Dhegiha Plurals and Proximates

[Rory M Larson]

> So I wonder if we simply have a more rapid delivery
> when we "know what we're talking about", but when we
> voice hypotheses and the like, we simply slow down and
> the phonology doesn't routinely suffer so much
> fast-speech reduction?

That's an interesting idea for the origin of the =i vs.
=bi distinction.  I don't think it works as such to
explain the actual situation in 19th century OP.  The
distinction there is bound up with a difference in
grammatical context as well as semantics.  The four
common ways of forming a statement seem to be:

  {Concept} i [ha|he].
  {Concept} is an ongoing fact.

  {Concept} i tHe.
  {Concept} is what happened.

  {Concept} bi ama'.
  {Concept} occurred according to the story.

  {Concept} bi tHe ama.
  {Concept} had already occurred at this point in the story.

I'm pretty sure I've never seen a sentence ending in
"bi ha", "bi tHe", "i ama'" or "i tHe ama'", though
it should be quite possible for a person to have to
pause to think about a fact they are reporting, or
to know a story well enough that they shouldn't
have to pause to think in recounting it.

A problem with this idea is that the =i or =bi
comes after the concept it is modifying.  Whether
you're having trouble putting your concept into
words or not, you've already done the job by the
time =i or =bi becomes an issue.

One could argue though that at some earlier point in
OP development *=bi was retained in this form in
thoughtful or formal speech involving multiple clauses
or sentences, while being elided to =i in rapid or
colloquial speech.  The difference might then have
been grammaticalized into the form we find in 19th
century OP.  Since =i and =bi work the same way in
both Omaha and Ponka, this grammaticalization event
would have to have occurred at a much earlier time,
in the early 18th century or before.

I'd consider this to be a viable hypothesis for the
origin of =i vs. =bi, in OP or Dhegiha.  It would
have the advantage of immediately explaining why =i
in OP behaves so much like *=pi in other MVS languages.
However, the possibility that =i derives from a
completely different element than *=pi seems equally
viable.  I think this is an open question.

Rory