Omaha nasal vowels

[Koontz John E]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Ardis R Eschenberg wrote:
> Catherine, I agree kombtha is kkoNbdha.  That was sloppy of me.  I've been
> transcribing 'he wants' as kkoNntha though.  Perhaps, I just added the 'n'
> unthinkingly.  However,  I believe I was taking the nasal consonant in
> 'want' as underlying based on the 2nd person where there is no other
> consonant after the nasal (?) vowel.
>  shkkoNna 'you want'

This verb is confusing because it is actually two inflected pieces - one
of the nicest examples, I think for why Siouanists need to see morphology
in terms of at least two levels of morphosyntax.  Both parts are irregular
or syncopating stems:

1    kkaN      bdha
2    s^kaN       na
3      gaN      dha

The first part is a k-stem, the only one with the first person in kk
instead of pp (as in ppaghe, s^kaghe, gagha=i).  The second part is
a normal dh-stem, with the s^n reduced to n in the normal modern way.  If
you look hard in the old texts you'll find a s^kaNs^na somewhere, I think.

The pattern with dh-stems is just like the one with y-stems in Dakotan:

    La                   OP

    bla  <  bRa <  pra   bdha <  bra <  pra
     la  < s^Ra < s^ra     na < s^Ra < s^ra
     ya  <          ra    dha <          ra

but in Dakotan the historical *br first person became *bR, and thus bl,
not by.  Dhegiha does get br > bR > R, but only in nouns, not in verbal
inflection.  The s^la to la thing occurred before contact in Dakotan,
while s^na to na occurred in OP c. 1870-1920.

The actually attested development was s^nV > hnV > nV.  I wonder if you
hear a long n in s^kaNna 'you want'?  I sometimes think I do.

> I guess the correct analysis is shkkoNa with an empathetic 'n' from the
> transition from a nasal vowel?

Just to emphasize, the n is the second person initial of dha, cf. bdhathe,
nathe, dhathe 'I/you/he eat(s)'.

> Or is this 'n' in shkkoNna' part of second person conjugation?  I guess
> this must be the case.  Help, John!

Yep.  It is.

> I apologize for ignorance.  Underlying verb forms can be difficult in
> UmoNhoN with its conjugation system.
> I know I am influenced by how we are writing at the school so I also
> apologize for slipping out of net siouan.
> I consistently hear idadoN and iNdadoN for 'what' here including in fast
> speech (prayers).  I'll try that minimal pair when we do body parts, it
> would be hard to elicit buttocks out of the blue right now.

If I'm right edadaN (which I think gets heard as idadaN) is 'what specific
thing' (i.e., verging on which) while iNdadaN is 'what indefinite thing'.
There might be a contrast between 'what did you do this with' and 'what
could we do this with'.  But that would probably get messed up with 'how
can ...', and either reading might work with the latter.  Safest to look
at the examples you have, or look for examples in the texts and try to
elicit something comparable.

I think niNdeska is a humorous term for a "white person."  This is a place
where Kathy has a length opposition.  I think the other term is nide
'tender, well-cooked, ripe', which is cuce in Osage, i.e., it is an old
*R word:  *Rute, cf. Lakota luta 'red'.

> Water sounds like 'ni' to me & this carries over to words containing the
> morpheme 'water.'  HaziniegaN (purple 'grape-water-like')-even the extra
> vowel after it does not make any nasalization apparent.

But how about with a stop following?  Ni=khe would be 'the river' perhaps.
I wonder how to say 'in water'.  Probably niadi or nithedi or some such.

I seem to recall hearing that it is hard to make nasalization apparent in
high vowels, and that this is one reason why nasal i is lowered in French.

JEK