Copala Triqui makes very frequent use of
man as an accusative marker. But does Itunyoso Triqui have an accusative or not?
The Itunyoso Triqui cognate seems to be man'an. In some uses it seems very much like an accusative:
 |
| Mark 1:36 |
But compare the next sentence in this passage, where man'an does not precede the object pronoun:
 |
| Mark 1:37 |
There is apparently an interesting difference between Itunyoso and Copala in this respect, since in Copala man would be obligatory before the object pronoun.
Compare the same passage in Copala Triqui:
 |
| they said to him 'everyone is looking for you' " Mark 1:37" |
2 comments:
Itunyoso Trique has two accusative clitics. /soʔ 1/ is the 2nd person singular accusative (/reʔ 1/ is the nominative). /yunj 1/ is the 1.S accusative (the nominative involves a laryngeal toggle and tone change). I think that /gunun/ is just the prefixed form of /unu 3.3/ 'oir/entender' here. Though, I don't know how this fits in with the translation.
'find' is nano' 3.3, but this form is also the 1.PL.EXCL, which is just marked with a final glottal stop. The word /taran' 2.3/ means "all."
I have /sij 4/ as 'llegar', not "complete", so this might be translated better as "When they arrived and found (him), they said 'We are all looking for you.'"
It's interesting. I guess I didn't really get what was happening in Copala with this accusative marker. There is nothing like this in Itunyoso Trique I think. The clitics just follow each other, e.g. nano'oh-so' 3.3.5-1, 'I am looking for you.'
Do you have a sense of what's going on with the word/particle man'an? Clearly the grammar rules are different, but this looks cognate to the accusative in Copala, so I'd like to understand how it is used in Itunyoso to have a clue as to the historical origin.
Post a Comment