New topic -- stative pronouns with reflexives?

[Koontz John E]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Koontz John E wrote:
> I asked, because there are some cases of just this A-REFL-A-VERB pattern
> in Winnebago, if I recall the examples from the Miner Field Lexicon
> correctly, and both Dakotan and Winnebago have some cases of REFL-A-VERB,
> too, as I recall.

Miner 1815 kiika'waz^a' 'wipe oneself', A1 ha-kipa'z^a ~ hakika'waz^a

Think A1 *wa-hki'k- paz^a  ~ *wa-hki'-p-paz^a
      A3    *hkii'k-paz^a

Recall that the first persons are ha (regular) ~ reflexes of *p
(syncopating).  I've reversed the alternative first persons.  The first
(as Miner gives them) is doubly inflected (regular prefixal and infixed
syncopating), whereas the second is singly inflected (regular prefixal).

Compare Miner 1922 kiiku'rus 'withdraw', A1 hakiku'rus, which has only the
prefixal pattern.

Now compare Miner 1829 kiiru's 'take for oneself, adopt', A1 hakidu's (d <
*pr), which has only the doubly inflected pattern.

Finally Miner 1839 kiiwa'gax 'take, draw picture', A1 kiipa'gax is only
inflected by the infixed pattern (A3 *hkii'-pakax, A1 *hkii'-p-pakax).

Miner 1813 kiik?o' 'shave oneself', has first person hikik?o'.  I think
this should be hiNkik?o', making it a stative pattern verb.  I suspect
this is an experiencer pattern.  K?o' is 'scrape', so the pattern is
something like '(face) oneself to be scraped', where 'face' is the third
person subject and the patient for which the verb is inflected is the
experiencer.  Because the experiencer is experiencing the scraping of his
own body, the stem is reflexive.  This is a bit convoluted, but not too
far from OP git?e 'one's kin to die', which is reflexive possessive and
agrees with the experiencer whose kin has died, e.g., iNt?e 'mine has
died; my own has died; mine is dead to me'.

As far as I know, this information is only in Miner's Field Lexicon.  It
does not appear in any of the grammars of Winnebago to date.

> ... and the Dakotan case (*hki- reciprocal and 'in the middle' and some
> *hkik(e) commitatives) is non-reflexive, with another formant yielding
> the reflexive.

See Boas & Deloria, pp. 79-80.

'in two parts' khi-c^a'ksa 'he cuts it in two by striking' (kaksa)

'in contact' wakhiks^aN 'I wrestle with him' (a small step to 'we wrestle
each other')

P. 80 refers to the reciprocal.  P. 79 refers to "the obsolete stem khi
which appears in adverbial form as kic^hic^a 'to be with'."  This is in
form (though apparently not in sense) a reflexive possessive of *khic^a
'to be with' (< *hkika).  Compare OP z^u'=gi-gdhe 'be with one's own' vs.
z^u'=gdhe 'be with'.  A reference here to p. 138 draws our attention to

wikho's^kalaka waN khos^ka'laka waN kic^hi yaNka'
girl               boy              with   was sitting

Boas & Deloria say kic^hi 'with one person' ... derived from an obsolete
verb khi.

Buechel (p. 300) gives examples with kic^(h)i' 'with, together with'
and kic^(h)i'c^a 'to be with, together with, following with, on the same
side with; ...', e.g., he uNki'c^(h)ic^a=pi 'he is with us'.

The "obsolete verb khi" seems to be Boas & Delroai's way of saying, "we
deduce the existence of this stem, but it is unattested in itself."

Buechel, p. 298, mentions that khi "indicates that the action is performed
through the middle."  "It does not, however, draw the accent."

JEK