Question re: Dhegiha and other Siouan quotatives

[Bryan James Gordon]

I made a list somewhere of different verbs with different verb
subcategorization behaviors to look into later, and I can't remember where
it is, but here's an interesting example:

Uxthéxchi gthí 'íthathe wíkaⁿbtha. "You promised to come back real soon and
I want you to."

*Gthí *"come back" is not conjugated. *'Íthathe *"you promised" has agent
conjugation. *Wíkaⁿbtha *has agent and dative conjugation, and the dative
"to you" is raised from the subject of "promised". Not only does this
example show both a conjugated and an unconjugated subordinate verb, but it
also raises questions about the semantics of these constructions. It would
seem that we cannot simply assume the syntactic complement of *gáⁿtha *"desire"
is also its semantic complement, because the semantic complement here is
clearly "come back" and not "you promised".

BJG


2014-02-22 11:30 GMT-07:00 David Kaufman <dvkanth2010 at gmail.com>:

> That is interesting, Bryan!
>
> Dave
>
> David Kaufman
> Linguistic Anthropology PhD candidate, University of Kansas
> Director, Kaw Nation Language Program
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Bryan James Gordon <linguista at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Digging through 19th century Omaha and Ponca texts I've found evidence
>> for a role for subcategorization, that is, some final verbs in some
>> contexts tend to follow conjugated verbs, while
>> others tend to follow "infinitives". Our resident syntacticians may have
>> more precise observations. Catherine?
>> On Feb 21, 2014 1:04 PM, "David Kaufman" <dvkanth2010 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Rory,
>>>
>>> So it seems like both forms conjugated may have been the original method
>>> (pre-20th century), but, perhaps due to the increasing influence of
>>> English, it can now be just final verb?  Interesting how these things come
>>> about.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> David Kaufman
>>> Linguistic Anthropology PhD candidate, University of Kansas
>>> Director, Kaw Nation Language Program
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Rory Larson <rlarson1 at unl.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Dave,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What you describe for Kaw seems to be what my experience with Omaha has
>>>> been.  As I recall, elicited statements usually have the first verb in
>>>> neutral form, but if you ask the speakers which way is better, giving both
>>>> options, they generally prefer the one with both verbs conjugated.  I think
>>>> the latter is the way it normally appears in Dorsey (19th century).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course, the real power of the old (?) system is that the first verb
>>>> can conjugate for different subjects and objects than the second one, as in
>>>> “I want you to give me the toy” = Toy-the me-you-give I-want.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] *On Behalf
>>>> Of *David Kaufman
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 21, 2014 12:54 PM
>>>>
>>>> *To:* SIOUAN at LISTSERV.UNL.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* Re: Question re: Dhegiha and other Siouan quotatives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Rory and Justin for the feedback.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On another note, I've also been wondering about how serial verbs are
>>>> handled in Siouan in general.  In the Kaw data, when two verbs come
>>>> together, the second verb always conjugates for person while the first
>>>> looks like it can either conjugate to match the second verb or it can stay
>>>> in the third person (neutral) form.  I seem to recall that in Biloxi,
>>>> serial verbs *always* match, first and second verbs having the same person
>>>> conjugation.  What do other Siouan languages do in regards to this?  Are
>>>> there any hard and fast rules about this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   David Kaufman
>>>>
>>>> Linguistic Anthropology PhD candidate, University of Kansas
>>>>
>>>> Director, Kaw Nation Language Program
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Rory Larson <rlarson1 at unl.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the analysis, Justin.  That makes much better sense than
>>>> what I had suggested.  Very interesting that the Kaw (a)be particle, which
>>>> should be either cognate or closely related to the Omaha (a)bi particle,
>>>> can ablaut.  I wasn’t aware of that; it’s good to know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] *On Behalf
>>>> Of *Mcbride, Justin
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:00 PM
>>>> *To:* SIOUAN at LISTSERV.UNL.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* Re: Question re: Dhegiha and other Siouan quotatives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For what it's worth, I believe that what appears to be a second token
>>>> of aba in the example, aba-daN is actually a different type altogether. In
>>>> this case, I think it's a case of the verb e(e), 'to say', plus the -(a)be
>>>> completive aspect marker plus the conjunction -(a)daN, 'and'
>>>> [e(e)-(a)be-(a)daN > aba-daN]. If so, then, that one really is just 's/he
>>>> said and,' and the first one is actually the subject marker. But that's not
>>>> to say that there aren't other examples of the quotative use of subject
>>>> markers in Ks, even within the same text. Here's an example of quotative
>>>> akHa:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> iccikkitaNga akha oo aNs^i waali miNkHe akHa.
>>>>
>>>> The Old Man said, "Oh, I'm getting fat."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This case is much clearer to my way of thinking because there are two
>>>> verbal auxiliaries marking the same state (in this case, at rest)
>>>> back-to-back, one of which refers to 1st person (miNkHe, part of the
>>>> quotation), and one 3rd person (akHa, marks quotation). It's curious to
>>>> note that in the audio for this, the speaker laughs after miNkHe and then
>>>> almost catches her breath before saying akHa, which would indicate to me
>>>> that she felt it was essential for concluding the sentence. It's
>>>> interesting to me in that it seems that the entire quoted clause is acting
>>>> almost like a verb following the canonical pattern (subject) SUBJ (verb)
>>>> AUX, where SUBJ and AUX match shape in the continuative aspect, as in
>>>> s^idoz^iNga akHa ghaage akHa, 'the boy is crying.'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -jtm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Rory Larson <rlarson1 at unl.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Dave,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In Omaha and Ponca, the corresponding article is amá, where you have
>>>> abá.  As with Kaw, it tends to imply ‘moving/absent’.  But we also have
>>>> another particle, apparently pronounced the same way, coming at the end of
>>>> the sentence, that implies that the foregoing is hearsay rather than solid
>>>> fact.  It can stand by itself, or it can be coupled with the ‘allegedly’
>>>> particle bi to make the common ending for 3rd person hearsay action,
>>>> biama.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I notice the accent changes to the first syllable in the second case of
>>>> your example.  I wonder if that could be underlyingly a-aba in that case?
>>>> The first would be the ablauted version of ‘he said it’, followed by either
>>>> the Old Man’s article abá or a ‘hearsay’ particle as in OP.  One problem
>>>> with that would be that the ‘hearsay’ amá in OP shouldn’t cause a preceding
>>>> verb to ablaut.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My $0.02.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Siouan Linguistics [mailto:SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu] *On Behalf
>>>> Of *David Kaufman
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:30 PM
>>>> *To:* SIOUAN at LISTSERV.UNL.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* Question re: Dhegiha and other Siouan quotatives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a question re: a curious structure in Kaw, and whether anything
>>>> like it occurs in other Dhegihan or even non-Dhegihan Siouan languages.
>>>>  The structure involves the articles akhá and abá, used for subjects in Kaw
>>>> and usually translated 'the', the first being roughly for
>>>> 'standing/sitting' and the other for 'moving/absent'.  However, in Kaw,
>>>> these subject articles also somehow seem to have become used as quotatives,
>>>> or 's/he said.'  Here is an example sentence with gloss:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Icíkitanga  abá, “Anyáxtaga-édan,” ába-dan,  nanstábe.*
>>>>
>>>> Old.Man   said   bite.me-then          said-then   kicked.him
>>>>
>>>> The Old Man said, “Then bite me,” and he kicked him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So abá, which is normally used for 'moving' subjects and is usually
>>>> translated 'the', is now being used for 's/he said.'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts on this, esp. from other Dhegihan perspectives, or other
>>>> Siouan languages that might have some similar usage?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   David Kaufman
>>>>
>>>> Linguistic Anthropology PhD candidate, University of Kansas
>>>>
>>>> Director, Kaw Nation Language Program
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>


-- 
***********************************************************
Bryan James Gordon, MA
Joint PhD Program in Linguistics and Anthropology
University of Arizona
***********************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20140222/e7e957aa/attachment.htm>