h- vs. x-aspiration in LDN

[Koontz John E]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, RLR wrote:
> No, Kaw just has the [h] aspiration, also Quapaw. Osage stands alone in
> Dhegiha in having [x] aspiration at all.  [x] aspiration appears to be
> recorded for Biloxi and Ofo however (and possibly Tutelo in the Dorsey
> transcriptions). I don't think that Dakotan [x] and [h] aspiration have
> distinct historical sources, ...

Nor I.

> but the set of correspondences that we reconstruct as *ph, *th, *kh in a
> few words ...

In other words the postaspirates or aspirates proper that show up as
aspirates in Dhegiha, instead of tense stops (hC or CC, depending on the
dialect) (and merge with the unaspirated series in IO and Wi).


Example       PMV     Teton    Omaha    IO      Wi

'grizzly'     *maNtho maNtho   maNc^hu  maNtho  maNc^o
          (or *maNtxo ?)
'fold'        *pethaN pehaN    bethaN   -wedaN  weejaN
'arrive here' *thi    hi       thi      ji      jii
'house'       *hti    thi      tti      c^hi    c^ii
'ruminant'    *hta    tha      tta      tha     c^aa

> might have involved C[x] clusters. But this would only be in a
> few words like 'grizzly'.

About the only case of *th (as opposed to *ht) that appears as th in
Dakotan instead of h.

> Most Dakotan th go back to what we reconstruct as *ht.  There are
> fossilized morphophonemic rules in Dakotan that show h-C > Ch.

Bob here refers to his discovery that the -kha and -kka derivational
suffixes in Dakotan and Dhegiha (in OP form), respectively, derive from
old h-final roots plus the -ka suffix.


JEK