<DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>-- Sara Trechter has a paper she did comparing the gender-sensitive modals<BR>in the various Siouan languages. --</FONT> Hmmm. It'd be interesting to try and get a copy somehow, if it's published.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>-- The Biloxi data deserve a lot more attention. Most of us have only looked at the tabular data<BR>in Dorsey & Swanton. The texts contain a lot on usage as well. I can't recall how much Einaudi might have said about them. --</FONT> While I don't have time right at the moment to do a thorough investigation of Einaudi's dissertation (which I have), I can say that from my recent perusal it appears she only mentions it in passing in a few places, especially the particles. I don't see much mention about how the gender issue affects verbs. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Looks like I have my work cut out for me! : )</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave<BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>"Rankin, Robert L" <rankin@ku.edu></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Sara Trechter has a paper she did comparing the gender-sensitive modals<BR>in the various Siouan languages. I don't remember if she published it<BR>or not. The Mississippi Valley languages all mark gender of speaker<BR>(except Winnebago/Hocank), but Mandan and Biloxi mark gender of<BR>addressee (and Biloxi, the speaker as well), and at least one of the<BR>particles was cognate between MA and BI. There is a good deal of<BR>cognacy within Mississippi Valley as I recall. The Biloxi data deserve<BR>a lot more attention. Most of us have only looked at the tabular data<BR>in Dorsey & Swanton. The texts contain a lot on usage as well. I can't<BR>recall how much Einaudi might have said about them.<BR><BR>Bob <BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: owner-siouan@lists.colorado.edu<BR>[mailto:owner-siouan@lists.colorado.edu] On Behalf Of Koontz John E<BR>Sent: Wednesday, January!
19, 2005
4:30 PM<BR>To: Siouan List<BR>Subject: Re: Male vs. female speech<BR><BR><BR>On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, David Kaufman wrote:<BR>> As I've been perusing the Dorsey/Swanton Biloxi dictionary and texts, <BR>> I've been noticing many instances of male vs. female speech patterns. <BR>> The one simple example I can think of at the moment is the optional <BR>> declarative particle na for a male speaker, and ni for a female <BR>> speaker<BR><BR>This is consistent with a slight Siouan tendency to final a in male<BR>particles and e in female particles, though o (au) vs. a also occurs.<BR><BR>> (and, if I remember correctly, the question particle wo for male, wa <BR>> for female). It seems to be most prominent in commands, and there <BR>> appear to be different command forms of verbs for male to male, male <BR>> to female or child, female to female, female to male, etc.<BR><BR>I'd say this is true most places where "sex" of speaker particles occur:<BR>prominent wi!
th
imperative, common with declarative, trailing off into<BR>less frequent categories.<BR><BR>I think I remember noticing that the female to male imperative was<BR>homophonous with the optative.<BR><BR>> I'm wondering if this is a common feature of all Siouan languages, or <BR>> is Taneks different in this respect.<BR><BR>This pattern occurs in Mississippi Valley except for Winnebago, where as<BR>far as I can recall it is absent, even though the very similar<BR>Ioway-Otoe has it. The patterns in Dakotan and Dhegiha are fairly<BR>similar, though different in detail. Ioway-Otoe is a bit different.<BR>Systems also occur<BR>in Biloxi and I think Tutelo. I can't remember for sure for Tutelo,<BR>Ofo,<BR>and Crow and Hidatsa.<BR><BR>Mandan uses a similar system to mark sex of addressee.<BR><BR>I recommend acquiring a set of non-Biloxi grammars for comparison with<BR>Biloxi, including Boas & Deloria "Teton," Lipkind "Winnebago," Whitman<BR>"Ioway-Otoe," Kennard "Mandan," and!
maybe
the Swanton & Boas "Siouan"<BR>and Boas "Ponca." More recent Dakota grammars like Rood & Taylor and<BR>Ingham are also great references, and at this point I think Bob's Quapaw<BR>sketch is going to be much more useful than Boas's Ponca one. For<BR>Hidatsa at the moment you're pretty much stuck with Matthews. For Crow<BR>Randy's grammar is almost out and much better than Lowie. Robinett's<BR>Hidatsa grammar and Kashcube's Crow grammar are pretty easy to track<BR>down, but take a bit of work to understand. Stripped of the formalism<BR>there's not a lot there, though it's more detailed on morphology than<BR>Matthews or Lowie.<BR><BR>In the absence of a comprehensive set of reference grammars for Siouan<BR>it's helpful to have a full set of brief documents available for the<BR>various languages. If you can't find something in one, go next door.<BR>If it occurs it's bound to be similar enough for the discussion to be<BR>helpful.<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p>
<hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Yahoo! Search presents - <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=30648/*http://movies.yahoo.com/movies/feature/jibjabinaugural.html">Jib Jab's 'Second Term'</a>