1st inclusive disjunctive pronoun

pronoun n/a



Proto-Mississipi-Valley *wą•k-?

Proto-Dakota ųkí-ʔe or: *ųkí-re

Dakota ųkíye

Proto-Dhegiha *ąkóe < **ąkó-ʔe (?) RR

Omaha-Ponca ągó JEK

Kanza/Kaw ągé RR

Osage oⁿgúe , †ąkó-e ‘we’ LF:122a

Quapaw ǫkówe [possibly plural with -we] JOD, RR



Biloxi ñḳíxtu , †ąkíxtu ‘we’ D&S:239a

General comment

Quapaw may be analyzed as showing the plural -we or the w may analyzed as a late glide replacing the ʔ of the demonstrative, ʔe•. Given the other DH forms, we tend toward the latter explanation, but cf. Biloxi. Tutelo mim (cf. 1Act) (also maesą́i H.) is not cognate but is comparable to Chiwere hį•ne. General lack of close agreement among the subgroups strengthens our belief that inclusive person represents an innovation which spread within Siouan. Biloxi -tu marks ‘pl’ here. Mandan rų- may be non-cognate and related to one of the Catawba inclusive affixes (which also has a Yuchi analog).

Details Language Word Source