Native American verbs vs. nouns

[rlarson at unlnotes01.unl.edu]

In light of Dave's challenge to question the equivalence of the
concepts "noun" and "verb" between different languages, I'd like
to present a view I've been developing on verbs and sentence
structure in MVS vs. IE.  My formal knowledge of linguistics is
admittedly sophomoric; if there are proper terms that I should
be using but am not, I apologize, and would appreciate being
informed of the correct ones.  In any case, since I've already
dropped this on two classes of beginning Omaha students, it's
probably about time to get some feedback from real linguists!

I start from the premise that the purpose of any directed
utterance is to get the party spoken to to do something to
further the agenda of the speaker.  I call this imposition on
the listener the "demand".  There are at least three basic
types of demand:

  1. Command.    The demand is that the listener perform some
                 action.

  2. Statement.  The demand is that the listener update his
                 mental database with information supplied
                 by the speaker.

  3. Question.   The demand is that the listener supply the
                 speaker with information requested.

The demand is the core of any complete sentence.  The remainder,
and usually the bulk, of the sentence is a verbal encoding of a
mental model of reality in the brain of the speaker, which is to
be decoded into a (hopefully) equivalent mental model in the
brain of the listener.  I call this mental model or its encoding
the "concept".  A complete sentence is one that ties a concept
to a demand, so that the listener is given both a mental map of
reality, and instructions as to what to do with it.

The English utterance

   The black cat on the porch.

is not considered a complete sentence, because it contains no
demand.  (It is a valid utterance in the context of a prior
question, e.g. "What are you looking at?", however, because
the expected demand form of the response to a question is a
statement, and hence we can save time by expressing the concept
alone and assuming the default demand.)  Note that the problem
here is not simply the lack of a verb, for we could just as well
say

   The black cat sitting on the porch, eating a mouse.

and we would be no better off, despite the addition of two verbs
which both describe the action of our subject.  The problem
remains that we have not told our listener what we want him to
do about the concept we have transmitted; there is still no
demand.

In English, and I think IE generally, we distinguish a special
version of the verb, called the "finite verb", which must be
present in every complete sentence.  (Actually, I'm not sure if
the command form is traditionally considered "finite" or not;
I'm assuming it to be so here for the purpose of this discussion.)
The importance of the finite verb is that the demand rides upon
it, and is indicated by the relationship of the finite verb to
other elements of the sentence.

  1. Command:
        Put the black cat on the porch!
        Look at the black cat sitting on the porch, eating a mouse!

  2. Statement:
        The black cat is on the porch.
        The black cat sitting on the porch is eating a mouse.

  3. Question:
        What is the black cat on the porch doing?
        Is the black cat sitting on the porch eating a mouse?

A verb is a word that indicates an action or a state of being.
As such, it is part of the concept exactly as is a noun.  A finite
verb, however, indicates a demand, as well as functioning as the
crux of the concept code.  All pieces of the sentence (or maybe I
should say independent clause) tie to it as the verb that heads
the concept, and its relationships help to indicate the demand.
This complicated system is fundamental to our whole English/IE
way of speaking and thinking, and I think we may tend to attribute
it to other languages where it doesn't really exist.

In MVS, the sentence structure typically runs somewhat as follows:

     [Topic]* [Verb]* [ModalParticle]*

where

     Topic => NounPhrase
           => PostpositionalPhrase
           => Adverb

None of these is absolutely essential.  In Omaha, there are
sentences without topics, sentences without modal particles,
and even sentences without verbs.  Verbs chain in inverse order
from that of English, so the final verb in the chain corresponds
to the IE finite verb in the sense of being the head of the verb
chain.  Unlike English, however, Omaha does not change the
position of this verb when the demand changes, nor does this
verb look or behave inflectionally any differently from other
verbs in the chain.

In MVS, a modal particle, usually the final one in the chain,
and usually distinctive according to whether the speaker is or
is not man, expresses the demand.  In other words, MVS codes
the demand as a separate element of the sentence, and does not
confuse verbs with the demand function as we do.

Admittedly, many sentences do not have modal particles at all,
and end in verbs.  Here, we feel at home in Indo-European land.
I would argue, though, that here the demand simply defaults,
usually to statement form in the absence of a command or question
particle.  (It may default to question if the utterance concerns
"you".)

The term "predication" has been mentioned a few times in the
discussion.  Insofar as I understand the term, I think it
approximates what I mean by the statement form of "demand",
but with an IE constraint.  In IE, everything hinges on the
finite verb.  In a statement, we first reference a topic the
listener can relate to, and then we say something about it
using the finite verb.  Since everything we can say hinges on
that one finite verb, we can make just one overt attribution
per sentence (ignoring and-ed finite verbs and so forth).
We can make any number of covert attributions, however, using
non-predicate adjectives, adjectival constructions and
subordinate clauses.

Trying to "grok" the non-trivial Omaha in Dorsey using my
predicating prejudices from IE about drove me nuts before I
began to suspect that they just don't predicate like we do,
and that they don't distinguish between overt and covert
attribution.  For them, attribution is all the same, verbs
are no more special than nouns, and you can use as many nouns
and verbs as you like to construct your concept.  When you
end it all, either by stating your demand, or by implying it
by default by ceasing to talk, your demand applies to the
whole concept structure you built, not to any one special
attribution that we IE speakers would call a predication.

Consider the following sentence sequence.  I made it up and
presented it to our speakers a few months ago, and they
accepted it at every stage.  (They were in an indulgent mood
that day!)

  ShoN'ge ska.
  The horse is white.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN.
  The white horse is beautiful.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN abdhiN'.
  I have a beautiful white horse.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN abdhiN' wakhe'ga.
  The beautiful white horse that I have is sick.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN abdhiN' wakhe'ga zhoN't?e.
  The beautiful white horse that I have which is sick is sound asleep.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN abdhiN' wakhe'ga zhoN't?e khe xta'adhe.
  I love the beautiful white horse that I have which is sick and lying
    sound asleep.

  ShoN'ge ska u'joN abdhiN' wakhe'ga zhoN't?e khe xta'adhe khe
    gini' koNbdhe'goN.
  I hope the beautiful white horse that I have which is sick and lying
    sound asleep, which I love, will recover.

To translate these sentences into English, we have to consider
each final verb of the sequence to be equivalent to our finite
verb, which forces the rest of the sentence into subordination
to the overt predication, with all other attributions covert,
and requires us to completely rearrange the English word order.
Even with the rearrangement, the English becomes downright impossible
toward the end.  Meanwhile, the Omaha flows on unperturbed, and
could probably continue lengthening in this manner indefinitely.
It has no finite verb with consequent predication to vex it, all
attributions are equal and cumulative, and the demand, which is
statement by default whenever we hit the period, applies to the
whole picture that the foregoing words have painted.

Anyway, that's my current conception of verbs in IE vs Siouan.
Comments, anybody?

Rory