Strange use of Quapaw article/aux.

[Koontz John E]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, R. Rankin wrote:

> I haven't seen the inanimate articles conjugated but of course the
> inanimate ones shouldn't have 1st and 2nd person forms.

I had't either, so I was pretty surprised at the following.  I can't think
what that a- is if not first person.

Note first person inflection of article *the* as *athe* in next set.

Na!  agdha'the  athe',       e'=     ama.
Why! I ate mine I must have, said he they say.

Na!  agdha'sniN=kki        az^aN'  athe',      e'=     ama.
Why! when I swallowed mine I slept I must have he said they say
jod 1890:63.5-6

I posted these before, but I realize some of my posts must get long
enough that they get skipped over with glazed eyes.

These are also interesting in being (some of the) examples in which the
evidential is glossed with 'must have' in what is clearly the evidential
sense for English.