Another (?) Omaha particle.

[R. Rankin]

> I'd have to check this particular text, but one or two of the texts simply
> substitute aN or gaN for egaN in the sense of the 'preceding action
> subordinate'.  I don't know if these things are idiosyncratic, influence
> of another language, or a dialect.  Of course egaN is just e=g(i)-aN, or,
> maybe better e-g(i)=aN, given where the inflection falls.

If I'm right, that would make the -gi- part cognate with Dakotan (and Tutelo)
ki(N) 'def. article'.  Does that make sense?  The particle is certainly -gi-
since the conjugation is egimaN, egiz^aN, egaN, isn't it?

And thanks to Sara for another interesting tid bit from Deloria.  When there's
time, it would be good to have a page reference for her treatment of ki+?uN as
separate particles with the semantics of k?uN.  But there's no hurry.

Bob

--
Robert L. Rankin, Visiting Professor
Research Center for Linguistic Typology
Institute for Advanced Study
La Trobe University
Bundoora, VIC 3083 Australia
Office: (+61 03) 9467-8087
Home:   (+61 03) 9499-2393
Admin:  (+61 03) 9467-3128
Fax:    (+61 03) 9467-3053