<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body ocsi="0" fpstyle="1">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Times New Roman;color: #000000;font-size: 12pt;">
Well, I agree with both of you to a point. If <i>ire</i> really means 'you go', then we have a little inflection. On the other hand,
<i>i-</i> 'you' is a replacement prefix. The inherited 2nd person prefix would have been
<i>š-. I</i>- would be derived from the independent pronoun. So one could argue either way. Either it's inflection or it is the replacement of inflection with an independent pronoun. And the order is indeed the very un-Siouan SVO. Note, however, that there
are several SVO sentences among those recorded by linguists looking at Tutelo proper.
<br>
<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
________________________________________<br>
From: Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu] on behalf of Anthony Grant [granta@EDGEHILL.AC.UK]<br>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 1:57 PM<br>
To: SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu<br>
Subject: Re: Tutelo verb 'go'<br>
<br>
Dave et al: this would be supportive but not definitive evidence. What is the clincher is the dearth of productive inflectional morphology.<br>
<br>
Anthony<br>
<br>
>>> David Kaufman <dvkanth2010@GMAIL.COM> 17/06/2013 19:44 >>><br>
The one sentence in your data, Bob, 'hodke tok ire chunkete posse', would<br>
seem to indicate a pidginized language, since most pidgins, I think, adopt<br>
Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) order (with the major exception of Mobilian<br>
Jargon, which maintained a verb-final order).<br>
<br>
Great paper!<br>
<br>
Dave<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM, ROOD DAVID S <david.rood@colorado.edu>wrote:<br>
<br>
> Wow... sounds a little like the Hindi (and neighbors) shift from<br>
> accusative to ergative in perfect tenses.<br>
><br>
> Have you ever thought of any tests for "stativity" in Siouan<br>
> besides the pronoun choices? Lakota stative verbs use a different pattern<br>
> for reduplication than do active verbs, and there are separate rules for<br>
> k-palatalization for statives (nikhuz^e without palatalization, e.g.). I<br>
> don't have those facts clear in my head, however. Anything else?<br>
><br>
> I appreciate Bob's description of the evolution of these patterns<br>
> in OVS, blaming most of it on phonology, and I always prefer a phonological<br>
> explanation to a semantic one. But the fact that motion verbs take patient<br>
> pronouns here and there, as mentioned in some of the other contributions to<br>
> this thread, makes one wonder if there's more to it than phonology.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
> David<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> David S. Rood<br>
> Dept. of Linguistics<br>
> Univ. of Colorado<br>
> 295 UCB<br>
> Boulder, CO 80309-0295<br>
> USA<br>
> rood@colorado.edu<br>
><br>
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Marianne Mithun wrote:<br>
><br>
> Ah, it's in the aspect suffixes, loud and clear. In Northern Iroquoian<br>
>> (which is all of Iroquoian except Cherokee), all verbs (except imperatives)<br>
>> are obligatorily inflected for aspect: Habitual, Perfective, or Stative. So<br>
>> for that, we just look at the marking on the end.<br>
>><br>
>> Stative verbs include things that everyone would immediately agree are<br>
>> states: 'be rich', 'be new' . . . Here the choice of pronominal paradigm<br>
>> is interesting. For resultant states ('wet'), usually patient prefixes are<br>
>> used. For inherent states, usually agent forms.<br>
>><br>
>> For transitive verbs, the statives are perfect, a kind of resultant<br>
>> state: 'I have eaten'. These have stative endings and patient pronominal<br>
>> prefixes. (I'm just sitting here full now.)<br>
>><br>
>> An interesting wrinkle is that some formally stative verbs are things<br>
>> that we might think, from their translations, as say progressive:<br>
>> 'singing'. These are often activities without a tangible product. The verb<br>
>> 'go' could be interpreted as 'be in motion' perhaps, as one grasps at<br>
>> straws for an explanation.<br>
>><br>
>> (Habituals and Perfectives usually occur with agents, but some occur with<br>
>> patients, such as 'to lose something', 'to yell', etc.) The agent or<br>
>> patient paradigm gets established with a particular verb stem, and will<br>
>> stick even if the stem meanders semantically.<br>
>><br>
>> Iroquoian is thus a little more interesting, because there is a basically<br>
>> agent/patient system with an active/stative overlay (stative perfects<br>
>> obligatorily occurring with patients).<br>
>><br>
>> Marianne<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --On Saturday, June 15, 2013 6:39 PM -0600 ROOD DAVID S <<br>
>> david.rood@COLORADO.EDU> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Marianne, thanks for that little essay. What are the "stative"<br>
>>> properties of Iroquoian 'go'? I'm used to relying on the pronoun choice<br>
>>> to classify the verbs; how do you separate them?<br>
>>> Best,<br>
>>> David<br>
>>><br>
>>> David S. Rood<br>
>>> Dept. of Linguistics<br>
>>> Univ. of Colorado<br>
>>> 295 UCB<br>
>>> Boulder, CO 80309-0295<br>
>>> USA<br>
>>> rood@colorado.edu<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Marianne Mithun wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Actually this is exactly why it is important to distinguish<br>
>>>> active/stative patterns from agent/patient patterns. Active/stative<br>
>>>> patterns are driven by Aktionsart, that is, the difference between<br>
>>>> events and states. Agent/patient systems are driven by the role of the<br>
>>>> referent, as instigating, volitional, in control, etc. Both occur,<br>
>>>> sometimes within the same language, but agent/patient systems are much<br>
>>>> more common cross-linguistically.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The two often yield similar patterns. Events are often instigated by<br>
>>>> agents and states often impact patients. A verb like 'jump' denotes an<br>
>>>> event and would usually appear with an agent in agent/patient systems,<br>
>>>> and an active participant in active/stative systems; a verb like 'be<br>
>>>> sick' denotes a state and would usually appear with a patient in<br>
>>>> agent/patient systems, and a stative participant in active/stative<br>
>>>> systems. But it is exactly in situations like the ones we're discussing<br>
>>>> that the distinction is important. From there of course<br>
>>>> cross-linguistic details become interesting: whether instigation or<br>
>>>> control is criterial when they do not coincide, what is classified as<br>
>>>> volitional, what is classified as a state, etc.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> (In Iroquoian languages, 'go' is grammatically stative, but occurs with<br>
>>>> agent pronominals, not surprisingly.)<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Marianne.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> --On Friday, June 14, 2013 10:44 PM +0000 "Rankin, Robert L."<br>
>>>> <rankin@KU.EDU> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>>> That sounds very peculiar to me. I suspect that what you're seeing is<br>
>>>>> the disjunctive (i.e., independent) pronominal for the 1st person<br>
>>>>> rather<br>
>>>>> than the patient. You may already have my active/stative comparative<br>
>>>>> paper, but just in case, I'll attach a copy. The last section is an<br>
>>>>> addition on OVS that attempts to explain the pronominals. Bottom line:<br>
>>>>> I don't think Tutelo uses stative subjects with "go".<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Bob<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ______________________________**____________________<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> From: Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu] on behalf of David<br>
>>>>> Kaufman [dvkanth2010@GMAIL.COM]<br>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 4:13 PM<br>
>>>>> To: SIOUAN@listserv.unl.edu<br>
>>>>> Subject: Tutelo verb 'go'<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Hi all,<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> It seems Tutelo's verb 'go' takes a patientive/object rather than<br>
>>>>> active/subject pronoun prefix, wi- instead of wa-. Does any other<br>
>>>>> Siouan language do this? (I can't compare with Biloxi since it lost<br>
>>>>> this agent/patient distinction in pronouns.) I'm particularly<br>
>>>>> interested in this because two Lower Mississippi Valley languages,<br>
>>>>> Atakapa and Chitimacha, also seem to take patientive/object instead of<br>
>>>>> active/subject pronouns with the verb 'go.' At first I thought this<br>
>>>>> was strange and counterintuitive, but now I'm seeing it may be a more<br>
>>>>> common phenomenon well beyond the Mississippi Valley. Any thoughts?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Dave<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> --<br>
>>>>> David Kaufman, Ph.C.<br>
>>>>> University of Kansas<br>
>>>>> Linguistic Anthropology<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
David Kaufman, Ph.C.<br>
University of Kansas<br>
Linguistic Anthropology<br>
<br>
Edge Hill University<br>
Times Higher University of the Year - shortlisted 2007, 2010, 2011<br>
www.edgehill.ac.uk<br>
<br>
<br>
This message is private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Edge Hill
or associated companies. Edge Hill University may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and business communications during staff absence.<br>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>