altepetl

[zorrah at ATT.NET]

I enjoyed the sacred landscape meaning of “altepetl” that was provided by Dr. Sullivan.

I learned in my “History of English” class that Modern English has “self-explaining compounds,” or what the authors define as “compounds of two or more native words whose meaning in combination is either self-evident or has been rendered clear by association and usage.”  The book says Old English and modern German are full of self-explaining compounds.  The authors argue that it was a way to conserve the native vocabulary without having to borrow from other languages (lest we lose our culture so the saying goes).

I’m thinking that these “self-explaining compounds” in English are approximately “Tatpurusa” dvandva compounds.  Some examples are given in “History of English” such as “greenhouse, railway, sewing machine, one-way street, and coffee-table book.”

Anyway, now that I think I know what dvandra means, what is the relationship between a dvandra and assimilation in Nahuatl?  I still don’t get it even after looking at Citlayani’s examples now pasted below:

(1) Dvanda
a:tl (water) + tepe:tl (hill) = a:ltepe:tl
A town needs water for irrigation and a hill to keep out of floods.
Thus the components have equal status and the compound is a dvandva.
The basic meaning is "it is water (and) it is a hill", "it is water and
a hill", originally two words, and people gradually started letting
them run together into one; and the sequence -tlt- became -lt-.
(2) Dvanda.
na:huatl + tlahto:lli is also a dvandva: "it is something
clear-sounding (and) it is a language", became na:huallahto:lli ; the
sequence -tltl- became -ll-.
(3) Not a Dvandva.
a:tl + tla:lli (earth) = a:tla:lli 'irrigated land', as it is (a
sort of) land, but it is not (a sort of) water: it is an ordinary
compound, not a dvandva.

There still does not seem to be an explanation for identifying a dvanda in Nahuatl and for following a specified assimilation pattern as a result.  As students, are we even supposed to look for the distinction of a dvanda when we are practicing assimilation patterns?  Any thoughts would be welcomed.  tlazohkamati.

citlalin xochime

-------------- Original message from Davius Sanctex <davius_sanctex at TERRA.ES>: --------------


> Juan,
>
> A dvandva, for example X-Y, is a coordinate lexical compound in wich both
> terms are equally in status and being semantically roughly equivalent of X
> and Y. The terms a loanword from a tradiotional sanscrit grammatical term
> (other three types of compounds are distinguished in sanscrit according to
> its semantic type or syntactical prominence (pra:dha:nyam): Tatpurusa
> compounds, in wich a compound of the for XY is a type of Y, avyayi:bha:va or
> inflecitonal invariant compounds and Bahuvri:hi compounds in wich XY denotes
> a type of entity not relaterd semantically to X or Y].
>
> Examples of these types in Spanish and English are:
> Tatpurusa: "fireman", "fountain-pen", "fish-hook" / "hombre rana"
> Bahuvri:hi: ? / pasacalles, nochebueno, matasuegras
> Dvandva: ? / carricoche, bolilápiz, "sofá cama".
>
> I think most compounds in Englis are Tatpurusa Compounds. In Spanish
> Bahuvri:hi compounds are more abundant. Dvandva compounds are rare in both
> language but not in sanscrito or nahuatl. (Some adverbial expresions in
> Spanish like "a quema ropa" are similar to avyayi:bha:va compounds of
> sanscrit).
>
>
> Davius Sanctex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20050529/b0371596/attachment.htm>