-ti verber

Clayton, Mary L. clayton at indiana.edu
Thu Sep 25 19:06:56 UTC 2014

Michel and Listeros,
As John said, in Joe’s system, which parallels Andrews' in this regard, 
he has two ti- verbers: v01a ti- 'be', 'become', and v04 'have'. V01a 
forms its causative by adding -lia (caus04), while v04 forms its 
causative by adding -a (caus08).

Below are some examples of intransitive verbs in v04 -ti- 'have' (from 
Joe's list of 9/24. For transparency, I am not using Joe’s numbering 
for pronimal prefixes. These examples are taken from his databases).

ontzinti 'it begins' FC bk 8 o:n-tzi:ntli- v04  'it has a beginning'.
tzinti 'començarse algo' 55m <tzintli-v04>    = 'for something to have 
a beginning'

cf. nitlatzintia 'comenzar algo', 'fundar o principiar alguna cosa' m55 
  <ni-tla-tzintli-v04-caus08> = to cause something to have a beginning'

ohxiti 'it has resin' FC bk 11 ohza-l2-v04

ahnihueliti 'no poder o no tener oportunidad para hazer algo'   
<ah1-ni-huelitl-v04> 55m, 71m1, 71m2

cf. nitehuelitia 'dar facultad, poder y autoridad a otro para hazer 
algo 71m2 <ni-te-huelitl-v04-caus08>

huictih 'they wield a hoe' FC bk7  <huictli-v04-pl>

nitequiti 'servuir el esclauo' 71m1, 'contribuir dar tributo' 55m, 
'obra dar' 55m  <ni-tequitl-v04>  = ‘for a slave to have work, duty’

cf. nitetequitia 'ocupar a otro dandole algun tequiuh' 71m1; repartir 
tequios' 71m1 <ni-te-tequitl-v04-caus08>   = ‘I give someone work, a 

ompahtih ‘they get well’FC Bk12  <o:n-pahtli-v04-plur>   = ‘They have 
opahtic ‘he got well’ FC Bk 10 <o:-pahtli-v04-pret2>   = ‘He had medicine’

cf. nimitzpahtia ‘I cure you” FC Bk 5  <ni-mitz-pahtli-v04-caus08> = ‘I 
cause you to have medicine’
cf. nitepahtia ‘sanar a otro’ 55m, 71m1, 71m2   = ‘I cause someone to 
have medicine’

     Indeed, v04 with the causative is more common. I give some 
additional examples below. The point is that the ti- in these cases 
means ‘have’ and not ‘be, become’.

ninocactia 'calzar zapatos; calzarse zapatos o sandalias'  
<ni-mo-cactli-v04-caus08> ='I cause myself to have shoes' certainly not 
'I cause myself to BE shoes'

ninocamisahtia 'vestirse la camisa' <ni-mo-camisahtli-v04-caus04>  = ‘I 
cause myself to have a camisa’

nicahuallocactia 'herrar bestias'  <ni-cahuallo-cactli-v04-caus08>   = 
'I cause a horse to have shoes'.

ninonantia, 'tomar por madre'  <ni-mo-na:ntli-v04-caus08>  .  = 'I 
cause myself to have a mother'.

nitenantia 'dar aotro alguna por madre, o por madrina'.  
<ni-te-na:ntli-v04-caus08>   = 'I cause someone to have a mother'   
NOTE that the Spanish equivalents are Molina’s. They mean ‘give’ = 
‘cause to have’, not ‘be/become’.

naltepetzintia 'poblar cibdad o lugar'. 'to found a city' 'to start a 
city'  <ni-a:tl1-tepe:tl-tzi:ntli-v04-caus04>   = 'to cause a city to 
have a beginning'

moamahtlapaltia 'echar ojas los arboles' 71m1, 71m2  
<mo-a:matl-ahtlapalli-v04-caus08>    = 'for a tree to leaf out, for a 
tree to cause itself to have "wings"'.

nitlaayotia 'aguar algo; aguar el vino; etc.' 55m   
<ni-tla-a:tl1-yoa:-l2-v04-caus08> ' = 'I cause something to have 

COMPARE THE V01a for a:tl with a verber:
nicatilia ‘I melt it’. <ni-c-a:tl-v01a-caus04>   = ‘I cause it to BE / 
BE LIKE water.
This is v01a and it takes a different causative.

ninocaltia 'edificar para si; edificar edificio para si'  
<ni-mo-calli-v04-caus08>   = I cause myself to have a house'

nitecaltia 'edificar casa a otro' <ni-te-calli-v04-caus08>    = 'I 
cause someone to have a house.

ninochimaltia 'escudarse'  <ni-mo-chimalli-v04-caus08> = 'I cause 
myself to have a shield'

     Sometimes we see a second object. For the moment at least, these 
are puzzling because there is another object with no additional verbal 
morphology, but the meanings seem to work the same, and Molina has some 
variation in the number of objects with the same meanings e.g. both 
ninotahtia and nicnotahtia ‘tomar a otro por padre’  = ‘to cause myself 
to have a father.

nicnaxcatia 'apropriar para si' 71m1, 'aplicar, o apropriar para si 
alguna cosa' 71m2, 'apropriar hazer proprio' 55m  
<ni-c-mo-a:xca:itl-v04-caus08>. = 'I cause myself to have a possession'

niteaxcatia 'dotar hija a otra persona; dotar; enagenar'   
<ni-te-a:xca:itl-v04-caus08>  =  ‘I cause someone to have a possession.


Quoting M Launey <mlauney at wanadoo.fr>:

> Dear John and listeros
> I?m puzzled by this translation -ti = « have ». I?m away for a week
> from my books, and I will check as soon as I can, but I can?t
> remember a single clear occurrence in the Classical Nahuatl corpus of
> a ?ti verb meaning « have ».
> To express « I have a mother », in the usual, straightforward sense,
> I know two ways. The most common one is ?ni-n?n-ê? (or ni-n?n-eh, if
> you like), i.e. something like « I?m mothered ». The other one, less
> frequent, is ?on-câ (or oncah) no-n?n?, lit. « My mother exists ».
> Milpa Alta and possibly quite a few other modern dialects have
> developed piya, originally « keep » or « have by/on oneself »
> (custodiar, o llevar encima) corresponding to most uses of Spanish
> « tener », and so in these dialects you would say ?nicpiya nonan?. It
> may be the case that some modern dialects say ?ninanti?, but again
> this lacks in Classical Nahuatl.
> We also have to be careful about the so-called « meaning » of verbs
> like « have » or « be » in languages that do have such verbs. The
> fact that these verbs lack in many other languages, and that such
> languages nevertheless express pretty well the same notions and
> relations, shows that « have » or « be » actually mark a complex set
> of relations, and if we try to find what is common to these relations
> (for instance in « have a mother », « have a house », « have to » (as
> a duty or a necessity), « have s.o. do sth. » (causative sense) or
> « have read » (past perfect)), we come to abstract relations such as
> « mutual position of two entities or two notions ». So, although I do
> not remember so, it may be the case that some compound words NS (Noun
> Stem) + -ti can be translated by « have » in English, but it would
> certainly be an atypical subcase of the use of « have » in English,
> and certainly different from « have a mother » or « have a house »,
> which are expressed by possessive nouns (in /-e?/ or /-wa?/) or with
> the existential oncâ.
> There obviously is a dissymetry between ?ti verbs based on animate
> vs. inanimate nouns. While cal-tia is amply attested in the corpus, I
> don?t think you will find cal-ti, and if you do, it will mean « be a
> house » which is nevertheless improbable (because a house is a house,
> and you can hardly introduce aspect « behave like a house »), or more
> likely « act in such a way that a house exists », i.e. « make a
> house », like tequiti « make the tequitl ». But I don?t remember
> having seen any of these uses of a possible cal-ti.
> So you may be right is saying that ?tia has to be analyzed ?ti+ a, if
> this is the way I understand your claim that there are no direct
> transitive verbers (even if the case of ?huia remains), but the
> semantic relation of ?ti vs. ?tia verbs is definitely not a
> causative, but rather an applicative one. Maybe we should again
> consider that all this sums up to abstract relations, and that ?tia
> (or maybe just the final ?a) does not basically mark causation, but
> the presence of an adjunct, a new participant to the process, that
> can be interpreted as a dative (in the case of applicatives) or a
> « « new » agent (in the case of causative).
> Sorry to be long once more, but the issue is indeed interesting.
> One more remark. I confirm the existence of an intransitive ?tia in
> verbs like cemilhuitia, cexiuhtia « spend a (whole) day, a (whole)
> year ». I must confess I have no satisfying explanation so far.
> Best
> Michel

Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org

More information about the Nahuat-l mailing list