How great you are

["Alfred W. Tüting"]

Hello Clive,

as always, I do share your view.

 >  (...) 
 
                         Initially, it occurred to me that the third 
line of the first stanza might be a subordinate adverbial (temporal) 
clause, with the postposition "el" in its "conjunctional" use as a 
subordinator, with a nominalized clause preceeding. [See Buechel Gr. 
(p.250, #148, 2); Ingham, 12.2.2.1.]  This would then make lines 2 & 3 
into two temporal clauses "in tandem" (as it were), both subordinate to 
the principal clause of the 4th line : ("WHEN/WHENEVER ["chan" perhaps 
being a truncated form of "channa".] I SEE THE STARS AND WHEN THE 
THUNDERBEINGS CRY OUT(AT the crying out of the Thunder Birds), YOUR 
POWER IS MADE MANIFEST." But then one notes that in this usage, "el" 
seems usually to follow the verb of said Nominalized Sub. Cl. 
immediately, or else be itself immediately preceeded by a nominalizing 
"kin/k'un"(which may also be omitted, Fr. Eugene tells us)==>"k'el". 
But, so far, I've been unable to locate any instances of this type of 
clause, in which other elements (as : Demonstative "lena" here, and 
Conjunction "kho") are permitted to intervene. I would suppose these 
"extras" may militate against the possibility of "hontonpi" being a Verb 
(to be translated "dynamically", as above), rather than a typically 
De-verbal Noun followed by Postposition as you have rendered it? <<


Yes, I understood wakiyaNhotxuNpi kiN as a noun (syntactically), hence 
writing it in one word. From times far back, I somehow had in mind smth 
like "im Donnergrollen/Grollen des Donners begegnest Du mir, o Herr...". 
IMHO, a wording like this had been tried to render in Lakota.




 
                                                  > Alfred, chiye, the 
only other detail in your faithful rendering I wanted to query, is in 
Second Stanza, line 3 : Wouldn't "Wanikhiya Mithawa kin" be just a 
Vocative? [="My Saviour, you died!"]; and "You died for me/mine" be : 
"mayakichit"e"==> Truncated, or "Short Form" (Buech.Gr,p.45, #41)==> 
"miyecit"e"< Second Dative Verb : kit'A [=die for]? <<


It's been a hipshot rather than that because I'd been pressed for time. 
And I'd have preferred a dative construction also. What doesn't go 
together very well with a vocative in the sense of "O my Saviour" 
appears to be that weird comma "Wa-ni-ki-ya, Mi-Ta-wa Kin", does it? I'd 
expected smth like "Wanikiya mitawa kin, nite"

Okay, nevertheless I share your opinion and also state that - as it 
seems - a vocative had been intended (with that comma just being a typo 
or such).

T.a.

Alfred le miye lo





   How Great You Are (In Sioux)

Wa-kan-tan-ka, Mako-che Ki Le Lu-ha
Wi-cah-pi Lena Ko Wan Bla-ka Chan
Wa-ki-yan Hon Ton Pi Kin Le-na Ko El
Wo-wa-sha-ke Ni-ta-wa Kin Ta-nin

Mi-na-gi Kin He-ya A Lo-o-wan
Wa-ni-ki-ya, Wa-kan-tan-ka
Wa-ni-ki-ya, Mi-Ta-wa Kin Ni-te
I-ni-tan-can, I-ni-tan-can <<


My rough translation:


G-d, you possess (hold) this land/country (in your hands)
And when(?) I see the stars,
in the thunders
your power/strength manifests.

My spirit sings in praise (of you) saying:
Saviour, G-d
Saviour, (for) mine you-died
you're (the) L-rd, you're (the) L-rd


wakxaN-txaNka, makxoche kiN le luha
wichah^pi lena kxo waNblake chaN
wakiyaNhotxuNpi kiN lena kxo el
wowas^ake nitxawa kiN tan?iN

minag^i kiN heya alowaN
wanikiya, wakxaN-txaNka
wanikiya, mitxawa kiN nit?e
initxaNchaN, initxaNchaN



Alfred