wa- in Experienver Verns (Re: Lakota wa- 'variety object')

[Koontz John E]

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Koontz John E wrote:
> ...  For example, the initial wa in wa...khega 'be sick', a non-dative
> experiencer verb (so it looks stative in inflection) is a blocked
> reference to the body or the part of it experiencing the sickness.
> (Though I am not positive you can't include a noun referring to this
> body part in the sentence - will have to check.)

It does appear that wa...khega never takes an argument for the part of the
body that hurts or the manner of the sickness, at least not in the OP
texts.  I think this is the argument that wa- precludes.  The person
experiencing the sickness is expressed with patient markers in the verb.

OP:

P1 aNwakhega
P2 wadhikhega
P3 wakhega
P12 wawakhega

One reason I am fairly certain that wa- precludes the locus of the
sickness is that the Osage equivalent verb is in LaFlesche as ...hu'hega,
also using patient markers for the sick person.  At least in the first
person and inclusive.  The second person has agent form.  The verb is
reformulated as prefixing, and the root hega suggests that OP -khega is
dative (*k-hega), but hu, which replaces wa-, certainly looks like hu
'leg; stalk, stem' (OP has hi, mostly in the latter sense).

Osage:

P1 aNhuheka
P2 dhahuheka
P3 huheka
P12 wahuheka

One way to get around not having an argument slot is to add an additional
clause, loosely attached.

jod 1891:45.3/4

kki dhe'=dhiNkhe iga'xdhaN=dhiNkhe we'dadhe=           d=egaN wakhega:
and this the     his wife  the     she has given birth having she is sick

i'=the wami'    xtaN= naN=i
mouth the blood drops usually

And his wife, who has given birth, is sick:  she keeps spitting up blood.

You can add an inalienable possessor argument wrt the sick person by
making a dative verb:

jod 1891:100.8

s^iNgaz^iNga iN'wakhega  (instead of aNwakhega)
child        is sick to me

My child is sick.