Obviative/Proximate and the Omaha verb system

[rlarson at unlnotes01.unl.edu]

Bob:

> Biloxi is quite different in that the positionals are a retention in the
> verb system there, as they are in Dakotan and other Siouan subgroups
outside
> of Dhegiha.  Positionals form something like continuatives in all Siouan
> languages and indeed in many other language families as well including
> Indo-European. (Spanish/Italian estar/stare, the progressive AUXs, are <
PIE
> *stan, after all.) In Dhegiha languages, however, these verbs undergo
> several stages of grammaticalization. The post verbal positionals are all
> derived from the article forms of the old verb roots.  The articles
always
> combine with -he 'be in a place' (which is conjugated only in the second
> person): dhiNk-he 'sitting', k-he 'lying', thaN-he 'standing anim.',
dhiN-he
> 'moving'. So the articles underly all these auxiliaries. Once a verb is
> grammaticalized into something like an article (or classifier if you
want),
> it is not supposed to return to full lexical status, but we weren't there
to
> warn the speakers that they were violating a universal.

This is interesting.  It explains why the positionals are so frequently
aspirated.  It looks like the -he is not preserved after a (nasal) vowel
in Omaha.

Are the terms you cite above Kaw, or proto-Dhegiha?

What about other positionals that don't end in -he?

Could we get a complete chart of these in Dhegiha?  I'll start it with
what I've got from OP.

Omaha/Ponca     Quapaw     Osage        Kaw           *Dhegiha
Others?

dhiN

thaN

dhiNkhe'

khe

the

dhaN

ge

ma

dhaNkha'

akha'

ama'


Rory