inclusive/exclusive

[ROOD DAVID S]

That's an interesting admission, Bruce, because I'm pretty sure we make
that point in the Handbook sketch.  I am happy to learn that I'm not the
only one who can overlook minutiae in places I think I know well.

I keep forgetting that Lakota also has dual demonstratives for third
persons: hena'os or hena'uNs (speakers vary), etc., for 'both'.  They
aren't used very often.  I wonder if there's an etymological connection
between the -uN-s suffix and the first person forms.

Best,
	David



David S. Rood
Dept. of Linguistics
Univ. of Colorado
295 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0295
USA
rood at colorado.edu

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, shokooh Ingham wrote:

> David
> Interesting that the dual /inclusive can only refer to
> agent/subject and not to object patient as  in 'he
> sees you and me'.  I think that emerges in Rigg's
> Grammar, but not explictly stated.  I've never seen it
> mentioned explicitly before
>
> Bruce
> --- ROOD DAVID S <rood at spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
>
>
> > For at least some of the speakers I've worked with,
> > moreover, even the
> > "dual inclusive" is applicable ONLY to agent/subject
> > roles; you have to
> > have the "pi" with the object forms even if it's
> > just the two of you.
> >
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/
>