From brant_gardner at hotmail.com  Fri Jul  1 01:41:19 2011
From: brant_gardner at hotmail.com (Brant Gardner)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:41:19 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1309453202.14614.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <THU.30.JUN.2011.194119.0600.BRANTGARDNER@HOTMAIL.COM>

It sounds like "List of market prices established by judge, Tlaxcala, 1545." Arthur J.O. Anderson, Frances Berdan, and James Lockhart, Beyond the Codices. The Nahua View of Colonial Mexico (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976, 208-13.

Brant Gardner
Albuquerque, NM

> From: nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:00:02 -0500
> 
> Send Nahuatl mailing list submissions to
> 	nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nahuatl-owner at lists.famsi.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Nahuatl digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan (Stefanie Teufel)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:51:45 -0500
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at mac.com>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> Message-ID: <303C2757-9DE7-41DB-9605-ED6915FF3333 at mac.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> Listeros,
> 	I can?t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing things sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao during the colonial period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
> 
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Calle Elías Amador 302
> Centro Histórico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
> idiez at me.com
> www.macehualli.org
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/nahuatl/attachments/20110629/e6fedc33/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:15:28 +0100 (BST)
> From: Stefanie Teufel <stefanyteufel at yahoo.de>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> Message-ID: <1309414528.46548.YahooMailRC at web28607.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Dear John,
> 
> I think it is: 
> ACTL638 List of things sold in the Tianquis of Tlaxcala por el Corregidor Diego 
> Ramírez. IN: Actas de Cabildo de Tlaxcala, F.129v-130r. (Tlaxcala, 6.10.1549). 4 
> p/ XXXVIII.
> I have only a transcription of Berthold Riese and a translation done by myself - 
> but in German. If you need it, please contact me.
> Best,
> Stefanie
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> Von: John Sullivan <idiez at mac.com>
> An: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, den 30. Juni 2011, 0:51:45 Uhr
> Betreff: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> 
> Listeros, 
> I can?t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing things 
> sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao during the colonial 
> period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
> 
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Calle Elías Amador 302
> Centro Histórico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
> idiez at me.comwww.macehualli.org
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/nahuatl/attachments/20110630/0a8c1409/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
> ***************************************
 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From igr at stanford.edu  Fri Jul  1 18:57:39 2011
From: igr at stanford.edu (Ian Robertson)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:57:39 -0700
Subject: ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
In-Reply-To: <303C2757-9DE7-41DB-9605-ED6915FF3333@mac.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.1.JUL.2011.115739.0700.IGR@STANFORD.EDU>

Hello John,

Depending on what you are looking for, you might get some mileage out of 
de Roja's (1988) study of colonial currency. It contains a really 
interesting comparative discussion of cacao-equivalences in various 
places and times, but I don't recall how much of a role records from 
Tlaxcallan may have played in it. Much more vaguely, I seem to recall 
some things about cacao values in Leander's "Códice de Otlazpan"--but I 
don't have the book (or the exact reference), and can't check...

Best,


Ian

de Rojas, José Luis
     1988    La Moneda Indígena y Sus Usos en la Nueva España en el 
Siglo XVI. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en 
Antropología Social, México, D.F.

-- 
Ian G. Robertson
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
Building 50, 450 Serra Mall
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-2034

p:    650-736-2868
f:    650-725-0605
e:    igr at stanford.edu

On 6/29/2011 3:51 PM, John Sullivan wrote:
> Listeros,
> I can’t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing 
> things sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao 
> during the colonial period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
>
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
>
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
>
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
>
> Calle Elías Amador 302
>
> Centro Histórico
>
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
>
> Mexico
>
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
>
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
>
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
>
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
>
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
>
> idiez at me.com <mailto:idiez at me.com>
>
> www.macehualli.org <http://www.macehualli.org>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From wm.annis at gmail.com  Fri Jul 22 12:59:10 2011
From: wm.annis at gmail.com (Wm Annis)
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 07:59:10 -0500
Subject: Coda /l/
Message-ID: <FRI.22.JUL.2011.075910.0500.WM.ANNIS@GMAIL.COM>

Now that the English translation/adaptation of Launey's "Introduction
to Classical Nahuatl" has finally reached my hands, I feel a bit
more confident to dive in.  (Lockhart's "Nahuatl as Written" has many
merits, but is exasperating to those few of us who are more, ahh,
fastidious about pronunciation.)

One thing I've noticed across different sources is slightly
conflicting information about how to pronounce /l/ at the end of
syllables.  Launey says it's simply devoiced, but whoever edits
Wikipedia articles on Aztec topics tends to mark it as a voiceless
lateral fricative [ł].  The ms. spelling "lh" could reasonably be
interpreted as either.  Is there even solid evidence to decide this?

I found a little discussion of this in the archives, but nothing very
decisive.

-- 
William S. Annis
www.aoidoi.org • www.scholiastae.org
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Mon Jul 25 06:08:51 2011
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:08:51 +0100
Subject: Tlaloc
In-Reply-To: <CAKjHCeg2YAYWLpDS4sS5mTTss4PyMzR63pgdu47OgCOoLACVgw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <MON.25.JUL.2011.070851.0100.A.APPLEYARD@BTINTERNET.COM>

Karttunen's dictionary says that the etymology of the Aztec rain god name Tlaloc is unclear, and that the plural Tlaloqueh is an irregular formation. But another source said that Tlaloc is Tla_l - o_ - c = "that which lies down on the ground" (likely meaning first "standing water", and then the god who made the rain that made pools of standing water on the ground).

Could it be that the name Tlaloc had started as an epithet which gradually replaced a previous standard name? (Compare the frequent habit of saying "the Lord" for the Christian God.)

(Aside: In a long list of minor production assistants at the end of a film recently I came across the (real) man's name Tlaloc Alvarez. How often are Aztec or Maya gods' names used nowadays as humans' given names?)

Citlalyani.

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


From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx  Mon Jul 25 15:16:11 2011
From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (dcwright)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:16:11 -0500
Subject: Tlaloc
In-Reply-To: <1311574131.56086.YahooMailClassic@web86701.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <MON.25.JUL.2011.101611.0500.DCWRIGHT@PRODIGY.NET.MX>

Dear Anthony:

Your question is interesting. I looked at this problem four years ago, in a
paper comparing the names of gods in Otomi and Nahuatl. Most of these names
are calques, in which the same (or similar) idea is shared across linguistic
barriers. This is also the norm with toponyms, anthroponyms, gentile nouns,
calendrical terms, "difrasismos", and the names of social structures,
animals, and plants. Unlike the European semantic category of "proper
names", in which phonological form is conserved or adapted across linguistic
frontiers, ancient Mesoamericans prefered to take ideas and represent them
with their own morphemes. Thus comparing these nouns across linguistic
borders can help clarify the etymology of a given word.

The names for the deity associated with rain, lightning and mountains,
Hmü'ye in Otomi and Tlaloc in Nahuatl, are exceptional in this sense, since
they are not calques, as are all of the other deinyms that have survived in
both Otomi and Nahuatl.

It would be interesting to look at the morphology of related names in other
Mesoamerican (or other) languages.

At the end of this message I have copied and pasted the relevant part of my
paper, with footnotes and references

Best regards,

David

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

La información que se presenta a continuación se tomó del siguiente trabajo,
actualmente en proceso editorial:
David Charles Wright Carr, “Los dioses en las lenguas otomí y náhuatl”,
ponencia presentada en el IX Coloqiuo Internacional sobre Otopames, Xalapa,
13 de noviembre de 2007.

Hmü’ye, “señor(a) de la lluvia” (Tototépec/Cardonal)*

Tlaloc, “tendido en la tierra”; “enterrado”**

* Carrasco (1987: 148) encontró este nombre en la crónica agustina de
Esteban García, quien describe la cultura de los otomíes serranos de
Tototépec. Kugel (2002: 82, 100) encontró un nombre similar, traducido como
“señores de las aguas”, usado para referirse a ciertas piedritas sagradas,
en un proceso contra idólatras de 1790, en el archivo parroquial de
Cardonal, en el Mezquital. En un pasaje del Confesionario mayor de
Bartholomé de Alva, se describe el culto a los “idolillos de Chalchihuite”
(Alva, 1998: 9-11). Lo que dice este sacerdote coincide, en lo fundamental,
con lo reportado por Kugel. En el diccionario del otomí serrano
(Echegoyen/Voigtlander, 2007: 119, 542) aparece el nombre Hmu’ye traducido
como “dueña de la lluvia”.

** Brundage, 1988: 70, 231 (nota 31); Carochi, 2001: 410 (libro 5, capítulo
4, § 2); Hassig, 2001: 8; Karttunen, 1992: 275, 276. Siméon (1999: 602)
deriva el nombre de esta deidad de las raíces tlal(li) “tierra” y (on)oc
“estar acostado/tendido”. Lockhart, en una nota a la gramática del náhuatl
de Carochi (2001: 410, nota 4), sugiere que el nombre se deriva de tlalo,
“one covered with earth”. Seler (1980: I, 85) afirma que “Tláloc significa
‘el que hace brotar’. Así este vocablo estáría derivado de tlaloa, un verbo
que, unido con el pronombre reflexivo, suele usarse, por cierto, en el
sentido de ‘apurarse, correr’, pero que propiamente tiene el significado de
‘brotar’”. Los diccionarios del náhuatl no apoyan este último análisis
(véanse Bierhorst, 1985: 337; Karttunen, 1992: 276; Molina, 1998: I, 21r;
II, 124r; Siméon, 1999: 602; Wolf, 2003: 115).

Referencias

Alva, Bartholomé de
1998 “Confessionario mayor y menor en lengua mexicana y pláticas contra las
supersticiones de idolatría, que en el dia de oy an quedado a los naturales
desta Nueva España, è instrucion de los santos sacramentos &c.”, facsímil de
la ed. de 1634, en Obras clásicas sobre la lengua náhuatl, ed. digital,
Ascensión Hernández de León-Portilla, compiladora, Madrid, Fundación
Histórica Tavera/Mapfre Mutualidad/Digibis.

Bierhorst, John
1985 A Nahuatl-English dictionary and concordance to the Cantares mexicanos,
with an analytical transcription and grammatical notes, Stanford, Stanford
University Press.

Brundage, Burr Cartwright
1988 The Fifth Sun, Aztec gods, Aztec world, 2a. reimpresión, Austin,
University of Texas Press.

Carochi, Horacio
2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
(1645), James Lockhart, traductor y editor, Stanford/Los Ángeles, Stanford
University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

Carrasco Pizana, Pedro
1987 Los otomíes, cultura e historia prehispánica de los pueblos
mesoamericanos de habla otomiana, facsímil de la ed. de 1950, Toluca,
Ediciones del Gobierno del Estado de México.

Echegoyen, Artemisa; Voigtlander M., Katherine
2007 Diccionario yuhú (otomí de la Sierra Madre Oriental), estados de
Hidalgo, Puebla y Veracruz, México, ed. preliminar, México, Instituto
Lingüístico de Verano.

Hassig, Ross
2001 Time, history, and belief in Aztec and colonial Mexico, Austin,
University of Texas Press.

Karttunen, Frances
1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2a. ed., Norman, University of
Oklahoma Press.

Kugel, Verónica
2002 “¿Sincretismo o idolatría? Dos percepciones y una relación de fuerzas
desigual en un documento del Archivo Parroquial de Cardonal (s. XVIII)”, en
Estudios de Cultura Otopame (Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas,
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México), no. 3, pp. 77-104.

Molina, Alonso de
1998 “Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana/Vocabulario en lengua
mexicana y castellana”, facsímil de la ed. de 1571, en Obras clásicas sobre
la lengua náhuatl, ed. digital, Ascensión Hernández de León-Portilla,
compiladora, Madrid, Fundación Histórica Tavera/Mapfre Mutualidad/Digibis.

Siméon, Rémi
1999 Diccionario de la lengua náhuatl o mexicana, redactado según los
documentos impresos y manuscritos más auténticos y precedido de una
introducción, 15a. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, traductora, México, Siglo
Veintiuno Editores.

Wolf, Paul P. de
2003 Diccionario español-náhuatl, México/La Paz, Instituto de
Investigaciones Históricas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
México/Fideicomiso Teixidor/Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur.

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

-----Mensaje original-----
De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
En nombre de ANTHONY APPLEYARD
Enviado el: lunes, 25 de julio de 2011 01:09
Para: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Tlaloc

Karttunen's dictionary says that the etymology of the Aztec rain god name
Tlaloc is unclear, and that the plural Tlaloqueh is an irregular formation.
But another source said that Tlaloc is Tla_l - o_ - c = "that which lies
down on the ground" (likely meaning first "standing water", and then the god
who made the rain that made pools of standing water on the ground).

Could it be that the name Tlaloc had started as an epithet which gradually
replaced a previous standard name? (Compare the frequent habit of saying
"the Lord" for the Christian God.)

(Aside: In a long list of minor production assistants at the end of a film
recently I came across the (real) man's name Tlaloc Alvarez. How often are
Aztec or Maya gods' names used nowadays as humans' given names?)

Citlalyani.


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


From susana at losrancheros.org  Wed Jul 27 14:34:22 2011
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:34:22 +0200
Subject: Suffix -NI
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.163422.0200.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.

Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
than customary present):
1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
with which to see oneself = mirror)
3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)

My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
instruments and adjectives?
So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?

For example
MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
"killable"?
NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
How to distinguish the latter?

Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.

Susana












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


From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx  Wed Jul 27 21:37:39 2011
From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:37:39 -0500
Subject: Suffix -NI
In-Reply-To: <4A5D004E3CE743099C008E7E4C251D88@susana>
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.163739.0500.DCWRIGHT@PRODIGY.NET.MX>

Dear Susan:

I think that the problem you describe comes from trying to force these
Nahuatl words into Indo-European grammatical categories. I only see two
instances for using the -ni suffix, the third merely being the use of the
second with an adjectival sense. Strictly speaking there isn't a class of
adjectives in Nahuatl, only the adjectival use of various grammatical
categories. We may translate these words as adjectives, but they are really
something else when analyzed in a more literal manner.

As I see it, instrumental deverbal nouns are based on the passive or
impersonal voice of certain verbs. They are formed by adding the -ni suffix
to the passive or impersonal form, thus giving the word an instrumental
meaning: "something that is habitually used to (verb)" or "instrument for
(verb)ing", as you explain very well. In some cases the passive/impersonal
suffix -lo: precedes the instrumental suffix; in others the
passive/impersonal suffix is -hua, -ohua, -lohua, or -hualo:. If the verb is
transitive it takes an object prefix (te:- and/or tla-) or an incorporated
object. If the verb is reflexive it takes the ne- prefix.

Here are some examples:

tequi, "to cut" > tlateco:ni (tla + (tequi - i) + (lo: - l) + ni),
"instrument for cutting something" ("knife/axe");

hui:tequi, "to whip/beat" > te:hui:teco:ni (te: + (hui:tequi - i) + (lo: -
l) + ni), "instrument for whipping/beating someone" ("whip/paddle/switch");

ma:pohpo:hua, "to wash one's hands" > nema:pohpo:hualo:ni (ne + (ma:itl - tl
- i) + pohpo:hua + lo: + ni), "instrument for washing one's hands"
("towel");

yo:li, "to live" > yo:li:huani (yo:li (i > i:) + hua + ni), "instrument for
living" ("food", for example).

Getting back to your query, your example cualoni is translated by Molina as
"cosa comestible", in the sense of "instrument for eating" (not an
"instrument for eating something", such as a spoon or a tortilla, but an
"instrument with which to undertake the act of feeding oneself". Of course
all this makes for very clumsy phrases when translated literally into
English, so we use adjectives; hence the adjectival use of an instrumental
deverbal noun.

My last example, yo:li:huani, could perhaps be translated as with an
adjectival sense, such as "healthy" or "energizing", depending on the
context.

Perhaps you are looking at Siméon's glosses; he translates cualoni as
"Comestible, bueno para comer" and labels the word as an "adjectival verb".
Siméon's dictionary has many virtues, and will sometimes provide the
solution to a sticky problem, but his grammatical classifications and the
roots he proposes for inflected words are the weakest parts of the package.

My explanation is based on these sources: Andrews, 2003a: 345-347;
Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 200-205, 248; Carochi, 2001: 180-183 (book 3,
chapter 2, § 2).

My examples are based on these: Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 205; Carochi,
2001: 180-183 (libro 3, capítulo 2, § 2); Karttunen, 1992: 90, 137, 165,
219, 232, 295, 341, 342; Molina, 1571b: 39v, 67r, 105r, 134v, 157v.

Best regards,

David

*************************************
References

CAMPBELL, R. Joe; KARTTUNEN, Frances
1989 Foundation course in Nahuatl grammar, volume 1: text and exercises,
Missoula, The University of Montana.

CAROCHI, Horacio
2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
(1645), James Lockhart, trad. and ed., Stanford/Los Angeles, Stanford
University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

KARTTUNEN, Frances
1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2nd. ed., Norman, University of
Oklahoma Press.

MOLINA, Alonso de
1571 Vocabulario en lengua mexicana y castellana, Mexico, Casa de Antonio de
Espinosa.

SIMÉON, Rémi
1999 Diccionario de la lengua náhuatl o mexicana, redactado según los
documentos impresos y manuscritos más auténticos y precedido de una
introducción, 15th. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, trad., Mexico, Siglo XXI
Editores.

*************************************
-----Mensaje original-----
De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
En nombre de Susana Moraleda
Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de julio de 2011 09:34
Para: Nahuat-l
Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Suffix -NI

Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.

Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
than customary present):
1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
with which to see oneself = mirror)
3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)

My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
instruments and adjectives?
So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?

For example
MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
"killable"?
NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
How to distinguish the latter?

Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.

Susana












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

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Jul 28 00:52:54 2011
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:52:54 -0400
Subject: Suffix -NI
In-Reply-To: <000b01cc4ca5$68ebf230$3ac3d690$@net.mx>
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.205254.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Susana,

David's first paragraph reiterates the little grammatical description I 
gave you this morning while I was actually in a classroom giving a 
test. I promised to respond this evening to round out the "lesson," but 
David's sketch below is excellent, and you can depend on it.

Michael

Quoting David Wright <dcwright at prodigy.net.mx>:

> Dear Susan:
>
> I think that the problem you describe comes from trying to force these
> Nahuatl words into Indo-European grammatical categories. I only see two
> instances for using the -ni suffix, the third merely being the use of the
> second with an adjectival sense. Strictly speaking there isn't a class of
> adjectives in Nahuatl, only the adjectival use of various grammatical
> categories. We may translate these words as adjectives, but they are really
> something else when analyzed in a more literal manner.
>
> As I see it, instrumental deverbal nouns are based on the passive or
> impersonal voice of certain verbs. They are formed by adding the -ni suffix
> to the passive or impersonal form, thus giving the word an instrumental
> meaning: "something that is habitually used to (verb)" or "instrument for
> (verb)ing", as you explain very well. In some cases the passive/impersonal
> suffix -lo: precedes the instrumental suffix; in others the
> passive/impersonal suffix is -hua, -ohua, -lohua, or -hualo:. If the verb is
> transitive it takes an object prefix (te:- and/or tla-) or an incorporated
> object. If the verb is reflexive it takes the ne- prefix.
>
> Here are some examples:
>
> tequi, "to cut" > tlateco:ni (tla + (tequi - i) + (lo: - l) + ni),
> "instrument for cutting something" ("knife/axe");
>
> hui:tequi, "to whip/beat" > te:hui:teco:ni (te: + (hui:tequi - i) + (lo: -
> l) + ni), "instrument for whipping/beating someone" ("whip/paddle/switch");
>
> ma:pohpo:hua, "to wash one's hands" > nema:pohpo:hualo:ni (ne + (ma:itl - tl
> - i) + pohpo:hua + lo: + ni), "instrument for washing one's hands"
> ("towel");
>
> yo:li, "to live" > yo:li:huani (yo:li (i > i:) + hua + ni), "instrument for
> living" ("food", for example).
>
> Getting back to your query, your example cualoni is translated by Molina as
> "cosa comestible", in the sense of "instrument for eating" (not an
> "instrument for eating something", such as a spoon or a tortilla, but an
> "instrument with which to undertake the act of feeding oneself". Of course
> all this makes for very clumsy phrases when translated literally into
> English, so we use adjectives; hence the adjectival use of an instrumental
> deverbal noun.
>
> My last example, yo:li:huani, could perhaps be translated as with an
> adjectival sense, such as "healthy" or "energizing", depending on the
> context.
>
> Perhaps you are looking at Siméon's glosses; he translates cualoni as
> "Comestible, bueno para comer" and labels the word as an "adjectival verb".
> Siméon's dictionary has many virtues, and will sometimes provide the
> solution to a sticky problem, but his grammatical classifications and the
> roots he proposes for inflected words are the weakest parts of the package.
>
> My explanation is based on these sources: Andrews, 2003a: 345-347;
> Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 200-205, 248; Carochi, 2001: 180-183 (book 3,
> chapter 2, § 2).
>
> My examples are based on these: Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 205; Carochi,
> 2001: 180-183 (libro 3, capítulo 2, § 2); Karttunen, 1992: 90, 137, 165,
> 219, 232, 295, 341, 342; Molina, 1571b: 39v, 67r, 105r, 134v, 157v.
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
> *************************************
> References
>
> CAMPBELL, R. Joe; KARTTUNEN, Frances
> 1989 Foundation course in Nahuatl grammar, volume 1: text and exercises,
> Missoula, The University of Montana.
>
> CAROCHI, Horacio
> 2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
> (1645), James Lockhart, trad. and ed., Stanford/Los Angeles, Stanford
> University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.
>
> KARTTUNEN, Frances
> 1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2nd. ed., Norman, University of
> Oklahoma Press.
>
> MOLINA, Alonso de
> 1571 Vocabulario en lengua mexicana y castellana, Mexico, Casa de Antonio de
> Espinosa.
>
> SIMÉON, Rémi
> 1999 Diccionario de la lengua náhuatl o mexicana, redactado según los
> documentos impresos y manuscritos más auténticos y precedido de una
> introducción, 15th. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, trad., Mexico, Siglo XXI
> Editores.
>
> *************************************
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
> En nombre de Susana Moraleda
> Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de julio de 2011 09:34
> Para: Nahuat-l
> Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Suffix -NI
>
> Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
> I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
> of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.
>
> Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
> than customary present):
> 1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
> 2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
> with which to see oneself = mirror)
> 3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)
>
> My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
> My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
> and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
> only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
> instruments and adjectives?
> So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
> and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?
>
> For example
> MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
>   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
> "killable"?
> NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
>   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
> How to distinguish the latter?
>
> Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.
>
> Susana
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



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


From t_amaya at megared.net.mx  Thu Jul 28 20:47:35 2011
From: t_amaya at megared.net.mx (t_amaya at megared.net.mx)
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:47:35 -0500
Subject: Suffix -NI
Message-ID: <THU.28.JUL.2011.154735.0500.>

 

	 Susana, nimitzyoltlapalohua 

	I’d like to help you with some examples taken from
Cuetzalan-Nahuat. I will write the T with tl for better understanding.
Of course I have in mind the writings of Olmos, Molina, Carochi and
other authors of our times. The examples are understood and produced
by people that have nahuat as mother language and prefer the use of
nahuat for everyday communication.  

	A. 

	1.    A difference:  

	_cualoni_ comes from a transitive “verb” cua (tlacua: nitlacua,
titlacua, 0-tlacua, etc.) 

	_micohuani_ comes from an intransitive “verb” miqui (nimiqui,
timiqui, 0-miqui, etc.). Truly, it comes from the impersonal form of
miqui: micoa 
	2.    So, when you are saying: _YN NANACATL IZTAC, CUALONI; CUALONI
‘N IZTACNANACATL_, you are meaning “the mushroom, the white one,
is edible”; “the white mushroom is edible”. Thus, cualoni means
“something/somebody edible” “that is edible” “that we can
eat” being cualo the passive form (nicualo, ticualo, etc.: I am
eaten, you are eaten, etc). But “cualo” also may mean “it is
eaten” (vid. R. Andrews), in Spanish: SE COME, ALGO QUE SE COME.
Thus: the ending particle NI is like an “agent” marker: the one
that, who, (Spanish: el que, la que, lo que). This way you have the
translation: cualoni = the one that is eaten, edible (Sp. lo que se
come, comestible).  
	3.    When you say: _TLACUALONI_, you are saying “the one that is
eaten-thing” simplifying: the one is eaten-thing; inverting: thing
(by which) the one is eaten; simplifying again: thing through which it
is eaten; interpreting: thing trough which things are eaten; i. e. an
instrument, a mean to make the eating possible. Thus,TLACUALONI may
be: a table, a room to eat, etc. 

	B.  

	1. MICOHUANI is not the same case. It scarcely admits tee an tlaa
(person-particle; thing-particle). If we combine micohuani with te or
tla it sounds improper but we understand it with very open eyes. BUT
WE DON’T UNDERSTAND THE COMBINANTION AS INSTRUMENTAL-MAKING (THING
THROUGH WHICH) BUT AS NOMINAL (THAT IS, WHO IS) OR ACCUSATIVE (THING
TO, THING THAT IS TO CAUSE). But attention: Because micohuani comes
from a intransitive verb, and itself it is the impersonal form of
_miqui_,  then it is not necessary (and is not grammatically
admissible to put them) to use te or tla particles. Thus,  when we are
talking about things,  micohuani only means: “the one of death”
“something of death” “something mortal” (sp. algo de muerte,
algo mortal), e.g. _YN TAMAZOLIN íN ICHIHCHI MICOHUANI_ (toad’s
spit is mortal; as for the toad, its spit is mortal).  

	Note: In Cuetzalan we prefer to use temictiani. _YN NANACATL
TLILTIC, TEMICTIANI_ (the black mushroom is poisonous, mortal)   

	2. But if we talk about persons, the matter is a little different.
In the example: _MICOHUANI ‘N MOTLATZIN, AMO TOTECH POHUI OC_, it
means: Your oncle is almost dead. He belongs to death, no more to us;
i.e. _micohuani_ could easily mean:  the one that is dying, who is
dying. But not “mortal” as when used as adjective for things (see
previous paragraph).  

	Micohua as impersonal may mean: it dies, many die, there is death
(sp. se muere, la gente muere, hay muerte). Thus, combining _micohua_
+ _ni_, we have for persons: “the one who is dying, who dies and
suddenly comes into life but again goes into death, because his real
state is that of someone who is practically dead”.  

	In a word: micohuani= belonging to death.  

	5. For this reason, there ist not _te-micohuani, tlamicohuani_, as
instrumental forms. We have to say _temictiloni (a dagger, a rifle),
tlamictiloni_ (a butcher’s knife). Talking about the liquor from
sugar cane (aguardiente or refino) and considering that we usually
drink it  because we want, we like it, we can express:  _yn refino
nemictiloni_,  translation: the aguardiente is mortal, killing. But
_MICTILONI_ comes from _MICTíA_ (_TLAMICTíA_, to kill animals,
things; _TEMICTíA_, to kill persons). 

	Nel cenca nehpactía ín onimitzpalehuihtoc.  

	Tomas Amaya 
 On Wed 27/07/11 10:34 AM , "Susana Moraleda" susana at losrancheros.org
sent:
  Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem
stupid, but
 I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted
a number
 of grammars. I ask you to please be patient with me.
 Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances
(other
 than customary present):
 1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who
sings)
 2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI
(instrument
 with which to see oneself = mirror)
 3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)
 My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
 My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both
transitive
 and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive
is used
 only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
 instruments and adjectives?
 So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not
adjective?
 and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?
 For example
 MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
 can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
 "killable"?
 NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
 can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
 How to distinguish the latter?
 Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.
 Susana
 _______________________________________________
 Nahuatl mailing list
 http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl [2]
-------------------------
Este e-mail fue enviado usando Webmail Meg at red.

Links:
------
[2]
http://webmail.megared.net.mx/parse.php?redirect=http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From brant_gardner at hotmail.com  Fri Jul  1 01:41:19 2011
From: brant_gardner at hotmail.com (Brant Gardner)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:41:19 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1309453202.14614.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <THU.30.JUN.2011.194119.0600.BRANTGARDNER@HOTMAIL.COM>

It sounds like "List of market prices established by judge, Tlaxcala, 1545." Arthur J.O. Anderson, Frances Berdan, and James Lockhart, Beyond the Codices. The Nahua View of Colonial Mexico (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976, 208-13.

Brant Gardner
Albuquerque, NM

> From: nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:00:02 -0500
> 
> Send Nahuatl mailing list submissions to
> 	nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nahuatl-owner at lists.famsi.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Nahuatl digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan (Stefanie Teufel)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:51:45 -0500
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at mac.com>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> Message-ID: <303C2757-9DE7-41DB-9605-ED6915FF3333 at mac.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> Listeros,
> 	I can?t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing things sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao during the colonial period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
> 
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Calle El?as Amador 302
> Centro Hist?rico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
> idiez at me.com
> www.macehualli.org
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/nahuatl/attachments/20110629/e6fedc33/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:15:28 +0100 (BST)
> From: Stefanie Teufel <stefanyteufel at yahoo.de>
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> Message-ID: <1309414528.46548.YahooMailRC at web28607.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Dear John,
> 
> I think it is: 
> ACTL638 List of things sold in the Tianquis of Tlaxcala por el Corregidor Diego 
> Ram?rez. IN: Actas de Cabildo de Tlaxcala, F.129v-130r. (Tlaxcala, 6.10.1549). 4 
> p/ XXXVIII.
> I have only a transcription of Berthold Riese and a translation done by myself - 
> but in German. If you need it, please contact me.
> Best,
> Stefanie
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> Von: John Sullivan <idiez at mac.com>
> An: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, den 30. Juni 2011, 0:51:45 Uhr
> Betreff: [Nahuat-l] ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
> 
> Listeros, 
> I can?t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing things 
> sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao during the colonial 
> period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
> 
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Calle El?as Amador 302
> Centro Hist?rico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
> idiez at me.comwww.macehualli.org
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.famsi.org/pipermail/nahuatl/attachments/20110630/0a8c1409/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 219, Issue 1
> ***************************************
 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From igr at stanford.edu  Fri Jul  1 18:57:39 2011
From: igr at stanford.edu (Ian Robertson)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:57:39 -0700
Subject: ordenanzas mercado tlaxcallan
In-Reply-To: <303C2757-9DE7-41DB-9605-ED6915FF3333@mac.com>
Message-ID: <FRI.1.JUL.2011.115739.0700.IGR@STANFORD.EDU>

Hello John,

Depending on what you are looking for, you might get some mileage out of 
de Roja's (1988) study of colonial currency. It contains a really 
interesting comparative discussion of cacao-equivalences in various 
places and times, but I don't recall how much of a role records from 
Tlaxcallan may have played in it. Much more vaguely, I seem to recall 
some things about cacao values in Leander's "C?dice de Otlazpan"--but I 
don't have the book (or the exact reference), and can't check...

Best,


Ian

de Rojas, Jos? Luis
     1988    La Moneda Ind?gena y Sus Usos en la Nueva Espa?a en el 
Siglo XVI. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en 
Antropolog?a Social, M?xico, D.F.

-- 
Ian G. Robertson
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
Building 50, 450 Serra Mall
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-2034

p:    650-736-2868
f:    650-725-0605
e:    igr at stanford.edu

On 6/29/2011 3:51 PM, John Sullivan wrote:
> Listeros,
> I can?t remember where I saw a document (perhaps an ordenanza) listing 
> things sold in the tianquiz of Tlaxcala with their prices in cacao 
> during the colonial period. Does anyone remember where this is published?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
>
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
>
> Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas
>
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
>
> Calle El?as Amador 302
>
> Centro Hist?rico
>
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
>
> Mexico
>
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
>
> Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
>
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
>
> Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
>
> Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
>
> idiez at me.com <mailto:idiez at me.com>
>
> www.macehualli.org <http://www.macehualli.org>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From wm.annis at gmail.com  Fri Jul 22 12:59:10 2011
From: wm.annis at gmail.com (Wm Annis)
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 07:59:10 -0500
Subject: Coda /l/
Message-ID: <FRI.22.JUL.2011.075910.0500.WM.ANNIS@GMAIL.COM>

Now that the English translation/adaptation of Launey's "Introduction
to Classical Nahuatl" has finally reached my hands, I feel a bit
more confident to dive in.  (Lockhart's "Nahuatl as Written" has many
merits, but is exasperating to those few of us who are more, ahh,
fastidious about pronunciation.)

One thing I've noticed across different sources is slightly
conflicting information about how to pronounce /l/ at the end of
syllables.  Launey says it's simply devoiced, but whoever edits
Wikipedia articles on Aztec topics tends to mark it as a voiceless
lateral fricative [?].  The ms. spelling "lh" could reasonably be
interpreted as either.  Is there even solid evidence to decide this?

I found a little discussion of this in the archives, but nothing very
decisive.

-- 
William S. Annis
www.aoidoi.org ? www.scholiastae.org
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From a.appleyard at btinternet.com  Mon Jul 25 06:08:51 2011
From: a.appleyard at btinternet.com (ANTHONY APPLEYARD)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:08:51 +0100
Subject: Tlaloc
In-Reply-To: <CAKjHCeg2YAYWLpDS4sS5mTTss4PyMzR63pgdu47OgCOoLACVgw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <MON.25.JUL.2011.070851.0100.A.APPLEYARD@BTINTERNET.COM>

Karttunen's dictionary says that the etymology of the Aztec rain god name Tlaloc is unclear, and that the plural Tlaloqueh is an irregular formation. But another source said that Tlaloc is Tla_l - o_ - c = "that which lies down on the ground" (likely meaning first "standing water", and then the god who made the rain that made pools of standing water on the ground).

Could it be that the name Tlaloc had started as an epithet which gradually replaced a previous standard name? (Compare the frequent habit of saying "the Lord" for the Christian God.)

(Aside: In a long list of minor production assistants at the end of a film recently I came across the (real) man's name Tlaloc Alvarez. How often are Aztec or Maya gods' names used nowadays as humans' given names?)

Citlalyani.

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


From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx  Mon Jul 25 15:16:11 2011
From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (dcwright)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:16:11 -0500
Subject: Tlaloc
In-Reply-To: <1311574131.56086.YahooMailClassic@web86701.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <MON.25.JUL.2011.101611.0500.DCWRIGHT@PRODIGY.NET.MX>

Dear Anthony:

Your question is interesting. I looked at this problem four years ago, in a
paper comparing the names of gods in Otomi and Nahuatl. Most of these names
are calques, in which the same (or similar) idea is shared across linguistic
barriers. This is also the norm with toponyms, anthroponyms, gentile nouns,
calendrical terms, "difrasismos", and the names of social structures,
animals, and plants. Unlike the European semantic category of "proper
names", in which phonological form is conserved or adapted across linguistic
frontiers, ancient Mesoamericans prefered to take ideas and represent them
with their own morphemes. Thus comparing these nouns across linguistic
borders can help clarify the etymology of a given word.

The names for the deity associated with rain, lightning and mountains,
Hm?'ye in Otomi and Tlaloc in Nahuatl, are exceptional in this sense, since
they are not calques, as are all of the other deinyms that have survived in
both Otomi and Nahuatl.

It would be interesting to look at the morphology of related names in other
Mesoamerican (or other) languages.

At the end of this message I have copied and pasted the relevant part of my
paper, with footnotes and references

Best regards,

David

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

La informaci?n que se presenta a continuaci?n se tom? del siguiente trabajo,
actualmente en proceso editorial:
David Charles Wright Carr, ?Los dioses en las lenguas otom? y n?huatl?,
ponencia presentada en el IX Coloqiuo Internacional sobre Otopames, Xalapa,
13 de noviembre de 2007.

Hm??ye, ?se?or(a) de la lluvia? (Totot?pec/Cardonal)*

Tlaloc, ?tendido en la tierra?; ?enterrado?**

* Carrasco (1987: 148) encontr? este nombre en la cr?nica agustina de
Esteban Garc?a, quien describe la cultura de los otom?es serranos de
Totot?pec. Kugel (2002: 82, 100) encontr? un nombre similar, traducido como
?se?ores de las aguas?, usado para referirse a ciertas piedritas sagradas,
en un proceso contra id?latras de 1790, en el archivo parroquial de
Cardonal, en el Mezquital. En un pasaje del Confesionario mayor de
Bartholom? de Alva, se describe el culto a los ?idolillos de Chalchihuite?
(Alva, 1998: 9-11). Lo que dice este sacerdote coincide, en lo fundamental,
con lo reportado por Kugel. En el diccionario del otom? serrano
(Echegoyen/Voigtlander, 2007: 119, 542) aparece el nombre Hmu?ye traducido
como ?due?a de la lluvia?.

** Brundage, 1988: 70, 231 (nota 31); Carochi, 2001: 410 (libro 5, cap?tulo
4, ? 2); Hassig, 2001: 8; Karttunen, 1992: 275, 276. Sim?on (1999: 602)
deriva el nombre de esta deidad de las ra?ces tlal(li) ?tierra? y (on)oc
?estar acostado/tendido?. Lockhart, en una nota a la gram?tica del n?huatl
de Carochi (2001: 410, nota 4), sugiere que el nombre se deriva de tlalo,
?one covered with earth?. Seler (1980: I, 85) afirma que ?Tl?loc significa
?el que hace brotar?. As? este vocablo est?r?a derivado de tlaloa, un verbo
que, unido con el pronombre reflexivo, suele usarse, por cierto, en el
sentido de ?apurarse, correr?, pero que propiamente tiene el significado de
?brotar??. Los diccionarios del n?huatl no apoyan este ?ltimo an?lisis
(v?anse Bierhorst, 1985: 337; Karttunen, 1992: 276; Molina, 1998: I, 21r;
II, 124r; Sim?on, 1999: 602; Wolf, 2003: 115).

Referencias

Alva, Bartholom? de
1998 ?Confessionario mayor y menor en lengua mexicana y pl?ticas contra las
supersticiones de idolatr?a, que en el dia de oy an quedado a los naturales
desta Nueva Espa?a, ? instrucion de los santos sacramentos &c.?, facs?mil de
la ed. de 1634, en Obras cl?sicas sobre la lengua n?huatl, ed. digital,
Ascensi?n Hern?ndez de Le?n-Portilla, compiladora, Madrid, Fundaci?n
Hist?rica Tavera/Mapfre Mutualidad/Digibis.

Bierhorst, John
1985 A Nahuatl-English dictionary and concordance to the Cantares mexicanos,
with an analytical transcription and grammatical notes, Stanford, Stanford
University Press.

Brundage, Burr Cartwright
1988 The Fifth Sun, Aztec gods, Aztec world, 2a. reimpresi?n, Austin,
University of Texas Press.

Carochi, Horacio
2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
(1645), James Lockhart, traductor y editor, Stanford/Los ?ngeles, Stanford
University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

Carrasco Pizana, Pedro
1987 Los otom?es, cultura e historia prehisp?nica de los pueblos
mesoamericanos de habla otomiana, facs?mil de la ed. de 1950, Toluca,
Ediciones del Gobierno del Estado de M?xico.

Echegoyen, Artemisa; Voigtlander M., Katherine
2007 Diccionario yuh? (otom? de la Sierra Madre Oriental), estados de
Hidalgo, Puebla y Veracruz, M?xico, ed. preliminar, M?xico, Instituto
Ling??stico de Verano.

Hassig, Ross
2001 Time, history, and belief in Aztec and colonial Mexico, Austin,
University of Texas Press.

Karttunen, Frances
1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2a. ed., Norman, University of
Oklahoma Press.

Kugel, Ver?nica
2002 ??Sincretismo o idolatr?a? Dos percepciones y una relaci?n de fuerzas
desigual en un documento del Archivo Parroquial de Cardonal (s. XVIII)?, en
Estudios de Cultura Otopame (Instituto de Investigaciones Antropol?gicas,
Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de M?xico), no. 3, pp. 77-104.

Molina, Alonso de
1998 ?Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana/Vocabulario en lengua
mexicana y castellana?, facs?mil de la ed. de 1571, en Obras cl?sicas sobre
la lengua n?huatl, ed. digital, Ascensi?n Hern?ndez de Le?n-Portilla,
compiladora, Madrid, Fundaci?n Hist?rica Tavera/Mapfre Mutualidad/Digibis.

Sim?on, R?mi
1999 Diccionario de la lengua n?huatl o mexicana, redactado seg?n los
documentos impresos y manuscritos m?s aut?nticos y precedido de una
introducci?n, 15a. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, traductora, M?xico, Siglo
Veintiuno Editores.

Wolf, Paul P. de
2003 Diccionario espa?ol-n?huatl, M?xico/La Paz, Instituto de
Investigaciones Hist?ricas, Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de
M?xico/Fideicomiso Teixidor/Universidad Aut?noma de Baja California Sur.

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

-----Mensaje original-----
De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
En nombre de ANTHONY APPLEYARD
Enviado el: lunes, 25 de julio de 2011 01:09
Para: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Tlaloc

Karttunen's dictionary says that the etymology of the Aztec rain god name
Tlaloc is unclear, and that the plural Tlaloqueh is an irregular formation.
But another source said that Tlaloc is Tla_l - o_ - c = "that which lies
down on the ground" (likely meaning first "standing water", and then the god
who made the rain that made pools of standing water on the ground).

Could it be that the name Tlaloc had started as an epithet which gradually
replaced a previous standard name? (Compare the frequent habit of saying
"the Lord" for the Christian God.)

(Aside: In a long list of minor production assistants at the end of a film
recently I came across the (real) man's name Tlaloc Alvarez. How often are
Aztec or Maya gods' names used nowadays as humans' given names?)

Citlalyani.


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


From susana at losrancheros.org  Wed Jul 27 14:34:22 2011
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:34:22 +0200
Subject: Suffix -NI
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.163422.0200.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.

Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
than customary present):
1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
with which to see oneself = mirror)
3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)

My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
instruments and adjectives?
So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?

For example
MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
"killable"?
NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
How to distinguish the latter?

Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.

Susana












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


From dcwright at prodigy.net.mx  Wed Jul 27 21:37:39 2011
From: dcwright at prodigy.net.mx (David Wright)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:37:39 -0500
Subject: Suffix -NI
In-Reply-To: <4A5D004E3CE743099C008E7E4C251D88@susana>
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.163739.0500.DCWRIGHT@PRODIGY.NET.MX>

Dear Susan:

I think that the problem you describe comes from trying to force these
Nahuatl words into Indo-European grammatical categories. I only see two
instances for using the -ni suffix, the third merely being the use of the
second with an adjectival sense. Strictly speaking there isn't a class of
adjectives in Nahuatl, only the adjectival use of various grammatical
categories. We may translate these words as adjectives, but they are really
something else when analyzed in a more literal manner.

As I see it, instrumental deverbal nouns are based on the passive or
impersonal voice of certain verbs. They are formed by adding the -ni suffix
to the passive or impersonal form, thus giving the word an instrumental
meaning: "something that is habitually used to (verb)" or "instrument for
(verb)ing", as you explain very well. In some cases the passive/impersonal
suffix -lo: precedes the instrumental suffix; in others the
passive/impersonal suffix is -hua, -ohua, -lohua, or -hualo:. If the verb is
transitive it takes an object prefix (te:- and/or tla-) or an incorporated
object. If the verb is reflexive it takes the ne- prefix.

Here are some examples:

tequi, "to cut" > tlateco:ni (tla + (tequi - i) + (lo: - l) + ni),
"instrument for cutting something" ("knife/axe");

hui:tequi, "to whip/beat" > te:hui:teco:ni (te: + (hui:tequi - i) + (lo: -
l) + ni), "instrument for whipping/beating someone" ("whip/paddle/switch");

ma:pohpo:hua, "to wash one's hands" > nema:pohpo:hualo:ni (ne + (ma:itl - tl
- i) + pohpo:hua + lo: + ni), "instrument for washing one's hands"
("towel");

yo:li, "to live" > yo:li:huani (yo:li (i > i:) + hua + ni), "instrument for
living" ("food", for example).

Getting back to your query, your example cualoni is translated by Molina as
"cosa comestible", in the sense of "instrument for eating" (not an
"instrument for eating something", such as a spoon or a tortilla, but an
"instrument with which to undertake the act of feeding oneself". Of course
all this makes for very clumsy phrases when translated literally into
English, so we use adjectives; hence the adjectival use of an instrumental
deverbal noun.

My last example, yo:li:huani, could perhaps be translated as with an
adjectival sense, such as "healthy" or "energizing", depending on the
context.

Perhaps you are looking at Sim?on's glosses; he translates cualoni as
"Comestible, bueno para comer" and labels the word as an "adjectival verb".
Sim?on's dictionary has many virtues, and will sometimes provide the
solution to a sticky problem, but his grammatical classifications and the
roots he proposes for inflected words are the weakest parts of the package.

My explanation is based on these sources: Andrews, 2003a: 345-347;
Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 200-205, 248; Carochi, 2001: 180-183 (book 3,
chapter 2, ? 2).

My examples are based on these: Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 205; Carochi,
2001: 180-183 (libro 3, cap?tulo 2, ? 2); Karttunen, 1992: 90, 137, 165,
219, 232, 295, 341, 342; Molina, 1571b: 39v, 67r, 105r, 134v, 157v.

Best regards,

David

*************************************
References

CAMPBELL, R. Joe; KARTTUNEN, Frances
1989 Foundation course in Nahuatl grammar, volume 1: text and exercises,
Missoula, The University of Montana.

CAROCHI, Horacio
2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
(1645), James Lockhart, trad. and ed., Stanford/Los Angeles, Stanford
University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

KARTTUNEN, Frances
1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2nd. ed., Norman, University of
Oklahoma Press.

MOLINA, Alonso de
1571 Vocabulario en lengua mexicana y castellana, Mexico, Casa de Antonio de
Espinosa.

SIM?ON, R?mi
1999 Diccionario de la lengua n?huatl o mexicana, redactado seg?n los
documentos impresos y manuscritos m?s aut?nticos y precedido de una
introducci?n, 15th. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, trad., Mexico, Siglo XXI
Editores.

*************************************
-----Mensaje original-----
De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
En nombre de Susana Moraleda
Enviado el: mi?rcoles, 27 de julio de 2011 09:34
Para: Nahuat-l
Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Suffix -NI

Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.

Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
than customary present):
1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
with which to see oneself = mirror)
3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)

My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
instruments and adjectives?
So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?

For example
MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
"killable"?
NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
How to distinguish the latter?

Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.

Susana












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

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Jul 28 00:52:54 2011
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:52:54 -0400
Subject: Suffix -NI
In-Reply-To: <000b01cc4ca5$68ebf230$3ac3d690$@net.mx>
Message-ID: <WED.27.JUL.2011.205254.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Susana,

David's first paragraph reiterates the little grammatical description I 
gave you this morning while I was actually in a classroom giving a 
test. I promised to respond this evening to round out the "lesson," but 
David's sketch below is excellent, and you can depend on it.

Michael

Quoting David Wright <dcwright at prodigy.net.mx>:

> Dear Susan:
>
> I think that the problem you describe comes from trying to force these
> Nahuatl words into Indo-European grammatical categories. I only see two
> instances for using the -ni suffix, the third merely being the use of the
> second with an adjectival sense. Strictly speaking there isn't a class of
> adjectives in Nahuatl, only the adjectival use of various grammatical
> categories. We may translate these words as adjectives, but they are really
> something else when analyzed in a more literal manner.
>
> As I see it, instrumental deverbal nouns are based on the passive or
> impersonal voice of certain verbs. They are formed by adding the -ni suffix
> to the passive or impersonal form, thus giving the word an instrumental
> meaning: "something that is habitually used to (verb)" or "instrument for
> (verb)ing", as you explain very well. In some cases the passive/impersonal
> suffix -lo: precedes the instrumental suffix; in others the
> passive/impersonal suffix is -hua, -ohua, -lohua, or -hualo:. If the verb is
> transitive it takes an object prefix (te:- and/or tla-) or an incorporated
> object. If the verb is reflexive it takes the ne- prefix.
>
> Here are some examples:
>
> tequi, "to cut" > tlateco:ni (tla + (tequi - i) + (lo: - l) + ni),
> "instrument for cutting something" ("knife/axe");
>
> hui:tequi, "to whip/beat" > te:hui:teco:ni (te: + (hui:tequi - i) + (lo: -
> l) + ni), "instrument for whipping/beating someone" ("whip/paddle/switch");
>
> ma:pohpo:hua, "to wash one's hands" > nema:pohpo:hualo:ni (ne + (ma:itl - tl
> - i) + pohpo:hua + lo: + ni), "instrument for washing one's hands"
> ("towel");
>
> yo:li, "to live" > yo:li:huani (yo:li (i > i:) + hua + ni), "instrument for
> living" ("food", for example).
>
> Getting back to your query, your example cualoni is translated by Molina as
> "cosa comestible", in the sense of "instrument for eating" (not an
> "instrument for eating something", such as a spoon or a tortilla, but an
> "instrument with which to undertake the act of feeding oneself". Of course
> all this makes for very clumsy phrases when translated literally into
> English, so we use adjectives; hence the adjectival use of an instrumental
> deverbal noun.
>
> My last example, yo:li:huani, could perhaps be translated as with an
> adjectival sense, such as "healthy" or "energizing", depending on the
> context.
>
> Perhaps you are looking at Sim?on's glosses; he translates cualoni as
> "Comestible, bueno para comer" and labels the word as an "adjectival verb".
> Sim?on's dictionary has many virtues, and will sometimes provide the
> solution to a sticky problem, but his grammatical classifications and the
> roots he proposes for inflected words are the weakest parts of the package.
>
> My explanation is based on these sources: Andrews, 2003a: 345-347;
> Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 200-205, 248; Carochi, 2001: 180-183 (book 3,
> chapter 2, ? 2).
>
> My examples are based on these: Campbell/Karttunen, 1989: 205; Carochi,
> 2001: 180-183 (libro 3, cap?tulo 2, ? 2); Karttunen, 1992: 90, 137, 165,
> 219, 232, 295, 341, 342; Molina, 1571b: 39v, 67r, 105r, 134v, 157v.
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
> *************************************
> References
>
> CAMPBELL, R. Joe; KARTTUNEN, Frances
> 1989 Foundation course in Nahuatl grammar, volume 1: text and exercises,
> Missoula, The University of Montana.
>
> CAROCHI, Horacio
> 2001 Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs
> (1645), James Lockhart, trad. and ed., Stanford/Los Angeles, Stanford
> University Press/UCLA Latin American Center Publications.
>
> KARTTUNEN, Frances
> 1992 An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl, 2nd. ed., Norman, University of
> Oklahoma Press.
>
> MOLINA, Alonso de
> 1571 Vocabulario en lengua mexicana y castellana, Mexico, Casa de Antonio de
> Espinosa.
>
> SIM?ON, R?mi
> 1999 Diccionario de la lengua n?huatl o mexicana, redactado seg?n los
> documentos impresos y manuscritos m?s aut?nticos y precedido de una
> introducci?n, 15th. ed., Josefina Oliva de Coll, trad., Mexico, Siglo XXI
> Editores.
>
> *************************************
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:nahuatl-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
> En nombre de Susana Moraleda
> Enviado el: mi?rcoles, 27 de julio de 2011 09:34
> Para: Nahuat-l
> Asunto: [Nahuat-l] Suffix -NI
>
> Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem stupid, but
> I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted a number
> of grammars.  I ask you to please be patient with me.
>
> Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances (other
> than customary present):
> 1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who sings)
> 2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI (instrument
> with which to see oneself = mirror)
> 3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)
>
> My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
> My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both transitive
> and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive is used
> only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
> instruments and adjectives?
> So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not adjective?
> and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?
>
> For example
> MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
>   can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
> "killable"?
> NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
>   can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
> How to distinguish the latter?
>
> Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.
>
> Susana
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



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


From t_amaya at megared.net.mx  Thu Jul 28 20:47:35 2011
From: t_amaya at megared.net.mx (t_amaya at megared.net.mx)
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:47:35 -0500
Subject: Suffix -NI
Message-ID: <THU.28.JUL.2011.154735.0500.>

 

	 Susana, nimitzyoltlapalohua 

	I?d like to help you with some examples taken from
Cuetzalan-Nahuat. I will write the T with tl for better understanding.
Of course I have in mind the writings of Olmos, Molina, Carochi and
other authors of our times. The examples are understood and produced
by people that have nahuat as mother language and prefer the use of
nahuat for everyday communication.  

	A. 

	1.    A difference:  

	_cualoni_ comes from a transitive ?verb? cua (tlacua: nitlacua,
titlacua, 0-tlacua, etc.) 

	_micohuani_ comes from an intransitive ?verb? miqui (nimiqui,
timiqui, 0-miqui, etc.). Truly, it comes from the impersonal form of
miqui: micoa 
	2.    So, when you are saying: _YN NANACATL IZTAC, CUALONI; CUALONI
?N IZTACNANACATL_, you are meaning ?the mushroom, the white one,
is edible?; ?the white mushroom is edible?. Thus, cualoni means
?something/somebody edible? ?that is edible? ?that we can
eat? being cualo the passive form (nicualo, ticualo, etc.: I am
eaten, you are eaten, etc). But ?cualo? also may mean ?it is
eaten? (vid. R. Andrews), in Spanish: SE COME, ALGO QUE SE COME.
Thus: the ending particle NI is like an ?agent? marker: the one
that, who, (Spanish: el que, la que, lo que). This way you have the
translation: cualoni = the one that is eaten, edible (Sp. lo que se
come, comestible).  
	3.    When you say: _TLACUALONI_, you are saying ?the one that is
eaten-thing? simplifying: the one is eaten-thing; inverting: thing
(by which) the one is eaten; simplifying again: thing through which it
is eaten; interpreting: thing trough which things are eaten; i. e. an
instrument, a mean to make the eating possible. Thus,TLACUALONI may
be: a table, a room to eat, etc. 

	B.  

	1. MICOHUANI is not the same case. It scarcely admits tee an tlaa
(person-particle; thing-particle). If we combine micohuani with te or
tla it sounds improper but we understand it with very open eyes. BUT
WE DON?T UNDERSTAND THE COMBINANTION AS INSTRUMENTAL-MAKING (THING
THROUGH WHICH) BUT AS NOMINAL (THAT IS, WHO IS) OR ACCUSATIVE (THING
TO, THING THAT IS TO CAUSE). But attention: Because micohuani comes
from a intransitive verb, and itself it is the impersonal form of
_miqui_,  then it is not necessary (and is not grammatically
admissible to put them) to use te or tla particles. Thus,  when we are
talking about things,  micohuani only means: ?the one of death?
?something of death? ?something mortal? (sp. algo de muerte,
algo mortal), e.g. _YN TAMAZOLIN ?N ICHIHCHI MICOHUANI_ (toad?s
spit is mortal; as for the toad, its spit is mortal).  

	Note: In Cuetzalan we prefer to use temictiani. _YN NANACATL
TLILTIC, TEMICTIANI_ (the black mushroom is poisonous, mortal)   

	2. But if we talk about persons, the matter is a little different.
In the example: _MICOHUANI ?N MOTLATZIN, AMO TOTECH POHUI OC_, it
means: Your oncle is almost dead. He belongs to death, no more to us;
i.e. _micohuani_ could easily mean:  the one that is dying, who is
dying. But not ?mortal? as when used as adjective for things (see
previous paragraph).  

	Micohua as impersonal may mean: it dies, many die, there is death
(sp. se muere, la gente muere, hay muerte). Thus, combining _micohua_
+ _ni_, we have for persons: ?the one who is dying, who dies and
suddenly comes into life but again goes into death, because his real
state is that of someone who is practically dead?.  

	In a word: micohuani= belonging to death.  

	5. For this reason, there ist not _te-micohuani, tlamicohuani_, as
instrumental forms. We have to say _temictiloni (a dagger, a rifle),
tlamictiloni_ (a butcher?s knife). Talking about the liquor from
sugar cane (aguardiente or refino) and considering that we usually
drink it  because we want, we like it, we can express:  _yn refino
nemictiloni_,  translation: the aguardiente is mortal, killing. But
_MICTILONI_ comes from _MICT?A_ (_TLAMICT?A_, to kill animals,
things; _TEMICT?A_, to kill persons). 

	Nel cenca nehpact?a ?n onimitzpalehuihtoc.  

	Tomas Amaya 
 On Wed 27/07/11 10:34 AM , "Susana Moraleda" susana at losrancheros.org
sent:
  Sorry to disturb everybody with a question that to many may seem
stupid, but
 I have no other alternative but to ask here, after having consulted
a number
 of grammars. I ask you to please be patient with me.
 Suffix -NI as far as I know, is added to verbs in three instances
(other
 than customary present):
 1) as agentive - added to the present tense - e.g. CUICANI (one who
sings)
 2) as instrumental - added to the impersonal - e.g. NEITTALONI
(instrument
 with which to see oneself = mirror)
 3) as adjective - added to the passive - e.g. CUALONI (eatable)
 My problem is how to distinguish (2) from (3)
 My reasoning is that, given that the impersonal is used with both
transitive
 and intransitive verbs (only with 3rd person sing), and the passive
is used
 only with transitive verbs, does this also apply in the creation of
 instruments and adjectives?
 So an intransitive verb can only become instrumental and not
adjective?
 and a transitive verb may become both instrumental and adjective?
 For example
 MICOHUANI (MICOHUA, impersonal, - death is going on - intransitive)
 can only mean "instrument with which to kill - poison", but not
 "killable"?
 NEITTALONI (ITTALO, passive, - he is seen - transitive/refl)
 can be "mirror", but can it also mean "mirrorable" or "seeable"?
 How to distinguish the latter?
 Sorry for the confusion and thanks a million for any feedback.
 Susana
 _______________________________________________
 Nahuatl mailing list
 http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl [2]
-------------------------
Este e-mail fue enviado usando Webmail Meg at red.

Links:
------
[2]
http://webmail.megared.net.mx/parse.php?redirect=http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl