lo siento mucho

[Michael McCafferty]

THREE TYPOS OF MY OWN BELOW:



Quoting Michael McCafferty <mmccaffe at indiana.edu>:

> Ken, Tomas, y otros listeros,
>
> The explanation below is not quite right, I don't think. Let's back up
> for a moment.
>
> The original form that Ken wrote was "ynitech yxci yhcuiliuhtica".
>
> We can write this in, shall we say?, the Andrewsian Alphabet as
>
> in i:tech ixci (?) ihcuiliuticah


THIS SHOULD READ:

in i:tech ixci (?) ihcuiliuhticah

>
>
> I'm assuming "ixci" is an original copy error or a Ken keyboarding
> error standing for icxi 'foot/feet'.
>
>
> ihcuiliutica

AND THIS SHOULD BE

ihcuiliuhtica


is not a "present progressive". This is an example of how
> an intransitive verb can join with -ti-cah to produce what is usually
> translated into English as an adjective, sometimes a noun:
>
> chica:hua  become strong
> chica:uticah

AND THAT SHOULD BE  chica:uhticah





it is strong, or something that is strong
>
> tlacoxe:lihui  divide in half
> tlahcoxe:liuhticah  it is divided in half; something divided in half
>
>
> 'adjacent to the foot/feet it is written, there is written, something
> got written' (I like the last one best).
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> Quoting t_amaya at megared.net.mx:
>
>>
>> 	Hallo Ken Kitayama,
>>
>> 	  BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
>> My first reading is. "on his foot, it is written ...", my seccond: "on
>> his foot, it is painted"
>>
>> 	Explaining: ca and oc (tica and toc) can be used for a resultant
>> state, if you want to express the progressive tense you have to say
>> e.g. tlahcuiliuhtica, quiihcuiliuhtica (he is writting (something), he
>> is painting it); i.e. we have to use the "thing" or "accusative"
>> particle.
>>
>> 	For me, according to the context, the verb may mean "to write" or
>> "to paint".
>>
>> 	Exemple in nahuat of Cuetzalan: in quinequía, choloz ilpihtoc
>> (ilpihtica) yn axno (the donkey is tied because he wanted to escape)
>>
>> 	You also have the particle tech, whose meaning is precisely "on".
>> Pay attention: depending on the context the text could mean: "on his
>> food, that is painted ..." ; it depends if you read: yn itech yxci,
>> ihcuiliuhtica, or: in itech ixci ihcuiliuhtica.
>>
>> 	Exemples: Yn itech imetz (foot in Cuetzalan nahuat), ihcuiliuhtica
>> ce totot; on his foot, it is painted a bird. In itech
>> imetz-ihcuiliuhtica, motta ce totot (on his painted foot one can see a
>> bird).
>>
>> 	I hope it helps you
>>
>> 	Nimitztlapaloa.
>>
>> 	Tomas Amaya
>> On Sun 28/03/10 6:30 PM , "Ken Kitayama" kk2443 at columbia.edu sent:
>>  My name is Ken Kitayama; I am a senior at Columbia University
>> working on a project dealing with corporal images in colonial New
>> Spain.  I have come across a 17th century document that uses the
>> phrase "ynitech yxci yhcuiliuhtica".  I have two questions.  First,
>> from my understanding, the verb "yhcuiliuhtica" as written is in the
>> present progressive tense, but this interpretation does not make sense
>> within the rest of the document.  So I was wondering if anyone had
>> seen the "-ca" prefix used as a verb of a resultant state ("it is
>> painted/inscribed").  Secondly, I am having trouble interpreting the
>> meaning of the verb "yhcuiliuhtica" itself.  I would like to know
>> whether it has to do with the verb "to paint" as in applying pigment
>> to the surface of the skin, or if it has to do more with an
>> interpretation like "to inscribe", where the skin is actually broken
>> and pigment is introduced inside the skin itself.  Thanks for your
>> help.
>> --
>> Ken Kitayama
>> Columbia College 2010
>> 3620 Lerner Hall
>> New York, NY 10027
>> -------------------------
>> Este e-mail fue enviado usando Webmail Meg at red.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nahuatl mailing list
> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl