Dhegiha Plurals and Proximates

[Rory M Larson]

> But there's really no evidence for =i outside of OP, except for that
> =tta=i=the, and, more importantly, Osage has pi/pe/pa where OP has i, not
> just where it has bi.

I've been looking over Carolyn Quintero's "First Course in Osage"
book in Mark's office.  It looks like there are number of cases
where we get some sort of Cai sequence, including the end sequence
of the we-plural form.  I think she mentions these somewhere as
diphthongs.  This may be a phonological quirk of Osage, and if so,
that =tta=i=the would be explained away.  Are you familiar with
these?

As far as I can tell, pi generally functions as a pluralizer,
except in third-person declarative forms (pe/pa), where it is
used for either singular or plural.  Is this understanding
correct?

There also seems to be a post-verbal particle =dhe ~ =e which is
supposed to function as a sort of emphatic.  Does this equate to
anything in any language outside of Osage?

Finally, I'm going to ask again for comment from the comparativists
(John?  Bob?) on the alternate Winnebago 3rd-person pluralizer
=ire.  Is it known to be cognate to anything outside of Winnebago?


> I think there actually are some Osage texts from the 1880s, just not
many,
> and unpublished.  They might be included in the Swetland microfilm copies
> of the Dorsey files.  There are also Dorsey's lexical slips.

Thanks for the tip!  I hope I run into them soon!

Rory