‘have sore eyes’
‘have a sore mouth inside’
‘I feel sore (from sitting too long)’
‘hurt (cause pain ?)’
ne, nedí, nĕdí, n’dí, nédi
ité, ī´te, éte
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 *ʔ. Biloxi -di is the common suffix
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 *į prior to the nasalization
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].