307

Bertonio (1603b:305) said

Some Indians say that pta and ta are

not distinguished on nouns but rather

mean the same thing.
This implies that the two were in free variation in 17th
century Juli, but Bertonio does not indicate whether they
both occurred on verbs. *_pta- as verbal derivational
has been cited in two published sources (see 6-2.16)
but has not occurred in the spoken data investigated for
this study. Since -ta- usually does not verbalize and
-pta- usually is not a verbal derivational, it has been
decided to treat ~pta- as the verbalizer and -ta- as the
verbal derivational, recognizing that they overlap but
seem to be diverging.

The combination -pta- verbalizer plus -jfia
nominalizer implies a human subject in the following

examples from La Paz/Tiahuanaco:

k'umara.pta.fia 'to become healthy’ k'umara_ ‘healthy'

quligi.ni.pta.fia ‘to progress, to become rich'
quligi.ni ‘one who has money'

Liamp'u.pta.fia ‘to humble oneself, repent, change character'

Llamp'u = 'clear'

If a verb stem does not permit a human subject (because

of Aymara semantic constraints), a noun plus the