draft manuscript - Linguistics - University of California, Berkeley

More documents

Recommendations

Info

‘So that he may truly know God, so that he may love him, so that he may hear his words, so that the dead may arrive in Heaven.’ (see (5.8)) (9.33) a. maniasenuni Dios yaw1k1 1m1nua yene weRanu? mania =senuni Dios yaw1k1 1m1nua yene weRanu what.action =purp God make long.ago 1pl.incl coord ‘Why did God create us as well?’ b. yeneikuasenuni Diossemai se, yenesaSitasenuni muRa Dios, RakumesamaipuRakana yeneamuyasukatasen aikiaRa tuyukaaRi yeneyuRitiupaRaSi, 1watimai Ritamakate yeneususenuni. yene= ikua =senuni Dios =semai se yene= saSita =senuni muRa Dios 1pl.incl= know =purp God =verid ? 1pl.incl= love =purp 3sg.ms God Ra= kumesa =mai =puRa =kana yene= amuyasukata 3sg.ms= say =inact.nomz =nom.pst =pl.ms 1pl.incl= observe =senuni aikiaRa tuyuka =aRi yene= yuRiti =upa =RaSi =purp dem.prox.ms land =loc.diff 1pl.incl= be.in.place =cess =nass 1wati =mai Ritama =kate yene= usu =senuni be.high.up =inact.nomz village =all 1pl.incl= go =purp ‘So that we may truly know God, so that we may love him, so that we may observe his commandments, and ceasing to remain on Earth, so that we may go to Heaven.’ (see (6.8)) The responses differ in relatively minor ways related to expressive choices in the content corresponding to differences in the questions, but the Catechism Fragment interestingly does not employ the apparent neologism amuyasukata ‘observe’ (see §9.3.1) found in the Full Catechism, instead employing senu ‘hear, listen’ to express the concept of observing God’s commandments. 10th Question-Response Pair The two questions in this pair differ in the form of the interrogative clitic – =tipa in the Catechism Fragment, and =pa in the Full Catechism – and whether the predicative noun Dios is overtly marked for plural number, as in Catechism Fragment. Note that the form of the clitic appears to vary freely in Old Omagua, and that number marking on semantically plural nouns modified by a numeral is optional in modern Omagua, suggesting that both questions are fully grammatical, with the differences simply reflecting different expressive choices. Finally, it is interesting to note in light of the apparent prenominal modifier ordering errors evident in the Full Catechims in other cases, that in both questions the ordering of prenominal modifiers is correct (i.e. aikiaRa musap1R1ka ‘these three’). (9.34) a. aikiaRa musap1R1ka personakana, Roayatipa musap1R1ka Dios? aikiaRa musap1R1ka persona =kana Roaya =tipa musap1R1ka Dios dem.prox.ms three person =pl.ms neg =interr three God ‘These three persons, are they not three Gods?’ b. Roaya muRa musap1R1ka Dios. aikiaRa musap1R1ka personakana uyepesemai Dios muRa. santísima trinidadnani RaSiRa. Roaya neg muRa musap1R1ka Dios 3sg.ms three God 149
aikiaRa musap1R1ka persona =kana uyepe =semai Dios muRa dem.prox.ms three person =pl.ms one =verid God 3sg.ms santísima trinidad Holy Trinity =nani Ra= SiRa =contr.foc 3sg.ms= name ‘They are not three Gods. These three persons are truly one God. The Holy Trinity is its name.’ (see (5.10)) (9.35) a. aikiaRa musap1R1ka personakana, Roayapa musap1R1ka Dioskana? aikiaRa musap1R1ka persona =kana Roaya =pa musap1R1ka Dios =kana dem.prox.ms three person =pl.ms neg =interr three God =pl.ms ‘These three people, are they not three Gods?’ b. Roaya [musa]p1R1ka Dioskana. aikiaRa musap1R1ka personakana persona uyepe titi Dios muRa. santísima trinidadnanimai RaSiRa. Roaya neg [musa]p1R1ka three Dios =kana God =pl.ms aikiaRa musap1R1ka persona =kana persona uyepe titi Dios muRa =pl.ms three person =pl.ms person one be.alone God 3sg.ms santísima trinidad Holy Trinity =nani =mai Ra= SiRa =contr.foc =? 3sg.ms= name ‘They are not three Gods. These three persons are one God alone. The Holy Trinity is its name.’ (see (6.10)) The responses, each of which we analyze as consisting of three short sentences, differ in a number of important ways. In the first sentence, which is a non-verbal clause, the Full Catechism lacks the pronominal form muRa 3sg.ms, found in the corresponding Catechism Fragment sentence. Based on modern Omagua, we expect muRa to be necessary here for the sentence to be grammatical (see §2.3.9). Note that in the second sentence of the response, however, also a non-verbal clause, the Full Catechism exhibits muRa in the expected position, just as in the Catechism Fragment, suggesting that its absence in the first sentence of the Full Catechism response may reflect a simple oversight, rather than a lack of mastery of the grammar of non-verbal clauses. The responses also differ in how the notion of God being a single god (despite being a trinity) is expressed in the second sentence, with the collocation uyepe titi ‘one alone’ appearing in the Full Catechism (and attested in modern Omagua), while the Catechism fragment employs the veridical: uyepe=semai ‘truly one’. We believe both of these constructions were grammatical. Finally, the third sentence of each of the responses exhibit the use of =nani as a contrastive focus marker on trinidad (also a strategy attested synchronically (see §2.3.8.2)), but the presence of the nominalizer =mai following the contrastive focus marker in the Full Catechism is inexplicable, and was presumably ungrammatical. 11th Question-Response Pair The questions in this pair differ in two ways. We see that the interrogative word maniamai ‘which’ in Catechism Fragment, 381 in (9.36), bears the interrogative 381 In modern Omagua, makatimai ‘which’. 150
Page 1 and 2:
A Linguistic Analysis of Old Omagua
Page 3 and 4:
2.3.2 Nominal Modification . . . .
Page 5 and 6:
List of Tables 1 Morphemes and Abbr
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgments Our greatest thanks
Page 9 and 10:
fut Future tense =usu =usaRi goal G
Page 11 and 12:
=Ra nom.purp Nominal purposive nom.
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 2: Early Locations of the Om
Page 15 and 16:
of Faith. The texts were produced b
Page 17 and 18:
summarizing its publication history
Page 19 and 20:
2.1 Phonological Inventory Old Omag
Page 21 and 22:
pronouns: free pronouns are shown t
Page 23 and 24:
These phonological processes have g
Page 25 and 26:
patiRi =k1Ra usu priest =dim go ‘
Page 27 and 28:
2.2.3 Verbal Morphology In this sec
Page 29 and 30:
have presumably wanted to overtly e
Page 31 and 32:
(O’Hagan and Wauters 2012), i.e.,
Page 33 and 34:
is attested in modern Omagua, altho
Page 35 and 36:
ta= yapiSika -ta InI iSipu =pupI na
Page 37 and 38:
2.2.3.2.3 Clausal Nominalizers Old
Page 39 and 40:
2.2.3.2.4 Subject Nominalizer -suRi
Page 41 and 42:
Table 2.12: Modern Omagua Verbs Nom
Page 43 and 44:
2.3.1 Basic Clause Structure Omagua
Page 45 and 46:
Table 2.16: Order of Modern Omagua
Page 47 and 48:
(2.39) ene yumiaw1RaRaSi ta, Roaya
Page 49 and 50:
aikiaRa musap1R1ka persona =kana Ro
Page 51 and 52:
marked by the purposive =senuni (se
Page 53 and 54:
This morpheme has fallen out of the
Page 55 and 56:
‘It is Jesus Christ, the Son of G
Page 57 and 58:
e.g., if, when, since, etc. - given
Page 59 and 60:
‘You rest while we go work.’ Mo
Page 61 and 62:
yene= =ikua Ra= susana =RaSi cruz =
Page 63 and 64:
awa =kai =suaRa =puRa man =? =advbl
Page 65 and 66:
2.3.9 Non-Verbal Predication Non-ve
Page 67 and 68:
Chapter 3 Text Conventions This cha
Page 69 and 70:
given for a very similar Quechua ca
Page 71 and 72:
central vowel /1/. The high central
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter 4 Lord’s Prayer 4.1 Bibli
Page 75 and 76:
text is unclear, although it should
Page 77 and 78:
(4.2) a. Ene nuamai ritama teneruri
Page 79 and 80:
ename 139 ne= iSaRi tanu 140 ukukui
Page 81 and 82:
The Jesuit missionary mentioned in
Page 83 and 84:
(5.2) a. i. Maraitipa Dios mura? ii
Page 85 and 86:
(5.5) a. i. Aguerepa Dios amiti? ii
Page 87 and 88:
. i. Dios semai raicua zenoni, mura
Page 89 and 90:
ii. Dios Taegrasemai, Ahua guaca em
Page 91 and 92:
La copia del original me fue entreg
Page 93 and 94:
(6.3) a. i. Mara e pupe Dios yahueq
Page 95 and 96:
(6.7) a. i. Marae rapa Dios yahuequ
Page 97 and 98:
(6.10) a. i. Ayquiara musa puereca
Page 99 and 100:
ii. Virgen Santa Maria ceuecacuarap
Page 101 and 102:
iii. yeneikua RasusanaRaSi, cruzaRi
Page 103 and 104:
(6.20) a. i. Era Xtiano cana Dios c
Page 105 and 106:
ii. Roaya, miaracanayacatu yennezum
Page 107 and 108:
(6.26) a. i. Mura quarasschi pupe m
Page 109 and 110:
(6.28) a. i. Mare tipa Ahuacana y a
Page 111 and 112: target: ‘Grieving with all their
Page 113 and 114: iii. m1t1R1pe 1p1sasui comulgayaRay
Page 115 and 116: muRia -i ta= saRa ta= ĩya =mukui =
Page 117 and 118: Chapter 7 Profession of Faith Below
Page 119 and 120: c. upai tautSakana eRa taconfesayaR
Page 121 and 122: When Uriarte and his Jesuit compani
Page 123 and 124: Uriarte’s own, and as such we do
Page 125 and 126: (Uriarte [1776]1986:ibid.) goes on
Page 127 and 128: wiSani =puRa tenepeta 290 muRa be.d
Page 129 and 130: eRaya usu yene= patiRi =kana well g
Page 131 and 132: 9.1 Jesuit Interactions with the Om
Page 133 and 134: Ecuador), 314 were sent to found a
Page 135 and 136: of Kambeba lived as far downriver a
Page 137 and 138: empeño para (sic) entroducir en la
Page 139 and 140: There is ample evidence that Quechu
Page 141 and 142: Chantre y Herrera (1901:93) similar
Page 143 and 144: El P. Ignacio María Franciscis fue
Page 145 and 146: versions of ecclesiastical texts in
Page 147 and 148: 9.3 Jesuit Language Use in Old Omag
Page 149 and 150: (9.8) wakutatara wakuta -tara carry
Page 151 and 152: espíritu santo =sui muRa virgen sa
Page 153 and 154: the former Spanish sense was the on
Page 155 and 156: A passive-like effect is achieved b
Page 157 and 158: maRai =tipa Dios what =interr God
Page 159 and 160: ‘Where is God?’ b. 1watimai Rit
Page 161: maRai =ikua =tipa Dios yaw1k1 upa =
Page 165 and 166: Table 9.2: Summary of Grammatical D
Page 167 and 168: ely on translation from a Quechua m
Page 169 and 170: Jesuits succeeded in bringing a sig
Page 171 and 172: conclusion to be drawn from the his
Page 173 and 174: Cabral, Ana Suelly Arruda Camara an
Page 175 and 176: Edmundson, George. 1922. Introducti
Page 177 and 178: Lemos Barbosa, Antonio. 1970. Peque
Page 179 and 180: Porro, Antonio. 1994. Social Organi
Page 181: Veigl, Franz Xavier. 1789. Status p
show all

draft manuscript - Linguistics - University of California, Berkeley

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?