A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE VERBAL COMPLEX IN YUKATEKAN MAYAN LANGUAGES. Charles Andrew Hofling

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE VERBAL COMPLEX IN
YUKATEKAN MAYAN LANGUAGES1
Charles Andrew Hoing

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale
The Yukatekan branch of the Mayan language family includes Yukateko, Southern
Lakantun, Northern Lakantun, Itzaj, and Mopan, language varieties spoken in the Maya
lowlands of Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize. The branch began to diversify approxi-
mately 1,000 years ago. An examination of all modern members of the family, as well as
colonial Yukateko, claries the members genetic relationships to one another and sug-
gests that extensive contacts occurred among members of the branch after separation.
The Proto-Yukatekan verbal complex is reconstructed, including person marking, status
marking, voice marking, verb classes, transitivity, and the aspectual system. Morphosyn-
tactic changes in the verbal complex are also noted for each of the daughter languages.
[Keywords: Mayan, Yukatekan, diachronic morphosyntax, language contact]
1. Introduction. The Yukatekan branch of the Mayan language family

includes Mopan, Itzaj, Lakantun, and Yukateko proper, language varieties
spoken in the Maya lowlands of Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize (see gure
1). Yukatekan languages have a split-ergative person-marking system on the
verb, with an ergative system in the completive aspect and optative mood
(dependent status) but a nominative system in the noncompletive aspects
(Bricker 1981; 1986). In this paper, I provide an overview of the verbal com-
plex for the entire Yukatekan group, including Northern and Southern La-
kantun, describing what changes have occurred and approximately when
they occurred in the various Yukatekan language varieties. In recent papers
(Hoing 2002; 2004), I have argued for the model of genetic relationship
of the family diagrammed in gure 1, supporting Kaufmans (1991) model.
Notable features of the model are that Mopan splits rst, and that Northern
and Southern Lakantun are distinct branches, with Northern Lakantun more
1
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American
Anthropological Association in Chicago. I am grateful to Keren Rice, her associate editor, and
two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. I follow
the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala and the Mayan linguists of Oxlajuuj Keej Maya
Ajtziib in using the language names Yukateko, Lakantun, and Itzaj instead of Yucatec,
Lacandon, and Itz, respectively. I take no strong position on whether these language varieties
should be considered different dialects or different languages, but do think that Yukateko and
Mopan are the most different. There is also dialect variation within Yukateko (Academia de la
Lengua Maya de Yucatn 2002). The dialect described in this paper is primarily from the north-
eastern region of the Yucatn Peninsula.
[IJAL, vol. 72, no. 3, July 2006, pp. 36796]

2006 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
00207071/2006/72030003$10.00
367
368 international journal of american linguistics
a.d. 1250
a.d. 1450
Kowoj
a.d. 1650
a.d. 2000 Mopan Itzaj Northern Southern Yukateko

Lakantun Lakantun
Fig. 1.The Yukatekan language family.
closely related to Itzaj, while Southern Lakantun is closely related to Yu-

kateko proper. There appears to have been a series of migrations from the
Petn in present-day Guatemala to northern Yucatn and from the north to
the south, resulting in a complex picture of shared innovations and contact-
induced changes. A group of Itzaj Maya migrated from Chichen Itz, Yu-
catn, to the Petn around 1200 according to interpretations of the Yukateko
Maya books of Chilam Balam (Schele and Mathews 1998:204), followed by
a group of Kowoj Maya from Mayapn, Yucatn, in the sixteenth century or
earlier (Jones 1998:817). Archaeological evidence in the Petn appears to
corroborate such a scenario (Rice et al. 1998, Pugh 2001; 2003, and Cecil
2001). Colonial sources refer to other Yukatekan groups as well, including
the Kejache and Ikaiche (see gure 2). After the conquest of the Itzajs in
1697, there were resettlements of all of the Yukatekan groups in Petn in
mission towns, with members of different groups thrown together, as well as
ight by refugee Yukatekan groups into the Lakantun forest (see gure 3).
In this article, I provide linguistic evidence for this scenario through an
investigation of the verbal complex, beginning with person marking (2),
verbal complex in yukatekan mayan 369
Fig. 2.Map of lowland Mayan languages in a.d. 1500.

Fig. 3.Map of lowland Mayan languages after a.d. 1700.

status marking (3), voice marking (4), and aspectual markers (5), followed
by concluding comments (6).
2. Person marking. Comparison and reconstruction of person marking

on the verb is relatively straightforward. The Set A person markers, which
always cross-reference transitive subjects and which cross-reference intran-
sitive subjects in verbs in the incompletive status, appear in table 1.2 An
example of Proto-Yukatekan incompletive verb inection appears in (1).
(1a) *W in-mach-ik-ech
inc 1sg.a-grab-its-2sg.b
I grab you
(1b) *W in-wen-el
inc 1sg.a-sleep-iis
I sleep
2
All modern Mayan forms appear in the practical orthography approved by the Academia
de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala: = [?], tz = [ts], ch = [tS], x = [S], j = [h], and = [I]. Glottal
stops are not marked in initial position. /j/ [X] and /h/ [h] appear to have merged completely
in all of the modern Yukatekan languages except Yukateko (Kaufman 1991:5 and Orie and
Bricker 2000). Reexes of both are phonetically [h] and there is no phonemic contrast in the
modern languages. In the Guatemalan practical orthography, [h] is represented by j when there
is no contrast between a glottal and velar fricative. In Proto-Yukatekan and colonial Yukateko,
there was phonemic contrast and the distinction between j and h is made in the practical or-
thography. In colonial manuscripts, word-nal h is not recorded but nal j generally is written.
In Yukateko and Southern Lakantun, long high tone is marked by an acute accent; long low
tone does not receive any accent mark. I have regularized the orthography but otherwise cite
forms as presented in the original sources, which for colonial Yukateko do not mark glottal
stops or reliably mark vowel length or tone. Much of the information in the tables is an update
and expansion of information contained in Bricker (1986), MacLeod (1987), and Kaufman
(1991). Brickers synthesis of Yukatekan verbal morphology includes original observations on
colonial and modern Yukateko. MacLeod provides a similar synthesis with original material on
Northern Lakantun. Kaufmans outline includes original observations on all varieties except
Itzaj, and in addition provides many Proto-Yukatekan reconstructions.
The following abbreviations are used in the examples: a, a.pr Set A person marker; avn ac-
tive verbal noun; b, b.pr Set B person marker; cis completive intransitive status; com com-
pletive aspect; cts completive transitive status; dep dependent status; der derived; dis
dependent intransitive status; dts dependent transitive status; dur durative aspect; excl exclu-
sive; imp imperative status; impis imperative intransitive status; impts imperative transitive
status; inc incompletive aspect; incl inclusive; inch inchoative; iis intransitive incompletive
status; intr intransitive; its incompletive transitive status; oblig obligative aspect; perf per-
fect; posit positional; rt root; sub subordinator; trn transitive. Capital letters are used to indi-
cate root forms.
372
TABLE 1
Set A Person Marking
Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Yukatekan1 Yukateko2 Yukateko3 Lakantun4 Lakantun5 Itzaj6 Mopan7
1s *in-C ~ (in)w-V in-C ~ (in)w- in(w)- in(w)- in(w)- in(w)- in(w)-
2s *a-C ~ aw-V a(w)- a(w)- a(w)- a(w)- a(w)- a(w)-
3s *u-C ~ (u)y-V u- ~ (u)y- u- ~ (u)y- u- ~ (u)y- (u)y- u- ~ (u)y- u(y)-
1p dual/excl *ka-C ~ k-V ka-C ~ k-V k- k(k)- (dual) ( j)k- (dual) ki(w)- ti(w)-
in(w)- . . . -oob (excl) in(w)- . . . -o (excl)
1p incl *k(a)- . . . -ex k(a)- . . . -(e)ex k- . . . -eex k(k) . . . -ex ( j)k- . . . -eex ki(w)- . . . -eex ti(w)- . . . -eex8
2p *a(w)- . . . -ex a(w)- . . . -(e)ex a(w)- . . . -eex a(w)- . . . ex a(w)- . . . -eex a(w)- . . . -eex a(w)- . . . -eex
3p *u(y)- . . . ob u(y)- . . . (o)ob u(y)- . . . oob u(y)- . . . oob u(y)- . . . o u(y)- . . . oo u(y)- . . . oo
1Kaufman (1990:71; 1991:9).
2Bricker (1986:21), McQuown (1967:230), and Smailus (1989:12). The rst-person plural form appears as ka- before consonant-initial stems and k- before vowel-initial stems.
3Blair (1965:127), Blair and Vermont-Salas (1965:2830), Bricker (1986:21), and Hanks (1990:156).
4Canger (1995:67). The rst-person plural forms appears as k- before consonant-initial stems and kk- before vowel-initial stems.
5
Bruce (1968:48). The rst-person plural form appears as k- before consonant-initial stems and jk- before vowel-initial stems.
6
Hoing (2000:35).
7
ALMG (2001:88), Schumann (1997:89), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976:910).
8
The inclusive form is now rare in Mopan (Ulrich and Ulrich 1986:2). The parenthesized forms with the glides w and y occur before vowel-initial stems.
international journal of american linguistics
It is of some interest to note that the inclusiveexclusive distinction for rst-

person plural pronouns is reconstructible for Proto-Yukatekan, and that con-
tact between Northern and Southern Lakantun seems to be reected in a
metathesized form of rst-person plural marker (k-, j-). Lakantun varieties
are also unique in their distinction between dual (k-, aj-) and exclusive
(in[w]- . . . -o[ob]) rst-person markers. Mopan innovated the rst-person
plural form, *k(a-) > ti(w)- (cf. Kaufman 1990:71), and the vowel change in
Itzaj (*ka- > ki-) may reect contact with Mopan. Similar patterns of allo-
morphic variation conditioned by consonant-initial or vowel-initial stems
appear throughout the family.
Set B person markers, which cross-reference all transitive direct objects
and intransitive subjects of verbs in the completive and dependent statuses,
are shown in table 2. Proto-Yukatekan examples of completive verb inec-
tion appear in (2).
(2a) *W in-mach-aj-ech
com 1sg.a-grab-cts-2sg.b
I grabbed you
(2b) *W wen-ih-ech
com sleep-cis-2sg.b
you slept
The third-person singular person marker -i( j) in Northern Lakantun, Itzaj,
and Mopan is a reinterpretation of a completive intransitive status marker
(cf. 2b). The lengthened vowel in rst- and second-person markers in Itzaj
and Mopan is the result of assimilation with a vowel-glottal consonant sufx
in the completive and dependent statuses (either the cis -ij or the dts -V; cf.
tables 3 and 4). These varieties also share a distinctive third-person plural
person marker (-[o]o), similarities that are interpreted here as the result of
contact between Mopan and Itzaj, and then migration from the Petn to the
Lakantun forest after the conquest of the Itzajs in 1697. Northern and South-
ern Lakantun are unique in their rst-person dual and rst-person exclusive
markers, also indicating contact.
3. Status marking. Status-marking sufxes encode information about as-

pect and transitivity. Transitive status-marking sufxes are shown in table 3.
An example of a Proto-Yukatekan root transitive verb in all statuses appears
in (3).
(3a) *W in-mach-ik-W
I grab him/her
374
TABLE 2
Set B Person Marking

1st.sg *-en -en -en -en -en -(e)en -(e)en
2nd.sg *-ech -ech -ech -ech -ech -(e)ech -(e)ech
3rd.sg *-W -W -W -W -W, -i8 -W, ij8 -W, -i8
1pl.dual/excl *-on -(o)on -oon -on (dual) -oon (dual) -oon -oon
-en-oob (excl) -en-o (excl)
1pl.incl *-on-ex -(o)on-(e)ex -oon-eex -on-ex -oon-eex -oon-eex -oon-eex9
2pl *-ex -(e)ex -eex -ech-ex -eex -eex -eex
3pl *-ob -(o)ob -oob -oob (-ij)-o8 -oo -oo
1Kaufman (1991:9).
2Bricker (1986:21), McQuown (1967:230), and Smailus (1989:12).
3Bricker (1986:21).
4Canger (1995:7).
5Bruce (1968:49).
6Hoing (2000:36).
7ALMG (2001:88), Schumann (1997:90), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1986:2).
8The -i( j) sufx was a perfective marker historically (Bricker 1986:23).
9The inclusive form is now rare in Mopan (Ulrich and Ulrich 1986:2).
TABLE 3
Transitive Status Markers

INC rt.trn & der.trn *-ik -ik -ik -ik -ik -ik -ik
COM rt.trn & der.trn *-aj -aj -aj -aj -aj -aj -aj
DEP rt.trn *-Vb -Vb, -W ~ -e -ej -ej -ej -V -V()
-t trn, -es trn *-e(h), -W -e, -W -ej, -ej ~ -W -ej, -W -ej, -W
IMP rt.trn *-V -V, -W ~ -e -ej -ej -ej -V -V
-t trn, -s trn *-e(h), -W -e, -W -ej, -ej ~ -W -ej, -ej -ej, -ej -ej, -W -e( j), -e( j) ~ -W
Perfect *-m-aj -m(-a[j]) -maj -mn -man ~ -mn -m-aj -ma
1
Kaufman (1991:29, 31).
2
Bricker (1986:26), MacLeod (1987:g. 45), McQuown (1967:23031, 23537), and Smailus (1989:4050). In the imperative and dependent
statuses, the -e sufx occurs in utterance-nal position (McQuown 1967:23637).
3Bricker (1986:26) and Hoing and Ojeda (1994).
4Canger (1995:8, 10, 1617).
5Bruce (1968:95; 1974) and MacLeod (1987:g. 25).
6Hoing (2000:52).
7ALMG (2001:154203), Kaufman (1991:31), Schumann (1997:12334), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1986:3435).
verbal complex in yukatekan mayan
375
(3b) *W in-mach-aj-W
com 1sg.a-grab-cts-3sg.b
I grabbed him/her
(3c) *ka in-mach-ab-W
sub 1sg.a-grab-dts-3sg.b
that I grab him/her
(3d ) *mach-a-W
grab-impts-3sg.b
grab him/her!
(3e) *W in-mach-m-aj-W
com 1sg.a-grab-perf-cts-3sg.b
I have grabbed him/her
Dependent status markers are interesting with regard to genetic and con-
tact relations. A -Vb dependent transitive status marker for root transitive
verbs is reconstructible for Proto-Yukatekan and documented in colonial
Yukateko. In Proto-Yukatekan, transitive verbs derived from active verbal
nouns with -t were marked by an -e(h) sufx in the dependent status, while
transitives derived from intransitive roots with the causative marker -es
had zero-marking. Since the colonial period, the -e( j) dts marker has
spread in Yukateko and, after Yukatekos moved into the Southern Lakan-
tun forest, reached Northern Lakantun. Only Mopan and Itzaj have retained
three distinct dependent status markers for these different classes of transi-
tive stems.
Perfect marking on Proto-Yukatekan is not certain. Rather than -m-aj,
analyzed as a perfect and a completive status marker, the perfect transitive
status marker may have been simply -ma, which was later reanalyzed (cf.
Kaufman 1991:31 and Hoing 2000:16970). The Lakantun perfect forms
with man ~ mn appear to be cognate with Itzaj perfect participial forms
with the sufxes m-aj-aan (cf. Hoing 2000:170).
Root intransitive status marking is largely unproblematic and is sum-
marized in table 4. In Southern and Northern Lakantun, the incompletive
status marker has the shape -Vn when the root ends in a nasal consonant
(Canger 1995:11 and MacLeod 1987:g. 27). In Southern Lakantun, the
status marker has the shape -ar when the root shape is CeC or CoC and -an
when the root shape is CeN or CoN (Canger 1995:11). It seems very likely
that the Proto-Yukatekan completive intransitive status marker ended in h,
given that it does in both modern Yukateko and Itzaj. Intransitive perfect
forms all include -aan. In Proto-Yukatekan, colonial Yukateko, and mod-
ern Yukateko, intransitive perfect forms could be additionally marked by
TABLE 4
Root Intransitive Status Marking

Incompletive *-Vl, -el, W -Vl, -el, W -Vl, -el, W -Vr, -Vn, W -Vl, -Vn, -er, -Vl, (-el ), -W -Vl, -el, -W
-ar, -an -en
Completive *-i(h) -i -ij ~ W -W -ij ~ -i (-ij) (-i )
Dependent *-Vk -Vk -Vk -Vk -Vk -Vk -Vk
Imperative *-en -en -en -en -en -en -en
Perfect *-an (-aj)-(a)an -(a)j-aan -an (?) -aan -aan -aan
1Kaufman (1991:31).
2Bricker (1986:27), MacLeod (1987:gs. 46, 50), McQuown (1967:23538), and Smailus (1989:2124, 130).
3Bricker (1986:27) and MacLeod (1987:g. 27).
4Canger (1995:11, 23).
6Hoing (2000:50, 166).
7ALMG (2001:119 49), Kaufman (1991:31), Schumann (1997:11221), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1986:1213, 1516, 1821, 36).
377
an -aj sufx attached to the stem before the perfect marker, e.g., bin-aj-an
he has gone (McQuown 1967:240 and Smailus 1989:13233; cf. tables 5,
6, and 8). While this pattern does occur in modern Yukateko (Bricker et al.
1998:373), it does not occur in the other members of the Yukatekan branch,
so its reconstruction is uncertain on the basis of Yukatekan data. An ex-
ample of a Proto-Yukatekan root intransitive verb in all statuses appears
in (4).
(4a) *W a-wen-el
inc 2a-sleep-iis
you sleep
(4b) *W wen(-ih)-ech
com sleep-cis-2sg.b
you slept
(4c) *ka wen-ek-ech
sub sleep-dis-2sg.b
that you sleep
(4d ) *wen-en
sleep-impis
sleep!
(4e) *wen(-aj)-aan-ech
sleep(-cis)-perf-2sg
you have slept
Status sufxes for intransitive stems derived from positional roots are
shown in table 5. Note that according to this analysis, the perfect form
began to shorten by colonial Yukateko times. In Northern Lakantun, a
roughly equivalent stative form with the sufx -Vkbal is equally common
and in Southern Lakantun, forms with -an are largely absent. Examples of
status marking on Proto-Yukatekan positionals are given in (5).
(5a) *W u-chuy-tal
inc 3a-hang-posit/iis
s/he hangs
(5b) *W chuy-l-aj(-ih)-W
com hang-posit-cis(-cis)-3sg.b
s/he hung
TABLE 5
Status Marking on Positional Stems

Incompletive *-taal -tal -tal -tar -tal -tal -tal
Completive *-l-aj(-i[h]) -l-aj(-i ) -l-aj-ij -r-j-ij -l-aj-ij -l-aj-ij -l-aj-i
Dependent *-l-aak -l-ak ~ -l-aj-ik -l-ak -r-ak -l-ak -l-ak -l-ak
Imperative *-l-en -l-en -l-en -r-en -l-en -l-en -l-en
Perfect *-l-aj-an (-l-aj)-an (-l )-aan (-Vk-bar) -aan, l-aj-aan (-l-aj)-aan
(*-Vk-bal ) (-Vk-bal ) (-Vk-bal ) -an (-Vk-bal )
1Kaufman (1991:31).
2Bricker (1986:29), MacLeod (1987:gs. 47, 50), McQuown (1967:23536), and Smailus (1989:3132, 13233).
3Bricker (1986:29).
4Canger (1995:2223).
5Bruce (1968:7273; 1974).
6Hoing (2000:168).
7ALMG (2001:22325), Kaufman (1991:31), Schumann (1997:12333), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976:910; 1986:78).
379
(5c) *ka chuy-l-ak-W

sub hang-posit-dis-3sg.b
that s/he hang
(5d ) *chuy-l-en
hang-posit/impis
hang!
(5e) *chuy-l-aj-an-W
hang-posit-cis-perf-3sg
s/he has hung
Inchoative or versive intransitive stems can be derived from adjective,
participle, and noun stems. Their status marking is shown in table 6. There
were two ways of marking inchoatives in Proto-Yukateko, possibly relating
to a contrast between temporary or extrinsic changes of state (with -taal in
the incompletive status) and permanent or intrinsic changes of state (with
-ch-aj-al in the incompletive status; cf. Bricker 1986:2930). Inchoative
marking is very similar to positional marking, as a comparison of (6) and
(5) shows.
(6a) *W y-utz-ch-aj-al
inc 3a-good-inch-intr-iis
s/he is getting well
(6b) *W utz-ch-aj-ih-W
com good-inch-intr-cis-3sg.b
s/he got well
(6c) *ka utz-ch-aj-ak-W
sub good-inch-intr-dis-3sg.b
that s/he get well
(6d ) *utz-ch-aj-aan-W
good-inch-intr-cis-perf-3sg
s/he has gotten well
4. Voice marking. Many root transitive verbs also have mediopassive

(middle) voice forms that take the same status markers as intransitive root
forms (compare tables 4 and 7). In such mediopassive forms, proto *CVC
root transitives become CVhC. The expected reexes occur in all modern
language varieties except Northern Lakantun and Itzaj (and occasionally
Southern Lakantun), which share the innovation of shortening the root
TABLE 6
Status Marking on Inchoative (Versive) Stems

Incompletive *-taal -tal -tal -tar -tal -tal -tal
*-ch-aj-al -ch-aj-al -ch-aj-al ch-j-r ch-l ~ -ch-j-r
-(a)j-al -(a)j-al
Completive *-aj(-i[h]) -aj(-i ) -(a)j-ij -ij -j-ij -aj-ij -aj-i
*-ch-aj(-i[h]) -ch-aj(-i ) -ch-aj(-ij) -ch-j -ch-j-i
Dependent *-aak -ak -ak -ch-ak ~ -ak -ak
*-ch(-aj)ak -ch-aj-ak -ch-aj-ak -ch-j-k
-ak
Perfect *-aj-an -aan -an -aan -aj-aan (-aj)-aan
*-ch-aj-an -ch-aj-aan
1Kaufman (1991:32).
2Bricker (1986:2930), McQuown (1967:23536), MacLeod (1987:gs. 46, 47, 50), and Smailus (1989:30). Perfect forms are not documented.
3Bricker (1986:30) and Bricker et al. (1998:348).
4Canger (1995:19, 22).

6Hoing (2000:60).
7ALMG (2001:207), Schumann (1997:11415, 120, 122), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:9).
381
vowel in the mediopassive voice (CC roots change to CaC).3 In Southern

Lakantun, transitive roots with the underlying forms CoC and CeC appear as
CoCar and CeCar respectively in the mediopassive voice forms, but
change to CaC in transitive forms (e.g., kubosar it oats but kubasik
s/he oats it; kujekar it loses branches but kujakik s/he prunes it (cf.
table 4 and Canger 1995).
An examination of passive voice marking shown in table 8 reveals an in-
novation in Yukateko and Lakantun for root transitives. The passive voice
marker -b metathesized with the nal consonant of the root, resulting in a
CV(V)C stem shape (Justeson 1989:30 and Kaufman 1991:3031). Only
Itzaj and Mopan retain the original -b passive marker sufx. Similarly,
Yukateko and Lakantun have generalized the root transitive passive perfect
pattern to derived transitive stems. These changes are interpreted as shared
innovations between Yukateko and Southern Lakantun, and then contact
between Northern and Southern Lakantun, as the Southern Lakantuns are
relatively recent immigrants from the Yucatn to the Lakantun forest. There
does not appear to be a passive imperative distinct from the dependent sta-
tus (optative) form. Examples of Proto-Yukatekan passive marking are given
in (7).
(7a) *W u-mach-b-al
inc 3a-grab-pas-iis
he is grabbed
(7b) *W mach-b-i(h)-W
com grab-pas-cis-3sg.b
he was grabbed
(7c) *ka mach-bak-W
sub grab-pas-dis-3sg.b
that he be grabbed
(7d ) *W mach-an-W
sub grab-perf-3sg.b
he has been grabbed
The antipassive voice marker -n appears in all statuses except the incom-
pletive, where the antipassive form is identical to the active verbal noun
3
The vowel in Itzaj, Mopan, and Lakantun corresponds to a short a in Yukateko, while
the vowel a in Itzaj, Mopan, and Lakantun corresponds to aa in Yukateko (Fisher 1973, Just-
eson 1986, and Hoing 2002). Brown and Wichmann (2004) have recently proposed a more
complex account of Mayan syllabic nuclei, in which these correspondences are problematic.
TABLE 7
Mediopassive (Middle) Voice Marking for Transitive Roots

Incompletive *CVhC-Vl *CVhC-Vl Cv3VC-Vl C(v3)VC-Vr, -Vn CVC-Vl CVC-Vl CVVC-Vl
-ar, -an CaC-l CaC-l CaaC-l
CaC-r (~ -ar)
1Kaufman (1991:10).
2MacLeod (1987:g. 48), McQuown (1967:236, 240), and Smailus (1989:2123).
3Bricker et al. (1998:333) and MacLeod (1987: g. 27).
4Canger (1995:1011, 13) (trn CaC < CoC-ar, CeC-ar, trn CC > CaC-r, -Vn sufxes appear on roots ending in a nasal consonant).
5Bruce (1968:97101; 1974).
6Hoing (2000:56).
7ALMG (2001:120) and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976).
383
384
TABLE 8
Passive Voice Marking

INC rt.trn *-b-Vl CVC-Vl, CVb-Vl8 CVVC-Vl, CVVb-Vl8 CVC-ar, CVb-Vr8 CVVC-Vr, CVVb-Vr8 -b-Vl -b-Vl
-t trn, -es trn *-(a)b-Vl -(a)b-Vl -aal -ar -aar/-aaj -b-Vl -b-Vl
COM rt.trn *-b(-i[h]) CVC-i, CVb-i8 CVVC-ij, VVb-i( j)8 CVC-ab, CVb8 CVVC-i, CVVb-i8 -b-ij -b-i
-t trn, -es trn *-(a)b(-i[h]) -(a)b-i -aab-ij -ab -aab(-i ) -b-ij -b-i
DEP rt.trn *-b-Vk CVC-Vk, CVb-Vk8 CVVC-Vk, CVVb-Vk8 CVC-ak, CVb-Vk8 CVVC-Vk, CVVb-Vk8 -b-Vk -b-Vk
-t trn. -es trn *-(a)b-Vk -(a)b-Vk -aak -ak -aak -b-Vk -b-Vk
PERF rt.trn *-an -(a)an -aan -an -aan -aan -aan
-t trn, -es trn *(-aj)-an (-aj)-(a)an -aan -an -aan -aan, -aj-aan (-aj)-aan, -aj-aan
1Kaufman (1991:31).
2Bricker (1986:28), Kaufman (1991:30), MacLeod (1987:gs. 48, 50), McQuown (1967:23435), and Smailus (1989:2223, 5456).
3Bricker (1986:28) and MacLeod (1987: gs. 31, 33).
4Canger (1995:12, 17).
5Bruce (1968:72, 75) and MacLeod (1987:gs. 31, 33).
6Hoing (2000:5758, 16566).
7Kaufman (1991:31), Schumann (1997:14751), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:47, 16, 36).
8For CV roots.
(avn) form of the root, as shown in table 9. Active verbal nouns refer to
actions and are a signicant word class in Mayan languages. They refer
to such activities as laughing, dancing, shouting, singing, and writ-
ing (Kaufman 1990:103). In Proto-Yukatekan, active verbal nouns were
derived from CVC root transitive verbs by lengthening the vowel, while in-
transitive verb roots take the causative sufx -(e)s and the detransitive suf-
x -aj as active verbal nouns or antipassives. Examples of Proto-Yukatekan
antipassive marking appear in (8).
(8a) trn root *MACH grab
*W in-maach-W
inc 1sg.a-grab-iis
I grab
(8b) *W maach-n-aj-en
com grab-ap-cis-1sg.b
I grabbed
(8c) avn root *BOOL payment
*W in-bool-W
inc 1sg.a-pay-iis
I pay
(8d ) *W bool-n-aj-en
com pay-ap-cis-1sg.b
I paid
(8e) intr root *OK enter
*W w-ok-s-aj-W
inc 1sg.a-enter-caus-dtr-iis
I insert
(8f ) *W ok-s-aj-n-aj-en
com enter-caus-dtr-ap-cis-1sg.b
I inserted
In Mopan, the -n antipassive has all but disappeared. It still occurs with
a few verbs, such as wy dream and alka run in the completive aspect
(ALMG 2001:138), as shown in (9).
(9a) *W wy-n-een
com dream-ap-1sg.b
I dreamed
386
TABLE 9
Antipassive Voice Marking

INC rt.trn = avn CVVC = avn CVC = avn CVVC = avn CVVC = avn CV(V)C = avn CV(V)C = avn CVC
-t-trn, -s-trn = avn, s-aj = avn, -s-aj = avn, s-aj = avn, -s-aj = avn, -s-aj = avn, -s-aj = avn, -s-aj
COM -n-aj[-ih] -n-aj(-i ) -n-aj(-ij) -n-j -n-j(-i) -n-aj(-ij) -n-i8
DEP -na-k ~ -n-aj-Vk -n-ak -n-ak -n-k -n-ak
IMP -n-en -n-en -n-en -n-en -n-en -n-en -n-en
PERF -n-aj-an -n-aj-aan -n-aj-aan -n-aan
1
Kaufman (1991:31).
2
Bricker (1986:27), McQuown (1967:234), and Smailus (1989:23, 35, 5253).
3
Bricker (1986:27).
4
Canger (1995:10).
5
Bruce (1968:63; 1974) and MacLeod (1987:g. 27).
6Hoing (2000:57, 169).
7ALMG (2001:13738), Kaufman (1991:31), Schumann (1997:12021, 15156), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1986:2123).
8In Mopan, the -n antipassive only occurs on a few verbs.
(9b) *W alka-n-een
com run-ap-1sg.b
I ran
Most Mopan verbs only appear in the antipassive voice with incomple-
tive status forms (ALMG 2001:137ff., Schumann 1997:15152, and Ulrich
and Ulrich 1976), leading Danziger (1996) to characterize the pattern as ac-
tiveinactive, with the formerly antipassive forms as the active set. Mopan
examples of incompletive antipassives are given in (10) (after Schumann
1997:152 and Ulrich and Ulrich 1986:2223).
(10a) trn root CHK chop
tan a-chk
dur 2a-chop
you are chopping
(10b) avn root AWAT shout
tan aw-awat
dur 2a-shout
you are shouting
(10c) intr root KIM die
tan a-kim-s-aj
dur 2a-die-caus-dtr
you are butchering
Note that unlike other Yukatekan language varieties, the vowels of tran-
sitive roots do not lengthen in Mopan. Only causatives have overt detransi-
tive marking with the sufx -aj. The work of indicating other aspects and
statuses for antipassives has shifted to aspectual auxiliaries, to be described
in 5.
5. Aspectual markers. There are several types of aspect markers in

Yukatekan languages. The simplest aspect markers are uninected parti-
cles (see table 10). The particle k- now obligatorily marks the incomple-
tive/habitual aspect on verbs in all modern varieties except Mopan and
Northern Lakantun, which retain zero-marking (Kaufman 1991:35, 40). The
particle t- marks the completive aspect on transitive verbs in all modern
varieties except Mopan, which again retains zero-marking. Since these as-
pect markers rst appeared after the colonial Yukateko period, the similari-
ties among Yukateko, Northern Lakantun, and Itzaj are assumed to be due
to contact, while the similarities of Yukateko and Southern Lakantun may
be the result of shared innovations. Completive marking on intransitive
verbs is zero in all varieties except modern Yukateko, which has innovated
a j intransitive completive marker (Kaufman 1991:40), and Northern Lakan-

tun, where j has been reported to be optionally present (MacLeod 1987:g.
62). Completive and incompletive marking in Proto-Yukatekan are shown
in (11).
(11a) *W in-mach-ik-ech
I grab you
(11b) *W in-wen-el
inc 1sg.a-sleep-iis
I sleep
(11c) *W in-mach-aj-ech
com 1sg.a-cts-2sg.b
I grabbed you
(11d ) *W wen(-ih)-en
com sleep(-cis)-1sg.b
I slept
A set of aspectual adverbs that occur with verbs in the incompletive
status is listed in table 11. Many of these may be inected as inchoative
(versive) verbs in the completive and dependent statuses, as in the Proto-
Yukatekan examples in (12) (cf. table 6 and Hoing 2000:47 48).
(12a) *yaan-W u-wen-el
oblig-3sg.b 3a-sleep-iis
s/he has to sleep
(12b) *yaan-aj-ih-W u-wen-el
oblig-cis-cis-3sg.b 3a-sleep-iis
s/he had to sleep
(12c) *ka yaan-aak-W u-wen-el
sub oblig desid-dis-3sg.b 3a-sleep-iis
that s/he would have to sleep
As shown in table 11, there is considerable sharing of these aspectual
adverbs across the family, but Mopan is the most divergent, lacking re-
exes corresponding to the necessitative, celeritive, and desiderative as-
pects. Complete information on Lakantun is lacking and many of the gaps
are likely the result of incomplete documentation.
A set of intransitive aspectual auxiliary verbs also occurs with verbs in
the incompletive status, shown in table 12. Examples of the Proto-Yukate-
kan inceptive auxiliary kahj appear in (13).
TABLE 10
Aspect Marking with Particles

Incompletive
Habituative *W, *walak (li )k-, walak k- k- W k- W, walak
Negative *ma taach ma taach ma t- ma ma (taax) ma (taach)
Completive
Transitive *W W t- t- t- t- W
Intransitive *W W j W W~j W W
1Kaufman (1991:35, 40).
2McQuown (1967:230, 243) and Smailus (1989:17).
3Bricker
et al. (1998:176, 32930).
4Canger (1995:10, 16).
5Bruce (1968:6062, 111), MacLeod (1987:g. 62), and Kaufman (1991:36).
6Hoing (2000:52, 186, 436).
7ALMG (2001:12223, 13536, 15455, 19495), Kaufman (1991:38), Schumann (1997:11315, 120, 12426, 13233, 170), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:2123).
389
390
TABLE 11
Aspectual Adverbs with the Incompletive Status

Progressive *tahn tan tan tan t(an) taan tan, tanak
Prox com ? tan t- . . . -e toj tantoj tan(-b.pr)-to
Necessitative *kabeht kabet kabet kabeet
Intensive *chich chich chich chich
Celeritive *sehb seb seb seeb seeb
Assurative *hel . . . -e he . . . -e j(el ) . . . e je je-(le) . . . e jed eek
Desiderative *taak tak(itak) taak tak tak
Customarily *suuk (?) suuk suk suk suk (?)
Obligative *yaan yan yaan yan ya(a)n yan
Abilitative *pahtal patal patal patal p(a)atal
1Kaufman (1991:33).
2Barrera Vsquez et al. (1980), McQuown (1967:23233, 244), and Smailus (1989:1820, 8789, 95).
3Bricker et al. (1998:331) and Kaufman (1991:40 45).
4Canger (1995).
5Bruce (1968:63, 65, 78, 81; 1975:219) and Kaufman (1991:36).
6Hoing (2000:52).
7ALMG (2001:12428), Kaufman (1991:35, 3839), Schumann (1997:140, 171), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:41 43).
TABLE 12
Intransitive Aspectual Auxiliaries

Terminative *tzok tzok tz(ook) tzook (?) tzo(o)k tzok
Terminative *hom jom jom job
Inceptive *hop hop joop jop
Inceptive *kahj kaj kaj kaj kaj
Past denite uch (?) uchik (?) uch(i )
Conditional *uhchak uchak uchak (?) uchak uchak uchak
Hypothetical *uhchuk uchuk uchuk (?) chak uchuk
Future k-a.pr-j k- bel(ik) a.pr
bin a.pr k(aj) kaaj ti Vintr, a.pr Vtr
1
Kaufman (1991:33, 46 47).
2
McQuown (1967:233) and Smailus (1989:8889).
3Bricker et al. (1998:20, 331) and Kaufman (1991:33, 46 47).
4Canger (1995).
5Bruce (1968:81, 93, 95, 99, 1012, 104; 1975:219) and Kaufman (1991:36).
6Hoing (2000:48 49, 52, 365).
7ALMG (2001:12933, 142 43, 18492), Kaufman (1991:35, 3839), Schumann (1997:119, 173), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:4651).
391
(13a) *W u-kahj-al u-wen-el

inc 3a-begin-iis 3a-sleep-iis
s/he begins to sleep
(13b) *W kahj-ih-W u-wen-el
com begin-cis-3sg.b 3a-sleep-iis
s/he began to sleep
(13c) *ka kahj-ak-W u-wen-el
sub begin-dis-3sg.b 3a-sleep-iis
that s/he begin to sleep
Mopan differs notably from the other varieties in its use of aspectual
auxiliaries. It lacks the terminative tzok and inceptive jop, found in the
others. The difference in the use of uch is also signicant. Most varieties
have the frozen form(s) corresponding to *uhchak and/or *uhchuk as an
epistemic marker indicating the possibility of the state or action indicated
by the verb. Mopan, however, frequently uses UCH in both its completive
and dependent forms with antipassives, as in (14) (Schumann 1997:152; cf.
Danziger 1996). Uchuk is interpreted as an imperative form by Schumann
(1997:153) and the ALMG (2001:141 42).
(14a) tan in-chk
dur 1sg.a-chop
I am chopping
(14b) uch-i in-chk
happen-cis/3sg.b 1sg.a-chop
I chopped
(14c) uch-uk-W a-chk!
happen-dis-3sg 2a-chop
Chop!
Mopan is innovative in this regard and compensates for the loss of the
-n antipassive, which previously occurred in the completive and depen-
dent statuses, by using the auxiliary uch happen, with incompletive status
forms (cf. example 8).
In addition, in Mopan alone, tan, tanak, uch, and uchuk are inected
with Set B person markers for the second- and third-person plural forms
(Schumann 1997:12627, 15253 and ALMG 2001:12526, 139 42), as in
(15). tan in the complex aspectual marker tan-to immediate past is in-
ected with Set B person markers throughout (ALMG 2001:12728).
(15a) tan-eex a-cheej

dur-2pl.b 2a-smile
you (plural) are smiling
(15b) tan-oo u-cheej
dur-3pl.b 3a-smile
they are smiling
(15c) uch-eex a-cheej
happen-2pl.b 2a-smile
you (plural) smiled
(15d ) uch-oo u-cheej
happen-3pl.b 3a-smile
they smiled
There is also a series of aspectual markers that may appear with a verb
in the dependent status, shown in table 13. With this set of auxiliaries, all
transitive verbs appear in the dependent status. Some intransitives also ap-
pear in the dependent status, as with the remote past *uhch and the ante-
rior past *sahm. Other intransitives occur as innitive forms with the verb
in the incompletive status following the subordinator ti, as shown in the
Proto-Yukatekan forms in (16). A comparison of tables 12 and 13 shows
some minor differences in status-marking systems, particularly with incep-
tive markers. There are also some differences in the status markers associ-
ated with auxiliaries. Mopan, for example, is unique in having abilitative
constructions in the dependent status (Kaufman 1991:38).
(16a) *bin-el u-kaaj u-bol-t-eh
go-iis 3a-go 3a-pay-trn-dts
s/he is going to pay it
(16b) *bin-el u-kaaj ti johk-ol
go-iis 3a-go sub go.out-iis
s/he is going to go out
6. Conclusion. An overview of the verbal complex conrms previous

research indicating that Mopan is the most divergent member of the Yukate-
kan branch. In some ways it is conservative, for example, in retaining zero-
marking for the incompletive and completive statuses. In other ways, it is
more innovative, particularly in having lost the -n antipassive marker, and
in its system of aspectual markers. On the other hand, certain similarities
among Itzaj, Northern Lakantun, and Mopan, such as the third-person sin-
gular -ij and the third-person plural (-[o]o) person markers, and others be-
394
TABLE 13
Aspectual Markers with the Dependent Status

Optative kaah ka k ka ka
Future *binel a.pr kaaj bin, benel a.pr bin, k-a.pr-n bin, k-a.pr-n, bel a.pr-kaaj ti bel(ik) a.pr-
ti Vintr-iis, a.pr kaaj ti Vintr-iis, bin a.pr-k(aaj) Vintr-iis, a.pr kaaj ti Vintr-iis,
Vtr-dts a.pr Vtr-dts ti a.pr-Vintr-iis, Vtr-dts a.pr Vtr-dts
a.pr-Vtr-dts
Inceptive hop ti Vintr-iis, kap ti Vintr-iis, kaj ti Vintr-iis,
a.pr Vtr-dts a.pr-Vtr-dts a.pr-Vtr-dts
Terminative job ti Vintr-iis,
a.pr-Vtr-dts
Remote Past *uhch uch uch uchij uchi
Anterior Past *sahm(e) sam(e) san saam (?) samij sami
Present Perfective tzook
Abilitative p(a)atal
1Kaufman (1991:33, 44, 48).
2MacLeod (1987:g. 60) and Smailus (1989:21, 80, 90, 94).
3Bricker et al. (1998:33233).
4Canger (1995).
5Bruce (1968:9495; 1974), Kaufman (1991:48), and MacLeod (1987:g. 62).
6Hoing (2000:159, 372, 380).

7ALMG (2001:12933, 18288), Kaufman (1991:35, 38), MacLeod (1987:g. 63), Schumann (1997:11819), and Ulrich and Ulrich (1976; 1986:44 48).
tween Yukateko, Lakantun and Itzaj, such as innovations of completive and

incompletive aspect markers, and still others between Northern and South-
ern Lakantun, such as changes in rst-person plural Set A person markers,
suggest contacts after diversication. Overall, both linguistic and ethnohis-
toric evidence suggests repeated movements and contacts among Yukatekan
groups over the last millenium or more. After 1700, Mayas in the Peten,
including Itzaj, Kowoj, and Mopan Mayas, were resettled in mission towns
(Jones 1998:387ff.) resulting in mixing of groups. On the north shore of
Lake Petn, Itzaj descendants of mission town groups are the modern Itzaj
Maya, while to the south they are the modern Mopan Maya (see gure 3).
At the time the missions were established, refugee groups, likely including
Itzaj, Mopan, Kowoj, and Kehache Maya, ed to the Lakantun forest mix-
ing with other refugees, and the Northern Lakantun are their descendants.
Speakers of Southern Lakantun, which appears closest to Yukateko, are
likely descendants of other Yukateko refugees.
REFERENCES
Academia de la Lengua Maya de Yucatn, A.C. 2002. Diccionario Maya Popular. Mrida:
Academia de la Lengua Maya de Yucatn, A.C.
Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala (ALMG), Comunidad Lingstica Mopan.
2001. Tojkinbeeb Tan Mopan, Gramtica Descriptiva Mopan. Guatemala: Academia de
Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala.
Barrera Vsquez, Alfredo; Juan Ramn Bastarrachea Manzano; William Brito
Sansores; Refugio Vermont Salas; David Dzul Gngora; and Domingo Dzul
Poot, eds. 1980. Diccionario maya Cordemex: mayaespaol, espaolmaya. Mrida,
Yucatn: Ediciones Cordemex.
Blair, Robert Wallace. 1964. Yucatec Maya noun and verb morpho-syntax. Ph.D. disser-
tation, Indiana University.
Blair, Robert W., and Refugio Vermont-Salas. 1965. Spoken (Yucatec) Maya. Ms.,
Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago.
Bricker, Victoria R. 1981. The Source of the Ergative Split in Yucatec Maya. Journal of
Mayan Linguistics 2:83127.
. 1986. A Grammar of Mayan Hieroglyphs. Middle American Research Institute Pub-
lication no. 56. New Orleans: Tulane University.
Bricker, Victoria R.; Eleuterio Poot Yah; and Ofelia Dzul de Poot. 1998. Dictio-
nary of the Maya Language as Spoken in Hocab, Yucatn. Salt Lake City: University of
Utah Press.
Brown, Cecil H., and Sren Wichmann. 2004. Proto-Mayan syllable nuclei. IJAL 70:12886.
Bruce, Roberto D. 1968. Gramtica del Lacandn. Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Antropologa
e Historia.
. 1974. El Libro de Chan Kin. Coleccin Cientca Lingstica no. 12. Mexico: Insti-
tuto de Antropologa e Historia.
. 1975. Lacandon Dream Symbolism. Mexico: Educiones Euroamericanas Klaus Thiele.
Canger, Una. 1995. Vocabulary of San Quintn. Ms. [originally collected in 196970].
Cecil, Leslie. 2001. Technological styles of late postclassic slipped pottery from the central Petn
lakes region, El Petn, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
Danziger, Eve. 1996. Split intransitivity and activeinactive patterning in Mopan Maya.
IJAL 62:379 414.
Fisher, William Morrison. 1973. Towards the reconstruction of Proto-Yucatec. Ph.D. dis-
sertation, University of Chicago.
Hanks, William F. 1990. Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space among the Maya.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hoing, Charles Andrew. 2000. Itzaj Maya Grammar. (With Flix Fernando Tesucn.)
Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
. 2002. Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Yukateko Mayaland. [Forthcom-
ing in Festschrift for Terrence Kaufman, ed. Thom Smith-Stark and Roberto Zavala. Phila-
delphia: John Benjamins.]
. 2004. Language and cultural contacts among Yukatekan Mayans. Collegium Antropo-
logicum 28, Supplement 1:24148. Zagreb, Croatia.
Hoing, Charles Andrew, and Fernando L. Ojeda. 1994. Yucatec Maya imperatives
and other manipulative language. IJAL 60:27294.
Jones, Grant D. 1998. The Conquest of the Last Maya Kingdom. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford
University Press.
Justeson, John S. 1986. Yucatecan phonological history. Ms.
. 1989. The representational conventions of Mayan hieroglyphic writing. Word and
Image in Maya Culture: Explorations in Language, Writing, and Representation, ed. Wil-
liam F. Hanks and Don S. Rice, pp. 2538. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Kaufman, Terrence. 1990. Algunos rasgos estructurales de los idiomas Mayances con ref-
erencia especial al Kiche. Lecturas sobre la Lingstica Maya, ed. Nora C. England and
Stephen R. Elliott, pp. 59114. La Antigua, Guatemala: Centro de Investigaciones Region-
ales de Mesoamrica.
. 1991. Notes on the structure of Yukateko and other Yukatekan languages. Ms.
MacLeod, Barbara. 1987. An Epigraphers Annotated Index to Cholan and Yukatekan
Verb Morphology. Monographs in Anthropology, no. 9. Columbia: Department of Anthro-
pology, University of Missouri.
McQuown, Norman A. 1967. Classical Yucatec (Maya). Handbook of Middle American
Indians, vol. 5, Linguistics, ed. Norman A. McQuown, pp. 201 47. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Orie, Olanike Ola, and Victoria R. Bricker. 2000. Placeless and historical laryngeals in
Yucatec Maya. IJAL 66:283317.
Pugh, Timothy. 2001. Architecture, ritual, and social identity at late postclassic Zacpetn,
Petn, Guatemala: Identication of the Kowoj. Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Illinois Uni-
versity, Carbondale.
. 2003. The exemplary center of the late postclassic Kowoj Maya. Latin American
Antiquity 14:40830.
Rice, Don S.; Prudence M. Rice; and Timothy Pugh. 1998. Settlement continuity and
change in the central Petn lakes region: The case of Zacpetn. Anatoma de Una Civiliza-
cin: Aproximaciones Interdisciplinarias a la Cultura Maya, ed. A. Ciudad et al., pp. 207
52. Madrid: Sociedad Espaola de Estudios Mayas.
Schele, Linda, and Peter Mathews. 1998. The Code of Kings: The Language of Seven
Sacred Maya Temples and Tombs. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Schumann, Otto Glvez. 1997. Introduccin al Maya Mopan. Mexico City: Universidad
Nacional Autnoma de Mexico, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropolgicas.
Smailus, Ortwin. 1989. Gramtica Maya. Hamburg: Wayasbah.
Ulrich, Mateo, and Rosemary de Ulrich. 1976. Diccionario Bilinge Maya Mopn y
Espaol, Espaol y Maya Mopan. Guatemala: Impreso de los talleres del Instituto
Lingstico de Verano en Guatemala.
. 1986. Mopan Maya Verbs. (With Charles Peck.) Guatemala City: Summer Institute
of Linguistics.

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE VERBAL COMPLEX IN YUKATEKAN MAYAN LANGUAGES. Charles Andrew Hofling

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

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

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE VERBAL COMPLEX IN YUKATEKAN MAYAN LANGUAGES. Charles Andrew Hofling

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE VERBAL COMPLEX IN

YUKATEKAN MAYAN LANGUAGES1

Charles Andrew Hoing

1. Introduction. The Yukatekan branch of the Mayan language family

[IJAL, vol. 72, no. 3, July 2006, pp. 36796]

a.d. 2000 Mopan Itzaj Northern Southern Yukateko

closely related to Itzaj, while Southern Lakantun is closely related to Yu-

Fig. 2.Map of lowland Mayan languages in a.d. 1500.

Fig. 3.Map of lowland Mayan languages after a.d. 1700.

2. Person marking. Comparison and reconstruction of person marking

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

It is of some interest to note that the inclusiveexclusive distinction for rst-

3. Status marking. Status-marking sufxes encode information about as-

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

(5c) *ka chuy-l-ak-W

4. Voice marking. Many root transitive verbs also have mediopassive

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

5Bruce (1968:73; 1974) and MacLeod (1987:g. 28).

vowel in the mediopassive voice (CC roots change to CaC).3 In Southern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

5. Aspectual markers. There are several types of aspect markers in

a j intransitive completive marker (Kaufman 1991:40), and Northern Lakan-

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

(13a) *W u-kahj-al u-wen-el

(15a) tan-eex a-cheej

6. Conclusion. An overview of the verbal complex conrms previous

Proto- Colonial Modern Southern Northern

6Hoing (2000:159, 372, 380).

tween Yukateko, Lakantun and Itzaj, such as innovations of completive and

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen