Ho-Chunk Wa

[Rory M Larson]

John wrote:
>In the other languages my suspicion, not original with me, is that this is
>a special alternative use of the wa- that serves to detransitivize
>transitive or experiencer stems, or at least to render their object or
>patient vague and unspecified.  The idea is that third person plurals are
>tantamount to third person idefinites, both as subjects and objects, in a
>variety of languages around the world, and that the reverse - indefinite
>to plural - might also be a reasonable path of development.  Of course, I
>think it is usually plural to indefinite, but I'm not sure.
>
>The indefinite wa- is found throughout Siouan languages.  It might well be
>an old incorporated noun or a classifier of some sort.  I'll leave Bob
>Rankin the job of describing the set of classifier prefixes he found
>relicts of with various nouns in various Siouan languages, though several
>of these seem to have the form *wV-.
>
>It is a moot point how many wa- morphemes there are, historically.
>Presumably first person and indefinite are different, at least in the
>attested languages (where *wa- first person often develops as *(h)a- or
>has a different length or accentuation) but historically even that's not
>absolutely guaranteed.  An indefinite makes a good source of first
>persons, too.

In OP, wa- is also used as the patient form of "we"; i.e. "us",
as well as for "them".  In certain contexts, however, it appears
as awa- when it means "us" in contrast with wa- for "them".  I
think this happens specifically with the causatives, e.g.:

      t?e'dhe           he killed him

      t?e'wadhe         he killed them

      t?e'awadhe        he killed us

I think this is right-- I'm going off the top of my head here.

Comments?

Rory