<tt><font size=2>Bob,</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>With no irons in this particular fire, I'd like to
play the Devil's advocate here. I don't really see that the choice
between</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>> a) Proto-Siouan did have a final vowel, namely
-e, and it was lost in Winnebago and replaced by -A in Dakota, OR:<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>and </font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2><br>
> b) Proto-Siouan had consonant-final, CVC, stems, and all of the other
Siouan languages innovated a final -e in these stems INDEPENDENTLY. <br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>is as stark your argument makes it to be.</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Looking at the data you present, I would be inclined
to read these stems as phonemically CVC in proto-Siouan, but as operating
within a phonological system that required a small, meaningless, schwa-like
vocalization after a final consonant to clarify that final sound. I
understand that in Korean, final stops have no release. In English,
we have a slight release, but we don't classify the release as a separate
vowel. Perhaps proto-Siouan had more of a release, which operated
for any final consonant. In daughter languages, this release might
be reinterpreted as a separate syllable or not. If it was interpreted
as syllabic, the vowel would be something rather unmarked: most likely
-e, possibly -i or -a, and definitely not rounded. If not, it would
stay consonant final, as in Winnebago or Mandan.</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>From what work I have done with Omaha, I think these
final -e sounds receive much less stress than previous vowels in the stem,
and the speakers sometimes seem a little ambivalent about whether they
should be pronounced -a or -e. When I try to get them to choose one,
I can usually make them agree that it's -e, but perhaps I'm the one imposing
something on the language that isn't actually there. Maybe even in
modern languages like Omaha, these final -e sounds are only somewhat more
pronounced consonant releases than we English speakers are used to.</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Rory</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"Rankin, Robert L"
<rankin@KU.EDU></b> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: Siouan Linguistics <SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu></font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">09/01/2011 03:22 PM</font>
<table border>
<tr valign=top>
<td bgcolor=white>
<div align=center><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to<br>
Siouan Linguistics <SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu></font></div></table>
<br>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: Ablaut et al</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Bruce, Paul, et al.<br>
<br>
I believe the question whether or not Proto-Siouan had consonant-final
stems is answered by looking at those same stems in the rest of the Siouan
languages. In each instance, virtually all of the other Siouan languages
(besides Dakotan and Winnebago) have a stem-final -e, that is, where Dakota
has ablauting -A, Winnebago has zero and Pat and various other Dakotanists
posit CVC stems. To me, this means that EITHER:<br>
<br>
a) Proto-Siouan did have a final vowel, namely -e, and it was lost in Winnebago
and replaced by -A in Dakota, OR:<br>
<br>
b) Proto-Siouan had consonant-final, CVC, stems, and all of the other Siouan
languages innovated a final -e in these stems INDEPENDENTLY. <br>
<br>
Given the pretty much unanimously agreed upon subgrouping of the Siouan
language family, it seems to me that (b) is very unlikely. I included
lots of evidence for this in that paper I sent to several of you/us. For
example (I hope formatting holds here):<br>
<br>
make marks ripe
shallow <br>
PS *ká:xe
*aRú:te *xé:pe <br>
CR -ka:xi
ó:ši
xé:pi <br>
HI -ka:xe
ó:te
xé:pi <br>
MA -kaáx
<br>
LA
káγA
lútA
xépA <br>
CH
gá:γe
dú:je
xé:we <br>
WI
gá:x
tú:č
γé:p <br>
OP
gá:γe
ní:de
xébe <br>
KS
gá:γe
ǰü:ǰe
<br>
OS
ká:γe
cü:ce
xé:pe <br>
QU
ká:γe
títte
<br>
BI
atutí
xépi <br>
OF
atúti
<br>
<br>
You can see that these 3 verbs that "ablaut" in Dakota all show
evidence of a stem-final -e (or a reflex of -e in CR and HI). I personally
don't see any way around reconstructing the *-e, given the subgrouping
and generalized distribution of virtually identical vowels. I might
add that final short -e is vulnerable even today and tends to devoice in
languages like Omaha following certain voiceless consonants, as in: /mikhe/
'I am the one who', which is often pronounced [mikhE] with a whispered
e. (I think John Koontz mentioned this to me; correct me if I'm wrong).
Anyway, the prevalence of an underlying final -e is evident in all
these stems.<br>
<br>
Now, whether there was a period during which Dakotan dialects lost final
-e and actually had CVC stems, I don't know. It may be possible,
but whether or not this happened, Dakotan generalized an [-a] in these
stems, and the impetus for this analogical change seems to have been suffixes
that had a suffix-initial a-, such as -ape/-api 'plural', -as^ 'negative'
and others. As far as I can tell, Dakotan is the only language in
the family that generalized the vowel /-a/ to this degree. So, while
"ablaut" is very real in Dakotan, it is, for the most part, phonologically
conditioned in the rest of Siouan. <br>
<br>
There are isolated examples that muddy the waters like "ablauting"
nouns, e.g., s^uNka 'dog' in Dakota, but this sort of thing is true of
all analogical change. Then there a few cases like ablauting nasal
vowels, aN ~ iN, etc. where analogy REALLY went to town. These don't
exist outside of Dakota as far as I know. <br>
<br>
Anyhow, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. :-) If this
presentation is confusing, to anyone, I can send a copy of the original
paper, as I already have to several.<br>
<br>
Sorry, I can't contribute anything intelligent at all to the Semitic part
of the discussion. <br>
<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
________________________________________<br>
From: Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu] on behalf of Rankin,
Robert L [rankin@KU.EDU]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:42 PM<br>
To: SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu<br>
Subject: Re: Ablaut et al<br>
<br>
Bruce,<br>
<br>
This is indeed an interesting topic. There is a close correlation
between Shaw's (and Carter's, etc.) Dakotan "consonant-final stems"
and stems where the other Siouan languages have long vowels. The
rule seems to have been: If the 1st syllable is long, it is accented;
if it is short, accent the 2nd syllable. Or, it could be phrased
in terms of morae. This begs the question whether or not Dakota had
final vowels in the initial accent words. I'm off this afternoon
on a short trip up to Omaha and Council Bluffs and will return to this
issue when I get back.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
________________________________________<br>
From: Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu] on behalf of shokooh
Ingham [shokoohbanou@YAHOO.CO.UK]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:23 AM<br>
To: SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu<br>
Subject: Ablaut et al<br>
<br>
--- On Mon, 29/8/11, rankin@KU.EDU <rankin@KU.EDU> wrote:<br>
<br>
Bob,<br>
This is in reply to your earlier message , where you sent your article
on Mississipi Valley Siouan "Ablaut". Thanks very much
for that. I found it very interesting and noticed that you mentioned
Shaw's work on Dakota phonology, which I read many years ago, there being
a copy of it in the SOAS library. One thing which interested me in
Shaw was her explanation of the exceptional initial stress in certain disyllabic
stems, káǧa 'to make' being one I think. She posits an earlier
monosyllabic, final consonantal form for these stems such as kaǧ- . I
have never seen this discussed much and wondered what other Siouanists
thought about it. It seems like a very neat analysis and parallels
the argument of Greenberg about Semitic lexical stems which are now disyllabic
in the majority such as katab 'to write'. He suggests that Semitic
stems were originally monosyllabic (in fact bisonsonantal) and that the
second syllable (or the third consonant depending on<br>
how you look at it) is a later addition allowing for lexical expansion,
an initial qat- 'cut' giving later qata', qataf, qatam, qasar and others
all realtable to the idea of 'cutting'. The other advantage is that
it makes Semitic stems look more like Indo-European ones, which is attractive.<br>
Without wishing to appear to be talking Nostratic, I do like the idea of
original monosyllabic stems, but of course it does get into difficult ground
as to how far back you think you can go. I wonder whether it holds
up in other Siouan languages.<br>
Bruce<br>
</font></tt>
<br>