Locatives and wa- problems.

[Rory Larson]

Ø  Does this answer your question?

Yes.  And thank you especially for the more complicated answer!

You are right about the Chiwere claim; the one that came up recently I think is specifically about Otoe.  Apparently the -wi particle is supposed to imply two actors when used in the third person.  But this is not attested in older sources, so the question is whether that usage is a recent development, or a misunderstanding by recent linguists, or whether the older linguists just missed it.  I thought getting a Hoocąk perspective might help in evaluating the claim.

I don’t have much to add to that other than in connection with the two different positionals, jee/jąą, that you mention.  In Omaha, in fact, we do have two ‘standing’ positionals, tʰe and tʰaⁿ.  The first is used for inanimates, and the second (rarely) for animate beings.  If I recall the sound shift rules I once learned from John and Bob correctly, MVS */tʰ/ should stay /tʰ/ in Omaha and go to /j/ in Hoocąk, so I think those two pairs should probably be cognate.  Bob might be better able to comment on this.

Best,
Rory


From: Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] On Behalf Of Iren Hartmann
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 2:17 PM
To: SIOUAN at LISTSERV.UNL.EDU
Subject: Re: Locatives and wa- problems.

Hi Rory,

the quick and simple answer to your question is no. There is no interchangeability between the two PL markers in Hoocąk. -wi is not used to mark 3rd PL subject. However, I recall that this has been claimed for Chiwere, maybe there it is indeed possible.
The more complicated answer to your question is, that there is one sort of exception that I know of:
For all full verbs 3rd PL subject is -ire in Hoocąk. And this is also true for all auxiliaries, except in the case of the positionals. With them -ire cannot be used, they inflect irregularly anyway.. There the third PL form is always nąąk (long version of the sitting/neutral positional), so that position is neutralized. However, there is a very curious form that one encounters every so often, which is hająwi = they exist. It consists of ha-(collective marker) jee (vertical positional, sometimes used as existential) and -wi (PL). This would be the only case in which you could get a -wi for 3rd PL subject. BUT it does NOT alternate with -ire, and it has to co-occur with the collective. I think there might have been two diferent "positionals" jee/jąą at some point and they got mostly conflated nowadays. This rare form here is a reflex of the one that was only used with animates and it is still in some use as an existential (hence also the curious nasalization). So really there is NO alternation bewteen -ire and -wi in Hoocąk ever.
Does this answer your question?

Best,
Iren


One other question that has come up that you might want to comment on:  Does Hoocąk ever use the -wi particle in the third person?  I thought a long time ago I had read that in the third person plural, either -wi or -ire could occur, but with somewhat different meanings.  Is there anything to that, or is my memory mistaken?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20130909/c80e9051/attachment.htm>