Verbs with Multiple Stative Concords

[R. Rankin]

More nice examples.  While I haven't found as many of
these "double statives" as I'd like, I think there are
a few more such.  I guess I'm actually going to have to
dredge up my data.  Randy may have had some cases in
Crow, too.  He sent me a number of forms corresponding
to my list of "experiencer verbs", but I can't recall
the details.

One important and interesting note illustrated here in
Carolyn's data.  When you expect the sequence /aN+dhi/
signaling 'I acting upon you' with both pronominals
stative, the portmanteau, /wi-/ overrides in all the
Dhegiha data I have (which isn't much, as I've said).
Osage illustrates that here.  'I+you' is ALWAYS /wi-/,
whether in an active or stative construction.  Thus,
for those trying to elicit such things, it's important
to stick to the other pronominals:  'you+me', 'we+you',
'you+us', etc.

But I don't think the above condition applies to
Dakotan, does it?  I don't recall seeing /chi-/ as a
replacement form mi+ni or ma+ni, but there was some
invariant ordering going on in Dakotan that may explain
it.  David was the one who explained all this and he
can answer it.

Bob




----- Original Message -----
From: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To: <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 12:10 AM
Subject: Verbs with Multiple Stative Concords


> On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, R. Rankin wrote:
> > I think all the MVS languages have this pattern
with at
> > least a few of those "experiencer" verbs.  They're
not
> > just Dakotan, and you can get two stative
pronominals.
> > Membership in the class varies, just as
stative-status
> > does across Siouan.
>
> I believe there are no examples of such verbs in the
Dorsey Omaha-Ponca
> texts, and, though I tried hard, within my skills at
the time anyway, to
> elicit comparable forms in OP during fieldwork, I was
unable.
> This is all negative evidence, but I'm inclined to
think that Omaha-Ponca
> just does it differently here.
>
> That said, Carolyn Quintero reports two cases of
double statives in Osage.
>
> wawebraN=pe 'we're (wa) tired of them (wa)' < ibraN
'be tired of'
>
> aN-dhi'-oxta 'you love me'
> < oxta 'to cherish'
>
> However
>
> wi'-oxta=i 'I love you'
>
> follows the regular transitive paradigm, and the
inclusive forms are
>
> aN'oxta=pe 'we love him'
> wao'xta=pe 'they like us'
>
> which follow the regular transitive paradigm.
>
> The closest I got to this pattern was
>
> wi'=s^ti e'=wi-kkic^haNha
> I   too  I'm as tall as you are
>
> Note the reciprocal -kki-.  I got also
>
> e'=s^ti e=aN'-kkic^haNha    'he's as tall as I am'
> e'=s^ti dhi e'=dhi-thaNha  'he's as tall as you are'
(no reciprocal)
>
> For whatever reason, I didn't elicit the important
form,
>
> ???? 'you're as tall as I am'
>
> I think the problem was that my consultant wanted to
revert to the same
> form as 'I'm as tall as you are'.
>
> I tried to fix this by doing 'bigger than' and got
into problems with
> a not unexpected lack of comparative forms, social
issues as to the
> appropriateness of making invidious comparisons, etc.
>
> I also had
>
> e'=dhi-dhaNska   b-dhiN    'I'm as big as you are'
> you're that size I am
>
> So I even wonder about e'=wi-kkic^haNha.
>
> OP 'tired of' is at least an experiencer verb:
>
> JOD 1891:61.3
>
> wadhi'ttaN=the aNwaN'z^edha  he'ga=m=az^i
> work           I am tired of little I not
> I am not a little tired of the work.
>
> The verb is aN Pat1 with u...z^edha.
>
> JEK
>