pedagogical enquiry

[Bruce Ingham]

Dear all
Following my previous note, one problem with the way I statede it is that
 you have to think of another
Person designation for the uN(k)- pronoun, which I was calling  1' ie
1st person prime, but it didn't come out very well on the scheme,
because the ' went on the wrong side of the .  So here is a clearer
version.  Maybe also one could put the new first person 1'  following
the old first person 1. as below:

Sing/exclusive			Plural/Inclusive

1. wa-/ ma-	

1'. uN(k)-			uN(k)-  -pi		

2. ya-/ -ni			ya-/ni-  -pi

3. _				-pi



Bruce


Date sent:      	Tue, 3 Oct 2000 01:28:26 +0400
Send reply to:  	"Wablenica" <mosind at yahoo.com>
From:           	"Wablenica" <mosind at yahoo.com>
To:             	<siouan at lists.Colorado.EDU>
Subject:        	Re: Pedagogical Query

Dear John:

> I do admit that first/inclusive <=> second combinations are a
>significant addition and need to be introduced carefully.

I wonder is there a more adequate term for "we inclusive"/"dual" form of the
Siouan verb?
It seem to me that uN-thi'  "I & thou dwell" is not real dual because there
are NO (and never were) 2d p. dual and 3d. p. dual forms.
Strictly speaking, the form uN-thi' covers only a subset of the meanings of
"we inclusive" because uN-thi' pi means both "we exclusive" and "we
inclusive plural" - "I & thou & he" / "I & y'all"

Perhaps the term that I saw in Algonquinist linguistics is proper - "12p" ?
If so, the paradigm of a stative verb is compactly and symmetrically
described by a table with 4 rows and 2 columns:

1p sing.           } 1p plur
12p                  }
2p sing.            2p pl.
3p sing.            3p pl.

(Yet I know that David is against this layout)
Best wishes, Constantine.

Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS
Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS
Dr. Bruce Ingham
Reader in Arabic Linguistic Studies
SOAS