Last updated 2023-01-19.
Proto-Amuzgo-Mixtecan (PAM) had productive plural marking, indicated by the prefix *n-. Often this was accompanied by deletion of the following consonant, though it is unclear if this occurred at the protolanguage stage or later. This plural marking continues to be productive in Amuzgo; for example:
In contrast, Proto-Mixtec (PM) lacks a plural distinction in most words. The PM words listed above all function as both singular and plural. There are only two adjectives which have a plural form derived from the n- prefix:
A process by which singular forms derive from historical plural forms can be found in other Mesoamerican languages. For example, Northern Tepehuan [babáːdai] ‘frog’ (sg.) reflects a historical plural with partial reduplication (compare Nahuatl [kʷejat͡ɬ] ‘frog’, [kʷeːkʷejah] ‘frogs’); Nahuatl [t͡saht͡sapalin] ‘mojarra’ (sg.) reflects a historical plural with partial reduplication and a diminutive suffix (compare Huichol [sáːpa] ‘mojarra’) (Bascom & Molina 1998: 25; Karttunen 1983: 71, 310; McIntosh & Grimes 1954: 25).
In these languages, fossilized plurals are generally nouns referring to animals or plants.
There are also a number of cases where a PM word (without number distinction) reflects a PAM plural form. A PM word reflecting the corresponding PAM singular form may not exist, or may exist with a different meaning, or may exist with the same meaning.
Unlike the languages mentioned above, fossilized plurals in Mixtec are never nouns referring to animals; this may be because words for animals frequently contain a classifying prefix. Mixtec fossilized plurals do include nouns for plants, as well as plant products, body parts, and man-made artifacts.
Likely fossilized plurals in Mixtec have been identified in some cases on the basis of the existence of a corresponding singular form (either in Mixtec or a related language), and in other cases simply on the basis of the initial consonant and semantic plausibility. The consonants that Mixtec words begin with are not at all evenly distributed, and I suspect that the majority of words with initial *n- are fossilized plurals.
Where both the singular and plural forms have reflexes in Mixtec, the two forms may have the same tone, or the tones may be different. I don’t have an explanation for this.
Cuicatec data comes from Anderson & Concepción (1983) and represents the speech of Santa María Pápalo; Triqui data comes from Hollenbach (2022) and represents the speech of San Juan Copala; Amuzgo data comes from Steward & Stewart (2000) and represents the speech of San Pedro Amuzgos. Proto-Mixtec reconstructions are my own.
Anderson, E. Richard, and Hilario Concepción Roque. (1983) Diccionario cuicateco: Español - cuicateco, cuicateco - español, México, D.F.: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano. Available online at https://www.sil.org/resources/archives/10945.
Bascom, Burt, and Gregorio Molina. (1998) Diccionario tepehuán de Baborigame, Chihuahua. Unpublished manuscript. Available online at https://www.sil.org/resources/archives/35910.
Hollenbach, Barbara E. (2022) Diccionario triqui–español y español–triqui: Triqui de San Juan Copala. Preliminary version. Available online at https://www.sil.org/resources/archives/79578.
Karttunen, Frances. (1983) An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl. Austin: University of Texas Press.
McIntosh, John. B., and Joseph E. Grimes. (1954) Niuqui Ꞌïiquisicayari: Vixárica niuquiyári, teivári niuquiyári hepáïsita = Vocabulario huichol-castellano, castellano-huichol. México, D.F.: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano en cooperación con la Dirección General de Asuntos Indígenas de la Secretaría de Educación Pública. Available online at https://www.sil.org/resources/archives/2063.
Stewart, Cloyd, and Ruth D. Stewart. (2000) Diccionario amuzgo de San Pedro Amuzgos, Oaxaca. Instituto Lingüístico de Verano, A.C. Available online at https://www.sil.org/resources/archives/10968.