tepi

[Galen Brokaw]

Lori, thank you. Of course. This makes a lot of sense. This is very
interesting, and just goes to show that the whole "-mapichtli" angle
that we were following was misguided from the start. This resolves the
"puzzle" that I mentioned. As I said in my original response, aside from
all the interesting things that can be said about verbal morphology,
glyph morphology, and their relationship, there didn't seem to be any
way to associate the glyph with the name "Tepi" that Delia gave from the
document. That was the real puzzling thing. I would be willing to bet,
and I'm sure Delia will probably confirm that the woman's name was Ana.
Lori, I think your explication of the glyph might be valid with the "ma"
being a close pun on "-na". But I wonder if it might be more likely that
this is an interesting example of the kind of phenomenological
configuration that you also see in more complex non-rebus pictographic
images (from the Laud codex, for example) where in some cases you have
two elements combined, one of which is contained within the other. This
type of interpretation would see the hand grasping the water as
indicating "ana" which means "to grab" and the water glyph would also
pun on [atl] to indicate the verbal segment [a] which begins the name
"Ana." The point being that you can't really grab without grabbing
something. So, they take advantage of the the phenomenological necessity
of the coupling of the grabbing and the object being grabbed to
reinforce the phonetic aspect of the word indicated.
Galen


Lori Boornazian Diel wrote:
> In the Codex Aubin, a glyph of a hand grasping water (at 12 House 1569) is
> used from the name Ana, a(tl) + ma(itl) for a-ma.  Also, in the Codex of
> Tlatelolco, the name glyph for Juan is written with a year sign (for xiuh-)
> and then a hand grasping water,  thereby giving xiuh-a-m(a) or an
> approximation of Juan (this happens in 5 different places in the ms).  So if
> it's a reference to a colonial woman, could it be her first name, Ana?  I'm
> pretty sure I've seen this glyph elsewhere for the name Ana as well.
> Best,
> Lori Diel
>
>
>
> --
> Lori Boornazian Diel
> Dept. of Art and Art History
> TCU Box 298000
> Texas Christian University
> Fort Worth, TX 76129
> 817-257-6613
>
>
>
> on 5/23/05 11:01 AM, John F. Schwaller at schwallr at morris.umn.edu wrote:
>
>
>>At 10:53 AM 5/23/2005, you wrote:
>>
>>>In
>>>any case, the name "Amapichtli" would also seem kind of strange in the
>>>sense that you can't really grasp water because it isn't solid. But
>>>there might be some interesting philosophical implications there.
>>
>>
>>We also do not see naked bottoms growing out of trees [Huexotzinco], but
>>the glyph is not uncommon.  Obviously the point I am making is that the
>>"tzinco" of naked bottom is just a glyph for "tzinco" frequently glossed as
>>new Tollan --> Tollantzinco
>>
>>Similarly, if the glyph described does exist [hand grasping water], and it
>>is not one I recall, could the "water" part be standing in for something
>>else?  I am drawing a blank, but others might be able to see it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>John F. Schwaller
>>Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean
>>315 Behmler Hall
>>University of Minnesota, Morris
>>600 E 4th Street
>>Morris, MN  56267
>>320-589-6015
>>FAX 320-589-6399
>>schwallr at morris.umn.edu
>
>
>