Non-wa Nominalizations

[Koontz John E]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Rankin, Robert L wrote:
> Good question.  I think you'd have to say that the epenthesis doesn't
> occur WITHIN roots.

But it's not clear that i'e is a root, i.e., it seems to be bimorphemic.
It is inflected by infixation, iae, idhae, etc.  And you have datives like
i'gie.  Of course it's not entirely clear what the i'- is but I assume
it's a locative.  If the root is the root of (e=)e 'to say' (A1 ehe, A2
es^e, A3 a=i), then that is historically something like *he, and that h
might explain why i'e is i'e and not i'dhe.  However, the root is not
inflected (within recorded OP) as A1 *i(p)he, A2 *is^e, A3 *i'(h)e.  On
the other hand, the first and second persons are what Winnebago and
Chiwere have for first persons of ee' 'to say'.  (Winnebago has hi-, of
course, not i-.)  How did that work in Quapaw?

JEK