Quapaw Articles (Re: Historical Explanation for *pi)

[Rankin, Robert L]

> Don't forget that Quapaw lacks the -akha and -apa set (they have the/a

> second -(a)pa marker) entirely.  There is little doubt that the
> positionals are the original set, with -akha, -apa as add-ons.
> Logically, of course, Quapaw could have been the one to lose the two
> rather than the other 4 gaining morphemes, but when this sort of loss
> occurs, it virtually always leaves traces, and I've found none.

> I assume the parenthetical remark refers to that =ma collective plural
for animate obviatives?

Right!

This pattern with articles looks like it would be a major isogloss in
Dhegiha dialectology.

THE major one, I'd guess.  Nother paper I should write.

Bob