Blackfoot III

[stoutfellow]

The next several sections of the book describe verb paradigms. Blackfoot verbs are marked for the person and number of the subject, and also - in the transitive case - for the person and number of the object. Given the plethora of person/number combinations that Blackfoot has, the paradigms are rather complex, but not particularly interesting. I'll pass over them, then, except to say a few words about transitive verbs whose logical subject is inanimate. In this situation, the verb is marked as having an unspecified subject; the logical subject is named, and the verb is also marked with a prefix translatable as "with" or "by means of". Thus, "the stone hit the dog" takes a form that might better be translated as "Someone by means of the stone hit the dog".

The Blackfoot system of demonstratives is fairly complex. English has essentially only two demonstratives, "this/these" and "that/those", both of which are marked for number. The distinction between the two is not easy to describe; it has something to do with proximity, but that proximity need not be physical. In "So, this guy Charlie, where is he from?", for example, the proximity stems from previous mention. ("That dratted cat!" is more likely to be a first mention.) Spanish has, as I understand it, a somewhat more detailed and more precise system, with the demonstratives "este", "ese", "aquel"; I've heard them described as first, second, and third person demonstratives - close to speaker, close to addressee but not speaker, not close to speaker or addressee. (hornedhopper or filkferengi, feel free to correct me on this.)

Blackfoot's system is more detailed yet. The demonstrative stems are:

• am: close and familiar to speaker


• anno: close to speaker and close or familiar to addressee


• amo: close to speaker but not to addressee


• ann: not close to speaker but close or familiar to addressee


• om: not close to speaker or addressee

They are marked for number and gender, and may also take diminutive suffixes, indicating pity or affection (usually used for, e.g., old people or children). There are other suffixes as well: -ma, indicating that the object is stationary; -ya, possibly indicating that the object is moving, but not towards the speaker; -hka, possibly indicating that the object is out of sight; and -ka, indicating that the location of the object is being described at another time than the present - e.g., amoka might refer to an object which, at a certain time in the past, was near the speaker but not the addressee. (At the time of publication, the author's interpretations of -ya and -hka had been disputed by other researchers.)

Comments

[hornedhopper.livejournal.com]

Very interesting.

Far be it from me to correct you on Spanish grammar, however! I learned mine from having to *converse* with my mother-in-law when she would come to stay for a few months at a time. She was under the impression that she spoke English, but in fact, did not. (g) I have never formally studied it and I'm sure I make hilarious gaffes whenever I enter into discussions at family parties. But it's okay, because I am at least communicating my ideas. But looking at the written form of Spanish always surprises me, because I see the spelling differently in my head, rather than have learned it in school.

[filkferengi]

Your description of the Spanish is accurate, although I'd tend to phrase it more informally as "near me, near you, & fer off from us both." ;)