ache

verb physical_somatic_disease

Proto-Siouan-Catawba *-re

Proto-Siouan *Ré-ʔE

Proto-Crow-Hidatsa *areʔ

Crow aleé ‘ache’ RG, RGG:100

Hidatsa arÉʔ ‘ache’ J

Pre-Mandan *rąʔ-

Mandan rą́ʔroʔš ‘it hurts’ RTC

Proto-Mississipi-Valley *nį́-ʔE, *Ré

Proto-Dakota

Lakota ištániyą ‘have sore eyes’ EB:236b , iśṫániyaƞ ‘have a sore mouth inside’ EB:236b , íniyą́ ‘I feel sore (from sitting too long)’ EJ , iniyaƞ EJ , mapániyĄ , paníyĄ

Proto-Hoocąk-Chiwere

Chiwere ñį́•čʔe, ñį́•čhe RR

Hoocąk téek ‘pain’ KM:3115 , teek ‘sore spot’ KM:1532 , hoték , hotek

Proto-Dhegiha *nįe RR

Omaha-Ponca nie gaxe ‘get hurt’ MAS:98 , ni_e ‘hurt (cause pain ?)’

Kanza/Kaw [< nįe?] RR

Osage níe, nié LF:107a

Quapaw įde RR , įté JOD

Proto-Southeastern

Proto-Biloxi-Ofo *rehé(-ri), *(i-)ré

Biloxi ne, nedí, nĕdí, n’dí, nédi D&S:234b

Ofo ité, ī´te, éte , †i•té ‘suffer’ D&S:324b, JSS , ạ́phaíte , †i•té ‘headache’

Proto-Catawba

Catawba warepa KS

General comment

Biloxi n before oral e typically represents an earlier sequence of n, r, R and a laryngeal articulation h < ʔ. Cf. ‘arise (2) > get up’, ‘standing, inanim. classifier’, and ‘apportative, + or - vertitive’. Thus the Biloxi form suggests an earlier *r-he arising through syncope. In the cases just cited, the Ofo reflex of *rh would seem to be l, not t as here, suggesting an earlier form without the *he we reconstruct for Proto-Biloxi-Ofo.

Ofo t can reflect either *r or *R. Ofo initial i- is unexplained. Proto-Biloxi-Ofo *h can reflect earlier *h or . Biloxi -di is the common suffix *-re.

Quapaw d reflects *R and Omaha-Ponca, Kanza/Kaw, and Osage n may perhaps also come from this source if n is the regular reflex of *R before a nasal vowel. Proto-Dhegiha shows fairly common loss of intervocalic ʔ without merger of the vowels. If Quapaw is cognate, it reflects metathesis of *R and prior to the nasalization of *R.

Hoocąk t reflects Proto-Siouan *R, while Chiwere čʔ reflects Proto-Mississipi-Valley *n, *r, *R, *t preceding a glottal stop. In Lakota intervocalic glottal stop has been lost and replaced by y. Mandan ą cannot be explained from either *rį́-ʔE or *Ré.

Proto-Crow-Hidatsa *areʔ could reflect an earlier *arʔE, *areʔE, or *areʔE since Proto-Crow-Hidatsa CʔV regularly becomes CVʔ, which then develops an echo vowel (CVʔV), whereupon Crow usually loses the intervocalic glottal stop; cf.

speak, talk’. In any event, Proto-Crow-Hidatsa initial a is unexplained. Proto-Crow-Hidatsa r can reflect either *r or *R. The Proto-Crow-Hidatsa form here may reflect *re plus *ʔE and an added a-, perhaps locative.

Quapaw and Hoocąk clearly reflect *Re, while Omaha-Ponca, Kanza/Kaw, Osage, Chiwere, and Lakota reflect Proto-Mississipi-Valley *nį-ʔE. Hoocąk and Chiwere suggest long vowels in both alternative forms. Hoocąk length may stem from monosyllabic lengthening; Chiwere length is either unaccounted for or suggests an earlier monosyllabic root. Proto-Siouan length is not supported by Crow/Hidatsa, which would normally retain it.

Accent placement in Mandan, Chiwere, Osage along with initial V present in Proto-Crow-Hidatsa, Quapaw and Ofo may suggest a Proto-Siouan initial syllable, but a Proto-Siouan monosyllable would be accented anyway. Nasalization may be secondary where it occurs throughout the family. Hoocąk, Quapaw, Biloxi/Ofo all suggest that the reconstruction should have no nasalization. Note that the only difference between the reconstructions *Ré-ʔE and *rį́-ʔE is the feature [+nasal].

Details Language Word Source