The Historical Development of The Progressive Aspect in Central Zapotec

THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE
PROGRESSIVE ASPECT IN CENTRAL ZAPOTEC
GEORGE AARON BROADWELL

UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
The Central Zapotec languages share the innovation of a progressive aspect prefix in
/ka-/ which contrasts with a habitual aspect /r-/, which is the reflex of a Proto-Zapotec
imperfective prefix */tyi-/. Early instances of this innovative progressive aspect prefix can
be found in colonial Zapotec texts from the sixteenth century, and the geographic disper-
sion of Central Zapotec languages with this form argues that the innovation must date to
some centuries prior to A.D. 1300, and that this morphological characteristic is a key marker
that distinguishes Central Zapotec languages from other members of the Zapotec family.
[KEYWORDS: Zapotec, progressive aspect, imperfective aspect, historical linguistics]
1. Introduction.
1.1. Central Zapotec languages. The Zapotec languages are indig-
enous to Oaxaca, Mexico. 1 They are part of the Zapotecan family, which
also includes the Chatino languages. Zapotecan languages are part of the
larger Otomanguean stock. We are fortunate to have written records dating
back about 500 years for the Valley Zapotec languages, and these allow us
an overview of the historical development of the languages. 2
1 The following abbreviations are used in the glosses: 1 = first person, 3 = third person, DEF
= definite future, DU = dual, EMPH = emphatic, FOC = focus, GEN = genitive, GER = gerund, HAB
= habitual aspect, HUM = human, IRR = irrealis, M = masculine, NEU = neutral, NOM = nominal-
izer, PERF = perfective, POSS = possessive, PRF = perfect, PL = plural, PROG = progressive aspect,
PRON = pronominal base, PSBL = possibilative, Q = question particle/marker, REL = relative, REP =
repetitive, R = respect, S = singular, STAT = stative, T, P, Q = labels for aspects in Colonial Valley
Zapotec, as discussed in 2.2 below.
I thank Rosemary Beam de Azcona, Donna Marks Kreutz, Brook Lillehaugen, Pamela Munro,
Michel Oudijk, and an anonymous IJAL reviewer and associate editor for many helpful comments
on the analysis of these texts, and Michel Oudijk for making several of the original documents
available for analysis. I also thank Ashwini Deo for her help with the understanding of aspect
systems and their historical evolution.
2 Zapotec languages are written in a variety of different practical orthographies, and because
this article focuses on the semantics of aspect markers, I have retained the orthographies of the
original sources, rather than trying to convert them all to a uniform phonetic representation.
Almost all Zapotec orthographies are based on Spanish orthographic practice, in which <c> = /k/
before back vowels and <qu> =/k/ before front vowels. The only exceptions among my sources
are Smith Stark and Mndez Espinosa, who use a phonetic rather than a practical orthography
and thus show a consistent /k/ for this sound. Because one of the principal morphemes discussed
in the paper contains this phoneme, the discrepancy in spelling between the sources has the
[IJAL, vol. 81, no. 2, April 2015, pp. 15185]

2015 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
00207071/2015/81020001$10.00
151
152 international journal of american linguistics
Zapotec
Solteco Western Core
Papabuco Southern Central Northern
(other branches) Cisyautepec
FIG. 1.Smith Starks (2007) classification of Zapotec.
Zapotec is a large group of languages, comparable to Romance in time

depth and diversity. Estimates of the number of Zapotec languages vary,
but there are perhaps 57 or more different languages in the family (Lewis,
Simons, and Fennig 2013). 3
In this paper, I examine one part of the aspectual morphology and changes
in its interpretation. The developments that are discussed in this paper affected
one large branch of the family, Central Zapotec.
I follow here the classification used by Smith Stark (2007) for the languages
under discussion. The trees in figures 1 and 2 show the overall classification
of the languages in the family. Because the position of the Cisyautepecan
group will be relevant later, I have included Smith Starks classification of it
here, in figure 1. 4 The chart in figure 2 shows a more detailed portion of his
classification of the Central Zapotec languages.
1.2. Aspectual innovations and Central Zapotec as a group. Al-
though Smith Stark proposed the Central Zapotec group, he was not able
to find a phonological innovation that supported this subgroup within the
potential to yield confusion. I have adopted the solution of sometimes spelling the forms cited
from Smith Stark twiceonce in his original spelling, with phonemic slashes, and then in a more
practical spelling, surrounded by angled brackets, to try to clarify the intended interpretation.
3 The modern languages discussed in this paper, with their ISO codes in parentheses, are:
San Lucas Quiavin Zapotec (zab), Mitla Zapotec (zaw), San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec and
San Pablo Gil Zapotec (ztu), San Baltazar Chichicapan Zapotec (zpv), Santo Domingo Albar-
radas Zapotec (zpv), Isthmus Zapotec (zai), Guevea de Humboldt Zapotec (zpg), Santa Maria
Quiegolani Zapotec (zpi), San Bartolom Zoogocho Zapotec (zpq), Macuiltianguis Zapotec (zaa),
Choapan Zapotec (zpc), San Juan Mixtepec Zapotec (zpm), Santa Catalina Quier Zapotec (ztq),
San Juan Guivin Zapotec (ztl), San Francisco Ozolotepec Zapotec (zao), and Santiago Xanica
Zapotec (zpr).
4 Because Smith Starks classification is an attempt to classify every Zapotec variety spoken
now or in the past, it quickly becomes difficult to understand, with multiple sub-branches. I have
represented in figure 2 a classification of only the languages which are discussed in this paper.
Central Zapotec
(other branches) Antequera Western Valley Mitla Albarradas Transyautepec
San Baltasar Chichicapan San Pablo Gil

Extended Ocotepec Western Tlacolula Valley & San Dionisio Ocotepec Guevea de Humboldt Petapa (other languages)
San Juan Guelavia

Isthmus San Lucas Quiavin
Zaachila Santa Ana del Valle
(other branches) Juchiteco Tlacolula de Matamoros
FIG. 2.A more detailed classification of Central Zapotec.

progressive aspect in central zapotec
153
family. He wrote, No he podido identificar ninguna innovacin que defina

al zapoteco central. Las variantes centrales comparten varios rasgos entre s,
pero sin definir agrupaciones mayores claras [I have not been able to iden-
tify any innovation that defines Central Zapotec. The Central varieties share
various features, but fail to form clear groups] (Smith Stark 2007:111).
The aspectual system reconstructed for Proto-Zapotec has a single im-
perfective aspect */tyi-/ (Kaufman 2003). 5 In all modern Central Zapotec
languages, however, the modern reflex of this prefix, /r-/, now serves as a
habitual aspect and contrasts with a progressive aspect /ka-/ (<ca-> in most
orthographies) or /ga-/.
The original Proto-Zapotec system with a single imperfective is still seen in
all the Northern Zapotec languages, such as Zoogocho (Sonnenschein 2005),
Choapan (Lyman Boulden 2007:73), and Macuiltianguis (Foreman 2006),
and in some Southern Zapotec languages, such as Coatec Zapotec (Beam de
Azcona [in preparation]). 6
In contrast to the languages with a single imperfective, many Zapotec
languages have innovated a distinction between habitual and progressive as-
pects. I argue here that all Central Zapotec languages share the innovation
of a habitual/progressive contrast, where the progressive is shown with a
reflex of /ka-/ or /ga-/. I argue below that this represents an innovation from
Proto-Zapotec, and that this aspectual contrast is one of the best diagnostics
for membership in the Central Zapotec group.
This argument has important implications for the correct classification of
the Cisyautepecan Zapotec languages. Although they are not included among
the Central Zapotec languages in Smith Stark (2007), in 3.3 below, I show
data that suggest that many of these languages also have a reflex of progres-
sive aspect /ka-/ <ca-> or /ga-/ and thus they should also be grouped with
Central Zapotec.
1.3. Aspects in Colonial Valley Zapotec. To return to examination of
the classification tree for Central Zapotec languages, a branch of particular
interest in figure 2 is one labeled Antequera. Antequera is an old name
for Oaxaca City and the nearby region. Very early in the colonial era,
Oaxaca City became a meeting ground for various ethnic groups, includ-
ing Spaniards, Zapotecs, Mixtecs, and other language groups of the state.
Many different dialects of Zapotec from around the state were spoken there,
but there was also a form of Zapotec native to Oaxaca City and nearby
5 Kaufman (2003) refers to this aspect marker as a habitual. However, I think imperfective
is a more accurate label for this aspect at the Proto-Zapotec level, since the reflexes of *tyi- across
the Zapotec family include a wide range of meanings, including both habitual and progressive.
6 In many of these grammars, the single prefix is called habitual, but the discussion makes
clear that the same aspect prefix is used in both habitual and progressive contexts.
progressive aspect in central zapotec 155
regions. 7 Smith Stark (2007) attributes the Colonial Valley Zapotec of Cor-
dova (1578a; 1578b) to the Antequera dialect. Other Colonial documents
cited below, such as Feria (1567), are of less certain dialectal provenance
and are merely labeled as Zapoteco without any clear indication of which
variety of Zapotec is represented. Nevertheless, the language of Feria (1567)
is extremely similar to that of Cordova (1578b); it is clear that they repre-
sent documents in the same language. 8
Most of the data in this paper come from my analysis of Feria (1567), one
of the earliest documents in the Zapotec language. It is a bilingual Zapotec
Spanish explanation of Catholic doctrine and a single copy survives in the
John Carter Brown Library at Brown University. 9 An image of a page is
shown in figure 3.
The variety labeled Isthmus in figure 2 also requires some special dis-
cussion. Modern Isthmus Zapotec is spoken in the area around Juchitn and
Tehuantepec, near the Pacific Coast. This is some 170 miles from Oaxaca
City, outside the Valley of Oaxaca, and far from the other languages in the
Central Zapotec group. Smith Stark (2007) has shown that the phonological
features of Isthmus are closest to those of the variety of Zapotec spoken around
Zaachila. The branches labeled Transyautepecan (which includes Guevea
de Humboldt) and Cisyautepecan (in Southern Zapotec) are both located
in the Yautepec district of Oaxaca, but on opposite sides of the Southern
Sierra mountains. Yautepec is adjacent to the Tehuantepec district, but the
languages spoken there are quite distinct from Isthmus Zapotec despite the
geographic proximity.
The historical circumstances that led to the movement of some Valley Za-
potecs toward the Isthmus are complex and the subject of ongoing research
among historians, but the emerging view (based on Oudijk 2008) seems to
be that the earlier Zapotec kingdom was based in Zaachila in the Valley
of Oaxaca. It began to expand toward the Pacific Coast and the Isthmus of
Tehuantepec in the fourteenth century. For about 150 years, there was both a
Valley and an Isthmus center of power, with tensions between the two, and
7 Possibly there are still some speakers of this dialect in towns near the city; Smith Stark
refers to unpublished work by Kaufman on this point.

8 Michel Oudijk (personal communication) informs me that Feria was the prior of San Juan
Teticpac from approximately 1551 to 1559, which would be the mostly likely years for the
composition of the Doctrina. If we assume that it reflects the local dialect, this might put it in
the Western Valley dialect group, since the modern San Juan Teticpac Zapotec language belongs
to this group. However, we cannot be sure that the dialect boundaries of the sixteenth century
were the same as those of the current day. It is also possible that Feria should be assigned to
the Antequera group or that the difference between Antequera and Western Valley varieties was
very slight or not clearly represented in the orthography.
9 For a transcription and analysis of the Spanish of the Doctrina and a description of how it
was written and compares to another contemporaneous text, see Resines (2002).
FIG. 3.A page image from Feira (1567). Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at
Brown University.
movements of populations from one center to the other. With the arrival of
the Spanish in 1521, the seat of power moved permanently to the Isthmus.
Oudijk (2008:113) sums up his conclusion on the chronology of this migration
as follows: . . . [the Zapotec ruler] Cosiioeza I governed Zaachila during the
second half of the 14th century and applied a policy of expansion based on
matrimonial and military alliances . . . Cosoiieza I, around 1370, made the
first entry into the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, where he probably founded vari-
ous towns, among them Guevea and Jalapa, with the objective of controlling
important trade routes. . . . In the middle of the 15th century a dynastic crisis
divided the Valley of Oaxaca into rival factions and lasted till the arrival of
the Spanish in 1521.
Thus the language spoken by Isthmus Zapotecs is derived from a Central
Zapotec variety, but one which left the Valley of Oaxaca between 1370 and
1521. The Guevea de Humboldt Zapotec variety may represent an even earlier
departure from the Valley of Oaxaca, from around 1370. Both may thus retain
some archaic characteristics of the Zapotec of that time period. And equally
important for the logic of the diachronic argument is that a feature present in
Isthmus Zapotec as well as in several other branches of the Central Zapotec
tree would be expected to be present in Antequera (and thus in Colonial Valley
Zapotec) as well. Such a feature should be reconstructible for Proto-Central-
Zapotec and possibly for higher branches in the tree. I argue below that the
habitual/progressive distinction has this property.
2. Use of the aspect markers in Colonial Valley Zapotec.

2.1. The morphology of Zapotec verbs. Both modern and Colonial
Valley Zapotec verbs conform to a general template like the following,
where most surface verbs will consist of a minimum of two morphemes: a
root and an aspect prefix.
ASPECT-(causative/repetitive)-ROOT(=applicative)(=subject clitic)
(=object clitic)
Thus the following example from San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec shows
a verb dzny preceded by a perfective aspect marker /-/ and followed by a
subject clitic.
(1) Ch -dzny=rby
when PERF-arrive=3:PL
When they arrived. . .
There are some exceptions to this pattern in Central Zapotec languages.
Verbs of position often have the property of appearing without any overt
aspect marker in sentences that get current state interpretations. As Lille-
haugen and Foreman (2013) have shown, this is true in all four main branches
of the Core Zapotec family (i.e., Papabuco, Southern Sierra, Central, and
Northern Sierra). In some analyses, such as Briggs (1961) and Munro and
Lopez (1999), such verbs are treated as having a special zero allomorph of
the stative. Consider the following examples from San Dionisio Ocotepec:
(2a) Lby c tby bldgt xn l=by
he located:high one birthmark red face=3
He has a red portwine stain on his face.
(2b) L bcw z djts y
foc dog stand behind house
The dog is behind the house.
(2c) Y ddy cbl
high suspended cable
The cable is suspended high up.
TABLE 1
SELECTED ASPECT PREFIXES IN COLONIAL VALLEY ZAPOTEC
Probable
Aspect Label Orthographic Representations Phonemicization Smith Starks Name
T <ti, te, to, t> /ri-, r- e-, r- u-, r-/ habitual
P <bi, pi, be, pe, b, p, co, go, c, g> /bi, be, b; gu, g/ completivo
Q <qui, que, qu, y, c> /ki, k, i/ potencial
HU <hua, hue, oa> /wa/ perfecto
NA <na> /na/ participio estativo
Notice that in these examples, the verb roots c be located in a high

place, z stand, and ddy be suspended from two or more supports
occur without overt aspect prefixes.
2.2. The aspect morphology of Colonial Valley Zapotec. As Smith
Stark (2008) has shown, Colonial Valley Zapotec had many prefixes related
to tense, aspect, or modality. Because the semantics of these prefixes has
varied over time, labels that imply a particular semantics tend to be mislead-
ing, so I use a label that refers to the predominant morphological realization
of the prefix. I reproduce a portion of his chart in table 1, showing the pre-
fixes most relevant to this discussion and to the examples which follow. 10
In table 1, the first three forms (T, P, Q) are the most general aspect prefixes,
which are applicable to the great majority of verbs in the language. In the
colonial grammar of Cordova (1578a), the T form corresponds to the Span-
ish simple present, the P form is the preterit, and the Q form is the future.
The following forms are one of the few paradigms with a translation in the
grammar (Cordova 1578a:19):
(3a) T-olla=ya
T-sing=1:S
Yo canto.
I sing, I am singing.
(3b) Pi-lla=ya
P-sing=1:S
Yo cant.
I sang.
10 The forms of the aspect prefixes with /e/ and /u/ include repetitive and causative mor-
phemes, respectively. As the chart in table 1shows, Colonial Valley Zapotec orthography is
considerably divergent from its likely phonemic interpretation, particularly with respect to voicing
distinctions, the representation of /r/, and the vowel /u/. See Smith Stark (2003) and Broadwell
(2010) for more discussion of these issues.
(3c) C-lla=ya
Q-sing=1:S
Yo cantar.
I will sing.
Because the forms listed in Cordova (1578a) are given in isolation for a
few sample verbs, it is difficult to understand how the aspect morphology is
actually used in the language.
There are many questions about this system, but this paper focuses on
the T aspect in Colonial Valley Zapotec and the two aspects that cover the
same semantic range in most modern Central Zapotec languages. I examine
the following questions:
1. What was the range of interpretations for the T aspect in Colonial
Valley Zapotec?
2. What were the changes as a new aspect marker for the progressive
developed?
3. What were the early environment and interpretations for the new
progressive aspect marker?
4. How did the modern Central Zapotec habitual vs. progressive
system evolve from the colonial system?
Beginning with the first question, we know that in the Spanish of the six-
teenth century the simple present tense could have both habitual and progres-
sive interpretations (Torres-Cacoullos 2012). When these translations were
given for the Zapotec words out of context, should we understand that they
have the same range of interpretations?
These questions are difficult to answer without an examination of the use
of the aspect markers in colonial texts. Broadwell and Lillehaugen (2013)
describe the construction of a 58,000 word FLEx database (SIL International
2014) of Colonial Valley Zapotec texts, which was the basis for the discus-
sion which follows.
2.3. Habitual uses of the T aspect in Colonial Valley Zapotec. The
T aspect in Colonial Valley Zapotec covers the same semantic range that
the combination of the habitual and the progressive aspects do in modern
Valley Zapotec languages. The following example is from Feria (1567) and
shows a habitual use of the T aspect very much like the habitual aspect in
modern languages. 11
11 In examples from Colonial Valley Zapotec material, the first line is the text in its original
orthography, the second line is the same text with morphological breaks indicated (and occasional
readjustments of separate words written as a unit in the original orthography), the third line is a
morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, the fourth line is the original Spanish translation from the text,
and the fifth line is a translation of the original Spanish. When the sense of the Zapotec departs
from its original Spanish, there is often an additional line for a literal translation of the Zapotec.
(4) Alaa cicatij taca, chi tiza beni neza

alaa cica =tij t- aca chi tiza beni neza
now like =dem T be when T walk person road
quelacahui: ciani liaataca, cani nacac
quela= cahui ciani liaa t- aca cani n- aca =c
NOM= dark many time T be this STA be =only
yaga, nacaci quie, zoo tua neza:
yaga n- aca =ci quie zoo tua neza
wood STA be =only stone stand at.edge.of road
ticilooni beniato
ti- ciloo =ni beniato
T think, believe =3 people
Passa ansi que quando vn hombre va camino de noche escuro,
muchas vezes acaesce que los arboles y las piedras se le hazen
hombres. (Feria 1567:f22v)
It happens that when a man goes walking in the dark of night, often
times it happens that the trees and the rocks appear to be people.
(Lit., Now it is like this, when a person walks the road (when) it
has become dark: many times it is this, it is only a tree, it is only a
stone that stand at the edge of the road: he believes it is a person.)
In this example, we see a description of the habitual behavior of people at
night, where the verbs be, walk, and think are in the T aspect.
The following sentence shows another example of a habitual interpretation
of the T aspect. Note that in this example, the shining of the sun and moon must
be interpreted as habitual actions, not as ones that are currently in progress.
(5) Tuacani naca cobicha tozanini chi,
tua cani n aca cobicha to- zani =ni chi
in this STA be sun T:CAUS illuminate =3 when
tuacani nac peo, plela, ni

tua cani n ac peo ple =la ni
in this STA be moon star =and REL
tozanniniquela: tobixene tiniyaticha
to- zanni =ni quela tobi xene tini =ya ticha
T:CAUS illuminate =3 night one be simple T say =1:S word
quitaaloo nipezaa B Dios n quiebaa,
quitaa loo ni pe- zaa B Dios n- quiebaa
all in REL PERF create lord God STA lie heaven
quetelayoo, looniala, quitaa
quete layoo loo nia =la quitaa
below land to water =and all
canipechiganilootono: peniche
cani pe- chiga =ni loo =tono p- eniche
this PERF provide =3 to =1pl PERF prepare, make
xillanitono
xillani =tono
servant =1pl
Alla esta el sol que alumbra de dia: alla esta la luna y las estrellas
que alumbran de noche. Finalmente todo quanto dios crio en el
cielo en la tierra y en la mar todo es nuestro. (Feria 1567:10v)
There is the sun that lights up the day and the moon and the stars
that light up the night. Finally, everything that God created in
the heavens and the earth and the sea, all is ours. (Lit., There
is the sun that lights up the day and the moon and the stars that
light up the night; I say one thing simply (?), all that the Lord
God created which lies in heaven and on earth below and in the
water, all this he provided to us, (he) made our servants.)
Thus one frequent use of the T aspect is in sentences describing habitual

actions.
2.4. T used as a progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec. In contrast,

the following example shows a use of the T aspect which is in a context
that might call for the progressive in a modern Valley Zapotec language:
(6) Anna tiabaya lato, copalaxa quela

anna ti- aba =ya lato copala =xa quela=
now T ask =1:S 2:PL how many times =EMPH NOM=
cobana xiquichaa Dios nitij penito

co- lana xiquichaa Dios nitij p- eni =to
PERF steal POSS property God this PERF do =2:PL
colla cetanicito
colla cetanici =to
after? grow =2:PL
Pregunto os ahora quantos hurtos destos aveis hecho en este
mundo despues que teneys uso de raz. (Feria 1567:f26)
Now I ask you, how many thefts of these have you committed
in this world after you had the use of reason. (Lit., Now I ask
you (PL), how many times did you commit this theft of Gods
property after you had grown?)
Note that in this context, the confessor asks the penitent a question at the
time of speech and says I ask you, using the T aspect. It is difficult to see
how this could be interpreted as habitual. Thus a second possible context for
the T aspect is in progressive contexts.
The following example has a similar character:
(7) Annalij teyonnia lachito xinni, niateni

anna =lij t-ey- onni =a lachi =to xinni niateni
now =EMPH T-REP do =1:S heart =2:PL child because
Dios quebannito, quixaleto piza looto . . .
Dios que- banni =to qui- xale =to pizaloo =to
God IRR awake =2:PL IRR open =2:PL eye =2:PL
Ruego os pues aora hijos por amor de dios, que desperteys, y
abrays los ojos. . . (Feria 1567:f86)
I beg you now, children, for the love of God, that you wake up
and open your eyes. . .
Here is another example of the T aspect in a context which must be interpreted

as progressive (from Oudijk 2011):
(8) nachi martes ( ix ) xichi peo Juliyo 1596

na chi martes 9 xichi peo Juliyo 1596
now day Tuesday POSS day month July
a[]os toniya memoria testame[n]to xitini
aos t- oni =ya memoria testamento xitini
years T do =1:S memory testament POSS possession
yan don pablo primentel peni hualachi

=ya n don pablo primentel peni hualachi
=1:S 1:S Don Pablo Pimentel person natural, native
pixana huaniroo
pixana hua- ni roo
Pichana PRF REL
Hoy da, martes 9 das del mes de julio del ao de 1596 aos hago
la memoria y testamento mios, yo Don Pablo Pimentel, persona
natural y Pichana. (Testament of Pablo Pimentel 1596)
Today, the ninth day of July, 1596 I make my memory and
testament, I Don Pablo Pimentel, native person and Pichana.
Since this document records the ongoing creation of a last will and tes-
tament (and not a habitual action), the T aspect can only be interpreted as
progressive in this example. 12
12 See also example (42) below for an instance of the T aspect with a progressive interpretation.
3. The habitual/progressive contrast in modern Central Zapotec

languages.
3.1. Valley and Isthmus languages. Let us compare several modern
Central Zapotec languages, which show a rather different system from that
of the CVZ system.
All of the well-documented modern Valley and Isthmus Zapotec languages,
to the best of my knowledge, have a contrast between two aspects which are
generally called HABITUAL and PROGRESSIVE or CONTINUATIVE. The difference
between habitual and progressive aspect is described for San Lucas Quiavin
by Lee (1995; 2006), for San Pablo Gil by Lpez Cruz (1997), for Mitla
Zapotec by Briggs (1961) and Stubblefield and Stubblefield (1991), for San
Baltazar Chichicapan by Benton (1997) and Smith Stark (2004), for Santo
Domingo Albarradas Zapotec by Adam (2003), for Guevea de Humboldt
Zapotec by Marks (1980), and for Isthmus Zapotec by Pickett (1989) and
Pickett, Black, and Marcial Cerqueda (2001).
The habitual aspect is used for habitual or repeated action and is generally
translated by the English simple present tense, as in the following examples from
San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec (my field notes) and San Lucas Quiavin Zapotec:
(9) R-ny-tnt=b
HAB-do-fool=3
He (always) acts like a fool. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

(10) R-yb cy Juny
HAB-snore head Juan
Juan (always) snores. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

(11) Zcydihs r-yennlaz Gyeeihly y-gyaan Gyeeihly becw
always HAB -forget Mike IRR-feed Mike dog
Mike always forgets to feed the dog. (San Lucas Quiavin) (Lee
2006:226)
Lee (2006) notes that the San Lucas Quiavin habitual may also be used
to express present perfect readings with stative predicates:
(12) A g-uhc tsiny wbihzh r-ahcx:uw Gyeeihly
already PERF-be fifteen day HAB-sick Mike
Mike has been sick for fifteen days. (San Lucas Quiavin) (Lee
2006:226)
Pickett (1989:230) notes that the Isthmus Zapotec habitual implies repeated
or on-going action in past or present time, the context (either within the same
sentence or a more extended context) giving the clue as to the time of action.
These sentences describe habitual behavior by the subjects. In contrast to
the habitual, the progressive is used in a few other contexts: (a) to describe
an action going on at the time of speech:
(13) R c-g=n ddx cn Aaron

here PROG-talk=1PL word with Aaron
Here we are talking with Aaron. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)
(14) Gt c-cw=n
tortilla PROG-throw=1PL
We are making tortillas. (San Pablo Gil) (Lpez Cruz
1997:88)
Or (b) to describe an action going on at the same time as another action. In

this situation, the two actions do not need to be at the same time as the time
of speech, so long as they overlap with each other:
(15) Cy-w=g Juny cy-ny dzny

PROG-eat=while Juan PROG -do work
Juan is eating and working/is eating while working. (San Dioniso

Ocotepec)
(16) Ch b-dd= lab c-yas
when PERF-pass=1SG she PROG-bathe
When I passed, she was bathing. (San Pablo Gil) (Lpez

Cruz 1997:88)
(17) Chih b-ziny=a ca-zub zhyeeht loh mees
when PERF-arrive=1SG PROG-sit cat on table
When I arrived, the cat was sitting/seating itself on the table.
(San Lucas Quiavin) (Lee 2006:236)
(18a) Ch -dzny=rby
when PERF-arrive=3: PL
When they arrived
(18b) l=rb cy-w=rb cmd
pron=3:PL:R PROG-eat=3:PL:R food
they (the parents) were eating
(18c) cy-n=rb fstjrr
PROG-do=3:PL:R celebration
they were having a celebration. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)
Or (c) as the complement of a verb like begin:
(19) -zl Juny cy-ld

PERF-begin Juan PROG-sing
Juan began to sing. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

(20) . . . ch -n= -zl c-r rny

when;then PERF-see=1SG PERF-begin PROG-come blood
. . . when I saw that it had begun to bleed. (San Dionisio
Ocotepec)
As (18) and (19) above from San Dionisio Ocotepec show, /ca-/ has an
allomorph /cay-/ which occurs before vowel-initial roots. This type of allomor-
phic alternation is common to many, but not all, Central Zapotec languages.
Mitla Zapotec (Briggs 1961:4546) and San Lucas Quiavin (Lee 2006:7)
show a similar pattern:
(21a) Cay-h=ni
PROG-eat=3
He is eating. (Mitla)
(21b) Uu cay-all Jwaany liebr?
Q PROG-read Juan book
Is Juan reading the book? (San Lucas Quiavin)
Isthmus Zapotec (Pickett, Black, and Marcial Cerqueda 2001:5961) shows
a slightly different pattern of allomorphy. For verbs where the habitual is /ri-/,
the progressive is /ca-/ before a consonant and /cay-/ before a vowel. For
verbs where the habitual is /ru-/, the progressive is /c-/:
(22a) ca-z
PROG-walk
is walking
(22b) cay-
PROG-drink
is drinking
(22c) c-u-caa
PROG-theme-write
is writing
The Isthmus progressive form in some words thus differs from the irrealis
form only in the voicing of the initial consonant. 13 Compare the irrealis form:
(23) g-u-caa
IRR-theme-write
will write
13 My sources (Pickett, Black, and Marcial Cerqueda 2001 and Pickett 1989) do not indicate
tone; possibly this also differs.

For nearly all the Central Zapotec languages, the habitual aspect is marked
with /r-/ and the progressive with /ca-/. However, the realization and allo-
morphy of the progressive are slightly different in Albarradas and Guevea de
Humboldt Zapotec (discussed in 3.2 below). Albarradas has /r-/ for habitual
and /g-/ for the progressive (Adam 2003:6871).
(24a) R-i-ghob=an
HAB-theme-pull=1:S
I pull.
(24b) G-ghob=an
PROG-sit=1:S
I am pulling.
In his account of the progressive in Albarradas, Adam (2003:148) posits
a /y/-epenthesis rule which will insert /y/ when the progressive occurs with
a vowel-initial root.
(25) Laha=z=zh gy-aw gyajt
PRON=only=M PROG-eat tortilla
Only he is eating tortillas. (Adam 2003:64)
However, the distribution of the /gy-/ allomorph is not limited to vowel-
initial roots, since /gay-/ also appears before verbs with a first-person plural
subject (Adam 2003:71):
(26) Gy-dohob=
PROG-pull:1PL=DU
We (two) are pulling.

Because the Albarradas progressive starts with /g/, it contrasts with one
allomorph of the irrealis aspect, /ga-/, only in its tone:
(27a) ga-ghob=an
IRR-pull=1:S
I will pull.
(27b) G-ghob=an
PROG-sit=1:S
I am pulling.
3.2. Transyautepecan languages. The only Transyautepecan language

for which there is available data is Guevea de Humboldt Zapotec. This lan-
guage also has /r-/ for the habitual and /g-/ for the progressive, with the
allomorph /gy-/ before vowel-initial roots (Marks 1980:66): 14
14 The reason that the initial consonant of the progressive surfaces as /g/ in these languages
is not entirely clear. The contrast between /k/ and /g/ is one of a set of fortislenis contrasts in
(28a) R-bi=m
HAB-sit=3:HUM
He sits down.
(28b) G-bi=m
PROG-sit=3:HUM
He is sitting down.
(28c) Gy-=me
PROG-drink=3:HUM
He is drinking.
3.3. Cisyautepecan languages. Although they are not classified as

Central Zapotec in Smith Stark (2007), evidence for a /ca-/ progressive
is also found in Cisyautepecan languages (Mndez Espinosa 2004:7677,
8889). Consider the following examples from San Pedro Mixtepec: 15
(29a) Le me r-lob
DET 3:S HAB-sweep
He sweeps. (San Pedro Mixtepec)
(29b) Le me ki lob
DET 3:M:S PROG sweep
He is sweeping. (San Pedro Mixtepec)

Similar patterns are found in Santa Catalina Quier. However, in several
other Cisyautepecan languages, a cognate to the progressive /ca-/ is followed
not by the bare verb stem (or the gerundial form discussed in 4.1 below) but
by a verb in the habitual aspect. Consider the following forms from San Juan
Guivin (Mndez Espinosa 2004:89):
(30a) La me r-lob
DET 3:S HAB-sweep
He sweeps. (San Juan Guivin)
(30b) Ka r-ol med win
PROG HAB-sing boy little
The little boy is singing. (San Juan Guivin)
Zapotec languages (Jaeger 1983 and Avelino 2001), where /k/ is the fortis member of the pair.
A tendency toward neutralizing the distinction in unstressed syllables has been noted in some
other Otomanguean languages, such as Trique (Hollenbach 1984 and DiCanio 2012), and a
similar process may perhaps be responsible for the initial /g/ in the Albarradas and Guevea de
Humboldt reflexes of this aspect prefix. Donna M. Kreutz (personal communication) tells me
that although a progressive prefix with initial /g/ is usual in Guevea de Humboldt Zapotec, some
older speakers of this language use /c-/ and /cy-/.
15 Mndez Espinosa (2004) writes the progressive as a separate word, but Nelson (2004:15)
writes the same element as a prefix.

Mndez Espinosa (2004) cites similar patterns for San Francisco Ozolotepec
and Santiago Xanica.
The Cisyautepecan languages in which the progressive marker is followed by
the habitual aspect may perhaps be relics of an earlier stage where the progressive
was still a separate word and had not yet been reanalyzed as an aspectual prefix.
However, descriptions of the aspectual systems of Cisyautepecan are not
consistent with respect to the progressive. Although Mndez Espinosa (2004)
includes examples of San Juan Mixtepec and Santa Maria Quiegolani pro-
gressives that are similar to /ca-/, other descriptions of the same languages
do not list them. San Juan Mixtepec is listed with /r-/ for habitual aspect and
/n-/ for progressive aspect by Hunn et al. (n.d:1213). Black (2000), in her
description of Santa Maria Quiegolani, does not mention a cognate of /ca-/ but
instead lists a progressive/habitual contrast for five verbs, with the progressive
indicated by a /z-/ prefix instead of the usual habitual /r-/.
Despite these inconsistencies, it seems correct to conclude that many of the
Cisyautepecan languages have a cognate to progressive /ca-/. Cisyautepecan
languages are classified with the Southern Zapotec languages in Smith Stark
(2007) based on phonological evidence, but they share this morphological
property with Central Zapotec languages.
4. Origins of the progressive aspect.

4.1. Smith Stark on the progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec.
Smith Stark (2004), comparing the colonial and modern aspect systems of
Zapotec languages, noted the apparent absence of the progressive aspect in
Colonial Valley Zapotec and hypothesized that they originated in a structure
like the following:
TAM:verb of position gerundial verb subject
He gives synchronic examples of such constructions with distinct verbs of
position and second verb in Chichicapan, such as the following:
(31a) Z y-awu=b geta
STAT:stand GER-eat=3:r tortilla
He is standing eating.
(31b) Zob y-awu bwtshi bga nin g-txi
STAT:sit GER-eat buzzard cow REL PERF-die
The buzzard is sitting eating the cow that died.
Smith Starks use of the term gerundial verb in this template is intended
to refer to a particular shape of the verb root that appears after the verb of
position. For most verbs, this is identical to the root, but there are occasionally
some deviations from this pattern. Smith Stark lays out the following patterns:
(a) Gerundial = Root when the root is consonant initial, except class B
transitives with an initial fortis obstruent.
(b) Gerundial = /y/ + Root when the root begins with an accented
vowel.
(c) Gerundial = /g/ + Root when the root begins with an unaccented
vowel or is a class B transitive with an initial fortis obstruent 16
Because the portion of the verb stem which follows the progressive aspect
in modern Chichicapan Zapotec looks like the gerundial, Smith Stark used
internal reconstruction to suggest that a modern construction like (32a) origi-
nated from an older syntax like that in (32b).
(32a) /Ka-gashaal==n/ <Ca-gashaaal==n>
PROG-GER:open=1:S=3
Im opening it.
(32b) /Ka gashaal==n/ <Ca gashaaal==n>
STAT:hang GER:open=1:S=3
Im opening it.
Although a few different verbs of position may be used to indicate pro-
gressive, the most widespread by far in Chichicapan is /ka/ <ca>, glossed
estar pegado in Spanish, which is approximately be stuck to, attached to.
However, the Zapotec, English, and Spanish verbs of location do not have
completely overlapping domains of use. In the modern Zapotec of San Di-
onisio Ocotepec, c could be used to describe the position of many things
which are off the ground but supported by something, such as apples on a
tree, a person in a hammock, or a hat on a head.
Although Smith Stark hypothesized such an evolution, he did not find any
actual examples of the progressive in Colonial Zapotec grammar, leading him
to speculate on reasons for their puzzling absence.
4.2. The progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec. Although their ex-
istence is not discussed in Cordova (1578a), there are some instances of
the progressive aspect that have so far not been discussed in the literature
on Colonial Valley Zapotec.
4.2.1. Identication of the progressive. I identify verbs with an initial
/ca-/ and which do not have any other aspect prefix as likely instances of
the progressive aspect. The clearest cases are with consonant-initial verbs; in
such cases an initial /ca-/ cannot easily be confused with any other sequence.
16 Smith Stark is not explicit in this paper about his phonological assumptions, but appar-
ently the following unaccented vowel should delete after /g/. The process by which vowels
are identified as accented or unaccented in Chichicapan is also not identified; presumably Smith
Stark posits some accentual distinction like this for vowels in Colonial Valley Zapotec as well.
Vowel-initial verbs in the progressive are more difficult to identify in the

Colonial Valley Zapotec texts. The clearest examples below are the allomorph
/ca-c-/ before the verb die in (45b) and the allomorph /ca-g-/ before the verb
do in (46), where the /c/ and /g/ are probably reflexes of the /g-/ posited by
Smith Stark (2004) as the marker of the gerundial before unaccented vowels.
However, as noted in 3 above, many modern Central Valley Zapotec lan-
guages have /cay-/ before vowel-initial stems, where /y/ is the marker of the
gerundial stem for verbs with an accented initial vowel. It seems possible that
Colonial Valley Zapotec had a similar allomorphy for some roots, but whether
this was reflected in the orthography is less clear. Word-initial /cay-/ (or /cai-/)
is rare in the corpus, and there are no clear examples of this allomorph of the
progressive in the colonial data.
However, it is possible that some examples written with c- are also at-
tempts to represent this allomorph of the progressive. One relevant vowel-
initial verb is acapea know, understand, which occurs in several examples
in 4.2.4 below. The orthography for these forms is cacapea (followed by other
adverbial or pronominal material). Because /c-/ is also one allomorph of the
irrealis aspect, it is not entirely clear whether such cases should be interpreted
as progressive or irrealis aspect. 17 The translations sometimes suggest that
the verb is likely to be in the progressive, as in (41), where the translation
is now you understand (agora entendeys). Other cases, such as (44), seem
identical in form but have translations that suggest the imperative. And plural
imperatives are often in the irrealis aspect.
Thus there is a certain degree of orthographic indeterminacy in the inter-
pretation of the early texts which makes some instances of the progressive
less certain than others.
4.2.2. Speaker subject, verb of speech contexts. Many of the clearest
examples of the progressive occur in phrases such as I now say to you ~ I
want to say to you ~ the words that I say:
(33) Quieni chahuito nicannia lato anna
qui- enni chahui =to ni ca- nni =a lato anna
IRR understand well =2:PL REL PROG say =1:S 2:PL now
Entiende de pues bien lo que aora os dire. (Feria 1567:f:25)
Understand well that which I now say to you (PL).
17 Recall from description of Albarradas Zapotec and Isthmus Zapotec in 3 above that pro-
gressive and irrealis are often distinguished only by tone or voicing of the initial consonant in
these languages. Since the colonial texts do not indicate tone and only sporadically indicate the
voicing of consonants, if the allomorphy of the Colonial Valley Zapotec system were similar
to that of modern Albarradas or Isthmus, the progressive and irrealis aspects would often be
written identically.
(34) Topaloo ticha cannia lato anna xini,

topa loo ticha ca- nni =a lato anna xini
two aspect, kind thing PROG say =1:S 2:PL now child
laacani naquia cozoba chahui tiyagato
laaca ni naquia cozoba chahui tiyaga =to
this REL STA be.necessary PERF sit well ear =2:PL
Dos cosas hijos os quiero aqui dezir: las quales conuiene oygays
con attencion. (Feria 1567:f60v)
Two things I want to say here to you, children: to which it is
necessary that you listen with attention. (Lit., There are two
kinds of things I say to you now, child; this that it is necessary
that you listen with attention.)
(35) Cetobilooci ticha tacalachia

ce tobi loo =ci ticha t- acalachi =a
DEF one aspect, kind =only thing T want =1:S
caniya anna xini xiticha xiteni Dios chela
cani =ya anna xini xiticha xiteni Dios chela
PROG say =1:S now child POSS word POSS GEN God and
xiteni cruz X, chela xiteni xonasi tao sancta
xiteni cruz chela xiteni xonasi tao sancta
POSS GEN cross and POSS GEN lady great holy
Maria, chela xiteni cechacuee sanctos . . .
Maria chela xiteni cechacuee sanctos
Maria and POSS GEN other saints
Sola otra cosa os quiero a que dezir (hijos) tocante a las imagines
de nuestro seor, de la cruz, X de nuestra seora, y de los de
mas sanctos. . . (Feria 1567:f66v)
There is only other thing that I want to say to you (sons)
concerting the images of our Lord, of the cross, . . . of our lady,
and of the other most holy things. . . (Lit., One more word I
want to say to you, child, (about) the word of God and of the
cross and of the holy lady Mary and of the other saints. . .)
(36) Conachahuito ticha cnia

co-na-chahui=to ticha ca-nni=a
PERF-hear-well=2:PL word prog-say=1:S
Oid con atteci lo que os quiero decir. (Feria 1567:f88)

Hear with attention that which I want to say. (Lit., Hear well
what I am saying.)
These examples are all very much tied to the speech situation, and the
statements with these markers have an interesting character relative to the
surrounding text. The majority of Feria (1567), an explanation of Catholic
doctrine, is entirely in the third person, so the occasional departures of the
author to address the audience directly have a startling and direct quality.
Perhaps, given the fact that few Zapotecs would have been able to read the
text, the document was intended to be read aloud to audiences, and these
passages where the speaker addresses the audience put particular emphasis
on the act of speech.
The following sequence shows a slightly different context, this time in the
imagined context of a forgiving Christian speaking to a repentant thief; it
uses a progressive in (37b), which begins the recommended phrase I say to
you that I forgive you now. . ..
(37a) Tebela tobi beni colanani xiquichaa
tebela tobi beni co bana =ni xiquichaa
if one person PERF steal =3 POSS property
le aani, chicani benicoca xiquichaani ni
leaa =ni chicani benicoca xiquichaa =ni ni
another? =3 then owner POSS property =3 REL
picuana: beni canizoaca quezij lachini

pi cuana beni cani zoaca qu- ezijlachi =ni
PERF stolen, be person this PSBL be IRR forgive =3
cobana, zoaca capini
co- lana zo- ca c- api =ni
PERF steal PSBL be able; can IRR tell =3
Si vna hombre hurtasse la hazienda agena: bien podria el dueo

de la hazienda perdonar a aquel que se le hurto, y dezirle:
If a man has stolen anothers property, the owner of the property
would be good to pardon the one that has stolen (?) and say to
him: (Lit., If one person stole the property of his fellow man,
then the owner of the property that was stolen, this person can
forgive the one that stole (and) can say)
(37b) Xini, pchela, aguizaca penilo, ,
xini pche =la a= guizaca p- eni =lo
child brother.M =and PRF= evil PERF do =2S
col nalo xiqchaaya,

co- lna =lo xi- quechaa =ya
PERF steal =2s POSS property =1:S
caninatezij lachialoy, anna tonnitilco

cani = na- tezij lachi =a loy anna t- onnitiloo
prog say =1:S STA forgive =1:S 2S now T forgive
ya tichatij
=ya ticha =tij
=1:S word =dem
Hijo, or hermano, mal lo has hecho, en me aver tomado mi
hazienda. Mas yo te perdono,
Son, or brother, you have done evil in having taken my property.
But I forgive you, (Lit., Son or brother, you have evilly stolen
my property; I say I forgive you now for this.)
(37c) Yatacatilachia, quixelo
ya t- aca =ti lachi =a quixe =lo
NEG T want(be-heart) =NEG heart =1:S pay =2S
xiquela queyaya.
xiquela queya =ya
POSS NOM price =1:S
y no quiero que me pagues nada. (Feria 1567:f25v)
and dont want you to pay me anything. (Lit., I dont want you
to pay me my price.)
4.2.3. Optionality of the progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec. Never-

theless, it is not obligatory for the author to use this /ca-/ marker. It is possible
in very similar situations to use the T aspect, as in the following examples:
(38) Tinnia anna, oalijca quitaalij beni
ti- nni a anna oa- lij =ca quitaalij beni
T say 1:S now PRF straight, true =EMPH all person
Christiano ninatij nabaani anna, chelani
Christiano ni n- ati nabaani anna chela ni
Christian REL STA die STA alive now and REL
coteteni ...
co- tete =ni
IRR cross =3
Digo pues que todos los christianos, p~sentes, passados, y por

venir. . . (Feria 1567:f46v)
I say then that all Christians present, past and those to come. . .
(Lit., I say now truly that all Christian people who are dead or
alive or will be born. . .)
(39) Anna tiabaya lato, copalaxa quela
anna ti- aba =ya lato copala =xa quela=
now T ask =1:S 2:PL how many times =EMPH NOM=
cobana xiquichaa Dios nitij penito colla
co- lana xiquichaa Dios nitij p eni =to colla
PERF steal POSS property God this PERF do =2:PL after?
cetanicito?
cetanici =to
grow =2:PL
Pregunto os ahora quantos hurtos destos aveis hecho esiste
(en este?) mundo despues que teneys uso de raz? (Feria
1567:f26)
Now I ask you, how many thefts of these have you committed in
this world after you had the use of reason? (Lit., Now I ask you
how many times did you do theft of this property of God after
had (already) grown?)
I believe that contrasts like these show us that in the sixteenth century,
the use of /ca-/ to indicate progressive was not yet an obligatory feature of
the language but was an emphatic option available to the speaker. The same
progressive situation could also be described with the T aspect. The historical
evolution in the past 500 years is thus one in which the /ca-/ marker has gone
from being an emphatic option used in a few contexts to being an obligatory
mark of progressive aspect.
The following example from a 1721 testament may show an intriguing relic
of the emphatic nature of /ca-/ aspect marking, compared with more neutral
aspect marking with T.
(40) Anna tinij na benij guijcha canijhuazij
anna tinij na benij guijcha ca- nij hua- zij
now T say 1:S.FP person sick PROG say PRF affliction
hua chijbaa
hua- chijbaa
PRF misery
Agora digo la enferma que me hallo mui pobre (Coyotepec
1721, testament of Maria de la Cruz)
Now I, the sick person, say that I find myself very poor (Lit.,
Now I, the sick person says, saying (there is) affliction and
misery.)
The verb ni say is used twice in this passage. In the first instance, it
is used with the T aspect. In the second instance, it appears to be repeated
for emphasis, but in the emphatic repetition, the aspect marker shifts to the
progressive in /ca-/.
A comparable evolution in the Spanish progressive construction estar +
participle is examined in considerable detail by Torres-Cacoullos (2012).
She shows that the progressive construction has existed in variation with the
simple present for several centuries in Spanish, with the progressive becoming
increasingly more frequent over time.
It is intriguing that in Spanish, some of the earliest verbs which show

evidence of the estar + participle progressive construction are verbs of speech,
and these are also among the earliest recorded contexts for the progressive
in Colonial Valley Zapotec.
4.2.4. Addressee subject contexts. When the addressee is the subject,
this presents another possible context where early use of the progressive ap-
pears in the sixteenth-century texts, particularly in formulas like now you
understand ~ understand well. As mentioned in 4.2.1 above, the interpreta-
tion of these examples is less certain because the verb acapea understand
begins with a vowel. Because the orthography possibly conflates the progres-
sive and the irrealis, clues about the best interpretation need to be sought in
the surrounding context.
Two examples appear after passages in which the author has explained the
deceitful nature of idols; they are translated by the Spanish present tense.
Because the addressees understanding of the nature should have been a re-
sult of the prior passage, it seems that in (41) the interpretation of cacapeato
as now you know is more coherent than the interpretation now you will
know because the knowledge should be complete at the same time as the
now adverbial.
(41) Anna cacapeato oalijca coxiguiex
anna c- acapea =to oa- lij =ca co- xiguie =x
now PROG know =2:PL PRF true =EMPH PERF trick =EMPH
bezeloo lachito colaalayoo quichaa
bezeloo lachi =to colaa layoo quichaa
devil heart =2:PL PERF for time to pass land property
nitij cotiato loo bitoo quiela, yagala:
nitij co- tia =to loo bitoo quie =la yaga =la
this PERF ask =2:PL to god stone =and wood =and
Agora entendeiys q[uie]n engaados estuvo el demonio en los
tiempos passados: pues pediades todas estas cosas a los ydolos
de piedra y de palo. . . (Feria 1567:f10v)
Now you understand how you were tricked by the devil in past
times: then you asked all these things of the idols of stone and
wood. (Lit., Now you know truly that the devil tricked you in
the past in this land, (when) you asked the gods of stone and
wood.)
Compare a similar passage in (42), where the T aspect is used.
(42) Niacani anna tacapeato oalijca
niacani anna t- acapea =to oa- lij =ca
thus, so now T know =2:PL PRF straight, true =EMPH
citoo tete coxigue bezeloo lato

citoo tete coxigue bezeloo lato
abundant, numerous very PERF trick devil 2:PL
Y por esto aora cognozcays, quan engaados os tuuo el
demonio. . . (Feria 1567:22v)
And so now you recognize how you were tricked by the devil. . .
A similar example where cacapea seems to represent the progressive, rather
than the irrealis, is seen in (43).
(43) Ana cacapealito, oalica
ana c- acapea =li =to oa- li =ca
now PROG know =EMPH =2:PL PRF straight, true =EMPH
huaxihui tete, oacecetete oca ticha
huaxihui tete oa- cete =to oca ticha
PRF sin very PRF adore =2:PL blindy thing
colaa quelahuecete xibitoo
colaa quela= hue- cete xibitoo
formerly, in old times NOM= PRF adore POSS god
xihuito . . .
xihui =to
sin =2:PL
Algo ia entedereys quan vana, y quan sin fundamento fue vuestra
religion antigua, pues solamente pretendiades en ella las cosas
corporales y t[em]p[or]ales. . . (Feria 1567:4v)
Something you will now understand of how vain and how without
foundation was your ancient religion, thus you only claimed
in it bodily and worldly thing. . . (Lit., Now you understand
truly that it was very sinful (when) you adored things blindly in
former days; your adoration of your wicked gods. . .)
On the other hand, (44) seems to show the verb used in the imperative,
which is a likely environment for the irrealis aspect.
(44) Cicanilato xinicacapeacha huito
cica =ni lato xini c- acapea chahui =to
like =3 2:PL child IRR know well =2:PL
quelacitoo quelanachono xiteni
quela= citoo quela= na- chono xiteni
NOM= abundant, numerous NOM= STA be valuable POSS GEN
anima ...
anima
soul
Pero vosotros hijos, entended bien la grandeza y preciosidad del

alma. . . (Feria 1567:f6v)
But you, sons, understand well the grandeur and preciousness of
the soul. . .
Although the orthography of Colonial Valley Zapotec makes it difficult to be
certain, examples like (41) and (43) suggest that addresseesubject sentences
were another environment for the early progressive.
4.2.5. Other uses of /ca-/ in Colonial Valley Zapotec. In addition to
the contexts I have just described, there are some other instances of /ca-/
in the early texts that require more reflection. The previous passages have
talked about the current states of individuals, but we find other readings
of /ca-/ when we turn to passages where the nouns do not denote specific
individuals but kinds. This use is similar to what is sometimes called the
GNOMIC reading of the imperfective, which is like a habitual reading but
predicated of non-referential or generic subjects (Comrie 1976 and Bybee,
Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994).
Consider the following passage, where the fate of the body (45a) and the
soul (45b) are contrasted, and the /ca-/ accompanies the description of what
happens to the soul.
(45a) Yataca cica xiticha beniati, quelani
ya t- aca cica xiticha beniati quelani
NEG T be thus POSS thing people because
chitatini, tobici pelalati tinniti loo,
chi t- ati =ni tobi =ci pela lati ti- nnitiloo
when T die =3 one =only flesh body T destroy
tilo xe, pecani leche layoo nicoyaa
ti- loxe pe- ca =ni leche layoo ni co yaa
T end, finish PERF be =3 same? land REL PERF be.formed
njtoni . . .
nj t- oni
REL T do
No es desta manera en loz hombres: por que qudo mueren, solo

el cuerpo es el que peresce, y se acaba, y se torna en la misina
tierra de que fue formado. . .
It is not in this manner in men: because when they die only the
body is what suffers and finishes and turns in the same land
in which it was formed. . . (Lit., The things of a man are not
like this, because when he dies, only the body is destroyed
and comes to an end and is in the same land (in which) it was
formed.)
(45b) Cicani ani[m]a yaga ca ctini, yaga

cica =ni anima yaga ca- c ti =ni yaga
thus =3 soul NEG PROG GER die =3 NEG
caloxeni, celij cazabi na bnini,

ca- loxe =ni celij cazabi na- bni =ni
PROG end, finish =3 always PROG float STA alive =3
Chela chi huetobi quechelayoo, chicani cazaca

Chela chi huetobi queche layoo chicani cazaca
and when PRF end pueblo land then again
loo quezijni xipelalatini
loo quezij =ni xi- pelalati =ni
aspect, kind IRR take =3 POSS body =3
mas el alma nomuere nise acaba, sino siempre queda biva, y al fin
del mundo ha de tornar atomar su cuerpo. (Feria 1567:f37v)
the soul does not die nor does it finish: at the end it always stays
alive and at the end of the world it will turn to take on its body.
(Lit., Like this the soul does not die, it does not end, always it
remains alive, and also when the world has ended then again it
will be to its flesh.) 18
Traugott (1972) has shown for English that early uses of the be + present
participle construction had a range of semantics not limited to the progres-
sive, and that these also included the kind of gnomic situations seen in this
example, where generic properties of kinds are described.
In the following paragraph, there is some current relevance to the speech
situation created by the initial adverbial phrase it is forty-eight years since
you began to be Christians, but the situations that are subsequently described
18 The analysis shown for this passage is the one that I think is most plausible. An anonymous
reviewer asks whether an alternate analysis is possible in which the ca following the negative
yaga is not the progressive aspect but an emphatic clitic =ca seen in some other contexts. This
would yield the following analysis:
Cicani ani[m]a yaga ca ctini, yaga caloxeni,
cica =ni anima yaga =ca c ti =ni yaga =ca loxe =ni
thus =3 soul NEG EMPH IRR die =3 NEG EMPH IRR:end, finish =3
celij cazabi na bnini

celij cazabi na- bni =ni
always PROG float STA alive =3
In this alternative, the verbs die and end are in the irrealis aspect, with the zero allomorph of
irrealis on the verb loxe. Although this analysis also seems possible, it is hard to see why the first
two verbs here differ in aspect from zabi float, since all three describe events in the afterlife.
(The negative yaga does not seem to induce irrealis aspect in other contexts, so this is not the
conditioning factor.) Note that in either analysis, the verb zabi float must be in the progressive,
so this passage still shows that progressive is used in some gnomic contexts.
(being Sunday; being a feast day) are not situations that are currently in
progress. 19
(46) Cotua bixono lijya cozoloo quela Christiano
cotua bi- xona lijya cozoloo quela= Christiano
PERF forty and eight year PERF begin NOM= Christian
xitenito, laa loo can celij pelohui
xiteni =to laa loo can celij pelohui
POSS GEN =2:pl focus? to this always PERF teach
bixocelato xiticha sancta yglesia nitij, ni
bixoce lato xiticha sancta yglesia nitij ni
father 2:PL POSS word holy church this REL
tenapeani, quitaalij beni Chistianos cagoni

t- e- napea =ni quitaalij beni Chistianos ca- g- oni
T REP order =3 all person Christians PROG IRR do
sacrameto, chelae cazoba domingo, cazoba
sacramento chela =e cazoba domingo cazoba
sacrament and =with PROG sit Domingo PROG sit
lan, chi titopato yootoo tonatiagato
lan chi ti- topa =to yootoo t- onatiaga =to
party when T joined together =2:PL church T hear =2:PL
tichatij
ticha =tij
word =dem
Quarenta y ocho aos ha que comenastes a ser christianos,
y desde estes siepre los padres os han predicado este
mandamiento de la yglesia: en que manda, que todos los
Christianos comulguen, y todos los domingos y fiestos que os
junteis en las iglesias, lo oys. (Feria 1567:f86)
It is forty-eight years since you began to be Christians, and since
then the priests have always taught this commandment of the
church: which commands that all Christians take communion, and
that all Sundays and feast days you come together in the church
and hear this word. (Lit., Your Christianity began forty-eight years
ago, and your fathers always taught the word of this holy church,
which orders that all Christians take sacrament and join together in
the church on Sundays and on feast days to hear this word.)
19 Note also that the first form which shows up in this example, ca-g-oni, is almost exactly
the sequence of /ca-/ + gerundial form predicted by Smith Stark, as in 4.1. The verb form here is
<oni> /uni/. The accent is not certain for CVZ, and Smith Starks rules depend on the accented
nature of a vowel-initial root. If we posit an unaccented initial vowel, then its gerundial form
should be ga + uni > g-uni. /ca-/ will occur before this to yield ca-g-uni, which in normal CVZ
orthography will be cagoni.
In this example, as in many similar passages, the location of a unit of time

(such as a feast) is expressed with a verb of position zoba is sitting in the
progressive aspect.
The uses of /ca-/ which have been detailed in 4.2.2 and 4.2.4 above are
completely parallel to modern Central Valley Zapotec. However the uses of
/ca-/ seen in this section have not, to the best of my knowledge, persisted into
any of the modern Central Valley Zapotec languages. They are intriguing as
a historical relic of a prior stage in the development of this prefix, when its
semantic range was apparently somewhat wider than its current range.
5. Evolution of the modern progressive aspect. The progressive as-

pect as attested in the sixteenth century Colonial Valley Zapotec texts is
an optional marker, usually but not always associated with a situation cur-
rently in progress. How did it evolve into the current, obligatory marker of
progressive? And at what point did the current system stabilize?
Here the existence of a progressive/habitual contrast and a progressive as-
pect system in Guevea and Isthmus Zapotec that is very similar to that found
in modern Valley Zapotec languages is an important clue to the diachrony
of the system. Pickett (1989) and Marks (1980) both describe systems which
are extremely similar in their habitual/progressive distinction to that of the
modern Valley languages. Because the ethnohistorical evidence suggests that
ancestors of the speakers of Guevea Zapotec left the Valley of Oaxaca in the
late fourteenth century, and the ancestors of the Isthmus Zapotecs left by the
end of the sixteenth century, this suggests that the innovations which created
the habitual/progressive distinction, with /ca-/ as the marker of the progres-
sive, had already occurred by this point.
The historical scenario for the speakers of Cisyautepecan languages is
less clear; but if they indeed share this innovation of Central Zapotec, then
this suggests that they also moved from the Valley to their current locations
at some time prior to the sixteenth century. Indeed, the progressive in these
languages shows signs of being less grammaticized than in other Central
Zapotec languages, which may point to a departure from the Valley even
earlier than the ancestors of Guevea.
Might the feature be diffused to Cisyautepecan, Guevea, and Isthmus Za-
potec? Here the details in the realization and allomorphy of the progressive
prefix are important. The voiced initial of the progressive in Guevea as /g-/
~ /gy-/ is different from the voiceless initial consonant in most other Central
Zapotec languages, which argues against simple borrowing. Another difficulty
for the idea of diffusion of the progressive in the Cisyautepecan languages is
the occurrence of /ca/ as a separate word, followed in some languages by a
verb inflected for the habitual aspect. Since all other other Central Zapotec
languages have /ca-/ as a prefix, it is hard to understand a prefix which is
borrowed as a separate word. On the other hand, the similarities of the al-
lomorphy of the Isthmus progressive prefix to that found in other Valley
Zapotec languages such as Mitla, San Dionisio Ocotepec, and San Lucas
Quiavin are extensive enough to point to shared retention of an early Proto-
Central-Zapotec form.
If we consider again the relationship of the languages in Central Zapotec,
this time with reference to when we have evidence for the progressive, then
the tree in figure 4 summarizes the logic of the problem. The progressive/
habitual distinction with /ca-/ as the marker of the progressive is found in
the Antequera branch in 1567 and must have been present in the Extended
Ocotepec branch prior to 1500 in order to be present in Isthmus Zapotec. It
must have been present in some Valley dialect that was the ancestor to Gue-
vea de Humboldt and Petapa prior to 1370. It is also attested in all the other
branches of Western Valley (Chichicapan, W. Tlacolula, Gl), in Mitla, and
in Albarradas. Therefore, I suggest that progressive */ka-/ is reconstructible
for Proto-Central-Zapotec at some time period probably several centuries
prior to 1300, ca. 11001200 C.E.
If the argument above is correct, then the presence of a reflex of progres-
sive */ka-/ can also serve as a test for membership in the Central Zapotec
branch. The placement of the Transyautepecan and Cisyautepecan languages,
in particular, has been a point of either neglect or uncertainty in the clas-
sification of the Zapotec languages. Rosemary Beam de Azcona (personal
communication) notes that in a prior draft of Smith Stark (2007), Smith
Stark had grouped both Transyautepecan and Cisyautepecan with Southern
Zapotec based on the presence of nasal-initial animal words. By the time of
publication he had regrouped Transyautepecan with Central Zapotec, but he
expressed some lingering doubts about these two options. 20
The presence of progressive */ka-/ in both the Transyautepecan and Cis-
yautepecan languages suggests that both are indeed branches of Central Za-
potec. In particular, it suggests that Cisyautepecan languages may not be
Southern Zapotec and that the features that they share with other Southern
languages are due to diffusion. Thus this paper provides evidence for a sig-
nificant change to Smith Starks (2007) published classification.
The examples from Feria (1567) probably preserve many features of the
original function of */ka-/ in its early stages, when it was an optional element
which was particularly frequent with verbs of speaking and understanding.
Even at this early stage, however, we still see */ka-/ in other contexts. Torres-
Cacoullos (2012) has documented that the Spanish progressive gradually in-
creased in frequency and expanded the range of verbs with which it appears
20 I thank Rosemary Beam de Azcona (personal communication) for her helpful comments
on this implication for the classification of Zapotec languages.

182
Central Zapotec
(other branches) Antequera Western Valley Mitla Albarradas Transyautepec Cisysutepec?

1567 ca. 1370
Chichicapan San Pablo Gil

Extended Ocotepec Western Tlacolula Valley & San Dionisio Ocotepec Guevea de Humboldt Petapa (other languages)
Isthmus
Zaachila
(other branches) Juchiteco
< 1500
FIG. 4.Dates for the innovative progressive aspect.

international journal of american linguistics
over the course of several centuries. As the analysis and interpretation of

Zapotec materials from the past five centuries progresses, we can hope to
have a more detailed understanding of how the infrequent and optional */ka-/
progressive of sixteenth-century Zapotec evolved into the obligatory category
of the modern Central Zapotec languages.
REFERENCES
ADAM, CHRISTOPHER. 2003. A study of Dihidx Bilyhab (Santo Domingo Albarradas Zapotec)
morphophonology. M.A. thesis, California State University, Northridge.
AVELINO, HERIBERTO. 2001. The acoustic correlates of the fortislenis distinction in Yalalg
Zapotec. M.A. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
BEAM DE AZCONA, ROSEMARY G. In preparation. A Grammar of Coatec Zapotec. Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
BENTON, JOSEPH P. 1997. Aspect shift in Chichicapan Zapotec narrative discourse. SIL Mex-
ico Workpapers 12:3446. <http:www.sil.org/mexico /workpapers/scans/WS12/WS1203-
BentonJ.pdf>.
BLACK, CHERYL A. 2000. Quiegolani Zapotec Syntax: A Principles and Parameters Approach.
Dallas: SIL International and University of Texas at Arlington.
BRIGGS, ELINOR. 1961. Mitla Zapotec Grammar. Mexico City: Instituto Lingstico de Verano and
Centro de Investigaciones Antropolgicas de Mxico.
BROADWELL, GEORGE A. 2010. Phonological distinctions in early Zapotec manuscripts (especially
fortis/lenis). Paper presented at the Zapotexts Seminar, University of California, Los Angeles.
<http://goo.gl/4vVOha>.
BROADWELL, GEORGE AARON, AND BROOK DANIELLE LILLEHAUGEN. 2013. Building an electronic data-
base for Colonial Valley Zapotec. Paper presented at the First International Conference on
Mesoamerican Linguistics, Fullerton, California.
BYBEE, JOAN; REVERE PERKINS; AND WILLIAM PAGLIUCA. 1994. The Evolution of the Grammar:
Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
COMRIE, BERNARD. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CORDOVA, JUAN DE. 1578a. Arte en lengva zapoteca. Mexico: Casa de Pedro Balli. Republished by
Nicols Len as Arte del idioma zapoteco de Juan de Crdova (Morelia, Michoacn: Imprenta
del Gobierno en la Escuela de Artes, 1886). A facsimile edition of Lens edition published
as Arte del idioma zapoteco (Mexico City: Ediciones Toledo and INAH, 1987).
. 1578b. Vocabulario en lengua zapoteca. Mexico City: Pedro Charte y Antonio Ricardo.
DICANIO, CHRISTIAN. 2012. The phonetics of fortis and lenis consonants in Itunyoso Trique. IJAL
78:23972.
FERIA, PEDRO DE. 1567. Doctrina christiana en lengua castellana y apoteca. Mexico City: En casa
de Pedro Ocharte. <http://www.archive.org/details/doctrinachristia00feri>.
FOREMAN, JOHN. 2006. The morphosyntax of subjects in Macuiltianguis Zapotec. Ph.D. disserta-
tion, University of California, Los Angeles.
HOLLENBACH, BARBARA. 1984. The phonology and morphology of tone and laryngeals in Copala
Trique. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona.
HUNN, EUGENE; AKESHA BARON; MEINARDO HERNNDEZ PREZ; ROGER REECK; AND HERMILO SILVA
CRUZ. n.d. A sketch of Mixtepec Zapotec grammar. <http://faculty.washington.edu/hunn/
vitae/Hunn_Zapotec_Grammar>.
JAEGER, JERI. 1983. The fortis/lenis question: Evidence from Zapotec and Jawo. Journal of
Phonetics 11:17789.
KAUFMAN, TERRENCE. 2003. Proto-Zapotec reconstructions. Ms.
LEE, FELICIA A. 1995. Aspect, negation, and temporal polarity in Zapotec. Proceedings of WCCFL
15, ed. B. Agbayani and S.-W. Tang, pp. 30520. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI.
. 2006. Remnant Raising and VSO Clausal Architecture: A Case Study from San Lucas
Quiavin Zapotec. New York: Springer.
LEWIS, M. PAUL: GARY F. SIMONS; AND CHARLES D. FENNIG. 2013. Ethnologue: Languages of the
World. Dallas: SIL International. <http://www.ethnologue.com>.
LILLEHAUGEN, BROOK DANIELLE, AND JOHN FOREMAN. 2013. A first look at positional verbs in Colo-
nial Valley Zapotec. International Conference on Mesoamerican Linguistics, Fullerton, Cali-
fornia. <http://www. academia.edu/ 2633436/A_first_look_at_positional_verbs_in_Colonial_
Valley_Zapotec>.
LPEZ CRUZ, AUSENCIA. 1997. Morfologa verbal del zapoteco de San Pablo Gil. M.A. thesis,
Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
LYMAN BOULDEN, HILARIO. 2007. Gramtica popular del zapoteco de Comaltepec, Choapan, Oax-
aca. Mexico City: Instituto Lingstico de Verano.
MARKS, DONNA. 1980. Morphophonemics of the Guevea de Humboldt Zapotec verb. SIL Mexico
Electronic Working Papers 4:4384. < http://www-01.sil.org/mexico /workpapers/scans/
WS04/WS0404-MarksD.pdf>.
MNDEZ ESPINOSA, OSCAR. 2004. El cisyautepequeo, un estudio dialectolgico de la lengua dits
(zapoteca) en la region suroriental del estado de Oaxaca. M.A. thesis, CIESAS, Mexico City.
MUNRO, PAMELA, AND FELIPE H. LOPEZ. 1999. X:ten Dizh Sah Sann Luuc: San Lucas Quia-
vin Zapotec Dictionary: Diccionario zapoteco de San Lucas Quiavin. Los Angeles: Chicano
Studies Research Center.
NELSON, JULIA LOUISE. 2004. Tone and glottalization on nominals in San Juan Mixtepec Zapotec.
M.A. thesis, University of Texas, Arlington.
OUDIJK, MICHEL. 2008. Una nueva historia zapoteca. Pictografa y escritura alfabtica en Oaxaca,
ed. Sebastin van Doesburg, pp. 89116. Oaxaca: Instituto Estatal de Educacin Pblica de
Oaxaca.
. 2011. Textos coloniales en zapoteco del Istmo de Tehuantepec. Cosmovisin y litera-
tura de los Binnigulasa, ed. Sergio Lpez Alonso and Eva E. Ramrez Gasga, pp. 10944.
Tehuantepec, Oaxaca: Universidad del Istmo.
PICKETT, VELMA B. 1989. Aspect in Isthmus Zapotec. General and Amerindian Ethnolinguistics:
In Remembrance of Stanley Newman, ed. Mary Ritchie Key and Henry M. Hoenigswald, pp.
22943. Berlin: Mouton.
PICKETT, VELMA B.; CHERYL BLACK; AND VICENTE MARCIAL CERQUEDA. 2001. Gramtica popular
del zapoteco del Istmo. 2nd ed. Juchitn, Oaxaca and Tucson: Centro de Investigacin y De-
sarrollo Binniz and Instituto Lingstico de Verano. <http://www.sil.org/mexico /zapoteca/
istmo /G023a-GramaticaZapIstmo-zai.htm>.
RESINES, LUIS, ed. 2002. Catecismo del Sacromonte y Doctrina Christiana de Fr. Pedro de Feria:
conversin y evangelizacin de moriscos e indios. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investiga-
ciones Cientficas (CSIC).
SMITH STARK, THOMAS C. 2003. La ortografa del zapoteco en el Vocabvlario de fray Juan de
Crdova. Escritura zapoteca: 2500 aos de historia, ed. Mara de los ngeles Romero Frizzi,
pp. 173240. Mexico City: CIESAS, Miguel ngel Porra, CONACULTA-INAH.
. 2004. El progresivo en zapoteco. Ms., Ponencia para el VII congreso nacional de
lingstica, Universidad de Guadalajara.
. 2007. Algunos isoglosas zapotecas. Clasificacin de las lenguas indgenas de Mxico:
Memorias del III Coloquio Internacional del Lingstica Mauricio Swadesh, ed. Christina
Buenrostro et al., pp. 69134. Mexico City: UNAM and Instituto Nacional de Lenguas
Indgenas.
. 2008. La flexion de tiempo, aspecto y modo en el verbo del zapoteco colonial del valle.
Memorias del Coloquio Francisco Belmar, ed. Ausencia Lpez Cruz and Michael Swanton,
pp. 377419. Oaxaca: Biblioteca Francisco de Burgoa, UABJO and Fundacin Alfredo Harp
Hel Oaxaca.
SONNENSCHEIN, AARON HUEY. 2005. A Descriptive Grammar of San Bartolom Zoogocho Zapotec.
Munich: Lincom Europa.
STUBBLEFIELD, MORRIS, AND CAROL STUBBLEFIELD. 1991. Diccionario zapoteco de Mitla, Oaxaca.
Mexico City: Instituto Lingstico de Verano.
SIL INTERNATIONAL. 2014. Fieldworks Language Explorer (FLEx). SIL Fieldworks. <http://field-
works.sil.org/flex/>.
TORRES-CACOULLOS, RENA. 2012. Grammaticalization through inherent variablity: The develop-
ment of a progressive in Spanish. Studies in Language 36:73122.
TRAUGOTT, ELIZABETH. 1972. A History of English Syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

The Historical Development of The Progressive Aspect in Central Zapotec

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Historical Development of The Progressive Aspect in Central Zapotec

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE

PROGRESSIVE ASPECT IN CENTRAL ZAPOTEC

GEORGE AARON BROADWELL

[IJAL, vol. 81, no. 2, April 2015, pp. 15185]

Solteco Western Core

Papabuco Southern Central Northern

(other branches) Cisyautepec

FIG. 1.Smith Starks (2007) classification of Zapotec.

Zapotec is a large group of languages, comparable to Romance in time

(other branches) Antequera Western Valley Mitla Albarradas Transyautepec

San Baltasar Chichicapan San Pablo Gil

San Juan Guelavia

FIG. 2.A more detailed classification of Central Zapotec.

family. He wrote, No he podido identificar ninguna innovacin que defina

refers to unpublished work by Kaufman on this point.

2. Use of the aspect markers in Colonial Valley Zapotec.

Notice that in these examples, the verb roots c be located in a high

(4) Alaa cicatij taca, chi tiza beni neza

tuacani nac peo, plela, ni

Thus one frequent use of the T aspect is in sentences describing habitual

2.4. T used as a progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec. In contrast,

(6) Anna tiabaya lato, copalaxa quela

cobana xiquichaa Dios nitij penito

(7) Annalij teyonnia lachito xinni, niateni

Here is another example of the T aspect in a context which must be interpreted

(8) nachi martes ( ix ) xichi peo Juliyo 1596

yan don pablo primentel peni hualachi

3. The habitual/progressive contrast in modern Central Zapotec

He (always) acts like a fool. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

Juan (always) snores. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

(13) R c-g=n ddx cn Aaron

Or (b) to describe an action going on at the same time as another action. In

(15) Cy-w=g Juny cy-ny dzny

Juan is eating and working/is eating while working. (San Dioniso

When I passed, she was bathing. (San Pablo Gil) (Lpez

Or (c) as the complement of a verb like begin:

(19) -zl Juny cy-ld

Juan began to sing. (San Dionisio Ocotepec)

(20) . . . ch -n= -zl c-r rny

tone; possibly this also differs.

We (two) are pulling.

3.2. Transyautepecan languages. The only Transyautepecan language

3.3. Cisyautepecan languages. Although they are not classified as

He is sweeping. (San Pedro Mixtepec)

writes the same element as a prefix.

4. Origins of the progressive aspect.

Vowel-initial verbs in the progressive are more difficult to identify in the

(34) Topaloo ticha cannia lato anna xini,

(35) Cetobilooci ticha tacalachia

(36) Conachahuito ticha cnia

Oid con atteci lo que os quiero decir. (Feria 1567:f88)

picuana: beni canizoaca quezij lachini

Si vna hombre hurtasse la hazienda agena: bien podria el dueo

col nalo xiqchaaya,

caninatezij lachialoy, anna tonnitilco

4.2.3. Optionality of the progressive in Colonial Valley Zapotec. Never-

Digo pues que todos los christianos, p~sentes, passados, y por

It is intriguing that in Spanish, some of the earliest verbs which show

citoo tete coxigue bezeloo lato

Pero vosotros hijos, entended bien la grandeza y preciosidad del

No es desta manera en loz hombres: por que qudo mueren, solo

(45b) Cicani ani[m]a yaga ca ctini, yaga

caloxeni, celij cazabi na bnini,