BOAS] HANDBOOK OF INDIAN LANGUAGES TAKELMA 175 



la-H-fhd'"'¥ he burst it (cf. -fha'°'g¥n I burst it) 



i-s'wili's'wal he tore it to pieces (cf. -s'lvili's'wili^n I tore it to 



pieces) 

 %-s'wi'ls'wal tear it to pieces! 

 l-s'wifls'wa'l he tore it (once) 

 l-Jieme^m he wrestled with him 22.10 (cf. -hememi'^n I wrestled 



with him 



despite the prefixed -%-', but: 



la-waya-fl)d''^¥i he burst it with a knife 



Tian-waya-s'wils'wa'Thi tear it through in pieces with a knife! 

 (73.3) 



Similarly: 



hd-H-sgaP-Y sga'V he picked him up 31.11 (cf. -sgdVsgigi^n I picked 

 him up) 

 but: 



Ida'TTiaP' dan haf^-sga^Ysga'Vi tongs rocks he-picked-them-up-with 

 ( = he picked up rocks with tongs) 170.17 



despite the lack of an instrumental prefix in the verb. Explicit in- 

 strumentality, however, can hardly be the most fundamental func- 

 tion of the -Thi. It seems that whenever a transitive verb that 

 primarily takes but one object is made to take a second (generally 

 instrumental or indirective in character) the instrumental -i- (with 

 retained -hi) is employed. Thus: 



ma'xla JduwU he threw dust 

 but: 



ma'xla ^alTduwuM dust he-threw-it-at-him (perhaps best trans- 

 lated as he-bethrew-him-with-dust) cf. 184.5 



where the logically direct object is ma'xla, while the logically indirect, 

 perhaps grammatically direct, object is implied by the final -hi and 

 the prefix al-. Similarly, in: 



¥o^px habaha'fi wd'^di'xda ashes he-clapped-them-over his-body 

 (perhaps best rendered by : he-beclapped-his-body-with-ashes) 

 182.9 



the logically direct obiect is Ic'o^'px, the logically indirect object, his- 

 body, seems to be implied by the -'i. This interpretation of the -hi 

 as being dependent upon the presence of two explicit objects is con- 

 firmed by the fact that most, if not all, simple verbs that regularly 

 retain it (such as give to, say to in non-aorist forms, bring to, 

 verbs in -anan-) logically demand two objects. 



§ 64 



