--- On Mon, 6/29/09, Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Verbs that agree with more than the subject
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Monday, June 29, 2009, 12:07 PM
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Paul
> Roser<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > At any rate, I don't believe that polypersonal markers
> must be fused (as in Klingon,
> > Hixkaryana or Mohawk, IIRC). In fact, some
> polypersonal-marking languages put one
> > marker before the verb stem and the other marker after
> it, so SUBJ-VERB-OBJ. The North
> Classical Nahuatl has separate verb-prefixes for subject
> and object:
> if I understand correctly, it's:

I don't know if this has been mentioned already (I'm only able to semi-follow this thread), but the typical Iroquoian verb structure is thus:


The pronominal prefixes come in three varieties: subjective, objective, transitive, with the latter usually being complex and fused.  Objective prefixes are SUBJECTIVE PREIFX+OBJECTIVE MARKER.  Verb bases can be very complex; they consistent minimally of a root, plus any number of other suffixes, such as detransitivizer/reflexive/reverser, causative, etc.  And there are significant variations of form among the Northern languages, and (I've read at least) even moreso with Cherokee, the sole surviving Southern language.