Professional Documents
Culture Documents
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1264986?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of
American Linguistics.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE SYNTAX OF POSTPOSITIONS IN UTO-AZTECAN1
RONALD W. LANGACKER
BLE 1
Mono (M)
Shoshoni (SH) Numic
Southern Paiute (SP)
Tubatulabal (TU)
Hopi (H)
Serrano (SR)
Cahuilla (CA) T k
Cupeno (CU) Cupan Takc Uto-Aztecan
Luiseno (L)
Papago (P)
Tarahumara (TA)]
Yaqui (Y) Taracahitic
Cora (CR) Corachol
Huichol (HU)
Aztec (A)
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
12 INTERNATIONALJOURNAL OF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONSIN UTO-AZTECAN 13
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
14 INTERNATIONAL
JOURNALOF AMERICAN
LINGUISTICS VOL. 43
TABLE 2
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONSIN UTO-AZTECAN 15
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
16 INTERNATIONALJOURNAL OF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONSIN UTO-AZTECAN 17
pronoun pe-, which reflects proto *pi-, languages, except that in all these languages
while Cupeno -?aw incorporates the third- we find a construction, illustrated in (21),
person singular pronoun *?a-, also recon- that can reasonably be said to derive from
structed for the protolanguage. Second, that in (12); the main discrepancy between
because of this reanalysis (or for other (12) and the daughter patterns can be
reasons), the two words of the pronoun-copy attributed to the loss in Numic of the
construction may coalesce into a single absolutive suffix *-t (which was replaced by
complex word or at least a tightly knit a series of nominalizing suffixes).
wordlike sequence. (21) M nopi-lna ?a-lqWena?a
Let us turn now to Classical Nahuatl. As (house-Acc it-farfrom)farfrom the
shown in (5)-(7), Aztec directly reflects the house
pronoun-copy construction in its simple, (M-L-G-210)
inverted, and discontinuous forms. The SP ?a-tulkWakani-a
only modification is that the sequence *-t-a (it-underhouse-Acc) underthehouse
was reanalyzedas a simple absolutive suffix, (SP-S-G-219)
eventually reflected as *-A(i),as part of the SH kahni-a-nma-pinankWa
general loss of accusative inflection in the (house-Acc-GENit-behind) behind
language. the house
However, the coalescence just noted for (NUM-M-PC)
Cahuilla-Cupeno calls our attention to a SH i-kulpa tinaa hunu-kulpa nulki
special form of the simplenoun construction (it-inside down canyon-inside ran)
in Aztec. For certain postpositions, a He ran downinside the canyon.
special connective -ti is inserted when the (NUM-M-PC)
postposition is attached directly to a noun, Wick R. Miller has suggested, quite plaus-
as shown in (19). ibly, that the Mono accusative suffix -na
(19) A cimal-ti-ka derives by reanalysis from the accusative
(shield-coNN-with)with a shield *-a suffix attached to nasalizing stems.
(A-G-L-90) Southern Paiute attests to inversion in the
The insertion is obligatory with some post- pronoun-copy construction. Shoshoni at-
positions and apparently optional with tests to both inversionand discontinuityin a
others. Since the third-person singular specialconstructioninvolving duplicationof
postposition base in Aztec is ?i-, the the postposition, which occurs on both the
derivationin (20) suggestsitself as the originnoun and its pronoun copy.
of this connective. I should note that the In Tubatulabal,we do not find a pronoun-
reduction of ta ?i to ti is phonologically copy constructionper se. In its stead we find
quite regular. Notice further that this a construction involving an object nominal
coalescence must precede the sound change and a preposition or postposition con-
*ta > Aadiachronically. stituting an independent word, as in (22).
(22) TU siigawiyam-i ?aamaayu
(20) *cimal-ta ?i-ka *cimal-t-i-ka
(Koso-ACC with) with the Koso
Indians
N-ABS PRON-P N-ABS-PRON-P
cimal-ti-ka (TU-V-G-150)
?akaziip ?oxolaa-l-a
(across canyon-ABS-ACC) across the
N-CONN-P
canyon
I will have little to say about the Numic (TU-V-G-150)
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
18 INTERNATIONALJOURNAL OF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
Voegelin cites five of these pre- or post- to represent the simple and inverted pro-
positions, which I list in (23). noun-copyconstructionsrespectively.Third,
(23) TU ?aamaayu with this analysis implies that we must disregard
(TU-V-G-150) the first syllable of these postpositions when
?akaziipacross we undertake to reconstruct postpositions
(TU-V-G-150) for the protolanguage, since the first
naawidam between syllable derives by incorporation of a
(TU-V-G-176) pronoun, as seen previouslyfor Cahuillaand
wahkiik toward Cupeno. In this instance, the remainder is
(TU-V-G-176) still no doubt historically complex, but by
wacPas by means of abstractingthe first syllablewe have taken a
(TU-V-WD-227) necessary first step in isolating the smaller
These elements are obviously complex, at units that can profitably be compared.
least diachronically.I would like to suggest In Hopi, proto *-t-a was reanalyzedas an
that they all result historically from re- accusative suffix. Therefore, we might
analysis of an earlier pronoun-postposition expect the pronoun-copy construction to
sequence, as shown in (24). mark the object nominal with accusative
(24) ?aamaayu < *?a-maayu(it-P) inflection rather than with the absolutive
?akaziip < *?a-kaziip(it-P) per se, and this is indeed the case. Some
naawidam < *na-widam(RCPR-P) examples are given in (26).
wahkiik < *wa-(h)kiik(them-P) (26) H ni-y ?e-iam
wacPas < *wa-cPas (them-P) (I-ACCPRON-for)forme
Several aspects of this analysis may be (H-F-GPA-5)
noted. First, it accounts for the fact that all kii-ki-hi-t ?a-ri
of these postpositions start with ?a, na, or (RDP-house-ABS-ACC it-at) at the
wa, all of which can be reconstructed as houses
postpositional object pronouns in Proto- (H-W-TD-171)
Uto-Aztecan. *?a- has already been dealt naa-y ?a-mim
with. *na- clearly reconstructsas a recipro- (father-Acc him-with) with his own
cal pronoun; further examples are given in father
(18), but I will not try to justify this recon- (H-W-L-45)
struction here in detail (see UA-L-PI). The Serrano situation is initially some-
*wa- is likely as the third-personpluralpost- what confusing. The pronoun-copy con-
positional object on the basis of this struction may appear without any special
Tubatulabalevidence and the use of wa- in marking on the object noun, as in the first
this way in Cora and Huichol, illustratedin example of (27). However, it may also
(25). appear with one of four suffixes, -t, -c, -n, or
(25) CR wa-hapWaon them -ki, sometimes erroneously referred to as
(CR-P-G-26) genitive suffixes (for lack of anything
HU wa-caata among them appropriate to call them); these are illus-
(HU-G-S-43) trated in the remainingexamples of (27).
Second, this analysis entails the prior (27) SR pi-naa pi-yika?
existence in Tubatulabal of the pronoun- (their-kinsman him-to) to their
copy construction, in both its simple and kinsman
inverted forms. With ?a- segmented as a (SR-H-C-28)
pronoun, the two examples in (22) are seen wahi?-t pi-yika?
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONSIN UTO-AZTECAN 19
(coyote-GEN him-to) against the pronominal prefix. That is, they mark the
coyote configuration sketched in (29), where there
(SR-H-G-66) is coreference between the noun to which
qaaqW-cpi-nu? the suffix is attached and the following
(sagebrush-GENit-from) from the pronominal element.
sagebrush (29) Ni-GEN PRONi-X
(SR-H-G-122) (Compare this with the first Shoshoni
mi-yi-k mi-na?-n pi-nu? example in [21].) (30) and the last example
(your-mother-GENyour-father-GEN in (28), in which the suffix -t occurs on a
him-from)from your motherand possessed noun, show that even those
father suffixes that derive historically from abso-
(SR-H-G-127) lutives have assumed this special syntactic
The suffixes-t and -c coincide in shape with function and are no longer simply abso-
two of the absolutive suffixesin Serrano, so lutives; (30) also illustratesdiscontinuity.
examples with these two suffixes can be (30) SR ni-sumani-t ni? pu-no? mii
taken as direct continuations of the pro- (my-bow-GENI it-from go)
noun-copy construction reconstructed for I walk awayfrom my bow.
the protolanguage. However, neither -n nor (SR-C-PC)
-ki can plausibly be derived from absolu- I cannot explore here, in detail, the nature
tives-note in particularthat they occur on of the syntacticreanalysisthat has occurred.
possessed nouns in (27), where an absolutive However, granted that this reanalysis has
would be expected to drop-and the taken place, it remains to determine the
mystery deepens when we notice that the source of -n and -ki, which cannot be
use of these suffixes is not restricted to derived from absolutives. We are provided
postpositional expressions. Some further with a clue by the fact that these suffixes
examples are given in (28). occur on possessed nouns, and also by the
(28) SR ?a-yi-ki oo-uuva? fact that (29) may be a possessive construc-
(his-mother-GEN her-eye) his tion. -ki, I claim, derives from a suffix
mother's eye formerlyused specificallyto mark possessed
(SR-H-G-199) nouns; it shows up in the Cupan languages
?ama-y ?a-na?-n ?a-huun-i as -ki, as shown in (31).
(that-Acc his-father-GEN his-heart- (31) CA ne-tyeenda?-am-ki
his
ACC) father's heart ACC (my-store-PL-PossD) my stores
(SR-H-D-43) (CA-B-IN)
?ama-c ?a-w6ocahav-t?a-piit CU com-amiigu-ki
(that-GENher-husband-GENhis- ourfriend
younger sister) her husband's (CU-HN-M-124)
youngersister L no-?exva-ki
(SR-H-G-54) my sand
Although I do not have enough data to (L-H-I-73)
present a definitiveanalysis of this so-called TO ban-gi-d
genitive construction in Serrano, it seems (coyote-PossD-his)his coyote
clearthat these suffixeshave been reanalyzed (TO-M-PL-333)
as syntactic markers of a special kind: they In Cahuillaand Cupeno, it occurs primarily
mark nonfinal nouns in syntactic phrases in on borrowed nouns, while in Luiseno it
which the final constituent begins with a occurs on nouns designating things not
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
20 INTERNATIONALJOURNAL OF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONS
IN UTO-AZTECAN 21
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
22 INTERNATIONALJOURNAL OF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
These independent postpositions often take -hemi with/about < -he-mi < *pi-mi
the accusative suffix -ta on the accompany- (him-P)
ing noun. The expressions in (42) thus -hamWanwith/and< *-he-man < *pi-
constitute a direct reflex of the pronoun- man (him-P)
copy construction as reconstructedin (12). -hapWa on/above < *-he-pa < *pi-pa
(42) Y ?im ?usi-m becibo (him-P)
(my child-PLfor)for my children More specifically,we may posit the develop-
(Y-L-TG-35) ment given in (45), a development which
tomi-ta becibo attests to the prior existence of the non-
for money inverted pronoun-copy construction in pre-
(Y-L-TG-39) Cora.
sawa-ta betuk
(45) *N he-x *N hex N-hex
undera tree
(Y-L-TG-180) PRON-P P P
The final subfamily to be considered is
Corachol. As (43) indicates, there is direct With the segmentation of these post-
evidence of the pronoun-copy construction positions in Cora we have only begun to
in both languages; based on limited data, it explore the marvels of postpositional ex-
appears that this construction is regularly pressions in Corachol. Let me conduct a
inverted in Cora but is uninverted in brief tour of these marvels and then try to
Huichol. explain their origin. In Cora, we find two
(43) CR wa-hapWa?u-huci-mWa series of pre- or postpositions that are very
(them-on their-younger brother- similarin form; generally,the postpositions
PL) on theiryoungerbrothers are bound forms, while the prepositions are
(CR-P-G-26) free forms that are identical to the post-
HU ?iiki tuupiiri-ciiziwaa-ki positions except for the addition of a final
(these policeman-PL them-with) -n. Two such pairs are illustratedin (46).
by means of thesepolicemen (46) CR haitiri-hapWa
(HU-G-S-43) above the clouds
The third-person singular postpositional (CR-MM-CE-xv)
base in Cora is ru-, an innovative form. The hapWan?i-canaka
expected Cora reflex of proto *pi- is he-, (on ART-earth)on the earth
which does not occur. However, a number (CR-P-NE-2)
of postpositions in Cora begin in he- (or in tete-hece
ha- when the change from he- to ha- can be on a rock
attributed to harmonization with the fol- (CR-P-G-71)
lowing vowel), and it is reasonable in view hecen ru-muve
of the preceding discussion to segment this (in his-feather) by means of their
he- as an original pronominal element. feathershafts
This analysis, sketched in (44), provides (CR-P-G-74)
further, though indirect, evidence for the pu-ri hecen watara sai ru-canaka
pronoun-copy construction in Corachol. (he-now in go other his-world)
(44) -hece in/on/for < -he-ce < *-he-cie < Now he goes to his other world.
*pi-cii (him-P) (CR-P-NE-1)
-hete under < -he-te < *-he-tia < Incidentally,the final example in (46) shows
*pi-tua (him-P) that discontinuity is possible with the pre-
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 POSTPOSITIONSIN UTO-AZTECAN 23
positional forms. Cora also has at least the together. Clearly we can reconstruct for
remnant of a postposition -na, which may Proto-Corachola postposition *-na meaning
be glossedplace of and occurs at least as one roughly at, but the real task is to determine
member of complex postpositional forms, what syntactic constructions are involved
as in (47). and how they developed historically to
(47) CR ?i-hatea-na-hece produce the somewhatconfusing synchronic
(ART-river-place of-in) in the river picture.
(CR-P-G-14) We can begin with the fairly obvious
Huichol also has a postposition -na, hypothesis that the transition vowel in (48)
glossed in/at, but it behaves in a very and (49) is the remains of the missing
peculiar manner. First, when it alone is third-person singular possessor suffix. Al-
attached to a noun, the third-person though this suffix is now -ya in Huichol,
singular possessor suffix, normally -ya, originally it was *-yi, as shown in (10)
surfacesas zero; however, a transitionvowel above, and the expected reflex of *-yi is -ye.
appears, usually e, as shown in (48). Thus we may posit (51) for the development
(48) HU ki-e-na of expressions like (48).
(house-v-at) at his house (51) *ki-yi-na (house-his-at)> *ki-(y)e-na
(HU-G-S-19) > ki-e-na at his house
Second, -na appears as the second member This transition vowel is now evidently
of complex postpositions the first members phonologically determined; hence by re-
of which derive historically from nouns; a analysis, the possessor suffix has been lost
transition vowel also appears in this con- and is zero synchronicallyin this construc-
struction, and moreover, the postposition tion.
has no overt object. Examples are given in Suppose now that we apply the steps in
(49). (51) to a noun susceptible to being re-
(49) HU hizi-e-na interpreted as a postposition, a noun such
(in front of-v-at) infront of him as hizi eye or wari back. The situation is
(hizi = eye) such that -na can easily be reinterpretedas
(HU-G-S-43) the missing third-person singular pronoun;
wari-e-na hence we may posit (52) as the origin of
(behind-v-at)behindhim expressions like (49).
(wari = back) (52) *wari-yi-na *wari-e-na
(HU-G-S-43) back-his-at > back-v-at >
Finally, -na consistently cooccurs with the N-POSSR-P N-V-P
third-person singular pronoun hee- (which
derives from proto *pi-) when this is used wari-e-na behindhim
with postpositions not recently derived behind-v-him
from nouns, as illustratedin (50). P-V-PRON
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
24 INTERNATIONALJOURNALOF AMERICANLINGUISTICS VOL. 43
(49) and (52) is used with postpositions that postpositional expressions and their dia-
appear to be derived fairly recently from chronic evolution into account. Some post-
nouns. In Cora, the innovative pronoun positions derive from nouns, others are
base ru- eventually won out for the third- compounded from smaller postpositions,
person singular, through developments some incorporate pronominal elements at
beyond the scope of this article. However, the beginningor the end, and some, the most
the independent prepositions ending in -n important ones comparatively,derive from
provide good evidence that -na at one time simple postpositions in the protolanguage.
functioned as a third-person singular post- We must untangle these myriad develop-
positional object pronoun in Cora, and we ments before we can determine what
have seen that he- can also be reconstructed portions of what postpositions can validly
in this role. To account for these preposi- be comparedfor purposesof reconstruction.
tions, illustratedin (46), we need only equate Most broadly, this article constitutes an
the final -n with -na and recall that Cora exercise in syntactic comparison and recon-
displays the inverted pronoun-copy con- struction in a non-Indo-Europeanlanguage
struction. We therefore have diachronic family. I hope to have shown that such work
derivationslike (53); I will not speculate on is both possible and fruitful; indeed, the
the synchronic derivation of this construc- problems that arise are not unmanageable,
tion. The shared portions of this develop- but rather are quite commensurate with
ment are naturally strong evidence that those encountered in phonological and
Cora and Huichol constitute a subfamily of lexical reconstruction.Not only is syntactic
Uto-Aztecan, a claim that is not controver- reconstructionpossible,givenadequatedata,
sial. but it is also necessaryif we hope to under-
?i-canaka stand fully the evolution of morphological
(53) *he-pa-na elements.
it-on-it AtRT-earth >
PRON-P-PRON N
5. The following references are cited in
'hapWa-n(a) ?i-canaka hapWan this article:
on-it ART-earth > on Brambila, David, S. J. Gramdtica Rardmuri.
P-PRON N P Mexico City: Editorial Buena Prensa, 1953.
(TA-B-G)
?i-canakaon the earth Bright, William. "Notes on Aztec." Informal
ART-earth notes, 1966. (A-B-NA)
N . Informal notes on Cahuilla, n.d.
(CA-B-IN)
4. Since the points I wish to establish Casagrande, Joseph B., and Kenneth Hale.
have been covered extensively in the body "Semantic Relationships in Papago Folk-
of this article,I will touch on them only very Definitions." In Studies in Southwestern Ethno-
linguistics, edited by Dell Hymes. The Hague:
brieflyby way of conclusion. I think I have Mouton, 1967. (P-CH-SR)
demonstratedbeyond reasonable doubt the Crook, Donald. Personal communication. (SR-
existence of the pronoun-copy construction C-PC)
of (12) in Proto-Uto-Aztecan,and numerous Daley, Jon P. "Shoshone Phonology and Mor-
other morphologicalelements and syntactic phological Sketch." M.A. thesis, Idaho State
University, 1970. (SH-D-PMS)
patterns have been supported as well. In Dibble, Charles E., and Arthur J. O. Anderson.
reconstructingindividual postpositions and Florentine Codex. Book 10, The People.
their meanings, we must take the syntax of Translation of Fray Bernardino de Sahagun,
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NO. 1 IN UTO-AZTECAN
POSTPOSITIONS 25
General History of the Things of New Spain. "Passive, Impersonal, Reflexive, and
Monographs of the School of American Unspecified Argument Constructions in Uto-
Research and the Museum of New Mexico, Aztecan." Manuscript,1974. (UA-L-PI)
no. 14, pt. 11. Santa Fe, N.M.: School of Lindenfeld, Jacqueline. "A Transformational
American Research and University of Utah, Grammar of Yaqui." Ph.D. dissertation,
1961. (A-DA-FC10) University of California, Los Angeles, 1969.
Freeze, Ray. "Hopi Genitive and Possessive (Y-L-TG)
Affixation." Manuscript, 1974. (H-F-GPA) . YaquiSyntax. UCPL, no. 76. Berkeley
Fuchs, Anna. Morphologie des Verbs im Cahuilla. and Los Angeles: University of California
Janua Linguarum, Series Practica, no. 87. Press, 1973. (Y-L-S)
The Hague: Mouton, 1970. (CA-F-MV) Mason, J. Alden. The Language of the Papago of
Garibay K., Angel Maria. Llave del Ndhuatl. Arizona. University of Pennsylvania Museum
Mexico City: Editorial Porrua, 1961. (A-G-L) Monographs. Philadelphia: University of
Grimes, Joseph E. Huichol Syntax. Janua PennsylvaniaMuseum, 1950. (P-M-LPA)
Linguarum, Series Practica, no. 11. The . "Tepecano: A Piman Language of
Hague: Mouton, 1964. (HU-G-S) Western Mexico." Annals of the New York
. "Huichol Tone and Intonation." IJAL Academy of Science 25 (1916): 309-416.
25 (1959): 221-32. (HU-G-HTI) (TO-M-PL)
Hill, Jane H. "A Grammar of the Cupefio McMahon, Ambrosio, and Maria Aiton de
Language." Ph.D. dissertation, University of McMahon. Cora y Espanol. Serie de Vocabu-
California, Los Angeles, 1966. (CU-H-G) larios Indigenas, no. 2. Mexico City: Instituto
Hill, Jane H., and Rosinda Nolasquez, eds. Lingiiistico de Verano, 1959. (CR-MM-CE)
Mulu'wetam: The First People (Cupeno Oral Miller, Wick R. Newe Natekwinappeh: Shoshoni
History and Language). Banning, Calif.: Malki Stories and Dictionary. University of Utah
Museum Press, 1973. (CU-HN-M) AnthropologicalPapers,no. 94. Salt Lake City:
Hill, Kenneth C. "A Grammar of the Serrano University of Utah Press, 1972. (SH-M-NN)
Language." Ph.D. dissertation, University of . Personal communication. (NUM-M-
California, Los Angeles, 1967. (SR-H-G) PC)
"Serrano Clitics." University of Michigan Molina, Fray Alonso de. Arte de la Lengua
Phonetics Laboratory Notes 4 (1969): 27-30. Mexicana y Castellana. Colecci6n de Incun-
(SR-H-C) ables Americanos, Siglo 16, vol. 6 (1571).
. A Serrano Dictionary. Computer print- Facsimile ed. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura
out, 1972. (SR-H-D) Hispanica, 1945. (A-M-A)
Hioki, Kojiro. "Zur Beschreibung des Systems Preuss, Konrad-Theodor. Die Nayarit-Expedi-
der Klitika im Cahuilla (Uto-Aztekisch, tion, Text-Aufnahmen und Beobachtungen unter
Sud-Kalifornien)."Manuscript,1971. (CA-H- Mexikanischen-Indianern. Vol. 1. Leipzig, 1912.
BSK) (CR-P-NE)
Hyde, Villiana. An Introduction to the Luiseno . "Grammatikder Cora-Sprache."IJAL 7
Language. Edited by Ronald W. Langacker (1932): 1-84. (CR-P-G)
et al. Banning, Calif.: Malki Museum Press, Sapir, Edward."SouthernPaiute: A Shoshonean
1971. (L-H-I) Language."AAASP 65 (1930):1-296. (SP-S-G)
Jacobs, Roderick A. "Syntactic Change: A Saxton, Dean, and Lucille Saxton. Dictionary:
Cupan (Uto-Aztecan) Case Study." Ph.D. Papago & Pima to English, English to Papago &
dissertation, University of California, San Pima. Tucson: University of Arizona Press,
Diego, 1972. (CUP-J-SC) 1969. (P-SS-D)
Johnson, Jean B. El Idioma Yaqui.Departmento Thord-Gray, I. Tarahumara-English, English-
de Investigaciones Antropol6gicas, Publica- Tarahumara Dictionary. Coral Gables, Fla.:
ciones no. 10. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional University of Miami Press, 1955. (TA-T-
de Antropologia e Historia, 1962. (Y-J-I) TED)
Lamb, Sydney M. "Mono Grammar." Ph.D. Voegelin, C. F. "Tubatulabal Grammar."
dissertation,Universityof California,Berkeley, UCPAAE 34 (1935): 55-189. (TU-V-G)
1958. (M-L-G) . "Working Dictionary of Tubatulabal."
Langacker, Ronald W. Papago field notes, IJAL 24 (1958): 221-28. (TU-V-WD)
1965. (P-L-FN) Whorf, B. L. "The Hopi Language." University
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
26 JOURNALOF AMERICAN
INTERNATIONAL LINGUISTICS VOL. 43
This content downloaded from 131.173.17.71 on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:48:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions