Woodland Indians Forum

You are not logged in.

Announcement

  • Index
  •  » Language
  •  » Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

#101 Apr-11-2018 09:52:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

Would you be willing to post the answers for Quiz 1-5? I'm working my way through it now.

1. In the sentence, "That stone is round," how do you say, "That stone"?   ne achsin or nen achsin

2. In the sentence, "She killed those little ants," how do you say, "those little ants"?   nel elikutitall

3. In the sentence, "I have cared for both big horses and little horses," how do you say, "big horses and little horses"?   chinqui nehenajungesak woak nehenajungetitak

4. In the sentence, "This strange fish was caught in the brook," how do you say, "This strange fish"?   won achtschipi names

5. In the sentence, "That important man is my uncle," how do you say, "That important man"?   na mechi lenno or nan mechi lenno (omechi is a typo in the lesson)

6. In the sentence, "I came to these little towns," how do you say, "these little towns"?   jul utenititink

7. In the sentence, "You saw her on the other side of the water," how do you say, "on the other side of the water"?  gamink

8. In the sentence, "She borrowed our spoons and kettles," how do you say, "our spoons and kettles"?   ndemhoansennanak woak ndahoosennanak (If you use the possessive marker, -umm-, in the possessive forms in this quiz, that’s okay—with the exception of any ending in –kan or –gan, as previously explained.)

9. How do you say, "What little river?"   Keku sipotit? or Keku tanghanneu?

10. In the sentence, "There are many crayfish in our little creeks," how do you say, "in our little creeks"?   nsipotitennanink

11. How do you say, "Oh, my bloody hand!"?   Wo, n’mokqui nachk! (Wo, mokqui nachk! would be okay, too, though not shown in the lessons.)

12. In the sentence, "I found it in the gulley, underneath a flat rock," how do you say, "in the gulley, underneath a flat rock"?   pachsajetitink allami schingachteyapuchk

13. In the sentence, "You saw their plantations and their white cedar trees," how do you say, "their plantations and their white cedar trees"?   wtakihakanuwawall woak wtalalauwawall

14. In the sentence, "She soon came upon those dead whales," how do you say, "those dead whales"?   nekachge mbiachkwunga

15. In the sentence, "Some people from that island visited us, yesterday," how do you say, "Some people from that island"? alende auwenik untschi ne menatewunk (or, …menatewunk untschi)

16. How would you say, "Where is your (pl.) chief?"   Ta hatsch ksakimawuwa achpo?

17. In the sentence, "The sum was two and four--or six," how do you say, "two and four--or six"?   nischa woak newo--schita guttasch

18. In the sentence, "We saw them on both sides of the hill," how do you say, "on both sides of the hill"?   wewundachqui wachtschutitink  (You could add untschi to this, but it isn't really needed.  Speaker's choice.)

19. In the sentence, "There were many alder trees in that forest," how do you say, "many alder trees"?   chweli topiak

20. In the sentence, "They came to the huts," how do you say, "to the huts"?  jagawanink li  (I don’t think the word, jagawan (“hut") is in the lessons.  I now recall that when I first posted these lessons, in 2001, people seeing them were using an online version of A Lenape-English Dictionary, or my hard copy book, A Delaware-English Lexicon, so they had access to a large vocabulary.  I’ll try to find a link to the first one for you.)

Offline

 

#102 Apr-11-2018 05:46:pm

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Here's a link to the online Brinton & Anthony dictionary put out by the boy scouts:  http://www.gilwell.com/lenape/index2.htm  This is the version people were using in 2001.  A reprint of the original 1889 book, which has the English index, is available at Amazon.  This Mission Delaware dictionary has about 4,000 entries.  My lexicon has over 6,000 entries.

Offline

 

#103 Apr-11-2018 11:00:pm

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Interesting. I think I follow you smile I noticed in the lessons, for example, different words for different types of trees

"topi" - 'an alder tree'
"mehittuk" - 'a tree'
"machtschikbi" - 'a pawpaw tree'

These prompted questions about what translating "white cedar tree" would consist of? The noun mehittuk + two of what in english (or german!) we would call adjectives? A separate noun altogether? The type of translation for flat rock with its english meanings reflected in its etymology is exactly what I wondered about for white cedar tree.

Thanks for clarifying.

Offline

 

#104 Apr-12-2018 09:54:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

Interesting. I think I follow you smile I noticed in the lessons, for example, different words for different types of trees

"topi" - 'an alder tree'
"mehittuk" - 'a tree'
"machtschikbi" - 'a pawpaw tree'

These prompted questions about what translating "white cedar tree" would consist of? The noun mehittuk + two of what in english (or german!) we would call adjectives? A separate noun altogether? The type of translation for flat rock with its english meanings reflected in its etymology is exactly what I wondered about for white cedar tree.

Thanks for clarifying.

Another way to look at this is that the etymologies of words which signify the same things in English and Lenape are not always (maybe even not ususally) the same.  For instance, English "rattlesnake" (rattle + snake) is wischalowe (frightening + tail) in Lenape.  These are different conceptions, but they both signify the exact same animal.

Offline

 

#105 Apr-12-2018 11:19:pm

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Very interesting.

Btw: Knowing now that the 2001 lesson learning group was working from a dictionary makes me feel a LOT better.

On to Lesson 6!

Offline

 

#106 Apr-13-2018 12:28:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Actually...before I move on to Lesson 6, three (hopefully) brief questions about some of errors from Quiz 1-5.

1. Interrogative Particles

How would you say, "Where is your (pl.) chief?" (Question 16)

Answer: Ta hatsch ksakimawuwa achpo?

Can you comment on "Ta" and "hatsch" together? Why can't we just say "Ta ksakimawuwaachpo?" I don't quite follow what "it is asked" means with reference to "hatsch" as an interrogatory particle?

2. & 3. Use of Obviative Suffix

In the sentence, "She borrowed our spoons and kettles," how do you say, "our spoons and kettles"? (Question 8)

How would you say, "Where is your (pl.) chief?" (Question 16)

My question is about the suffixes on "spoons," "kettles" and "chiefs".

I'm trying to understand why these don't require obviate endings?

Even though "spoons" and "kettles" are inanimate nouns (I think), aren't they secondary nouns in the sentence? Therefore, don't they need an obviative ending instead of a plural ending?

ndemhoansennanall  (our spoons)
ndahoosennanall   (our kettles)

Chief is an animate noun that is possessed by "you. Doesn't is need an obivative ending, too?

ksakimawuwawall   (our chiefs)

Offline

 

#107 Apr-13-2018 07:40:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

Actually...before I move on to Lesson 6, three (hopefully) brief questions about some of errors from Quiz 1-5.

1. Interrogative Particles

How would you say, "Where is your (pl.) chief?" (Question 16)

Answer: Ta hatsch ksakimawuwa achpo?

Can you comment on "Ta" and "hatsch" together? Why can't we just say "Ta ksakimawuwaachpo?" I don't quite follow what "it is asked" means with reference to "hatsch" as an interrogatory particle?

"Ta ksakimawuwa achpo?" is fine, though an interrogative "ha" or "hatsch" (sometimes, "eet") is most often inserted.  The question without an interrogative particle is recognized, in speech, by a rise in intonation because without an interrogative particle this could mean "Your chief is definitely there."  (ta ["where" or "how"] sounds exactly like ta ["definitely"] in Unami).  Of course, this doesn't matter in writing because the question mark shows it to be a question.

2. & 3. Use of Obviative Suffix

In the sentence, "She borrowed our spoons and kettles," how do you say, "our spoons and kettles"? (Question 8)

How would you say, "Where is your (pl.) chief?" (Question 16)

My question is about the suffixes on "spoons," "kettles" and "chiefs".

I'm trying to understand why these don't require obviate endings?

Even though "spoons" and "kettles" are inanimate nouns (I think), aren't they secondary nouns in the sentence? Therefore, don't they need an obviative ending instead of a plural ending?

ndemhoansennanall  (our spoons)
ndahoosennanall   (our kettles)

Well...  You are right about them needing obviative endings.  (Another screw-up on my part.)  However, these nouns are ANIMATE, and that's why they need obviative suffixes.  It's because they are secondary ANIMATE nouns in the sentence.  ONLY animate nouns require obviative suffixes.  (In any case, the animate obviative suffix looks exactly the same as the inanimate plural suffix, so if I had used the correct forms, you might not have recalled that those nouns are animate.  A small consolation for my error, though.

Actually, there are situations where my answer would be correct, although I'm reaching, here.  LOL!  If the sentence followed another wherein the woman referenced was obviative--like, "My husband brought his older sister home, this evening."--then "she," in the second sentence--"She borrowed our spoons and kettles."--could be an obviative subject (which the verb would show) and "our spoons and kettles" would not be obviative.  But, this is really for a later lesson.

Chief is an animate noun that is possessed by "you. Doesn't is need an obivative ending, too?

ksakimawuwawall   (our chiefs)

That word should be "your chief" not "our chiefs")  But:  No.  Only animate nouns possessed by animate 3rd persons take obviative suffixes.  Thus, osakimawuwawall ("their chief"), but ksakimawuwa ("your (pl.) chief").

Obviation is probably the strangest concept, in the Algonquian languages, to speakers of English and other European languages.

Offline

 

#108 Apr-13-2018 11:31:pm

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Obviation is a very difficult concept for me right now (unfortunately). A lot of this has to do with how obviation is applied to nouns.

I need to write it out again for myself: Only animate nouns possessed by animate third persons take obviative suffixes. Only "he/she" and "their" animate nouns can potentially have obviative endings. First- and second-person forms in both singular and plural do not take obviative suffixes. So "your (sg.)" "your (pl.) "our (excl.)" and "our (incl.)" do not take obviative suffixes.

Ok, on to lesson 6. Really this time.

Offline

 

#109 Apr-14-2018 06:29:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

So "your (sg.)" "your (pl.) "our (excl.)" and "our (incl.)" do not take obviative suffixes.

And, of course, "my."

Offline

 

#110 Apr-14-2018 10:53:pm

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

yup!

Offline

 

#111 Apr-15-2018 01:05:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

I suspect I might have a few questions working through Lesson 6 even before getting to the quiz.

I'm currently working through Part III of the Introduction to Verbs.

Position 1 - Theme

TA Theme 4 - The TA "first person subject/second person object, inverse theme sign" is "-l."  Initial verbal action is "right to left" (object < verb < subject).  Object plural suffixes appear in final position.  The subject is ALWAYS first person and the object is ALWAYS second person in these verbs.

Example:  kwangomel ["I greet you (sg.)"]

Example:  kpetekhammolhummo ["I write to you (pl.)"]

Question about the second example. I think I'm confused about the condition that "object plural suffixes appear in final position."

Shouldn't "I write to you (pl.)" end with an "-l"?  kpetekhammol Is -hummo" a future suffix I will learn about?

Offline

 

#112 Apr-15-2018 04:59:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

-hummo is a 2nd person plural suffix.  Sometimes, it is written as -hhummo or -himmo or -hhimmo, etc.  The double consonants merely indicate that an immediately preceding vowel is short.  This isn't needed in the case you cite because it isn't immediately preceded by a vowel.  The use of -hhimmo is just a writing convention used when the immediately preceding vowel is an i.  This is getting too far into the weeds, though.  It's enough to know that this is a 2nd person plural suffix.  Note your quotation, above:  "Object plural suffixes appear in final position."

Offline

 

#113 Apr-16-2018 12:30:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

I see that's part of Lesson 7. Phew! Still on Lesson 6. It's a dense lesson!

Offline

 

#114 Apr-18-2018 12:53:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

I'm working back through Lesson 7 and trying to separate what I think are bound pronoun suffixes (position 5) from other suffixes that might be present.

Without going through every conjugation in the lesson I'm hoping you can help guide me through a couple examples from the first four translation blocks - up through INDEPENDENT ORDER - INDICATIVE MODE - PRETERITE TENSE - NEGATIVE FORM

1. kpohonasi ['you (sg.) drum'] - Is there a suffix here? Or is the final consonant in pohonasin just dropped?

2. pohonasuwak ['they drum'] - Is there both a bound pronoun suffix ("-uwa-" position 5) and a plural suffix ("-k" position 7)?

3. matta pohonasiwin ['there is no drumming']  - There is a negation "-w-" suffix (position 4). What is the final "-in" suffix? Is this a bound pronoun suffix (position 5) that happens to have the same letters as the end of the verb?

4. m'bohonasihump ['I drummed'] - There is a preterite "-p" suffix (position 6). What is the "-hum-" suffix? I see it also applies to the second person "kpohonasihump"

Offline

 

#115 Apr-18-2018 06:30:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

I'm working back through Lesson 7 and trying to separate what I think are bound pronoun suffixes (position 5) from other suffixes that might be present.

Without going through every conjugation in the lesson I'm hoping you can help guide me through a couple examples from the first four translation blocks - up through INDEPENDENT ORDER - INDICATIVE MODE - PRETERITE TENSE - NEGATIVE FORM

1. kpohonasi ['you (sg.) drum'] - Is there a suffix here? Or is the final consonant in pohonasin just dropped?

There is no verbal suffix.  The Moravians used un-prefixed subordinative mode forms of verbs as "headwords" in their dictionaries because they saw these forms as the closest to the infinitive forms of European languages.  Thus, pohonasin--the headword--"to drum," is actually the form with a suffix, -n, indicating a subordinative.  kpohonasi is an indicative mode form, which is what this part of the lessons is covering.  There is a form kpohonasin ('you (sg.) drum'), but that occurs in subordinate clauses.  No need to get into that, here.

2. pohonasuwak ['they drum'] - Is there both a bound pronoun suffix ("-uwa-" position 5) and a plural suffix ("-k" position 7)?

No.  pohonasu = 'he drums.'  -u is the 3rd person singular suffix.  This is pluralized by adding -ak to it.  The -w- is another remnant of an old form which ended in voiceless w (pohonasuw) and now it shows up again, when pohonasu is suffixed.

3. matta pohonasiwin ['there is no drumming']  - There is a negation "-w-" suffix (position 4). What is the final "-in" suffix? Is this a bound pronoun suffix (position 5) that happens to have the same letters as the end of the verb?

This is an animate intransitive verb.  -n is the bound pronoun suffix for an indefinite person.  It is, literally, 'some indefinite person is drumming' or 'some indefinite persons are drumming.'  It can be glossed as 'there is drumming going on' or simply as 'there is drumming.'  In this case, 'there is no drumming.'

4. m'bohonasihump ['I drummed'] - There is a preterite "-p" suffix (position 6). What is the "-hum-" suffix? I see it also applies to the second person "kpohonasihump"

-hump is the preterite suffix for 1st and 2nd person singular independent indicative mode forms of AI verbs.  I believe this is covered in another part of the lessons.

Offline

 

#116 Apr-19-2018 12:54:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Thank you. This is very helpful for sorting through the suffixes and for understanding what the "headword" is.

If could follow-up with a question about the Imperfect constructions. The suffix is "-shann-" before other suffixes, but "-sa" when it is the final suffix.

m'bohonasihummennaxa - ['we (excl.) have been drumming']

I presume" -hummenna-" is the imperfect suffix for 1st and 2nd person plural independent indicative mode forms of AI verbs?

The final suffix "-xa" is an alternative spelling for "-sa"?

Offline

 

#117 Apr-19-2018 04:50:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

Thank you. This is very helpful for sorting through the suffixes and for understanding what the "headword" is.

If could follow-up with a question about the Imperfect constructions. The suffix is "-shann-" before other suffixes, but "-sa" when it is the final suffix.

m'bohonasihummennaxa - ['we (excl.) have been drumming']

I presume" -hummenna-" is the imperfect suffix for 1st and 2nd person plural independent indicative mode forms of AI verbs?

The final suffix "-xa" is an alternative spelling for "-sa"?

I could have gone into more detail about this.  As in Lesson 6, Part 2 which says:

There are, however, some variant forms of the 1st and 2nd person plural suffixes which should be mentioned.  Here are the alternate forms:

1st person plural = -hhummenna (in the unspecified tense) and -hhummennap OR -hhummennakup (in the preterite tense)

2nd person plural = -hhummoap or -hhummoakup / -hhimmoap or -hhimmoakup (in the preterite tense)


that alternative -k- also shows up at the end of -hhummenna- in the imperfect tense.  (preterite and imperfect are both past tenses)  Thus, -hhummennak-.  So, the -xa at the end of this word is actually just a writing convention for -ksa.

Offline

 

#118 Apr-19-2018 11:47:pm

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

That makes sense about -xa at the end of the word. It definitely felt to me like a written alternative for -ksa.

Thanks!

Offline

 

#119 Apr-21-2018 12:51:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

I'm currently working through Lesson 7, Part 4 on Animate Intransitive Verbs in Conjunct Order.

I'm a little confused about the constructions of the negative form. The third person suffix constructions, whether for singular or plural, don't appear to have the "-w-" marker (Position 4). The "-w" is absent from indicative, imperfect tenses, and subjective tenses. I presume it is also absent from a preterite tense?

Does the "-w-" disappear?

Quatsch matta pommissiq'?  ["Why doesn't she (or he) walk along?"]

Quatsch matta pommissichtik?  ["Why don't they walk along?"]

Quatsch atta pommissichtiksa?  ["Why haven't they walked along?"]

atta pommissique  ["if she (or he) doesn't walk along"]

atta pommissichtique  ["if they don't walk along"]

My guess at preterite constructions: Quatsch matta pommissiqup?  ["Why didn't she (or he) walk along?"]
                                                     Quatsch matta pommissichtiwik?  ["Why don't they walk along?"]

Offline

 

#120 Apr-21-2018 05:45:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

I'm currently working through Lesson 7, Part 4 on Animate Intransitive Verbs in Conjunct Order.

I'm a little confused about the constructions of the negative form. The third person suffix constructions, whether for singular or plural, don't appear to have the "-w-" marker (Position 4). The "-w" is absent from indicative, imperfect tenses, and subjective tenses. I presume it is also absent from a preterite tense?

Does the "-w-" disappear?

Quatsch matta pommissiq'?  ["Why doesn't she (or he) walk along?"]

Quatsch matta pommissichtik?  ["Why don't they walk along?"]

Quatsch atta pommissichtiksa?  ["Why haven't they walked along?"]

atta pommissique  ["if she (or he) doesn't walk along"]

atta pommissichtique  ["if they don't walk along"]

In the third person forms, the -w- undergoes a linguistic phenomenon called metathesis wherein it exchanges places with final -k.  The -w- is in all these words, but in final position.  Thus, -q' is actually pronounced like the qu in the English word, aquarium.  Essentially, -kw, but the -w is voiceless (i.e., spoken withouth the vocal chords being used).  The alternative ending -k is pronounced the same way--the final -w being understood.   You will see both spellings in the Moravian writings.  This is why I included both in the lessons.  In a few very rare instances -k' (with that apostrophe) will be seen.  Of course, you can see the w sound in the subjunctive (not "subjective") mode, much easier.  As for the imperfect tense ending, -ksa, it is pronounced as -kwsa, with voiceless w, again.

My guess at preterite constructions: Quatsch matta pommissiqup?  ["Why didn't she (or he) walk along?"]
                                                     Quatsch matta pommissichtiwik?  ["Why don't they walk along?"]

For the first one, that would be a good way to write it to represent the sound of it, but the Moravians would write it pommissikup.  Remember, from the pronunciation lesson, that ku sometimes = kw.  Your second example should be pommissichtikup.  (Your English for this one is accidentally put in the present tense.)

Offline

 

#121 Apr-22-2018 12:07:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

pommissichtikup - ["Why don't they walk along?"]

Of course! I forgot the preterite suffix in final position.

I'd like to follow up with a question about the position of the negative "-w-" suffix.

Is the "-w" (Position 4) in the final position, but silent, in every preterite and imperfect construction?

For example...

Quatsch matta pommissiwanq'?  ["Why don't we (incl.) walk along?"]

Quatsch matta pommissiweek?  ["Why don't you (pl.) walk along?"]

"wanq'" and "week" are the conjunct order suffixes? What position are they in?

Offline

 

#122 Apr-22-2018 06:31:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

pommissichtikup - ["Why don't they walk along?"]

Of course! I forgot the preterite suffix in final position.

I'd like to follow up with a question about the position of the negative "-w-" suffix.

Is the "-w" (Position 4) in the final position, but silent, in every preterite and imperfect construction?

This -w is not "silent," but "voiceless."  It is spoken without using the vocal chords.  It is, basically, just sounding the -w with the breath.  It is a very weak sound.  It's best to go to the online Lenape Talking Dictionary and listen to it.  In the Lenape box, type in ankw to hear what it sounds like.  Notice that it is almost inaudible, but you can hear it.  When the subjunctive suffix, -e, is added to it, you can hear the -w- very well.  If a consonant is added to the -w-, then it stays very weak; for example type in -kwsa to hear this.  The voiceless w is there at the end of both the 1st person plural and 2nd person plural suffixes--not because they represent the negative suffix, as we saw with the 3rd person forms which undergo metathesis, but because they are part of the 1st person plural and 2nd person plural suffixes.  There is some variation between 1st person plural exclusive suffixation in the Moravian texts.  Sometimes the subjunctive is written as -enke (as in Southern Unami) and sometimes as -enque (as in Munsee).  This is likely due to Northern Unami's geographical position between these other two dialects, which produced this variability.  (We are really getting into the weeds here, though.) 

For example...

Quatsch matta pommissiwanq'?  ["Why don't we (incl.) walk along?"]

Quatsch matta pommissiweek?  ["Why don't you (pl.) walk along?"]

"wanq'" and "week" are the conjunct order suffixes? What position are they in?

The -w- is a separate suffix from the -anq' and -eek, just to be clear, terminologically.  Their positions are 4 and 5, respectively.

Offline

 

#123 Apr-23-2018 02:00:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

This -w is not "silent," but "voiceless."  It is spoken without using the vocal chords.  It is, basically, just sounding the -w with the breath.  It is a very weak sound.  It's best to go to the online Lenape Talking Dictionary and listen to it.  In the Lenape box, type in ankw to hear what it sounds like.  Notice that it is almost inaudible, but you can hear it.  When the subjunctive suffix, -e, is added to it, you can hear the -w- very well.  If a consonant is added to the -w-, then it stays very weak; for example type in -kwsa to hear this.

I typed ankw, we, and kwsa into the online Lenape Talking Dictionary and heard a significant difference, yes. I'm going to have to be more sensitive to this voiceless -w as I go back through the grammar lessons.

The -w- is a separate suffix from the -anq' and -eek, just to be clear, terminologically.  Their positions are 4 and 5, respectively.

Great. That makes sense to me. I was looking for that -w- in each of the negation examples.

One more part for Lesson 7. And then I'm going to have to go back over it again at least once before I move to the quiz. It's a dense lesson.

Offline

 

#124 Apr-23-2018 12:35:pm

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4246
Website

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

johnb wrote:

One more part for Lesson 7. And then I'm going to have to go back over it again at least once before I move to the quiz. It's a dense lesson.

Always a good idea; but, remember that the next quiz covers Lesson 7 AND Lesson 8.

Offline

 

#125 Apr-24-2018 01:08:am

johnb
Visitor
Registered: Mar-30-2018
Posts: 94

Re: Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

7 and 8!! smile Well, I still need to go back over 7.

Here I was accustomed to the ending "-tsch" as a marker for the future and I get to the end of Lesson 7 and the Future Imperative ends with "-me" and "-mowe" PLUS the third person plural ending for the Prohibitive Mode of the Ordinary Imperative ends in -"chtinitsch."

When you confront a sentence of text in Lenape, where do you start with translation? Are there certain words, prefixes, suffixes etc that you are looking for first? Or do you take each word one-by-one and look to identify the stem (verb or noun) assuming it is not a pronoun, particle, conjunction, or preposition?

Offline

 
  • Index
  •  » Language
  •  » Delaware (Northern Unami) Language Lessons

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson