, I think it is safe to assume that folks here are all committed to improving their knowledge of this interesting language. However, there are many very important texts about Nahuatl and “Nahua” culture history that are not written in either English (or Spanish). For example, Michel Launey’s 1986, French thèse d’etat is the most comprehensive and philologically-grounded examination of classical Nahuatl grammar I have found to date. It is accessible: Jonathan Amith put a PDF of the original online and the CNRS published an abridged version in 1994. Yet, it seems that the 1609 pages of this thèse are practically invisible to American academics. Not only is this work not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies. While the further might be understandable, that latter is not. Launey’s work is contemporary with Andrews, who, on the other hand, is widely cited in American publications. And while both simultaneously “rediscovered” Carochi, it is now solely Andrews who gets the credit for this. This preference is also shown on this listserv. Not only is Andrews cited more often than Launey (actually, I don’t remember EVER seeing Launey cited here), but commentators on Nahuatl grammar often use Andrews’ idiosyncratic terminology. Why is this? Is it because Andrews’ work is superior to Launey’s? I don’t think so. Personally, I prefer Launey’s work as it is better grounded philologically (his examples are taken from Nahuatl texts, whereas Andrews doesn’t explain where he gets much of his data besides Carochi) and is more consonant with modern linguistic description (Andrews, particularly in the 2nd edition of his big book, practically tries to reinvent a whole series of linguistic units). I suspect that the key reason is that Launey’s work (which is quite extensive reaching from the mid-1970s till the beginning of the 21st century) is mostly in French. Perhaps I am wrong; if so, I would appreciate some guidance on this. But, there are numerous other examples which make me suspect linguistic lethargy on the part of colleagues. For instance, when discussing Chimalpahin’s description of the precolonial organization of Chalco, the important work of Susan Schroeder is always cited. But Elke Ruhnau’s major study of this, which was contemporaneous with Schroeder’s first investigations, is rarely mentioned. For example, Lockhart’s 1992 book dedicates considerable attention to Chimalpahin’s descriptions of social organization, but Ruhnau’s study, published 4 years earlier, doesn’t even get a mention in passing. It’s as if her work just doesn’t exist. I don’t have any insight as to the comparative quality of the two studies, but if Ruhnau’s book was published in the Norman or Stanford in English instead of in Hamburg in German, I suspect it would be cited with greater frequency. If studies aren’t being cited (and therefore read) simply because they were written in either English or Spanish, this speaks exceedingly badly of the current state of Nahuatl academic study. If this is indeed the case (and I am open to seeing this differently), Nahuatl scholarship will have adopted a provincialism that would never be acceptable in, say, classical or mediaeval studies. For this reason, I strongly oppose any linguistic protocol on this listserv. It is easier to read a foreign language than write in one. The foremost goal of this listserv, like academic investigation in general, should be to encourage scholars to share their doubts and findings in the broadest possible (serious) forum. --- On Mon, 2/23/09, Chema Tlaquetzqui wrote: From: Chema Tlaquetzqui Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 4:54 AM Hi, I don't know this romgil06 at prodigy.net.mx, but given the .mx domain, I assume he's in Mexico and a quick Google search seems to indicate that he often writes in Spanish. Considering this, I don't think he had any political agenda by switching languages. It seems unfair to expect people to write a substantial response in a language they might not be comfortable writing in, particularly when most people on these mailing lists should already be able to read both English and Spanish quite well, as per the mailing list description. I have been a user on many polyglot mailing lists, and these sorts of language issues tend to pop-up every so often. Usually people just decide to send bilingual (or even trilingual) emails to avoid letting languages get in the way of the discussion and to encourage participation. It is a hassle, but better than people assuming a reply is "political" and hence unworthy of credence. I was more annoyed with the lack of quotes in his mangled reply. It made it very hard to parse. Chema On Feb 23, 2009, at 00:53 , Michael McCafferty wrote: > Any indication as to who wrote this? > > I'm also curious, or perhaps suspicious, as to linguistic protocol > here. Why, if Dr. Whittaker wrote in English, and this present > respondent certainly knows English, did he/she not respond in English? > Anything goes? Devrais-je pouvoir repondre en francais? In tla > nichachalacaya mazehualcopa? I don't know. It seems that, for the sake > of clarity, it would be better to stay in one language...unless > there's > a political agenda. And once that's a possibility, I tend to be stingy > with credence as to what people say, even in Spanish. > > Michael > > Quoting "John F. Schwaller" : > >> >> From: "romgil06" >> Date: Sun, February 22, 2009 >> >> Gordon Whittaker escribió: >> >> First, with regard to the term 'Aztec': It was indeed first >> popularized by >> Clavigero. However, it is a perfectly good term used by the >> Aztecs to >> refer to themselves in connection with their ancestry, >> >> Perdon pero con todo respeto esto no es cierto. >> >> El uso de Azteca aparece primero en la obra del historiador mestizo >> Cristobal del >> Castillo Historia de la Venida de los mexicanos. donde >> expone su particular versión de la historia del pueblo de >> desarrapados >> que ni >> nombre tenían y que el mismo explica porque llegaron a >> llamarse mexicas o mexicanos. >> >> En la versión de Del Castillo Los aztecas son un pueblo DISTINTO >> de los >> mexicas,esto es de los que vivieron y fundadron Tenochtitlan , >> en Del Castillo los "aztecas" aparecen como los amos de los >> mexicas o los >> atlachichimecas de la ribera del lago, los aztecas son los que >> los explotaban. >> >> La versión de Cristobal del Castillo fue recogida por Chimalpain y >> reproducida en su >> Memorial Breve de Culhuacan, sin dar crédito a la obra >> de Del Castillo . Después Chimalpain o Tezozomoc la usan en la >> crónica >> Mexicayotl, >> en una variante de la historia de Del Castillo. Ahí en la >> Mexicayotl uno de los hijos, el menor del rey de los aztecas es >> quien saca >> a sus >> subditos de aztlan chicomoztoc >> >> >> Con todo respeto es un punto de vista muy cuestionable y no se puede >> citar un solo >> documento fuente que señale que: >> >> "However, it is a perfectly good term used by the Aztecs to refer to >> themselves in >> connection with their ancestry" >> >> Tampoco puedes citar una obra fuente donde ocurra que: >> >> I believe Cuauhtemoc himself is recorded in Nahuatl using the term. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> Finally, you use the term 'Culhua Mexica': This phrase, which was >> favoured >> by Barlow, is based on an occasional term found in Spanish, not >> Nahuatl, >> contexts. 'Colhua' ('Culhua' is simply a Colonial-period spelling) is >> singular, 'Mexica' is plural. If the Aztecs had wanted to use >> this, they >> would have had to say 'Colhuaque Mexica' in reference to their >> dynasty's >> descent from the line of Colhuacan. >> >> >> En que contexto nahuatl ha encontrado Gordon el uso del termino >> azteca para >> referirse a los habitantes de Tenochtitlan. >> Adelanto que no puede citar uno solo, porque no existe. Todos los >> documentos que se >> pueden citar en uno u otro sentido son coloniales >> aunque sean escritos en nahuatl o de forma bilingue nahuatl español. >> >> Efectivamente Robert Barlow fue uno de los pioneros en señalar el >> error del >> equivocado uso del termino azteca y como parte de esa labor >> redacto "la extensión del imperio de los colua mexica" publicado >> por el >> INAH y la >> UDLA, Obras de Robert Barlow vol 4, publico tambien los >> artículos "La formación del imperio de los colhua mexica", "Algunas >> consideraciones >> sobre el término imperio azteca"y "El concepto >> populart de los "aztecas" todos en obras de Robert Barlow vol 3 >> INAH UDLA . >> >> Hay otro buen artículo sobre el mismo tema de Don Miguel Leon >> Portilla >> León-Portilla, Miguel, "Los aztecas. Disquisiciones sobre un >> gentilicio", Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl, v. 31, 2000, p. 275-281 >> >> Obras recientes en la misma óptica vease: Mexicaltzingo >> Arqueología de >> un reino >> culhua mexica de Raul Avila INAH y Culhua Mexico una >> revisión arqueo etnohistórica del imperio de los mexica tenochca >> Fernando >> Robles INAH >> >> Señala Gordon: >> >> Of course, the term 'Mexica' is appropriate in describing both the >> Tenochca in a >> narrow sense and, more >> literally, the citizens of both Mexico Tenochtitlan and Mexico >> Tlatelolco, >> and indeed in describing the empire they founded. >> >> Esto es un gran y profundo error de Gordon es borrar las >> importantes >> diferencias >> históricas, etnicas y religiosas que existian entre ambos >> naciones indias. Unos eran los tlatelolcas los adoradores del dios >> Yiacatecutli y >> con su propioi panteon divino, su nobleza y sus >> especialidades productigvas y guerreras, los cuales fueron forzados a >> adorar a >> Huitzilopochtli tras su derrota y otro pueblo eran los >> adoradores del Tetzahuitl, del hijo de Tlaloc o del pariente de >> Opochtli >> como a si >> mismo se identifica Huitzilopochtli ( códice Aubin , >> Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas) >> >> Una simple visita al templo mayor de Tlatelolco y observar de la >> segunda >> a la >> quinta etapa permite ver que entre Tlatelolcas y Colhuas >> Mexicas hasta arquitectónicamente los templos mayores eran >> distintos y >> solo se >> hicieron iguales despues de la conquista mexica. En los >> tlatelolcas no hay doble templo en la cima del "cu" mayor ni >> restos de la >> doble >> escalinata y ni de la alfarda central en las etapas citadas >> >> Hacer un solo paquete de distintos pueblos es borrar la >> historia, es >> como decir >> que son lo mismo los irlandeses, los del país de gales, >> los escocesea, los bretones y los sajones, y sólo porque desde >> tal siglo >> todos >> son ciudadanos o vasallos del Reino Unido, cuando esa >> unidad es un un resultado de un proceso histórico de la fundación del >> estado nación, >> que cmo el problema irlandes nos lo recuerda no ha >> logrado resolver las diferencias. SEria el mismo error que decir >> que todos >> los >> pueblos de España son Españoles borrando la diferencias de >> todo tipo ( linguisticas, culturales, antropomorficas, históricas, >> religiosas) que >> existen entre los castellanos con los habitantes de las >> canarias, los de cataluña, el pais vasco, los galllegos, etc . Lo >> mismo >> vimos en el >> caso de la antigua URSS o de la extinta Yugoeslavia. >> >> Hacer un sólo paquete bnorrar las diferencias curiosamente fue el >> punto de >> vista >> base de la politica sobre las nacionalidades de Stalin >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> 'Culhua Mexica': This phrase, which was favoured >> by Barlow, is based on an occasional term found in Spanish, not >> Nahuatl, >> contexts >> >> Realmente lo que nunca se encontra es un documento "nahuatl" con el >> término azteca >> para referirse a los habitantes de Tenochtitlan , >> repito lease las glosas de los codices. Telleriano, vaticano rios, >> magliabechi, >> borbónico, florentino vease la crónica mexicayotl, la >> mexicana, las relaciones de Chimalpain , la obra de Cristobal del >> castillo, la >> leyenda de los soles, los anales de Cuauhtitlan, los anales >> de Tlatelolco y otros códices coloniales mas , vease las >> crónicas de >> Duran , >> Sahagún, Mendieta, Motolinia, los escritos de Olmos, la >> historia Tolteca Chichimeca, Códice Aubin y en todos , pero todos >> nunca >> parecera el >> termino azteca para referirse a los habitantes de >> Tenochtitlan y menos aún para referirse a quienes detentaban el >> poder >> político y >> religioso en ese imperio y menos aún mçpara nombrar >> de esa forma a todos los pueblos de "the central Mexico highlands" >> como >> los agrupa >> el DR Smith. >> >> >> Por otro lado bien podria decirnos Gordon que documentos nahuatls >> conoce >> que no sean >> coloniales. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> By the way, you speak of the "Tenocha". I have seen this >> inaccurate form >> occasionally in non-specialist literature. It should always be >> 'Tenochca'. >> The term is unusual only in that it should come from a place name >> 'Tenochco', which, however, is unattested, but may well have >> designated >> the heart of the original settlement. 'Tenochca' or 'Tenochtitlan >> chaneque' >> >> Parece que la crónica Mexicayotl es un de esas "non-specialist >> literature" >> donde >> los mexicanos se llamaban asi mismo tenochcas por ser habitantes de >> Tenochtitlan y >> por considerar a Tencoh el "padre" fundador de su >> pueblo. "... Y cuando ya por mucho tiempo ya estan los mexica los >> tenochca después >> de que allá murio Tenochtzin ..." Cronica mexicayotl >> folio 110. >> >> Leemos en otro ejemplar de "literatura no especializada" , este es el >> códice aubin >> en sus noticias del año 1539 "Aqui partieron para >> Yancuic Tlalpan; fueron los tenochca..." hay mas noticias sobre estos >> tenochcas en >> ese códice. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> If the Aztecs had wanted to use this, they would have had to say >> 'Colhuaque Mexica' >> in reference to their dynasty's >> >> descent from the line of Colhuacan. >> >> No es que se inventaran un linaje es que esa fue su historia. >> >> Dice la Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas " En ese >> tiempo tenían >> los >> mexicanos por señor a Ilancueitl, una señora principal que >> los mandaba, y esta fue mujer de Acamapichtli, el cual era de >> Culhuacan y >> ella de >> Coatlinchan, y aunque era de Culhuacan , Acamaapichtli >> descendía de los de México, porque allí fue casada su madre con un >> principal de >> Culhuacan y la madre era de los mexicanos. Y casado, >> por consejo de su mujer vino a México, y les dijo que pues era de los >> principales y >> no tenían señor que lo tomarían por señor, y así fue el >> primer seño, y murió su mujer el año 24 de la fundación de México >> Y muerta >> ella , >> fue tomado él por señor, porque en vida de ella no fue >> tomado sino por principal " >> >> De una manera mas extensa se trata el tema de como los colhuas se >> hicieron >> del poder >> en Tenochtitlan en los folios 110 a 119 de la >> Crónica mexicayotl >> >> POr otro lado dice el Dr Michael Smith >> >> I am constantly criticized for my usage of the term Aztec to mean the >> entire Late >> Postclassic population of the central Mexico highlands, >> both Nahuatl-speaking and others such as Otomian languages. I have >> 3 main >> reasons >> for sticking to this usage: (1) there is no good >> alternate term; (2) book publishers insist in using "Aztec" in >> book titles to >> generate sales; and (3) the various peoples of Late Postclassic >> central Mexico shared many cultural traits, spoke or understood >> the same >> language, >> and they were in constant contact with one another >> through trade, visiting, and other means. This was a single >> culture, and >> if don't >> call it Aztec, what term can we use? >> >> Dr MIchael ya tiene otro mas que se apunta a la lista de los que lo >> critican sobre >> todo por la cientificidad del segundo argumento que >> usted plantea: >> >> "(2) book publishers insist in using "Aztec" in book titles to >> generate >> sales". >> >> Resulta ahora que son los vendedores de libros, la >> mercadotecnia, los >> que definen >> e imponen los conceptos que deben usar quienes >> estudian de una u otra forma las culturas prehiuspánicas . Usemos >> aztecas >> porque es >> una marca mas vendible, perdon es ciencia lo que >> se trata de hacer o estamos tratando de vender papas fritas. >> >> Si bien es cierto lo que dice Smith >> >> the various peoples of Late Postclassic central Mexico shared many >> cultural traits, >> spoke or understood the same language, and they were >> in constant contact with one another through trade, visiting, and >> other >> means. >> >> Pero fueron precisamente las diferencias mas grandes o mas chicas >> en todos >> esos >> aspectos y entros mas importantes como la religión, lo >> que hacia que unos indios se considerasen a si mismos como una >> nacion o >> pueblo y ver >> a los otros como de una nación distinta, esas >> diferencias los hacian verse asi mismo como diferentes del otro, >> situación que se >> tradujo en diferencias en la política, la ideológia y la >> religion. >> >> Así por ejemplo aunque los mexicas y los tlaxcaltecas se >> reconocieran de >> origen >> chichimeca y hablaran nahuatl como la lengua que >> habian aprendido, entre ellos no se reconocian como iguales , >> situación >> que Cortés >> detecto y supo aprovechar politica y militarmente. >> Aunque Tlaxcaltecas y Huexotzincas hablaran nahuatl y opcuparan >> espacios >> vecinos y >> adoraran ambos a Mixcoat, el varonil, por ello el que >> porta el maxtle, por ello el camaxtle, a pesar de sus elementos >> comunes >> cada pueblo >> era un señorio distinto >> >> HOy sucede lo mismo en los distintos paises que fuimos colonias de >> España >> compartimos muchas cosas pero somos paises distintos, >> ¿Porque cuesta tanto trabajo tener esa optica cuando se mira el >> pasado >> prehispánico? >> Por que hacer tabla raza de las diferencias, porque >> borrar la historia >> >> Gordon es fiel a la escuela de Seler y a la escuela Hegeliana para >> los >> cuales los >> paises fuera de Europa no tiene historia >> son pueblos sin historia. Y eso lo dice Seler conm todas sus >> letras en su >> articulo >> sobre Aztlan >> >> No deja de ser paradójico que esa corriente de pensamiento haya >> surgido en >> un país >> como la actual Alemania que ha tenido uno de los >> mas azarosos procesos de conformación del estado nación y que para >> lograrlo necesito >> la construcción y derrumbe del imperio prusiano, >> la derrota en dos guerras mundiale, el ascenso del nazismo, la >> mutilacion y >> ocupación sovieta de una parte del territorio y el derrumbe >> del muro >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Fri Mar 13 18:32:53 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:32:53 -0600 Subject: Launey In-Reply-To: <787406.18745.qm@web111506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Howdy again, Michael! You sent me back to the Nahuat-l archives, somewhat puzzled, to see what I had been replying to. I found this: “[…] For example, Michel Launey’s 1986, French thèse d´état is the most comprehensive and philologically-grounded examination of classical Nahuatl grammar I have found to date. It is accessible: Jonathan Amith put a PDF of the original online and the CNRS published an abridged version in 1994. Yet, it seems that the 1609 pages of this thèse are practically invisible to American academics. Not only is this work not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies. While the further might be understandable, that latter is not. Launey’s work is contemporary with Andrews, who, on the other hand, is widely cited in American publications. And while both simultaneously “rediscovered” Carochi, it is now solely Andrews who gets the credit for this. […]” So by “this work” you were referring specifically to the 1986 thesis, which indeed was not cited in Lockhart, 2001, nor in Wright, 2007; both publications only cite vol. 1 of Launey’s *Introduction à la langue et à la littérature aztèques* (1979) and the 1992 Spanish translation of the same work. What mislead me was the second to the last sentence, where it says that “Launey’s work is contemporary with Andrews.” That threw me back to the decade of 1971-1980 (since the first edition of J. Richard Andrew’s *Introduction to Classical Nahuatl* was published in 1975), and set my head in the general space of Launey’s work. Your post is clear enough; my quick reading of it was responsible for the confusion. As for Andrews, rather than Launey, getting the credit for “rediscovering” Carochi, it’s worth pointing out that Andrews’s *Introduction…* (1975) appeared four years before Launey’s *Introduction…* (1979), and that Launey’s earliest article in the list you provide is from 1977. So the “rediscovery” was not quite “simultaneous,” at least as far as the published results seem to indicate. I’m grateful to you for conceding that the omission of Launey’s thesis of 1986 “might be understandable” “in the bibliographical guides for those learning Nahuatl;” thanks to these phrases I don’t feel quite so inexhaustive. Because of the word “might,” however, just to be safe, I’ve added a mention of the 1986 thesis to a manuscript for an eventual second edition of my book. Some of my undergraduate history students at the University of Guanajuato do read French and could benefit from this more advanced treatment of Nahuatl grammar, and surely there will be other potential readers in the same situation. Thanks for the list of Launey’s publications and the link to his thesis, by the way. These are very useful, as is Jonathan Amith’s post with links to reproductions of Launey’s studies on his own web site. Providing such material is a positive contribution which will enrich the general level of scholarship of the community that gathers on this list. Peace, David De: Michael Swanton [mailto:mwswanton at yahoo.com] Enviado el: viernes, 13 de marzo de 2009 01:26 a.m. Para: Nahuat-l (messages); David Wright Asunto: Re: [Nahuat-l] Launey There seems to be some confusion between Michel Launey’s 1979 pedagogic grammar and his rarely cited, though extremely valuable 1986 thèse. The former grew out of his classes in the 70s in Paris VIII and was first published by L’Harmattan. The first volume of this was later translated (defectively) into Spanish and published by the UNAM in 1992. As Lindsay Sidders points out, an English version is currently being prepared. The thèse was never published in its entirety. An abridged, edited version was published in 1994 by the CNRS. Jonathan Amith has done the Nahuatl studies a tremendous favor by making this text available online (it is also available on the CNRS website as a series separate PDFs: http://www.vjf.cnrs.fr/celia/FichExt/Etudes/Launey/tm.htm). I would dare say that Monsieur Launey’s thèse is the single most comprehensive and philologically-grounded linguistic investigation of classical Nahuatl grammar of the 20th century. For those who don’t know his work on Nahuatl besides the pedagogic grammar, I append here Michel Launey’s other publications on this language (I exclude his work on Palikur). Launey, Michel. 1977. Le pluriel transcatégoriel /-ke’/ en nahuatl : contribution à l’étude de la relation ‘être/avoir’. Amerindia, 2 : 19-45. _____. 1978. Deux sources du passif d’après la morphologie nahuatl. Actes du XLIIe Congrès International des Américanistes: Congrès du Centenaire, Paris, 1976. IV: 471-484. Société des Américanistes, Paris. _____. 1979. Le datif dans une langue sans cas (Nahuatl classique). In : Relations prédicat-actant(s) dans des langues de types divers (C. Paris, éd.) vol. 2 : 29-70. SELAF, LACITO documents 2-3, Paris. _____. 1981a. Une intérpretation linguistique des schémas relationnels : passifs-impersonnels et causitifs en nahuatl classique. Amerindia, 6 : 17-58. _____. 1981b. Compte-rendu : ‘Five Studies Inspired by Nahuatl Verbs in –oa’ (Canger). Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 106: 312-313. _____. 1983. Concession de phrase et concession particulière en nahuatl classique. In : L’expression de la concession (Valentin, éd.) Université de Paris IV, Linguistica Palatina Colloquia I. _____. 1984. Fonctions et catégories dans l’opposition verbo-nominale : l’exemple du nahuatl. In : “L’opposition verbo-nominale dans diverses langues du monde” (Nicole Tersis-Surugue, éd) Modèles linguistiques, 6 : 133-148. _____. 1986. Catégories et opérations dans la grammaire nahuatl. Thèse d’Etat, Université de Paris IV. _____. 1988. Le linguiste et le funambule : réflexions sur l’universalité et la spécificité linguistiques et culturelles. Amerindia, 13 : 169-192. _____. 1991a. Compte rendus: ‘Gramática mazateca’ (Jamieson); ‘Xo-nitháán me’phaa’; ‘Registro de la variación fonológica en el náhuatl moderno’ (Monzón). Amerindia, 16: 223-25. _____. 1991b. In memoriam Carlos López Ávila. Amerindia, 16: 227. _____. 1992. Sortilèges des nuages et sorcelleries de la sarigue (à propos d'une traduction du Tratado de hechicerías d'Olmos). Amerindia, 17: 183-196. _____. 1994. Une grammaire omnipredicative : essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique. Collection Sciences du langage. CNRS Éditions, Paris. _____. 1995a. L’Arte de la lengua mexicana de Aldama y Guevara. Amerindia, 19-20: 237-244. _____. 1995b. Compte rendu : fray Andrés de Olmos Arte de la lengua mexicana Fac-similé. Introduction et transcription d’A. et M. León-Portilla. Journal de la Société des Américanistes, 81: 348-352. _____. 1996a. Retour au -tl aztèque. Amerindia, 21: 77-91. _____. 1996b. Compte rendu : ‘Mexikanische Grammatik’ (Humboldt). Amerindia, 21: 203-209. _____. 1997a. La elaboración de los conceptos de la diátesis en las primeras gramáticas del náhuatl. In: La descripción de las lenguas amerindias en la época colonial. Biblioteca Ibero-Americana, 63. (Klaus Zimmermann, ed) 21-41. Vervuert, Frankfurt am Main / Iberoamericana, Madrid. _____. 1997b. La distance intraduisable : Les préfixes directionnels du nahuatl. Amerindia, 22: 15-30. _____. 1999. Compound nouns vs. incorporation in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 52(3-4): 347-364. _____. 2002. On some causative doublets in Classical Nahuatl. In: The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation (Masayoshi Shibatani, ed): 301-317. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. _____. 2004. The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(1): 49-69. --- On Thu, 2/26/09, David Wright wrote: From: David Wright Subject: [Nahuat-l] Launey To: "Nahuat-l (messages)" Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 11:23 AM In reponse to Michael Swanton's recent post: Hi, Michael! I enjoyed seeing you again at the colloquium at the Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas a few months back. I hope all is well. There's a little mistake in your recent post that needs to be corrected. You state: "Not only is this work [Michel Launey's *Introduction à la langue et à la littérature aztèques*] not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies." Following is a paragraph from Wright Carr (2007: 43) (David Charles Wright Carr, *Lectura del náhuatl: fundamentos para la traducción de los textos en náhuatl del periodo Novohispano Temprano*, México, Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Indígenas, 2007): "La gramática del lingüista francés Michel Launey, Introduction à la langue et à la littérature aztèques (“Introducción a la lengua y a la literatura aztecas”), constituye una aportación relevante a la descripción del náhuatl novohispano. Consta de dos tomos: el primero es la gramática propiamente dicha, y en el segundo hay una serie de textos en náhuatl con comentarios. Fue publicada inicialmente en 1979 (el primer tomo) y 1980 (el segundo); hay una reimpresión de 1995 y una traducción al castellano del primer volumen —salpicada de errores de traducción, edición y/o imprenta—, impresa en 1992. Launey, a diferencia de los nahuatlatos de la escuela mexicana, hizo un estudio a fondo de la gramática de Horacio Carochi, lo que le permitió presentar una descripción más precisa del náhuatl novohispano. Registra el saltillo y las vocales largas mediante signos diacríticos, aprovechando para este propósito el sistema ortográfico de Carochi. Este libro es útil para el principiante, particularmente la edición francesa, para los que leen este idioma. Aparte de las virtudes ya mencionadas, presenta una gran claridad en la exposición de la gramática náhuatl, pues fue concebida como un método didáctico, más que una gramática a secas." So it is cited in Wright Carr, 2007! Granted, I got my hands on the French edition after having prepared most of the book, but it was used as a complementary source in some sections (see notes see footnotes 144, 165, 198, 213, 341, 362, 364, 365, 371, 376, 385, 602). No problem, my friend, I just thought I should set the record straight, since this is a public forum and our messages will be available in an on-line archive for years. Peace, David Wright _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sun Mar 15 01:59:21 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:59:21 -0400 Subject: New Views on the Aztec World Symposium Message-ID: MARCH 31-APRIL 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF MEXICO, CAMPUS CHICAGO, THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY CHICAGO AND THE MEXICO TOURISM BOARD PRESENT: NEW VIEWS ON AZTEC WORLD Coordinator: Oscar Alatriste, M A Academic Dean, Escuela de Extensión de la UNAM en Chicago Tuesday, March 31, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM Venue: The Newberry Library "PROJECTION OF TWO DOCUMENTARIES" A) MEXICAN TOURISM (10 min.) Promotional Film: Presenter and Commentator: Arq. Rodrigo Esponda C Director, Midwest USA Mexico Tourism Board B) ON THE AZTECS (60 min.) Documentary: Secrets of the Dead. Aztecs Massacre Presenter and commentator: Elizabeth Baquedano Ph D Institute of Archaeology. University College London Thursday, April 2, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM Venue: The Newberry Library "ROUNDTABLE: GODS, GOLD AND WRITING IN THE AZTEC WORLD" Speaker: Guilhem Olivier Durand, Ph D Institute of Historical Research, UNAM Lecture: Men and Gods in the Aztec World Speaker: Elizabeth Baquedano, Ph D Institute of Archaeology, University College London Lecture: Reevaluating Aztec Gold Speaker: Ellen T Baird, PhD Department of Art History, University of Illinois at Chicago Lecture: The will of Don Miguel Damian: An Aztec Family in Colonial Mexico, 1576 Moderator: Oscar Alatriste UNAM campus Chicago Hors doeuvres will be serve March 31-April 4 EXHIBITION ON COLONIAL MEXICAN NAHUA PICTORIAL WRITING Venue: The Newberry Library Hall Entrance The Newberry Library 60 West Walton Street Chicago, Il 60610 www.newberry.org -- John F. Schwaller President, SUNY Potsdam 44 Pierrepont Ave. Potsdam, NY 13676 schwallr at potsdam.edu _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Sun Mar 15 23:51:40 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:51:40 -0600 Subject: Corrections to the UNAM edition of Launey Message-ID: Estimados listeros: Now that Jonathan Amith has provided us with a digital version of the UNAM's Spanish edition of Launey's Nahuatl grammar, my Mexican students are going to want to consult it. I vaguely remember reading on this list about a correction sheet prepared by Una Canger. Can someone please provide a copy, or Canger's e-mail address? Saludos, David Wright _____ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sat Mar 21 17:11:53 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:11:53 -0400 Subject: ANN: Aztec Words in Maya lecture Message-ID: April 9, 7:00 PM Aztec Words in Ancient Maya Inscriptions: "Signs of Early Contact" By Dr. Martha Macri Nahuatl was the language of the Aztec Empire. Words of Nahuatl origin can be found spelled with syllabic signs in early Maya inscriptions. In this talk, Dr. Macri discusses dated monuments that suggest several distinct periods of early contact between the ancient Maya and the Nahuatl speaking peoples of Mexico. Phoebe Hearst Museum Patio and Gallery College Avenue on the campus of the University of California Berkeley, California http://hearstmuseum.berkeley.edu/outreach/public_programs.htm _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sat Mar 21 17:26:03 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:26:03 -0400 Subject: Nahua Workshop, May 1-2, 2009 Message-ID: May 1-May 2 Nahua Workshop "Issues in Nahua Identity and Language: Past and Present" University of Maryland This interdisciplinary workshop will explore current research on identity and language among Nahuatl-speakers from historical and contemporary perspectives. Scholars will explore a variety of ways of conceptualizing the relation between Nahuatl-speakers and colonial and national Mexican society and institutions. How has religious ideology, schooling, or the creation of written texts mediated the creation of identities? Papers will also explore the challenges of using ethnography or using textual analysis to understand the nature of intercultural relations and of social and linguistic change. To what extent do ethnographic fieldwork or textual sources allow scholars to recognize and conceptualize change in Nahuatl-speaking communities and peoples? Friday, May 1 2:00 pm Jane Hill / Keynote address (University of Arizona) Uto-Aztecan as a Mesoamerican Language Family: Implications for Understanding Aztecan and the Nahua 3:30 pm Jacqueline Messing (LASC Fellow) Identity and Narrative in Colonial Tlaxcala, Mexico 4:00 pm Jonathan Amith The practice and politics of Nahuatl standardization: Local and national identity in conflict 4:30 pm Comment Saturday, May 2 8:45 am Breakfast 9:15 Jim Maffie (LASC Fellow) In Huehue Tlamanitiliztli and la Verdad: Philosophical Language and Identity in Friar Bernardino de Sahagúns Colloquios y doctrina chistiana 9:45 Berenice Alcantra Rojas (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México) Authorship and Translation in Doctrinal Nahuatl Texts from the Colonial Period. 10:15 Comment, Alejandro Cañeque, Department of History, University of Maryland, College Park 10:30 Break 10:45 Alan & Pamela Sandstrom (Indiana University-Purdue) Huastecan Nahua Ethnic Identity, Processes of Globalization, and the Protestant Invasion 11:15 John Sullivan (University of Zacatecas) The IDIEZ Project: Countering the Deculturization of Nahuas at Mexican Universities St. Mary's Hall - Multipurpose room University of Maryland, College Park 11:45 Comment http://www.lasc.umd.edu/Events/Workshops.html _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From swood at uoregon.edu Sat Mar 21 19:16:58 2009 From: swood at uoregon.edu (Stephanie Wood) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:16:58 -0700 Subject: photos of archives? Message-ID: Hello colleagues, Sorry for any duplicaiton. I am writing to ask whether anyone might be willing to loan interior photographs they have of any Mesoamerican archives for a documentary we at the University of Oregon are making about manuscript rescue -- especially of Spanish colonial-period documents, and especially of documents that help us reconstruct the histories of indigenous communities under colonial rule. We will gladly give you credit if your photos are chosen for the film. The higher the resolution, the better, but we will be delighted to consider whatever photos you have. And please let us know if and how we might contact archivists if permissions would be necessary. If you can supply any metadata -- place, date (even roughly), etc. -- that would be very helpful. If you have any stories that we might quote about worrisome or improving archive conditions, these would be welcome, too. I can only receive messages under 10 megabytes, so some images (if digital) may have to be sent one by one, depending upon their size. If you wish to mail prints through the standard mail, please see the address below. Please indicate in your message exactly how you would like to be cited (full name, title?, institution affiliation, if any?). Just so you know, we do not wish to paint an overly negative view, and we will be showing improvements that have been made in manuscript preservation. So, shots of humidity threats, insects, rodents, bundling methods, fire, etc., would be useful, as well as recent organizing and preservation efforts. Many thanks for considering this! Stephanie Wood Wired Humanities Project / CSWS 1201 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1201 U.S.A. _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From ixtlil at earthlink.net Thu Mar 26 13:17:03 2009 From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:17:03 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French... Message-ID: With regard to the post of 12 March, 2009, wherein Lee expresses continuing confidence in the article by published by Lee in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl, volume 37, 2006, I have these comments. While 2001--the latest year for sources that Lee's cites in the ECN article of 2006--was a productive year for Lesbre with seven articles, through 2000 Lesbre had published seventeen articles plus reviews, and was not an obscure figure, especially when there were at the time only a handful of active Texcocan and Nezahualcoyotl specialists in the world. Lesbre did publish by then in well known and available journals such as L'Homme and Journal de la Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes and these excellent pieces should have led to a rapid and thorough investigation by Lee. Several key articles were published by 2000 and should have been consulted. I agree that people should read, for example, Lesbre's �Nezahualcoyotl entre historia, leyenda y divinizacion �, Colloque international El h?roe entre el mito y la historia, Mexico novembre 1998. Publi? dans El h?roe entre el mito y la historia, (Federico Navarrete, Guilhem Olivier eds), M?xico : CEMCA, UNAM, 2000, pp. 21-55, or his surpassingly subtle "Oublis et censures de l�historiographie acolhua coloniale : Nezahualcoyotl �, C.M.H.L.B.Caravelle n�72 , Toulouse, Juin 1999, pp. 11-30, or his "Coyohua itlatollo : el ciclo de Coyohua �, Latin American Indian Literatures Journal, vol. 16, n� 1, Penn State McKeesport, spring 2000, pp. 47-75 to determine which author does or does not make authentic claims to knowledge regarding Nezahualcoyotl. Later works should also be consulted, such as: "Nezahualcoyotl, portrait inhabituel d�un tlatoani pr?hispanique �, Destins, destinations, destinataires. H?ros et images, Universit? de Nantes : Centre international des langues, 2001, pp. 16-28 and Lesbre's excellent, thought-provoking new article on leaf 2 of the Mappe Quinatzin in the latest ECN. This calls for a great deal of work as Lesbre is no quick read. He presents many ideas at once, requiring the reader to exercise patience and contemplation along the way. My objections to Lee's article do not rest only on the failure to include important research from Lesbre, although this is a significant matter and Lee's explanation is both odd to have been offered and insufficient. They are generated by the lack of use of the key Texcocan pictorial historical manuscript, the Codex Xolotl in the analysis of early Texcocan history, misinterpretations of key pictorial pictorial information in the Codex de Xicotepec but especially in the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3, and failure to link accurately and completely the content of these key pictorial documents to the alphabetic texts. These are basic skills required to generate proper and genuine understanding in a researcher, prior to the researcher being able to generate responsible and accurate conclusions to present to the public. With a defective foundation, the conclusions reached have little probability of providing authentic information about Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco. I will demonstrate the errors in handling the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3 in one or two future posts�real world allowing--over the next two weeks. These can be handled in a brief manner suitable for this medium. In the meantime, readers should record how many errors in basic interpretation of pictorial content and the relation of such content to alphabetic texts they can find in the single paragraph dealing mostly with the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 that spans pages 246-47 of Lee's essay or in the paragraph dealing with the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 on page 243. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Tue Mar 31 13:26:33 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:26:33 -0400 Subject: Florentine Codex on DVD Message-ID: The Bilingual Press of Arizona State University's Hispanic Research Center is making a 16 DVD set of the complete Florentine Codex available for $600. For those who prefer, they also provide the same material pre-loaded on a portable hard drive for $800. For further information see the following web page: http://www.asu.edu/brp/newandforthcoming/Florentine1.html -- ***************************** 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 schwallr at potsdam.edu Tue Mar 31 18:32:40 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:32:40 -0400 Subject: Ball game question In-Reply-To: <28B4161FB1974341A5B340AAEF3E63AC@eguiluz> Message-ID: On our sister list aztlan at lists.famsi.org there has been a good discussion about the words tlachtli and tlachco. I have copied the responses into one rather long, but quite interesting post to share it with Nahuatl. 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 > John F. Schwaller wrote: > You have the words somewhat reversed: > > Tlachtli is the ball game > > Tlachco is the place where it is played. > > Campbell, R. Joe wrote: > 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 Gordon Whittaker wrote: > Dear John and Joe, > > Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't tlachtli just the ball court, not > the ball game itself? The Spanish use of 'juego' tends to blur the > distinction, but do we actually have clear cases in Nahuatl texts of the > term being used for the game? Tlachtli looks to me like a loan from > Zapotec, as I think I may have argued in my dissertation. My memory's not > what it used to be. > > Best, > Gordon John Schwaller wrote: > Tlachtli is the game itself > > tlachco would be the "place of the game;" the final -co, is a locative, > denoting that it is a location of the game (tlach + co). > > As for a Zapotec origin, I cannot comment. It works like a standard > Nahuatl stem. > > > Campbell, R. Joe wrote: > Dear Gordon, > > My hazy memory was that "tlachtli" was the game -- and "tlachco" the > ball court. But your idea of looking at textual usage sent me to the > Florentine Codex, thumbing pages and running my search finger down one > column after another... |8-) Actually, I ran a search program to list > all sentences which might be coded for the morpheme and > since it's one of the easy ones, I think all or most occurrences are > already coded. > To my surprise, most of the usages indicated a reference to the > court itself. So your present memory is still better than mine. > > Molina's three dictionaries give results that ended up in an aborted > summary below -- "tlachtli" refers to either the game or the court. In > 1555 he refers only to the game, but in both the 1571 dictionaries, he > points out the double possibility. > > All the best, > > Joe > > > Florentine: > > *tlachtli *** > nahuallachco. on a magical ball court. . b.2 > f.14 p.239| > teotlachco. !place> teo:tl-tlachtli-co1>. b.2 f.12 p.186| > tezcatlachco. !place> tlachtli-co1>. b.2 f.11 p.185| > tlachco. ball court; on the ball court; in a ball game. co1>. b.8 f.2 p.29| > tlachcotecatl. person of Tlachco. . b.8 f.3 > p.51| > tlachcuauhyo. having a ball-court eagle design. yo:tl1>. b.10 f.4 p.64| > tlachtemalacatl. stone ring which is on a ball court. malacatl>. b.8 f.2 p.29| > tlachtli. . . b.2 f.14 p.231| > tlachtli. ball court. . b.3 f.3 p.37| > > from Molina: > > tlachtli. batei, juego de pelota con los quadriles, o el mesmo lugar > donde juegan este juego; batel juego de pelota con las naigas; iuego > de pelota assi el lugar (assi is iuego de pelota con las nalgas); > juego de pelota con las nalgas. s. el lugar donde juegan assi. > . 71m1-3| > > > Florentine contexts: > > tlachtli > > 1. *nahuallachco*. nahuallachco . in the magical ball court . > (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.239) > > 2. *teotlachco*. in ohualtemoc, mec tlamelahua, in motenehua > teotlachco: . when he had come down here, then he went direct to > [the place] called the god's ball court. . > (b.2 f.9 c.34 p.145) > > 3. *teotlachco*. auh in onacic, in teotlachco in painal, niman ye > ixpan micoa: . and when [the priest with] paynal came to > teotlachco, then there was the slaying [of sacrificial victims] > before him. . (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.176) > > 4. *teotlachco*. teotlachco. . teotlachco . teo:tl-tlachtli-co1> (b.2 f.12 c.38 p.186) > > 5. *teotlachco*. in teotlachco: oncan miquia in intoca catca > amapantzitzin, . teotlachco: there died those named amapantzin > [impersonating the god amapan]. . tlachtli-co1> (b.2 f.12 c.38 p.186) > > 6. *tezcatlachco*. tezcatlachco. . tezcatlachco . > > 7. *tezcatlachco*. in tezcatlachco: no oncan micoaya, oncan miquia > in ixiptla huitznahuatl: zan quenman, amo mochipa: . > tezcatlachco: there also there was slaying; there died the > impersonator of uitznauatl--only at times, not often. . > > 8. *tlachco*. in oquimonmicti, mec quinhuihuilana, tlachco: . when > they had slain them, then they dragged them about the ball court. > . (b.2 f.9 c.34 p.145) > > 9. *tlachco*. tlachco timotlalia . in the ball court you are set . > (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.239) > > 10. *tlachco*. mochi patolco, tlachco, quitlamia, . he used up > everything in patolli and tlachtli. . (b.4 f.9 c.27 > p.94) > > 11. *tlachco*. aoc tepapatla, patolco, tlachco, ohuiti, chicuati, > quichicuatilia, anoze quimomachtia in ollatolli, patollatolli, > ollatole, patollatole: . he no longer overcame others in patolli > or tlachtli, or embarrassed, despoiled, or took all the wagers, > even though he understood the language, the rules, of tlachtli and > patolli. . (b.4 f.9 c.27 p.94) > > 12. *tlachco*. auh manozo ic onilpitinemi, ma ipatiuh mochiuhtica, > in oncan oonquetzaloc in patolco, in tlachco: ca oontlatlalililoc > in mayehuatl in quecehuatl, in nelpiloni: . but may he go bound > to it; may it become his aid when he hath been placed there in the > patolli game, in the ball game; for the glove, the leather hip > guard, the girdle have been placed on; . (b.6 f.5 > c.13 p.64) > > 13. *tlachco*. ca oc yehhuatl ontenamiquiz in patolco, in tlachco: > oc yehhuatl onteollamiz, oc yehhuatl ompatoz. . for yet he is to > contend with others in the patolli game, in the ball game; he is > yet to play the ball game with others; he is yet to play patolli. > . (b.6 f.5 c.13 p.64) > > 14. *tlachco*. niman ic quitlani in ixquich tlazotli tlatquitl, auh > mochintin quintlani, in ixquichtin tetlatlattaque, in oncan > tlachco: . then he won all the costly goods, and he won > everything from all who watched there in the ball court. . > (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 15. *tlachco*. ihuan tlacencahualo in tlachco, tlaahuililo, > tlaxalhuilo, tlachpano: . and things were arranged on the ball > court; there was sprinkling, there was sanding, there was > sweeping. . (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58) > > 16. *tlachco*. ihuan in ixquich quitlanitoz tlatoani, in > tlazotilmatli in xomoihhuitilmatli, in tlazomaxtlatl, in > chalchiuhtentetl, teocuitlanacochtli, chalchiuhcozcatl, > teocuitlacozcatl, matzopetztli chalchihuitl huei ipan ca, tlazotl: > ihuan in ixquich tlazotilmatli, ihuan pepechtli quihualquixtia in > calpixque, quihuallalia in tlachco. . and all which the ruler was > to wager in the game -- the valued capes, the duck feather capes, > the costly breech clouts, the green stone lip plugs, the golden > ear plugs, the green stone necklaces, the golden necklaces, the > wrist bands with large, precious, green stones upon them, and all > the precious capes and bedding -- the majordomos brought out and > placed in the ball court. . (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58) > > 17. *tlachco*. ca amo tlachco, patolco otictlali, . not in tlachtli > nor in patolli hast thou entered. . (b.9 f.4 c.9 > p.42) > > 18. *tlachcotecatl*. auh in yehhuatl tlatoani: niman quinnonotza in > ixquichtin calpixque, petlacalcatl, aztacalcatl: cuauhnahuac > calpixqui, huaxtepec calpixqui, cuetlaxtecatl: tochpanecatl: > tziuhcoacatl, tepecuacuilcatl, huappanecatl, coaixtlahuacatl, > tlappanecatl, tlachcotecatl, matlatzincatl, ocuiltecatl, > xilotepecatl, atotonilcatl, axocopanecatl, itzcuincuitlapilcatl, > atocpanecatl, ayotzintepecatl, . the ruler then consulted with > all the majordomos -- the men of the petlacalco and of the > aztacalco, the majordomos of quauhnauac and uaxtepec, and [those] > of cuetlaxtlan, tochpan, tziuhcoac, tepequacuilco, uapan, > coatlixtlauacan, tlappan, tlachco, matlatzinco, ocuillan, > xilotepec, atotonilco, axocopan, itzcuincuitlapilco, atocpan, and > ayotzintepec. . (b.8 f.3 c.17 p.51) > > 19. *tlachcuauhyo*. inic tlanamaca, quipantilia in quinamaca, > yoltica, yancuic, cualli, chicahuac, tlamachyo, tlamachtilmatli: > apantilmatli, tlahcohuitecqui, tlachcuauhyo, tonatiuh onmani, > tohtonatiuhio, ocelotilmatli, ocelotl, cuauhtli onicac, > ihhuimoyahuac, tetemalacayo, xochimoyahuac, xochiteteyo, > xoxochiteyo, cohuaxayacayo, ixnextlacuilollo, tezzacanecuillo, > tlalpiloni ontemi, nochpaltilmatli, tlauhtilmatli, > xochpallaxochio, tlahcalhuaztilmatli, tlacalhuaz tlaxochio, > tlalpilli, colotlalpilli, teneh, tlatentilli, tenchilnahuayo, > tenixyo, tenmolonqui, tempozonqui, tenmimiliuhqui, tenchapanqui. . > In order to deal, he seeks out that which he sells: the fresh, the > new, the good, the strong, the designed -- designed capes, capes > to be worn; those of a weave not compressed; those of a ball-court > eagle design, those with a sun design on them -- provided with > suns; ocelot capes -- the ocelot, the eagle stand thereon; those > with a design of scattered flowers, a design of stone discs, a > scattered flower design; with flowered borders -- with flowers on > the border; with serpent mask designs; those painted with bloodied > faces; those with a curved labret, with bead pendants extending; > carmine-colored capes, red capes, those with yellow flower > designs; capes with the blowgun design -- those with the blowgun > design with flowers; netted capes, scorpion-colored netted capes; > those having a border, having a trimming, having red eyelets -- > bordered with eyes; having fluffed, frayed borders, rolled seams, > fringed borders. . (b.10 f.4 c.17 > p.64) > > 20. *tlachtemalacatl*. auh in itech tlachmatl, ontetl > tlachtemalacatl manca, . and on the walls were two stone, ball > court rings. . (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 21. *tlachtli*. tlachtli icpac, huel in cuica quetzalcoxcox, . over > the ball court the fine pheasant sings . (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.231) > > 22. *tlachtli*. i cecni quitecac tlachtli zan moch tetl, . > elsewhere he built a ball court all of stone. . (b.3 > f.3 c.14 p.37) > > 23. *tlachtli*. quitlanitoa in ixquich tlazotli in teocuitlatl, in > teocuitlacozcatl, in chalchihuitl, in teoxihuitl, in tlazotli, in > tlazotilmatli, in tlazomaxtlatl, in milli, in calli, cotzehuatl, > teocuitlamatemecatl, quetzalmachoncotl, xomoihhuitilmatli, > cacahuapetlatl in oncan netlanihua, itoca tlachtli: . they > wagered [in this game] all [manner of] costly goods -- gold, > golden necklaces, green stone, fine turquoise, slaves, precious > capes, valuable breech clouts, cultivated fields, houses, leather > leg bands, gold bracelets, arm bands of quetzal feathers, duck > feather capes, bales of cacao -- [these] were wagered there in the > game called tlachtli. . (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 24. *tlachtli*. auh in oncan huel inepantla tlachtli, onoca tlecotl > tlaxotlalli in tlalli, . and there, in the very center of the > ball court, was a line, drawn upon the ground. . (b.8 > f.2 c.10 p.29) > Gordon Whittaker wrote: > Dear Joe and Fritz, > > Thanks for your input on tlachtli. Joe, that's quite an impressive > database you have! From your citations it would seem that tlachtli > primarily names the ball court, but could be extended (as Molina attests > as well) to include the game itself. > > The specific name of the game, ollamatiliztli and the like, as opposed to > the court it was played on, presumably also turns up in the Classical > Nahuatl corpus, but I have no idea with regard to its frequency. The index > to the Florentine Codex available at the SUP-INFOR web site lists only the > following related forms: > > ollama II-239(3) > vllama VIII-29 > ollamaloni X-87 > ollamaloz VIII-58 > ollamanj VIII-29 > > Fritz, I agree with you that there's nothing unusual about the appearance > of Nahuatl tlach-tli. However, given the long history of Zapotec and > Mixtec ball courts -- from which the Aztec-style court derives --, the > chances are good, I think, that the word is an adaptation of Zapotec làchi > 'pelota de los indios'. It is so listed in the Junta Colombina dictionary > (and presumably also in Córdova, although I don't have it at hand right > now). It is also the term for "campo llano" in general. Nahuatl, of > course, cannot have an initial l, so a form with initial tl or il are the > typical alternatives to dropping it. > > Best, > Gordon > -- ***************************** 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 schwallr at potsdam.edu Sun Mar 1 04:13:09 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 23:13:09 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research Message-ID: From: "Jerry Offner" Date: Sat, February 28, 2009 Recent comments on the list provide an opportunity to point out again the excellence and utility of the body of work assembled by French researchers on things Nahua or Aztec or whatever. For present purposes to avoid further controversy, let's call them "residents of what is now called part of Mexico before the Spanish invasion"--that's got a great commercial ring to it! I only wish we saw such energy invested in line by line understanding of the written sources and their relationships, and more importantly the written sources' relationships to the pictorial material. Instead, until recent times, we have seen so many resources, decade after decade, directed towards reclassifying Nahua culture and history to fit Western ideologies and related grand theoretical schemes. The results have proven better at exposing the explanatory inadequacy of these themes than in understanding the Nahua. The French, in the meantime, have been paying attention to the facts on the ground an! d trying to understand Nahua culture in its own terms and the results show it. There is no question that the work of the French is little regarded and little known. A recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl by Jongsoo Lee purports to provide a new and proper understanding at last of Texcoco and Nezahualcoyotl. It does not cite or discuss at all the work of Patrick Lesbre, available in both French and Spanish. Lesbre had covered this same ground years earlier, better, far more accurately and with far more insight, experience, appropriate restraint and subtlety. Had the author been aware of or read Lesbre's work, the publication might have been abandoned as inferior and superfluous. Neither is the work of Marc Thouvenot productively utilized, especially his lifetime of work on the Codex Xolotl. The lack of evidence presented from and evident lack of knowledge of the content of the Codex Xolotl invalidates the author's "telescoped history" attempts to discuss Tenochcan, Texcocan (and Azcapotzalcan) history and their interrelationships. A hund! red years of history comes across as flat as a printed page. You can't write about Aztecs and in particular you can't write about Texcoco without knowing the work of the French researchers over the past three decades. Recently, Lacandena published on Nahua writing, appearing to scold many, and I think quite inappropriately, for their perceived inadequacies in linguistic formalities and presentation methods without making more than a passing reference to Thouvenot's work--only his dissertation and not the body of programs--in French, Spanish and also usually English easily found on-line at: http://www.sup-infor.com/index.htm (At least one list member of these lists is a contributor. It is still fashionable in some shrinking enclaves to deride or dismiss on-line material but this, as is often the case, is of the highest quality and is in many ways better than printed material. A major DVD of the resources on line and new material is in press for those who prefer a material token or talisman for legitimacy). Marc's work is easily searched to form and investigate hypotheses on glyphs and their readings. For example, Lacandena does a good job of showing a particular kind of bird glyph can be read as huilo- as well as or instead of toto- (uh-oh, I hope I am not scolded for my presentation method in this instance, I took off those pesky -tl's but left the rest in lower case and did not use the canonic form, and did not indicate vowel length, but I think they're all long anyway...). A quick use of the program CEN from Thouvenot and his group automatically provides just over a dozen examples of glyphs with the huilo- element, easily allowing the user to pop up pictures of the glyphs and providing exact references as to their location. Experienced people working on glyphs in a document are going to be using Marc's program to investigate all types of birds that appear as candidates, although you can usually quickly rule in or out owls and other birds with distinctive appearances. Fo! r example, if you are trying to match toponymic glyphs in a pictorial document with colonial and modern lists of place names or with names on maps, you are going to investigate any possibility that comes to mind--and most of the time you still won't get a "hit" or you'll get too many--e.g. Coatepec, Huehuetepec, etc.. You will also be more efficient time if you are not using canonic forms. The same is true of types of trees and snakes. Lacadena's work does contain the promise of a deeper grammatical understanding of glyphic texts, except that there aren't any, other than a few strings in the Codex Xolotl that Dibble has published on years ago. Still, Lacandena does a good job of showing that the Codex de Xicotepec has strong relationships to the Texcocan school of tlacuilome. Perhaps some sort of non-prescriptive-laden bridge can be built between the two efforts of Lacandena and Thouvenot. Regarding the website mentioned above, can anyone cite instances of references to this on-line body of work in recent, non-French, non-Mexican published work? (There are some among the Mexican researchers that Marc has patiently trained, but any from the US? Getting a list of those works would very likely prove an efficient roadmap to good recent work). Other resources on the website produced by Marc and his collaborators include an on-line Nahuatl dictionary and a veritable Nahua encyclopedia placing individual glyphs in a natural science context or in a cultural context via references to Sahagun and other sources. All resources are linked, so that if your are investigating snakes, you might recognize, as Sybille de Pury did, at a glance, that the apparent Coatepec glyph in Section 5 of the Codex de Xicotepec is very likely not Coatepec but instead is more likely related to the snake teuctlacozauhqui. If you enter "TECUTLACOZAUHQUI" into the GDN program (yes, they know about teuc- and tecu- so let's skip all that...), you find: TECUTLACOZAUHQUI : "La amarilla gobernante" (Tecutlaco?auhquj) Ay en esta tierra una culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Dizen: es el principe, o princesa de todas las culebras, es gruessa, y larga: tiene eslabones en la cola, como vibora: tiene grande cabe?a, y gran boca tiene dientes; y la lengua orcaxada: tiene escamas gruessas, es de color amarillo de la color de la flor de la calaba?a: tiene unas manchas negras como las del tigre: los eslabones tienen pardillos, y duros: silva esta serpiente. Come conejos y liebres, y aves; come cualesqujer aves /o anjmales: y aunque tiene dientes no los masca, sino tragalos, y alla dentro los dixiere, o desmuele. Si alguna ave topa tragasela entera, y si estan encima de algun arbol arrojelos la pon?o?a con que los haze cayer muertos. Lib. 11, fol. 77, p. 229 r. y v. Esta serpiente siempre anda, acompa?ada, con su hembra; y la hembra con su macho: aunque siempre andan el uno apartado del otro y quando se qujeren juntar silva el uno, y luego viene el otro. y si alguno mata al uno dellos el otro persigue al que le mato hasta que le mata. En los eslabones se parece, si esta serpiente es de muchos a?os: porque cada a?o produce un eslabon esta culebra /o serpiente no puede andar por tierra rasa mas va por encima del heno y de las matas como volando, sino le hazen mal no hazen mal. Lib. 11, fol. 78, p. 230 r. y v. Ay otra culebra que se llama cincoatl, o cencoatl; es mediana, no tiene cascabeles, nj muerde es amarilla, y colorada, y parda escura, qujere parecer a la culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Lib. 11, fol. 87, p. 239 v. You then go back and look more closely at the Codex de Xicotepec glyph and you see it is composed of two facing yellow snakes with spots, forked tongues and (small) rattles. One of the most obvious Coatepec glyphs of all times then becomes most likely not a Coatepec glyph at all. And you broaden your search of place names well beyond Coatepec. Marc is extremely generous with his time and a researcher ignores his work at their peril. For example, his efforts, along with Sybille de Pury have helped me identify the second town in the Codex de Xicotepec as Cuauhchinanco and have helped me rule out any appearance of Nezahualcoyotl in that codex until Section 16 (rather than Section 9 as the author of the ECN article, uncritically following Stresser-Pean, supposes). And it was of course Lesbre in his review of Stresser-Pean's book long ago that initially suggested that Stresser-Pean's reading of the Nezahualcoyotl glyph in Section 9 was incorrect and that he appeared instead in the later section--where his glyph is quite clear but was misread by Stresser-Pean. And of course, the French Guy and Claude Stresser-Pean were the ones sufficiently trusted by the people of the small village of Cuaxicala to allow them to being their codex to the public. The French education system has had a way of producing people with finely tuned sensitivities to texts, pictorial as well as alphabetic--every detail is considered important, and Marc's, and his collaborators' and Patrick's work all show it. And leaving aside facility in reading French, which is often just a few sound changes away from Spanish and can be managed with a good (on-line or paper) dictionary, the French have been diligent in their efforts to publish in Spanish and they are enthusiastic in their efforts to communicate by e-mail in English or Spanish, finding French not sufficiently challenging). Why, then, their low profile in the US? Perhaps their empirical rather than ideological approach has kept them isolated? Although academic resources may be at an all-time low, albeit with some hope of improvement on the horizon, it would be good to get Thouvenot and his group and Lesbre over to the US to raise our game some. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Sun Mar 1 20:07:13 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:07:13 -0600 Subject: Aztecs and Nahuas Message-ID: Dear John F. Schwaller: "Postclassic Central Mexican Culture", for example, is a little better and harder to knock down than an anthropomorphic construction of the male gender filled with dry grain stalks! Peace, David Wright -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Mon Mar 2 00:06:44 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:06:44 -0600 Subject: Aztecs and Nahuas Message-ID: Dear John F. Schwaller: Sorry, my last message should have been a reply to Jerry Offner, whose name was way down at the bottom of the message! In fact, was replying as an afterthought, a few hours after reading the message. Peace, David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 10:25:34 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:25:34 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl intonation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Nahuatlatoque, I'm wondering if some kind soul can put me on the track of a good (or even middling) study or description of Nahuatl intonation, preferably in a dialect relatively close to the Valley of Mexico. It's sometimes been said that the lilting intonation of rural Mexican Spanish in the central area comes from Nahuatl, something that seems likely to me. But I've never seen a study of this, or, for that matter, a reconstruction of what Classical Nahuatl intonation might have been like (an impossible task, I suspect). I would be grateful to any of you who have worked with speakers of various dialects, if you could perhaps provide a few pointers on this matter -- given the fact that so little audio material is available freely online or elsewhere. Are there considerable differences between basic declarative and question patterns in, say, Guerrero and Puebla/Tlaxcala or Huaxteca Nahuatl? Are the patterns in Morelos similar to one, or several, of these? Thanks in advance! Best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 10:47:55 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:47:55 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl p ~ w alternation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Nahuatlatoque, I am rather curious about a consonant fluctuation in two Nahuatl terms -- pa:nitl 'banner' and copilli 'tapering cap'. Pa:nitl has the rare variant hua:nitl, seen in the name of a Postconquest ruler of Tenochtitlan. And Cohuil is a rare variant of Copil, the name of a migration-period leader, in the Cronica Mexicana. Both sources are impeccable, so there is no reason for us to assume scribal error. Do any of you know of other instances of such a fluctuation within a dialect, or of a p:w correspondence between dialects? Perhaps Fran and Joe have come across a further example or two in their databases. Thanks for any tips on this. Best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 gwhitta at gwdg.de Mon Mar 9 11:28:40 2009 From: gwhitta at gwdg.de (Gordon Whittaker) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 12:28:40 +0100 Subject: Nahuatl p ~ w alternation: Addendum Message-ID: I forgot to mention that I am, of course, aware of the occasional w > p development in morpheme-final position (tla:uhcopa ~ tla:pcopa). Thanks again, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 Thu Mar 12 05:05:14 2009 From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:05:14 -0400 Subject: Revitalization in Nahuatl Message-ID: Listpohuanimeh, I received the following message and, after checking several sources, send an attempt at a helpful answer, as well as a disclaimer of expertise in the area of language revitalization. Then it occurred to me that maybe several of nocnihuan on this list might be willing to help out, possibly contributing items of interest to others on the list, and, certainly, to me. Tlazohcamati de antemano, Joe . . . . . . . . . My name is ..... ...., and I am a graduate student enrolled in ...... .....'s class on Language Revitalization. For my final paper, I chose to research the past and current situation of Nahuatl, focusing on language revitalization and maintenance efforts. A classmate of mine recommended I e-mail you for advice concerning my research, due to your expertise on Nahuatl. Could you give me an idea of where to look in order to find information on the past and present situation of Nahuatl? Thank you so much for your time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From joslee at unt.edu Thu Mar 12 15:27:58 2009 From: joslee at unt.edu (Lee, Jongsoo) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:27:58 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research In-Reply-To: <380-2200926282025478@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Dear listeros, A couple weeks ago, Professor Offner mentioned my article on Nezahualcoyotl published in Estudios de cultura nahuatl and presented it as lacking in scholarship because I didn't consult French scholars such as Professor Patrick Lesbre. I apologize for the delay, but I would just like to respond briefly. First, even though my article was recently published, I finished this piece in 2001. It is true that at that time I was unaware of Professor Lesbre's work. To a large extent this is a problem related to limitations of institutional resources and the dissemination of work published outside the US and in other languages. However, since that time, I have come across Professor Lesbre's work, and I have cited him in a subsequent publication. Even after reading Professor Lesbre's work, however, I don't feel that my article in Estudios de cultura nahuatl should be considered inferior or superfluous as Professor Offner suggests. Lesbre's work has a different focus, is based on different sources, and is informed by a different point of view. I believe that any prudent reader will easily see that professor Lesbre and I approach Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco in different ways and thus enrich the understanding of this important topic in different ways. I would urge those interested to read the respective arguments and make their own decisions. Best, Jongsoo Lee From: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Offner Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 2:03 PM To: Aztlan; Nahuat-L Subject: [Nahuat-l] Calling attention to the French and how they help in one's research Recent comments on the list provide an opportunity to point out again the excellence and utility of the body of work assembled by French researchers on things Nahua or Aztec or whatever. For present purposes to avoid further controversy, let's call them "residents of what is now called part of Mexico before the Spanish invasion"--that's got a great commercial ring to it! I only wish we saw such energy invested in line by line understanding of the written sources and their relationships, and more importantly the written sources' relationships to the pictorial material. Instead, until recent times, we have seen so many resources, decade after decade, directed towards reclassifying Nahua culture and history to fit Western ideologies and related grand theoretical schemes. The results have proven better at exposing the explanatory inadequacy of these themes than in understanding the Nahua. The French, in the meantime, have been paying! attention to the facts on the ground and trying to understand Nahua culture in its own terms and the results show it. There is no question that the work of the French is little regarded and little known. A recent article in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl by Jongsoo Lee purports to provide a new and proper understanding at last of Texcoco and Nezahualcoyotl. It does not cite or discuss at all the work of Patrick Lesbre, available in both French and Spanish. Lesbre had covered this same ground years earlier, better, far more accurately and with far more insight, experience, appropriate restraint and subtlety. Had the author been aware of or read Lesbre's work, the publication might have been abandoned as inferior and superfluous. Neither is the work of Marc Thouvenot productively utilized, especially his lifetime of work on the Codex Xolotl. The lack of evidence presented from and evident lack of knowledge of the content of the Codex Xolotl invalidates the author's "telescoped history" attempts to discuss Tenochcan, Texcocan (and Azcapotzalcan) ! history and their interrelationships. A hundred years of history comes across as flat as a printed page. You can't write about Aztecs and in particular you can't write about Texcoco without knowing the work of the French researchers over the past three decades. Recently, Lacandena published on Nahua writing, appearing to scold many, and I think quite inappropriately, for their perceived inadequacies in linguistic formalities and presentation methods without making more than a passing reference to Thouvenot's work--only his dissertation and not the body of programs--in French, Spanish and also usually English easily found on-line at: http://www.sup-infor.com/index.htm (At least one list member of these lists is a contributor. It is still fashionable in some shrinking enclaves to deride or dismiss on-line material but this, as is often the case, is of the highest quality and is in many ways better than printed material. A major DVD of the resources on line and new material is in press for those who prefer a material token or talisman for legitimacy). Marc's work is easily searched to form and investigate hypotheses on glyphs and their readings. For example, Lacandena does a good job of showing a particular kind of bird glyph can be read as huilo- as well as or instead of toto- (uh-oh, I hope I am not scolded for my presentation method in this instance, I took off those pesky -tl's but left the rest in lower case and did not use the canonic form, and did not indicate vowel length, but I think they're all long anyway...). A quick use of the program CEN from Thouvenot and his group! automatically provides just over a dozen examples of glyphs with the huilo- element, easily allowing the user to pop up pictures of the glyphs and providing exact references as to their location. Experienced people working on glyphs in a document are going to be using Marc's program to investigate all types of birds that appear as candidates, although you can usually quickly rule in or out owls and other birds with distinctive appearances. For example, if you are trying to match toponymic glyphs in a pictorial document with colonial and modern lists of place names or with names on maps, you are going to investigate any possibility that comes to mind--and most of the time you still won't get a "hit" or you'll get too many--e.g. Coatepec, Huehuetepec, etc.. You will also be more efficient time if you are not using canonic forms. The same is true of types of trees and snakes. Lacadena's work does contain the pro! mise of a deeper grammatical understanding of glyphic texts, exce pt that there aren't any, other than a few strings in the Codex Xolotl that Dibble has published on years ago. Still, Lacandena does a good job of showing that the Codex de Xicotepec has strong relationships to the Texcocan school of tlacuilome. Perhaps some sort of non-prescriptive-laden bridge can be built between the two efforts of Lacandena and Thouvenot. Regarding the website mentioned above, can anyone cite instances of references to this on-line body of work in recent, non-French, non-Mexican published work? (There are some among the Mexican researchers that Marc has patiently trained, but any from the US? Getting a list of those works would very likely prove an efficient roadmap to good recent work). Other resources on the website produced by Marc and his collaborators include an on-line Nahuatl dictionary and a veritable Nahua encyclopedia placing individual glyphs in a natural science context or in a cultural context via references to Sahagun and other sources. All resources are linked, so that if your are investigating snakes, you might recognize, as Sybille de Pury did, at a glance, that the apparent Coatepec glyph in Section 5 of the Codex de Xicotepec is very likely not Coatepec but instead is more likely related to th! e snake teuctlacozauhqui. If you enter "TECUTLACOZAUHQUI" into the GDN program (yes, they know about teuc- and tecu- so let's skip all that...), you find: TECUTLACOZAUHQUI : "La amarilla gobernante" (Tecutlaco?auhquj) Ay en esta tierra una culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Dizen: es el principe, o princesa de todas las culebras, es gruessa, y larga: tiene eslabones en la cola, como vibora: tiene grande cabe?a, y gran boca tiene dientes; y la lengua orcaxada: tiene escamas gruessas, es de color amarillo de la color de la flor de la calaba?a: tiene unas manchas negras como las del tigre: los eslabones tienen pardillos, y duros: silva esta serpiente. Come conejos y liebres, y aves; come cualesqujer aves /o anjmales: y aunque tiene dientes no los masca, sino tragalos, y alla dentro los dixiere, o desmuele. Si alguna ave topa tragasela entera, y si estan encima de algun arbol arrojelos la pon?o?a con que los haze cayer muertos. Lib. 11, fol. 77, p. 229 r. y v. Esta serpiente siempre anda, acompa?ada, con su hembra; y la hembra con su macho: aunque siempre andan el uno apartado del otro y quando se qujeren juntar silva el uno, y luego viene el otro. y si alguno mata al uno dellos el otro persigue al que le mato hasta que le mata. En los eslabones se parece, si esta serpiente es de muchos a?os: porque cada a?o produce un eslabon esta culebra /o serpiente no puede andar por tierra rasa mas va por encima del heno y de las matas como volando, sino le hazen mal no hazen mal. Lib. 11, fol. 78, p. 230 r. y v. Ay otra culebra que se llama cincoatl, o cencoatl; es mediana, no tiene cascabeles, nj muerde es amarilla, y colorada, y parda escura, qujere parecer a la culebra que se llama tecutlaco?auhquj. Lib. 11, fol. 87, p. 239 v. You then go back and look more closely at the Codex de Xicotepec glyph and you see it is composed of two facing yellow snakes with spots, forked tongues and (small) rattles. One of the most obvious Coatepec glyphs of all times then becomes most likely not a Coatepec glyph at all. And you broaden your search of place names well beyond Coatepec. Marc is extremely generous with his time and a researcher ignores his work at their peril. For example, his efforts, along with Sybille de Pury have helped me identify the second town in the Codex de Xicotepec as Cuauhchinanco and have helped me rule out any appearance of Nezahualcoyotl in that codex until Section 16 (rather than Section 9 as the author of the ECN article, uncritically following Stresser-Pean, supposes). And it was of course Lesbre in his review of Stresser-Pean's book long ago that initially suggested that St! resser-Pean's reading of the Nezahualcoyotl glyph in Section 9 was incorrect and that he appeared instead in the later section--where his glyph is quite clear but was misread by Stresser-Pean. And of course, the French Guy and Claude Stresser-Pean were the ones sufficiently trusted by the people of the small village of Cuaxicala to allow them to being their codex to the public. The French education system has had a way of producing people with finely tuned sensitivities to texts, pictorial as well as alphabetic--every detail is considered important, and Marc's, and his collaborators' and Patrick's work all show it. And leaving aside facility in reading French, which is often just a few sound changes away from Spanish and can be managed with a good (on-line or paper) dictionary, the French have been diligent in their efforts to publish in Spanish and they are enthusiastic in their efforts to communicate by e-mail! in English or Spanish, finding French not sufficiently challenging). Why, then, their low profile in the US? Perhaps their empirical rather than ideological approach has kept them isolated? Although academic resources may be at an all-time low, albeit with some hope of improvement on the horizon, it would be good to get Thouvenot and his group and Lesbre over to the US to raise our game some. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:26:26 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:26:26 -0700 Subject: Launey Message-ID: There seems to be some confusion between Michel Launey?s 1979 pedagogic grammar and his rarely cited, though extremely valuable 1986 th?se. The former grew out of his classes in the 70s in Paris VIII and was first published by L?Harmattan. The first volume of this was later translated (defectively) into Spanish and published by the UNAM in 1992. As Lindsay Sidders points out, an English version is currently being prepared. The th?se was never published in its entirety. An abridged, edited version was published in 1994 by the CNRS. Jonathan Amith has done the Nahuatl studies a tremendous favor by making this text available online (it is also available on the CNRS website as a series separate PDFs: http://www.vjf.cnrs.fr/celia/FichExt/Etudes/Launey/tm.htm). ? I would dare say that Monsieur Launey?s th?se is the single most comprehensive and philologically-grounded linguistic investigation of classical Nahuatl grammar of the 20th century. ? For those who don?t know his work on Nahuatl besides the pedagogic grammar, I append here Michel Launey?s other publications on this language (I exclude his work on Palikur). ? ? Launey, Michel. 1977. Le pluriel transcat?goriel /-ke?/ en nahuatl : contribution ? l??tude de la relation ??tre/avoir?. Amerindia, 2?: 19-45. ? _____. 1978. Deux sources du passif d?apr?s la morphologie nahuatl.? Actes du XLIIe Congr?s International des Am?ricanistes:? Congr?s du Centenaire, Paris, 1976.? IV:? 471-484. Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, Paris. ? _____. 1979. Le datif dans une langue sans cas (Nahuatl classique).? In : Relations pr?dicat-actant(s) dans des langues de types divers (C. Paris, ?d.) vol. 2 : 29-70.? SELAF, LACITO documents 2-3, Paris. ? _____. 1981a. Une int?rpretation linguistique des sch?mas relationnels : passifs-impersonnels et causitifs en nahuatl classique.? Amerindia, 6 : 17-58. ? _____. 1981b. Compte-rendu : ?Five Studies Inspired by Nahuatl Verbs in ?oa? (Canger).? Zeitschrift f?r Ethnologie, 106:? 312-313. ? _____. 1983. Concession de phrase et concession particuli?re en nahuatl classique.? In : L?expression de la concession (Valentin, ?d.) Universit? de Paris IV, Linguistica Palatina Colloquia I. ? _____. 1984. Fonctions et cat?gories dans l?opposition verbo-nominale : l?exemple du nahuatl.? In : ?L?opposition verbo-nominale dans diverses langues du monde? (Nicole Tersis-Surugue, ?d) Mod?les linguistiques, 6 : 133-148. ? _____. 1986. Cat?gories et op?rations dans la grammaire nahuatl.? Th?se d?Etat, Universit? de Paris IV. ? _____. 1988. Le linguiste et le funambule : r?flexions sur l?universalit? et la sp?cificit? linguistiques et culturelles.? Amerindia, 13 : 169-192. ? _____. 1991a. Compte rendus:? ?Gram?tica mazateca? (Jamieson); ?Xo-nith??n me?phaa?; ?Registro de la variaci?n fonol?gica en el n?huatl moderno? (Monz?n).? Amerindia, 16:? 223-25. ? _____. 1991b. In memoriam Carlos L?pez ?vila.? Amerindia, 16:? 227. ? _____. 1992. Sortil?ges des nuages et sorcelleries de la sarigue (? propos d'une traduction du Tratado de hechicer?as d'Olmos).? Amerindia, 17:? 183-196. ? _____. 1994. Une grammaire omnipredicative : essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique.? Collection Sciences du langage.? CNRS ?ditions, Paris. ? _____. 1995a. L?Arte de la lengua mexicana de Aldama y Guevara.? Amerindia, 19-20:? 237-244. ? _____. 1995b. Compte rendu : fray Andr?s de Olmos Arte de la lengua mexicana Fac-simil?.? Introduction et transcription d?A. et M. Le?n-Portilla.? Journal de la Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, 81:? 348-352. ? _____. 1996a. Retour au -tl azt?que.? Amerindia, 21:? 77-91. ? _____. 1996b. Compte rendu : ?Mexikanische Grammatik? (Humboldt).? Amerindia, 21:? 203-209. ? _____. 1997a. La elaboraci?n de los conceptos de la di?tesis en las primeras gram?ticas del n?huatl.? In:? La descripci?n de las lenguas amerindias en la ?poca colonial.? Biblioteca Ibero-Americana, 63.? (Klaus Zimmermann, ed)? 21-41.? Vervuert, Frankfurt am Main / Iberoamericana, Madrid. ? _____. 1997b. La distance intraduisable : Les pr?fixes directionnels du nahuatl. Amerindia, 22: 15-30. ? _____. 1999. Compound nouns vs. incorporation in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 52(3-4): 347-364. ? _____. 2002. On some causative doublets in Classical Nahuatl. In: The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation (Masayoshi Shibatani, ed): 301-317. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ? _____. 2004. The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(1):? 49-69. ? ? --- On Thu, 2/26/09, David Wright wrote: From: David Wright Subject: [Nahuat-l] Launey To: "Nahuat-l (messages)" Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 11:23 AM In reponse to Michael Swanton's recent post: Hi, Michael! I enjoyed seeing you again at the colloquium at the Instituto de Investigaciones Filol?gicas a few months back. I hope all is well. There's a little mistake in your recent post that needs to be corrected. You state: "Not only is this work [Michel Launey's *Introduction ? la langue et ? la litt?rature azt?ques*] not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies." Following is a paragraph from Wright Carr (2007: 43) (David Charles Wright Carr, *Lectura del n?huatl: fundamentos para la traducci?n de los textos en n?huatl del periodo Novohispano Temprano*, M?xico, Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Ind?genas, 2007): "La gram?tica del ling?ista franc?s Michel Launey, Introduction ? la langue et ? la litt?rature azt?ques (?Introducci?n a la lengua y a la literatura aztecas?), constituye una aportaci?n relevante a la descripci?n del n?huatl novohispano. Consta de dos tomos: el primero es la gram?tica propiamente dicha, y en el segundo hay una serie de textos en n?huatl con comentarios. Fue publicada inicialmente en 1979 (el primer tomo) y 1980 (el segundo); hay una reimpresi?n de 1995 y una traducci?n al castellano del primer volumen ?salpicada de errores de traducci?n, edici?n y/o imprenta?, impresa en 1992. Launey, a diferencia de los nahuatlatos de la escuela mexicana, hizo un estudio a fondo de la gram?tica de Horacio Carochi, lo que le permiti? presentar una descripci?n m?s precisa del n?huatl novohispano. Registra el saltillo y las vocales largas mediante signos diacr?ticos, aprovechando para este prop?sito el sistema ortogr?fico de Carochi. Este libro es ?til para el principiante, particularmente la edici?n francesa, para los que leen este idioma. Aparte de las virtudes ya mencionadas, presenta una gran claridad en la exposici?n de la gram?tica n?huatl, pues fue concebida como un m?todo did?ctico, m?s que una gram?tica a secas." So it is cited in Wright Carr, 2007! Granted, I got my hands on the French edition after having prepared most of the book, but it was used as a complementary source in some sections (see notes see footnotes 144, 165, 198, 213, 341, 362, 364, 365, 371, 376, 385, 602). No problem, my friend, I just thought I should set the record straight, since this is a public forum and our messages will be available in an on-line archive for years. Peace, David Wright _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:27:38 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:27:38 -0700 Subject: Aztlan-Chicomoztoc and the chronicles Message-ID: Speaking of the Cr?nica X, someone should point out that a detailed philological examination of the subject has recently been published: ? Peperstraete, Sylvie. 2007. La ?Chronique X?. Reconstitucion et analyse d?une source perdue fondamentale sur la civilisation Azt?que, d?apr?s l?Historia de las Indias de Nueva Espa?a de D. Dur?n (1581) et la Cr?nica Mexicana de F.A. Tezozomoc (ca. 1598). BAR International Series 1630, Archaeopress, Oxford. ? --- On Sat, 2/28/09, Gordon Whittaker wrote: From: Gordon Whittaker Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Aztlan-Chicomoztoc and the chronicles To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org Date: Saturday, February 28, 2009, 6:16 PM Dear Maria, dear colleagues, Thanks so much for your contribution to the 2009 Great Aztlan Debate! It's much appreciated, since you've done a lot of work in this area. I fully agree with you (and Henry Nicholson) on the need to conduct a careful critical examination of the sources, one that includes, among other things, an exacting philological analysis of the texts and their affiliations. And you are perfectly right that one should be careful not to assume, just because a number of 16th- and 17th-century sources provide a particular piece of information, that that information is independent in each. As you point out, Motolinia was indeed a primary source for Lopez de Gomara, Zorita, Mendieta, Torquemada, and so on. But, unless I am very mistaken, no one has been suggesting so far that these sources are independent of each other. If I recall correctly, only Motolinia and Lopez de Gomara have been mentioned so far in the debate, and not in connection with Aztlan or a particular tradition. I had noted, in answer to a post from Roberto, that Miguel Leon-Portilla was incorrect in asserting, on the one hand, that Lopez de Gomara, following Cortes, only used 'los de Mexico' for the Mexica and, on the other hand, that the term 'mexicano/a(s)' first came into use after Diaz del Castillo made it popular. I mentioned in that context that Motolinia was already using the term by 1541 at the latest. I'm sure you will agree with me that this is not the same kind of thing as you were talking about. Cronica X is a fascinating subject! We still need a painstakingly thorough study and test of this hypothesis, as also of Cronica Y, and, of course, of the various other lost or presumed sources to which we could, perhaps, assign for convenience the other letters of the alphabet. Barlow set us on this path with his initial astute study, but a lot more needs to be done before we can confidently say that we have solved the puzzle. Duran's primary source, the Historia that he repeatedly mentions, may well be the Cronica X, or at least a close relative. As you (and I) have already said, there are a number of variants of the Aztlan cycle, and these can indeed be placed in different source groups. And, as you know, the specifics vary considerably -- e.g. as to how many calpoltin of the Azteca Mexitin there were and how Chicomoztoc and (Teo)colhuacan are treated geographically, geopolitically, and (if you'll excuse the coinage) geomythologically. For the sake of the discussion (since Susan Schroeder's extensive work on Chimalpahin had been brought up), and to avoid unnecessarily long documentation in what is just an exchange of ideas, I restricted myself in previous posts to the Nahuatl texts of the Codex Aubin and Chimalpahin (which includes passages adopted and adapted from Tezozomoc and Alonso Franco that have not survived independently). It is true, as you say, that Chimalpahin, like other sources of this early period, frequently mixed materials gleaned from a variety of sources. Ixtlilxochitl and Chimalpahin name quite a few of their primary informants and materials. We know from this that Chimalpahin consulted learned Mexica and Chalca nobles. The result is not a deliberate total synthesis (like Ixtlilxochitl's Historia Chichimeca in contrast to his Relaciones) but a series of related and overlapping accounts that are more or less faithful to their sources (to the extent that we can judge this), though refined and emended according to Chimalpahin's perception of things. Thus, he was certainly not averse to blending material from one source into another, as Schroeder and you have shown. What we should not forget, however, is that Chimalpahin, unlike Lopez de Gomara, to name but one example, was not simply consulting informants and documents. He was himself at least cursorily acquainted with the traditions as a result of his upbringing and heritage. He grew up surrounded by elders familiar with Aztec-period traditions, but, at the same time, he was versed in the methods of European scholarship. Ixtlilxochitl is sometimes lost at sea in his attempt to interpret unglossed pictorials, as we can see in his repeated attempts to read the same glyphs. Chimalpahin was either much more skilled at this, or had better consultants. Chimalpahin indeed makes good use of what you call the Cronica X and Y versions of the migration accounts. But BOTH versions (and Chimalpahin's own retelling) support points I was making: namely, (1) that Aztlan was generally understood in 16th-century Mexico, and probably earlier, to be more than just the island of this name, as many in the past have mistakenly assumed, and (2) that the Nahuatl ethnonym 'Azteca' included more than just the Mexitin, although they are paramount and, in some accounts, the only group explicitly named as such. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that Cronica X and Y are theoretical constructs that, if they ever existed as discrete works or traditions, may have included more -- or perhaps less -- than what we assume them to. If we say that Cronica X only contained what is found in similar form in all the extant works known to have used it, we adopt a minimalist approach with regard to this construct. If we say that Cronica X itself used and incorporated more than one traditional account (the norm in 16th-century historiography and mythography), based on additional elements found only in, say, two known sources, then we have a maximalist approach. Just as much as two authors can add to, or blend into, their common primary source the same secondary source independently of each other, so too can two authors leave out (again independently) a secondary strand contained in their primary source, in order to concentrate on a particular unitary narrative, one that may have been gaining currency at the time. There are arguments that can be made for each stance. We simply don't know for sure. But it sure is fun, and worthwhile, to consider and to debate the options! Maria, thanks again for your thought-provoking contribution. I'm really looking forward to your upcoming article on the Seven Caves. Your stimulating work in this area is something the 'Azteca', whoever they may (or may not) have been, would have been very proud of! All the best, Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From mwswanton at yahoo.com Fri Mar 13 07:36:17 2009 From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:36:17 -0700 Subject: Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) Message-ID: At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I would like to clarify my previous comment about the possibility--normally unacceptable in my opinion--of language barriers in research and listservs such as this one. ? By its nature, academic work creates networks among people who share similar intellectual interests. These networks almost organically emerge through work, conferences, teacher-student relations, ?fieldwork?, etc. For many researchers--certainly for me--this is what is most appreciated about academic investigation. However, I don?t think I?m saying anything new if I point out that such networks also run the risk of becoming closed circuits. This can be quite unconscious. I see this in my own work; it?s just easier to know the work of people I get along with, whose investigations have a similar orientation to mine, who I see regularly, etc. ? As is usually the case though, relevant work is often carried out outside our immediate networks and we are all going to miss relevant publications from time to time. But the goal should be to know as much as we can about what?s going on (and has gone on) in our field of inquiry. And fields of inquiry such as ours should not be arbitrarily circumscribed to literature in one particular language or another. ? Now, for those of us who study a language called Nahuatl it might appear that I am pushing an open door on this language issue. This is why I included a pair of examples in my earlier post. By no means was it intended to be a sophistic ad hominem reproach to those who cannot read French or German or whatever. (This latter would doubtlessly be counterproductive since when criticism is taken personally many of us often only retreat into our core network). Rather, my intention was to note the perils of an unjustified isomorphism between our academic networks and particular languages. It was in this sense that I opposed setting up any sort of language ?netiquette? for this listserv. Our goal should be to use this space which, gratefully, has been made available to us to expand our networks about what?s going on in Nahuatl studies regardless of the language in which one most easily writes. --- On Wed, 2/25/09, Michael Swanton wrote: From: Michael Swanton Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) To: "Nahuat-L" Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 8:35 PM Thanks to Gordon and Michel for this interesting exchange. Having never investigated the earliest philological contexts where the word ?Azteca? occurs, I admit my surprise in seeing just how closely the term is associated with the Mexica. ? Lurking behind these exchanges is another issue which I believe is quite relevant to Nahuatl studies, namely the multilingualism that these studies require. ? First of all, I think it?s necessary to make a distinction between academics (highly trained professionals employed as specialists, often teachers, of particular fields of inquiry) and amateurs (individuals who, out of their own intellectual curiosity, engage in study of a particular subject). I recognize this distinction is not always clear-cut. And, I will be quick to point out that amateurs have carried out excellent investigations; indeed, some outshine their academic counterparts or have shown them the way. However, I believe the distinction is important for ethical reasons. ? Academics are granted--rightly or wrongly--a particular social status not given to amateurs. Academics have greater ease in teaching at universities, in publishing books in academic presses, in receiving publicly-supported grant monies, etc. For this reason, academics have a greater ethical obligation to their field of inquiry (and, I would also say, to the people whose culture/language they are studying). ? With this in mind, Michel is absolutely correct in stating that ?ignorance of a language can never be an argument in academic discussion?. Let us suppose an academic?s line of investigation clearly leads him/her to studies or documentation written in some language L that is unknown to him/her. It would seem to me that the investigator has two acceptable options: (1) learn something of L, perhaps with help of colleagues, to be able to at least decipher the texts or (2) redirect his/her line of investigation. What is not acceptable is (3) to ignore the material, pretending that it is not relevant because the investigator doesn?t bother to read it. From my perspective, an academic who takes this unacceptable third option is simply demonstrating a lack of professional ethics and a sadly narrow, provincial view of academic investigation. ? Coming back to Nahuatl studies, I think it is safe to assume that folks here are all committed to improving their knowledge of this interesting language. However, there are many very important texts about Nahuatl and ?Nahua? culture history that are not written in either English (or Spanish). ? For example, Michel Launey?s 1986, French th?se d?etat is the most comprehensive and philologically-grounded examination of classical Nahuatl grammar I have found to date. It is accessible: Jonathan Amith put a PDF of the original online and the CNRS published an abridged version in 1994. Yet, it seems that the 1609 pages of this th?se are practically invisible to American academics. Not only is this work not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies. While the further might be understandable, that latter is not. Launey?s work is contemporary with Andrews, who, on the other hand, is widely cited in American publications. And while both simultaneously ?rediscovered? Carochi, it is now solely Andrews who gets the credit for this. ? This preference is also shown on this listserv. Not only is Andrews cited more often than Launey (actually, I don?t remember EVER seeing Launey cited here), but commentators on Nahuatl grammar often use Andrews? idiosyncratic terminology. ? Why is this? ? Is it because Andrews? work is superior to Launey?s? I don?t think so. Personally, I prefer Launey?s work as it is better grounded philologically (his examples are taken from Nahuatl texts, whereas Andrews doesn?t explain where he gets much of his data besides Carochi) and is more consonant with modern linguistic description (Andrews, particularly in the 2nd edition of his big book, practically tries to reinvent a whole series of linguistic units). ? I suspect that the key reason is that Launey?s work (which is quite extensive reaching from the mid-1970s till the beginning of the 21st century) is mostly in French. Perhaps I am wrong; if so, I would appreciate some guidance on this. ? But, there are numerous other examples which make me suspect linguistic lethargy on the part of colleagues. For instance, when discussing Chimalpahin?s description of the precolonial organization of Chalco, the important work of Susan Schroeder is always cited. But Elke Ruhnau?s major study of this, which was contemporaneous with Schroeder?s first investigations, is rarely mentioned. For example, Lockhart?s 1992 book dedicates considerable attention to Chimalpahin?s descriptions of social organization, but Ruhnau?s study, published 4 years earlier, doesn?t even get a mention in passing. It?s as if her work just doesn?t exist. I don?t have any insight as to the comparative quality of the two studies, but if Ruhnau?s book was published in the Norman or Stanford in English instead of in Hamburg in German, I suspect it would be cited with greater frequency. ? If studies aren?t being cited (and therefore read) simply because they were written in either English or Spanish, this speaks exceedingly badly of the current state of Nahuatl academic study. If this is indeed the case (and I am open to seeing this differently), Nahuatl scholarship will have adopted a provincialism that would never be acceptable in, say, classical or mediaeval studies. ? For this reason, I strongly oppose any linguistic protocol on this listserv. It is easier to read a foreign language than write in one. The foremost goal of this listserv, like academic investigation in general, should be to encourage scholars to share their doubts and findings in the broadest possible (serious) forum. --- On Mon, 2/23/09, Chema Tlaquetzqui wrote: From: Chema Tlaquetzqui Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Rejoinder to Whitaker (Cross-post from Aztlan) To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 4:54 AM Hi, I don't know this romgil06 at prodigy.net.mx, but given the .mx domain, I assume he's in Mexico and a quick Google search seems to indicate that he often writes in Spanish. Considering this, I don't think he had any political agenda by switching languages. It seems unfair to expect people to write a substantial response in a language they might not be comfortable writing in, particularly when most people on these mailing lists should already be able to read both English and Spanish quite well, as per the mailing list description. I have been a user on many polyglot mailing lists, and these sorts of language issues tend to pop-up every so often. Usually people just decide to send bilingual (or even trilingual) emails to avoid letting languages get in the way of the discussion and to encourage participation. It is a hassle, but better than people assuming a reply is "political" and hence unworthy of credence. I was more annoyed with the lack of quotes in his mangled reply. It made it very hard to parse. Chema On Feb 23, 2009, at 00:53 , Michael McCafferty wrote: > Any indication as to who wrote this? > > I'm also curious, or perhaps suspicious, as to linguistic protocol > here. Why, if Dr. Whittaker wrote in English, and this present > respondent certainly knows English, did he/she not respond in English? > Anything goes? Devrais-je pouvoir repondre en francais? In tla > nichachalacaya mazehualcopa? I don't know. It seems that, for the sake > of clarity, it would be better to stay in one language...unless > there's > a political agenda. And once that's a possibility, I tend to be stingy > with credence as to what people say, even in Spanish. > > Michael > > Quoting "John F. Schwaller" : > >> >> From: "romgil06" >> Date: Sun, February 22, 2009 >> >> Gordon Whittaker escribi?: >> >> First, with regard to the term 'Aztec': It was indeed first >> popularized by >> Clavigero. However, it is a perfectly good term used by the >> Aztecs to >> refer to themselves in connection with their ancestry, >> >> Perdon pero con todo respeto esto no es cierto. >> >> El uso de Azteca aparece primero en la obra del historiador mestizo >> Cristobal del >> Castillo Historia de la Venida de los mexicanos. donde >> expone su particular versi?n de la historia del pueblo de >> desarrapados >> que ni >> nombre ten?an y que el mismo explica porque llegaron a >> llamarse mexicas o mexicanos. >> >> En la versi?n de Del Castillo Los aztecas son un pueblo DISTINTO >> de los >> mexicas,esto es de los que vivieron y fundadron Tenochtitlan , >> en Del Castillo los "aztecas" aparecen como los amos de los >> mexicas o los >> atlachichimecas de la ribera del lago, los aztecas son los que >> los explotaban. >> >> La versi?n de Cristobal del Castillo fue recogida por Chimalpain y >> reproducida en su >> Memorial Breve de Culhuacan, sin dar cr?dito a la obra >> de Del Castillo . Despu?s Chimalpain o Tezozomoc la usan en la >> cr?nica >> Mexicayotl, >> en una variante de la historia de Del Castillo. Ah? en la >> Mexicayotl uno de los hijos, el menor del rey de los aztecas es >> quien saca >> a sus >> subditos de aztlan chicomoztoc >> >> >> Con todo respeto es un punto de vista muy cuestionable y no se puede >> citar un solo >> documento fuente que se?ale que: >> >> "However, it is a perfectly good term used by the Aztecs to refer to >> themselves in >> connection with their ancestry" >> >> Tampoco puedes citar una obra fuente donde ocurra que: >> >> I believe Cuauhtemoc himself is recorded in Nahuatl using the term. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> Finally, you use the term 'Culhua Mexica': This phrase, which was >> favoured >> by Barlow, is based on an occasional term found in Spanish, not >> Nahuatl, >> contexts. 'Colhua' ('Culhua' is simply a Colonial-period spelling) is >> singular, 'Mexica' is plural. If the Aztecs had wanted to use >> this, they >> would have had to say 'Colhuaque Mexica' in reference to their >> dynasty's >> descent from the line of Colhuacan. >> >> >> En que contexto nahuatl ha encontrado Gordon el uso del termino >> azteca para >> referirse a los habitantes de Tenochtitlan. >> Adelanto que no puede citar uno solo, porque no existe. Todos los >> documentos que se >> pueden citar en uno u otro sentido son coloniales >> aunque sean escritos en nahuatl o de forma bilingue nahuatl espa?ol. >> >> Efectivamente Robert Barlow fue uno de los pioneros en se?alar el >> error del >> equivocado uso del termino azteca y como parte de esa labor >> redacto "la extensi?n del imperio de los colua mexica" publicado >> por el >> INAH y la >> UDLA, Obras de Robert Barlow vol 4, publico tambien los >> art?culos "La formaci?n del imperio de los colhua mexica", "Algunas >> consideraciones >> sobre el t?rmino imperio azteca"y "El concepto >> populart de los "aztecas" todos en obras de Robert Barlow vol 3 >> INAH UDLA . >> >> Hay otro buen art?culo sobre el mismo tema de Don Miguel Leon >> Portilla >> Le?n-Portilla, Miguel, "Los aztecas. Disquisiciones sobre un >> gentilicio", Estudios de Cultura N?huatl, v. 31, 2000, p. 275-281 >> >> Obras recientes en la misma ?ptica vease: Mexicaltzingo >> Arqueolog?a de >> un reino >> culhua mexica de Raul Avila INAH y Culhua Mexico una >> revisi?n arqueo etnohist?rica del imperio de los mexica tenochca >> Fernando >> Robles INAH >> >> Se?ala Gordon: >> >> Of course, the term 'Mexica' is appropriate in describing both the >> Tenochca in a >> narrow sense and, more >> literally, the citizens of both Mexico Tenochtitlan and Mexico >> Tlatelolco, >> and indeed in describing the empire they founded. >> >> Esto es un gran y profundo error de Gordon es borrar las >> importantes >> diferencias >> hist?ricas, etnicas y religiosas que existian entre ambos >> naciones indias. Unos eran los tlatelolcas los adoradores del dios >> Yiacatecutli y >> con su propioi panteon divino, su nobleza y sus >> especialidades productigvas y guerreras, los cuales fueron forzados a >> adorar a >> Huitzilopochtli tras su derrota y otro pueblo eran los >> adoradores del Tetzahuitl, del hijo de Tlaloc o del pariente de >> Opochtli >> como a si >> mismo se identifica Huitzilopochtli ( c?dice Aubin , >> Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas) >> >> Una simple visita al templo mayor de Tlatelolco y observar de la >> segunda >> a la >> quinta etapa permite ver que entre Tlatelolcas y Colhuas >> Mexicas hasta arquitect?nicamente los templos mayores eran >> distintos y >> solo se >> hicieron iguales despues de la conquista mexica. En los >> tlatelolcas no hay doble templo en la cima del "cu" mayor ni >> restos de la >> doble >> escalinata y ni de la alfarda central en las etapas citadas >> >> Hacer un solo paquete de distintos pueblos es borrar la >> historia, es >> como decir >> que son lo mismo los irlandeses, los del pa?s de gales, >> los escocesea, los bretones y los sajones, y s?lo porque desde >> tal siglo >> todos >> son ciudadanos o vasallos del Reino Unido, cuando esa >> unidad es un un resultado de un proceso hist?rico de la fundaci?n del >> estado naci?n, >> que cmo el problema irlandes nos lo recuerda no ha >> logrado resolver las diferencias. SEria el mismo error que decir >> que todos >> los >> pueblos de Espa?a son Espa?oles borrando la diferencias de >> todo tipo ( linguisticas, culturales, antropomorficas, hist?ricas, >> religiosas) que >> existen entre los castellanos con los habitantes de las >> canarias, los de catalu?a, el pais vasco, los galllegos, etc . Lo >> mismo >> vimos en el >> caso de la antigua URSS o de la extinta Yugoeslavia. >> >> Hacer un s?lo paquete bnorrar las diferencias curiosamente fue el >> punto de >> vista >> base de la politica sobre las nacionalidades de Stalin >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> 'Culhua Mexica': This phrase, which was favoured >> by Barlow, is based on an occasional term found in Spanish, not >> Nahuatl, >> contexts >> >> Realmente lo que nunca se encontra es un documento "nahuatl" con el >> t?rmino azteca >> para referirse a los habitantes de Tenochtitlan , >> repito lease las glosas de los codices. Telleriano, vaticano rios, >> magliabechi, >> borb?nico, florentino vease la cr?nica mexicayotl, la >> mexicana, las relaciones de Chimalpain , la obra de Cristobal del >> castillo, la >> leyenda de los soles, los anales de Cuauhtitlan, los anales >> de Tlatelolco y otros c?dices coloniales mas , vease las >> cr?nicas de >> Duran , >> Sahag?n, Mendieta, Motolinia, los escritos de Olmos, la >> historia Tolteca Chichimeca, C?dice Aubin y en todos , pero todos >> nunca >> parecera el >> termino azteca para referirse a los habitantes de >> Tenochtitlan y menos a?n para referirse a quienes detentaban el >> poder >> pol?tico y >> religioso en ese imperio y menos a?n m?para nombrar >> de esa forma a todos los pueblos de "the central Mexico highlands" >> como >> los agrupa >> el DR Smith. >> >> >> Por otro lado bien podria decirnos Gordon que documentos nahuatls >> conoce >> que no sean >> coloniales. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> By the way, you speak of the "Tenocha". I have seen this >> inaccurate form >> occasionally in non-specialist literature. It should always be >> 'Tenochca'. >> The term is unusual only in that it should come from a place name >> 'Tenochco', which, however, is unattested, but may well have >> designated >> the heart of the original settlement. 'Tenochca' or 'Tenochtitlan >> chaneque' >> >> Parece que la cr?nica Mexicayotl es un de esas "non-specialist >> literature" >> donde >> los mexicanos se llamaban asi mismo tenochcas por ser habitantes de >> Tenochtitlan y >> por considerar a Tencoh el "padre" fundador de su >> pueblo. "... Y cuando ya por mucho tiempo ya estan los mexica los >> tenochca despu?s >> de que all? murio Tenochtzin ..." Cronica mexicayotl >> folio 110. >> >> Leemos en otro ejemplar de "literatura no especializada" , este es el >> c?dice aubin >> en sus noticias del a?o 1539 "Aqui partieron para >> Yancuic Tlalpan; fueron los tenochca..." hay mas noticias sobre estos >> tenochcas en >> ese c?dice. >> >> Dice Gordon >> >> If the Aztecs had wanted to use this, they would have had to say >> 'Colhuaque Mexica' >> in reference to their dynasty's >> >> descent from the line of Colhuacan. >> >> No es que se inventaran un linaje es que esa fue su historia. >> >> Dice la Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas " En ese >> tiempo ten?an >> los >> mexicanos por se?or a Ilancueitl, una se?ora principal que >> los mandaba, y esta fue mujer de Acamapichtli, el cual era de >> Culhuacan y >> ella de >> Coatlinchan, y aunque era de Culhuacan , Acamaapichtli >> descend?a de los de M?xico, porque all? fue casada su madre con un >> principal de >> Culhuacan y la madre era de los mexicanos. Y casado, >> por consejo de su mujer vino a M?xico, y les dijo que pues era de los >> principales y >> no ten?an se?or que lo tomar?an por se?or, y as? fue el >> primer se?o, y muri? su mujer el a?o 24 de la fundaci?n de M?xico >> Y muerta >> ella , >> fue tomado ?l por se?or, porque en vida de ella no fue >> tomado sino por principal " >> >> De una manera mas extensa se trata el tema de como los colhuas se >> hicieron >> del poder >> en Tenochtitlan en los folios 110 a 119 de la >> Cr?nica mexicayotl >> >> POr otro lado dice el Dr Michael Smith >> >> I am constantly criticized for my usage of the term Aztec to mean the >> entire Late >> Postclassic population of the central Mexico highlands, >> both Nahuatl-speaking and others such as Otomian languages. I have >> 3 main >> reasons >> for sticking to this usage: (1) there is no good >> alternate term; (2) book publishers insist in using "Aztec" in >> book titles to >> generate sales; and (3) the various peoples of Late Postclassic >> central Mexico shared many cultural traits, spoke or understood >> the same >> language, >> and they were in constant contact with one another >> through trade, visiting, and other means. This was a single >> culture, and >> if don't >> call it Aztec, what term can we use? >> >> Dr MIchael ya tiene otro mas que se apunta a la lista de los que lo >> critican sobre >> todo por la cientificidad del segundo argumento que >> usted plantea: >> >> "(2) book publishers insist in using "Aztec" in book titles to >> generate >> sales". >> >> Resulta ahora que son los vendedores de libros, la >> mercadotecnia, los >> que definen >> e imponen los conceptos que deben usar quienes >> estudian de una u otra forma las culturas prehiusp?nicas . Usemos >> aztecas >> porque es >> una marca mas vendible, perdon es ciencia lo que >> se trata de hacer o estamos tratando de vender papas fritas. >> >> Si bien es cierto lo que dice Smith >> >> the various peoples of Late Postclassic central Mexico shared many >> cultural traits, >> spoke or understood the same language, and they were >> in constant contact with one another through trade, visiting, and >> other >> means. >> >> Pero fueron precisamente las diferencias mas grandes o mas chicas >> en todos >> esos >> aspectos y entros mas importantes como la religi?n, lo >> que hacia que unos indios se considerasen a si mismos como una >> nacion o >> pueblo y ver >> a los otros como de una naci?n distinta, esas >> diferencias los hacian verse asi mismo como diferentes del otro, >> situaci?n que se >> tradujo en diferencias en la pol?tica, la ideol?gia y la >> religion. >> >> As? por ejemplo aunque los mexicas y los tlaxcaltecas se >> reconocieran de >> origen >> chichimeca y hablaran nahuatl como la lengua que >> habian aprendido, entre ellos no se reconocian como iguales , >> situaci?n >> que Cort?s >> detecto y supo aprovechar politica y militarmente. >> Aunque Tlaxcaltecas y Huexotzincas hablaran nahuatl y opcuparan >> espacios >> vecinos y >> adoraran ambos a Mixcoat, el varonil, por ello el que >> porta el maxtle, por ello el camaxtle, a pesar de sus elementos >> comunes >> cada pueblo >> era un se?orio distinto >> >> HOy sucede lo mismo en los distintos paises que fuimos colonias de >> Espa?a >> compartimos muchas cosas pero somos paises distintos, >> ?Porque cuesta tanto trabajo tener esa optica cuando se mira el >> pasado >> prehisp?nico? >> Por que hacer tabla raza de las diferencias, porque >> borrar la historia >> >> Gordon es fiel a la escuela de Seler y a la escuela Hegeliana para >> los >> cuales los >> paises fuera de Europa no tiene historia >> son pueblos sin historia. Y eso lo dice Seler conm todas sus >> letras en su >> articulo >> sobre Aztlan >> >> No deja de ser parad?jico que esa corriente de pensamiento haya >> surgido en >> un pa?s >> como la actual Alemania que ha tenido uno de los >> mas azarosos procesos de conformaci?n del estado naci?n y que para >> lograrlo necesito >> la construcci?n y derrumbe del imperio prusiano, >> la derrota en dos guerras mundiale, el ascenso del nazismo, la >> mutilacion y >> ocupaci?n sovieta de una parte del territorio y el derrumbe >> del muro >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Fri Mar 13 18:32:53 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:32:53 -0600 Subject: Launey In-Reply-To: <787406.18745.qm@web111506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Howdy again, Michael! You sent me back to the Nahuat-l archives, somewhat puzzled, to see what I had been replying to. I found this: ?[?] For example, Michel Launey?s 1986, French th?se d??tat is the most comprehensive and philologically-grounded examination of classical Nahuatl grammar I have found to date. It is accessible: Jonathan Amith put a PDF of the original online and the CNRS published an abridged version in 1994. Yet, it seems that the 1609 pages of this th?se are practically invisible to American academics. Not only is this work not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies. While the further might be understandable, that latter is not. Launey?s work is contemporary with Andrews, who, on the other hand, is widely cited in American publications. And while both simultaneously ?rediscovered? Carochi, it is now solely Andrews who gets the credit for this. [?]? So by ?this work? you were referring specifically to the 1986 thesis, which indeed was not cited in Lockhart, 2001, nor in Wright, 2007; both publications only cite vol. 1 of Launey?s *Introduction ? la langue et ? la litt?rature azt?ques* (1979) and the 1992 Spanish translation of the same work. What mislead me was the second to the last sentence, where it says that ?Launey?s work is contemporary with Andrews.? That threw me back to the decade of 1971-1980 (since the first edition of J. Richard Andrew?s *Introduction to Classical Nahuatl* was published in 1975), and set my head in the general space of Launey?s work. Your post is clear enough; my quick reading of it was responsible for the confusion. As for Andrews, rather than Launey, getting the credit for ?rediscovering? Carochi, it?s worth pointing out that Andrews?s *Introduction?* (1975) appeared four years before Launey?s *Introduction?* (1979), and that Launey?s earliest article in the list you provide is from 1977. So the ?rediscovery? was not quite ?simultaneous,? at least as far as the published results seem to indicate. I?m grateful to you for conceding that the omission of Launey?s thesis of 1986 ?might be understandable? ?in the bibliographical guides for those learning Nahuatl;? thanks to these phrases I don?t feel quite so inexhaustive. Because of the word ?might,? however, just to be safe, I?ve added a mention of the 1986 thesis to a manuscript for an eventual second edition of my book. Some of my undergraduate history students at the University of Guanajuato do read French and could benefit from this more advanced treatment of Nahuatl grammar, and surely there will be other potential readers in the same situation. Thanks for the list of Launey?s publications and the link to his thesis, by the way. These are very useful, as is Jonathan Amith?s post with links to reproductions of Launey?s studies on his own web site. Providing such material is a positive contribution which will enrich the general level of scholarship of the community that gathers on this list. Peace, David De: Michael Swanton [mailto:mwswanton at yahoo.com] Enviado el: viernes, 13 de marzo de 2009 01:26 a.m. Para: Nahuat-l (messages); David Wright Asunto: Re: [Nahuat-l] Launey There seems to be some confusion between Michel Launey?s 1979 pedagogic grammar and his rarely cited, though extremely valuable 1986 th?se. The former grew out of his classes in the 70s in Paris VIII and was first published by L?Harmattan. The first volume of this was later translated (defectively) into Spanish and published by the UNAM in 1992. As Lindsay Sidders points out, an English version is currently being prepared. The th?se was never published in its entirety. An abridged, edited version was published in 1994 by the CNRS. Jonathan Amith has done the Nahuatl studies a tremendous favor by making this text available online (it is also available on the CNRS website as a series separate PDFs: http://www.vjf.cnrs.fr/celia/FichExt/Etudes/Launey/tm.htm). I would dare say that Monsieur Launey?s th?se is the single most comprehensive and philologically-grounded linguistic investigation of classical Nahuatl grammar of the 20th century. For those who don?t know his work on Nahuatl besides the pedagogic grammar, I append here Michel Launey?s other publications on this language (I exclude his work on Palikur). Launey, Michel. 1977. Le pluriel transcat?goriel /-ke?/ en nahuatl : contribution ? l??tude de la relation ??tre/avoir?. Amerindia, 2 : 19-45. _____. 1978. Deux sources du passif d?apr?s la morphologie nahuatl. Actes du XLIIe Congr?s International des Am?ricanistes: Congr?s du Centenaire, Paris, 1976. IV: 471-484. Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, Paris. _____. 1979. Le datif dans une langue sans cas (Nahuatl classique). In : Relations pr?dicat-actant(s) dans des langues de types divers (C. Paris, ?d.) vol. 2 : 29-70. SELAF, LACITO documents 2-3, Paris. _____. 1981a. Une int?rpretation linguistique des sch?mas relationnels : passifs-impersonnels et causitifs en nahuatl classique. Amerindia, 6 : 17-58. _____. 1981b. Compte-rendu : ?Five Studies Inspired by Nahuatl Verbs in ?oa? (Canger). Zeitschrift f?r Ethnologie, 106: 312-313. _____. 1983. Concession de phrase et concession particuli?re en nahuatl classique. In : L?expression de la concession (Valentin, ?d.) Universit? de Paris IV, Linguistica Palatina Colloquia I. _____. 1984. Fonctions et cat?gories dans l?opposition verbo-nominale : l?exemple du nahuatl. In : ?L?opposition verbo-nominale dans diverses langues du monde? (Nicole Tersis-Surugue, ?d) Mod?les linguistiques, 6 : 133-148. _____. 1986. Cat?gories et op?rations dans la grammaire nahuatl. Th?se d?Etat, Universit? de Paris IV. _____. 1988. Le linguiste et le funambule : r?flexions sur l?universalit? et la sp?cificit? linguistiques et culturelles. Amerindia, 13 : 169-192. _____. 1991a. Compte rendus: ?Gram?tica mazateca? (Jamieson); ?Xo-nith??n me?phaa?; ?Registro de la variaci?n fonol?gica en el n?huatl moderno? (Monz?n). Amerindia, 16: 223-25. _____. 1991b. In memoriam Carlos L?pez ?vila. Amerindia, 16: 227. _____. 1992. Sortil?ges des nuages et sorcelleries de la sarigue (? propos d'une traduction du Tratado de hechicer?as d'Olmos). Amerindia, 17: 183-196. _____. 1994. Une grammaire omnipredicative : essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique. Collection Sciences du langage. CNRS ?ditions, Paris. _____. 1995a. L?Arte de la lengua mexicana de Aldama y Guevara. Amerindia, 19-20: 237-244. _____. 1995b. Compte rendu : fray Andr?s de Olmos Arte de la lengua mexicana Fac-simil?. Introduction et transcription d?A. et M. Le?n-Portilla. Journal de la Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes, 81: 348-352. _____. 1996a. Retour au -tl azt?que. Amerindia, 21: 77-91. _____. 1996b. Compte rendu : ?Mexikanische Grammatik? (Humboldt). Amerindia, 21: 203-209. _____. 1997a. La elaboraci?n de los conceptos de la di?tesis en las primeras gram?ticas del n?huatl. In: La descripci?n de las lenguas amerindias en la ?poca colonial. Biblioteca Ibero-Americana, 63. (Klaus Zimmermann, ed) 21-41. Vervuert, Frankfurt am Main / Iberoamericana, Madrid. _____. 1997b. La distance intraduisable : Les pr?fixes directionnels du nahuatl. Amerindia, 22: 15-30. _____. 1999. Compound nouns vs. incorporation in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 52(3-4): 347-364. _____. 2002. On some causative doublets in Classical Nahuatl. In: The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation (Masayoshi Shibatani, ed): 301-317. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. _____. 2004. The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(1): 49-69. --- On Thu, 2/26/09, David Wright wrote: From: David Wright Subject: [Nahuat-l] Launey To: "Nahuat-l (messages)" Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 11:23 AM In reponse to Michael Swanton's recent post: Hi, Michael! I enjoyed seeing you again at the colloquium at the Instituto de Investigaciones Filol?gicas a few months back. I hope all is well. There's a little mistake in your recent post that needs to be corrected. You state: "Not only is this work [Michel Launey's *Introduction ? la langue et ? la litt?rature azt?ques*] not cited in the bibliographic guides for those learning Nahuatl (Lockhart, 2001: 148-151, Wright Carr, 2007: 42-45, etc.), but rarely does it appear cited in more specialized studies." Following is a paragraph from Wright Carr (2007: 43) (David Charles Wright Carr, *Lectura del n?huatl: fundamentos para la traducci?n de los textos en n?huatl del periodo Novohispano Temprano*, M?xico, Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Ind?genas, 2007): "La gram?tica del ling?ista franc?s Michel Launey, Introduction ? la langue et ? la litt?rature azt?ques (?Introducci?n a la lengua y a la literatura aztecas?), constituye una aportaci?n relevante a la descripci?n del n?huatl novohispano. Consta de dos tomos: el primero es la gram?tica propiamente dicha, y en el segundo hay una serie de textos en n?huatl con comentarios. Fue publicada inicialmente en 1979 (el primer tomo) y 1980 (el segundo); hay una reimpresi?n de 1995 y una traducci?n al castellano del primer volumen ?salpicada de errores de traducci?n, edici?n y/o imprenta?, impresa en 1992. Launey, a diferencia de los nahuatlatos de la escuela mexicana, hizo un estudio a fondo de la gram?tica de Horacio Carochi, lo que le permiti? presentar una descripci?n m?s precisa del n?huatl novohispano. Registra el saltillo y las vocales largas mediante signos diacr?ticos, aprovechando para este prop?sito el sistema ortogr?fico de Carochi. Este libro es ?til para el principiante, particularmente la edici?n francesa, para los que leen este idioma. Aparte de las virtudes ya mencionadas, presenta una gran claridad en la exposici?n de la gram?tica n?huatl, pues fue concebida como un m?todo did?ctico, m?s que una gram?tica a secas." So it is cited in Wright Carr, 2007! Granted, I got my hands on the French edition after having prepared most of the book, but it was used as a complementary source in some sections (see notes see footnotes 144, 165, 198, 213, 341, 362, 364, 365, 371, 376, 385, 602). No problem, my friend, I just thought I should set the record straight, since this is a public forum and our messages will be available in an on-line archive for years. Peace, David Wright _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sun Mar 15 01:59:21 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:59:21 -0400 Subject: New Views on the Aztec World Symposium Message-ID: MARCH 31-APRIL 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF MEXICO, CAMPUS CHICAGO, THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY CHICAGO AND THE MEXICO TOURISM BOARD PRESENT: ?NEW VIEWS ON AZTEC WORLD? Coordinator: Oscar Alatriste, M A Academic Dean, Escuela de Extensi?n de la UNAM en Chicago Tuesday, March 31, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM Venue: The Newberry Library "PROJECTION OF TWO DOCUMENTARIES" A) MEXICAN TOURISM (10 min.) Promotional Film: Presenter and Commentator: Arq. Rodrigo Esponda C Director, Midwest USA Mexico Tourism Board B) ON THE AZTECS (60 min.) Documentary: ?Secrets of the Dead. Aztecs Massacre Presenter and commentator: Elizabeth Baquedano Ph D Institute of Archaeology. University College London Thursday, April 2, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM Venue: The Newberry Library "ROUNDTABLE: GODS, GOLD AND WRITING IN THE AZTEC WORLD" Speaker: Guilhem Olivier Durand, Ph D Institute of Historical Research, UNAM Lecture: Men and Gods in the Aztec World Speaker: Elizabeth Baquedano, Ph D Institute of Archaeology, University College London Lecture: Reevaluating Aztec Gold Speaker: Ellen T Baird, PhD Department of Art History, University of Illinois at Chicago Lecture: The will of Don Miguel Damian: An Aztec Family in Colonial Mexico, 1576 Moderator: Oscar Alatriste UNAM campus Chicago Hors d?oeuvres will be serve March 31-April 4 EXHIBITION ON COLONIAL MEXICAN NAHUA PICTORIAL WRITING Venue: The Newberry Library Hall Entrance The Newberry Library 60 West Walton Street Chicago, Il 60610 www.newberry.org -- John F. Schwaller President, SUNY Potsdam 44 Pierrepont Ave. Potsdam, NY 13676 schwallr at potsdam.edu _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx Sun Mar 15 23:51:40 2009 From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright) Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:51:40 -0600 Subject: Corrections to the UNAM edition of Launey Message-ID: Estimados listeros: Now that Jonathan Amith has provided us with a digital version of the UNAM's Spanish edition of Launey's Nahuatl grammar, my Mexican students are going to want to consult it. I vaguely remember reading on this list about a correction sheet prepared by Una Canger. Can someone please provide a copy, or Canger's e-mail address? Saludos, David Wright _____ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sat Mar 21 17:11:53 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:11:53 -0400 Subject: ANN: Aztec Words in Maya lecture Message-ID: April 9, 7:00 PM Aztec Words in Ancient Maya Inscriptions: "Signs of Early Contact" By Dr. Martha Macri Nahuatl was the language of the Aztec Empire. Words of Nahuatl origin can be found spelled with syllabic signs in early Maya inscriptions. In this talk, Dr. Macri discusses dated monuments that suggest several distinct periods of early contact between the ancient Maya and the Nahuatl speaking peoples of Mexico. Phoebe Hearst Museum Patio and Gallery College Avenue on the campus of the University of California Berkeley, California http://hearstmuseum.berkeley.edu/outreach/public_programs.htm _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Sat Mar 21 17:26:03 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:26:03 -0400 Subject: Nahua Workshop, May 1-2, 2009 Message-ID: May 1-May 2 Nahua Workshop "Issues in Nahua Identity and Language: Past and Present" University of Maryland This interdisciplinary workshop will explore current research on identity and language among Nahuatl-speakers from historical and contemporary perspectives. Scholars will explore a variety of ways of conceptualizing the relation between Nahuatl-speakers and colonial and national Mexican society and institutions. How has religious ideology, schooling, or the creation of written texts mediated the creation of identities? Papers will also explore the challenges of using ethnography or using textual analysis to understand the nature of intercultural relations and of social and linguistic change. To what extent do ethnographic fieldwork or textual sources allow scholars to recognize and conceptualize change in Nahuatl-speaking communities and peoples? Friday, May 1 2:00 pm Jane Hill / Keynote address (University of Arizona) Uto-Aztecan as a Mesoamerican Language Family: Implications for Understanding Aztecan and the Nahua 3:30 pm Jacqueline Messing (LASC Fellow) Identity and Narrative in Colonial Tlaxcala, Mexico 4:00 pm Jonathan Amith The practice and politics of Nahuatl standardization: Local and national identity in conflict 4:30 pm Comment Saturday, May 2 8:45 am Breakfast 9:15 Jim Maffie (LASC Fellow) In Huehue Tlamanitiliztli and la Verdad: Philosophical Language and Identity in Friar Bernardino de Sahag?n?s Colloquios y doctrina chistiana 9:45 Berenice Alcantra Rojas (Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de M?xico) Authorship and Translation in Doctrinal Nahuatl Texts from the Colonial Period. 10:15 Comment, Alejandro Ca?eque, Department of History, University of Maryland, College Park 10:30 Break 10:45 Alan & Pamela Sandstrom (Indiana University-Purdue) Huastecan Nahua Ethnic Identity, Processes of Globalization, and the Protestant Invasion 11:15 John Sullivan (University of Zacatecas) The IDIEZ Project: Countering the Deculturization of Nahuas at Mexican Universities St. Mary's Hall - Multipurpose room University of Maryland, College Park 11:45 Comment http://www.lasc.umd.edu/Events/Workshops.html _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From swood at uoregon.edu Sat Mar 21 19:16:58 2009 From: swood at uoregon.edu (Stephanie Wood) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:16:58 -0700 Subject: photos of archives? Message-ID: Hello colleagues, Sorry for any duplicaiton. I am writing to ask whether anyone might be willing to loan interior photographs they have of any Mesoamerican archives for a documentary we at the University of Oregon are making about manuscript rescue -- especially of Spanish colonial-period documents, and especially of documents that help us reconstruct the histories of indigenous communities under colonial rule. We will gladly give you credit if your photos are chosen for the film. The higher the resolution, the better, but we will be delighted to consider whatever photos you have. And please let us know if and how we might contact archivists if permissions would be necessary. If you can supply any metadata -- place, date (even roughly), etc. -- that would be very helpful. If you have any stories that we might quote about worrisome or improving archive conditions, these would be welcome, too. I can only receive messages under 10 megabytes, so some images (if digital) may have to be sent one by one, depending upon their size. If you wish to mail prints through the standard mail, please see the address below. Please indicate in your message exactly how you would like to be cited (full name, title?, institution affiliation, if any?). Just so you know, we do not wish to paint an overly negative view, and we will be showing improvements that have been made in manuscript preservation. So, shots of humidity threats, insects, rodents, bundling methods, fire, etc., would be useful, as well as recent organizing and preservation efforts. Many thanks for considering this! Stephanie Wood Wired Humanities Project / CSWS 1201 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1201 U.S.A. _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From ixtlil at earthlink.net Thu Mar 26 13:17:03 2009 From: ixtlil at earthlink.net (Jerry Offner) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:17:03 -0500 Subject: Calling attention to the French... Message-ID: With regard to the post of 12 March, 2009, wherein Lee expresses continuing confidence in the article by published by Lee in Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl, volume 37, 2006, I have these comments. While 2001--the latest year for sources that Lee's cites in the ECN article of 2006--was a productive year for Lesbre with seven articles, through 2000 Lesbre had published seventeen articles plus reviews, and was not an obscure figure, especially when there were at the time only a handful of active Texcocan and Nezahualcoyotl specialists in the world. Lesbre did publish by then in well known and available journals such as L'Homme and Journal de la Soci?t? des Am?ricanistes and these excellent pieces should have led to a rapid and thorough investigation by Lee. Several key articles were published by 2000 and should have been consulted. I agree that people should read, for example, Lesbre's ?Nezahualcoyotl entre historia, leyenda y divinizacion ?, Colloque international El h?roe entre el mito y la historia, Mexico novembre 1998. Publi? dans El h?roe entre el mito y la historia, (Federico Navarrete, Guilhem Olivier eds), M?xico : CEMCA, UNAM, 2000, pp. 21-55, or his surpassingly subtle "Oublis et censures de l?historiographie acolhua coloniale : Nezahualcoyotl ?, C.M.H.L.B.Caravelle n?72 , Toulouse, Juin 1999, pp. 11-30, or his "Coyohua itlatollo : el ciclo de Coyohua ?, Latin American Indian Literatures Journal, vol. 16, n? 1, Penn State McKeesport, spring 2000, pp. 47-75 to determine which author does or does not make authentic claims to knowledge regarding Nezahualcoyotl. Later works should also be consulted, such as: "Nezahualcoyotl, portrait inhabituel d?un tlatoani pr?hispanique ?, Destins, destinations, destinataires. H?ros et images, Universit? de Nantes : Centre international des langues, 2001, pp. 16-28 and Lesbre's excellent, thought-provoking new article on leaf 2 of the Mappe Quinatzin in the latest ECN. This calls for a great deal of work as Lesbre is no quick read. He presents many ideas at once, requiring the reader to exercise patience and contemplation along the way. My objections to Lee's article do not rest only on the failure to include important research from Lesbre, although this is a significant matter and Lee's explanation is both odd to have been offered and insufficient. They are generated by the lack of use of the key Texcocan pictorial historical manuscript, the Codex Xolotl in the analysis of early Texcocan history, misinterpretations of key pictorial pictorial information in the Codex de Xicotepec but especially in the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3, and failure to link accurately and completely the content of these key pictorial documents to the alphabetic texts. These are basic skills required to generate proper and genuine understanding in a researcher, prior to the researcher being able to generate responsible and accurate conclusions to present to the public. With a defective foundation, the conclusions reached have little probability of providing authentic information about Nezahualcoyotl and Texcoco. I will demonstrate the errors in handling the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 and leaf 3 in one or two future posts?real world allowing--over the next two weeks. These can be handled in a brief manner suitable for this medium. In the meantime, readers should record how many errors in basic interpretation of pictorial content and the relation of such content to alphabetic texts they can find in the single paragraph dealing mostly with the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 3 that spans pages 246-47 of Lee's essay or in the paragraph dealing with the Mappe Quinatzin, leaf 2 on page 243. Jerry Offner ixtlil at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Nahuatl mailing list Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl From schwallr at potsdam.edu Tue Mar 31 13:26:33 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:26:33 -0400 Subject: Florentine Codex on DVD Message-ID: The Bilingual Press of Arizona State University's Hispanic Research Center is making a 16 DVD set of the complete Florentine Codex available for $600. For those who prefer, they also provide the same material pre-loaded on a portable hard drive for $800. For further information see the following web page: http://www.asu.edu/brp/newandforthcoming/Florentine1.html -- ***************************** 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 schwallr at potsdam.edu Tue Mar 31 18:32:40 2009 From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:32:40 -0400 Subject: Ball game question In-Reply-To: <28B4161FB1974341A5B340AAEF3E63AC@eguiluz> Message-ID: On our sister list aztlan at lists.famsi.org there has been a good discussion about the words tlachtli and tlachco. I have copied the responses into one rather long, but quite interesting post to share it with Nahuatl. 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 > John F. Schwaller wrote: > You have the words somewhat reversed: > > Tlachtli is the ball game > > Tlachco is the place where it is played. > > Campbell, R. Joe wrote: > 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 Gordon Whittaker wrote: > Dear John and Joe, > > Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't tlachtli just the ball court, not > the ball game itself? The Spanish use of 'juego' tends to blur the > distinction, but do we actually have clear cases in Nahuatl texts of the > term being used for the game? Tlachtli looks to me like a loan from > Zapotec, as I think I may have argued in my dissertation. My memory's not > what it used to be. > > Best, > Gordon John Schwaller wrote: > Tlachtli is the game itself > > tlachco would be the "place of the game;" the final -co, is a locative, > denoting that it is a location of the game (tlach + co). > > As for a Zapotec origin, I cannot comment. It works like a standard > Nahuatl stem. > > > Campbell, R. Joe wrote: > Dear Gordon, > > My hazy memory was that "tlachtli" was the game -- and "tlachco" the > ball court. But your idea of looking at textual usage sent me to the > Florentine Codex, thumbing pages and running my search finger down one > column after another... |8-) Actually, I ran a search program to list > all sentences which might be coded for the morpheme and > since it's one of the easy ones, I think all or most occurrences are > already coded. > To my surprise, most of the usages indicated a reference to the > court itself. So your present memory is still better than mine. > > Molina's three dictionaries give results that ended up in an aborted > summary below -- "tlachtli" refers to either the game or the court. In > 1555 he refers only to the game, but in both the 1571 dictionaries, he > points out the double possibility. > > All the best, > > Joe > > > Florentine: > > *tlachtli *** > nahuallachco. on a magical ball court. . b.2 > f.14 p.239| > teotlachco. !place> teo:tl-tlachtli-co1>. b.2 f.12 p.186| > tezcatlachco. !place> tlachtli-co1>. b.2 f.11 p.185| > tlachco. ball court; on the ball court; in a ball game. co1>. b.8 f.2 p.29| > tlachcotecatl. person of Tlachco. . b.8 f.3 > p.51| > tlachcuauhyo. having a ball-court eagle design. yo:tl1>. b.10 f.4 p.64| > tlachtemalacatl. stone ring which is on a ball court. malacatl>. b.8 f.2 p.29| > tlachtli. . . b.2 f.14 p.231| > tlachtli. ball court. . b.3 f.3 p.37| > > from Molina: > > tlachtli. batei, juego de pelota con los quadriles, o el mesmo lugar > donde juegan este juego; batel juego de pelota con las naigas; iuego > de pelota assi el lugar (assi is iuego de pelota con las nalgas); > juego de pelota con las nalgas. s. el lugar donde juegan assi. > . 71m1-3| > > > Florentine contexts: > > tlachtli > > 1. *nahuallachco*. nahuallachco . in the magical ball court . > (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.239) > > 2. *teotlachco*. in ohualtemoc, mec tlamelahua, in motenehua > teotlachco: . when he had come down here, then he went direct to > [the place] called the god's ball court. . > (b.2 f.9 c.34 p.145) > > 3. *teotlachco*. auh in onacic, in teotlachco in painal, niman ye > ixpan micoa: . and when [the priest with] paynal came to > teotlachco, then there was the slaying [of sacrificial victims] > before him. . (b.2 f.11 c.38 p.176) > > 4. *teotlachco*. teotlachco. . teotlachco . teo:tl-tlachtli-co1> (b.2 f.12 c.38 p.186) > > 5. *teotlachco*. in teotlachco: oncan miquia in intoca catca > amapantzitzin, . teotlachco: there died those named amapantzin > [impersonating the god amapan]. . tlachtli-co1> (b.2 f.12 c.38 p.186) > > 6. *tezcatlachco*. tezcatlachco. . tezcatlachco . > > 7. *tezcatlachco*. in tezcatlachco: no oncan micoaya, oncan miquia > in ixiptla huitznahuatl: zan quenman, amo mochipa: . > tezcatlachco: there also there was slaying; there died the > impersonator of uitznauatl--only at times, not often. . > > 8. *tlachco*. in oquimonmicti, mec quinhuihuilana, tlachco: . when > they had slain them, then they dragged them about the ball court. > . (b.2 f.9 c.34 p.145) > > 9. *tlachco*. tlachco timotlalia . in the ball court you are set . > (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.239) > > 10. *tlachco*. mochi patolco, tlachco, quitlamia, . he used up > everything in patolli and tlachtli. . (b.4 f.9 c.27 > p.94) > > 11. *tlachco*. aoc tepapatla, patolco, tlachco, ohuiti, chicuati, > quichicuatilia, anoze quimomachtia in ollatolli, patollatolli, > ollatole, patollatole: . he no longer overcame others in patolli > or tlachtli, or embarrassed, despoiled, or took all the wagers, > even though he understood the language, the rules, of tlachtli and > patolli. . (b.4 f.9 c.27 p.94) > > 12. *tlachco*. auh manozo ic onilpitinemi, ma ipatiuh mochiuhtica, > in oncan oonquetzaloc in patolco, in tlachco: ca oontlatlalililoc > in mayehuatl in quecehuatl, in nelpiloni: . but may he go bound > to it; may it become his aid when he hath been placed there in the > patolli game, in the ball game; for the glove, the leather hip > guard, the girdle have been placed on; . (b.6 f.5 > c.13 p.64) > > 13. *tlachco*. ca oc yehhuatl ontenamiquiz in patolco, in tlachco: > oc yehhuatl onteollamiz, oc yehhuatl ompatoz. . for yet he is to > contend with others in the patolli game, in the ball game; he is > yet to play the ball game with others; he is yet to play patolli. > . (b.6 f.5 c.13 p.64) > > 14. *tlachco*. niman ic quitlani in ixquich tlazotli tlatquitl, auh > mochintin quintlani, in ixquichtin tetlatlattaque, in oncan > tlachco: . then he won all the costly goods, and he won > everything from all who watched there in the ball court. . > (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 15. *tlachco*. ihuan tlacencahualo in tlachco, tlaahuililo, > tlaxalhuilo, tlachpano: . and things were arranged on the ball > court; there was sprinkling, there was sanding, there was > sweeping. . (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58) > > 16. *tlachco*. ihuan in ixquich quitlanitoz tlatoani, in > tlazotilmatli in xomoihhuitilmatli, in tlazomaxtlatl, in > chalchiuhtentetl, teocuitlanacochtli, chalchiuhcozcatl, > teocuitlacozcatl, matzopetztli chalchihuitl huei ipan ca, tlazotl: > ihuan in ixquich tlazotilmatli, ihuan pepechtli quihualquixtia in > calpixque, quihuallalia in tlachco. . and all which the ruler was > to wager in the game -- the valued capes, the duck feather capes, > the costly breech clouts, the green stone lip plugs, the golden > ear plugs, the green stone necklaces, the golden necklaces, the > wrist bands with large, precious, green stones upon them, and all > the precious capes and bedding -- the majordomos brought out and > placed in the ball court. . (b.8 f.4 c.17 p.58) > > 17. *tlachco*. ca amo tlachco, patolco otictlali, . not in tlachtli > nor in patolli hast thou entered. . (b.9 f.4 c.9 > p.42) > > 18. *tlachcotecatl*. auh in yehhuatl tlatoani: niman quinnonotza in > ixquichtin calpixque, petlacalcatl, aztacalcatl: cuauhnahuac > calpixqui, huaxtepec calpixqui, cuetlaxtecatl: tochpanecatl: > tziuhcoacatl, tepecuacuilcatl, huappanecatl, coaixtlahuacatl, > tlappanecatl, tlachcotecatl, matlatzincatl, ocuiltecatl, > xilotepecatl, atotonilcatl, axocopanecatl, itzcuincuitlapilcatl, > atocpanecatl, ayotzintepecatl, . the ruler then consulted with > all the majordomos -- the men of the petlacalco and of the > aztacalco, the majordomos of quauhnauac and uaxtepec, and [those] > of cuetlaxtlan, tochpan, tziuhcoac, tepequacuilco, uapan, > coatlixtlauacan, tlappan, tlachco, matlatzinco, ocuillan, > xilotepec, atotonilco, axocopan, itzcuincuitlapilco, atocpan, and > ayotzintepec. . (b.8 f.3 c.17 p.51) > > 19. *tlachcuauhyo*. inic tlanamaca, quipantilia in quinamaca, > yoltica, yancuic, cualli, chicahuac, tlamachyo, tlamachtilmatli: > apantilmatli, tlahcohuitecqui, tlachcuauhyo, tonatiuh onmani, > tohtonatiuhio, ocelotilmatli, ocelotl, cuauhtli onicac, > ihhuimoyahuac, tetemalacayo, xochimoyahuac, xochiteteyo, > xoxochiteyo, cohuaxayacayo, ixnextlacuilollo, tezzacanecuillo, > tlalpiloni ontemi, nochpaltilmatli, tlauhtilmatli, > xochpallaxochio, tlahcalhuaztilmatli, tlacalhuaz tlaxochio, > tlalpilli, colotlalpilli, teneh, tlatentilli, tenchilnahuayo, > tenixyo, tenmolonqui, tempozonqui, tenmimiliuhqui, tenchapanqui. . > In order to deal, he seeks out that which he sells: the fresh, the > new, the good, the strong, the designed -- designed capes, capes > to be worn; those of a weave not compressed; those of a ball-court > eagle design, those with a sun design on them -- provided with > suns; ocelot capes -- the ocelot, the eagle stand thereon; those > with a design of scattered flowers, a design of stone discs, a > scattered flower design; with flowered borders -- with flowers on > the border; with serpent mask designs; those painted with bloodied > faces; those with a curved labret, with bead pendants extending; > carmine-colored capes, red capes, those with yellow flower > designs; capes with the blowgun design -- those with the blowgun > design with flowers; netted capes, scorpion-colored netted capes; > those having a border, having a trimming, having red eyelets -- > bordered with eyes; having fluffed, frayed borders, rolled seams, > fringed borders. . (b.10 f.4 c.17 > p.64) > > 20. *tlachtemalacatl*. auh in itech tlachmatl, ontetl > tlachtemalacatl manca, . and on the walls were two stone, ball > court rings. . (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 21. *tlachtli*. tlachtli icpac, huel in cuica quetzalcoxcox, . over > the ball court the fine pheasant sings . (b.2 f.14 c.38 p.231) > > 22. *tlachtli*. i cecni quitecac tlachtli zan moch tetl, . > elsewhere he built a ball court all of stone. . (b.3 > f.3 c.14 p.37) > > 23. *tlachtli*. quitlanitoa in ixquich tlazotli in teocuitlatl, in > teocuitlacozcatl, in chalchihuitl, in teoxihuitl, in tlazotli, in > tlazotilmatli, in tlazomaxtlatl, in milli, in calli, cotzehuatl, > teocuitlamatemecatl, quetzalmachoncotl, xomoihhuitilmatli, > cacahuapetlatl in oncan netlanihua, itoca tlachtli: . they > wagered [in this game] all [manner of] costly goods -- gold, > golden necklaces, green stone, fine turquoise, slaves, precious > capes, valuable breech clouts, cultivated fields, houses, leather > leg bands, gold bracelets, arm bands of quetzal feathers, duck > feather capes, bales of cacao -- [these] were wagered there in the > game called tlachtli. . (b.8 f.2 c.10 p.29) > > 24. *tlachtli*. auh in oncan huel inepantla tlachtli, onoca tlecotl > tlaxotlalli in tlalli, . and there, in the very center of the > ball court, was a line, drawn upon the ground. . (b.8 > f.2 c.10 p.29) > Gordon Whittaker wrote: > Dear Joe and Fritz, > > Thanks for your input on tlachtli. Joe, that's quite an impressive > database you have! From your citations it would seem that tlachtli > primarily names the ball court, but could be extended (as Molina attests > as well) to include the game itself. > > The specific name of the game, ollamatiliztli and the like, as opposed to > the court it was played on, presumably also turns up in the Classical > Nahuatl corpus, but I have no idea with regard to its frequency. The index > to the Florentine Codex available at the SUP-INFOR web site lists only the > following related forms: > > ollama II-239(3) > vllama VIII-29 > ollamaloni X-87 > ollamaloz VIII-58 > ollamanj VIII-29 > > Fritz, I agree with you that there's nothing unusual about the appearance > of Nahuatl tlach-tli. However, given the long history of Zapotec and > Mixtec ball courts -- from which the Aztec-style court derives --, the > chances are good, I think, that the word is an adaptation of Zapotec l?chi > 'pelota de los indios'. It is so listed in the Junta Colombina dictionary > (and presumably also in C?rdova, although I don't have it at hand right > now). It is also the term for "campo llano" in general. Nahuatl, of > course, cannot have an initial l, so a form with initial tl or il are the > typical alternatives to dropping it. > > Best, > Gordon > -- ***************************** 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