inclusive/exclusive

[Rory M Larson]

> The point is that unyanpi is neither exclusive nor inclusive -- it is
> 'I and others'.  On the other hand, unye 'you and I went' could only be
> used to remind someone of something the two of you had done at some
point;
> it has to be limited to two people, and only the speaker and a single
> addressee are available.  It's most common as an imperative -- unyin
> kte heci 'let's go', said to one person.

I wonder how solid this is?  'WE', in English and Siouan, basically means
'myself plus somebody else'.  In Siouan, I prefer to think of it as a
separate 'person' which, like 'you' and '3rd person', can be pluralized or
not.  This is certainly what the grammar seems to indicate.  WE-singular is
myself plus one other person, which might be you or him/her; and WE-plural
is myself plus more than one other person, which might be any mixture.

Granting that 'you and I' is the most common, and perhaps prototypical,
usage of uNye, the real test is in how fluent speakers would translate
'S/he and I went'.  Is it well-established, tested against numerous Dakotan
speakers, that 's/he and I went' is regularly translated as uNyaNpi rather
than as uNye?

Rory