[Spam:0005 SpamScore] Order of verb affixes

[Rankin, Robert L]

Rory,

For some odd reason our univ. server is marking all your postings as
"SPAM".  I can't figure why.

Just a couple of observations on your 'boil with' or 'pepper' stems.  I
wonder if the u-/o- of *ohaN 'boil' is the locative prefix?  It's
entirely possible that it is/was but that it's become lexicalized with
its root, of course.  Etymologically it certainly had the /o/, but *o >
u throughout in Omaha, of course, and in initial position in IO.  So the
question might be IS u- a prefix here, or WAS u- a prefix here -- but
not any longer.

Beyond that, in Dakotan the locative prefixes are mavericks in that they
can occur at various points in the prefix string deriving new lexemes
with each "move".  This is covered in the paper on the Word in Siouan
from the Dixon/Aikhenvald volume that John, John, Randy and I
coauthored.

In my experience there's no variability between [wi] and [we].  [we] is
always a contraction of /wa- + i-/, 'noun formative plus instrumental'.
I think that's what you're saying here. . . .

Bob

*********************************
Rory writes:

I'm just looking at a borrowed copy of Jimm Good Tracks' 1992 dictionary
of Iowa-Otoe-Missouria in comparison with OP.  I've run across the word
for '(black) pepper', which is glossed as "Mixed Herbs", or

     mankan iki'rohan (LR)/
     mankan' wi'kiruhan (JY)

In OP, the word for 'pepper' is

     weo'kkihaN

which seems to be formed from

     wa-i-u-kki-haN

where u-haN' means 'to cook' or 'boil'.  The entire construction seems
to mean something like 'something that is boiled together (with the rest
of the food)'.  In OP, verbs beginning with u- take their affixed
personal, reciprocal, reflexive and possessive pronouns between the u-
and the verb stem, except for 'we', which attaches to the front to make
ugu'-.

I don't know much about IOM, but it looks to me like the words cited for
'pepper' are essentially the same except for the preceding
'medicine'/'herb', but in a somewhat different order

     (wa)-i-kki-u-haN

with the reciprocal pronoun kki brought out in front of the u-.

Am I correct in this analysis?  If so, is it normal for IOM to put
affixed pronouns in front of the u-/o- in such verbs?  And if it is,
then how do Hochunk and Dakotan compare on this?

Thanks,
Rory