Siouan case alignment.

[Koontz John E]

On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Robert L. Rankin wrote:
> clearly stative (or adjectival).  In several languages there are cases of
> SEMANTICALLY ACTIVE VERBS THAT USE (OR MAY USE) THE STATIVE SUBJECT
> PRONOUN SET.  It is this set that I'd like to ask you about.  
> 
> 1.  Are there such verbs in the Siouan language(s) you've studied?

Yes.  Though my data, obviously, isn't going to add much to what Bob
already knows about Dhegiha, since it's Omaha-Ponca.  

> 2.  If so, what are they? 
> 3.  Can you provide examples?  These would need to be in the 2nd, 3rd or
> inclusive (1st dual/pl.) persons, since 3rd person forms do not have
> prefixes that reveal case alignment.  All help will be gratefully
> acknowledged.

* dhiNge' 'to lack'
aNdhiN'ge, dhidhiN'ge, wadhiN'ge

The verb agrees with the one who lacks the thing, not with the thing
lacked.  Agreement is stative.

JOD1890:107.12

maNze=s^te  aNdhiN'ge he 
iron  any   I lack it DECf 

* gi'udaN 'to be pleased by, be pleasant for'
iN'udaN, dhi'udaN, (?) iN'gudaN

The verb agrees with the one who experiences the pleasure, not with the
source of the pleasure.  Agreement is dative/stative.  

Omaha Fieldwork

niN'niN giu'daN=                attas^aN
tobacco is pleasurable for her  very
'She likes to smoke too much'


JOD1890:247.9

dhi'udaN=tta=the
it shall be good for you!

(of the thrusting of a hot iron into a water monster's injury)


* gi't?e 'for one's to die'
iNt?e', dhit?e', we't?e

I am unsure how to count this one.  I don't have any examples on the order
of 'you have died for us', so it appears to pattern like the others, in
that the verb agrees with the person who experiences the loss, not the one
lost.  However, t?e is normally active, and noticed that in one of the
examples the person lost takes a subject artilce (ama).  Agreement is
dative/stative, active agreement with the one lost may be possible.

Note that it is perfectly possible to say 'my brother died' and not mark
possession only in the kinterm.  That seems to be the normal pattern with
inalienably possessed kin.  

JOD1890:347.10-11

s^iN'ga=z^iNga aNt?aN=i   e=   de,    we't?a=i 
child          we had him that=TOPIC, he has died to us (ours has died)
Though we had a child, he has died.

May be aNthaN=i?

JOD1890:495.8-9

niNkka=s^iNga=ama iNt?e'           ha
people            have died to me  DECm
Some of my friends have died.

* uxpa'dhe  'to fall; to be lost'
uwa'xpadhe, udha'xpadhe, aNwan'xpadhe

There seems to be no reason why this cannot be used actively in the sense
of 'to fall (from a height)', but I have only third person examples in the
texts.  

Note, however, this example of 'to be lost':

JOD1891:120.4

uxpa'dhe     idha'kkuhe    ha
it gets lost I fear for it DECm

Now note:

* uixpadhe 'to lose something; something to be lost for one'
iNwiN'xpadhe, ?udhi'xpadhe, ?uwagixpadhe 

(I'm lacking the questioned forms, and there is some variation in u-i- <
u-gi- paradigms.)

The one who loses the thing is agreed with, the thing lost is not.
Agreement is dative/stative.  

JOD1890:647.2

s^aN'ge iNwiN'xpadhe=de     naNba' we'bahaN
horse   I lost it    TOPIC  two    he knew them
He recognized two horses that I had lost.

> 4.  There may also be semantically stative verbs that use active
> morphology.  I'm also interested in any of these you have.  They might
> include 'be sitting, be standing, by lying, be around, to stay/dwell'. 

All these, in standard Dhegiha form.  In OP t?e' 'to die' is always
active, as far as I know, except in the na=t?'e 'to die by heat'
derivation.  But na= derivations are always stative.

> Additional notes that may be helpful to you:  In many active/stative
> languages actions over which the speaker lacks "control" may require
> stative morphology.  So verbs like 'sneeze, hiccup, belch, fart, pant,
> vomit' are sometimes stative morphologically.  In Kansa and Quapaw these
> verbs all seem to be active morphologically, but certain other verbs can
> be stative.  'Die' can be either.  'Fall' is another good one to look at. 
> Miner's Winnebago lexicon lists 'fall over', 'fall down' and 'keep falling
> down in weakness while running in fear' as requiring the stative pronoun
> set. 

As far as I know the 'sneeze', etc., set are all active.  I don't have
inflectional information on many of them.

I've mentioned 'fall' and 'die' above.  There is another verb 'to fall',
also, active:  xiadha.  I have no inflectional information on this, but in
Osage (fide LaFlesche) it inflects axibdha, dhaxis^na, xiadha, aNxidha=i.
Now, since this is obviously the Omaha pattern of dh-stem in the second of
the two co-verbs, I suspect it reflects Omaha.  I'm not sure what to make
of the -a- in the third person only.