A Grammar of the Yucatecan Mayan Language
by David & Alejandra Bolles

VERBS

Intransitive Verbs

83.  The normal modern regular intransitive verb suffixes appended to the verb root to form the intransitive verbs are:

However, the intransitive verbs are often irregular as will be seen in the examples.

For the general form when the verb is regular the vowel in the verb suffix -Vl agrees with the vowel of the verb root. Two of the more common irregularities are those verb roots which appear in the general form as the verb root itself and those verb roots which tack on the verb suffix of -tal. The general form is conjugated with Set A pronouns, as will be seen in Section 84.

For the second form, those verb roots which do not take on a verb suffix in the general form usually use -nahi as their second form and those verb root which take the verb suffix -tal in the general form usually use -lahi as their second form. The second form, as was noted in Section 75, is conjugated with Set B pronouns, and is listed in the third person singular, -i.

For the third form today -aan is generally standard, although in some cases for those verbs which use -nahi the suffix -nahaan is an alternative, and for those verbs which use -lahi the suffix -lahaan is an alternative. The third form, as was noted in Section 75, is conjugated with Set B pronouns, and is listed in the third person singular. However the third person singular pronoun, -i, since at least early colonial times has been contracted out. The third form is also used as an adjectival past participle as noted in Section 56. Examples: labaan che = rotten tree, lubaan tunich = fallen stone, etc.

For the fourth form the vowel in -Vc agrees with the vowel in the general form. Those intransitive verbs which use -nahi in the second form use -nac in the fourth form and those intransitive verbs which use -lahi in the second form use -lac in the fourth form. The fourth form, as was noted in Section 75, is conjugated with Set B pronouns, and is listed in the third person singular. However the third person singular pronoun, -i, since mid-colonial times is frequently contracted out and is rarely if ever used today.

Mek is the verb root for "embrace". The intransitive forms are:

mek, meknahi, mekaan, meknac

Naac is the verb root for indicating upward motion. As noted in the transitive conjugation naac appears with the causative marker particle -z- placed between it and the verbal suffixes. The meaning of the verb in the transitive conjugation is "to lift". In the intransitive conjugation however the meaning of naacal is "to climb, to raise up".

naacal, naaci, naacaan, naacac

Han is the verb root for "eat". In the transitive conjugation han appears with the particle -t- placed between it and the verbal suffixes. Here however it appears without that consonant.

hanal, hani, hanaan, hanac

Lub is the verb root for "to fall". This verb, like han (to eat), is regular, but the vowel is u.

lubul, lubi, lubaan, lubuc

Cux is the verb root for "to live". This verb uses -tal for its general form.

cuxtal, cuxlahi, cuxaan, cuxlac

It is our opinion, although this is not based on actual fact in terms of concrete examples, that the intransitive conjugation was once also just as regular as the transitive and archaic passive conjugations still are. We feel that due to the propensity of the Mayan language to use contractions the intransitive conjugation has been long subjected to these contractions to such a degree that the true form of this conjugation is no longer known, nor was it known even in the period of first contact with European culture. At least if it was known this knowledge was not passed on to the writers of the various dictionaries and grammars. However, knowledge of the true form of the intransitive conjugation lingers on subconsciously as can be seen in how a Spanish verb is transformed into a Mayan intransitive verb. For example, the Spanish verb juntar (to gather) is transformed into the Mayan intransitive verb "to gather" as follows:

juntar, juntarnahi, juntarnahaan, juntarnac

As will be seen in Section 184 this set of suffixes (-, -nahi, -nahaan, -nac) is the standard one used for transforming Spanish verbs into Mayan intransitive verbs.

When we combine the use of this suffix set to transform Spanish verbs into intransitive Mayan verbs with the information presented in Sections 100 - 104 in which various sets of intransitive verb suffixes transform various parts of speech into intransitive verbs we come to the conclusion that there was in fact once an uniform underlying structure to the intransitive conjugation. The form of that structure was:

-Cahal, -Cahi, -Cahaani, -Cahaci

in which the "C" is a consonant of the following values: n, ch, l, p, t, k, dz (listed more or less in the order of importance). Thus the following were the full uncontracted sets of intransitive verb suffixes:

One could say that there is in fact an intransitive verb marker, namely "-Cah-", just as there is, as shown in Section 91, a passive verb marker, namely "-ab-", which is inserted between the verb root and a standard set of verb suffixes. These standard verb suffixes which operate for the intransitive and passive conjunctions are:

-al, -i, -aani, -aci

Remember that the general form is conjugated with Set A pronouns while the second, third and fourth forms are conjugated with Set B pronouns. Thus the third person singular Set B pronoun -i is shown with these three forms.

Now, if one compares verbs using the standardized complete intransitive verb suffixes with the examples of modern intransitive verbs given above one can see that in every case the modern verb suffixes can be construed to be contracted subsets of the complete suffix sets. For example:

In the general form of mek the suffix is lost completely. In the second form there is no change. In the third form the intransitive verb marker -nah- is lost as well as, in the third person singular only, the personal pronoun -i. In the fourth form the -ah- of the marker is lost as well as, in the third person singular only, the personal pronoun -i.

In this case in all forms the intransitive verb marker -nah- has been lost as well as for the third and fourth forms, in the third person singular only, the personal pronoun -i.

In the general form for the verb root cux the suffix has for some reason taken on the contracted form of the suffix -tahal. We have no explanation for this transformation. In the second form there is no change. In the third form the intransitive verb marker -lah- is lost as well as, in the third person singular only, the personal pronoun -i. In the fourth form the -ah- of the marker is lost as well as, in the third person singular only, the personal pronoun -i.

Notice that in the third and fourth forms in all cases the third person singular pronoun has been lost. As will be shown in the paradigms in Sections 86 and 87, this is the only pronoun to be lost. For the third form the third person singular pronoun has been lost ever since colonial times, and we have not found any examples of its usage. On the other hand, there are examples of the fourth form both with and without the third person singular pronoun all through the colonial literature and it seems to us that the use of this pronoun can still be heard today.

In summary, we feel that the intransitive conjugation is in fact based upon a regular conjugation, but that it has given way to contracted forms over the centuries to such an extent that today the conjugation gives the appearance of being irregular. If this assumption is correct, then the range of contractions for each of the four forms is as follows:

-Cahal: -tal / -hal / -Vl / -
-Cahi: -hi / -i
-Cahaani: -Cahaan / -aan
-Cahaci: -Cahci / -Caci / -aci / -ci
-Cahac / -Cac / -Vc

While the above discussion is not of much help to the reader in helping him know what the modern form of any particular modern intransitive verb will be, it should be pointed out that when in doubt, a person speaking modern Mayan who is unsure of what the modern-day form of an intransitive verb is can get away with using the standardized form. While the result may sound peculiar to the Mayan listener, at least it will be grammatically correct and unmistakable in its intent. Furthermore, the above discussion may be of some significance for those dealing with hieroglyphs. That is, there is an indication that the verb suffix -nahal may exist if a reading offered by Dieter Dütting is correct. (T1.756.568:23 - 683:102 = u.dzi.u:l - na:hal) Whether this is a correct reading or not, the knowledge of these standardized suffixes may be of help when working on the problem of decipherment.

84.  Intransitive conjugation time sequence. The model verb used here is hok (to go out) (hokol, hoki, hokaan, hokoc). Most of the tenses have been explained in the previously in the transitive conjugation. The new tenses are explained as they appear.

As was noted in the introductory remarks to this chapter on verbs, Section 75, and then again in Section 83, the second, third, and fourth forms of the intransitive verbs are conjugated in each tense using Set B pronouns. Examples of these conjugations are given here.

85.  The conjugation of the second form:

For the verb root hok (to come out):

For the verb root han (to eat):

For the verb root mek (to embrace):

For the verb root cux (to live):

86.  The conjugation of the third form:

For the verb root hok (to come out):

For the verb root han (to eat):

For the verb root mek (to embrace):

For the verb root cux (to live):

87. The conjugation of the fourth form:

For the verb root hok (to come out):

For the verb root han (to eat):

For the verb root mek (to embrace):

For the verb root cux (to live):

Notice that for the contractions of fourth form verbs whose roots end in -c or -k that with the exception of the third person singular these contractions result in the same words as their corresponding persons from the conjugation of the second form.

88.  The imperative is, as in English, defective, but is pluralized by the addition of the suffix -eex.

The intransitive conjugation is the only conjugation which has a true imperative. As mentioned in the transitive conjugation, what is now taken to be the transitive imperative appears to be derived from the transitive suggested future tense.

89.  Negation: the negation of the foregoing tenses is generally accomplished by preceding the tense by ma (not).

Exceptions are the following:

90.  Interrogatives: interrogative phrases using the foregoing conjugation generally use the tenses as they are.

Exception:

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page