Singers (was RE: Bruce Ingham's ...)

[Koontz John E]

Wrote Constantine Chmielnicki <mosind at yahoo.com>:
> For x?okxa, "to be a traditional drum singer; to sing traditional Indian
> music", the separation of a nominal form from the verbal one has yielded
> perhaps all possible paradigms:
> wa-x?okxa (Buechel)
> x?o-wa-kxa (Lakhota Project)
> ma-x?okxa
> x?okxa hemacha, and
> x?okxa wimachas^a (p.s.)

I noticed in reading Bruce's paper that this term was similar to Dhegiha
xukka 'singer'.  I hope I haven't gotten this confused with Osage s^okka
'prompter in ceremony' again, though I'm not sure they're not related.
The u vs. o difference is just differences in treating *o.  The match is
exact, except for the differences in fricative sound symbolic grading (s^
vs. x), and the fact that Da x? should come out ? in OP and k? in Osage.
Maybe it's a loan from Dakotan into Dhegiha (or at least OP).  That might
explain the loss of ?.

JEK