Nahuatl -ka words: evidence for a proto-Uto- Aztecan derivational pattern

Dakin, Karen

doi:10.1524/stuf.2004.57.1.6

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jane Hill's (2001a,b) proposal that speakers of Proto‐Uto‐Aztecan were maize cultivators located in Mesoamerica confronts the longer‐held view that they were foraging peoples located in the US Southwest and Northern Mexico (Campbell 1997; Fowler 1983; Miller 1983a,b, 1984). In her model of northward expansion (supported also in Dakin (2003, 2004) and Dakin and Wichmann (2000)), Hill provides linguistic evidence in the form of early cognates of water management and cultivation in southern and northern languages (especially Hopi), suggesting that agriculture‐related vocabulary was present in Uto‐Aztecan before the break‐up of the northern and southern branches. Most recent arguments against this proposal are found in Merrill et al.…”

Section: Historical Research On Uto‐aztecan Languagesmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…In addition to classification, recent publications continue to focus on diachronic phonology (e.g., Dakin 1996; Manaster Ramer 1992, 1997; Miller et al. 2005; Shaul 2000; Stubbs 1995), morphological reconstruction (e.g., Dakin 2004; Haugen 2008a; Toosarvandani 2010; Valiñas‐Coalla 2008), and syntactic change (e.g., Campbell 1987; Haugen 2007, 2008b; Jelinek 1998, 2003). New diachronic research, as in the earliest Uto‐Aztecan tradition, continues to be driven by questions pertaining to the general mechanisms of linguistic change.…”

Section: Historical Research On Uto‐aztecan Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behind the Mexican Mountains: Recent Developments and New Directions in Research on Uto‐Aztecan Languages

Caballero

2011

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Featuring considerable diversity and one of the oldest and richest traditions of historical and descriptive research in the Americas, Uto‐Aztecan languages have played an important role in the development of general methods in linguistic classification and reconstruction and the development of typological and theoretical research. However, despite being one of the best‐studied language families in the Americas, there are still important gaps in our knowledge about these languages. The goal of this paper is twofold: (i) to survey some recent developments in the study of Uto‐Aztecan languages, and (ii) to outline some of the gaps in our knowledge and where new research on these languages is headed. This paper focuses on the Uto‐Aztecan languages of Northern Mexico: although these languages have received growing attention in recent years, they remain largely under‐described. And while they are still spoken by large and vibrant speech communities, the languages of this area are increasingly vulnerable to the escalating pressures imposed by the Spanish speaking population, making the task of carrying out deep and comprehensive language documentation both still possible and urgent. This paper argues that deepening our understanding of Uto‐Aztecan languages, especially those of Northern Mexico, will not only positively contribute to community‐based efforts of language maintenance, it will also provide crucial keys to linguistic typology, developing linguistic theories, as well as the reconstruction of the linguistic and cultural past of the Americas.

show abstract

Section: Historical Research On Uto‐aztecan Languagesmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Historical Research On Uto‐aztecan Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behind the Mexican Mountains: Recent Developments and New Directions in Research on Uto‐Aztecan Languages

Caballero

2011

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), but this is falsified by a detailed comparison. As first suggested by Sapir in 1913, and later by Dakin (2000) and further consolidated by Pharao Hansen (2014, Forthcoming) it is the other way roundthe added j must be a development of the original h before e, and only some varieties later drop the j (except in words where it no longer precedes an e).…”

Section: A New Phonological Chronology For Corachol-nahuanmentioning

confidence: 87%

What Happened When? Relative Chronology and the state of pre-Nahuan in the Classic Period

Hansen¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, Nahuatl has been seen as a language with a shallow chronology and proposed dates for proto-Nahuatl tend to locate it in the early Mesoamerican post-classic period (ca. 800-900 CE). At the same time, the Uto-Aztecan language family has been described as having a rake like structure, with little internal branching. As such, though the development from proto-Uto-Aztecan (ca. 3500 BCE) to proto-Nahuatl is relatively well understood, no intermediate stages have been reconstructed so far. Dakin (1982) proposed a highly useful chronology of phonological changes in the development from proto-Uto-Aztecan to proto-Nahuatl. Nevertheless, some recent findings suggest a need to revise her chronology somewhat, especially because her proposal does not operate with an intermediate proto-Corachol-Nahuan stage which seems to be necessary (Pharao Hansen 2020, Greenhill et al. 2023). At the same time a major question in the study of Mesoamerican history, is the question of whether Nahuas (or rather pre-Nahuas) were present in Central Mexico, during the classic period, perhaps with a significant population at the classic period megalopolis of Teotihuacan. Some efforts to read the Teotihuacan writing system has proposed phonetic readings anachronistically using colonial Nahuatl, this however begs the question of what the pre-Nahuan language would have sounded like in the classic period, during the heyday of Teotihuacan. This paper presents an analysis of the relative chronology of some phonological changes in the development of Proto-Nahuatl from pre-Nahuatl, and their relevance for understanding what pre-Nahuatl might have been like in the classical period (ca. 200-600 CE) during which the language's assimilation to the Mesoamerican Language Area must have taken place.

show abstract

“…In addition there are a number of other Nahuatl nouns that begin with p that have cognates in other UA languages and that are not commonly possessed, such as pawa-tl. This word has a paradigmatic relationship with a:wa-ka-tl , since a number of Nahuatl (C)VCV-ka- nouns are derived from (C)VCV- roots (see Dakin 2004), and pawa-tl also has a doublet a:wa-tl ‘oak’, so the term may refer more to a generic kind of large tree. In any case, rather than explain it as a borrowing from Totonac we need to find an explanation for the doublets.…”

Section: Nahuatl Nouns In –Wa-tlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comments on Kaufman and Justeson: “The History of the Word for Cacao in Ancient Mesoamerica”

Wichmann

2010

Ancient Mesoam

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nahuatl -ka words: evidence for a proto-Uto- Aztecan derivational pattern

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Behind the Mexican Mountains: Recent Developments and New Directions in Research on Uto‐Aztecan Languages

Behind the Mexican Mountains: Recent Developments and New Directions in Research on Uto‐Aztecan Languages

What Happened When? Relative Chronology and the state of pre-Nahuan in the Classic Period

Comments on Kaufman and Justeson: “The History of the Word for Cacao in Ancient Mesoamerica”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About