R: Teoti:-hua-0-ca:-n

[Antonio Perri]

Dear Russell,
I apologize for the lateness in the answer.
I guess the one you allued it's me, since I wrote some time ago to you in
the list about the reaing of "Teotihuacan". As you probably remember, I
quoted not my own reading of this locative, but the one given by Launey in
his grammar. I wrote as follows:
(indeed, the case of Teo-ti-hua-can is analyzed as a verbal one by Launey:
"The place where gods make themselves (from the impersonal of teoti, "to
become a god")". I quote from Launey grammar: "usually, -can is suffixed to
the participial suffix, then to the "ajectives" in -c -qui, possessive nouns
in -hua, -e, -yo an agent nouns derived from perfect". Notice, however, that
many of these elements (e.g. so-called ajectives) are in fact derived from
verbs, an that the same -can is connected to transitive verbs: e.g. from
com(itl)-chihua, "to make pottery", we have "con-chiuh-can", "place where
they make pottery". In this case, no doubt that "ciuh-" is the root of a
verb "to make" with incorporate object.
Notice, however, that your basic argument could be splitte in two relevant
parts, namely:
i) does the suffix *can* allows for ana analysis such as it is formed from
*ca(tl)* (a nominal suffix) plus a "generic locative" *n*? I have no
definite answer to you on this matter (incidentally, I wonder if someone
"wiser"  in the list could be of some help in elucidating this point also to
me);
ii) does *teoti-hua-(c-atl)* is a nounified verb, or it is just a verb? The
answer to this question is quite simple an quite difficult at the same time:
indeed, one could say "it is both a name and a verb", provided that the
"indoeuropean" binary contrast between names and verbs no longer holds for
an omnipredicative lunguage such as nahuatl. In other words, you could
either consider *teotihua(c-atl)* as a name (but notice that you always need
to translate it as a sort of predicative clause, "one/it was/became a god")
or, in the form *teotihua(c)* as a verb "(the gods) make (made) temselves",
i.e. "they became god". It doesn't really matter which is your option, since
the real meaning of the nahuatl form is someting in-between the two, say, a
predicative form one could translate into English (or Italian, of course)
nounifying it (always in a predicative form) or as a common verbal
utterance.
Sincerely
Antonio

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Accounts Clerk <rcoleman at library.uwa.edu.au>
A: Multiple recipients of list <nahuat-l at server.umt.edu>
Data: martedì 29 giugno 1999 9.19
Oggetto: Teoti:-hua-0-ca:-n


>I did not get any corrections on my last post regarding teoti:-hua-0-ca:tl.
>So, it would seem that I am on the right track.
>
>Now, take the place name Teotihuacan. Would I be correct in assuming that
>there is a preterite agentive noun form here.
>
>So Teotihuacan would look like Teoti:-hua-0-ca:-n :
>
>i.e. Teoti:-hua-0-ca: = (it/one was/became a god) = the preterite agentive
>form made up of (teoti = to be/become a god; -hua = impersonal verb suffix;
>0 = zero tense suffix; ca:tl = noun that creates the preterite agentive
noun
>and connects to the locative suffix); plus -n = locative suffix.
>
>These are my assumptions and because I have not been corrected in my
>previous posts I can only assume that I am possibly on the right track in
my
>understanding of the place name Teotihuacan. However, having said that, I
>know there is one person on the list that will say this is incorrect, that
>there is a verb here and not a "noun-ified" verb.  I now depend upon as
much
>feed back as possible to help me gain a better understanding of the
>mechanics behind this name Teotihuacan.
>
>Is it a verb or is it a preterite agentive noun? And Why?
>
>Thanks in advance for your feedback.
>
>Russell Coleman
>
>P.S. How does one render in English the preterite form teoti:-hua-0-c?  Is
>it "one/it was/became a god?
>
>