ordering of person markers

[ROOD DAVID S]

Shannon,
	I don't know how you will get this to be accepted by the
theoreticians, but the real facts about Lakhota person markers are that
they occur in the order in which they were historically added to the verb.
Thus wa/ya are closest to the verb, and exhibit a lot of phonological
reductions.  Next to the left come ma/ni; to the left of that comes uNk,
and to the left of that comes wicha.  Whether uNk is treated as
subject or object depends on what it occurs with, not its sequence in
the string.  It's the affix, not its role, that has an ordering constraint.
With the double statives, the SOV order used for the rest of the language
seems to be adopted.
	I know that isn't going to fit into a tree very well.
	David
David S. Rood
Dept. of Linguistics
Univ. of Colorado
295 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0295
USA
rood at colorado.edu

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Shannon West wrote:

> Super! Thanks so much, David. I'm getting some similar ones to this, but not
> invariably, unfortunately. I've decided that the ordering of person markers
> (whether pronouns or not, it doesn't matter) is 3rd Person - 1st person -
> 2nd person - verb. This seems to work throughout the entire system but fails
> for 'double-patient' verbs. But then, so does OSV (+ the one exception 'we -
> you'). So I've not figured this one out yet. I'll put together my data at
> some point (all of which I plan to recheck before then) and show y'all how
> screwy it is. :)
>
> Shannon
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> > [mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu]On Behalf Of ROOD DAVID S
> > Sent: September 30, 2002 11:06 AM
> > To: Shannon West
> > Cc: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> > Subject: details on new data on double statives
> >
> >
> >
> > The message I sent this morning was pretty close to correct.  I'm
> > reporting material that Regina Pustet elicited in the past few weeks from
> > Neva Standing Bear.
> > 	iya-ma-ni-khapha 'I am bigger/taller than you'
> > 	iya-ni-ma-khapha 'you are bigger/taller than me'
> >
> > The Boas and Deloria discussion begins on p. 77.
> >
> > 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>)
> > >
> >
>