?uN as AUX V.

[Koontz John E]

On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, R. Rankin wrote:
> This pretty much confirms Catherine's and John's notion that this aux.
> functions as an imperfective marker.  Thus far I have no feeling for
> when you would use reflexes of *?uN and when you might use
> positionals, but presumably the distinction is that one that exists
> between 'continuative aspect' and 'imperfective aspect'.

This Biloxi case and the Quapaw one do seem to confirm the imperfective
reading.  Of course, we wouldn't necessarily find that languages as
diverse as Biloxi and Dhegiha would have exactly the same uses of the
markers.  In Dhegiha the continuative pattern of use with the articles
must be more recent, and may have preempted a lot of the sphere of *?uN.
The pieces of it that are left in OP seem somewhat specialized and
fragmentary.  Only dhaN seems at all productive.  The use of aN with the
with =xti and with =s^naN looks somewhat fossilized, and with the negative
and =s^te even more so.

It occurs to me that =daN in temporal uses - I think it figures as 'when'
in Osage, though not in OP - might be *=d(u") LOCATIVE + *aN IMPERF-AUX.
There are some cases of daN in OP that read like 'during':

haN=daN 'during (the) night' 1890:17.20

egasaNi=daN 'during (the) next day' 1890:370.5

me'=daN 'during (the) spring' 1890:393.7

Otherwise the gloss 'during' applies to dhedhu(adi) (with clauses) and a
particle de.

This is sort of icing on the cake - it's nice to know where things may
come from, even little particles - but not necessary to the pursuit of
*?uN as a part marker.  If I've missed a widespread particle *taN
'during', let me know!