Fw: Error Condition Re: Re: transitivity, etc,

[ROOD DAVID S]

It's 6 am and I'm home without my books, but Shannon, you should know that
there has been some change in Lakhota in the last 60 years w/r/t these
forms (be proud of, etc.). When Boas and Deloria discuss them, they say
that only the sequence ni-ma is used (check out the facts about order --
the only thing I'm sure of is that they assert that only one combination
works).  However, some recent elicitation work has turned up ni-ma for
'you me' and ma-ni for 'I-you' for today's speakers (70-80 year olds).
Again, I need to check my notes to verify that the glosses are right --
all I remember now is that the order of affixes contrasted.  That may be
interference from English, but it may be a clue that the concept of
"subject" is lurking there somewhere.

David


David S. Rood
Dept. of Linguistics
Univ. of Colorado
295 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0295
USA
rood at colorado.edu

On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Shannon West wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> > [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of R. Rankin
> > Sent: September 29, 2002 4:16 PM
> > To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> > Subject: Re: Fw: Error Condition Re: Re: transitivity, etc,
> >
> >
> > I think all the MVS languages have this pattern with at
> > least a few of those "experiencer" verbs.  They're not
> > just Dakotan, and you can get two stative pronominals.
> > Membership in the class varies, just as stative-status
> > does across Siouan.
> >
> > If you believe that "subject" is part of "UG", then you
> > have verbs with stative subjects acting transitively on
> > objects -- both marked w/ pronominals from the
> > "stative" set.
>
> I'm wondering about this too. Given that I do have to work with a 'subject',
> a work-around is going to be in order. Is there any chance that the either
> the subject or object of these verbs is different in some way? A dative
> perhaps? (I'm grasping at straws). Also, is there some ordering difference
> with these? I have a set that is completely incomprehensible to me.
>
> Linda? Do you have a set of these in Nakota? Any idea at all how they work,
> because they seem to be out to lunch and completely different from many of
> the Lakhota ones.
>
> Shannon
> (I am *so* hoping to deal with this as a 'I don't know how this works, it
> requires further study'. <grin>)
>