From idiez at me.com  Fri Feb  1 05:17:24 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:17:24 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <1359693068.87147.YahooMailClassic@web142401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <THU.31.JAN.2013.231724.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Michael,
	No te equivocaste en tu observación. No fue "casi como" si yo estuviera corrigiendo una tarea. Ésa es mi profesión. Soy profesor universitario que pasa una buena parte de su día corrigiendo diferentes aspectos de la escritura de sus alumnos indígenas universitarios cuando escriben en náhuatl. En un correo anterior comentaste que mi afirmación sobre la "o" antecesiva se trataba de una prescripción ortográfica y no un argumento lingüístico. De nuevo, tienes razón, pero no creo que estemos peleados. En IDIEZ hemos dedicado ya más de una década a ir conformando esa prescripción ortográfica única que algún día les permitirá a todos los nativohablantes de náhuatl comunicarse entre sí por escrito sin mayores dificultades. Nos amparamos en el trabajo académico colectivo de los nativohablantes, la consulta de fuentes gramaticales desde el siglo XVI hasta ahora y en todos los comentarios y sugerencias que nos hayan hecho llegar una gran cantidad de lingüístas que han trabajado con nosotros a través de los años, algunos en persona y otros a través de nahuat-l y Facebook. ¿Cómo podríamos estar peleados con las personas que nos señalan maneras de mejorar nuestro trabajo?
Un abrazo,
John

On Jan 31, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Michael Swanton <mwswanton at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos originales a esta lista. También me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que presenta John, Joe y Michael aquí. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.
> 
> Si uno piensa que el análisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro público como éste. John me sorprendió entonces con su respuesta que constó de unas afirmaciones casi como alguien que está corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las buenas intenciones de John; eso está fuera de duda, tengo claro que su intención es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus afirmaciones. 
> 
> Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las leí, me pregunté si de veras ¿el formativo ō es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ¿puede ser un proclítico, más como mā?
> Joe observa que el ō puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan. Pero no veo cómo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un clítico y un afijo. En términos generales, las reglas de acentuación se pueden aplicar antes de que un clítico se adjunte a su anfitrión (como en español, mándame) o después (como en latín, itaque). [Sería interesante saber entonces dónde caería el acento en una construcción como mā qui (Qué lo tome), ¿sobre el mā o sobre el qui? o ¿es espondaica?]
> 
> Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ō no es un prefijo en nahuatl clásico sino un proclítico. Un primero es su distribución: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como señala John, hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sintácticos entre el ō y el tema verbal (p.e. ō nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras “partículas” (p.e. ye ō cuēl mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso morfofonológico de epéntesis de los demás prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui pero ōquicac y no ōccac*).
> 
> La ortografía no es buen guía para entender estatus lingüístico de un morfema. La práctica de escribir el ō junto al verbo probablemente tiene más que ver con su tamaño diminutivo cuando se escribe que un análisis de su distribución.
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:
> 
> From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
> To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM
> 
> John, ome Michaels, and all,
> 
> 
>   Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
> professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
> interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
> us.  Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
> the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
>   Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
> philologists of Europe.  In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
> ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
> and American Structuralism.
>   He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
> analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
> "Zee native speaker is never wrong."  --The native speaker is
> the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
> language.
>   And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
> you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
> that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
> source of the data."
> 
>   So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
> of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
> if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
> ("oten" or "o ten").  I assumed that the logical structure of
> the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
> It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
> classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
> [o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
> stress, it must be one word, not two.  How else could I account
> for a stressless word ("ten")?  The same logic leads one to
> assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.
> 
>   Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
> conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
> learned the logic of linguistic analysis!
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
> > But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> > during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> > noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> > element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> > Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> > in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> > when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> > 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

From mwswanton at yahoo.com  Fri Feb  1 04:31:08 2013
From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:31:08 -0800
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <20130126230843.odvns8q6eco0gog4@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.31.JAN.2013.203108.0800.MWSWANTON@YAHOO.COM>














Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos originales a esta lista. También me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que presenta John, Joe y Michael aquí. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.

Si uno piensa que el análisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro público como éste. John me sorprendió entonces con su respuesta que constó de unas afirmaciones casi como alguien que está corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las buenas intenciones de John; eso está fuera de duda, tengo claro que su intención es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus afirmaciones. 

Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las leí, me pregunté si de veras ¿el formativo ō es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ¿puede ser un proclítico, más como mā?
Joe observa que el ō puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan. Pero no veo cómo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un clítico y un afijo. En términos generales, las reglas de acentuación se pueden aplicar antes de que un clítico se adjunte a su anfitrión (como en español, mándame) o después (como en latín, itaque). [Sería interesante saber entonces dónde caería el acento en una construcción como mā qui (Qué lo tome), ¿sobre el mā o sobre el qui? o ¿es espondaica?]

Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ō no es un prefijo en nahuatl clásico sino un proclítico. Un primero es su distribución: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como señala John, hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sintácticos entre el ō y el tema verbal (p.e. ō nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras “partículas” (p.e. ye ō cuēl mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso morfofonológico de epéntesis de los demás prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui pero ōquicac y no ōccac*).

La ortografía no es buen guía para entender estatus lingüístico de un morfema. La práctica de escribir el ō junto al verbo probablemente tiene más que ver con su tamaño diminutivo cuando se escribe que un análisis de su distribución.


--- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell,  R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:

From: Campbell,  R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM

John, ome Michaels, and all,


  Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
us.  Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
  Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
philologists of Europe.  In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
and American Structuralism.
  He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
"Zee native speaker is never wrong."  --The native speaker is
the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
language.
  And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
source of the data."

  So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
("oten" or "o ten").  I assumed that the logical structure of
the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
[o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
stress, it must be one word, not two.  How else could I account
for a stressless word ("ten")?  The same logic leads one to
assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.

  Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
learned the logic of linguistic analysis!

Joe


Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:

> But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> 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

From jdanahuatl at gmail.com  Sat Feb  2 06:23:56 2013
From: jdanahuatl at gmail.com (Jonathan Amith)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 00:23:56 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <6A1B0949-0A7A-49B3-B958-0DA575E79DA4@me.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.2.FEB.2013.002356.0600.JDANAHUATL@GMAIL.COM>

Listeros,

I am not sure that in a modern Nahuatl language the o: has the same status
as it did in Classical, where it might best be considered a phrasal
proclitic, though Michel would be the best judge of that, I think. But in
the modern languages with which I am familiar it does seem to be best
analyzed as a verbal prefix.

In many cases 3rd sg object deletion can occur in most if not all Balsas
Valley communities, after a series of elements such as ma, ma:, tla:, o:

['man kwa] for 'let me eat it' The stress is on the first syllable, 'man.
One finds a similar process in cases such as ['o:t chi:w] 'you did it', and
['tla:t neki] 'if you want it'.

In several villages as well the future copula has been fused to a noun:

nitla:katl yes  'I will be a man'
Ameyaltepec [ni tla: katl 'yes]
Oapan           [ni tla: 'katl yes]
One could write the forms differently: nitla:katl yes in Ameyaltepec and
nitla:katlyes in Oapan, but Oapan speakers have no trouble with a separated
copula in these circumstances, either in writing or reading.

Another point of note is that a standard orthography is not a limiting
factor in written communication among Nahuatl speakers. There are enough
lexicosemantic and grammatical differences. It doesn't quite matter if one
writes posoni, poso:ni, pozoni, pozo:ni if in Northern Puebla it means 'to
bloom' (a flower) and in central Guerrero it means 'to boil'. Thousands of
similar lexical differences could be mentioned, including most flora and
fauna. In Northern Puebla mah se: kimana would not be intellgible to a
central Guerrero speaker whether it is spelled quimana or kimana. And
central Guerrero niktlahto:ltia would not be understood as 'I ask him/her'
in most other Nahuatl languages.

jda


2013/1/31 John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>

> Michael,
>         No te equivocaste en tu observación. No fue "casi como" si yo
> estuviera corrigiendo una tarea. Ésa es mi profesión. Soy profesor
> universitario que pasa una buena parte de su día corrigiendo diferentes
> aspectos de la escritura de sus alumnos indígenas universitarios cuando
> escriben en náhuatl. En un correo anterior comentaste que mi afirmación
> sobre la "o" antecesiva se trataba de una prescripción ortográfica y no un
> argumento lingüístico. De nuevo, tienes razón, pero no creo que estemos
> peleados. En IDIEZ hemos dedicado ya más de una década a ir conformando esa
> prescripción ortográfica única que algún día les permitirá a todos los
> nativohablantes de náhuatl comunicarse entre sí por escrito sin mayores
> dificultades. Nos amparamos en el trabajo académico colectivo de los
> nativohablantes, la consulta de fuentes gramaticales desde el siglo XVI
> hasta ahora y en todos los comentarios y sugerencias que nos hayan hecho
> llegar una gran cantidad de lingüístas que han trabajado con nosotros a
> través de los años, algunos en persona y otros a través de nahuat-l y
> Facebook. ¿Cómo podríamos estar peleados con las personas que nos señalan
> maneras de mejorar nuestro trabajo?
> Un abrazo,
> John
>
> On Jan 31, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Michael Swanton <mwswanton at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos
> originales a esta lista. También me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que
> presenta John, Joe y Michael aquí. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.
> >
> > Si uno piensa que el análisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece
> una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro público como éste. John me
> sorprendió entonces con su respuesta que constó de unas afirmaciones casi
> como alguien que está corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las
> buenas intenciones de John; eso está fuera de duda, tengo claro que su
> intención es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar
> una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus
> afirmaciones.
> >
> > Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las leí, me pregunté si de
> veras ¿el formativo ō es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ¿puede ser un
> proclítico, más como mā?
> > Joe observa que el ō puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan.
> Pero no veo cómo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un clítico y
> un afijo. En términos generales, las reglas de acentuación se pueden
> aplicar antes de que un clítico se adjunte a su anfitrión (como en español,
> mándame) o después (como en latín, itaque). [Sería interesante saber
> entonces dónde caería el acento en una construcción como mā qui (Qué lo
> tome), ¿sobre el mā o sobre el qui? o ¿es espondaica?]
> >
> > Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ō no es un
> prefijo en nahuatl clásico sino un proclítico. Un primero es su
> distribución: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como señala John,
> hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sintácticos entre el ō y el tema
> verbal (p.e. ō nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras “partículas” (p.e.
> ye ō cuēl mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso
> morfofonológico de epéntesis de los demás prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui
> pero ōquicac y no ōccac*).
> >
> > La ortografía no es buen guía para entender estatus lingüístico de un
> morfema. La práctica de escribir el ō junto al verbo probablemente tiene
> más que ver con su tamaño diminutivo cuando se escribe que un análisis de
> su distribución.
> >
> >
> > --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:
> >
> > From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
> > To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
> > Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> > Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM
> >
> > John, ome Michaels, and all,
> >
> >
> >   Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
> > professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
> > interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
> > us.  Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
> > the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
> >   Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
> > philologists of Europe.  In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
> > ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
> > and American Structuralism.
> >   He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
> > analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
> > "Zee native speaker is never wrong."  --The native speaker is
> > the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
> > language.
> >   And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
> > you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
> > that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
> > source of the data."
> >
> >   So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
> > of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
> > if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
> > ("oten" or "o ten").  I assumed that the logical structure of
> > the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
> > It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
> > classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
> > [o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
> > stress, it must be one word, not two.  How else could I account
> > for a stressless word ("ten")?  The same logic leads one to
> > assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.
> >
> >   Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
> > conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
> > learned the logic of linguistic analysis!
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> >
> > > But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> > > during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> > > noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> > > element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> > > Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> > > in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> > > when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> > > 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
>
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From susana at losrancheros.org  Thu Feb  7 15:19:06 2013
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:19:06 +0100
Subject: CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.161906.0100.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

Piyali listeros,
Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de la 
Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que Sullivan 
en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen y en el 
curso de Campbell aparece la Y.

Como llegò a desaparecer esta Y?

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Feb  7 16:42:13 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:42:13 -0500
Subject: CHIA and CHIYA
In-Reply-To: <5113C5EA.7030308@losrancheros.org>
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.114213.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Hi, Susana,

There is always a wiser voice than mine to chime in, but from where I 
stand the /y/ *is* there "chia". What we have is an orthographic 
problem rather than a phonological one. This happened across the board 
when European languages with their orthographical and phonological 
mindsets encountered the "exotic" languages of the Americas. In your 
cases, orthographic "chia" is in fact [chiya], and orthographic "pia" 
is [piya].

I came across an interesting example of how Europeans spelled Native 
words in "unusual" ways just the other day with an Illinois language 
exclamation. The Jesuit missionary wrote it "ii8e".

The letter 8 can represent a number of things, mostly /w/, /oo/, but 
even /o(o)w/ and /wa/.

So, what does ii8e represent? We're not sure of vowel length, but it 
was something either /iiyoowe/ or /iyoowe/. ;-)

Michael



Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> Piyali listeros,
> Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de
> la Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
> Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que
> Sullivan en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen
> y en el curso de Campbell aparece la Y.
>
> Como llegò a desaparecer esta Y?
>
> Gracias
> 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 jdcomegys at cvip.net  Thu Feb  7 18:33:23 2013
From: jdcomegys at cvip.net (jdcomegys at cvip.net)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:33:23 -0800
Subject: Off topic request for rights to republish form or guide in
 Spanish.
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.103323.0800.JDCOMEGYS@CVIP.NET>

This is a little off topic. Does anyone have a sample request or form for permission to the rights to republish 
illustrations in Spanish? Or know of a good writers guide in Spanish that would have sample forms or letters? I 
know the rights and procedures are a little different from copyright law in the USA. 

¿Hay alguien que tenga un formulario par pedir permiso a usar los derechos del autor para reeditar unos 
illustraciones en español que sirve para UNAM en México o el Ministerio de Educación y Ciéncia? 

Thanks, John Comegys jdcomegys at cvip.net

------- Original Message -------
>From    : nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org[mailto:nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org]
Sent    : 2/7/2013 10:00:02 AM
To      : nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Cc      : 
Subject : RE: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 287, Issue 1

 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. CHIA and CHIYA (Susana Moraleda)
   2. Re: CHIA and CHIYA (Michael McCafferty)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:19:06 +0100
From: Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>
To: nahuatl discussion list <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <5113C5EA.7030308 at losrancheros.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Piyali listeros,
Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de la 
Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que Sullivan 
en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen y en el 
curso de Campbell aparece la Y.

Como llegò a desaparecer esta Y?

Gracias
Susana


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu,  7 Feb 2013 11:42:13 -0500
From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <20130207114213.5suzqfib0ogs8ogo at webmail.iu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"

Hi, Susana,

There is always a wiser voice than mine to chime in, but from where I 
stand the /y/ *is* there "chia". What we have is an orthographic 
problem rather than a phonological one. This happened across the board 
when European languages with their orthographical and phonological 
mindsets encountered the "exotic" languages of the Americas. In your 
cases, orthographic "chia" is in fact [chiya], and orthographic "pia" 
is [piya].

I came across an interesting example of how Europeans spelled Native 
words in "unusual" ways just the other day with an Illinois language 
exclamation. The Jesuit missionary wrote it "ii8e".

The letter 8 can represent a number of things, mostly /w/, /oo/, but 
even /o(o)w/ and /wa/.

So, what does ii8e represent? We're not sure of vowel length, but it 
was something either /iiyoowe/ or /iyoowe/. ;-)

Michael



Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> Piyali listeros,
> Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de
> la Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
> Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que
> Sullivan en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen
> y en el curso de Campbell aparece la Y.
>
> Como llegò a desaparecer esta Y?
>
> Gracias
> 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 


End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 287, Issue 1
***************************************

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


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Thu Feb  7 19:09:13 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:09:13 -0500
Subject: CFP - 3rd Annual Nahuatl @ Yale conference, May,
 2013 - new details
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.140913.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Nahuatl meeting at Yale

On May 10 and 11, 2013, the Northeastern group of Nahuatl Studies will host the 
Third Annual Conference and Workshop at Yale.  The schedule will include 
advanced Nahuatl study, group document translation, and papers by scholars.

The program is filling up rapidly.  At present we have accepted 9 papers.  We 
are particularly interested in receiving more proposals for the analysis of 
documents.  As has been past practice, scholars gather to work collectively on 
the translation of documents which are shared before the meeting.  Please 
contact the organizers if you wish to present a document for study and to make 
arrangements for its distribution.

Please consider joining us in this exciting weekend, with a document for study, 
with a paper, or simply by attending.  More details will be forthcoming as plans 
are made final.  Please check the following web page:

http://www2.potsdam.edu/schwaljf/Nahuatl/Yale2013.htm

Thanks to the Yale Council on Latin American and Iberian Studies a few hotel 
rooms are being provided for conference attendees. These are available on a 
first-come-first-served basis.

The organizers include:
Caterina Pizzigoni (cp2313 at columbia.edu)
John Sullivan (idiez at me.com)
Louise Burkhart (burk at albany.edu)
John F. Schwaller (schwallr at potsdam.edu)

-- 
*****************************
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 karttu at comcast.net  Thu Feb  7 19:51:22 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:51:22 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.145122.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

In spoken Nahuatl, the difference between the vowel-vowel sequence ia  
and the sequence with an intervening glide iya is generally  
inaudible. There are, however, morphological distinctions.  For  
instance, the intervocalic y of chiya and piya reveals its presence  
when it becomes word-final or is followed by a consonant. Then the y  
changes its quality: the preterite stem of chiya is chix, and the x  
also shows up in nouns  derived from the preterite stem like  
teo:pixqui 'priest' from piya.

There is no obvious reason to choose miyac/miyec over miac/miec  
'much, many' since the context never puts the y (if there is one)  
into a context in which it could change to x.

What is more, there is no way to tell whether a verb written as  
ending in ia will be an invariant Class 1 verb like ihya:ya 'to  
stink' that just adds a preterite -c/-queh; a class 2 verb that has a  
preterite stem that drops the final vowel and changes y to x like  
piya and chiya and some others; or a Class 3 verb that doesn't have a  
y in there at all and forms its preterite stem by dropping the final  
a and adding a glottal stop: aquia 'to adjust something' where the  
preterite stem is aquih.  (In An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl,  
for strictly morphological reasons, I give the canonical form of this  
class of verbs as ending in i followed by a long vowel a:.)

It is precisely because there is no way of telling from the  
traditional spelling(s) or even from hearing a form in isolation,  
whether one is dealing with iya or ia  that Molina uses the  
convention of including the preterite form with every verb entry in  
his dictionary.

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


From karttu at comcast.net  Thu Feb  7 20:51:02 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 15:51:02 -0500
Subject: Better example
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.155102.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

I realized after I hit send that ihya;ya isn't a good example, since  
it is ya, but not iya.

I've been trying to recall a verb with a preterite in -iyac and can't  
come up with one at the moment.

If anyone else can provide one, I'd be grateful.

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Fri Feb  8 00:46:23 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 19:46:23 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <865EBA52-DD7C-4E54-A4F0-4DBD53479CFE@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.194623.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Class 1 verbs ending in -ia are hard to find, true enough.

One comes to mind, but it can go three ways: cozahuia:

preterit: ocozahuiz, ocozahuiac, ocozahuix

I believe the rare orthographic -ia verbs Class 1 are usually /-iya/.

Michael



Quoting Frances Karttunen <karttu at comcast.net>:

> In spoken Nahuatl, the difference between the vowel-vowel sequence ia
>  and the sequence with an intervening glide iya is generally
> inaudible. There are, however, morphological distinctions.  For
> instance, the intervocalic y of chiya and piya reveals its presence
> when it becomes word-final or is followed by a consonant. Then the y
> changes its quality: the preterite stem of chiya is chix, and the x
> also shows up in nouns  derived from the preterite stem like
> teo:pixqui 'priest' from piya.
>
> There is no obvious reason to choose miyac/miyec over miac/miec
> 'much, many' since the context never puts the y (if there is one)
> into a context in which it could change to x.
>
> What is more, there is no way to tell whether a verb written as
> ending in ia will be an invariant Class 1 verb like ihya:ya 'to
> stink' that just adds a preterite -c/-queh; a class 2 verb that has a
>  preterite stem that drops the final vowel and changes y to x like
> piya and chiya and some others; or a Class 3 verb that doesn't have a
>  y in there at all and forms its preterite stem by dropping the final
>  a and adding a glottal stop: aquia 'to adjust something' where the
> preterite stem is aquih.  (In An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl,
> for strictly morphological reasons, I give the canonical form of this
>  class of verbs as ending in i followed by a long vowel a:.)
>
> It is precisely because there is no way of telling from the
> traditional spelling(s) or even from hearing a form in isolation,
> whether one is dealing with iya or ia  that Molina uses the
> convention of including the preterite form with every verb entry in
> his dictionary.
>
> Fran
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



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


From campbel at indiana.edu  Sun Feb 10 23:24:01 2013
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:24:01 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <865EBA52-DD7C-4E54-A4F0-4DBD53479CFE@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <SUN.10.FEB.2013.182401.0500.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Fran, Michael, and Everyone,

notes on ia vs. iya


   First of all, in Nahuatl both /y/ and /w/ tend to be deleted
intervocalically when preceded by /i/ and /o/, respectively. In the
case of /y/, this involves the deletion of one of two adjacent very
similar segments.  In fact, [y] and [i] differ articulatorily only
by syllabicity -- [i] is syllabic and /y/ is non-syllabic.  The same
phenomenon occurs in the Spanish of Northern Mexico: "chair" is
[si-ya] in most other dialects, but in Northern Mexico, it is
commonly pronounced as [si-a].
   In spite of the fact that Nahuatl might be said to lack the
phoneme /u/ because it doesn't have a five vowel system, the /o/
phoneme occupies the back, non-low space, and *behaves* in a way
parallel to the /i/ phoneme -- that is, /w/ engages in the same
tendency to delete when following /o/ (e.g., cempoalli (twenty)).
One who doubts that "cempoalli" has an underlying /w/ should refer
to the preterit form "onicpouh" [onikpow], 'I counted it'.

   So, the rule that one is forced to adopt is that you can't
believe your ears -- in the case of [ia] and [oa], the determination
of the presence of /y/ and /w/ depends on morphological analysis.

   As Fran pointed out, stems that *seem* to be "chia" and "pia" are
really "chiya" and "piya" when the preterits "oquichix" and
"oquipix" are considered.

-------------------------------

   The imperfect verb ending is -ya.  In the case of verbs whose
stems end in -a, the [y] of -ya is preserved:

   oquimacaya           he was giving it to him
   ocacalacaya          it was rattling
   oquinamacaya         he was selling it
   oquiquinacaya        he was groaning
   oquipacayah          they were washing it
   ocaanayah            they each took hold of it

   Likewise, the verbs in "-o":

   otemoyah             they were descending
   oquizoya             she was stringing it up

   Passive verbs in -{lo} behave in the same way:

   ocacoya              it was heard
   omacoya              it was given
   ohuicoya             it was brought


   On the other hand, the [y] of the imperfect -ya is frequently
deleted after verbs whose stems end in -i:

   oquimacia            he was fearing him
   onictecia            I was grinding it
   oquimihcaliah        they were fighting against them

   The "verber" suffix -ya which derives "becoming" verbs from nouns
(which is what all "verber" suffixes do |8-) ) loses its /y/ after
/i/:

   timazatia            you become like a deer
   titochtia            you become like a rabbit
   nahtlehtia           I turn into nothing
   atia                 it melts, it turns into water
   cetiah               they become one, they unite
   itztia               it becomes cold, it chills


   But the presence of /y/ is revealed in preterits such as the following:
(as Fran indicated)

   oatix                it melted
   oitztix              it became cold


   Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
But note the following forms:

   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit

   Their behavior is due to the fact that they don't really end in
"-ia", but in "-iya", as has already been seen in the behavior of
"atia" and "itztia".

   (I hadn't really understood the meaning of Michael's note before
I wrote this.)

Joe

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


From karttu at comcast.net  Sun Feb 10 23:33:57 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:33:57 -0500
Subject: Thanks for the examples
Message-ID: <SUN.10.FEB.2013.183357.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

  Dear Joe,

Thank you for these examples that I didn't come up with. And bless  
you for your huge data base and strategies for pulling out things  
like this. We have come to rely on you.


Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
But note the following forms:

   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit

Fran

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


From susana at losrancheros.org  Mon Feb 11 18:13:22 2013
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:13:22 +0100
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <20130210182401.hp86i421wws8cggg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.191322.0100.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

Sí. Todo está muy bien, pero...
Should one "complain" about people writing/pronouncing PIA and CHIA and 
telling them that in reality, in good classical Nahuatl, these words are 
PIYA and CHIYA? - What are we supposed to use as a valid argument? How 
are we so certain that they are so? -- I tend to make reference to the 
way in which their preterites are formed, i.e. OPIX and OCHIX versus 
OPIH and OCHIH -- In other words, how do we know (or how can we 
demonstrate) that these words in reality bear a Y??

No sé si me explico.
Susana

P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other 
dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving 
from the Spanish language!




On 11/02/2013 00:24, Campbell, R. Joe wrote:
> Fran, Michael, and Everyone,
>
> notes on ia vs. iya
>
>
>   First of all, in Nahuatl both /y/ and /w/ tend to be deleted
> intervocalically when preceded by /i/ and /o/, respectively. In the
> case of /y/, this involves the deletion of one of two adjacent very
> similar segments.  In fact, [y] and [i] differ articulatorily only
> by syllabicity -- [i] is syllabic and /y/ is non-syllabic.  The same
> phenomenon occurs in the Spanish of Northern Mexico: "chair" is
> [si-ya] in most other dialects, but in Northern Mexico, it is
> commonly pronounced as [si-a].
>   In spite of the fact that Nahuatl might be said to lack the
> phoneme /u/ because it doesn't have a five vowel system, the /o/
> phoneme occupies the back, non-low space, and *behaves* in a way
> parallel to the /i/ phoneme -- that is, /w/ engages in the same
> tendency to delete when following /o/ (e.g., cempoalli (twenty)).
> One who doubts that "cempoalli" has an underlying /w/ should refer
> to the preterit form "onicpouh" [onikpow], 'I counted it'.
>
>   So, the rule that one is forced to adopt is that you can't
> believe your ears -- in the case of [ia] and [oa], the determination
> of the presence of /y/ and /w/ depends on morphological analysis.
>
>   As Fran pointed out, stems that *seem* to be "chia" and "pia" are
> really "chiya" and "piya" when the preterits "oquichix" and
> "oquipix" are considered.
>
> -------------------------------
>
>   The imperfect verb ending is -ya.  In the case of verbs whose
> stems end in -a, the [y] of -ya is preserved:
>
>   oquimacaya           he was giving it to him
>   ocacalacaya          it was rattling
>   oquinamacaya         he was selling it
>   oquiquinacaya        he was groaning
>   oquipacayah          they were washing it
>   ocaanayah            they each took hold of it
>
>   Likewise, the verbs in "-o":
>
>   otemoyah             they were descending
>   oquizoya             she was stringing it up
>
>   Passive verbs in -{lo} behave in the same way:
>
>   ocacoya              it was heard
>   omacoya              it was given
>   ohuicoya             it was brought
>
>
>   On the other hand, the [y] of the imperfect -ya is frequently
> deleted after verbs whose stems end in -i:
>
>   oquimacia            he was fearing him
>   onictecia            I was grinding it
>   oquimihcaliah        they were fighting against them
>
>   The "verber" suffix -ya which derives "becoming" verbs from nouns
> (which is what all "verber" suffixes do |8-) ) loses its /y/ after
> /i/:
>
>   timazatia            you become like a deer
>   titochtia            you become like a rabbit
>   nahtlehtia           I turn into nothing
>   atia                 it melts, it turns into water
>   cetiah               they become one, they unite
>   itztia               it becomes cold, it chills
>
>
>   But the presence of /y/ is revealed in preterits such as the following:
> (as Fran indicated)
>
>   oatix                it melted
>   oitztix              it became cold
>
>
>   Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
> really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
> forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
> final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
> But note the following forms:
>
>   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
>   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit
>
>   Their behavior is due to the fact that they don't really end in
> "-ia", but in "-iya", as has already been seen in the behavior of
> "atia" and "itztia".
>
>   (I hadn't really understood the meaning of Michael's note before
> I wrote this.)
>
> Joe
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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  Mon Feb 11 18:48:11 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:48:11 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <511934C2.3080301@losrancheros.org>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.134811.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> Sí. Todo está muy bien, pero...
> Should one "complain" about people writing/pronouncing PIA and CHIA
> and telling them that in reality, in good classical Nahuatl, these
> words are PIYA and CHIYA? - What are we supposed to use as a valid
> argument? How are we so certain that they are so? --


I tend to make
> reference to the way in which their preterites are formed, i.e. OPIX
> and OCHIX versus OPIH and OCHIH --

That is an excellent rule of thumb.

>
> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
> from the Spanish language!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Espa%C3%B1ol_Mexicano.PNG




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


From campbel at indiana.edu  Mon Feb 11 20:08:08 2013
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:08:08 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.150808.0500.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Susana,

   All languages have dialects.  "Dialect" (or "dialect") refers to the 
variant of a language shared by one group of people as opposed to 
another group.

   In a language where everyone spoke in exactly the same way (or 
nearly so), there would be no dialects.  There have been many books and 
articles devoted to the study of the Spanish dialects, discussing, 
among other things, whether the final /n/ is velarized, the "palatal l" 
(i.e., orthographic 'll') is pronounced as a [y] or 'zh', 
syllable-final /s/ is aspirated, the aspiration of syllable-final /s/ 
before a voiced consonant like /b d g/ results in devoicing of the 
consonant cluster (e.g., "los gatos" --> [lojjatoh]), 'rr' is 
pronounced as a fricative rather than a vibrant, etc.).  These are 
geographical DIALECTS.

   There are also variants referred to as "social dialects" -- e.g., 
the variation of /rr/ in Mexico City between men and women according to 
age.

   But the undeniable fact is that speakers of a language tend to have 
variation in groups and we call those groups "dialects".  Universities 
devote class time to courses called "Spanish Dialectology".  I have 
taught graduate courses in Spanish Dialectology. Spanish speakers from 
Mexico City easily recognize Mexicans from the Gulf Coast by their 
speech -- "Ah! Es Jarocho".

   In Mexico, it is common to refer to indigenous languages as 
"dialectos".  Then, in the minds of people who think that economic 
stratification is directly  correlated with a scale of superiority, 
Spanish is a "lengua" and Nahuatl is a "dialecto".  Therefore, how 
could Spanish ever have a "dialecto"?

   About fifty years ago I was accosted on the beach at Acapulco by a 
woman who proceeded to engage my friend and me in conversation.  When 
she asked what we did, my friend (still a student) told her that I 
worked on languages -- like the local one (Nahuatl).  She replied, "Ah! 
No es una lengua!  Hablan puro dialecto!  I asked her, "En que se 
reconoce la diferencia entre 'lengua' y 'dialecto'?"   "Ah!"  she 
shouted.  "Los dialectos no tienen ni gramatica ni diccionario!!"

I still enjoy remembering those few moments on the beach....

Joe


> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
> from the Spanish language!
>
>
>

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Mon Feb 11 20:14:28 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:14:28 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <20130211150808.hq5vt5ilz44sok0o@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.151428.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting "Campbell,  R. Joe" <campbel at indiana.edu>:

> Susana,
>
>
>   About fifty years ago I was accosted on the beach at Acapulco by a
> woman who proceeded to engage my friend and me in conversation.  When
> she asked what we did, my friend (still a student) told her that I
> worked on languages -- like the local one (Nahuatl).  She replied,
> "Ah! No es una lengua!  Hablan puro dialecto!  I asked her, "En que
> se reconoce la diferencia entre 'lengua' y 'dialecto'?"   "Ah!"  she
> shouted.  "Los dialectos no tienen ni gramatica ni diccionario!!"
>
> I still enjoy remembering those few moments on the beach....
>

I think I might've mentioned this story before, Joe, but I was talking 
with an old cowboy in front of a laundromat in New Mexico when he 
pointed to a group of Navajo men across the road at a taco bar. He 
said, "See them Indians. They don't have a language." I told him that 
actually I was studying that language and it was in fact a real 
language, and one with an extraordinarily complex verb system. I don't 
know if he believed me or not.

Michael

> Joe
>
>
>> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
>> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
>> from the Spanish language!
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 12 14:13:44 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:13:44 -0500
Subject: Yale Nahuatl Conference
Message-ID: <TUE.12.FEB.2013.091344.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

Thanks to an overwhelming response from scholars, we have reached our limit on 
the number of papers which we can accept for presentation at the Northeastern 
Group of Nahuatl Scholars meeting at Yale this May.

Nonetheless, those who have documents which they would like to share with the 
group, so that we all can work on specific translation problems, are encouraged 
to submit their proposals.


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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


From idiez at me.com  Thu Feb 14 02:58:54 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:58:54 -0600
Subject: Standardization
Message-ID: <WED.13.FEB.2013.205854.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Piyali notequixpoyohuan,
	The University of Warsaw, under the revitalization project now undertaken by Justyna Olko's team in Warsaw and IDIEZ, will begin a new editorial series of monolingual publications in Nahuatl. We will publish original works in all genres from all variants of Modern Nahuatl. And all of these works will be written in the standardized orthography, based on Horacio Carochi's work, and perfected by Richard Andrews, Joe Campbell and Frances Karttunen. The first work will be a book of children's literature written by Refugio Nava, from Tlaxcala. We have already standardized its orthography, not so difficult, considering the source. Modern Huastecan Nahuatl is also already standardized. So, as we proceed with works from each variant, we will also be proceeding toward a rigorous standardized orthography of Nahuatl that can be used by native speakers of all variants to communicate with each other, as well as be able to read what their ancestors wrote (this implying that we will have to standardize the orthography of Older Nahuatl texts; more fun!)
	Obviously, an educated reader and writer of Nahuatl will have to be versed in the specificities of each variant, but I have a feeling that everyone will find this fascinating, as do we.
	From a happy group of people in Warsaw and Zacatecas,
John

John Sullivan, Ph.D.
Research Scholar in Nahuatl Studies and
Academic Director of the Yale-IDIEZ Nahuatl Language Institute,
Yale University;
Visiting scholar, Faculty of Artes Liberales
University of Warsaw;
Professor of Nahua language and culture
Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas;
Director, Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
Tacuba 152, int. 43
Centro Histórico
Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
Mexico
Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
idiez at me.com
www.macehualli.org

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


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 19 18:30:46 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:30:46 -0500
Subject: Northeastern Nahuatl Meeting
Message-ID: <TUE.19.FEB.2013.133046.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

I am pleased to announce that a tentative schedule of papers is now posted online:

http://www2.potsdam.edu/schwaljf/Nahuatl/Yale2013sched.htm

The papers will be 20 minutes long with 10 minutes for questions and comments.

We are still hoping to collect additional documents in Nahuatl for group study.


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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


From idiez at me.com  Mon Feb 25 12:59:25 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:59:25 -0600
Subject: SIL question
Message-ID: <MON.25.FEB.2013.065925.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Listeros,
	Can anyone tell the name of the book, published a few years ago, that is a critical history of the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Mexico?
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Mon Feb 25 18:54:19 2013
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (Magnus Pharao Hansen)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:54:19 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 290, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2.1361815202.30661.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <MON.25.FEB.2013.135419.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

The best one is by Todd Hartch.
Todd Hartch. 2006. Missionaries of the State: The Summer Institute of
Linguistics, State Formation, and Indigenous Mexico, 1935-1985. Tuscaloosa:
University of Alabama Press, 2006.

Others are:

   - Hvalkof, Søren, and Peter Aaby (eds.): *Is God an American? An
   Anthropological Perspective on the Missionary Work of the Summer Institute
   of Linguistics* (A Survival International Document, International
   Workgroup for Indigenous Affairs, Copenhagen/London 1981), ISBN
   87-980717-2-6<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/8798071726>
   .
   - Stoll, David. 1983 *Fishers of Men or Founders of Empire? The Wycliffe
   Bible Translators in Latin America. A US Evangelical Mission in the Third
   World* (London, Zed Press 1983)
   -



On 25 February 2013 13:00, <nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org> wrote:

> 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. SIL question (John Sullivan)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: nahuatl discussion list <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:59:25 -0600
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] SIL question
> Listeros,
>         Can anyone tell the name of the book, published a few years ago,
> that is a critical history of the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Mexico?
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Magnus Pharao Hansen
PhD. student
Department of Anthropology

Brown University
128 Hope St.
Providence, RI 02906

*magnus_pharao_hansen at brown.edu*
US: 001 401 651 8413
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 26 13:37:02 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:37:02 -0500
Subject: Results of skull analysis
Message-ID: <TUE.26.FEB.2013.083702.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

In Today's Art Daily there is a report on analysis of skulls found in the Templo 
Mayor associated with a sacrificial stone:

http://artdaily.com/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=60989#.USy6EqWG18E


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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


From idiez at me.com  Fri Feb  1 05:17:24 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:17:24 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <1359693068.87147.YahooMailClassic@web142401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <THU.31.JAN.2013.231724.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Michael,
	No te equivocaste en tu observaci?n. No fue "casi como" si yo estuviera corrigiendo una tarea. ?sa es mi profesi?n. Soy profesor universitario que pasa una buena parte de su d?a corrigiendo diferentes aspectos de la escritura de sus alumnos ind?genas universitarios cuando escriben en n?huatl. En un correo anterior comentaste que mi afirmaci?n sobre la "o" antecesiva se trataba de una prescripci?n ortogr?fica y no un argumento ling??stico. De nuevo, tienes raz?n, pero no creo que estemos peleados. En IDIEZ hemos dedicado ya m?s de una d?cada a ir conformando esa prescripci?n ortogr?fica ?nica que alg?n d?a les permitir? a todos los nativohablantes de n?huatl comunicarse entre s? por escrito sin mayores dificultades. Nos amparamos en el trabajo acad?mico colectivo de los nativohablantes, la consulta de fuentes gramaticales desde el siglo XVI hasta ahora y en todos los comentarios y sugerencias que nos hayan hecho llegar una gran cantidad de ling??stas que han trabajado con nosotros a trav?s de los a?os, algunos en persona y otros a trav?s de nahuat-l y Facebook. ?C?mo podr?amos estar peleados con las personas que nos se?alan maneras de mejorar nuestro trabajo?
Un abrazo,
John

On Jan 31, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Michael Swanton <mwswanton at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos originales a esta lista. Tambi?n me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que presenta John, Joe y Michael aqu?. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.
> 
> Si uno piensa que el an?lisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro p?blico como ?ste. John me sorprendi? entonces con su respuesta que const? de unas afirmaciones casi como alguien que est? corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las buenas intenciones de John; eso est? fuera de duda, tengo claro que su intenci?n es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus afirmaciones. 
> 
> Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las le?, me pregunt? si de veras ?el formativo ? es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ?puede ser un procl?tico, m?s como m??
> Joe observa que el ? puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan. Pero no veo c?mo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un cl?tico y un afijo. En t?rminos generales, las reglas de acentuaci?n se pueden aplicar antes de que un cl?tico se adjunte a su anfitri?n (como en espa?ol, m?ndame) o despu?s (como en lat?n, itaque). [Ser?a interesante saber entonces d?nde caer?a el acento en una construcci?n como m? qui (Qu? lo tome), ?sobre el m? o sobre el qui? o ?es espondaica?]
> 
> Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ? no es un prefijo en nahuatl cl?sico sino un procl?tico. Un primero es su distribuci?n: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como se?ala John, hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sint?cticos entre el ? y el tema verbal (p.e. ? nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras ?part?culas? (p.e. ye ? cu?l mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso morfofonol?gico de ep?ntesis de los dem?s prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui pero ?quicac y no ?ccac*).
> 
> La ortograf?a no es buen gu?a para entender estatus ling??stico de un morfema. La pr?ctica de escribir el ? junto al verbo probablemente tiene m?s que ver con su tama?o diminutivo cuando se escribe que un an?lisis de su distribuci?n.
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:
> 
> From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
> To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM
> 
> John, ome Michaels, and all,
> 
> 
>   Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
> professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
> interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
> us.  Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
> the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
>   Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
> philologists of Europe.  In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
> ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
> and American Structuralism.
>   He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
> analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
> "Zee native speaker is never wrong."  --The native speaker is
> the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
> language.
>   And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
> you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
> that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
> source of the data."
> 
>   So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
> of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
> if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
> ("oten" or "o ten").  I assumed that the logical structure of
> the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
> It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
> classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
> [o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
> stress, it must be one word, not two.  How else could I account
> for a stressless word ("ten")?  The same logic leads one to
> assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.
> 
>   Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
> conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
> learned the logic of linguistic analysis!
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
> > But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> > during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> > noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> > element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> > Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> > in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> > when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> > 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

From mwswanton at yahoo.com  Fri Feb  1 04:31:08 2013
From: mwswanton at yahoo.com (Michael Swanton)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:31:08 -0800
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <20130126230843.odvns8q6eco0gog4@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <THU.31.JAN.2013.203108.0800.MWSWANTON@YAHOO.COM>














Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos originales a esta lista. Tambi?n me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que presenta John, Joe y Michael aqu?. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.

Si uno piensa que el an?lisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro p?blico como ?ste. John me sorprendi? entonces con su respuesta que const? de unas afirmaciones casi como alguien que est? corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las buenas intenciones de John; eso est? fuera de duda, tengo claro que su intenci?n es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus afirmaciones. 

Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las le?, me pregunt? si de veras ?el formativo ? es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ?puede ser un procl?tico, m?s como m??
Joe observa que el ? puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan. Pero no veo c?mo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un cl?tico y un afijo. En t?rminos generales, las reglas de acentuaci?n se pueden aplicar antes de que un cl?tico se adjunte a su anfitri?n (como en espa?ol, m?ndame) o despu?s (como en lat?n, itaque). [Ser?a interesante saber entonces d?nde caer?a el acento en una construcci?n como m? qui (Qu? lo tome), ?sobre el m? o sobre el qui? o ?es espondaica?]

Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ? no es un prefijo en nahuatl cl?sico sino un procl?tico. Un primero es su distribuci?n: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como se?ala John, hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sint?cticos entre el ? y el tema verbal (p.e. ? nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras ?part?culas? (p.e. ye ? cu?l mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso morfofonol?gico de ep?ntesis de los dem?s prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui pero ?quicac y no ?ccac*).

La ortograf?a no es buen gu?a para entender estatus ling??stico de un morfema. La pr?ctica de escribir el ? junto al verbo probablemente tiene m?s que ver con su tama?o diminutivo cuando se escribe que un an?lisis de su distribuci?n.


--- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell,  R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:

From: Campbell,  R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM

John, ome Michaels, and all,


? Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
us.? Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
? Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
philologists of Europe.? In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
and American Structuralism.
? He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
"Zee native speaker is never wrong."? --The native speaker is
the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
language.
? And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
source of the data."

? So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
("oten" or "o ten").? I assumed that the logical structure of
the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
[o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
stress, it must be one word, not two.? How else could I account
for a stressless word ("ten")?? The same logic leads one to
assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.

? Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
learned the logic of linguistic analysis!

Joe


Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:

> But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> 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

From jdanahuatl at gmail.com  Sat Feb  2 06:23:56 2013
From: jdanahuatl at gmail.com (Jonathan Amith)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 00:23:56 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <6A1B0949-0A7A-49B3-B958-0DA575E79DA4@me.com>
Message-ID: <SAT.2.FEB.2013.002356.0600.JDANAHUATL@GMAIL.COM>

Listeros,

I am not sure that in a modern Nahuatl language the o: has the same status
as it did in Classical, where it might best be considered a phrasal
proclitic, though Michel would be the best judge of that, I think. But in
the modern languages with which I am familiar it does seem to be best
analyzed as a verbal prefix.

In many cases 3rd sg object deletion can occur in most if not all Balsas
Valley communities, after a series of elements such as ma, ma:, tla:, o:

['man kwa] for 'let me eat it' The stress is on the first syllable, 'man.
One finds a similar process in cases such as ['o:t chi:w] 'you did it', and
['tla:t neki] 'if you want it'.

In several villages as well the future copula has been fused to a noun:

nitla:katl yes  'I will be a man'
Ameyaltepec [ni tla: katl 'yes]
Oapan           [ni tla: 'katl yes]
One could write the forms differently: nitla:katl yes in Ameyaltepec and
nitla:katlyes in Oapan, but Oapan speakers have no trouble with a separated
copula in these circumstances, either in writing or reading.

Another point of note is that a standard orthography is not a limiting
factor in written communication among Nahuatl speakers. There are enough
lexicosemantic and grammatical differences. It doesn't quite matter if one
writes posoni, poso:ni, pozoni, pozo:ni if in Northern Puebla it means 'to
bloom' (a flower) and in central Guerrero it means 'to boil'. Thousands of
similar lexical differences could be mentioned, including most flora and
fauna. In Northern Puebla mah se: kimana would not be intellgible to a
central Guerrero speaker whether it is spelled quimana or kimana. And
central Guerrero niktlahto:ltia would not be understood as 'I ask him/her'
in most other Nahuatl languages.

jda


2013/1/31 John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>

> Michael,
>         No te equivocaste en tu observaci?n. No fue "casi como" si yo
> estuviera corrigiendo una tarea. ?sa es mi profesi?n. Soy profesor
> universitario que pasa una buena parte de su d?a corrigiendo diferentes
> aspectos de la escritura de sus alumnos ind?genas universitarios cuando
> escriben en n?huatl. En un correo anterior comentaste que mi afirmaci?n
> sobre la "o" antecesiva se trataba de una prescripci?n ortogr?fica y no un
> argumento ling??stico. De nuevo, tienes raz?n, pero no creo que estemos
> peleados. En IDIEZ hemos dedicado ya m?s de una d?cada a ir conformando esa
> prescripci?n ortogr?fica ?nica que alg?n d?a les permitir? a todos los
> nativohablantes de n?huatl comunicarse entre s? por escrito sin mayores
> dificultades. Nos amparamos en el trabajo acad?mico colectivo de los
> nativohablantes, la consulta de fuentes gramaticales desde el siglo XVI
> hasta ahora y en todos los comentarios y sugerencias que nos hayan hecho
> llegar una gran cantidad de ling??stas que han trabajado con nosotros a
> trav?s de los a?os, algunos en persona y otros a trav?s de nahuat-l y
> Facebook. ?C?mo podr?amos estar peleados con las personas que nos se?alan
> maneras de mejorar nuestro trabajo?
> Un abrazo,
> John
>
> On Jan 31, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Michael Swanton <mwswanton at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Jacinto es hablante de nahuatl y le agradezco su aportaciones de datos
> originales a esta lista. Tambi?n me gusta leer los comentarios y datos que
> presenta John, Joe y Michael aqu?. Todos dan mucha vida a la lista.
> >
> > Si uno piensa que el an?lisis que ofrece alguien tiene errores, merece
> una respuesta razonada, sobretodo en un foro p?blico como ?ste. John me
> sorprendi? entonces con su respuesta que const? de unas afirmaciones casi
> como alguien que est? corrigiendo una tarea. No pongo en tela de juicio las
> buenas intenciones de John; eso est? fuera de duda, tengo claro que su
> intenci?n es ayudar y no siempre se tiene tiempo suficiente para redactar
> una respuesta extensa. A su vez, no fueron para nada descabelladas sus
> afirmaciones.
> >
> > Pero tampoco no son en todo obvias. Cuando las le?, me pregunt? si de
> veras ?el formativo ? es un prefijo igual como qu(i)? O ?puede ser un
> procl?tico, m?s como m??
> > Joe observa que el ? puede portar el acento en nahuatl de Tepoztlan.
> Pero no veo c?mo eso, por si mismo, nos ayuda distinguir entre un cl?tico y
> un afijo. En t?rminos generales, las reglas de acentuaci?n se pueden
> aplicar antes de que un cl?tico se adjunte a su anfitri?n (como en espa?ol,
> m?ndame) o despu?s (como en lat?n, itaque). [Ser?a interesante saber
> entonces d?nde caer?a el acento en una construcci?n como m? qui (Qu? lo
> tome), ?sobre el m? o sobre el qui? o ?es espondaica?]
> >
> > Pero creo que hay argumentos para decir que el formativo ? no es un
> prefijo en nahuatl cl?sico sino un procl?tico. Un primero es su
> distribuci?n: se encuentra al borde de las palabras y, como se?ala John,
> hasta se puede encontrar otros adjuntos sint?cticos entre el ? y el tema
> verbal (p.e. ? nopan quiyauh) o intercalado entre otras ?part?culas? (p.e.
> ye ? cu?l mic). Un segundo argumento es su nulo efecto sobre el proceso
> morfofonol?gico de ep?ntesis de los dem?s prefijos (niccaqui y quicaqui
> pero ?quicac y no ?ccac*).
> >
> > La ortograf?a no es buen gu?a para entender estatus ling??stico de un
> morfema. La pr?ctica de escribir el ? junto al verbo probablemente tiene
> m?s que ver con su tama?o diminutivo cuando se escribe que un an?lisis de
> su distribuci?n.
> >
> >
> > --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu> wrote:
> >
> > From: Campbell, R. Joe <campbel at indiana.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] Nahuatl Digest, Vol 284, Issue 3
> > To: "John Sullivan" <idiez at me.com>
> > Cc: "nahuatl discussion list" <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> > Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 11:08 PM
> >
> > John, ome Michaels, and all,
> >
> >
> >   Sometime during my first semester of graduate school, my
> > professor was discussing an issue of linguistics and he abruptly
> > interrupted his discourse and opened his eyes wide and looked at
> > us.  Of course, we already knew his lecturing rhythm -- after
> > the pause, he was going to tell us "One of the Big Truths".
> >   Henry Kahane had studied with some of the most important
> > philologists of Europe.  In the late '30s he fled Hitler and
> > ended up at the University of Illinois, teaching both philology
> > and American Structuralism.
> >   He was ready to tell us the First of his Rules about
> > analyzing a language with input from a native speaker:
> > "Zee native speaker is never wrong."  --The native speaker is
> > the source of data for the linguist who seeks to describe his
> > language.
> >   And then Kahane smiled and said, "And zee second Rule is that
> > you must never trust the zee native speaker as a linguist...
> > that is, he is not trained in analysis, but he is the ultimate
> > source of the data."
> >
> >   So when I started learning Nahuatl in Tepoztlan in the Summer
> > of 1962, it would never have occurred to me to ask don Juanito
> > if the sequence "oten" ('it filled up') was one word or two
> > ("oten" or "o ten").  I assumed that the logical structure of
> > the language would soon reveal the answer and it soon did.
> > It turned out that all nouns, verbs, and other major word
> > classes, have penultimate stress, and since in the sequence
> > [o..t..e..n..], the [o] is stressed and the [e] is without
> > stress, it must be one word, not two.  How else could I account
> > for a stressless word ("ten")?  The same logic leads one to
> > assume that "nocal" is one word, not two.
> >
> >   Back to the two Rules -- a little reflection leads you to the
> > conclusion that ideal linguist is the Native Speaker who has
> > learned the logic of linguistic analysis!
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> >
> > > But Michael, that's what agglutinating languages do. Native speakers
> > > during the entire Colonial Period wrote the possessor attached to the
> > > noun. The fact that many native speakers today write it as a separate
> > > element is due to the influence of Spanish; i.e., mi casa = no chan.
> > > Or "Yo te veo", "ni mitz itta". I have never seen an older document
> > > in which the possessor is separated from the noun. Except, perhaps,
> > > when the scribe's quill ran out of ink.
> > > 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
>
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From susana at losrancheros.org  Thu Feb  7 15:19:06 2013
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:19:06 +0100
Subject: CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.161906.0100.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

Piyali listeros,
Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de la 
Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que Sullivan 
en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen y en el 
curso de Campbell aparece la Y.

Como lleg? a desaparecer esta Y?

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Thu Feb  7 16:42:13 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:42:13 -0500
Subject: CHIA and CHIYA
In-Reply-To: <5113C5EA.7030308@losrancheros.org>
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.114213.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Hi, Susana,

There is always a wiser voice than mine to chime in, but from where I 
stand the /y/ *is* there "chia". What we have is an orthographic 
problem rather than a phonological one. This happened across the board 
when European languages with their orthographical and phonological 
mindsets encountered the "exotic" languages of the Americas. In your 
cases, orthographic "chia" is in fact [chiya], and orthographic "pia" 
is [piya].

I came across an interesting example of how Europeans spelled Native 
words in "unusual" ways just the other day with an Illinois language 
exclamation. The Jesuit missionary wrote it "ii8e".

The letter 8 can represent a number of things, mostly /w/, /oo/, but 
even /o(o)w/ and /wa/.

So, what does ii8e represent? We're not sure of vowel length, but it 
was something either /iiyoowe/ or /iyoowe/. ;-)

Michael



Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> Piyali listeros,
> Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de
> la Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
> Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que
> Sullivan en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen
> y en el curso de Campbell aparece la Y.
>
> Como lleg? a desaparecer esta Y?
>
> Gracias
> 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 jdcomegys at cvip.net  Thu Feb  7 18:33:23 2013
From: jdcomegys at cvip.net (jdcomegys at cvip.net)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:33:23 -0800
Subject: Off topic request for rights to republish form or guide in
 Spanish.
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.103323.0800.JDCOMEGYS@CVIP.NET>

This is a little off topic. Does anyone have a sample request or form for permission to the rights to republish 
illustrations in Spanish? Or know of a good writers guide in Spanish that would have sample forms or letters? I 
know the rights and procedures are a little different from copyright law in the USA. 

?Hay alguien que tenga un formulario par pedir permiso a usar los derechos del autor para reeditar unos 
illustraciones en espa?ol que sirve para UNAM en M?xico o el Ministerio de Educaci?n y Ci?ncia? 

Thanks, John Comegys jdcomegys at cvip.net

------- Original Message -------
>From    : nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org[mailto:nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org]
Sent    : 2/7/2013 10:00:02 AM
To      : nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Cc      : 
Subject : RE: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 287, Issue 1

 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. CHIA and CHIYA (Susana Moraleda)
   2. Re: CHIA and CHIYA (Michael McCafferty)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:19:06 +0100
From: Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>
To: nahuatl discussion list <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
Subject: [Nahuat-l] CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <5113C5EA.7030308 at losrancheros.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Piyali listeros,
Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de la 
Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que Sullivan 
en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen y en el 
curso de Campbell aparece la Y.

Como lleg? a desaparecer esta Y?

Gracias
Susana


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu,  7 Feb 2013 11:42:13 -0500
From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] CHIA and CHIYA
Message-ID: <20130207114213.5suzqfib0ogs8ogo at webmail.iu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"

Hi, Susana,

There is always a wiser voice than mine to chime in, but from where I 
stand the /y/ *is* there "chia". What we have is an orthographic 
problem rather than a phonological one. This happened across the board 
when European languages with their orthographical and phonological 
mindsets encountered the "exotic" languages of the Americas. In your 
cases, orthographic "chia" is in fact [chiya], and orthographic "pia" 
is [piya].

I came across an interesting example of how Europeans spelled Native 
words in "unusual" ways just the other day with an Illinois language 
exclamation. The Jesuit missionary wrote it "ii8e".

The letter 8 can represent a number of things, mostly /w/, /oo/, but 
even /o(o)w/ and /wa/.

So, what does ii8e represent? We're not sure of vowel length, but it 
was something either /iiyoowe/ or /iyoowe/. ;-)

Michael



Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> Piyali listeros,
> Por favor alguien podria hablarme del fenomeno de la "desaparicion de
> la Y" en palabras como CHIA en vez de CHIYA, PIA en vez de PIYA, etc.?
> Los diccionarios de Molina y de Simeon ignoran la Y, igual que
> Sullivan en su gramatica, mientras que en el diccionario de Karttunen
> y en el curso de Campbell aparece la Y.
>
> Como lleg? a desaparecer esta Y?
>
> Gracias
> 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 


End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 287, Issue 1
***************************************

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


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Thu Feb  7 19:09:13 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:09:13 -0500
Subject: CFP - 3rd Annual Nahuatl @ Yale conference, May,
 2013 - new details
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.140913.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Nahuatl meeting at Yale

On May 10 and 11, 2013, the Northeastern group of Nahuatl Studies will host the 
Third Annual Conference and Workshop at Yale.  The schedule will include 
advanced Nahuatl study, group document translation, and papers by scholars.

The program is filling up rapidly.  At present we have accepted 9 papers.  We 
are particularly interested in receiving more proposals for the analysis of 
documents.  As has been past practice, scholars gather to work collectively on 
the translation of documents which are shared before the meeting.  Please 
contact the organizers if you wish to present a document for study and to make 
arrangements for its distribution.

Please consider joining us in this exciting weekend, with a document for study, 
with a paper, or simply by attending.  More details will be forthcoming as plans 
are made final.  Please check the following web page:

http://www2.potsdam.edu/schwaljf/Nahuatl/Yale2013.htm

Thanks to the Yale Council on Latin American and Iberian Studies a few hotel 
rooms are being provided for conference attendees. These are available on a 
first-come-first-served basis.

The organizers include:
Caterina Pizzigoni (cp2313 at columbia.edu)
John Sullivan (idiez at me.com)
Louise Burkhart (burk at albany.edu)
John F. Schwaller (schwallr at potsdam.edu)

-- 
*****************************
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 karttu at comcast.net  Thu Feb  7 19:51:22 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:51:22 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.145122.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

In spoken Nahuatl, the difference between the vowel-vowel sequence ia  
and the sequence with an intervening glide iya is generally  
inaudible. There are, however, morphological distinctions.  For  
instance, the intervocalic y of chiya and piya reveals its presence  
when it becomes word-final or is followed by a consonant. Then the y  
changes its quality: the preterite stem of chiya is chix, and the x  
also shows up in nouns  derived from the preterite stem like  
teo:pixqui 'priest' from piya.

There is no obvious reason to choose miyac/miyec over miac/miec  
'much, many' since the context never puts the y (if there is one)  
into a context in which it could change to x.

What is more, there is no way to tell whether a verb written as  
ending in ia will be an invariant Class 1 verb like ihya:ya 'to  
stink' that just adds a preterite -c/-queh; a class 2 verb that has a  
preterite stem that drops the final vowel and changes y to x like  
piya and chiya and some others; or a Class 3 verb that doesn't have a  
y in there at all and forms its preterite stem by dropping the final  
a and adding a glottal stop: aquia 'to adjust something' where the  
preterite stem is aquih.  (In An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl,  
for strictly morphological reasons, I give the canonical form of this  
class of verbs as ending in i followed by a long vowel a:.)

It is precisely because there is no way of telling from the  
traditional spelling(s) or even from hearing a form in isolation,  
whether one is dealing with iya or ia  that Molina uses the  
convention of including the preterite form with every verb entry in  
his dictionary.

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


From karttu at comcast.net  Thu Feb  7 20:51:02 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 15:51:02 -0500
Subject: Better example
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.155102.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

I realized after I hit send that ihya;ya isn't a good example, since  
it is ya, but not iya.

I've been trying to recall a verb with a preterite in -iyac and can't  
come up with one at the moment.

If anyone else can provide one, I'd be grateful.

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Fri Feb  8 00:46:23 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 19:46:23 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <865EBA52-DD7C-4E54-A4F0-4DBD53479CFE@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <THU.7.FEB.2013.194623.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Class 1 verbs ending in -ia are hard to find, true enough.

One comes to mind, but it can go three ways: cozahuia:

preterit: ocozahuiz, ocozahuiac, ocozahuix

I believe the rare orthographic -ia verbs Class 1 are usually /-iya/.

Michael



Quoting Frances Karttunen <karttu at comcast.net>:

> In spoken Nahuatl, the difference between the vowel-vowel sequence ia
>  and the sequence with an intervening glide iya is generally
> inaudible. There are, however, morphological distinctions.  For
> instance, the intervocalic y of chiya and piya reveals its presence
> when it becomes word-final or is followed by a consonant. Then the y
> changes its quality: the preterite stem of chiya is chix, and the x
> also shows up in nouns  derived from the preterite stem like
> teo:pixqui 'priest' from piya.
>
> There is no obvious reason to choose miyac/miyec over miac/miec
> 'much, many' since the context never puts the y (if there is one)
> into a context in which it could change to x.
>
> What is more, there is no way to tell whether a verb written as
> ending in ia will be an invariant Class 1 verb like ihya:ya 'to
> stink' that just adds a preterite -c/-queh; a class 2 verb that has a
>  preterite stem that drops the final vowel and changes y to x like
> piya and chiya and some others; or a Class 3 verb that doesn't have a
>  y in there at all and forms its preterite stem by dropping the final
>  a and adding a glottal stop: aquia 'to adjust something' where the
> preterite stem is aquih.  (In An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl,
> for strictly morphological reasons, I give the canonical form of this
>  class of verbs as ending in i followed by a long vowel a:.)
>
> It is precisely because there is no way of telling from the
> traditional spelling(s) or even from hearing a form in isolation,
> whether one is dealing with iya or ia  that Molina uses the
> convention of including the preterite form with every verb entry in
> his dictionary.
>
> Fran
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>



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


From campbel at indiana.edu  Sun Feb 10 23:24:01 2013
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:24:01 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <865EBA52-DD7C-4E54-A4F0-4DBD53479CFE@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <SUN.10.FEB.2013.182401.0500.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Fran, Michael, and Everyone,

notes on ia vs. iya


   First of all, in Nahuatl both /y/ and /w/ tend to be deleted
intervocalically when preceded by /i/ and /o/, respectively. In the
case of /y/, this involves the deletion of one of two adjacent very
similar segments.  In fact, [y] and [i] differ articulatorily only
by syllabicity -- [i] is syllabic and /y/ is non-syllabic.  The same
phenomenon occurs in the Spanish of Northern Mexico: "chair" is
[si-ya] in most other dialects, but in Northern Mexico, it is
commonly pronounced as [si-a].
   In spite of the fact that Nahuatl might be said to lack the
phoneme /u/ because it doesn't have a five vowel system, the /o/
phoneme occupies the back, non-low space, and *behaves* in a way
parallel to the /i/ phoneme -- that is, /w/ engages in the same
tendency to delete when following /o/ (e.g., cempoalli (twenty)).
One who doubts that "cempoalli" has an underlying /w/ should refer
to the preterit form "onicpouh" [onikpow], 'I counted it'.

   So, the rule that one is forced to adopt is that you can't
believe your ears -- in the case of [ia] and [oa], the determination
of the presence of /y/ and /w/ depends on morphological analysis.

   As Fran pointed out, stems that *seem* to be "chia" and "pia" are
really "chiya" and "piya" when the preterits "oquichix" and
"oquipix" are considered.

-------------------------------

   The imperfect verb ending is -ya.  In the case of verbs whose
stems end in -a, the [y] of -ya is preserved:

   oquimacaya           he was giving it to him
   ocacalacaya          it was rattling
   oquinamacaya         he was selling it
   oquiquinacaya        he was groaning
   oquipacayah          they were washing it
   ocaanayah            they each took hold of it

   Likewise, the verbs in "-o":

   otemoyah             they were descending
   oquizoya             she was stringing it up

   Passive verbs in -{lo} behave in the same way:

   ocacoya              it was heard
   omacoya              it was given
   ohuicoya             it was brought


   On the other hand, the [y] of the imperfect -ya is frequently
deleted after verbs whose stems end in -i:

   oquimacia            he was fearing him
   onictecia            I was grinding it
   oquimihcaliah        they were fighting against them

   The "verber" suffix -ya which derives "becoming" verbs from nouns
(which is what all "verber" suffixes do |8-) ) loses its /y/ after
/i/:

   timazatia            you become like a deer
   titochtia            you become like a rabbit
   nahtlehtia           I turn into nothing
   atia                 it melts, it turns into water
   cetiah               they become one, they unite
   itztia               it becomes cold, it chills


   But the presence of /y/ is revealed in preterits such as the following:
(as Fran indicated)

   oatix                it melted
   oitztix              it became cold


   Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
But note the following forms:

   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit

   Their behavior is due to the fact that they don't really end in
"-ia", but in "-iya", as has already been seen in the behavior of
"atia" and "itztia".

   (I hadn't really understood the meaning of Michael's note before
I wrote this.)

Joe

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


From karttu at comcast.net  Sun Feb 10 23:33:57 2013
From: karttu at comcast.net (Frances Karttunen)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:33:57 -0500
Subject: Thanks for the examples
Message-ID: <SUN.10.FEB.2013.183357.0500.KARTTU@COMCAST.NET>

  Dear Joe,

Thank you for these examples that I didn't come up with. And bless  
you for your huge data base and strategies for pulling out things  
like this. We have come to rely on you.


Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
But note the following forms:

   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit

Fran

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


From susana at losrancheros.org  Mon Feb 11 18:13:22 2013
From: susana at losrancheros.org (Susana Moraleda)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:13:22 +0100
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <20130210182401.hp86i421wws8cggg@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.191322.0100.SUSANA@LOSRANCHEROS.ORG>

S?. Todo est? muy bien, pero...
Should one "complain" about people writing/pronouncing PIA and CHIA and 
telling them that in reality, in good classical Nahuatl, these words are 
PIYA and CHIYA? - What are we supposed to use as a valid argument? How 
are we so certain that they are so? -- I tend to make reference to the 
way in which their preterites are formed, i.e. OPIX and OCHIX versus 
OPIH and OCHIH -- In other words, how do we know (or how can we 
demonstrate) that these words in reality bear a Y??

No s? si me explico.
Susana

P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other 
dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving 
from the Spanish language!




On 11/02/2013 00:24, Campbell, R. Joe wrote:
> Fran, Michael, and Everyone,
>
> notes on ia vs. iya
>
>
>   First of all, in Nahuatl both /y/ and /w/ tend to be deleted
> intervocalically when preceded by /i/ and /o/, respectively. In the
> case of /y/, this involves the deletion of one of two adjacent very
> similar segments.  In fact, [y] and [i] differ articulatorily only
> by syllabicity -- [i] is syllabic and /y/ is non-syllabic.  The same
> phenomenon occurs in the Spanish of Northern Mexico: "chair" is
> [si-ya] in most other dialects, but in Northern Mexico, it is
> commonly pronounced as [si-a].
>   In spite of the fact that Nahuatl might be said to lack the
> phoneme /u/ because it doesn't have a five vowel system, the /o/
> phoneme occupies the back, non-low space, and *behaves* in a way
> parallel to the /i/ phoneme -- that is, /w/ engages in the same
> tendency to delete when following /o/ (e.g., cempoalli (twenty)).
> One who doubts that "cempoalli" has an underlying /w/ should refer
> to the preterit form "onicpouh" [onikpow], 'I counted it'.
>
>   So, the rule that one is forced to adopt is that you can't
> believe your ears -- in the case of [ia] and [oa], the determination
> of the presence of /y/ and /w/ depends on morphological analysis.
>
>   As Fran pointed out, stems that *seem* to be "chia" and "pia" are
> really "chiya" and "piya" when the preterits "oquichix" and
> "oquipix" are considered.
>
> -------------------------------
>
>   The imperfect verb ending is -ya.  In the case of verbs whose
> stems end in -a, the [y] of -ya is preserved:
>
>   oquimacaya           he was giving it to him
>   ocacalacaya          it was rattling
>   oquinamacaya         he was selling it
>   oquiquinacaya        he was groaning
>   oquipacayah          they were washing it
>   ocaanayah            they each took hold of it
>
>   Likewise, the verbs in "-o":
>
>   otemoyah             they were descending
>   oquizoya             she was stringing it up
>
>   Passive verbs in -{lo} behave in the same way:
>
>   ocacoya              it was heard
>   omacoya              it was given
>   ohuicoya             it was brought
>
>
>   On the other hand, the [y] of the imperfect -ya is frequently
> deleted after verbs whose stems end in -i:
>
>   oquimacia            he was fearing him
>   onictecia            I was grinding it
>   oquimihcaliah        they were fighting against them
>
>   The "verber" suffix -ya which derives "becoming" verbs from nouns
> (which is what all "verber" suffixes do |8-) ) loses its /y/ after
> /i/:
>
>   timazatia            you become like a deer
>   titochtia            you become like a rabbit
>   nahtlehtia           I turn into nothing
>   atia                 it melts, it turns into water
>   cetiah               they become one, they unite
>   itztia               it becomes cold, it chills
>
>
>   But the presence of /y/ is revealed in preterits such as the following:
> (as Fran indicated)
>
>   oatix                it melted
>   oitztix              it became cold
>
>
>   Further, the fact that words like "tochtia" and "mazatia" do not
> really end in their apparent "-ia" endings is seen in their preterit
> forms.  Real "-ia" endings form their preterits by dropping their
> final "-a" and adding "-h", e.g., niteyollalia --> oniteyollalih.
> But note the following forms:
>
>   otimazatiac          you became like a deer
>   otitochtiac          you became like a rabbit
>
>   Their behavior is due to the fact that they don't really end in
> "-ia", but in "-iya", as has already been seen in the behavior of
> "atia" and "itztia".
>
>   (I hadn't really understood the meaning of Michael's note before
> I wrote this.)
>
> Joe
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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  Mon Feb 11 18:48:11 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:48:11 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <511934C2.3080301@losrancheros.org>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.134811.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting Susana Moraleda <susana at losrancheros.org>:

> S?. Todo est? muy bien, pero...
> Should one "complain" about people writing/pronouncing PIA and CHIA
> and telling them that in reality, in good classical Nahuatl, these
> words are PIYA and CHIYA? - What are we supposed to use as a valid
> argument? How are we so certain that they are so? --


I tend to make
> reference to the way in which their preterites are formed, i.e. OPIX
> and OCHIX versus OPIH and OCHIH --

That is an excellent rule of thumb.

>
> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
> from the Spanish language!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Espa%C3%B1ol_Mexicano.PNG




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


From campbel at indiana.edu  Mon Feb 11 20:08:08 2013
From: campbel at indiana.edu (Campbell, R. Joe)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:08:08 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.150808.0500.CAMPBEL@INDIANA.EDU>

Susana,

   All languages have dialects.  "Dialect" (or "dialect") refers to the 
variant of a language shared by one group of people as opposed to 
another group.

   In a language where everyone spoke in exactly the same way (or 
nearly so), there would be no dialects.  There have been many books and 
articles devoted to the study of the Spanish dialects, discussing, 
among other things, whether the final /n/ is velarized, the "palatal l" 
(i.e., orthographic 'll') is pronounced as a [y] or 'zh', 
syllable-final /s/ is aspirated, the aspiration of syllable-final /s/ 
before a voiced consonant like /b d g/ results in devoicing of the 
consonant cluster (e.g., "los gatos" --> [lojjatoh]), 'rr' is 
pronounced as a fricative rather than a vibrant, etc.).  These are 
geographical DIALECTS.

   There are also variants referred to as "social dialects" -- e.g., 
the variation of /rr/ in Mexico City between men and women according to 
age.

   But the undeniable fact is that speakers of a language tend to have 
variation in groups and we call those groups "dialects".  Universities 
devote class time to courses called "Spanish Dialectology".  I have 
taught graduate courses in Spanish Dialectology. Spanish speakers from 
Mexico City easily recognize Mexicans from the Gulf Coast by their 
speech -- "Ah! Es Jarocho".

   In Mexico, it is common to refer to indigenous languages as 
"dialectos".  Then, in the minds of people who think that economic 
stratification is directly  correlated with a scale of superiority, 
Spanish is a "lengua" and Nahuatl is a "dialecto".  Therefore, how 
could Spanish ever have a "dialecto"?

   About fifty years ago I was accosted on the beach at Acapulco by a 
woman who proceeded to engage my friend and me in conversation.  When 
she asked what we did, my friend (still a student) told her that I 
worked on languages -- like the local one (Nahuatl).  She replied, "Ah! 
No es una lengua!  Hablan puro dialecto!  I asked her, "En que se 
reconoce la diferencia entre 'lengua' y 'dialecto'?"   "Ah!"  she 
shouted.  "Los dialectos no tienen ni gramatica ni diccionario!!"

I still enjoy remembering those few moments on the beach....

Joe


> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
> from the Spanish language!
>
>
>

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Mon Feb 11 20:14:28 2013
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:14:28 -0500
Subject: When there is a Y and when there isn't
In-Reply-To: <20130211150808.hq5vt5ilz44sok0o@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <MON.11.FEB.2013.151428.0500.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Quoting "Campbell,  R. Joe" <campbel at indiana.edu>:

> Susana,
>
>
>   About fifty years ago I was accosted on the beach at Acapulco by a
> woman who proceeded to engage my friend and me in conversation.  When
> she asked what we did, my friend (still a student) told her that I
> worked on languages -- like the local one (Nahuatl).  She replied,
> "Ah! No es una lengua!  Hablan puro dialecto!  I asked her, "En que
> se reconoce la diferencia entre 'lengua' y 'dialecto'?"   "Ah!"  she
> shouted.  "Los dialectos no tienen ni gramatica ni diccionario!!"
>
> I still enjoy remembering those few moments on the beach....
>

I think I might've mentioned this story before, Joe, but I was talking 
with an old cowboy in front of a laundromat in New Mexico when he 
pointed to a group of Navajo men across the road at a taco bar. He 
said, "See them Indians. They don't have a language." I told him that 
actually I was studying that language and it was in fact a real 
language, and one with an extraordinarily complex verb system. I don't 
know if he believed me or not.

Michael

> Joe
>
>
>> P.S. Joe, when you talk about "silla" you mention "in most other
>> dialects".... but as far as I know, there are no "dialects" deriving
>> from the Spanish language!
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 12 14:13:44 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:13:44 -0500
Subject: Yale Nahuatl Conference
Message-ID: <TUE.12.FEB.2013.091344.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

Thanks to an overwhelming response from scholars, we have reached our limit on 
the number of papers which we can accept for presentation at the Northeastern 
Group of Nahuatl Scholars meeting at Yale this May.

Nonetheless, those who have documents which they would like to share with the 
group, so that we all can work on specific translation problems, are encouraged 
to submit their proposals.


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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


From idiez at me.com  Thu Feb 14 02:58:54 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:58:54 -0600
Subject: Standardization
Message-ID: <WED.13.FEB.2013.205854.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Piyali notequixpoyohuan,
	The University of Warsaw, under the revitalization project now undertaken by Justyna Olko's team in Warsaw and IDIEZ, will begin a new editorial series of monolingual publications in Nahuatl. We will publish original works in all genres from all variants of Modern Nahuatl. And all of these works will be written in the standardized orthography, based on Horacio Carochi's work, and perfected by Richard Andrews, Joe Campbell and Frances Karttunen. The first work will be a book of children's literature written by Refugio Nava, from Tlaxcala. We have already standardized its orthography, not so difficult, considering the source. Modern Huastecan Nahuatl is also already standardized. So, as we proceed with works from each variant, we will also be proceeding toward a rigorous standardized orthography of Nahuatl that can be used by native speakers of all variants to communicate with each other, as well as be able to read what their ancestors wrote (this implying that we will have to standardize the orthography of Older Nahuatl texts; more fun!)
	Obviously, an educated reader and writer of Nahuatl will have to be versed in the specificities of each variant, but I have a feeling that everyone will find this fascinating, as do we.
	From a happy group of people in Warsaw and Zacatecas,
John

John Sullivan, Ph.D.
Research Scholar in Nahuatl Studies and
Academic Director of the Yale-IDIEZ Nahuatl Language Institute,
Yale University;
Visiting scholar, Faculty of Artes Liberales
University of Warsaw;
Professor of Nahua language and culture
Universidad Aut?noma de Zacatecas;
Director, Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
Tacuba 152, int. 43
Centro Hist?rico
Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
Mexico
Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
Mobile (Mexico): +52 1 (492) 103-0195
Mobile (US): (615) 649-2790
idiez at me.com
www.macehualli.org

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


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 19 18:30:46 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:30:46 -0500
Subject: Northeastern Nahuatl Meeting
Message-ID: <TUE.19.FEB.2013.133046.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

Colleagues,

I am pleased to announce that a tentative schedule of papers is now posted online:

http://www2.potsdam.edu/schwaljf/Nahuatl/Yale2013sched.htm

The papers will be 20 minutes long with 10 minutes for questions and comments.

We are still hoping to collect additional documents in Nahuatl for group study.


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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


From idiez at me.com  Mon Feb 25 12:59:25 2013
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:59:25 -0600
Subject: SIL question
Message-ID: <MON.25.FEB.2013.065925.0600.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Listeros,
	Can anyone tell the name of the book, published a few years ago, that is a critical history of the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Mexico?
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Mon Feb 25 18:54:19 2013
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (Magnus Pharao Hansen)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:54:19 -0500
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 290, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2.1361815202.30661.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <MON.25.FEB.2013.135419.0500.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

The best one is by Todd Hartch.
Todd Hartch. 2006. Missionaries of the State: The Summer Institute of
Linguistics, State Formation, and Indigenous Mexico, 1935-1985. Tuscaloosa:
University of Alabama Press, 2006.

Others are:

   - Hvalkof, S?ren, and Peter Aaby (eds.): *Is God an American? An
   Anthropological Perspective on the Missionary Work of the Summer Institute
   of Linguistics* (A Survival International Document, International
   Workgroup for Indigenous Affairs, Copenhagen/London 1981), ISBN
   87-980717-2-6<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/8798071726>
   .
   - Stoll, David. 1983 *Fishers of Men or Founders of Empire? The Wycliffe
   Bible Translators in Latin America. A US Evangelical Mission in the Third
   World* (London, Zed Press 1983)
   -



On 25 February 2013 13:00, <nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org> wrote:

> 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. SIL question (John Sullivan)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: nahuatl discussion list <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:59:25 -0600
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] SIL question
> Listeros,
>         Can anyone tell the name of the book, published a few years ago,
> that is a critical history of the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Mexico?
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Magnus Pharao Hansen
PhD. student
Department of Anthropology

Brown University
128 Hope St.
Providence, RI 02906

*magnus_pharao_hansen at brown.edu*
US: 001 401 651 8413
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From schwallr at potsdam.edu  Tue Feb 26 13:37:02 2013
From: schwallr at potsdam.edu (John F. Schwaller)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:37:02 -0500
Subject: Results of skull analysis
Message-ID: <TUE.26.FEB.2013.083702.0500.SCHWALLR@POTSDAM.EDU>

In Today's Art Daily there is a report on analysis of skulls found in the Templo 
Mayor associated with a sacrificial stone:

http://artdaily.com/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=60989#.USy6EqWG18E


-- 
John F. Schwaller
President
SUNY Potsdam
44 Pierrepont Ave.
Potsdam, NY  13676

schwallr at potsdam.edu

tel: 315-267-2100
fax 315-267-2496

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