Behold, I greet you all my family and relations, with eternal bonds of love and thanksgiving to belong to such a loving and beautiful family, as this.

Wherefore, I desire for my daughter Lillian Joell Lopez, to understand who she is and where she comes from.

Lilly’s Father is 1/4 Yaqui Indian from Sonora Mexico, her Grandfather Hagoth’s first settlement and along The Great Bay (Baja Mexico) Today..

And,I Paniths Palojami am recording, compiling and writing this Family History record, as commanded by my Grandfathers. It is a priestly duty to keep our histories and pass them on to our progenitors.

Wherefore, the word of the Lord came unto me saying, family history is a sure word of prophecy, and on this day October 15, 2016 I begin:

Yea and,  this is a part of my daughter Lillian Joell Lopez’s Geneology. Lilly’s story begins with her fathers side of the family, just as well as her mothers family history.

But, on her fathers side of history. We begin with the part, when Lehi came to America in 600 BC with the record known as:

The Book of Mormon..
In this record, which was brought to light by the family on her mother’s side known as the Mormons, pioneers named after the ancient first people.. and I won’t write about that now, I will write about it in another record for Lilly.

Nonetheless, the Mormons on her mothers side of the family
would bring to light the record of her fathers history.

We, love our Mormon Heritage and Culture ..
and The Native American
Yaqui Heritage and Culture,
The Nemenhah.

Lilly is the embodiment of both.

According to:

The Book of Alma
the Son of Alma

Chapter 63
Shiblon and later Helaman take possession of the sacred records—Many Nephites travel to the land northward—Hagoth builds ships, which sail forth in the west sea—Moronihah defeats the Lamanites in battle. About 56–52 B.C.

1 And it came to pass in the commencement of the thirty and sixth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, that Shiblon took possession of those sacred things which had been delivered unto Helaman by Alma.

2 And he was a just man, and he did walk uprightly before God; and he did observe to do good continually, to keep the commandments of the Lord his God; and also did his brother.

3 And it came to pass that Moroni died also. And thus ended the thirty and sixth year of the reign of the judges.

4 And it came to pass that in the thirty and seventh year of the reign of the judges, there was a large company of men, even to the amount of five thousand and four hundred men, with their wives and their children, departed out of the land of Zarahemla into the land which was northward.

5 And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being anexceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the landBountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.

6 And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.

7 And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built otherships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.

8 And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not.

9 And it came to pass that in this year there were many people who went forth into the land northward. And thus ended the thirty and eighth year.

10 And it came to pass in the thirty and ninth year of the reign of the judges, Shiblon died also, and Corianton had gone forth to the land northward in a ship, to carry forth provisions unto the people who had gone forth into that land.

11 Therefore it became expedient for Shiblon to confer those sacred things, before his death, upon the son ofHelaman, who was called Helaman, being called after the name of his father.

12 Now behold, all those engravings which were in the possession of Helaman were written and sent forth among the children of men throughout all the land, save it were those parts which had been commanded by Alma shouldnot go forth.

13 Nevertheless, these things were to be kept sacred, andhanded down from one generation to another; therefore, in this year, they had been conferred upon Helaman, before the death of Shiblon.

14 And it came to pass also in this year that there were some dissenters who had gone forth unto the Lamanites; and they were stirred up again to anger against the Nephites.

15 And also in this same year they came down with a numerous army to war against the people of Moronihah, or against the army of Moronihah, in the which they were beaten and driven back again to their own lands, suffering great loss.

16 And thus ended the thirty and ninth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi.

17 And thus ended the account of Alma, and Helaman his son, and also Shiblon, who was his son.

This is The last book of Alma..

56-52BC Hagoth Built Ships
This begins Hagoth’s Record of his people, the Nephites and Lamanites who made the Covenant of no more wars and shedding blood, they laid down their weapons and they were known as Ammonites.

The Book of Hagoth
Hagoth built ships and departed from the Land Southward with his family and twelve Nephite and twelve Ammonite families. They traveled north along the Pacific coastline to the mouth of the Colorado River, up the Colorado River to the area now known as Four Corners where they settled for a time.

They became known as the Nemenhah people. They left the Four Corners area and established two new settlements – one on the plains area and the other further north in the mountains where they remained undefiled by the Gadiantonhem Robbers.

1) Behold, I am Hagoth, and I am waxed old. I write this book so that my generations may be kept and so that the acts of my people may be recorded. I am that same Hagoth, the son of Hagmeni who was the boon companion of Moroni and followed him in war and peace. And it was my father who was a builder of walls and battlements who assisted Moroni in subduing the enemies of the Nephites and in securing our lands and our religion and our freedom.

The same was my father, and he descended from that Zoram who took the eldest of the daughters of Ishmael to wife; and also from Jacob the brother of Nephi, whose father took his journey into the wilderness from Jerusalem when Zedekiah was king; and also from that Simeon who was a Priest of the Temple, who took his journey with Mulek when the Benjamites retreated from ruined Jerusalem, and also from that Mulek himself, who was son of Zedekiah the King.

Wherefore behold, I am descended from Joseph, the same who was sold into Egypt, and from Aaron the brother of Moses, and also from Judah.

2) Behold, I have seen much war and much peace. In the years of my life I have seen much prosperity and much poverty. I have governed my people when the Spirit strove with them and many received the Holy Ghost and prophesied, and I have governed when many people denied the faith.

Wherefore, it seemed meet to my people that I should make an account of all of our doings.

3) In the year that Moroni, that great captain of the Nephites died, behold, my father also died. For, he had received many wounds in the wars. But my father taught me in all manner of building and I became exceedingly accomplished in the building with wood.

4) Now, it was also in that year that many of the Nephites began to see that those families who had not sent men into the wars to protect their liberties were filled with pride. For they were very rich because of their trade in the wars. Many could see the seeds of the downfall of our nation and they desired to go into the Land Northward.

And there were others who saw that much of the country was wasted and yet the
Lamanites persisted.

Therefore, many desired to move, as our father Nephi moved, away from the threat.

5) Wherefore, I built a ship, and it was after the pattern of the ship built by Nephi except that it was much larger. Into this ship went up many of the Nephites and from Bountiful, by the Isthmus, they set sail into the West Sea. These Nephites sailed following the shore northward beyond the land Desolate and they went down out of the ship at the mouth of a great river.

The place where they went down out of the ship was exceedingly barren, however, and the people sent the ship and a few trusty men back to the land Bountiful for provisions.

6) Now, I Hagoth, being exceedingly concerned for our brethren and their families who had made the journey into the north by sea, I went to Shiblon to get the word of the Lord concerning them.

Now Shiblon was also concerned, for many had also taken their journey northward by land. And he went to the Lord and inquired of Him. And the Lord commanded that I should send provisions unto the Nephites in the Land Northward both by the West Sea and by the East Sea.

Yea, I did build a fleet of ships by which many of the Nephites and their families removed into the Land Northward and Shiblon commanded that copies be made of all the writings of our fathers and that they should be carried with those journeying into the Land Northward so that the people should not dwindle in unbelief.

7) Now, the people who sailed to the Land Northward by way of the East Sea found a land of dense forests and much water and they did establish themselves somewhat in that land and a record is kept, I am told, of their doings.

The people who journeyed into the Land Northward by way of the West Sea passed near unto the Land of Desolation and for many days found a land barren and unforgiving.

And when they ran low of provisions, they stayed their journey at the mouth of a great river and sent my ship back for provisions.

And I did send even more ships and more people into the Land Northward by that same route, for it seemed curious to me that so great a river should flow out of a barren country.

And even I, myself, took my family and certain of the Lamanites of the People of Ammon, who had covenanted with Moroni to take up the sword no more against us, even they went with me into the Land Northward.

8) And it came to pass that we kept the land in sight, lest we become lost in the sea and we came to a place where there was land on the right hand and land afar off on the left hand for many days, and we traveled between the shores until they came together at the mouth of the great river of which I had been told and of which I have spoken.

9) Now, the water of the river was muddied as if it had traveled down from out of a mountainous place and where it emptied into the sea, it sullied the clear blue waters there.

But there was an abundance of fish in this place, yea, even great marshal fish which provided much meat, and though the land was barren, some of our people desired to stay there because of the abundance of fish and other creatures of the sea that they
could trade with our brethren in the Land Southward.

Yea, the more part of them desired to stay and build a city, and they did establish themselves at the mouth of the river.

Lilly’s Father is 1/4 Yaqui Indian from Sonora Mexico, her Grandfather Hagoth’s first settlement and along The Great Bay (Baja Mexico) Today..

Geneology

Hagoth Sr.Father Hagoth,Hagotl,Father Hagotl,Ha-ahgotl (m)
Genealogy:
Nephite → Nemenhah of Hagohah → Nemenhah of the Mountains

Father: Hagmeni (the boon companion of Captain Moroni)

Wife: Abinah (the sister of Timan, the clerk of Shiblon) – 2 Pa Natan 5:13

Son: Hagoth/Hagothah/Hag Tlouah (Hagoth lived thirty and eight years and he begot Hag Tlouah, whom many called Hagothah.)

Son: Hagmeni (Hagoth lived thirty and eight years and he begot Hagmeni.)

Grandson: Sahnempet (Hagmeni lived fifty and eight years and he begot Sanhempet.) who married Pahhem/Minempah

Great Grandson: Ougou (the youngest son of Sanhempet and the High Priest of Mentinah when the Savior visited
those people) who married Pa-Samentem (the daughter of Corianton/King Corianton and Isabel) (Sanhempet
lived twenty and three years and begot Ougou.)
Great Great Grandson: Manti (Ougou lived twenty and eight years and begot Manti.) who married Pa-Hanat
Great Great Great Grandson: Shimlei (Manti lived forty and nine years and begot Shimlei) who married Pac Almanah
(the granddaughter of Corianton/Alma and Pa-Sabel)
Etc., etc.: (The Mentinah Archives is the family records of this family line)
Son: Ameliki

Known For: Hagoth was the writer of the Book of Hagoth

(written as in Nemenhah and .. in Jaredite).

Lillian’s Grandfather Hagoth

He was large in stature and exceedingly accomplished in the building with wood being taught by his father who was responsible for the battlements the Nephites used to defend themselves when Captain Moroni lead them to victory over the Lamanites.

Hagoth built ships to help those who wished to migrate north. With Shiblon, he made sure records were on the ships going north. {In 56 BC} Hagoth left to the Land Northward. {In 54 BC} he went up the Akish{Colorado} river with 12 Nephite and 12 Lamanite brethren and their families (60 Lamanites).

He killed the fish in the event where the Lord saved his people by the miracle of the great fish. They settled in the city Akish-hah (Hagohah or the City of Hagoth) and traded with those at the mouth of the Akish River by sending wood down the river. He turned down being established as king and supported the establishment a government where the women chose a council of judges.

When the first council was chosen by the mothers, Hagoth was chosen to preside. In response to the Gadiantonhem threat, the Nemenhah split into two bodies, in the 75th year of the reign of Judges (6th year of the Nemenhah).

The larger group followed Hementah to live on the plains.

The smaller followed Hagoth to live in the mountains {Sanpete Valley, Utah}.

They maintained trade with each other but closed all trade southward to elude the Gadiantonhem attention.

Hagoth was a great man and large in stature.

 

See: “The People of Hagoth” References:

Short History, Hagoth 1, 6, 11, 12-14, 20, 25-26, 31-32, 36-39, 41, 43, Hagmeni 1, 3, 14, 16, Sahnempet 1, 4-5, 37-
38, Ougou 1, 120, 2 Shi-Tugohah 1:6-9, 2:7, 9, 3:1-2, 12, 14, 16, 4:1-6, 11-12, 1 Shi-Muel 1:1, 4, 6-7, 12, 2:1, 3, 8-12, 14, 16, 41,
46-47, 4:3, 6:12, 8:4, 2 Shi-Muel 3:22, Manti 1:3, 4:39, 7:22, 9:10, 12:8, Shimlei 1:1, 5, 2:5-7, 10-11, 1 Pa Natan 1:5, 7:78, 2 Pa
Natan 1:19, 22, 29, 31, 2:30, 3:10, 5:12-14, 16, Heinmet 5:21, Mor-Honayah 1:2, 7:2, 8:12, 11:13, 28-29, 14:49, 15:4, Shi
Honayah 4:12-13, 17, 28, 41, 49, 66, 5:7, 21, 8:1, 9:4, 8, 11:4, 12:(2), 5, 15:6, Henet Peniet 1:25, 2:32, Memish 1:6-7, 11-13, 4:5,
Winet Memniet 5, Minisourit 8:4, 10:4, Shi-Timorah 1, 36, Aku Hawaohtim 7:13-14, Aku Winaym 2:14-15, 3:18, Osaraksit 1:7, 78
13, 2:6, 2 Wahshahshay 2:22-23, Menipahsits 1:2, 6:29, Lamentation 26:4, 36:14, Wallahowah 4:7, 5:2, 18

(see Book of Mormon: Alma 63:5)

Hagoth (City) also called: City of Hagoth/Hagohah (City)/(maybe) Akish-ah(City) There were two Cities of Hagoth. This one was at the mouth of the Akish river {Colorado river} where it emptied into the Great Bay {Baja Bay}.

Yaquis of Sonora Mexico

See: “City of Hagoth”, (maybe) “Akish-ah”
References: Hagoth 8-9, 1 Shi-Muel 2:13, Shi Honayah 9:4, Manti (9:10)
Hagoth’s Descendants which will build Zion in the Latter Days
References: Ougou 125, 127, 184, 187, 2 Shi-Muel 8:5, 14, (9:12), 12:13, Manti 7:22, 28, 30-32, 8:26-27, 11:6, 20, 23, 13:4, 6,
18, Shimlei 4:5, 2 Pa Natan 1:2, 2:35, 39, 43, 3:38-39, 4:30, 33, 47, Heinmet 2:14, 24, 26, Mor-Honayah 4:12-13, 15, 16, 18, 26,
27, 30, 5:30, 6:9-10, 16, 21, Shi Honayah 11:19-20, 25, 30, 13:42, 53, 57, 67, 14:1, 17, 21, 23-24, 33-34, 39-40, 42-43, 45, 54-56,
59, 61-62, 80, 87, Memish 4:4, 10:14, 12:13, 18-22, Momet 3:5, 21, 23-25, 27, Teanicumset 3:26, Minisourit 8:19, 43-44, 9:1-2,
15, 10:9, Lamination 25:6-7, 2 Eapalekthiloom 7:27
Hagoth (Valley)

 

See: “Land of Hagoth”
Reference: Mor-Honayah 11:28,
Hagoth, City of/Hagohah (City) There were two cities called by this name.
See: “City of Hagoth/Hagohah (City)” or Hagoth (City)
Hagoth, the Councils of the People of
See: “The Councils of the People of Hagoth”
Hagoth (Remnant), Descendants of – who will thrash the Nations Together
See: “Descendants of Hagoth (Remnant) who will thrash the Nations Together”
Hagoth, Land of
See: “Land of Hagoth”

Native to Guatemala
Region Central highlands

Cesar Padilla de Ramarra (m) Of Guatemala
Genealogy:
Mayan
Ancestor: Hagoth
Known For: Cesar is one of the translators of the Mentinah Archives and a member of its translating counsel. {He was the feather of that council until his death. He died with all his family and extended family by a mudslide that wiped out his village during the hurricane season of 2005 there in Guatemala. He was one of the record keepers of many ancient libraries in the Americas including the library where the Mentinah Archives were housed. He was a migrant worker. He checked on those libraries year after year as he followed the migrant train. He took rubbings and copies of the Archives to the translators. His wife typed his translations on an old typewriter using one finger. Cesar showed Cloudpiler the Mentinah Library, so he is one of those who have held the plates in his own hands as was alluded to in the Forward of the Archives.}
References: Title page of the Mentinah Archives, Forward

 

Quiché language

K’iche’ language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Quiche language)
K’iche’
Quiché
Qatzijob’al
Pronunciation [kʼiˈtʃeʔ]
Native to Guatemala
Region Central highlands
Ethnicity K’iche’
Native speakers
(2.3 million cited 1991–2000[1])[2]
Language family
Mayan
Eastern (Quichean–Mamean)
Greater Quichean
Quichean
Quiché–Achi
K’iche’
Early forms
Classical K’iche’
K’iche’
Official status
Recognised minority
language in
Guatemala[3]
Regulated by Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala (ALMG)
Language codes
ISO 639-3 quc

Glottolog kich1262[4]
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters.
K’iche’ ([kʼiˈtʃeʔ], also Qatzijob’al “our language” to its speakers), or Quiché (/kiːˈtʃeɪ/[5]), is a Maya language of Guatemala, spoken by the K’iche’ people of the central highlands. With over a million speakers (some 7% of Guatemala’s population), K’iche’ is the second-most widely spoken language in the country after Spanish. Most speakers of K’iche’ languages also have at least a working knowledge of Spanish.
The Central dialect is the most commonly used in the media and education. The literacy rate is low, but K’iche’ is increasingly taught in schools and used on radio. The most famous work in the Classical K’iche’ language is the Popol Vuh (Popol Wu’uj in modern spelling).
Contents [hide]
1 Dialects
2 Phonology
2.1 Stress
2.2 Vowels
2.3 Consonants
2.4 Syllabic structure
3 Orthography
4 Morphology
4.1 Nouns
4.2 Pronouns
4.3 Verbs
4.3.1 Voice and derivation
5 Syntax
6 Speech Genres
6.1 Babytalk
7 Notes
8 References
9 External links
Dialects[edit]
Kaufman (1970) divides the K’iche’ complex into the following five dialects, with the representative municipalities given as well (quoted in Par Sapón 2000:17).
East
Joyabaj
Zacualpa
Cubulco
Rabinal
San Miguel Chicaj
West
Nahualá
Santa Clara La Laguna
Santa Lucía Utatlán
Aldea Argueta, Sololá
Cantel
Zunil
San José Chiquilajá, Quetzaltenango
Totonicapán
Momostenango
Central
Santa María Chiquimula
San Antonio Ilotenango
Santa Cruz del Quiché
Chichicastenango
North
Cunén
South
Samayac
Mazatenango
The Nahualá dialect of K’iche’ shows some differences from other K’iche’ lects: Nahualá preserves an ancient Proto-Mayan distinction between five long vowels (aa, ee, ii, oo, uu) and five short vowels (a, e, i, o, u). It is for this conservative linguistic feature that Guatemalan and foreign linguists have actively sought to have the language called “K’ichee’,” rather than K’iche’ or Quiché.
Phonology[edit]
K’iche’ has a rather conservative phonology. It has not developed many of the innovations found in neighboring languages, such as retroflex consonants or tone.
Stress[edit]
Stress is not phonemic. It occurs on the final syllable, and on every other syllable before the final in an iambic pattern.
Unstressed vowels are frequently reduced (to [ɨ] or [ə]) or elided altogether, often producing consonant clusters even at the beginnings of words. For example, sib’alaj “very” may be pronounced [siɓlaχ], and je na la’ “thus” [χenðaʔ].
Vowels[edit]
K’iche’ dialects differ in their vowel systems. Historically, K’iche’ had a ten-vowel system: five short and five long. Some dialects (for instance, Nahualá and Totonicapán) retain the ten-vowel system. Others (for instance, Cantel) have reduced it to a six-vowel system with no length distinctions: short /a/ has become /ə/ in these dialects, and the other short vowels have merged with their long counterparts.[6] Different conventions for spelling the vowels have been proposed, including by the Proyecto Lingüístico Francisco Marroquín, the Summer Institute of Linguistics and the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala. The table below shows the two vowel systems, and several of the spelling systems that have been proposed.
Phonemes Spelling
Ten-vowel Six-vowel PLFM SIL ALMG
/a/ /ə/ a ä a
/aː/ /a/ aa a
/e/ /e/ e ë e
/eː/ ee e
/i/ /i/ i ï i
/iː/ ii i
/o/ /o/ o ö o
/oː/ oo o
/u/ /u/ u ü u
/uː/ uu u
Vowels typically undergo syncope in penultimate syllables, allowing for a wide array of complex onsets. Diphthongs are found in recent loanwords.
Consonants[edit]
K’iche’ has both pulmonic stops and affricates, p /p/, t /t/, tz /ts/, ch /tʃ/, k /k/, and q /q/, and glottalized counterparts b’ /ɓ/, t’ /t’/, tz’ /ts’/, ch’ /tʃ’/, k’ /k’/, and q’ /q’/. The glottalized /ɓ/ is a weak implosive, while the other glottalized consonants are ejectives. The pulmonic stops and affricates are typically aspirated.
Bilabial Alveolar Post-
alveolar Retroflex Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal
Nasals m [m] n [n]
Glottalized plosive b’ [ɓ] t’ [tʼ] k’ [kʼ] q’ [qʼ]
Aspirated plosive p [pʰ] t [tʰ] k [kʰ] q [qʰ] ‘ [ʔ]
Glottalized affricate tz’ [tsʼ] ch’ [tʃʼ]
Aspirated affricate tz [tsʰ] ch [tʃʰ]
Fricative s [s] x [ʃ] j [x~χ] h [h]
Approximant w [ʋ] l [l] r [ɻ] y [j]
In West Quiche, the approximants l /l/, r /ɻ/, y /j/, and w /w/ devoice and fricate to [ɬ], [ʂ], [ç], and [ʍ] word-finally and often before voiceless consonants. In some dialects,[which?] intervocalic /l/ alternates between [l] and [ð], a highly unusual sound change. The fricative[ð] is most common between the vowels o and a and between two o’s, and occurs more often than not between two a’s.
Syllabic structure[edit]
Complex onsets are very common in K’iche’, partially due to the active process of penultimate syncope. Complex codas are rare, except when the first member of the complex coda is a phonemic glottal stop, written with an apostrophe. The sonorants /m, n, l, r/ may be syllabic.
Orthography[edit]
Historically, different orthographies have been used to transliterate the K’iche’ languages. The classic orthography of Father Ximénez who wrote down the Popol Vuh is based on the Spanish orthography and has been replaced by a new standardized orthography defined by the ALMG (Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala). Ethnohistorian and Mayanist Dennis Tedlock uses his own transliteration system which is completely different from any of the established orthographies, but this system will not be given here.
The first line of Popol Wuj in different orthographies:
Ximénez’s classical orthography Are v xe oher tzíh varal Quíche ubí.
ALMG orthography Are’ uxe’ ojer tzij waral K’iche’ ub’i’.
(Ximénez’s Spanish translation) Este es el principio de las Antiguas historias aquí en el Quiché.
(Tedlock’s English translation) “This is the beginning of the ancient word, here in the place called Quiché.”
Morphology[edit]
Like other Mayan languages, K’iche’ uses two sets of agreement markers — known to Mayanists as “Set A” and “Set B” markers — which can appear on both nouns and verbs. “Set A” markers are used on nouns to mark possessor agreement, and on verbs to agree with the transitive subject (ergative case). “Set B” markers are used on verbs to agree with the transitive object or the intransitive subject (absolutive case).
Set A markers
Before a consonant Before a vowel
First person singular nu- or in- w- or inw-
Second person singular a- aw-
Third person singular u- r-
First person plural qa- q-
Second person plural i- iw-
Third person plural ki- k-
Set B markers
First person singular in-
Second person singular at-
Third person singular Ø-
First person plural oj- (uj- in some varieties)
Second person plural ix-
Third person plural e- (eb’- in some varieties)
Nouns[edit]
Nouns are not inflected for case. Their role in the sentence is indicated by word order, and by agreement marking on the grammatical head which they depend on.
Only a few nouns — most of them referring to humans — are inflected for number. On nouns which do show number, the most common plural suffixes are ab’ and ib’ : e.g. ixoq “woman”, ixoq-ib’ “women”; ak’al “child”, ak’al-ab’ “children.”
A few common nouns have irregular plurals: achi “man”, achi-jab’ “men”; ali “girl”, ali-tomab’ “girls.”
Nouns agree with their possessors, using the Set A agreement markers: nu-wuj “my book,” a-wuj “your book,” u-wuj “his book,” etc.
Nouns may be used as predicates. When they are, they agree with their subject using the Set B agreement markers: in achi “I am a man,” at achi “you are a man,” achi “he is a man,” etc.
Pronouns[edit]
K’iche’ distinguishes six pronouns, classified by person and number. Gender and case are not marked on pronouns. Pronouns are often omitted, as subject and object agreement are obligatorily marked on the verb.
Subject and object pronouns
In orthography In IPA
First person singular in /in/
Second person singular at /at/
Third person singular are’ /aɾeʔ/
First person plural uj /uχ/
Second person plural ix /iʃ/
Third person plural iyare’ /ijaɾeʔ/
Verbs[edit]
Verbs are highly morphologically complex, and can take numerous prefixes and suffixes serving both inflectional and derivational purposes.
The table below shows the inflectional template of a K’iche’ verb. Agreement follows an ergative/absolutive pattern. Subjects of transitive verbs are indexed using Set A markers. Intransitive subjects and transitive objects are indexed using Set B markers. Aspect and mood are also indicated, as is movement: the prefix ul- in the movement slot indicates movement towards the speaker, while the prefix e- (or b’e- in some varieties) indicates movement away.
Verb inflection
Aspect/mood Set B (absolutive) Movement Set A (ergative) Stem Status suffix
k- at- b’in -ik katb’inik “You walk.”
x- at- inw- il -o xatinwilo “I saw you.”
ch- Ø- a- k’am -a’ chak’ama’ “Carry it!”
k- Ø- ul- wa’ -oq kulwa’oq “S/he comes and eats.”
The last morpheme on a verb, the so-called “status suffix,” is a portmanteau morph whose form determined by a rather complicated set of rules. Relevant factors include:
whether the verb is transitive or intransitive
whether the verb’s mood is indicative or imperative
whether or not the verb contains a movement marker
whether or not the verb falls at the end of an intonational phrase
Voice and derivation[edit]
The examples above involve verbs with simple stems. Verb stems may also be morphologically complex. Complex stems may involve voice suffixes
Causative: -isa (-kam- “die,” -kam-isa- “kill (someone)”)
Passive: -x (-kuna- “cure (someone),” -kuna-x- “be cured”)
Completive passive: -taj (-kuna- “cure (someone),” -kuna-taj- “be completely cured; recover”)
Antipassive: -n, -on or -un (-mes- “sweep (something) clean,” -mes-on- “sweep up”)
or derivational suffixes, many of which form verb stems from other parts of speech. For instance, the versive suffix -ir or -ar forms verb stems from adjectives: utz “good,” -utz-ir- “get good”; nim “big,” -nim-ar- “get big.” Multiple suffixes can appear within a single stem: -nim-ar- “get big,” -nim-ar-isa- “enlarge (something),” -nim-ar-isa-x- “be enlarged.”
Syntax[edit]
As with all Mayan languages, K’iche’ has an ergative pattern of verb agreement, and often uses verb-object-subject (VOS) word order. Most modern speakers use SOV, SVO, and VSO word orders interchangeably. Language purists have tried to preserve the traditional verb-initial word order, while influence from Spanish (an SVO language) promotes a subject-initial order.

Yaqui language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yaqui
Yoem Noki
Pronunciation [joʔem noki]
Native to Mexico, U.S.
Region Sonora, Arizona
Ethnicity Yaqui people
Native speakers
18,000 (2010 census)[1]
Language family
Uto-Aztecan
Cáhita
Yaqui
Language codes
ISO 639-3 yaq
Glottolog yaqu1251[2]
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters.
Yaqui (or Hiaki), locally known as Yoeme or Yoem Noki, is a Native American language of the Uto-Aztecan family. It is spoken by about 20,000 Yaqui people, in the Mexican state of Sonora and across the border inArizona in the United States.

Uto-Aztecan languages
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Uto-Aztecan)
Uto-Aztecan
Geographic
distribution: Western United States, Mexico
Linguistic classification: One of the world’s primarylanguage families
Proto-language: Proto-Uto-Aztecan
Subdivisions:
Hopi
Tübatulabal
Numic
Serran
Cupan
Tarahumaran
Cahitan
Opatan
Corachol
Tepiman
Aztecan
ISO 639-5: azc
Glottolog: utoa1244[1]
{{{mapalt}}}
Pre-contact distribution of Northern Uto-Aztecan languages (note: this map does not show the total distribution in Mexico).
Uto-Aztecan or Uto-Aztekan /ˈjuːtoʊ.æzˈtɛkən/ is a Native American language family consisting of over 30 languages. Uto-Aztecan languages are found almost entirely in the Western United States and Mexico. The name of the language family was created to show that it includes both the Ute language of Utah and the Aztecan languages of Mexico.
The Uto-Aztecan language family is one of the largest linguistic families in the Americas in terms of number of speakers, number of languages, and geographic extension.[2] The northernmost Uto-Aztecan language is Shoshoni, which is spoken as far north as Salmon, Idaho, while the southernmost is the Pipil language of El Salvador. Ethnologue gives the total number of languages in the family as 61, and the total number of speakers as 1,900,412.[3] The roughly 1.5 million speakers of Nahuatl languages account for almost four-fifths (78.9%) of these.
The internal classification of the family often divides the family into two branches: a northern branch including all the languages of the US and a Southern branch including all the languages of Mexico, although it is still being discussed whether this is best understood as a genetic classification or as a geographical one. Below this level of classification the main branches are well accepted: Numic (including languages such asComanche and Shoshoni) and the Californian languages (formerly known as the Takic group) including Cahuilla and Luiseño, account for most of the Northern languages except for Hopi and Tübatulabal. The Southern languages are divided into the Tepiman (including O’odham and Tepehuán), the Tarahumaran languages including Raramuri and Guarijio language, the Cahitan languages (Yaqui and Mayo language),Corachol (including Cora and Huichol) and Nahuan languages. The homeland of the Uto-Aztecan languages is generally considered to have been in the American Southwest or possibly Northwestern Mexico – although there is some discussion of the possibility that the language family originated in southern Mexico, within the Mesoamerican language area.
Contents [hide]
1 Proto-language and Uto-Aztecan homeland
2 Geographic distribution
2.1 Present-day locations of living Uto-Aztecan languages in Mexico and Mesoamerica
3 Classification of Uto-Aztecan languages
3.1 History of classification
3.2 Present scheme
3.3 Extinct languages
4 Proto–Uto-Aztecan language
4.1 Vowels
4.2 Consonants
5 Notes
6 Bibliography
7 Works on individual languages
8 External links
Proto-language and Uto-Aztecan homeland[edit]
The Proto-Uto-Aztecan language is the hypothetical common ancestor of the Uto-Aztecan languages. Authorities on the history of the language group have usually placed the Proto-Uto-Aztecan homeland in the border region between the United States and Mexico, namely the upland regions of Arizona and New Mexico and the adjacent areas of the Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua, roughly corresponding to theSonoran Desert and the western part of the Chihuahuan Desert. The proto-language would have been spoken by Mesolithic foragers in Aridoamerica, about 5,000 years ago.
Based on clues to the ecological niche inhabited by the proto-Uto-Aztecans offered reconstructions of the plant related vocabulary, Fowler placed the center of the proto-Uto-Aztecan dialect continuum in Central Arizona with Northern dialects extending into Nevada and the Mojave desert, and Southern dialects extending south through the Tepiman corridor into Mexico.[4] The homeland of the Numic languages has been placed in Southern California near Death Valley, and the homeland of the proposed Southern Uto-Aztecan group has been placed on the coast of Sonora.[5]
A contrary proposal, that suggests the homeland of Proto-Uto-Aztecan to have been much further to the south, was published in 2001 by Jane H. Hill, based on her reconstruction of maize-related vocabulary in Proto-Uto-Aztecan. By her theory, the assumed speakers of Proto-Uto-Aztecan were maize cultivators in Mesoamerica, who gradually moved north, bringing maize cultivation with them, during the period of roughly 4,500 to 3,000 years ago. The geographic diffusion of speakers corresponded to the breakup of linguistic unity.[6][7] This hypothesis has been criticized on several grounds, and it is not generally accepted by Uto-Aztecanists.[8][9][10][11][12] A survey of agriculture-related vocabulary by Merrill (2012) found that the agricultural vocabulary can only be reconstructed for Southern Uto-Aztecan. This supports a conclusion that the Proto-Uto-Aztecan speech community did not practice agriculture, but only adopted it after entering Mesoamerica from the North.[13]
A recent proposal by David L. Shaul presents evidence suggesting contact between proto-Uto-Aztecan and languages of central California such as Esselen and the Yokutsan languages. This leads Shaul to suggest that proto-Uto-Aztecan was spoken in California’s Central Valley area, and formed part of an ancient Californian linguistic area.[14]
Geographic distribution[edit]
Northern-UA-languages.png
Uto-Aztecan languages are spoken in the North American mountain ranges and adjacent lowlands of the western United States (in the states of Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Utah, California, Nevada, Arizona) and of Mexico (states of Sonora, Chihuahua, Nayarit,Durango, Zacatecas, Jalisco, Michoacán, Guerrero, San Luis Potosí, Hidalgo, Puebla, Veracruz, Morelos, Estado de México, and the Federal District). Classical Nahuatl, the language of the Aztecs, and its modern relatives are part of the Uto-Aztecan family. The Pipil language, an offshoot of Nahuatl, spread to Central America by a wave of migration from Mexico, and formerly had many speakers there. Now it has gone extinct in Guatemala and Honduras, and it is nearly extinct in western El Salvador, all areas dominated by use of Spanish.
Present-day locations of living Uto-Aztecan languages in Mexico and Mesoamerica[edit]
UtoAztecanlanguages.png
Classification of Uto-Aztecan languages[edit]
History of classification[edit]
Uto-Aztecan has been accepted by linguists as a language family since the early 1900s, and six subgroups are accepted as valid by all experts: Numic, Takic, Pimic, Taracahitic, Corachol, and Aztecan. This leaves two ungrouped languages—Tübatulabal and Hopi (sometimes termed “isolates within the family”). As to higher-level groupings, disagreement has persisted since the 19th century. Presently scholars also disagree as to where to draw language boundaries within dialect continua.
The similarities among the Uto-Aztecan languages were noted as early as 1859 by J.C.E. Buschmann, but he failed to recognize the genetic affiliation between the Aztecan branch and the rest. He ascribed the similarities between the two groups to diffusion. Brintonadded the Aztecan languages to the family in 1891 and coined the term Uto-Aztecan. John Wesley Powell, however, rejected the claim in his own classification of North American indigenous languages (also published in 1891). Powell recognized two language families: “Shoshonean” (encompassing Takic, Numic, Hopi, and Tübatulabal) and “Sonoran” (encompassing Pimic, Taracahitan, and Corachol). In the early 1900s Alfred L. Kroeber filled in the picture of the Shoshonean group,[15] while Edward Sapir proved the unity among Aztecan, “Sonoran”, and “Shoshonean”.[16][17][18] Sapir’s applications of the comparative method to unwritten Native American languages are regarded as groundbreaking.[citation needed] Voegelin, Voegelin & Hale (1962) argued for a three way division of Shoshonean, Sonoran and Aztecan, following Powell.[19]
As of about 2011, there is still debate about whether to accept the proposed basic split between “Northern Uto-Aztecan” and “Southern Uto-Aztecan” languages.[2] Northern-Utoaztecan corresponds to Powell’s “Shoshonean”, while the latter is all the rest, i.e., Powell’s “Sonoran” plus Aztecan. Northern Uto-Aztecan was proposed as a genetic grouping by Jeffrey Heath (1978) based on morphological evidence, and Manaster Ramer (1992) adduced phonological evidence in the form of a sound law. Kaufman (1981) accepted the basic division into Northern and Southern branches as valid. Other scholars have rejected the genealogical unity of either both nodes or the Northern node alone.[20][21][22][23] Miller’s argument was statistical, arguing that Northern Uto-Aztecan languages displayed too few cognates to be considered a unit. On the other hands he found the number of cognates among Southern Uto-Aztecan languages to suggest a genetic relation.[22] This position was supported by subsequent lexicostatistic analyses by Cortina-Borja & Valiñas-Coalla (1989) and Cortina-Borja, Stuart-Smith & Valiñas-Coalla (2002). Reviewing the debate, Haugen (2008) considers the evidence in favor of the genetic unity of Northern Uto-Aztecan to be convincing, but remains agnostic on the validity of Southern Uto-Aztecan as a genetic grouping. Hill (2011) also considered the North/South split to be valid based on phonological evidence, confirming both groupings. Merrill (2013) adduced further evidence for the unity of Southern Uto-Aztecan as a valid grouping.
Hill (2011) also rejected the validity of the Takic grouping decomposing it into a Californian areal grouping together with Tubatulabal.
Some classifications have posited a genetic relation between Corachol and Nahuan (e.g. Merrill (2013)). Kaufman recognizes similarities between Corachol and Aztecan, but explains them by diffusion instead of genetic evolution.[24] Most scholars view the breakup of Proto-Uto-Aztecan as a case of the gradual disintegration of a dialect continuum.[25]
Present scheme[edit]
Below is a representation of the internal classification of the language family based on Shaul (2014). The classification reflects the decision to split up the previous Taracahitic and Takic groups, that are no-longer considered to be valid genetic units. Whether the division between Northern and Southern languages is best understood as geographical or phylogenetic is under discussion. The table contains demographic information about number of speakers and their locations based on data from The Ethnologue. The table also contains links to a selected bibliography of grammars, dictionaries on many of the individual languages.(† = extinct)
Genealogical classification of Uto-Aztecan languages
Family Groups Languages Where spoken and approximate number of speakers Works
Uto-Aztecan languages Northern Uto-Aztecan
(possibly an areal grouping) Numic Western Numic Paviotso, Bannock, Northern Paiute 700 speakers in California, Oregon, Idaho and Nevada Nichols (1973)
Mono About 40 speakers in California Lamb (1958)
Central Numic
Shoshoni, Goshiute 1000 fluent speakers and 1000 learners in Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Idaho McLaughlin (2012)
Comanche 100 speakers in Oklahoma Robinson & Armagost (1990)
Timbisha, Panamint 20 speakers in California and Nevada Dayley (1989)
Southern Numic Colorado River dialect chain: Ute, Southern Paiute, Chemehuevi 920 speakers of all dialects, in Colorado, Nevada, California, Utah, Arizona Givón (2011), Press (1979), Sapir (1992)
Kawaiisu 5 speakers in California Zigmond, Booth & Munro (1991)
Californian language area Serran Serrano, Kitanemuk (†) No native speakers currently, but learners of Serrano in Southern California Hill (1967)
Cupan Cahuilla, Cupeño 35 speakers of Cahuilla, no native speakers of Cupeño Seiler (1977), Hill (2005)
Luiseño-Juaneño 5 speakers in Southern California Kroeber & Grace (1960)
Tongva (Gabrielino-Fernandeño) (†) (extinct since ca. 1900) Sta. Catalina Island, Los Angeles, Southern California, ongoing revival efforts Munro & Gabrielino/Tongva Language Committee (2008)
Hopi Hopi 6,800 speakers in northeastern Arizona Hopi Dictionary Project (1998), Jeanne (1978)
Tübatulabal Tübatulabal 5 speakers in Kern County, California Voegelin (1935), Voegelin (1958)
Southern Uto-Aztecan
(possibly an areal grouping) Tepiman
Pimic O’odham (Pima-Papago) 14,000 speakers in southern Arizona, US and northern Sonora, Mexico Zepeda (1983)
Pima Bajo (O’ob No’ok) 650 speakers in Chihuahua and Sonora, Mexico Estrada-Fernández (1998)
Tepehuan Northern Tepehuan 6,200 speakers in Chihuahua, Mexico Bascom (1982)
Southern Tepehuan 10,600 speakers in Southeastern Durango Willett (1991)
Tepecano (†) Extinct since 1972, spoken in Northern Jalisco Mason (1916)
Tarahumaran Tarahumara (several varieties) 45,500 speakers of all varieties, all spoken in Chihuahua Caballero (2008)
Upriver Guarijio, Downriver Guarijio 2,840 speakers in Chihuahua and Sonora Miller (1996)
Tubar (†) Spoken in Sinaloa and Sonora Lionnet (1978)
Cahita Yaqui 11,800 in Sonora and Arizona Dedrick & Casad (1999)
Mayo 33,000 in Sinaloa and Sonora Freeze (1989)
Opatan Opata (†) Extinct since approx. 1930. Spoken in Sonora. Shaul (2001)
Eudeve (†) Spoken in Sonora, but extinct since 1940 Lionnet (1986)
Corachol Cora 13,600 speakers in northern Nayarit Casad (1984)
Huichol 17,800 speakers in Nayarit and Jalisco Iturrioz Leza, Ramírez de la Cruz & (2001)
Aztecan Pochutec (†) extinct since 1970s, spoken on the coast of Oaxaca Boas (1917)
Core Nahuan Pipil 20-40 speakers in El Salvador Campbell (1985)
Nahuatl 1,500,000 speakers in Central Mexico Launey (1986), Langacker (1979)
In addition to the above languages for which linguistic evidence exists, it is suspected that among dozens of now extinct, undocumented or poorly known languages of northern Mexico, many were Uto-Aztecan.[26]
Extinct languages[edit]
Main article: List of extinct Uto-Aztecan languages
See also: List of extinct languages of North America
A large number of languages known only from brief mentions are thought to have been Uto-Aztecan languages, that became extinct before being documented.[27]
Proto–Uto-Aztecan language[edit]
Vowels[edit]
Proto-Uto-Aztecan is reconstructed as having an unusual vowel inventory: *i *a *u *o *ɨ. Langacker (1970) demonstrated that the fifth vowel should be reconstructed as *ɨ as opposed to *e—there had been a long-running dispute over the proper reconstruction.[28][29][30]
Consonants[edit]
Bilabial Coronal Palatal Velar Labialized
velar Glottal
Stop *p *t *k *kʷ *ʔ
Affricate *ts
Fricative *s *h
Nasal *m *n *ŋ
Rhotic *r
Semivowel *j *w

Mayo language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Yessan-Mayo language or Mayo language (Brazil).
Mayo
Native to Sonora, Sinaloa, and parts inDurango, Mexico
Ethnicity Mayo
Native speakers
40,000 (2010 census)[1]
Language family
Uto-Aztecan
Mayo
Language codes
ISO 639-3 mfy
Glottolog mayo1264[2]
Mayo is an Uto-Aztecan language. It is spoken by about 40,000 people, the Mexican Mayo or Yoreme Indians, who live in the South of the Mexican state of Sonora and in the North of the neighboring state of Sinaloa. Under the “Law of Linguistic Rights,” it is recognized as a “national language” along with 62 other indigenous languages and Spanish which all have the same validity in Mexico.
The Mayo language is partially intelligible with the Yaqui language, and the division between the two languages is more political, from the historic division between the Yaqui and the Mayo peoples, than linguistic.
Programming in both Mayo and Yaqui is carried by the CDI’s radio station XEETCH, broadcasting from Etchojoa, Sonora.
Contents [hide]
1 Morphology
2 See also
3 External links
4 References

K’iche’ language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Quiche language)
K’iche’
Quiché
Qatzijob’al
Pronunciation [kʼiˈtʃeʔ]
Native to Guatemala
Region Central highlands
Ethnicity K’iche’
Native speakers
(2.3 million cited 1991–2000[1])[2]
Language family
Mayan
Eastern (Quichean–Mamean)
Greater Quichean
Quichean
Quiché–Achi
K’iche’
Early forms
Classical K’iche’
K’iche’
Official status
Recognised minority
language in
Guatemala[3]
Regulated by Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala (ALMG)
Language codes
ISO 639-3 quc
Glottolog kich1262[4]
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters.
K’iche’ ([kʼiˈtʃeʔ], also Qatzijob’al “our language” to its speakers), or Quiché (/kiːˈtʃeɪ/[5]), is a Maya language of Guatemala, spoken by the K’iche’ people of the central highlands. With over a million speakers (some 7% of Guatemala’s population), K’iche’ is the second-most widely spoken language in the country after Spanish. Most speakers of K’iche’ languages also have at least a working knowledge of Spanish.
The Central dialect is the most commonly used in the media and education. The literacy rate is low, but K’iche’ is increasingly taught in schools and used on radio. The most famous work in the Classical K’iche’ language is the Popol Vuh (Popol Wu’uj in modern spelling).
Contents [hide]
1 Dialects
2 Phonology
2.1 Stress
2.2 Vowels
2.3 Consonants
2.4 Syllabic structure
3 Orthography
4 Morphology
4.1 Nouns
4.2 Pronouns
4.3 Verbs
4.3.1 Voice and derivation
5 Syntax
6 Speech Genres
6.1 Babytalk
7 Notes
8 References
9 External links
Dialects[edit]
Kaufman (1970) divides the K’iche’ complex into the following five dialects, with the representative municipalities given as well (quoted in Par Sapón 2000:17).
East
Joyabaj
Zacualpa
Cubulco
Rabinal
San Miguel Chicaj
West
Nahualá
Santa Clara La Laguna
Santa Lucía Utatlán
Aldea Argueta, Sololá
Cantel
Zunil
San José Chiquilajá, Quetzaltenango
Totonicapán
Momostenango
Central
Santa María Chiquimula
San Antonio Ilotenango
Santa Cruz del Quiché
Chichicastenango
North
Cunén
South
Samayac
Mazatenango
The Nahualá dialect of K’iche’ shows some differences from other K’iche’ lects: Nahualá preserves an ancient Proto-Mayan distinction between five long vowels (aa, ee, ii, oo, uu) and five short vowels (a, e, i, o, u). It is for this conservative linguistic feature that Guatemalan and foreign linguists have actively sought to have the language called “K’ichee’,” rather than K’iche’ or Quiché.
Phonology[edit]
K’iche’ has a rather conservative phonology. It has not developed many of the innovations found in neighboring languages, such as retroflex consonants or tone.
Stress[edit]
Stress is not phonemic. It occurs on the final syllable, and on every other syllable before the final in an iambic pattern.
Unstressed vowels are frequently reduced (to [ɨ] or [ə]) or elided altogether, often producing consonant clusters even at the beginnings of words. For example, sib’alaj “very” may be pronounced [siɓlaχ], and je na la’ “thus” [χenðaʔ].
Vowels[edit]
K’iche’ dialects differ in their vowel systems. Historically, K’iche’ had a ten-vowel system: five short and five long. Some dialects (for instance, Nahualá and Totonicapán) retain the ten-vowel system. Others (for instance, Cantel) have reduced it to a six-vowel system with no length distinctions: short /a/ has become /ə/ in these dialects, and the other short vowels have merged with their long counterparts.[6] Different conventions for spelling the vowels have been proposed, including by the Proyecto Lingüístico Francisco Marroquín, the Summer Institute of Linguistics and the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala. The table below shows the two vowel systems, and several of the spelling systems that have been proposed.
Phonemes Spelling
Ten-vowel Six-vowel PLFM SIL ALMG
/a/ /ə/ a ä a
/aː/ /a/ aa a
/e/ /e/ e ë e
/eː/ ee e
/i/ /i/ i ï i
/iː/ ii i
/o/ /o/ o ö o
/oː/ oo o
/u/ /u/ u ü u
/uː/ uu u
Vowels typically undergo syncope in penultimate syllables, allowing for a wide array of complex onsets. Diphthongs are found in recent loanwords.
Consonants[edit]
K’iche’ has both pulmonic stops and affricates, p /p/, t /t/, tz /ts/, ch /tʃ/, k /k/, and q /q/, and glottalized counterparts b’ /ɓ/, t’ /t’/, tz’ /ts’/, ch’ /tʃ’/, k’ /k’/, and q’ /q’/. The glottalized /ɓ/ is a weak implosive, while the other glottalized consonants are ejectives. The pulmonic stops and affricates are typically aspirated.
Bilabial Alveolar Post-
alveolar Retroflex Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal
Nasals m [m] n [n]
Glottalized plosive b’ [ɓ] t’ [tʼ] k’ [kʼ] q’ [qʼ]
Aspirated plosive p [pʰ] t [tʰ] k [kʰ] q [qʰ] ‘ [ʔ]
Glottalized affricate tz’ [tsʼ] ch’ [tʃʼ]
Aspirated affricate tz [tsʰ] ch [tʃʰ]
Fricative s [s] x [ʃ] j [x~χ] h [h]
Approximant w [ʋ] l [l] r [ɻ] y [j]
In West Quiche, the approximants l /l/, r /ɻ/, y /j/, and w /w/ devoice and fricate to [ɬ], [ʂ], [ç], and [ʍ] word-finally and often before voiceless consonants. In some dialects,[which?] intervocalic /l/ alternates between [l] and [ð], a highly unusual sound change. The fricative[ð] is most common between the vowels o and a and between two o’s, and occurs more often than not between two a’s.
Syllabic structure[edit]
Complex onsets are very common in K’iche’, partially due to the active process of penultimate syncope. Complex codas are rare, except when the first member of the complex coda is a phonemic glottal stop, written with an apostrophe. The sonorants /m, n, l, r/ may be syllabic.
Orthography[edit]
Historically, different orthographies have been used to transliterate the K’iche’ languages. The classic orthography of Father Ximénez who wrote down the Popol Vuh is based on the Spanish orthography and has been replaced by a new standardized orthography defined by the ALMG (Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala). Ethnohistorian and Mayanist Dennis Tedlock uses his own transliteration system which is completely different from any of the established orthographies, but this system will not be given here.
The first line of Popol Wuj in different orthographies:
Ximénez’s classical orthography Are v xe oher tzíh varal Quíche ubí.
ALMG orthography Are’ uxe’ ojer tzij waral K’iche’ ub’i’.
(Ximénez’s Spanish translation) Este es el principio de las Antiguas historias aquí en el Quiché.
(Tedlock’s English translation) “This is the beginning of the ancient word, here in the place called Quiché.”
Morphology[edit]
Like other Mayan languages, K’iche’ uses two sets of agreement markers — known to Mayanists as “Set A” and “Set B” markers — which can appear on both nouns and verbs. “Set A” markers are used on nouns to mark possessor agreement, and on verbs to agree with the transitive subject (ergative case). “Set B” markers are used on verbs to agree with the transitive object or the intransitive subject (absolutive case).
Set A markers
Before a consonant Before a vowel
First person singular nu- or in- w- or inw-
Second person singular a- aw-
Third person singular u- r-
First person plural qa- q-
Second person plural i- iw-
Third person plural ki- k-
Set B markers
First person singular in-
Second person singular at-
Third person singular Ø-
First person plural oj- (uj- in some varieties)
Second person plural ix-
Third person plural e- (eb’- in some varieties)
Nouns[edit]
Nouns are not inflected for case. Their role in the sentence is indicated by word order, and by agreement marking on the grammatical head which they depend on.
Only a few nouns — most of them referring to humans — are inflected for number. On nouns which do show number, the most common plural suffixes are ab’ and ib’ : e.g. ixoq “woman”, ixoq-ib’ “women”; ak’al “child”, ak’al-ab’ “children.”
A few common nouns have irregular plurals: achi “man”, achi-jab’ “men”; ali “girl”, ali-tomab’ “girls.”
Nouns agree with their possessors, using the Set A agreement markers: nu-wuj “my book,” a-wuj “your book,” u-wuj “his book,” etc.
Nouns may be used as predicates. When they are, they agree with their subject using the Set B agreement markers: in achi “I am a man,” at achi “you are a man,” achi “he is a man,” etc.
Pronouns[edit]
K’iche’ distinguishes six pronouns, classified by person and number. Gender and case are not marked on pronouns. Pronouns are often omitted, as subject and object agreement are obligatorily marked on the verb.
Subject and object pronouns
In orthography In IPA
First person singular in /in/
Second person singular at /at/
Third person singular are’ /aɾeʔ/
First person plural uj /uχ/
Second person plural ix /iʃ/
Third person plural iyare’ /ijaɾeʔ/
Verbs[edit]
Verbs are highly morphologically complex, and can take numerous prefixes and suffixes serving both inflectional and derivational purposes.
The table below shows the inflectional template of a K’iche’ verb. Agreement follows an ergative/absolutive pattern. Subjects of transitive verbs are indexed using Set A markers. Intransitive subjects and transitive objects are indexed using Set B markers. Aspect and mood are also indicated, as is movement: the prefix ul- in the movement slot indicates movement towards the speaker, while the prefix e- (or b’e- in some varieties) indicates movement away.
Verb inflection
Aspect/mood Set B (absolutive) Movement Set A (ergative) Stem Status suffix
k- at- b’in -ik katb’inik “You walk.”
x- at- inw- il -o xatinwilo “I saw you.”
ch- Ø- a- k’am -a’ chak’ama’ “Carry it!”
k- Ø- ul- wa’ -oq kulwa’oq “S/he comes and eats.”
The last morpheme on a verb, the so-called “status suffix,” is a portmanteau morph whose form determined by a rather complicated set of rules. Relevant factors include:
whether the verb is transitive or intransitive
whether the verb’s mood is indicative or imperative
whether or not the verb contains a movement marker
whether or not the verb falls at the end of an intonational phrase
Voice and derivation[edit]
The examples above involve verbs with simple stems. Verb stems may also be morphologically complex. Complex stems may involve voice suffixes
Causative: -isa (-kam- “die,” -kam-isa- “kill (someone)”)
Passive: -x (-kuna- “cure (someone),” -kuna-x- “be cured”)
Completive passive: -taj (-kuna- “cure (someone),” -kuna-taj- “be completely cured; recover”)
Antipassive: -n, -on or -un (-mes- “sweep (something) clean,” -mes-on- “sweep up”)
or derivational suffixes, many of which form verb stems from other parts of speech. For instance, the versive suffix -ir or -ar forms verb stems from adjectives: utz “good,” -utz-ir- “get good”; nim “big,” -nim-ar- “get big.” Multiple suffixes can appear within a single stem: -nim-ar- “get big,” -nim-ar-isa- “enlarge (something),” -nim-ar-isa-x- “be enlarged.”
Syntax[edit]
As with all Mayan languages, K’iche’ has an ergative pattern of verb agreement, and often uses verb-object-subject (VOS) word order. Most modern speakers use SOV, SVO, and VSO word orders interchangeably. Language purists have tried to preserve the traditional verb-initial word order, while influence from Spanish (an SVO language) promotes a subject-initial order.

 

This entry was posted in Let's Share Our Dreams and Visions. Bookmark the permalink.