Questions on Incorporation

[Koontz John E]

> I would like to do a comparative study of incorporation in
> Siouan ...

I seem to recall a survey of Dakotan incorporation by Willem de Reuse.
Can anyone confirm this?  

my language = Omaha-Ponca

> 	1) Does your language have a productive system of noun incorporation?

Some objects lack articles, but I am not sure if this qualifies.  There is
no evidence of phonological incorporation in a productive fashion.  Most
of the things that are clearly phonologically incorporated are not truly
productive, and are nominal or pronominal mainly in a historical sense.

> 	2) Does the language allow other thing (post positions, etc.) to be
> incorporated?

You might be looking for parallels with the incorporation of
postpositional phrases that occurs in Crow.  You should certainly look at
the distribution of C-final enclitics in Dakotan, but as Dhegiha tends to
abhor C-final things, this kind of test is hard to come by.  There are
some case of =C(C)V postpositions being contracted to =C(C) before
V-initial verbs (see below).  

Demonstratives are incorporated into verbs of saying and thinking, mainly
e 'that (aforesaid?), it' and ga 'yon', but also ede 'to say what' (as in
'what did he say?'), which seems to be something like [e=d(a)]=e, where
e=da is 'what' (cf. edadaN 'what', presumably e=da=daN, with the daN
CONTINGENT enclitic), and e is 'to say'.  

One could argue that most of the demonstrative + postposition/enclitic
forms are constructed similarly, cf. e'=di 'that-at' = 'there (is)', e'tta
'that-to, thither', e=di=thaN, e=tta'=thaN 'that from, thence', e'=naN
'that-many', e'=gaN 'that-like, thus, so'.  The latter is actually
inflected, as e'=gimaN 'I am like that', e'=giz^aN 'you are like that',
e'=gaN 'he is like that, like that, thus, so', cf. e=aN 'how', which lacks
the g(i) derivation.  One occasionally catches the postpositional forms
acting as impersonal verbs, especially, e=di 'there (is)'.  A nice example
migth be gu'=di ga=hau! 'thither!' or 'get away!' which is marked as
imperative.  You can do the same with du'=di 'hither'.  

Postpositions seem to be incorporated in forms like [e=d]=uihe.  I seem to
recall that the gloss here is 'to be part of', but I'll have to check
that.  I seem to remember the form, but be vague on the gloss.  

It's perhaps moot whether [e=dh(e)]=e=gaN 'to think' has e'=gaN 'like
that' as a required enclitic, or has e=dhe, the original verb 'to think'
incorporated in an impersonal e'=gaN.  

The motion verbs all cheerfully take as proclitics the du=, s^u=, gu=
series of demonstratives, and the s^(u) forms are quite productive in the
sense of 'to(ward) you'.  For example, s^u'=bdhe 'I'm heading toward you'.   

> 	3) Do you know what types of things can be incorporated? (inanimate
> nouns, non-specific
> 		nouns, salient nouns, people/characters, etc.)

No, I'm afraid not.

> 	4) Do you find that younger speakers incorporate less than older
> speakers?

No data.  One could perhaps compare Catherine Rudin's texts with Dorsey's.
My suspicion is that there are not really any temporal variations in what
occurs, because it's not very productive.  But I haven't looked at the "no
article objects."  

> 	5) Do you know of any published or non-published papers on the
> subject on incorporation
> 		in your language?

No.
 
> 	6) Lastly, could you send some glossed examples of any and all
> types of incorporation in
> 		your particular language?

Yes, if any of this qualifies as more than a gross disappointment ...

I'd certainly be interested in seeing the final paper!