A little new light on a familiar word ?? ["WT" (p.7)]
Clive Bloomfield
cbloom at ozemail.com.au
Mon Jan 14 01:38:32 UTC 2008
On 13/01/2008, at 2:40 PM, Clive Bloomfield wrote:
>
> Emil AFH Text :
>
> Thiwahe kin lel April 7th, 1506, ehanl akhe thokata akichita
> sh'akin kta wan thonpi. He Don Juan de Jassu na Doña Maria de
> Azpilcueta chincapi ca wichicisakpe hakakta thaowachekiyepi el
> miniakashtanpi na Francis eya chasthonpi.
>
> Wildenhues :
>
> "Here on April 7th, 1506, another great knight of the future was
> born. He was the sixth and last child of Don Juan de Jassu and Doña
> Maria de Azpilcueta, and at his
> baptism in the parish church received the name of Francis."
>
> A literal version :
>
> "Into this family, on April 7th, 1506, was born one who was to
> prove again & again, in future years, a mighty soldier. This
> (babe), the son of Don Juan de Jassu and
> Donna Maria de Azpilcueta, as their sixth-born youngest offspring,
> was baptized in their (family) chapel, and christened "Francisco/
> Francis." (lit. "Francis saying
> they-named-him."
>
> [NOTES : Seems to be nothing especially noteworthy here.]
I take this back! Now, as we all know, the word akhe' means "again; a
second time" [B-Md., s.v.] "again; repeated; a second time" [Riggs,
DakEngD, s.v.].
In any case, one might perhaps have expected akhe'shnashna (or s'a
maybe) to correspond my translation "again & again" there.
Clearly, in this context, Xavier has only just entered this Vale of
Tears, so how COULD akhe' there mean "again/a second time"?
Doesn't akhe' (especially followed immediately by thoka'ta, & in a
prospective KTA clause) mean there, something more like : "in time
yet to come/in subsequent years"?
Accordingly, I would retranslate thus :
"Into this family, on Apr.7, 1506, was born one who was destined/
bound to become, in time/years to come, to be a mighty soldier."
Correct?
Further, one also notes with interest that perhaps more than a hint
of this sense appears to occur in another familiar adverb/Stative
Verb "eha'ke" (which, as we know, normally means "last" [B&D,p.139];
also "be last" [Buech.LakotaT&T., 215]), when used with hunh /huNh^/
'some' in such sentences as Buech. Gr.'s examples on Page 338, #198,
3) :
Ma'zaska eha'ke hunh^ wachi'n. [='I want a little more money."]
Wicha'sha eha'ke hunh^ wanji'la chin. [="He wants one man more."]
Q.1 : IF eha'ke adds the nuance : 'more, but for the last time, no
more!' (which akhe' may not have), wouldn't Fr. B. have translated
(or annotated) accordingly, or just used akhe'?
Q.2 : Would substitution of akhe' (for eha'ke) in either sentence
substantially alter the translation, or not? Is this an example of
Fr. B.'s bad Lakhota idiom?
Q.3 : Does the loss of aspiration there in "eha'Ke" conclusively rule
out any possible cognate status with "akhe"? Or is this just a false
trail?
Finally, I note that, interestingly enough, S.R. Riggs has two
separate entries for eha'ke in his Dakota Dict. (Buechel does supply
both meanings, but collapses them into one entry). B&D (p. 139) have
"last". :
1) EHA'KE : (advb.) "Yet, yet to come." Example : eha'ke wanji'dan :
"one yet"
2) EHA'KE : (n.) "the last one".
There are also the fascinating words :
EHA'KEDAN/EHA'KEDANKASE/EHA'KEDANKECHINHAN : (advb.) "yet a little
while".
>
>
>
>
> Emil AFH Text :
>
> Francis atkuku Don Juan, tohantan kin akichita oyuonihanyeh^ci unpi
> kin hecha etanhan ohutkanke, na wokinihanca hecha, heon
> Wichashayatapi John eciyapi Navarra etanhan kin owotanla kilah^ca
> wiyukcan khiye, chankhe oehake iyagleya wichakeya nakicijin, eya
> hecheca esha waphipishni na woshkishke echela wishi yuhah^ce k'eyash.
>
> Wildenhues :
>
> "Don Juan, his father, noble scion of a long line of honoured
> knights, was the trusted counsellor of his king, John of Navarre,
> and was faithful to the last, though
> trouble & misfortune were the only recompense he ever received for
> his loyalty."
>
> A literal version :
>
> "Don Juan, the father of Francis, being the type of man ('hecha')
> who derived his roots from (lit. "had roots in/rooted in") the sort
> of people who had, from time out of mind ('tohantan'), been
> warriors of great renown, was a highly respected man : hence it was
> that he had incurred the estimation (with/in the eyes of) King John
> of Navarre (lit. "the one called K.J. from Navarre"), of being one
> whose highest value was integrity/uprightness/'straightshooting'/
> honour, and so he actually stood by him till the (bitter/very) end
> ('oehake'), in spite of the fact that he was ill-starred, and even
> though he only ever received trouble/messy complications in
> recompense."
OR, perhaps : "(D.J., in the event, stood by King Juan)...even though
that was the case (he'checa esha'), all the reward (wishi'...k'eyash)
he ever reaped from that , was ill-luck and trouble."
>
> [NOTES : Was particularly perplexed by the exact meaning here, of
> the verb "kila" with that attached intensifier-->"kilah^ca".
> [Perhaps : "He [D.J.] passionately believed in (his own) honour."
> The sentence's SUBJECT seemed to me to be "Don Juan", who, we are
> told, incurred an opinion ('wiyukcankhiye'), [with/in the eyes of]
> the King called John of Navarre (DIRECT OBJECT?)], of being one
> who passionately believed ['kilah^ca'] in honour/honesty. I WAS
> ALSO EXERCISED BY the precise subordinating construction governed
> by that Causative : "khiye".
Apologies for the garbling there.
>
>
>
> Emil AFH text :
>
> Navarra el othonwahe wan aithanchanyan yanke kin he Pampeluna e,
> yunkhan he echa nakikshinpi na el akichita sh'aka wan, Ignatius
> eciyapi Loyola etanhan kin OIGLUSHICIN na heon hankeya makha
> woyuonihan el oshkinchiyeh^ce k'un hena ayushtan, na isamya wowashi
> wophethethushni oic'ile kta cha, Ithanchan Thawa Iyotan Thanka kin
> etkiya Christ Jesus.
>
> Wildenhues :
>
> "The capital of Navarre is the city of Pampeluna, in the defense of
> which, another great knight, Ignatius of Loyola, received that
> injury which led hin to abandon the career of worldly honour and to
> seek a more honorable service in the livery of His Supreme
> Commander, Christ Jesus."
>
> Another version :
>
> "The capital/leading city of Navarre is Pamplona, and there, during
> its defence a mighty warrior, Ignatius Loyola, GOT HIMSELF INTO A
> TERRIBLE PLIGHT, and for that reason he
> finally quit his feverish endeavours/activities in honour of land
> (conquests?), in order to seek out for himself a less mercenary
> occupation, for the sake of his Supreme Lord, Christ Jesus."
>
> [NOTES : Exact sense of Reflexive Verb "oiglushicA" remains
> unclear to me - ones learns from historical research that St.
> Ignatius Loyola, a founder of the Jesuits, (as was St. Fr. Xavier),
> was originally a rapacious military captain who had his leg
> shattered by a cannonball, in the siege of Pamplona.
> Here, (pace Frs. B.&M.'s definition of : 'spoil one's own
> reputation;'disgrace oneself'), the word would appear to signify
> not much more than 'got himself hurt'/'got himself into bad trouble'.
>
> To support this interpretation, Buech.-Md. also has : iglu'shicA :
> "to make oneself bad/get ones's self into difficulty".
> I'm really not sure exactly what that locative o- prefix adds
> there! Could it be just emphasize that the disastrous incident
> happened to I. L. 'IN that place/city' ?
> The fascinating word "wophethETHu(n)shni", I thought to be prob.
> based on the Root "ophethun" [="buy"], so I interpreted the word as
> a Reduplicated & negated Stative Verb/"adjective" (or adverb.)
> referring to the "wowasi" with a sense something akin to :
> "(He sought out for himself) "wowasi" [=work, occupation] that was
> "isamya" [=more]
> "non-commercial-->unsordid"--> 'less mercenary/involving less
> filthy lucre'.]
Seems an unusual reduplication? Checked the spelling. Would't one
have expected : wophethunTHUNshni? Misprint/typo?
>
> Regards,
>
> Clive Bloomfield.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20080114/98889642/attachment.html>
More information about the Siouan
mailing list