argument structure of k'u 'give'

[ROOD DAVID S]

Jan's question about whether we can also use two objects of other persons
is an important one here.  Are "nimak'upi" and/or "manic'upi" possible?
What about something like uNnic'upi 'they gave you to us/they gave us to
you' (the expected reading of this one, of course, is 'we gave it to
you'). It also occurs to me to wonder whether the verb la 'ask for' works
like k'u. Can one say wicha-ma-la-pi 'they asked me for you'? (I think
this 'for' is not benefactive, but rather that the verb means 'ask to
have', doesn't it?  If so, then we have a possible two-object verb
without "benefactive" as one of the core argument roles.)


David S. Rood
Dept. of Linguistics
Univ. of Colorado
295 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0295
USA
rood at colorado.edu

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Jan Ullrich wrote:

>
>
> I have been musing about the wicha-ma-k'u-pi for some time. In fact, I
> posted on this verb form on 29 February 2000, but it didn't arouse much
> interest on the list.
>
> I encountered it in the following sentence:
>
> Tona wicha'mak?u kiN hena' waNzhi'ni wauN'mni kte shni.
> >From those he gave me I shall lose none.
>
> However, the previous sentence of the same text says:
>
> Ate tona mak?u kiN hena' oyas?iN el mau'pi kte.
> All of those that my father gave me will come to me.
>
> In both instances the object is animate according to the context.
>
> At that time I finally came to a conclusion the wicha'mak?u was some sort of
> error. Mainly because the text was a translation from English (Buechel's
> Lakota translation of Bible History) and I believe the results of
> translations are often unidiomatic. And also, because the use of mak?u for
> 'he gave them to me' is frequent and common, while I could only one
> occurrence of wicha'mak?u in this meaning.
>
> Therefore I am very surprised by Linda's Assiniboin sentence with
> wicha'mak?u of the same reading. I always get mak?u from speakers when
> eliciting sentences like "he gave me two horses" (ShuNkawakhaN nuNpa mak?u).
>
> I also found wicha'mak?u with the meaning "they gave ME to them" as in the
> sentence recorded by Regina:
>
> Thoka'mayaNpi thawa'chiNpi kiN en wicha'mak?u shni wo.
> = Don't give me to the will of my enemies.
>
> This time it is from Riggs/Renvile's Dakota translation of Bible.
> Riggs/Renvile use mak?u consistently for 'he gave THEM to me'.
>
>
> There is another suspicious verbal form of this kind in Buechel's biblical
> translation:
>
> nima'kahipi = they brought you to me.
>
>
> So I wonder what would be used for expressing "they gave YOU to me" and
> "they gave ME to you"
> Would it be nimak'upi and manic'upi respectively, or would one or both of
> these forms be considered ungrammatical and some other structure would be
> employed?
>
>
> Jan
>
>
>
>
> > lcumberl at indiana.edu
> > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:12 AM
> > To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
> > Subject: Re: argument structure of k'u 'give'
> >
> >
> > Quoting ROOD DAVID S <rood at spot.Colorado.EDU>:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Could it also mean 'they were given to me'?
> >
> >
> > I have this in my data for Asb:
> >
> > pusapina wiNc^ha-ma-k'u-pi  'they gave me the kittens'
> >
> > Linda
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Příchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry.
> > Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
> > Verze: 6.0.795 / Virová báze: 539 - datum vydání: 12.11.2004
> >
> ---
> Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry.
> Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
> Verze: 6.0.795 / Virová báze: 539 - datum vydání: 12.11.2004
>
>