kkiaghe

[Koontz John E]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Rory M Larson wrote:
> > Gaaghe is an interesting verb nonetheless in that it seems to lose its
> initial G on occasion in forms like Kansa /kkiighe/  <   kkiaghe 'make or
> do to or for someone'. (Dorsey, Kaw file)
>
> ??  In OP, we have gi- for the 'dative' form:
>
>   gia'ghe 'make or do for someone'
>     iNga'ghe '...     for me'
>     ria'ghe  '...     for you'
>
> How does dative OP gi- relate to dative Kaw kki-  ?

As Bob suggested in a posting after this, I have looked at the Dhegiha
(and MVS) datives and noticed this peculiarity of the datives.  In fact, I
can supply a pretty thorough handout summarizing the datives et al. in MVS
if anyone is interested.

In terms strictly of Dhegiha, people may want to note that the OP datives,
regular and syncopating (or irregular) are quite different from those in
Osage, Kaw, and Quapaw (to the extent the latter is known).  It's almost
like having an additional branch to MVS:  Dakotan, Omaha-Ponca,
Osage-Kaw-Quapaw, and Winnebago-Chiwere.  Actually, there are some
differences in this area between Winnebago and Ioway-Otoe, but not as
major as those within Dhegiha.

Considering the k-stems only, OP has gi-V... < underlying //gi-gV...//,
for all of the type 1 k-stems, i.e., gaaghe, gaNaNze, and so on, yield
giaghe, giaNze, etc.  This happens only in the third person, so you get

A1    e'ppaghe
A2  dhe's^kaghe
A3    giagha=i

(Rory gives the object forms, using his own notation.)

In Osage, etc., the third persons seem to be khi(a)ghe, khioNze, etc.,
which are, naturally, given Osage aspirate affrication, written
ks^i(a)ghe, ks^ioNze, etc.  (From memory.)  I won't venture to try to
remember the inflected forms!

I'd be curious if Kaw kki(a)ghe comes from elicitation or from a Dorsey
form that might be ambiguous with khi(a)ghe.  I'd expect the aspirate
because the Osage data is so clear on aspiration.

I have hypotheses about what is happening in these forms, diachronically,
but for the moment let me confine myself to saying, yes, there is this
very odd difference in the k-stem datives of OP and "Southern Dheigha."

The plain old regular dative is quite different, too.