From jfschwaller at gmail.com  Mon Mar 10 21:06:12 2014
From: jfschwaller at gmail.com (John Schwaller)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:06:12 -0400
Subject: Conference at Yale - May 2014
Message-ID: <MON.10.MAR.2014.170612.0400.JFSCHWALLER@GMAIL.COM>

The deadline for proposals for the Northeastern Group of Nahuatl Scholars
is drawing near.  The program will be very interesting with papers both on
pre-conquest and colonial Nahuatl, as well as studies on modern dialects
and culture.

There is room on the schedule for one or two more papers and two or three
more documents.

Please contact me, or one of the other organizers if you wish to offer a
paper or document.  As noted earlier, we are working to publish selected
works from the symposium.

A block of rooms has been set aside for participants, so please contact the
organizers about the availability of these.

The organizers include:

Caterina Pizzigoni (cp2313 at columbia.edu)

John Sullivan (idiez at me.com)

Louise Burkhart (burk at albany.edu)

John F. Schwaller (jschwaller at albany.edu)


-- 
John F. Schwaller
Professor,
University at Albany
1400 Washington Ave.
Albany NY 12222

jfschwaller at gmail.com
518-608-4522
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From idiez at me.com  Tue Mar 18 21:05:57 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.220557.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti- functions as a subject in:
	a) titlacah, We are people 
	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
But what about in:
	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
Iʻm using these examples because the “subject prefix” is explicit. But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
	e) niquitta in chichi, Iʻm looking at the dog. (which I would literally translate as “I´m looking at it, the dog"
In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø- at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a “subject prefix” can serve:
1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
	So the question is, Is there a better term that “subject” to refer to the “subject prefixes”? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating things?
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From idiez at me.com  Tue Mar 18 22:24:36 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.232436.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think Andrews calls them “personal pronouns”.
John

On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:

> John,
> 
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> "chichi".
> 
> From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> subject prefixes.
> 
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> languages.
> 
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
>> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
>> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
>> functions as a subject in:
>> 	a) titlacah, We are people
>> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
>> But what about in:
>> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
>> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
>> literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
>> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
>> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
>> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
>> ?subject prefix? can serve:
>> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
>> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
>> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
>> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
>> person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
>> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
>> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
>> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
>> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
>> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
>> complicating things?
>> 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 mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Mar 18 21:38:27 2014
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <3FD47E0C-6E15-4962-90B5-4C3172F0880C@me.com>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.173827.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

John,

I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
"nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
Indo-European languages are about.

For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", 
and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause 
nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before 
"chichi".

 From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed 
subject prefixes.

I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as 
indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European 
languages.

I hope I have somewhat understood your question.

Best,

Michael



Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:

> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> functions as a subject in:
> 	a) titlacah, We are people
> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> complicating things?
> 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 idiez at me.com  Wed Mar 19 07:43:40 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
Subject: ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.084340.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Mis estimados,
	Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think). Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs pretty much do the same thing. For example:
a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb
b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb.
	So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents. 
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From joostkremers at fastmail.fm  Wed Mar 19 03:01:04 2014
From: joostkremers at fastmail.fm (Joost Kremers)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.040104.0100.JOOSTKREMERS@FASTMAIL.FM>

Hi list,

On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> Indo-European languages are about.

It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog". 

>From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
than appearances suggest...

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Mar 19 03:28:38 2014
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <878us6rixb.fsf@fastmail.fm>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.232838.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Absolutely! No doubt about it.

Been there, done that.




Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:

> Hi list,
>
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
>> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
>> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
>> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
>> Indo-European languages are about.
>
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>
> From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
>
> --
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
>
>



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


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Mar 19 17:33:34 2014
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (Magnus Pharao Hansen)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:33:34 -0600
Subject: subject prefix
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.113334.0600.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Understanding this aspect of Nahuatl morphosyntax, really requires a deeper
analysis of Nahuatl syntax like the ones carried out by Andrews and Launey.
The fact that ti is a subject prefix and yet is used in cases like
"Xitechpalehui
in timomacehualhuan" is the characterizing feature of classic Nahuatl
syntax. Syntacticians like Andres and Launey both end up saying that this
means that the actual structure of the Nahuatl sentence is not "Help us,
your vassals" but rather "help us we who are your vassals". In the same way
the actual structure of the Nahuatl sentence "xiquitta in chichi" is not
"look at the dog" but "look at it, (it is a) dog". I dont know of anyone
who have proposed a better analysis of the Nahuat syntax structure, even
though it does challenge us to look beyond the English translation when we
try to understand the grammatical structure of Nahuatl.

There are tonnes of relational words with first and second person
inflection. But the two words that you use as examples are not relational
words but adverbs. Adverbs do not agree with anything because they are not
arguments of the verb.

Again this is stuff that you can read in depth analyses of in all of the
main Nahuatl grammars from Carochi to Andrews, Launey and Lockhart.

Best,
Magnus



On 19 March 2014 11:00, <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. subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    3. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>    4. ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli (John Sullivan)
>    5. Re: subject prefix (Joost Kremers)
>    6. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> functions as a subject in:
>         a) titlacah, We are people
>         b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
>         c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>         d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> Iʻm using these examples because the “subject prefix” is explicit. But the
> question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>         e) niquitta in chichi, Iʻm looking at the dog. (which I would
> literally translate as “I´m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø- at
> the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know
> exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a “subject
> prefix” can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to
> that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in
> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in
> timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that
> very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction
> with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because
> of us, your vassals
>         So the question is, Is there a better term that “subject” to refer
> to the “subject prefixes”? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating
> things?
> John
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: Mccafferty Michael <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think
> Andrews calls them “personal pronouns”.
> John
>
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > John,
> >
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> >
> > For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> > and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> > nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> > "chichi".
> >
> > From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> > subject prefixes.
> >
> > I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> > indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> > languages.
> >
> > I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> >
> >> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> >> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> >> functions as a subject in:
> >>      a) titlacah, We are people
> >>      b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> But what about in:
> >>      c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >>      d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> >> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> >>      e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> >> literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
> >> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
> >> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> >> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> >> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> >> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> >> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> >> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> >> person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
> >> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> >> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> >> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> >> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >>      So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> >> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> >> complicating things?
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nahuatl mailing list
> >> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> >> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> John,
>
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" structure
> of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of "nuclear clauses,"
> as Andrews calls them, which is not what Indo-European languages are about.
>
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", and
> that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause nature of
> Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before "chichi".
>
> From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> subject prefixes.
>
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as indeed
> subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European languages.
>
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
>
>  We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
>> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
>> functions as a subject in:
>>         a) titlacah, We are people
>>         b) tinehnemih, We are walking
>> But what about in:
>>         c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>>         d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
>> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>>         e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
>> literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
>> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
>> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
>> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
>> ?subject prefix? can serve:
>> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
>> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
>> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
>> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
>> person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
>> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
>> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
>> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
>> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>>         So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
>> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
>> complicating things?
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
> Mis estimados,
>         Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject
> prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject
> prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think).
> Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs
> pretty much do the same thing. For example:
> a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example
> from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in
> person/number with the subject of the verb
> b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have
> received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan
> Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in
> person/number with the subject of the verb.
>         So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of
> relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team
> here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents.
> John
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> To: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Hi list,
>
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
>
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>
> >From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
>
> --
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Absolutely! No doubt about it.
>
> Been there, done that.
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:
>
>  Hi list,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
>>> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
>>> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
>>> Indo-European languages are about.
>>>
>>
>> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
>> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
>> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
>> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
>> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>>
>> From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
>> than appearances suggest...
>>
>> --
>> Joost Kremers
>> Life has its moments
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Magnus Pharao Hansen
PhD. candidate
Department of Anthropology

Brown University
128 Hope St.
Providence, RI 02906

*magnus_pharao_hansen at brown.edu <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 tekuani at hotmail.es  Sat Mar 22 00:57:09 2014
From: tekuani at hotmail.es (Jacinto Acatecatl)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 18:57:09 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1395248402.26001.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <FRI.21.MAR.2014.185709.0600.TEKUANI@HOTMAIL.ES>

 hi 

 
  
  Frase 
  
  
  Traducción 
  
 
 
  
  Xitechpalehui
  en timomacehualhuan
  
  
  Ayúdanos a
  nosotros los indígenas
  
 
 
  
  topampa en
  timomacehualhuan
  
  
  Para los
  indígenas
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
  Si lo que se
  quiere decir ayuda para los indígenas, en el náhuatl moderno podría
  utilizarse “palehuilistle pampa to masehualtin”
   
  Si lo que se
  pretende decir yo veo al perro: podríamos decir “ neh niktah chichi/itzcuintli.
  Pero cuando
  se quiere decir estoy viendo un perro sonaría como lo siguiente:
  Niktlatok se
  chichi/itzcuitli o bien, neh niktlatok se chichi/itzcuitli
   
  Ojala pueda
  ser de ayuda, buen fin de semana.
   
  Jacinto
  Acatecatl Namictle
  Jaslit8 at yahoo.com.mx
   
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 



 
> From: nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:00:02 -0500
> 
> Send Nahuatl mailing list submissions to
> 	nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nahuatl-owner at lists.famsi.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Nahuatl digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    3. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>    4. ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli (John Sullivan)
>    5. Re: subject prefix (Joost Kremers)
>    6. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <3FD47E0C-6E15-4962-90B5-4C3172F0880C at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti- functions as a subject in:
> 	a) titlacah, We are people 
> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit. But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø- at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a ?subject prefix? can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating things?
> John
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: Mccafferty Michael <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <10AB199B-8042-4025-A2E9-1A5B0DDDA356 at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> 
> Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think Andrews calls them ?personal pronouns?.
> John
> 
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> 
> > John,
> > 
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> > 
> > For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> > and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> > nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> > "chichi".
> > 
> > From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> > subject prefixes.
> > 
> > I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> > indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> > languages.
> > 
> > I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Michael
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> > 
> >> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> >> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> >> functions as a subject in:
> >> 	a) titlacah, We are people
> >> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> But what about in:
> >> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> >> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> >> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> >> literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
> >> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
> >> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> >> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> >> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> >> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> >> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> >> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> >> person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
> >> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> >> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> >> conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> >> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> >> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> >> complicating things?
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nahuatl mailing list
> >> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> >> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s at webmail.iu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"
> 
> John,
> 
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", 
> and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause 
> nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before 
> "chichi".
> 
>  From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed 
> subject prefixes.
> 
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as 
> indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European 
> languages.
> 
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
> > We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> > nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> > functions as a subject in:
> > 	a) titlacah, We are people
> > 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> > But what about in:
> > 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> > 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> > I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> > But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> > 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> > literally translate as ?I´m looking at it, the dog"
> > In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful Ø-
> > at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> > know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> > ?subject prefix? can serve:
> > 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> > 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> > 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> > prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> > person/number (in conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e.,
> > Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> > 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> > that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> > conjunction with the noun´s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> > timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> > 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> > to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> > complicating things?
> > John
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nahuatl mailing list
> > Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
> Message-ID: <5555FE85-BCE1-4139-B934-4EC121CC3251 at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
> 
> Mis estimados,
> 	Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think). Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs pretty much do the same thing. For example:
> a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb
> b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb.
> 	So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents. 
> John
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
> From: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> To: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <878us6rixb.fsf at fastmail.fm>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> 
> Hi list,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog". 
> 
> >From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
> 
> -- 
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <20140318232838.fomeyby1c8w8scc4 at webmail.iu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"
> 
> Absolutely! No doubt about it.
> 
> Been there, done that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:
> 
> > Hi list,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> >> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> >> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> >> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> >> Indo-European languages are about.
> >
> > It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> > among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> > is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> > words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> > is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
> >
> > From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> > than appearances suggest...
> >
> > --
> > Joost Kremers
> > Life has its moments
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
> ***************************************
 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From jfschwaller at gmail.com  Mon Mar 10 21:06:12 2014
From: jfschwaller at gmail.com (John Schwaller)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:06:12 -0400
Subject: Conference at Yale - May 2014
Message-ID: <MON.10.MAR.2014.170612.0400.JFSCHWALLER@GMAIL.COM>

The deadline for proposals for the Northeastern Group of Nahuatl Scholars
is drawing near.  The program will be very interesting with papers both on
pre-conquest and colonial Nahuatl, as well as studies on modern dialects
and culture.

There is room on the schedule for one or two more papers and two or three
more documents.

Please contact me, or one of the other organizers if you wish to offer a
paper or document.  As noted earlier, we are working to publish selected
works from the symposium.

A block of rooms has been set aside for participants, so please contact the
organizers about the availability of these.

The organizers include:

Caterina Pizzigoni (cp2313 at columbia.edu)

John Sullivan (idiez at me.com)

Louise Burkhart (burk at albany.edu)

John F. Schwaller (jschwaller at albany.edu)


-- 
John F. Schwaller
Professor,
University at Albany
1400 Washington Ave.
Albany NY 12222

jfschwaller at gmail.com
518-608-4522
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From idiez at me.com  Tue Mar 18 21:05:57 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.220557.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti- functions as a subject in:
	a) titlacah, We are people 
	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
But what about in:
	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit. But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?- at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a ?subject prefix? can serve:
1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating things?
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl

From idiez at me.com  Tue Mar 18 22:24:36 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.232436.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think Andrews calls them ?personal pronouns?.
John

On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:

> John,
> 
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> "chichi".
> 
> From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> subject prefixes.
> 
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> languages.
> 
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
>> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
>> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
>> functions as a subject in:
>> 	a) titlacah, We are people
>> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
>> But what about in:
>> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
>> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
>> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
>> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
>> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
>> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
>> ?subject prefix? can serve:
>> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
>> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
>> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
>> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
>> person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
>> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
>> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
>> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
>> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
>> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
>> complicating things?
>> 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 mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Tue Mar 18 21:38:27 2014
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <3FD47E0C-6E15-4962-90B5-4C3172F0880C@me.com>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.173827.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

John,

I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
"nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
Indo-European languages are about.

For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", 
and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause 
nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before 
"chichi".

 From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed 
subject prefixes.

I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as 
indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European 
languages.

I hope I have somewhat understood your question.

Best,

Michael



Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:

> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> functions as a subject in:
> 	a) titlacah, We are people
> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> complicating things?
> 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 idiez at me.com  Wed Mar 19 07:43:40 2014
From: idiez at me.com (John Sullivan)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
Subject: ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.084340.0100.IDIEZ@ME.COM>

Mis estimados,
	Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think). Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs pretty much do the same thing. For example:
a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb
b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb.
	So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents. 
John
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl


From joostkremers at fastmail.fm  Wed Mar 19 03:01:04 2014
From: joostkremers at fastmail.fm (Joost Kremers)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s@webmail.iu.edu>
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.040104.0100.JOOSTKREMERS@FASTMAIL.FM>

Hi list,

On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> Indo-European languages are about.

It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog". 

>From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
than appearances suggest...

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

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


From mmccaffe at indiana.edu  Wed Mar 19 03:28:38 2014
From: mmccaffe at indiana.edu (Michael McCafferty)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
Subject: subject prefix
In-Reply-To: <878us6rixb.fsf@fastmail.fm>
Message-ID: <TUE.18.MAR.2014.232838.0400.MMCCAFFE@INDIANA.EDU>

Absolutely! No doubt about it.

Been there, done that.




Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:

> Hi list,
>
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
>> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
>> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
>> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
>> Indo-European languages are about.
>
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>
> From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
>
> --
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
>
>



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


From magnuspharao at gmail.com  Wed Mar 19 17:33:34 2014
From: magnuspharao at gmail.com (Magnus Pharao Hansen)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:33:34 -0600
Subject: subject prefix
Message-ID: <WED.19.MAR.2014.113334.0600.MAGNUSPHARAO@GMAIL.COM>

Understanding this aspect of Nahuatl morphosyntax, really requires a deeper
analysis of Nahuatl syntax like the ones carried out by Andrews and Launey.
The fact that ti is a subject prefix and yet is used in cases like
"Xitechpalehui
in timomacehualhuan" is the characterizing feature of classic Nahuatl
syntax. Syntacticians like Andres and Launey both end up saying that this
means that the actual structure of the Nahuatl sentence is not "Help us,
your vassals" but rather "help us we who are your vassals". In the same way
the actual structure of the Nahuatl sentence "xiquitta in chichi" is not
"look at the dog" but "look at it, (it is a) dog". I dont know of anyone
who have proposed a better analysis of the Nahuat syntax structure, even
though it does challenge us to look beyond the English translation when we
try to understand the grammatical structure of Nahuatl.

There are tonnes of relational words with first and second person
inflection. But the two words that you use as examples are not relational
words but adverbs. Adverbs do not agree with anything because they are not
arguments of the verb.

Again this is stuff that you can read in depth analyses of in all of the
main Nahuatl grammars from Carochi to Andrews, Launey and Lockhart.

Best,
Magnus



On 19 March 2014 11:00, <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. subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    3. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>    4. ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli (John Sullivan)
>    5. Re: subject prefix (Joost Kremers)
>    6. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> functions as a subject in:
>         a) titlacah, We are people
>         b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
>         c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>         d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit. But the
> question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>         e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?- at
> the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know
> exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a ?subject
> prefix? can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to
> that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in
> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in
> timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that
> very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction
> with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because
> of us, your vassals
>         So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating
> things?
> John
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: Mccafferty Michael <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think
> Andrews calls them ?personal pronouns?.
> John
>
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > John,
> >
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> >
> > For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> > and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> > nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> > "chichi".
> >
> > From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> > subject prefixes.
> >
> > I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> > indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> > languages.
> >
> > I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> >
> >> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> >> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> >> functions as a subject in:
> >>      a) titlacah, We are people
> >>      b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> But what about in:
> >>      c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >>      d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> >> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> >>      e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> >> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> >> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
> >> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> >> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> >> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> >> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> >> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> >> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> >> person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
> >> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> >> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> >> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> >> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >>      So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> >> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> >> complicating things?
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nahuatl mailing list
> >> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> >> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> John,
>
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" structure
> of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of "nuclear clauses,"
> as Andrews calls them, which is not what Indo-European languages are about.
>
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", and
> that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause nature of
> Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before "chichi".
>
> From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> subject prefixes.
>
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as indeed
> subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European languages.
>
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
>
>  We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
>> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
>> functions as a subject in:
>>         a) titlacah, We are people
>>         b) tinehnemih, We are walking
>> But what about in:
>>         c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>>         d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
>> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
>>         e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
>> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
>> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
>> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
>> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
>> ?subject prefix? can serve:
>> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
>> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
>> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
>> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
>> person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
>> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
>> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
>> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
>> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
>> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
>>         So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
>> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
>> complicating things?
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
> Mis estimados,
>         Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject
> prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject
> prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think).
> Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs
> pretty much do the same thing. For example:
> a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example
> from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in
> person/number with the subject of the verb
> b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have
> received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan
> Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in
> person/number with the subject of the verb.
>         So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of
> relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team
> here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents.
> John
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> To: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Hi list,
>
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
>
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>
> >From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
>
> --
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Absolutely! No doubt about it.
>
> Been there, done that.
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:
>
>  Hi list,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
>>> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
>>> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
>>> Indo-European languages are about.
>>>
>>
>> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
>> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
>> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
>> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
>> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
>>
>> From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
>> than appearances suggest...
>>
>> --
>> Joost Kremers
>> Life has its moments
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>


-- 
Magnus Pharao Hansen
PhD. candidate
Department of Anthropology

Brown University
128 Hope St.
Providence, RI 02906

*magnus_pharao_hansen at brown.edu <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 tekuani at hotmail.es  Sat Mar 22 00:57:09 2014
From: tekuani at hotmail.es (Jacinto Acatecatl)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 18:57:09 -0600
Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1395248402.26001.nahuatl@lists.famsi.org>
Message-ID: <FRI.21.MAR.2014.185709.0600.TEKUANI@HOTMAIL.ES>

 hi 

 
  
  Frase 
  
  
  Traducci?n 
  
 
 
  
  Xitechpalehui
  en timomacehualhuan
  
  
  Ay?danos a
  nosotros los ind?genas
  
 
 
  
  topampa en
  timomacehualhuan
  
  
  Para los
  ind?genas
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
 
  
  Si lo que se
  quiere decir ayuda para los ind?genas, en el n?huatl moderno podr?a
  utilizarse ?palehuilistle pampa to masehualtin?
   
  Si lo que se
  pretende decir yo veo al perro: podr?amos decir ? neh niktah chichi/itzcuintli.
  Pero cuando
  se quiere decir estoy viendo un perro sonar?a como lo siguiente:
  Niktlatok se
  chichi/itzcuitli o bien, neh niktlatok se chichi/itzcuitli
   
  Ojala pueda
  ser de ayuda, buen fin de semana.
   
  Jacinto
  Acatecatl Namictle
  Jaslit8 at yahoo.com.mx
   
  
 
 
  
   
  
  
   
  
 



 
> From: nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
> To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:00:02 -0500
> 
> Send Nahuatl mailing list submissions to
> 	nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nahuatl-request at lists.famsi.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nahuatl-owner at lists.famsi.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Nahuatl digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    2. Re: subject prefix (John Sullivan)
>    3. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
>    4. ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli (John Sullivan)
>    5. Re: subject prefix (Joost Kremers)
>    6. Re: subject prefix (Michael McCafferty)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 22:05:57 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <3FD47E0C-6E15-4962-90B5-4C3172F0880C at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti- functions as a subject in:
> 	a) titlacah, We are people 
> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> But what about in:
> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit. But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?- at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a ?subject prefix? can serve:
> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily complicating things?
> John
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:24:36 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: Mccafferty Michael <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <10AB199B-8042-4025-A2E9-1A5B0DDDA356 at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> 
> Thanks Michael, this is pretty much the way I understand it. I think Andrews calls them ?personal pronouns?.
> John
> 
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 22:38, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> 
> > John,
> > 
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> > 
> > For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog",
> > and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause
> > nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before
> > "chichi".
> > 
> > From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed
> > subject prefixes.
> > 
> > I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as
> > indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European
> > languages.
> > 
> > I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Michael
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> > 
> >> We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> >> nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> >> functions as a subject in:
> >> 	a) titlacah, We are people
> >> 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> But what about in:
> >> 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> >> But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> >> 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> >> literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> >> In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
> >> at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> >> know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> >> ?subject prefix? can serve:
> >> 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> >> 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> >> 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> >> prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> >> person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
> >> Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> >> 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> >> that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> >> conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> >> timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> >> 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> >> to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> >> complicating things?
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nahuatl mailing list
> >> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> >> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:38:27 -0400
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <20140318173827.pvqbjlnh28g00o0s at webmail.iu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"
> 
> John,
> 
> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> For me "niquitta in chichi" is more like "I see him, which is a dog", 
> and that "inner" translation helps me in seeing the nuclear clause 
> nature of Nahuatl. But I agree that there is a zero prefix before 
> "chichi".
> 
>  From this perspective these "yolcameh" you're talking about are indeed 
> subject prefixes.
> 
> I think there might be a challenge is see these subject prefixes as 
> indeed subject prefixes because of the nature of Indo-European 
> languages.
> 
> I hope I have somewhat understood your question.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>:
> 
> > We are having a grammatical discussion here in Warsaw concerning the
> > nature of the Nahuatl subject prefix.  I guess you could say that ti-
> > functions as a subject in:
> > 	a) titlacah, We are people
> > 	b) tinehnemih, We are walking
> > But what about in:
> > 	c) Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> > 	d) topampa in timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> > I?m using these examples because the ?subject prefix? is explicit.
> > But the question actually arose after looking at an example like:
> > 	e) niquitta in chichi, I?m looking at the dog. (which I would
> > literally translate as ?I?m looking at it, the dog"
> > In this case, some people say that there is not even a meaningful ?-
> > at the beginning of chichi. Now I know that there is. But I want to
> > know exactly what it is doing. It seems that what we have called a
> > ?subject prefix? can serve:
> > 1. as the subject of a noun, i.e. titlacah, We are people
> > 2. as the subject of a verb, i.e. tinehnemih, We are walking
> > 3. as something that links the noun referent of a verbal object
> > prefix to that very verbal object prefix via the category of
> > person/number (in conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e.,
> > Xitechpalehui in timomacehualhuan, Help us, your vassals
> > 4. as something that links the noun referent of relational prefix to
> > that very relational prefix via the category of person/number (in
> > conjunction with the noun?s number suffix), i.e., topampa in
> > timomacehualhuan, because of us, your vassals
> > 	So the question is, Is there a better term that ?subject? to refer
> > to the ?subject prefixes?? Or are the Poles just unnecessarily
> > complicating things?
> > John
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nahuatl mailing list
> > Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> > http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:43:40 +0100
> From: John Sullivan <idiez at me.com>
> To: list nahuatl discussion <nahuatl at lists.famsi.org>
> Subject: [Nahuat-l] ceyoc tlamantli tlen tlapacholli
> Message-ID: <5555FE85-BCE1-4139-B934-4EC121CC3251 at me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
> 
> Mis estimados,
> 	Going back through Andrews, it looks like he puts a zero subject prefix on relational words, given that it is a nuclear clause. This subject prefix would point to the verbal nuclear clause as a whole (I think). Actually I have no problem with this. Deverbal nouns that work as adverbs pretty much do the same thing. For example:
> a) ihciuhca titotlaloah, we are running swiftly. In this contrived example from Classical Nahuatl, the agentive noun, ihciuhca, does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb
> b) yolic intlanehnehuiliah, you (pl.) think slowly (a comment a have received frequently over the years). In this example from modern Huastecan Nahuatl, the same thing happens, the agentive noun does not agree in person/number with the subject of the verb.
> 	So now, the question is, has anyone seen any examples of relational words with first or second person subject prefixes? The team here in Poland has found a few in Classical documents. 
> John
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:01:04 +0100
> From: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> To: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <878us6rixb.fsf at fastmail.fm>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> 
> Hi list,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> > I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien" 
> > structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of 
> > "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what 
> > Indo-European languages are about.
> 
> It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog". 
> 
> >From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> than appearances suggest...
> 
> -- 
> Joost Kremers
> Life has its moments
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 23:28:38 -0400
> From: Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>
> To: Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>
> Cc: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> Subject: Re: [Nahuat-l] subject prefix
> Message-ID: <20140318232838.fomeyby1c8w8scc4 at webmail.iu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"
> 
> Absolutely! No doubt about it.
> 
> Been there, done that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Joost Kremers <joostkremers at fastmail.fm>:
> 
> > Hi list,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 18 2014, Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu> wrote:
> >> I understand what you're talking about in terms of the "alien"
> >> structure of Nahuatl, in terms of its being a language composed of
> >> "nuclear clauses," as Andrews calls them, which is not what
> >> Indo-European languages are about.
> >
> > It might be interesting to note, however, that it is a common assumption
> > among semanticists that a noun such as "man" or "dog" or "house", etc.
> > is semantically a predicate, even if it's used as an argument. In other
> > words, the semantic representation of a clause such as "I see the dog"
> > is something along the lines of "I see x and x is a dog".
> >
> > From that perspective, Nahuatl and Indoeuropean languages are more alike
> > than appearances suggest...
> >
> > --
> > Joost Kremers
> > Life has its moments
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
> 
> 
> End of Nahuatl Digest, Vol 327, Issue 1
> ***************************************
 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl