Dakota 'orphan'

[Rankin, Robert L]

> Should the "nica" component in wablenica be the word nicA
> 'to lack smth/sb' then I would expect the 1st singular form
> of wablenica to be wablemanice. In reality the 1st singular
> is wamablenica (i.e. 'ma' is not affixed before nica and the
> final vowel is not ablauted, as it is in nicA).

> This makes me wonder that perhaps nicA 'to lack smth/sb' is not part of wablenica. What do you think?
> Jan

Given the parallel compounds in so many other Siouan languages, I'm quite convinced that /nica/ is indeed the cognate of /dhiNge, niNge, niki/, etc.  I guess, then, that I'd agree with Bruce:

> . . .  but equally it could have started from -nica and then the word got reanalysed as a unit, which would explain the placing of ma- in wa-mable-nica and could also explain the non ablaut which Jan mentions
Bruce

Reanalysis is pretty common with these two-part verbs.  For example the verb 'to cough', /hoxpe/, which incorporates the noun /ho:/ 'voice'.  In some Dhegiha languages it is conjugated conservatively, 
1sg      ho- a-xpe, 
2sg      ho-ra-xpe, 
3sg      ho      xpe
1pl oN-ho      xp-ape

In other Dhegiha languages it is reanalyzed as a gestalt and conjugated innovatively:
1sg  a-hoxpe
2sg ra-hoxpe
3sg      hoxpe
1pl oN-hoxp-ape

I feel sure nica here is the 'lack' verb, at least historically.  I'd be a lot happier if I knew exactly what wable was by itself.  Jan shows with wa-ma-ble that the root is -ble.

Bob