ritual and conversational discourse in nahuatl
Post on 02-May-2023
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
Ritual and conversational discourse in Nahuatl.
From “There is no drink as sweet and fragrant as this” to “eat your meal!”
José Antonio Flores Farfán
CIESAS
Key words
Nahuatl conversational and ritual discourse, discourse markers, Nahuatl (internal) linguistic
variability, sociolinguistic competence in (Balsas) Nahuatl, Nahuatl contact and purism.
Abstract
Linked to a series of sociolinguistic differentials (e.g. power, cultural, conversational)
materialized in specific linguistic phenomena, this paper analyzes a couple of discourse
markers in Nahuatl linguistics; namely, the presence/absence of epenthetic /i/, its metathesis,
and the marked use of pronominal prefixes. All these resources indexicalize different
discourse genres and types of interaction together with different social positions in ritual and
conversational discourse. Epenthetic /i/ has mostly been described as an obligatory segment to
maintain the structure of the Nahuatl syllable, which according to existent grammatical
descriptions does not allow consonant clusters. Yet as documented by this and other few
works this restriction only holds for written discourse. As an overall trend, in actual oral
practice the presence or absence of epenthetic /i/ manifests two different types of discourse,
ranging from a highly formal (i.e. ritual) to an informal (i.e. extemporaneous) discourse.
Metathesis of epenthetic /i/ is also interpreted by speakers as a marked choice towards a
Nahuatl de iksaan, “ancient Nahuatl”, especially with the imperative, xi-/ ix-, whereas its
deletion is conceived as the unmarked choice indexing more conversational, informal
(referential or not) practices. Regarding pronouns, the shift between the first person singular
bound morphemes ni- to the second person singular ti-, while addressing a second person
singular, mits-, which from an external point of view could be thought as ungrammatical, also
indexes different interactional treatments and power differentials, such as those concomitant
to generational, gender differences and different types of discourse and interaction. All this is
succinctly analyzed in this paper for the first time, theoretically advancing an interpretation
that goes beyond quantitative paradigms in sociolinguistics, postulating more than for
example an audience oriented (Bell 1984) a conversational and power approach to the
variable use of language, particularly in the case of Nahuatl.
1 Introduction
In this paper the contemporary sociolinguistic complexity of Nahuatl1 is explored. Nahuatl
heterogeneity has historically manifested itself in a number of forms, such as the existence of
an honorific system and sophisticated forms of High speech indexing social stratification
since Prehispanic Mexico. As becomes clear considering the contemporary situation of
Nahuatl as a number of languages the idea of Nahuatl as a homogenous single unity
constitutes part of a colonial monolingual legacy. Moreover, the diversity not only of the
Nahuatl language, but of most Mesoamerican languages constitutes an eloquent expression of
the multilingual ethos that prevailed at the time of the Spanish invasion which still prevails up
to this day even when often highly endangered.
Nahuatl has been one of the most documented and studied languages of the Americas both
diachronically and synchronically. Yet the more we know of the language the more we
realize that several aspects not only of its structure but most of all of its use still have to be
2
unraveled (cf. for example Flores Farfán 2004), such as those described in this contribution.
For instance, contrary to what is thought, both by the layman and even by several linguists
(cf. for example Canger 1988) Nahuatl is not a single language, but rather a still
undetermined number of languages or better a continuum of Nahuatl varieties. The idea of
Nahuatl as a single language stems from a predominant (monolingual) ideology that goes
way back into prehispanic times, when Nahuatl had high prestige in a diglossic spectrum
both internally; i.e., within the Nahuatl dialects or languages and externally; i.e., with
respect to other genetically unrelated languages (cf. Flores Farfán 2004, 2007a, 2007b).
Before Aztec invasion of the Mexican plateau a number of Nahuatl speaking populations
already dwelled in what today is the Mexico City area. While expanding military dominance
to the whole Mesoamerican territory Aztecs or Mexicas imposed their own varieties as the
prestige ones. This becomes evident when considering the status of Nahuatl as lingua
franca, among other facts, such as the existence of clear cut varieties linked to internal
social stratification; the Pillatolli “(High: H) Speech of the ruling class” (with other varieties
indexing such differences, such as the Tecpanlatolli, “(High) Palace speech” and the
Macehualatolli “(Low: L) Speech of the commoners” (for a more detailed analysis on this
topic see Flores Farfán 2007a).
Although scarcely investigated, Nahuatl variability has historically manifested itself in a
number of forms. The most well known is the Nahuatl honorific system materialized in a
series of sophisticated markers of most of all High speech genres and varieties. Its very
existence indexes social stratification since Pre-Hispanic Mexico, which even when
significantly reduced, is still in use up to this day (see for example Hill and Hill 1986).
Organized in a diglossic Nahuatl internal spectrum most clearly expressed in prehispanic
and early colonial times, sociolinguistic variability manifested itself in a number of forms
pinpointing to social differentiation; indexing the existence of different social groups in a
hierarchical structure which included warriors and priests at the top of the social pyramid,
passing through a number of artisans and specialists such as magicians and physicians,
reaching the lower strata of society where peasants or Macehualme dwelled. Internal
Nahuatl variability expressed itself in the existence of a native terminology such as the one
alluded to above, including the existence of series of High speech varieties and genres such
as sacred oratory, “poetry”, which were of exclusive use of the Piltin, “the ruling class”.
Such clearly differentiated Nahuatl varieties included as part of their repertoire marked
choices in terms of the morphology conveying different social identities, outstandingly the
High forms. Just consider the plural markers indexing the two main poles of the prehispanic
Nahuatl society just mentioned: -me for the Macehual-me and –tin for the Pil-tin. Notice
that while the form Macehual-tin is indeed possible, probably only when uttered by a
member of the ruling class, such as the Tlatoani “THE speaker, i.e., the ruler”, the form
*Pil-me is never attested. This is consonant with the original Fergusonian definition of
diglossia, in which High varieties are grammatically more complex and include Low forms,
yet not the other way around. Moreover, this is further confirmed by the fact that High
varieties present other plural markers (tlaca-h, “, persons, men”) while Low varieties are
limited to just one (tlaca-me), together with the pejorative overtones that –me also conveys,
as stated by Simeon (1981: 113) in his Nahuatl dictionary for the plural form of female,
cihua-me.
Along the same lines, in the early periods other socio-morphological marked choices
included the use of differentiated absolutive forms such as –tl and –tli, as in xochi-tl (L) vs.
xochi-tli (H) “flower” (which from a conventional view have been reduced to “stylistic”
differences). This is clearly expressed in that the use of xochitli was restricted to the
expression of sacred oratory “poetry”, as suggested an exclusive part of the linguistic
3
repertoire of the ruling class. In passing, notice that [i] in xochitli resembles the epenthetic
process treated in this contribution, echoing a similar actor centered-perspective
interpretation.
All this, together with the use of archaisms, highly elaborated metaphors and the above
mentioned use of sophisticated honorific speech, favored Nahuatl central varieties which
were superimposed by the Mexica as the prestige modalities of the language, the dialectal
varieties of Mexico Tenochtitlan and Tezcoco (for a summary of these features see Table 1).
High and Low Varieties Characteristics
High varieties Low varieties Examples
1 Use of
absolutives –tl
and –tli for the
same noun
+ - Xochi-tl (H/L)
Xochi-tli (H)
“Flower”
2 Use of plural
-meh
- + Cihua-meh
(L)
“(Despicable)
Women”
3 Use of plurals
-h
–tin
+ - Tlaca-h (H)
Tlaca-tin (H)
“Men, people”
4 More use of
archaisms
+ - Otlacua-qui
(H)
Otlacuac
(H/L)
“He eat”
4
5 More use of
honorifics
+ - T-on-tlaca-h
(H)
Ti-tlaca-meh
(L)
“We are
persons,
men”
6 Central
dialectological
varieties
(Mexico-
Tenochtitlan and
Tezcoco)
+ - Tlacatl (H)
Tacat (L)
“Person,
man”
7 More
grammatical
complexity
+ -
See 1, 3, 4, 5
These High varieties were actually the documentation target of missionaries who
recovered them for their own purposes of evangelization. Thus, Nahuatl variability has
always been an outstanding index of the power relationships prevalent way back in the
history of Pre-, colonial and contemporary Mexico (see Hill and Hill 1986, Flores Farfán
2004, etc).
As suggested, at contact with Spanish invaders, the colonial power realized that it was
functionally and politically convenient to recast Nahuatl lingua franca for purposes of
evangelization and administration of the new imposed social order. This entailed not only
continuity and consequent maintenance of the use of Nahuatl in different realms but even its
expansion to new domains of use, outstandingly in its written form. In this respect, a written
5
Nahuatl tradition for such colonial purposes arose; often times appropriated by Nahuas
themselves to defend their interests, producing the vastest written documentation of any
Indo-American language which rivals with any Classical tradition of the world (cf. Lockhart
1992, Flores Farfán 2004).
The history of Nahuatl-Spanish contact variability is an area which in the last analysis has to
do with the tension between language shift and retention. In this respect, to put it in a
nutshell, in its history Nahuatl has undergone processes of hybridization with Spanish
leading to a continuum of syncretic Nahuatl (see e.g. Hill and Hill 1986). One of its
expressions are several Nahuatl varieties conceived in a continuum ranging from more
conservative to innovative (more Hispanized) forms (see Flores Farfán, 1999, etc.). In turn,
these varieties are evaluated in an ambivalent ideological frame basically related to
linguistic purism, revealing a number of sociolinguistic processes. In the long run, these
include the passage from a polysynthetic to an analytic language, bringing the indigenous
language closer to the hegemonic one in terms of its linguistic typological features (compare
for example kaliitik to iitik kahli, “Inside the house”). As an overall effect, this passage
entails the reduction of Nahuatl expressive resources, outstandingly lexical coinage, which
often times is evaluated as an index of Nahuatl “inferiority” by speakers themselves.
The history of the Nahuatl-Spanish contact and conflict is a whole rich separate chapter on
its own (se Hill and Hill 1986; Lockhart 1992, Flores Farfán 2004, 2007a, 2007b). Even
when not the direct topic of this contribution, I will briefly summarize it inasmuch
contemporary Nahuatl sociolinguistic competence in the Balsas region confronts itself to
contact variability. This is to say that “internal” Nahuatl variability is an actor perspective
use of the language defined in contradistinction to contact phenomena. In other words, the
Nahuatl de iksaan, “ancient Nahuatl”, is almost naturally opposed to the very existence of
Nahuatl-Spanish phenomena. Outstandingly expressed in resistance to Spanish borrowings,
loans are the most frequent targets of purist expression. Favorite purist shibboleths include
numerals (rarely used over five, makwihli, the traditional twentieth numeral based system
has been practically displaced, as in most if not all Mexican indigenous languages), personal
names and other forms for objects not formerly existing in Nahuatl material culture such as
trains and the like (e.g. tepostoonaltlamachiiwa, “watch”). Nahuatl purism develops a
highly complex expression materialized in a series of facets, including theoretical,
methodological and empirical issues (cf. Flores Farfán 2003). Thus, together with the
emergence of continua of Nahuatl linguistic varieties regionally and socially differentiated,
the overall effect of purist ideologies produces ambivalent forces revolving around the
dilemma of language shift or retention, expressed in the existence of for instance the
abovementioned innovative versus conservative varieties of the language which in turn are
ideologically valued.
In practice, all this allows to identify, a highly paralyzing purist trend which plays in favor
of Nahuatl displacement. This is a form of negative purism inhibiting Nahuatl continuity
and viability, unfortunately the most common purist manifestation in indigenous
communities or at least the most visible one. These include several written varieties (e.g.
translations of the Mexican constitution with no readers) carrying among others a series of
paradoxes such as purists’ less active oral competence or Nahuatl proficiency. Thus
ideologies of legitimo Mexicano (Hill and Hill 1986), the “real”, “authentic”, postulated
mythical ideal Nahuatl, reinforces itself in any form of internal variability, one of the less
investigated expressions of Nahuatl variation which is the case in point analyzed in the
present contribution ---the socio-cognitive use of epenthesis and other morphological facts
in actual interaction. As part of this Nahuatl sociolinguistic competence in the Balsas region,
internal Nahuatl variability is also nurtured by lexical coinage as for instance expressed in
language games close to the purist creation, yet evaluated in much more positive terms,
6
resembling local favorite tongue twisters or riddles (e.g. tsintsiinkiriantsintsoonkwaakwaa,
“scissor”, tsintsinkirianteenpiitskoontsiin, “bottle”). Such Nahuatl verbal art also points to a
series of resources ranging from extemporaneous to ritual speech, even expanding the
Nahuatl repertoire in terms of incorporating Spanish materials subject to processes of
nativization and reanalysis (e.g. opposing forms such as miichin “Fish”, to peskaados,
“Wooden fish as crafts for the tourist market” cf. Flores Farfán 1992). All these genres and
resources contribute to the vitality of the language, a part less examined by Nahuatl
scholars, to which this paper intends to at least partially advance for the Balsas region (see
map).
With this context in mind, an outline of the overall organization of Nahuatl talk in the
Balsas Nahuatl speaking area, a place about a three hour drive south of today’s Mexico City,
heading towards Acapulco, in the state of Guerrero, Mexico, will be discussed. Although it
became subordinated to the Aztec “empire”, and consequently paid tribute to the dominant
group, it was relatively independent. Its distinctiveness is pinpointed by a number of facts. It
received a specific denomination by the Aztecs, Cohuixca, a word translated as “lizard”.
This gives an idea of the way the Aztec dominant group treated other Nahuatl varieties and
their speakers, implying both an allusion to the hot and arid conditions of the region,
together with a pejorative name for speakers which were probably mostly considered
Macehualtin, “commoners, peasants, members of the lower class”.
Today the Balsas region comprises about 20 communities with a total of around 50
thousand people disseminated along the banks of the river of the same name (see map).
[MAP NEAR HERE]
Regarding the language itself some of the most outstanding characteristics that distinguish
Balsas Nahuatl from other Nahuatl (or Nahua-t with t cf. Canger 1988) languages include
the use of ka “no” for the free standing negation and x(i)- for the bound negation as in
xtlaakatl, siwaatl “it is not a man, it is a female”. Other features comprise the use of specific
lexicon that differs with respect to the Classical forms, such as koontli “water recipient”,
instead of koomitl; kuhtli “tree” instead of kwawtli (cf. Canger 1988; Flores Farfán 1999),
together with the low productivity of honorific forms, in contrast to for instance Classical
Nahuatl. Balsas Nahuatl has only one honorific layer, mostly present in ritual speech such as
the Huehuetlatohli “The elders, bride petition speech”2. This ritual genre, briefly analyzed in
this contribution, will be contrasted with conversational or spontaneous Nahuatl speech
below. For this purpose, let us take a look at the use of some Nahuatl discourse markers in
these communities.
2 Discourse markers in Balsas Nahuatl
We know relatively little of Nahuatl variability, especially in prehispanic and colonial times
(for efforts in this sense see Karttunen and Lockhart 1976; Lockhart 1992, Flores Farfán
2004, 2005, 2007b). Some of the few remarks that refer to Nahuatl variability in colonial
times are due to missionaries such as the Franciscan Friar Alonso de Molina in his 1977/1571
Vocabulario en la Lengua Mexicana (cf. Flores Farfán 2007a) and outstandingly the
seventeenth century Jesuit Horacio Carochi’s, Arte de la Lengua Mexicana 1983/1645. The
latter provides some examples of the differences between males’ and females’ speech. For
instance, Carochi notes that:
Some women, when speaking affectionately, say
notelpochticatzin instead of notelpochtzin [my young man];
it is a decent expression, although it shows love… Men do
7
not use these flattering expressions. (Carochi
2001/1645:311, quoted in Wright 2008:6)
Even when not directly linked to a female/male speech difference, this is the type of
morphological variation that we will be looking at in contemporary speech, considering social
deixis in two poles of a continuum that inform the overall Nahuatl (formal) ritual versus
(informal) conversational speech continuum as part of the overall sociolinguistic Balsas
Nahuatl competence.
In this paper instead of analyzing the most obvious realm of discourse markers in Nahuatl
(or any language), the lexical ones3, I will discuss a couple of not at all evident issues which
have been largely unanalyzed in Nahuatl linguistics; namely:
- the use (or not) of epenthetic /i/ in specific morphological paradigms,
- the use of ti- and mits-, two pronoun shifters referred to second persons in Nahuatl.
These two morphological segments are here interpreted recasting an actors’ perspective
approach, against an external point of view that could or even would consider them “errors”,
“ungrammatical”, “non-acceptable” or at best “forms in free variation” --without any social
meaning whatsoever (cf. e.g. Andrews 1975).
The only study that has faced the use of epenthesis is that of Tuggy (1981). The author’s
work is based on a cognitive approach to language which conceives epenthesis as a way of
dealing and solving internal linguistic “conflicts”. This is at least partially based on
recovering actors’ perspectives, inasmuch it acknowledges the possibility of epenthesis as a
multiple analyses approach. Even when opening up space for speakers use in a state of
cognitive flux which allow multiple choices, Tuggy’s work does not deal with the
sociolinguistic (cognitive or not) significance of the use of epenthesis, one of the main
objectives of this paper, together with the analysis of the accompanying abovementioned
discourse markers.
Canonically, i.e. from a received (grammatical) perspective, the use of epenthesis is
described by all Nahuatl grammars as an obligatory condition to warrant the inexistence of cc
clusters in the Nahuatl syllable (cf. e.g. Andrews 1975; Launey 1981), which are considered
problematic. Consider (1), in which all is are epenthetic:
(1) ni-hkwaa nakatl “I eat meat”
ti-hkwaa nakatl “You eat meat”
ki-kwaa nakatl “(S)he eats meat”
ti-hkwaan nakatl “We eat meat”
nan-ki-kwaan nakatl “You (pl) eat meat”
ki-kwaan nakatl “They eat meat”
Yet, from the point of view of the oral use of the language by contemporary Balsas Nahuatl
speakers, the use of epenthesis constitutes a resource that indexes different types of
interactions, discourse and textual effects; probably metaphorically and at times also
explicitly indexing different social positions and interactional effects. Take for instance the
presence of i in the bound negative form xi-, which is a characteristic feature of ritual
discourse as witnessed in (2). This is a text derived from a fragment of a ritual discourse
showing this specific use of epenthesis. The text itself is known as a Huehuetlatohli, “Bride’s
petition”. It was collected by Ramírez Celestino in the 70s (cf. Ramirez Celestino and Flores
8
Farfán 2008), when it was still in use in several Balsas Nahuatl communities.4 Today it is an
endangered if not an almost extinct genre in most Balsas or several other Nahuatl
communities. Its presence can be considered a Nahuatl vitality index. Consider the following
fragment of this text:
(2) Kas ye melaak oonogeerraro, kas melaak saan
oomitsonmaatilaantikiiskeh mokoneetsiin, kaampa kaan momaatsiin
tikonpixtoya keeitlaa un see xoochitl.
Peeroh nooihke nikitowa nikwaahki see tlahtlakoolaatl, xitlah tliin
tsopelik awiaak.
(Ramírez Celestino and Flores Farfán 2008:58)
Maybe it is true that you have already fought, maybe it is
true that they have only come to stole away your beloved
daughter from your honorable hands, away from where with your
honorable hands you have been taking care of her as a flower.
But at the same time I state that I bring the water of sin
[ritual drink]. There is no [drink] as sweet and fragrant as
this.
This fragment is produced after a long ritual greeting, filled with honorific morphology. The
Huehue or bride petitioner utters xitlah tliin tsopelik awiaak, “There is no [drink] as sweet
and fragrant as this”, where the negative form xitlah surfaces, instead of the unmarked
conversational form xtlah, “nothing”, typical of informal, colloquial discourse. If epenthetic i
is found in more colloquial speech, it is either associated with an issue of reflexivity exerted
by the speaker with respect to his / her own discourse production, as is the case of elicitation,
which in a way is also a form of ritual speech reminiscent of a type of foreign talk, a “genre”
designed to please an audience (cf. Bell 1984). Such speaker oriented perspective invites
reconsidering attention to speech not so much linked to speech itself, but to participants’
power differentials in interaction. For instance in the text as a whole, epenthesis is exploited
as a resource linked to a generational differential, indicated by the fact that speakers consider
forms as the imperative xi-, where epenthesis surfaces, Mexicano de iksaan “ancient, old
Mexicano”, as in (3). Just as is the case with honorific morphology young speakers would not
dare utilize the imperative nor the High forms, as when a grandmother orders his grandson,
also conveying an emphatic effect:
(3) xi-tla-kwaa!
imp-obj5-eat
Eat your meal!
Occasionally, even some other features as the metathesis of the epenthetic /i/ are conceived
as Mexicano de iksaan “ancient, old speech”, as when a Nahua leader of the Consejo de
Pueblos Nahuas del Alto Balsas, a grassroot movement against the construction of an
hydroelectric dam in the region, in an assembly, while coordinating it, asks someone near him
in the audience to lend him a chair6:
(4) ixneechtlanewti mosilletita
“lend me your chair (to sit down)”
9
Thus the presence or absence of epenthetic /i/ in such forms as xtlah vs. xitlah “nothing”,
and its metathesis, constitutes a resource to mark different registers and, as we will see,
interactional strategies, not an arbitrary or random choice. As a suggested general trend in a
state of flux, the equation presence vs. absence of epenthesis corresponds to two varieties,
oscillating in a continuum from a more ritual speech to a colloquial, extemporaneous, more
spontaneous speech.
Even in old Nahuatl texts from the sixteenth century, epenthesis is precisely stylistically
exploited to mark poetic, sacred chants, as exemplified in (5):
(5) in puyuma xochi-tli, in cacahua xochi-tli
“Flowers of ecstasy, cacao flowers” (Garibay 2000:93).
All this suggests that Nahuatl variation is a highly marked behavior, part of a highly
sophisticated sociolinguistic historical and cognitive competence that is not until now that we
are starting to unravel. This is not only due to geographical differences, as it has usually been
(mostly eurocentrically) conceived from a dialectological point of view (Canger 1988), but
constrained by ideological and pragmatic reasons, of course linked to old and new social
stratifications (cf. Flores Farfán 2004, 2007a, 2007b).
Notice that against prescriptive Nahuatl grammars, (5) violates the complementary
distribution stating that every noun which root ends with a vowel will take the absolutive
suffix –tl, while roots ending in a consonant will take –tli, as in:
(5)(1)
tooch-tli “Rabbit” -abs
Yet in contrast to prescriptive grammars which are based on written sources or elicited, de-
contextualized forms, deletion of epenthetic /i/ and further morphology, including complete
personal markers as in (6), is in deed possible in all tenses, modes and persons in
extemporaneous discourse, as exemplified in the following verbal paradigms:
(6) Indicative mode
Present
In the context of a drinking session among friends one man
said, justifying a nasty comment of one of his partners:
tooa de relajo (vs. kitoowa de relajo) “He says it as a joke”
Future
In the same context, while referring to contrasting ways of
behavior that distinguish Balsas Nahuatl speakers from
Mestizos (mainstream Mexican people) in terms of greeting
females with a kiss, one man said:
teeh itoos urbano (vs. teeh kitoos urbano) “He will say it is
(a custom) of the city”
10
Perfect
In the context of an interaction of a grandmother with her
granddaughter while calling her to eat:
ootkak? (vs. ootihkak?) “Do you listen, i.e. pay
attention?”
Imperfect
In the context of a seller that buys crafts facing a
potential buyer who invited him to a party that the seller
could not attend:
newa hnekia yaas (vs. newa niknekia yaas) “I wanted to go”
Optative mode
Exhortative
In the context of a mother-son interaction in the household
while the mother is cooking dinner:
maa nteki (vs. maa nikteki) “Let me cut it (the onions)”
Imperative
In the context of a party while addressing the musicians to
start playing:
peewa! vs. xpeewa! “Start!”
Therefore in general as can be seen it can be stated that the presence versus absence of
markers such as object, epenthesis and even personal prefixes allows different contextual
interpretations, ranging from more formal registers and genres to informal ones, respectively.7
Presence or absence of epenthetic /i/ as well as the presence or absence of the object prefix
is also exploited to produce textual effects, such as emphasis:
(7) uumpa ka mota, xta “Your father is there, look”
uumpa ka mota, xkita! “Your father is there, watch out!”
Thus deletion not only of epenthesis but of the whole object morphology, implicitly
forbidden in (prescriptive) Nahuatl grammar descriptions, has not been really understood and
only alluded to, especially from the stance of a more conversational approach to Nahuatl
grammar (cf. nevertheless Flores Farfán 1992) as suggested here.
Moreover, under certain circumstances, via deletion as an expressive resource, a speaker
may in fact simultaneously allude to the social position of an addressee, while at the same
time producing an effect of familiarity with him / her / them. For instance, in the process of a
bride petition which is part of the historical Nahuatl genres known as Huehuetlatōlli, “Elders
speech”, as suggested above, by addressing the young groom with forms that present deletion
of epenthetic /i/ and specific object prefix k-, the speaker, a Huehue, the specialist in charge of
developing the whole petition ritual, indexes his social position in the face of the groom’s
elders, while at the same time looking to reduce the social distance between him and the
groom, a resource exemplified in:
11
(8) Ye tpia [instead of ye tikpia] monaamik aaman saa tliin
tikteteemoos?
You (familiar, affectionate) already have your partner, what
are you looking for now?
Notice that tpia is a form that the Huehue would never utilize to address the father’s groom,
but used exclusively to appeal to the young man’s responsibility to develop a proper behavior
in his marriage.
Yet not only deletion is exploited in terms of social deixis. Let us turn to another interesting
instance, which has also only marginally been reported in the literature, let alone explained in
terms of its social meaning; namely, the simultaneous use of resources that morphologically
indicate the same person.
3 The simultaneous use of the second persons and its social meaning
A conversational resource marking a familiar conversational treatment is witnessed in (9), in
which the second singular personal form ti- is used together with the second object prefix,
mits-, literally “you to you”; grammatically corresponding to the same person:
(9) Sepa ooneechwaahtiitlankeh saan kwaaltsiin aaman. Dekeh
kitoowaya yewa xkineki, saaihkoon konkaawaaskeh. Hkinekian
saan kwaaltsiin yeektli konyeektlaaliiskian iipan tlatoohle,
Señor, keechkitsiin nooihki tewatsiin timonekiitis. Aaman
nooihki señor xkita xneechmaka motlatooltsiin, nooihki
nikmati mogracia Dios nooihki tewatsiin niknekiiskia xkita
xneechmalkochowili iikoneew Dios niknekiiskia saan
kwaaltsiin. Maaka xkito saan oo-ti-mits-tlaatla-t-ako!
perf-2sg-2obj-burn-lig-aux
(Ramírez Celestino and Flores Farfán 2008: 56-57)
He is the one who hired me as Huehue, from whose honorable
breath I conform myself. I only come to life due to peoples’
heart. Now your honorable foot is the same as mine. Once
again I was sent here in the most beautiful way. If he said
that she does not want to [get married], in the same way they
would leave her alone [i.e. won’t bother her]. They only
wanted to beautifully and correctly reach an agreement with
respect to the proper discourse, Sir, just as with respect to
the amount that Thou would be willing [to contribute for the
wedding]. Now in this same way, Sir, look! Enable me your
honorable word, just as I know the grace of God, in the same
way that I would like for Thou to see in the most beautiful
way. May it not be that you would say that I just came to
turn you on fire! [to provoke your anger] (lit. you-to-you-
burn-stand).
Such elements have been only marginally recorded in Nahuatl linguistics, and not at all
understood from the point of view of the native interpretation and use, i.e. explained.
12
The use of ti-mits- 2sg-2obj “you to you”8 are not only not ungrammatical forms, but in
interactional practice marks a strong reduction of social distance between the speaker and his
addresses, implying familiarity and an affectionate treatment, even manipulated as a discourse
marker to pinpoint to the power structure in specific interactions, as is the case in point
analyzed here. For example while addressing the groom the Huehue admonishes him on how
to properly behave after been married, using timits-:
(10) Aaman newa nikitowa: iihoh, xkonita keenon tiyaas. Maaka
ihkoon tikchiiwas keen sekimeh kichiiwan. Xkonita xkoowa
mohaboontsiin tikwaalneextis motomiintsiin yootimotlaaniliito
keechkitsiin xwaalmokowiiili mohaboontsiin, moistatsiin. Ya
ye tpiyas mokoneewaan. Iika mokoneetsiin xkwaahkwiilis see
frutita. Aaman keemah hijo ihkoon ti-mits-ih-lia.
2sg-2obj-say-apl
(Ramírez Celestino and Flores Farfán 2008:89)
Now I say: Son, go and see how you are doing [i.e. behaving].
Let it not be that you do things as others do. Go and buy
your soap. You will come and encounter the sacred money that
you already have earned. You will come to buy for yourself a
small portion of your soap, of your salt. Now you will have
your children. For your small child bring some fruit. This is
the way I’m telling you now, son.
In another passage in which the Huehue was asked about his potential conflicts as a Huehue
by Cleofas Ramírez Celestino (CR), who collected this text in the early 70s, at the time in her
20s, the Huehue (Bonifacio Bárcenas BB) addresses her with timits-, again implying such a
familiar treatment as in (11):
(11) CR. Kwaakon tewa xkaaana mitspatlan?
BB. Ka’. Newa xkaana neechpatlan, bendito sea Dios.
Xkaana neechpatlan. Astaah naan ye nitlaantiw.
Timitsihlia iipan 1952 nimomaamaxti. Aaman iipan in fecha
niaw, yeen,xkiixtiili kweentah.
(Ramírez Celestino and Flores Farfán 2008: 74)
CR. Hence in your case you never got replaced?
BB. No. Nowhere I got dismissed. Nowhere I’ve been dismissed.
Up until now I have been successful.
As I tell you I taught myself in 1952. Up until this very
day I go on, just make your numbers.
It is worthwhile noting that, as far as I can see, together with few communities in Morelos
and a few others (e.g. Tetelcingo, Morelos, Tuggy personal communication) it is mostly in
Balsas Nahuatl in which the simultaneous use of ti-mits-2Sg-2Ob- is not only allowed, but
conversationally exploited. In other words, we witness the concurrent use of a morphology
that normally establishes a paradigmatic relationship, that of a second person agent (you) with
a second person object (to you). This would apparently turn out to be ungrammatical,
inasmuch as a reflexive relationship (which in this Nahuatl variety is marked with the
13
reflexive pronoun no-) does not emerge either. Nevertheless, in conversational practice such
use is not only totally acceptable, but, as I have outlined in this paper, conveys a powerful
meaning in terms of social deixis, both in conversational and ritual discourse. Thus such
variability it is not a matter of a meaningless or arbitrary variation between e.g. ni- and ti-
prefixes. Rather it implies a conversational treatment in which the Huehue, the “bride
petitioner” creates empathy with his addressee, while at the same time indexing his social
position; utilizing a number of other resources as the ones depicted here in a dynamic state of
conversational flux which we have only started to understand.
4 Final remarks
It is an irony that Mesoamerican languages, which have received a great deal of attention,
especially Nahuatl, are still very poorly understood from the stance of a more conversational
approach to the language (cf. nevertheless Flores Farfán 1992). In this paper I have explained
some features of this conversational or sociolinguistic competence, such as the use and
interpretation of the deletion of specific morphology, which has not really being understood
and only incidentally alluded to by former works, and at least implicitly forbidden in received
Nahuatl grammar descriptions. In fact via such expressive resources; for example by
addressing the young couple in the Huehuetlatolli “brides petition”, that we have briefly
analyzed, with forms that present deletion of epenthetic i and specific object prefix k-, the
speaker indexes their social (“lower”) position in the face of their elders and the Huehue
himself.
In turn, we have seen that the use of epenthesis in the negative form xi- can be considered a
characteristic feature of ritual discourse. If found in more colloquial speech, it is either
associated to an issue of reflexivity exerted by the speaker with respect to his / her own
discourse production and power relationships, as in the case of elicitation situations, together
with being linked to a generational differential or even manipulated to produce discursive
effects. In the same vein, it is worthwhile recalling that in the Balsas region the simultaneous
use of ti-mits-2Sg-2Ob- is allowed as a concurrent use of a morphology that normally
establishes a paradigmatic relationship, that of a second person agent (you) with a second
person object (to you), the patient, establishing not only a transitive but a differentiated
trajectory in terms of the participants of the speech act.
Such uses cannot be judged in terms of a close knit (grammatical) approach and it is also
beyond simple acceptability. In practice speakers interpret this usage not as an insignificant
variation between the ni- and ti- prefixes, but rather as a conversational marked choices and
emerging relational strategies in which for instance the bride petitioner is trying to create
empathy with his addressee, something that is perfectly the case in point in the bride petition
situation that has been analyzed. The use of the second person ti-“you” plus the second object
mits- “to you” precisely by “violating” Nahuatl combinatory rules constitutes a form of
addressing which indexicalizes familiarity and an affectionate treatment not exempt of a
power differential with the addressee, something that is not until now that we are really
starting to unravel.
Along the fact that we have only have started to understand Nahuatl conversational
structure, works which have investigated Nahuatl sociolinguistics are still few and based in
instruments such as surveys or interviews, which allow only marginal access to the
communicative competence in the language as deployed in everyday practices even when
speakers themselves infiltrate the interview with their own verbal culture, often times
interrupting the discursive hegemony conveyed by such instruments (cf. Briggs 1986), as
eloquently shown by Hill and Hill (1986).
14
Recall that ideologically forms where epenthesis surfaces, specifically with the imperative
xi-, are conceived by speakers themselves as Mexicano de iksaan “ancient, old (legitimo)
Mexicano” (Hill and Hill, 1986) an internal fact (i.e. not due to contact) that is also linked to
the topic of purism as a form to position oneself as the “real, legitimate, authentic” speaker, a
true possessor or owner of the language (cf. Flores Farfán 2003). Notice that purism as an
extreme reaction to contact varieties of the language produces a background against which
internal variability is judged and defined, at least indirectly favoring the reassurance and
productivity of a series of internal linguistic resources as the ones briefly depicted in this
contribution. In this respect, from the point of view of speakers themselves, the range of
variability that has been alluded to here constitute critical features of Nahuatl native theory
and practice, particularly amounting to the retention of the language not only in terms of the
range and socio-cognitive productivity of the Nahuatl linguistic repertoire but emotionally
speaking as well. In this sense, Balsas Nahuatl sociolinguistic competence, particularly in its
complex expression as multiple varieties of the language, constitutes a stream of Nahuatl
maintenance and resistance on which speakers invest quite a deal of reflexivity, including
producing specific linguistic ideologies not necessarily negatively oriented, such as purists
trends also positively conceived, favoring the vitality and thus viability of the language. This
runs along the lines of the Hills conclusion of their book Speaking Mexicano (1986) in which
they also identified the possibility of purism playing a constructive and crucial role to
reinforce the use of and the ultimate survival of the indigenous languages.
Notes
1 Nahuatl is a denomination that stems from the Aztecs (see below) use of the term in
prehispanic times, meaning the “pristine, audible, clear language”, a language with capital
letters, apt for poetry and science. This is the term recovered in the academic world, and
therefore will be the name utilized in this paper, in contrast to Mexicano, which is the most
common denomination that most contemporary speakers use.
2 Studies of the Huehuetlatolli include among others: Guerrero (2005), León-Portilla and
Silva Galeana (2003), García Quintana (1988), Ramírez Celestino and Dakin (1980);
Celestino Solís (1994), Díaz Cíntora (1993), Garibay (2000), and Ramírez Celestino and
Flores Farfán (2008).
3 As a topic for a separate paper in Balsas Nahuatl these include: iiwe, “Really, no doubt”
ye(n) “Yes”, (x)teh?, “No?”, “Well”, kas, “Maybe” bah, “Of course” diay, “Then”, kwakoon?
“What then if not?”
4 Since the whole text comprises more than 100 hundred pages, I will only utilize some
fragments of the alluded Huehuetlatohli to illustrate the cases in point. For the full text see
Ramírez Celestino and Flores Farfán (2008).
5 Abbreviations are as follows: - abs: absolutive, apl: applicative aux: auxiliar, imp:
imperative, lig: ligature, obj: object, perf: perfect, sg: singular.
6 It is interesting noticing that the speaker who utters this expression is a pseudo speaker of
Nahuatl; i.e. someone who pretends to speak the language in search of empathy with his
audience, the case in point since most of the members of the audience in this assembly, which
was against the construction of a dam in the late 80s, are Nahuatl-dominant or plentiful
speakers. For more details see Flores Farfán (1999).
7 Deletions are also related to contact with Spanish, but I am not directly dealing with this
type of phenomena here but rather concentrating on the internal conversational system and its
sociolinguistic meaning. For extensive contact studies of Balsas Nahuatl cf. Flores Farfán
(1999, 2005. etc.).
8 Cf. Michel Launey (1981: 362) based in Pittman, Brewer, and Dakin (quoted in Launey
1981, 361), where a mention of the use of Morelos ti-mitz- in Morelos can be found.
15
References
Andrews, R. (1975) Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bell, A. (1984) Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13: 145--204.
Briggs, Ch.(1986) Learning How to Ask. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Canger, U. (1988) Nahuatl Dialectology: A Survey and Some Suggestions. International
Journal of American Linguistics vol. 54/1: 28--72.
Carochi, H. (1983/1645) Arte de la lengua mexicana con la declaracion de los adverbios
della. Study by Miguel León-Portilla. Mexico: UNAM.
Carochi, H. (2001/1645). Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its
adverbs. Translated and edited with commentary by James Lockhart. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Celestino Solís, E. (1994) Xochitlali: Brindis por la Flor. In M. M. Alonso (comp.) Rituales
Agrícolas y otras Costumbres Guerrerenses (siglos xvi-xx). México: CIESAS. 167--177.
Díaz Cíntora, S. (1993) Oraciones, Adagios, Adivinanzas y Metáforas del Libro Sexto del
Códice Florentino. México: Pórtico de la Ciudad de México.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (1992) Sociolingüística del Náhuatl. Conservación y Cambio de la
Lengua Mexicana en el Alto Balsas. México: CIESAS.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (1999) Cuatreros Somos y Toindioma Hablamos. Contactos y Conflictos
entre el Náhuatl y el Español en el Sur de México. México: CIESAS.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (2003) Nahuatl Purism: Between Language Innovation, Maintenance and
Shift. In J. Brincat, W. Boeder and Th. Stolz (eds.) Purism in Minor Languages,
Endangered Languages, Regional Languages, Mixed Languages. Papers from the
conference on ‘Purism in the Age of Globalisation’ Bremen, September 2001. Bochum:
Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. 281--313.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (2004) Classical Nahuatl: Outlining its sociolinguistic complexity. In
Thomas Stolz (ed.) Alte Sprachen, Diversitas Linguarum vol. 8:167--178. Bochum:
Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (2005) Variations and Language Ideologies in Mesoamerican Languages:
The Case of Nahuatl. In R. Muhr (ed.) Standard Variation and Languages Ideologies in
Different Language Cultures around the World. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 311--330.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (2007a) La Variación Lingüística en las Artes Mexicanas (Con Especial
Énfasis en el Náhuatl). In O. Zwarjtes, G. James and E. Ridruejo (eds) Missionary
Linguistics III/ Lingüística Misionera III: Morphology and Syntax. Selected Papers from
the Third and Fourth International Conferences on Missionary Linguistics, Honk Kong/
Macau 2005, Valladolid 2006. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 59--74.
Flores Farfán, J. A. (2007b) Early and Contemporary Nahuatl Texts in Sociolinguistic
Perspective. Sociolinguistic Studies vol.1-3: 415--433.
García Quintana, J. (1988) El Huehuetlatolli--Antigua Palabra--como Fuente para la Historia
Sociocultural de México. Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl 12: 61--71.
Garibay K., M. A. (2000) Poesía náhuatl. Romances de los Señores de la Nueva España vol.
I. México: UNAM.
Guerrero D., Gregorio (2005) Ueuetlatojli para Pedir Perdón a los Padres de una Joven que
fue Raptada. Nauatlamatilistli. Sabiduría y Arte de los Nauas 1: 1.
Hill, Jane H. and K. Hill (1986) Speaking Mexicano. Dynamics of a Syncretic Language in
Central Mexico. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
Karttunen, F. and J. Lockhart (1976) Nahuatl in the Middle Years. Language Contact
Phenomena in Texts of the Colonial Period. Berkeley: University of California Press
Launey, M. (1981) Introduction à la Langue et la Litérature Aztèques. París: Harmattan.
16
León-Portilla, M. and L. Silva Galeana (2003) Huehuetlatolli. Testimonios de la Antigua
Palabra. México: SEP--Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Lockhart, J. (1992) The Nahuas. A Social and Cultural History of the Indians of Central
Mexico. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Molina, Fr. A. de (1977/1571) Vocabvlario en lengva castellana y mexicana[;] Vocabvlario
en lengva mexicana y castellana. México: Antonio de Spinosa. Re--edition México:
Editorial Porrúa.
Ramírez Celestino, C. and K. Dakin (1980) Huehuetlatolli de Xalitla, Guerrero: Una Visita
para Pedir novia. Tlalocan. Revista de Fuentes para el Conocimiento de las Culturas
Indígenas de México no. III: 71--81.
Ramírez Celestino, C. and J. A. Flores Farfán. (2008) Huehuetlatohli de Ahuehuepan.
México: CIESAS.
Tuggy, D. (1981) Epenthesis of i in Classical and TetelcingoNahuatl. Evidence for multiple
analysis. In F. Karttunen (ed.) Texas Linguistic Forum. Papers in honor of Fernando
Horcasitas 18:223--255. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Wright, E. R. (2008) A Dramatic Diaspora: Spanish Theater and its Mexican Interpretation. In
B. D. Sell, L. M. Burkhart and E. R. Wright (eds) Nahuatl Theater vol. 3. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
top related