Details
General
| Morphemic form: | N{(q)mik}V |
| New orthography: | +mippaa, -mmippaa, -rmippaa |
| Old orthography: | -migpoĸ |
| Combinations: | Click here |
| Left sandhi: | Default,
|
| Right sandhi: | Default/none,
|
| Inflection sandhi: | Default/none,
|
| Stem type: | k-stem |
| Diathesis: | Agentive |
| Valency change: | None |
| Valency: | Divalent,
|
| HTR morpheme: | ði,
|
| HTR stem: | (q)mii, (q)mitci, |
Description and behaviour
Form and usage:
The meaning of this affix is 'Agent touches Patient with N'.
When used intransitively, the meaning seems to become 'Agent does something with N', i.e. the diathesis of this affix is agentive.
However, there are also examples of lexicalised words formed with this affix, which have a separate HTR-stem formed with {ði}; for example ikusimmippaa, ikusimmiivoq, 'he kicks it' and isimmippaa, isimmiivoq, 'he winks at him'.
The latter is formed with {əcə}N, 'eye'.
However, confusingly, there is also a different, lexicalised word isimmippaa, isimmitsivoq, 'he kicks it', which is from {itəɣ}, i.e. {isə}N, 'tip of boot' (seemingly not productive, but is found in e.g. isigak, 'foot'). These two different words, isimmippaa, are indistinguishable in the new orthography, although they could be distinguished in the old orthography, i.e. issingmigpâ vs. isingmigpâ. However, they can be distinguished by their different HTR-forms. This strange form, isimmitsivoq, may have arisen as a way to tell them apart.
In any case, it seems that the affix may be used agentively today, but in some lexicalised words it appears to have a HTR-form, which seems to most regularly be {(q)mii}, with {(q)mitci} as an irregularity. Note also that in isimmippaa, 'he winks at him', the epenthetic consonant appears to have been /k/, and not /q/ as it appears today.
According to the Comparative Eskimo Dictionary, this affix derives from a morpheme {miɣ-}, and, as they say, with a meaning 'as if from the instrumental case ending -mik', although this comment does not make it clear whether it in fact does derive from some form of verbalisation of this case ending. There are at least two arguments against this hypothesis:
- According to the reconstruction in the Comparative Eskimo Dictionary, the instrumental case ending is {məɣ}, and not {miɣ}, so it seems unlikely that the present affix should derive from this, since the vowel is different.
- The present affix does not alternate between initial /m/ and /n/ for distinguishing singular/plural, like the instrumental case ending does. With other verbalisations of the oblique case endings, this alternation is preserved, so if this morpheme indeed were a verbalisation, it would be strange that this alternation was not present here too.
Thus, there may have been some conflation of the meanings of these two morphemes, but we shall assume that they are of different origins.
Meanings and examples
- aquutermippaa, he hits it with the rudder
[8]
E.g. an underwater rock that his boat passes over. From aquut, 'rudder'.
- isigammippaa, he kicks it with the/his foot
[8]
From isigak, 'foot'.
- kujaarmippaa, he hits it with the keel
[8]
E.g. an underwater rock that his boat passes over. From kujaaq, 'keel'.
- ikusimmippaa, he hits/pushes him with the elbow
[4]
From ikusik, 'elbow'.
When used intransitively.
References
- [1] Michael Fortescue, Steven Jacobson, Lawrence Kaplan (2010): Comparative Eskimo Dictionary (2ED).
- [4] C.W. Schultz-Lorentzen (1958): Den Grønlandske Ordbog.
- [6] Jonathan Petersen (1967): Ordbogêraĸ.
- [8] Christian Berthelsen, Birgitte Jakobsen, Robert Petersen, Inge Kleivan & Jørgen Rischel (1997): Oqaatsit.