=?utf-8?Q?=C2=A0N-ti_?=verbs (supplement)

[M Launey]

Dear listeros

I had planned to give up the N-ti issue, but reading some messages really gives me a strange feeling. So let me put it another way.

I can admit that very often the translation of N–ti by « be N » is possible, however unsatisfactory (because it misses the dynamic, aspectual nature of what is actually a verb of action).

I fully agree that in nearly all its occurrences N-tia can be translated by « give N to s.o. », « provide s.o. with N », even if my gloss would not be « make s.o. have N », but rather « make N for s.o. » (that is, I analyze the form as an applicative) ; but both glosses give the correct sense anyway.

But if you say adamantly that « have N » is a common translation for N-ti, and all the more so if you claim that it is the most frequent one, then I hate to be blunt, but it is just false. Again, I challenge you to bring any substantial evidence from the Classical Nahuatl corpus (note that I am speaking of N-ti allegedly meaning « have N », not of N-tia admittedly meaning « give N »). For instance, take the Florentine Codex with Dibble and Anderson’s translation, which is very reliable because these people have a deep knowledge of Nahuatl language and culture, and count how many occurrences of N-ti are or even could be translated by « have N ».

Mary Clayton and Tomas Anaya met the challenge, and picked up a few possible examples, with their references. In my opinion these examples were not convincing, and I tried to explain why, with arguments that everyone is free to find convincing or less convincing. So at least that was food for thought and discussion between peers, and I thank Mary and Tomas for that.

Sincerely

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