altepetl

[Rikke Marie Olsen]

Joe:

I thought there was a broad consensus about *tl*, *l* and *t*, that certain
dialects (I can't name them) has an *l* in places where classical Nahuatl
would have a *tl*, and other dialects still has a *t* instead of *tl*.

I can't say anything about voiceless alveolar affricates, but if it's a
possibility in the evolvement of dialects, couldn't it also happen with a
single word within a dialect?

Rikke


-----Original Message-----
From: Nahua language and culture discussion [mailto:NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU]
On Behalf Of campbel at INDIANA.EDU
Sent: 30. maj 2005 06:48
To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU
Subject: Re: altepetl

    First, I think that the activity on this thread and the previous one,
Chimalpain, have been a nice demonstration of the power and utility of
Nahuat-l.
I imagine that most of us would not be able to sustain this level of
activity on
a year-round basis, but I prefer "busy" to "quiet".

    Second, a little quibble, but a very serious one on the quote below:
As Fran has stated very clearly, yes, "altepetl" developed from a phrase
(involving two full *words*) rather than from the compounding of *stems*,
but I
am relatively sure (even though we all know that one who is "sure" is on
slippery ice) that pronouncing the phrase "atl tepetl" with one's built-in
speech habits and one's notions of Nahuatl pronunciation (either now or
sixteenth century, or, more accurately, prior to the sixteenth century) will
not
lead one down the path of reality.  I think that John, for one, can render a
good native-sounding pronunciation of the phrase, but that is *not* the main
point.

    Phonetically, we know that /tl/ is a voiceless alveolar affricate; if we
proceed from the voiceless lateral fricative release to the probably dental
stoppage (we don't know whether the dental stop may have assimilated in
point of
articulation to the immediately preceding consonant), it is hard to imagine
how
the transition could have developed a voiced [l] segment (and then deleted
the
preceding [t] segment.
    My point of view is that we shouldn't deceive ourselves by believing
that
we "feel" or "appreciate" what happened when we don't.  I am not suggesting
that
we not sniff down any likely path of inquiry, just that we recognize ones
that
are not reasonable.
>
> I believe that the original form was atl-tepetl. Only if you try to
> pronounce it, it will sound more and more like al-tepetl the more you say
> it. In other words I see it as an assimilation of 'tl' in front of 't'
gives
> 'lt'.
>
>

    Third, since I thought that some examples of "difrasismos" would be
helpful.
In spite of the fact that there is a list member who knows much more about
them
than I do, I'm sending an uncommented set of them for your curiosity and
enjoyment.  The "uncommented" nature of the list is well motivated -- at
some
point, tlatzihuiliztli set in and there is no cure for that.

Joe



iahaz icuitlapil                 his subjects, his vassals

ahcohuic tlalchihuic quittaz     he will respect him

ahuaqueh tepehuaqueh             inhabitants of a city

apixqueh tepepixqueh             guardians of a town

ahuayohuaque, huitzyohuaque      possessors of offspring

pochotl ahuehuetl                shelter

tealcececahui, tetzitzicazhui    one who punishes

teatoyahuia tetepexihuia         she punishes someone

huehuetitlan, ayacachtitlan      in rituals of song and dance

xomolli, caltechtli              oblivion

teoatl tlachinolli               war

teoatl tlachinoltilmahtli        cape which has a war symbol on it

tocochca, in toneuhca            our nourishment

tecue, in tehuipil               someone's woman

huictli, mecapalli               bondage

tinechopochtiz, tinechitzcactiz  you will occupy a place in my confidence,
                                 you will have my proxy

ixequeh nacacequeh               prudent people

petlatiz icpaltiz                he will reign

tecomic tecaxic timayahuiz       you will pilfer