Bhojpuri to Querétaro Otomi: a property can require a verb, not an added copula
A Bhojpuri property statement may be rebuilt as an inflected predicate
Thakur describes Bhojpuri copular constructions, including affirmative बा and related forms. A description of an object’s size can therefore contain an ordinary property expression together with copular material. That structure should not be assumed to carry over intact to Querétaro Otomi.
Palancar’s field-based study of San Ildefonso Tultepec Otomi analyzes property concepts through verbs, nouns, and particular compound constructions, rather than a freely interchangeable class of ordinary adjectives. A source meaning such as “it is big” may consequently need an inflected target property predicate. Looking for an independent counterpart of every source copular word can produce the wrong analysis.
Being large is different from becoming large
Palancar shows that property predicates do not all accept the same tense patterns. In his San Ildefonso data, the expression for being big does not form the intended “became big” meaning simply by receiving ordinary past morphology. A construction involving growing supplies that change-of-state interpretation.
This matters when Bhojpuri distinguishes an object’s current size from a change in that size. The translator must retain the difference between a state and a transition, rather than interpret every past-looking target form as the same kind of past event. The study is specifically grounded in a Querétaro variety; its detailed forms should not be silently substituted for every regional Otomi variety.
A doubled target vowel can mark tone
INALI’s writing standard describes tonal and nasal-vowel distinctions. In that standard, rising tone is written with a doubled vowel. Its nguu means house, whereas ngu has a different function as a conjunction meaning like or as. Reducing the doubled vowel because Bhojpuri spelling does not show a corresponding pair would change the target word.
The standard also illustrates tone in verbal proclitics through dí nextí and di nexti. The written accent participates in distinctions of person and verbal interpretation, rather than serving as optional decoration. A Bhojpuri source verb and its auxiliary carry information that may be distributed across a differently written target construction. Removing target marks can remove that information even when the remaining letters look almost unchanged.
Number and variety still need their own decisions
Thakur’s singular हम contrasts with plural हमनी. An Otomi translation must preserve that speaker count before selecting its target person forms. Tone or an inflected property predicate cannot compensate for interpreting one source speaker as several. This source distinction is separate from the target’s orthographic representation of person.
INALI emphasizes substantial internal diversity and multiple community names across Otomi varieties. The general writing standard provides a framework, while Palancar’s examples demonstrate a particular Querétaro grammar. For a Bhojpuri description, use that distinction concretely: establish the source state or change of state, preserve its participants, and then select forms appropriate to the intended variety rather than combining regional forms merely because all are labelled Otomi.
Language references