myaamiaataweenki, like the other Algonquian languages, has two different forms of the noun depending on whether it is obviative or proximate.
Laura Welcher used a circle metaphor to explain the obviative:proximate contrast in Potawatomi. As far as I know, this was a teaching method that she did not widely publish, but some of the (now-deceased) Potawatomi elders were still cheerfully remembering and using this strategy decades later:
[A] circle was drawn for most sentences and the audience was asked to state the obviative within that message.
- Potawatomi Traveling Times 2016-08-15, 22(4):1 pdf†
† The document linked above contains a photograph of person who has since passed away (Viewing images of people who have died is a violation of some Indigenous religious beliefs).
Summary Table
Here's a table, showing the different forms in myaamiaataweenki.
| Meaning | [proximate] |
[obviative] |
|---|---|---|
| 🐕 | alemwa | alemwali or alemooli |
| 🐕🐕 | alemwaki | alemwahi or alemoohi |
In some of the Algonquian languages, there are no obviative plurals anymore. But myaamiaataweenki still has them!
...so how do they work? What do you do with them?
Using Obviative and Proximate in Conversation
That's where the circle comes in! There can only be one (1) proximate in a sentence; all other animates have to be obviative.
Think of it this way: conversations and stories aren't limitless. We can only keep track of so many things at one time.
So to help us keep track of what we're talking about, imagine a circle. The circle has just enough room for me/us (1st person), you/y'all (2nd person), and one other animate noun (3rd person) .
The 3rd person you decide to bring into the circle is proximate. All the rest, the ones you leave out, are obviative.
But don't take my word for it...
Examples from speakers
Compare this sentence, where alemooki is the only one in the circle...
neehi alemooki meekišiweeciki
'and dogs bark' Trowbridge 367-13-1
...with this next one, where there's not enough room in the circle for everyone. The speaker who LeBoullenger recorded 400 years ago decided to leave kwaahkwaanihsia 'grasshopper' out, and make it an obviative:
kwaahkwaanihsiahi eemwaaci
'he eats grasshoppers' LeBoullenger 376-56-1
The grasshoppers don't fit in the circle, because the person doing the eating is the one we're talking about, and he's already there!
So what?
You might not use it right now, but this ending gets used in the stories a lot...because most of the time you have to talk about more than two people to tell a story!
So if you haven't heard it yet or seen it before, keep your eyes and ears open - I bet you'll run into it soon!