Ho-Chunk Wa

[Henning Garvin]

Greetings everybody.  I recently stumbled onto something interesting and I
wanted to get your thoughts on it.  I saw an earlier discussion of the
prefix ‘wa-’ in Ho-Chunk and I had something else to add.

One function of this form seems to be 3PL object marker on verbs.  It has
been identified as such in most of the literature.  However there seems to
be a slight twist.  In eliciting forms, I have been told that this form can
only refer to human beings.  For example:

waNk  naaNka waacanaN.
waNk  naaNka  wa-haca-naN.
men    those      3PL-1S to see- DEC.

I saw those men.

caa  naaNka  hacanaN.
caa  naaNka  haca-naN.
deer those      1S-to see-DEC

I saw those deer.

When I started to ask, speakers informed me that this was the case.  That
‘wa-’ when used as a 3PL object marker can only refer to human beings.  I
noticed in the Boas and Deloria Grammar of Dakota that a similar form exists
in that langauge.  Namely ’wic’a’ which they state is the plural object for
human and animate beings.  They do not go further into depth so I have no
idea what they mean by ‘animate being’.

I haven’t run across any other examples of this through the course of my
studies.  I also have no idea what to call this phenomenon other than trying
to describe it.  Is this happening in other Siouan langauges?  Could it be
some type of remnant of a noun class system that has ,over time,
dissappeared?  I would appreciate any comments you all might like to make.

Thank you and I hope everyone is well.



Henning Garvin
UW-Madison
Anthropology/Linguistics





_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail