ozcoa, ozcohua, izcoa, izcohua

[Michael McCafferty]

Hi, John,

The existence of the -ohua form would suggest, it seems, that the -oa 
form is an orthographic reduction.

As for whether this is ozcohua or [i]zcohua, I wonder if the evidence 
lies in  items 3 and 4 that Joe sent earlier today:

ne[o]zcolo

nee[o]zcolo

An initial i- giving hypothetical *[i]zcohua would disappear under the 
influence of ne-, as we see for example in nehmatiliz.

I can't think of an example where ne- precedes a word with initial o-, 
but it seems to me that both vowels would remain. In the examples above 
the word is not *nozcolo. It seems that the verb in question could be 
[i]zcohua.

Then again, we have some snow fog tonight, so that might be getting in 
my way to understanding.

Michael


Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>: of

> Sorry,
> 	I should have asked, is it ozcoa, ozcohua, izcoa or izcohua?
> John
> _______________________________________________
> 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