Conjugation Of A Sentence in Tutelo-Saponi

[David Kaufman]

Having finally found my Tutelo material, I can now make a few points, I
think:

I am not sure what the mi- prefix is in your sentence, Scott.  It looks
like the Tutelo first person singular pronouns are wa- and wiN- (N
representing nasality), the latter being the 'dative' form that seems to be
used with possession of body parts (Oliverio p. 135).  The more I think
about your sentence, the more I think using the causative -hiye might be
appropriate (Oliverio p. 119), so that the verb part of your sentence would
look more like this: wiN-yaNtoste:ke-hiye < wiN- = 1st pers sg pronoun
dative; -yaNti = heart; -ste:ke = good; -hiye = causative, thus coming out
as literally 'It causes my heart (to be) good.'  This would be like Biloxi
aNk-yaNdi-phi-ye < aNk- = 1st pers singular pronoun (subject or
possessive); -yaNdi = heart; -phi = good (vs. pi = liver); -ye =
causative.  Biloxi lost the active-patient split of other Siouan languages,
so aNk- is the only pronoun for 'I' now used, which is actually cognate
with Tutelo waNk-/waN- 1st person plural.

Okay, that i- prefix does not show up in Oliverio as a definite article
'the' (Oliverio p. 202).  It does, however, show up as an *indefinite* (=
English a, an) article suffix -i.  According to Oliverio (p. 202) the
Tutelo *definite* articles are -ki(N) or -se.  The former agrees with
Lakota -kiN and the latter I believe is more of an emphatic definite
article agreeing with Biloxi -yaN and -di on nouns.  (So, Tutelo
yaNti-ki(N) 'the heart' vs. yaNti-i 'a heart' (?); not sure if that last
would combine into a long vowel -i: or would remain separate).

Hope this helps.

Dave

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Rory Larson <rlarson1 at unl.edu> wrote:

>  Hi Scott,****
>
> ** **
>
> Yes, the word “the” is what we have in mind when we talk about the
> “definite article”.  We may use this term to refer to certain classifying
> words in Siouan languages as well when we feel that they are doing about
> the same thing in those languages that “the” does for us in English.  We
> should be cautious about this though, because we generally think in English
> or some other European language, and we may be imposing our language’s
> logical paradigm on the Siouan language we are trying to understand when we
> classify things this way.  I think it’s generally safer and more productive
> to try to understand each element of the language we are trying to learn on
> its own terms, without worrying too much about abstract universal
> grammatical classifications.****
>
> ** **
>
> In any case, I don’t think you should need “articles” of any kind for the
> simple sentence you are trying to construct.  I don’t know much of anything
> about Tutelo-Saponi, but in Siouan languages I do have experience with, it
> should break down first into two basic parts, as follows:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 [The smell of sweetgrass] [I love].****
>
> ** **
>
> In English, we are required to use “the” a lot.  In some other European
> languages, it might be required even more.  In German or French, the first
> clause would probably have to be [The smell of the sweetgrass], with both
> “smell” and “sweetgrass” getting a definite article.  But in Siouan,
> insofar as I am familiar with it, classifying “articles” are only used when
> you are talking about a particular thing rather than a generality.  “The
> smell that reached my nose coming out of the kitchen last night” is
> something specific, and might take an “article”.  “The smell of sweetgrass”
> is a generality that characterizes sweetgrass, not something specific to a
> particular context that you would be referencing, so it probably would not
> need an article.  (Languages vary: someone with a different experience may
> shoot me down here!)  So we can probably rewrite that sentence as:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 [Smell of sweetgrass] [I love].****
>
> ** **
>
> As Dave and Bob have pointed out, there should probably be no word for
> “of” in a Siouan language.  They handle it differently, and for that
> matter, English uses “of” in subtly different ways too.  In this case, our
> logic makes “smell” something possessed by “sweetgrass”.  That’s reasonable
> enough, but Siouan probably wouldn’t see it that way.  Another way of
> handling it is to make “sweetgrass” into a sort of adjective that describes
> the smell you’re talking about: “sweetgrass smell”.  This works in English
> too, and in practice it conveys the same meaning as “the smell of
> sweetgrass”, though the underlying logical conception is different in the
> two formulations.  Siouan would use the second formulation:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 [Sweetgrass smell] [I love].****
>
> ** **
>
> As Dave brought out, if you are also coining the word for “sweetgrass” by
> simply translating “sweet” and “grass”, the order will be to stick the
> “adjective” (stative verb) “sweet” after the noun, “grass”, which it
> describes.  Hence, English “sweetgrass” in Siouan would be “grass-sweet”:*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
>                 [Grass-sweet smell] [I love].****
>
> ** **
>
> Next, you need to know how to say “I love it”.  For this, you should just
> need the I-form conjugation of the verb “love”.  For most verbs, this would
> be pretty easy.  You would simply look up the verb “love” and then slap the
> I-form of the affixed pronoun in front of it.  In Omaha, that would be
> something like a-love, as in “Ah love the smell of sweetgrass.”
> Unfortunately, in Siouan, as Bob points out, “love” and “like” formulations
> tend to be a little more hairy, typically something like “It is good to
> me”, or “It is good in my heart”.  They also may vary according to just
> what it is that is loved or liked.  Loving fried chicken is different from
> loving your girlfriend.  We don’t make the distinction in English.  Siouan
> languages likely do.****
>
> ** **
>
> Finally, I would note that Siouan languages commonly have what we might
> call “emphatic pronouns”.  This is probably what you will find in a
> dictionary if you look up the word “I”, which is what I suspect your “mi”
> word is.  In English, we must have a subject in any sentence other than a
> command.  In Siouan, this is not necessary.  We use an emphatic pronoun as
> a subject only when we want to emphasize it in contrast to something else.
> Compare:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 I love the smell of sweetgrass.                   (I’m
> just telling you about myself and what I like.)****
>
> ** **
>
>                 **I** love the smell of sweetgrass.             (I do,
> unlike somebody else we’ve been discussing, who doesn’t.)****
>
> ** **
>
> If you use “mi” in this sentence, you will probably be conveying the
> second idea.  So you should probably drop the “mi” and just figure out how
> to say “I love it” about an odor.****
>
> ** **
>
> At this point, we have:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 [Grass-sweet smell] [I-love].****
>
> ** **
>
> where the “I” is part of a conjugated form of the contruction for “love”,
> not a separate word by itself.****
>
> ** **
>
> Now we just have to plug in the right translations.****
>
> ** **
>
> It looks like you have three possible words for ‘grass’:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 sokta:ki****
>
>                 mukta:ki****
>
>                 oto:****
>
> ** **
>
> Have you checked the Tutelo-English side of Oliverio’s dictionary to see
> what these translate to going the other way?  Hopefully, you could refine
> the problem by chasing it down from the other direction.****
>
> ** **
>
> Bob says that oto: means ‘to be blue or green’.  Could that possibly have
> been extended to mean ‘grass’ in some contexts as we do with vegetation
> when we say “greenery”?****
>
> ** **
>
> Can the other two words be broken down into smaller elements?  Are they
> actually so-kta:ki and mu-kta:ki, as they appear?  If so, what do “so”,
> “mu” and “kta:ki” mean?****
>
> ** **
>
> Meuse’s/Dorsey’s sunktagi presumably is the word Oliverio is writing as
> sokta:ki, so maybe we should go with this one in the way Dave suggested:**
> **
>
> ** **
>
>                 sokta:ki-chiko:yo = ‘sweetgrass’  ?****
>
> ** **
>
> Then if we are using “pi” to mean ‘smell’, we would have:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 sokta:ki-chiko:yo pi = ‘sweetgrass smell’, or ‘the smell
> of sweetgrass’.****
>
> ** **
>
> The problem here is that “smell” in English can be either a noun, a
> transitive verb, or an intransitive verb.  We are looking for a noun, but
> it is very likely “pi” is a verb in Tutelo.  Looking in the Biloxi
> dictionary, both Dorsey-Swanton and Dave’s standardized version, there seem
> to be several forms listed on the English-Biloxi side, but all of them are
> verbs.  (Odor, a noun, is also listed, but these are specific types of
> odor, mostly bad.)  The most salient word for ‘smell’ is “hi”, and I’m
> wondering if that isn’t cognate to Tutelo “pi”?  If “pi” is a verb, we
> might be in trouble.  Or not.  Siouan can be flexible.  If it is a
> transitive verb, then****
>
> ** **
>
>                 sokta:ki-chiko:yo pi [I-love].****
>
> ** **
>
> might mean****
>
> ** **
>
>                 “I love to smell sweetgrass.”****
>
> ** **
>
> rather than****
>
> ** **
>
>                 “I love the smell of sweetgrass.”****
>
> ** **
>
> Again, the logical analysis is different, but it probably won’t affect the
> end-user.****
>
> ** **
>
> Bob has a good breakdown of “love” as****
>
> ** **
>
>                 yaⁿt-o-steke       = “heart-in-good”, or “is good in one’s
> heart”****
>
> ** **
>
> Biloxi has a comparable word:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 ki-yaⁿdi-pi            = “to-one’s-heart-good”, “is good
> to one’s heart”, or “be satisfied (from eating)”****
>
> ** **
>
> This one conjugates with a nasal I/we affixed pronoun before the dative or
> possessive marker “ki”:****
>
> ** **
>
>                 ⁿki-yaⁿdi-pi          = “I am satisfied”****
>
> ** **
>
> So, Biloxifying Tutelo enough to finish the sentence, why don’t we try:***
> *
>
> ** **
>
>                 Sokta:ki-chiko:yo pi ⁿki-yaⁿt-osteke.****
>
> ** **
>
> I’ll leave it to you, Bob and Dave to improve on this.  I’m sure Tutelo
> doesn’t conjugate in exactly the same way as Biloxi!  :-)****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you for sharing your ideas and research with the list.  Perhaps you
> will be the one to write that comprehensive but readable work on
> Tutelo-Saponi someday, or perhaps someone else will because of your
> persistent interest.  It is that constant desire to know and understand
> that heritage, especially on the part of people who have it as part of
> their background, that will keep the momentum going to preserve and recover
> it.  Good luck in all your work!****
>
> ** **
>
> All the best,****
>
> Rory****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] *On Behalf Of
> *Scott Collins
> *Sent:* Saturday, May 25, 2013 8:07 PM
> *To:* SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
>
> *Subject:* Re: Conjugation Of A Sentence in Tutelo-Saponi****
>
>  ** **
>
> Here is what Meuse had for -i :****
>
>
> * *
>
> *"-i*, articulate state marker, article (definite or indefinite), “a, an,
> the”. Also *-y*. ****
>
> Nominals serving as modifiers are always in the articulate state, and
> follow the ****
>
> word being modified, which will be in the construct. Stand-alone nominals
> can ****
>
> also be in the articulate, to signify the general article (no real
> distinction between ****
>
> indefinite / definite articles.) Spelling “-y” following some vowels is
> purely ****
>
> aesthetic, and is interchangeable with -i. However, if the final syllable
> of the ****
>
> construct includes a strong nasal and/or glottal quality (generally
> indicated by ****
>
> final -n, -n’, or -q), the corresponding articulate will end in a
> ‘broken’ dipthong ****
>
> similarly incorporating the nasal and/or glottal, in slightly weaker form.
> This ****
>
> sound can be inserted by the speaker at any point within the ‘broken
> dipthong’; ****
>
> exactly where would be difficult to discern in rapid pronunciation."
> ---Meuse, Yesnechi, pg. 18.****
>
>  ****
>
> Also see Oliverio, pg. 202 for -i and i- usages.****
>
>  ****
>
> The word "the" is a definite article correct?****
>
>  ****
>
> Oliverio, pg.323 the word love as yato-ste:kE****
>
> Meuse, pg 71, the word love as Yandosteka****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> Here is one link that has some information on sweetgrass ranges:
> http://www.ecoseeds.com/sweetgrassinfo.html#anchor504328****
>
>  ****
>
> However, I do not have a source that tells me one way or the other that
> the Tutelo, Saponi or Occaneechi utilized it or not. I know that I use it
> at present. Also sense there are other herbs used as sweetgrass or called
> sweetgrass I'm sure there was a usage at some piont in the past, but at
> what level I don't know. I'm not sure any ethnobotanical work has been done
> in the past that gathered that sort of detail. If there was I would love to
> read it.****
>
>  ****
>
> Grass is a word found in Meuse pg. 70, "Grass – Sunktagi"****
>
>  ****
>
> Grass in Oliverio, pg 319, " grass  mukta:ki, oto:, sokta:ki " ****
>
>  ****
>
> I don't think I'm translating from English into Tutelo-Saponi exactly word
> for word, but I am trying to get as close as possible so that I can have a
> good translation of what I'm wishing to say in the language. I'm definitely
> not a linguist or an English major so alot of help is needed in order to
> try and utilize my people's language. I use all the availble to me
> sources/dictionaries on Tutelo-Saponi because none of the individual
> dictionaries is complete. Some have words the others left out or were
> unaware of at the time they published. I do rely heavily on Oliverio's
> dictionary as well as this list here in order to try and get word
> formations that aren't in any of the dictionaries; based on the way this
> list says Siouan languages form their words.  Of this I am very greatful,
> for without it I would be constantly hitting brickwalls in attempting to
> utilize the language.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> The usages of -ki also seem to be variant and have various meanings; (see
> Oliverio, pg.214 for -ki usages). It gets confusing.****
>
>  ****
>
> My wish is that someone would do a more comprehensive work on
> Tutelo-Saponi and a work that would be accessable to people like myself as
> well being a teaching tool for learning the language. The only extensive
> interaction I get on the language is here on this list. Not that I haven't
> tried to get others to join in the discussions on our langauge elsewhere.
> ****
>
>    ****
>
>  ****
>
> Again, I want to thank this list and especially Dave and Robert. Your help
> has been invaluable. Hopefully if I keep at this long enough I may be able
> to utilize my ancestors language in better way that is fully correct and
> truly Siouan as a living language. ****
>
>  ****
>
>
> Scott P. Collins
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR
>
> Evil Is An Outer Manifestation Of An Inner Struggle
>
> “Men and women become accomplices to those evils they fail to oppose.”
>
> "The greater the denial the greater the awakening."
>
> --- On *Sat, 5/25/13, Rankin, Robert L. <rankin at KU.EDU>* wrote:****
>
>
> From: Rankin, Robert L. <rankin at KU.EDU>
> Subject: Re: Conjugation Of A Sentence in Tutelo-Saponi
> To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> Date: Saturday, May 25, 2013, 3:07 PM****
>
> I agree with Willem and Dave that we can’t just translate the English
> word-for-word into Tutelo-Saponi.  The Siouan way of saying ‘I love the
> smell of sweetgrass’ would not contain an equivalent for “of”, in fact I’m
> not at all sure that there is ever much of an equivalent of that
> preposition in Siouan.  I think the way it would be expressed in a Siouan
> language would be something close to ‘Sweetgrass-smell to.me-it.is.good’.
> And actually, the words translated ‘love’ in the literature are a compound
> of yaⁿt-‘heart’, o- ‘in it’, and steke ‘good’.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> I’ve never heard of William Meuse, but from his spellings, it looks as
> though he just copied the Dorsey file from the Smithsonian letter for
> letter.  It’s better to use Oliverio, since she standardized the spellings,
> included all earlier research and includes context with examples.  ****
>
>   ****
>
> I don’t know the range of sweetgrass for certain, but I doubt the Tutelos
> had it in any quantity and I don’t think it grows that far south.  The term
> for sweetgrass in Dakota-Lakota matches the word for ‘onion’ in Kansa and
> Osage.  I don’t know which meaning was the original one, though onions are
> more widespread.  ****
>
>   ****
>
> The Tutelo word ‘oto:’ just means ‘to be blue or green’.  In that sense it
> probably wouldn’t be used for ‘grass' by itself..  So I don’t know what to
> do about trying to translate ‘sweetgrass’.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> I don't think that i- equates to 'the' in any sense, so I'm not sure where
> that usage is coming from.  In the Sapir transcriptions of Tutelo it
> appears that -ki after the noun is used for 'the', and since that matches
> the definite article in Dakotan, I suspect that's as close as we can get in
> Tutelo.****
>
>   ****
>
> Bob ****
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] on behalf of Scott
> Collins [saponi360 at YAHOO.COM]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 24, 2013 10:52 PM
> *To:* SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> *Subject:* Conjugation Of A Sentence in Tutelo-Saponi****
>
> Verb at end of sentence ****
>
> Adjectives follow nouns ****
>
> Adverbs and Direct Objects before the Verb ****
>
>   ****
>
> I love the smell of sweetgrass. ****
>
>   ****
>
> I = mi (subject/noun) ****
>
> Love = yato-ste:kE (verb) ****
>
> The = i- (definite article) ****
>
> Smell = pi (you can add an infatic such as –se after the word) (adjective)
> ****
>
> Of = qekego (preposition) ****
>
> Sweetgrass = chiko:yo oto: (object/noun) ****
>
>
>
> My final conjugation: ****
>
> I- pi qekego  chiko:yo oto:  mi yato-ste:kE. ( I love the smell of
> sweetgrass.)   ****
>
>  ****
>
> Is this all correct?****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
>
>
> Scott P. Collins
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR
>
> Evil Is An Outer Manifestation Of An Inner Struggle
>
> “Men and women become accomplices to those evils they fail to oppose.”
>
> "The greater the denial the greater the awakening."****
>
> ** **
>



-- 
David Kaufman, Ph.C.
University of Kansas
Linguistic Anthropology
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20130526/54e4e07c/attachment.html>