Dakota ki(N)haN, k?uN, etc.

[REGINA PUSTET]

I wonder if kiNhaN might fit in
some way into the pattern of kiN (ki in Lakota) vs. k?uN. Bob usually
explains k?uN as involving something like kiN + uN Perfect-Aux or *ruN
PAST, I think. Could kihaN be a continuative variant? Is there a
ki(N)he?
   
  In  my data, kiN and kiNhaN are used interchangeably in all contexts, although I would assume, as John indicates, that -haN either derives from progressive -haN or from the source of the latter, -haN 'to stand (inanimate subject)'. KiNhe does not exist, and there is no trace of a continuative/progressive/otherwise aspecually charged connotation of kiNhaN in my corpus.
  Footnote on the previous discussion: In addition to the NOUN plus DEM plus ARTICLE patterns, there is also a pattern  NOUN DEM, with the article absent, which is used interchangeably with the two other patterns. Actaully, my speakers prefer the latter patterns, at least the "youngsters" who are under 75. The new pattern probably arose under the influence of English syntax, in which DEM and ART never cooccur.
   
  Regina
   
   
   

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20060223/48ff2316/attachment.htm>