(O)maha

[Koontz John E]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, Alan Hartley wrote:
> The earliest I've seen with O- is 1814 H. M. BRACKENRIDGE Views
> Louisiana I. vi. 76 "Mahas, (or Oo-ma-ha) Reside on the Maha creek."
>
> This doesn't seem like "aux" to me.

Do you mean in general, or in the context of this example?  I admit the
idea has its weaknesses, of course.  Apart from simple issues of
satisfactory attestation, lack of parallelism in handling of Osage, and
distinguishing this approach from truncation, the u-pronunciation of the
locative or directional prefix in Omaha-Ponca (*o > u, *u > i, *i > i) is
a possible issue.  However, all the adjacent and downriver Siouan groups
retain o, and the u is not a particularly high one.

What if you think of the citation here in French terms, "Mahas, (ou
ou-ma-ha)  Demeurent au ruisseau Maha."  I think you could fairly say au
Maha or aux Mahas, depending on whether you refer to the creek or the
people.  Or is the preposition a correct in this context in French?  My
French is definitely sort of catch as catch can.