APPENDIX.

Tenses are formed by addinggeeto the pronoun for the perfect, andgahfor the future, andgahgeefor the second future. These terms play the part, and supply the want of, auxiliary verbs. The imperative is made ingah, and the potential indauwhere the second future isdaugee. The subjunctive is made by prefixing the wordkishpin, meaning if. The inflectionnuh, asks a question, and as it can be put to all the forms of the conjugation, it establishes an interrogative mood. The particle see, negatives the verb, and thus all verbs can be conjugated positively and negatively.To constitute the plural, the lettergis added to the conjugations; thus,nesaugeaugmeans, I love them. But this is an animate plural, and can only be added to words of the vital class. Besides, if the verb or noun to be made plural does not end in a vowel, but in a consonant, thegcannot be added without interposing a vowel. It results, therefore, that the vowel class of words have their plurals in _äg_,eeg,ig,og, orug. But, if the class of words be non-vital and numerical, the plural is made in the lettern. But this letter cannot, as in the other form, be added, unless the word terminate in a vowel, when the regularplurals are _än_,een,in,on, orun. This simple principle clears up one cause of perplexity in the conjugations, and denotes a philosophical method, which divides the whole vocabulary into two classes; while this provisionsupersedes, it answers the purpose ofgender. There is, in fact, no gender required by the conjugations, it being sufficient to denote thevitalityornon-vitalityof the class. Nothing can be clearer. This is one of the leading traits of the grammar of the language, upon the observance of which the best speakers pride themselves.It does not, however, result that, because there is no gender required in the conjugations, the idea of sexuality is unknown to the nomenclature. Quite the contrary. The tenses for male and female, in the chief orders of creation, areiabaandnozha. These words prefixed to the proper names of animals, produce expressions of precisely the same meaning, and also the same inelegance; as if we should say, male goose, female goose, male horse, and female horse, male man and female man. The term for man (inini) is masculine, and that for woman (equa) feminine in its construction. It is only in the conjugations that the principle of gender becomes lost in that of vitality.7.Active and passive voices.—The distinction between these two classes of verbs is made by the inflectionego. By adding this form to the active verb, its action is reversed, and thrown back on the nominative. Thus, the verb to carry isnim bemön, I carry;nim bemön-ego, I am carried.Adowawais the act of thumping, as a log by the waves on the shore._ Adowawa-ego_ is a log that is thumped by the waves on shore.Nesaugeah, I love;Nesaugeigo, I am loved. In the latter phrase, the personal termauis dropped, and the long sound ofeslips intoi, which converts the inflection intoigoinstead ofego.8.Participles.—My impression is, that the Indians are in the habit of using participles, often to the exclusion of other proper forms of the verb. The vocabulary contains abundantly the indicative forms of the verb. To run, to rise, to see, to eat, to tie, to burn, to strike, to sing, to cry, to dance, are the common terms of parlance; but as soon as these terms come to be connected with the action of particular persons, this action appears to be spoken of as if existing—both the past and future tenses being thrown away; and the senses appear to be, I, you, he, or they; running, rising,seeing, eating, tying, burning, striking, singing, crying, dancing. At least, I have not been able to convince myself that the action is not referred to as existing. When the participles should be used, they, on the contrary, employ the indicative forms, by which such sentences are made as, he run, he walk, for running, walking.The general want of the substantive verb, in their colloquial phrases, constantly leads to imperfect forms of syntax. Thus,nëbäis the indicative, first person of the verb to sleep; but if the term, I am sleeping, be required, the phrase isne nëbä, simply, I sleep. So, too,tshägizis the first person indicative to burn; but the colloquial phrase, I am burned, or burning, isnen tshägiz—the verb remaining in the indicative, and not taking the participle form.It is not common to address persons by their familiar names, as with us—as John, or James. The very contrary is the usage of Indian society, the object being to conceal all personal names, unless they be forced out. If it be required to express this sentence, namely: Adario has gone out (or temporarily departed), but will soon return; the equivalent isOgima,ke mahjaun,panema,ke takooshin. This sentence literally retranslated is, Chief, he gone; by and by, he (will) return—the noun chief being put for the personal noun Adario. It will be perceived that the pronounkeis repeated after the noun, making, chief, he gone.Panemais an adverb which is undeclinable under all circumstances, andtahkooshin, the future tense of the verb to arrive, or come (by land). The phraseology is perfectly loaded with local or other particulars, which constantly limit the action of verbs to places, persons, and things.XXV.A Vocabulary of the Odjibwa Algonquin Language.By H. R. Schoolcraft.On referring to the manuscript of this vocabulary, it is found to fill a large folio volume, which puts it out of my power to insert it in this connection. It is hoped to bring it into the series of the Ethnological volumes, now in the process of being published at Philadelphia, under the auspices of Congress.APPENDIXNo. 2.THE EXPEDITION TO ITASCA LAKE IN 1832.[450]SYNOPSIS.1. INDIAN LANGUAGESI. II.Observations on the Grammatical Structure and Flexibility of the Odjibwa Substantive. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.III.Principles Governing the Use of the Odjibwa Noun-adjective. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.IV.Some Remarks respecting the Agglutinative Position and Properties of the Pronoun. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.2. NATURAL HISTORY.V.Zoology.1. Limits of the Range of the Cervus Sylvestris in the Northwestern parts of the United States. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.—Northwest Journal.2. Description of the Fringilia Vespertina, discovered by Mr. Schoolcraft in the Northwest. ByWilliam Cooper.—Annals of the New York Lyceum of Natural History.3. A list of Shells collected by Mr. Schoolcraft during his Expedition to the Sources of the Mississippi in 1832. ByWilliam Cooper.VI.Botany.1. List of Species and Localities of Plants collected during the Exploratory Expeditions of Mr. Schoolcraft in 1831 and 1832. ByDouglass Houghton, M. D.,Surgeon to said Expeditions.VII.Mineralogy and Geology.1. A Report on the Existence of Deposits of Copper in the Trap Rocks of Upper Michigan. By Dr.Douglass Houghton.2. Remarks on the Occurrence of Native Silver, and the Ores of Silver, in the Stratification of the Basins of Lakes Huron and Superior. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.3. A General Summary of the Localities of Minerals observed in the Northwest. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.4. Geological Outlines of the Valley of Takwymenon in the Basin of Lake Superior. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.5. Suggestions respecting the Geological Epoch of the Deposit of Red Sandstone of St. Mary's Falls, Michigan. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.3. INDIAN TRIBES.VIII.Condition and Disposition.1. Official Report to the War Department, of an Expedition through Upper Michigan and Northern Wisconsin in 1831. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.2. Brief Notes of a Tour in 1831, from Galena, in Illinois, to Fort Winnebago, on the source of Fox River, Wisconsin. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.3. Official Report of the Expedition to Itasca Lake in 1832. ByHenry R. Schoolcraft.4. Report of the Vaccination of the Indians in 1832, under the authority of an Act of Congress. By Dr.Douglass Houghton.4. TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOGRAPHY.IX.Astronomical and Barometrical Observations.1. Table of Geographical Positions observed in 1836. ByJ. N. Nicollet.5. SCENERY.X.Letters on the Scenery of Lake Superior. ByMelancthon Woolsey.VideSouthern Literary Messenger, 1836.APPENDIX.INDIAN LANGUAGESI.Observations on the Grammatical Structure and Flexibility of the Odjibwa Substantive.[270]Inquiry1.Observations on the Ojibwai substantive. 1. The provision of the language for indicating gender—Its general and comprehensive character—The division of words into animate and inanimate classes. 2. Number—its recondite forms, arising from the terminal vowel in the word. 3. The grammatical forms which indicate possession, and enable the speaker to distinguish the objective person.Most of the researches which have been directed to the Indian languages, have resulted in elucidating the principles governing the use of the verb, which has been proved to be full and varied in its inflections. Either less attention has been paid to the other parts of speech, or results less suited to create high expectations of their flexibility and powers have been attained. The Indian verb has thus been made to stand out, as it were in bold relief, as a shield to defects in the substantive and its accessories, and as, in fact, compensating, by its multiform appendages of prefix and suffix—by its tensal, its pronominal, its substantive, its adjective, and its adverbial terminations, for barrenness and rigidity in all other parts of speech. Influenced by this reflection, I shall defer,in the present inquiry, the remarks I intend offering on the verb, until I have considered the substantive, and its more important adjuncts.Palpable objects, to which the idea of sense strongly attaches, and the actions or condition, which determine the relation of one object to another, are perhaps the first points to demand attention in the invention of languages. And they have certainly imprinted themselves very strongly, with all their materiality, and with all their local, and exclusive, and personal peculiarities upon the Indian. The noun and the verb not only thus constitute the principal elements of speech, as in all languages; but they continue to perform their first offices, with less direct aid from the auxiliary parts of speech, than would appear to be reconcilable with a clear expression of the circumstances of time and place, number and person, quality and quantity, action and repose, and the other accidents, on which their definite employment depends. But to enable the substantives and attributives to perform these complex offices, they are provided with inflections, and undergo changes and modifications, by which words and phrases become very concrete in their meaning, and are lengthened out to appear formidable to the eye. Hence the polysyllabic, and the descriptive character of the language, so composite in its aspect and in its forms.To utter succinctly, and in as few words as possible, the prominent ideas resting upon the mind of the speaker, appear to have been the paramount object with the inventors of the language. Hence, concentration became a leading feature. And the pronoun, the adjective, the adverb, and the preposition, however they may be disjunctively employed in certain cases, are chiefly useful as furnishing materials to the speaker, to be worked up into the complicated texture of the verb and the substantive. Nothing, in fact, can be more unlike, than the language, viewed in its original, elementary state—in a vocabulary, for instance, of its primitive words, so far as such a vocabulary can now be formed, and the same language as heard under its oral, amalgamated form. Its transpositions may be likened to a picture, in which the copal, the carmine, and the white lead, are no longer recognized as distinct substances, but each of which has contributed its share towardsthe effect. It is the painter only who possesses the principle, by which one element has been curtailed, another augmented, and all, however seemingly discordant, made to coalesce.Such a language may be expected to abound in derivatives and compounds; to afford rules for giving verbs substantive, and substantives verbal qualities; to concentrate the meaning of words upon a few syllables, or upon a single letter, or alphabetical sign; and to supply modes of contraction and augmentation, and, if I may so say,short cuts, andby-pathsto meanings, which are equally novel and interesting. To arrive at its primitives, we must pursue an intricate thread, where analogy is often the only guide. We must divest words of those accumulated syllables, or particles, which, like the molecules of material matter, are clustered around the primitives. It is only after a process of this kind, that theprinciple of combination—that secret wire, which moves the whole machinery can be searched for, with a reasonable prospect of success. The labor of analysis is one of the most interesting and important, which the subject presents. And it is a labor which it will be expedient to keep constantly in view, until we have separately considered the several parts of speech, and the grammatical laws by which the language is held together; and thus established principles and provided materials wherewith we may the more successfully labor.1. In a general survey of the language as it is spoken, and as it must be written, there is perhaps no feature which obtrudes itself so constantly to view, as the principle which separates all words, of whatever denomination, into animates and inanimates, as they are applied to objects in the animal, vegetable, or mineral kingdom. This principle has been grafted upon most words, and carries its distinctions throughout the syntax. It is the gender of the language; but a gender of so unbounded a scope, as to merge in it the common distinctions of a masculine and feminine, and to give a twofold character to the parts of speech. The concords which it requires, and the double inflections it provides, will be mentioned in their appropriate places. It will be sufficient here to observe, that animate nouns require animate verbs for their nominatives, animate adjectives to express their qualities, and animate demonstrative pronouns to mark the distinctions of person. Thus, if we say, "I see a man; I see a house," the termination of the verb must be changed. What was in the first instancewâb imâ, is alteredtowâb indân.Wâb, is here the infinitive, but the root of this verb is still more remote. If the question occurs "Is it a good man, or a good house," the adjective, which, in the inanimate form isonishish-í, is, in the animateonishish-i[n']. If the question be put, "Is it this man, or this house," the pronounthis, which ismâ bum, in the animate, is changed tomâ ndun, in the inanimate.Nouns animate embrace the tribes of quadrupeds, birds, fishes, insects, reptiles, crustacæ, the sun, and moon, and stars, thunder, and lightning, for these are personified; and whatever either possesses animal life, or is endowed, by the peculiar opinions and superstitions of the Indians, with it. In the vegetable kingdom, their number is comparatively limited, being chiefly confined to trees, and those only while they are referred to, as whole bodies, and to the various species of fruits, and seeds, and esculents. It is at the option of the speaker to employ nouns, either as animates or inanimates: but it is a choice seldom resorted to, except in conformity with stated exceptions. These conventional exceptions are not numerous, and the more prominent of them, may be recited. The cause of the exceptions it is not always easy to perceive. It may, however, generally be traced to a particular respect paid to certain inanimate bodies, either from their real or fancied properties—the uses to which they are applied, or the ceremonies to which they are dedicated. A stone, which is the altar of sacrifice to their Manitoes; a bow, formerly so necessary in the chase; a feather, the honored sign of martial prowess; a kettle, so valuable in the household; a pipe, by which friendships are sealed and treaties ratified; a drum, used in their sacred and festive dances; a medal, the mask of authority; vermilion, the appropriate paint of the warrior; wampum, by which messages are conveyed, and covenants remembered. These are among the objects, in themselves inanimates, which require the application of animate verbs, pronouns, and adjectives, and are thereby transferred to the animate class.It is to be remarked, however, that the names for animals, are only employed as animates, while the objects are referred to as whole and complete species. But the gender must be changed, when it becomes necessary to speak of separate numbers. Man, woman, father, mother, are separate nouns, so long as the individualsare meant; but hand, foot, head, eye, ear, tongue, are inanimates. Buck, is an animate noun, while his entire carcass is referred to, whether living or dead; but neck, back, heart, windpipe, take the inanimate form. In like manner, eagle, swan, dove, are distinguished as animates; but beak, wing, tail, are arranged with inanimates. So oak, pine, ash, are animate; branch, leaf, root, inanimates.Reciprocal exceptions, however, exist to this rule—the reasons for which, as in the former instance, may generally be sought, either in peculiar opinions of the Indians, or in the peculiar qualities or uses of the objects. Thus the talons of the eagle, and the claws of the bear, and of other animals, which furnish ornaments for the neck, are invariably spoken of, under the animate form. The hoofs and horns of all quadrupeds, which are applied to various economical and mystic purposes; the castorum of the beaver, and the nails of man, are similarly situated. The vegetable creation also furnishes some exceptions of this nature; such are the names for the outer bark of all trees (except the birch), and the branches, the roots, and the resin of the spruce, and its congeners.In a language, which considers all nature as separated into two classes of bodies, characterized by the presence or absence of life; neuter nouns will scarcely be looked for, although such may exist without my knowledge. Neuters are found amongst the verbs and the adjectives, but it is doubtful whether they render the nouns to which they are applied neuters, in the sense we attach to that term. The subject in all its bearings is interesting, and a full and minute description of it would probably elicit new light respecting some doubtful points in the language, and contribute something towards a curious collateral topic—the history of Indian opinions. I have stated the principle broadly, without filling up the subject of exceptions as fully as it is in my power, and without following its bearings upon points which will more properly come under discussion at other stages of the inquiry. A sufficient outline, it is believed, has been given, and having thus met, at the threshold, a principle deeply laid at the foundation of the language, and one which will be perpetually recurring, I shall proceed to enumerate some other prominent features of the substantive.2. No language is perhaps so defective, as to be totally withoutnumber. But there are, probably, few which furnish so many modes of indicating it, as the Odjibwa. There are as many modes of forming the plural, as there are vowel sounds, yet there is no distinction between a limited and unlimited plural; although there is, in the pronoun, aninclusiveand anexclusiveplural. Whether we saymanormen,two menortwenty men, the singularinin´i, and the pluralnin´iwug, remains the same. But if we saywe, orus, orour men(who are present), orwe, orus, orour Indians(in general), the pluralwe, andus, andour—for they are rendered by the same form—admit of a change to indicate whether the objective person beincludedorexcluded. This principle, of which full examples will be given under the appropriate head, forms a single and anomalous instance of the use of particular plurals. And it carries its distinctions, by means of the pronouns, separable and inseparable, into the verbs and substantives, creating the necessity of double conjugations and double declensions, in the plural forms of the first person. Thus, the term for "Our Father," which, in the inclusive form isKósinân, is, in the exclusive,Nósinân.The particular plural, which is thus, by the transforming power of the language, carried from the pronoun into the texture of the verb and substantive, is not limited to any fixed number of persons or objects, but arises from the operations of the verb. The general plural is variously made. But the plurals making inflections take upon themselves an additional power or sign, by which substantives are distinguished into animate and inanimate. Without this additional power, all nouns plural would end in the vowelsa,e,i,o,u. But to mark the gender, the lettergis added to animates, and the letternto inanimates, making the plurals of the first class terminate in _âg_,eeg,ig, _ôg_,ug, and of the second class in _ân_,een,in, _ôn_,un. Ten modes of forming the plural are thus provided, five of which are animate, and five inanimate plurals. A strong and clear line of distinction is thus drawn between the two classes of words; so unerring, indeed, in its application, that it is only necessary to inquire how the plural is formed, to determine whether it belonged to one or the other class. The distinctions which we have endeavored to convey will, perhaps, be more clearly perceived, by adding examples of the use of each of the plurals.Animate Plural.a. Odjibwâi,a Chippewa.Odjibwaig,Chippewas.e. Ojee,a Fly.Oj-eeg,Flies.i. Kosénan,Our father, (in.)Kosenân-ig,Our fathers, (in.)o. Ahmô,a Bee.Ahm-ôg,Bees.u. Ais,a Schell.Ais-ug,Shells.Inanimate Plural.a. Ishkôdai,Fire.Ishkôdain,Fires.e. Wadôp,Alder.Wadôp-een,Alders.i. Adetaig,Fruit.Adetaig-in,Fruits.o. Nôdin,Wind.Nôdin-ôn,Winds.u. Meen,Berry.Meen-un,Berries.Where a noun terminates with a vowel in the singular, the addition of theg, orn,shows at once, both the plural and the gender. In other instances, as inpeenai, a partridge—seebi, a river—it requires a consonant to precede the plural vowel, in conformity with a rule previously stated. Thus,peenai, is renderedpeenai-wug—andseebi,seebi-wun. Where the noun singular terminates in the broad, instead of the long sound ofa, as inogimâ, a chief,ishpatinâ, a hill, the plural isogim-ag,ishpatinân. But these are mere modifications of two of the above forms, and are by no means entitled to be considered as additional plurals.Comparatively few substances are without number. The following may be enumerated:—Missun´,Firewood.Ussáimâ,Tobacco.Pinggwi,Ashes.Naigow,Sand.Méjim,Food.Ahwun,Mist.Kôn,Snow.Kimmiwun,Rain.Mishk´wi,Blood.Ossâkumig,Moss.Ukkukkuzhas,Coals.Unitshimin,Peas.Others may be found, and indeed, a few others are known. But it is less an object, in this lecture, to pursue exceptions into their minutest ramifications, than to sketch broad rules, applicable, if not to every word, to at least a majority of words in the language.There is, however, one exception from the general use of number, so peculiar in itself, that not to point it out would be an unpardonable remissness in giving the outlines of a language, in which it is an object neither to extenuate faults nor to overratebeauties. This exception consists in the want of number in thethird personof the declensions of animate nouns, and the conjugation of animate verbs. Not that such words are destitute of number, in their simple forms, or when used under circumstances requiring no change of these simple forms—no prefixes and no inflections. But it will be seen, at a glance, how very limited such an application of words must be, in a transpositive language.Thusmangandkâg(loon and porcupine) take the plural inflectionwug, becomingmang wugandkâg wug(loons and porcupines). So, in their pronominal declension:—My loonNi mangoomThy loonKi mangoomMy porcupineNi gâgoomThy porcupineKi gâgoomMy loonsNi mangoomugThy loonsKi mangoomugMy porcupinesNi gâgoomugThy porcupinesKi gâgoomugBut his loon, or loons (o many oom un), his porcupine or porcupines (o gâg oom un), are without number. The rule applies equally to the class of words in which the pronouns are inseparable. Thus, my father and thy father,nôsandkôs, become my fathers and thy fathers, by the numerical inflectionug, formingnôsugandkôsug. But _ôsun_, his father or fathers, is vague, and does not indicate whether there be one father or twenty fathers. The inflectionun, merely denotes theobject. The rule also applies equally to sentences in which the noun is governed by or governs the verb. Whether we say, "I saw a bear,"ningi wâbumâ mukwah, or "a bear saw me,"mukwah ningi wâbumig, the noun, itself, undergoes no change, and its number is definite. Butogi wâbumân muk-wun, "he saw bear," is indefinite, although both the verb and the noun have changed their endings. And if the narrator does not subsequently determine the number, the hearer is either left in doubt, or must resolve it by a question. In fine, the whole acts of the third person are thus rendered questionable. This want of precision, which would seem to be fraught with so much confusion, appears to be obviated in practice, by the employment of adjectives, by numerical inflections in the relative words of the sentence, by the use of the indefinite article,paizhik, or by demonstrative pronouns. Thus,paizhik mukwun ogi wâbumân,conveys with certainty the information "he sawabear." But in this sentence both the noun and the verb retain the objective inflections, as in the former instances. These inflections are not uniformlyun, but sometimeseen, as inogeen, his mother, and sometimes _ôn_, as inodakeek-ôn, his kettle, in all which instances, however, the number is left indeterminate. It may hence be observed, and it is a remark which we shall presently have occasion to corroborate, that the plural inflection to inanimate nouns (which have no objective form), forms the objective inflection to animate nouns, which have no number in the third person.3. This leads us to the consideration of the mode of forming possessives, the existence of which, when it shall have been indicated by full examples, will present to the mind of the inquirer, one of those tautologies in grammatical forms, which, without imparting additional precision, serve to clothe the language with accumulated verbiage. The strong tendency to combination and amalgamation, existing in the language, renders it difficult, in fact, to discuss the principles of it in that elementary form which could be wished. In the analysis of words and forms we are constantly led from the central point of discussion. To recur, however, from these collateral unravellings to the main thread of inquiry, at as short and frequent intervals as possible, and thus to preserve the chain of conclusions and proofs, is so important, that, without keeping the object distinctly in view, I should despair of conveying any clear impressions of those grammatical features which impart to the language its peculiar character.It has been remarked that the distinctions of number are founded upon a modification of the five vowel sounds. Possessives are likewise founded upon the basis of the vowel sounds. There are five declensions of the noun to mark the possessive, ending in the possessive in _âm_,eem,im, _ôm_,um,oom. Where the nominative ends with a vowel, the possessive is made by adding the letterm, as inmaimai, a woodcock,ni maimaim, my woodcock, &c. Where the nominative ends in a consonant, as inais, a shell, the full possessive inflection is required, makingnin daisim, my shell. In the latter form, the consonantdis interposed between the pronoun and noun, and sounded with the noun, in conformity with a general rule. Where the nominative ends in the broad in lieu of the long sound ofa, as inogimâ, a chief, thepossessive is _âm_. The sound ofi, in the third declension, is that ofiin pin, and the sound ofu, in the fifth declension, is that ofuin bull. The latter will be uniformly represented byoo.The possessive declensions run throughout both the animate and inanimate classes of nouns, with some exceptions in the latter, as knife, bowl, paddle, &c.Inanimate nouns are thus declined.Nominative.Ishkôdai,Fire.Possessive.My,NinDishkod-aim.Thy,KiDishkod-aim.His,ODishkod-aim.Our,KiDishkod-aim-inân. (in.)—NiDishkod-aim-inân. (ex.)Your,KiDishkod-aim-iwâ.Their,ODishko-aim-iwâ.Those words which form exceptions from this declension, take the separable pronouns before them as follows:—Môkoman,A Knife.Ni môkoman,My Knife.Ki môkoman,Thy Knife.O môkoman,His Knife, &c.Animate substantives are declined precisely in the same manner as inanimate, except in the third person, which takes to the possessive inflections,aim,eem,im, _ôm_,oom, the objective particleun, denoting the compound inflection of this person, both in the singular and plural,aimun,eemun,imun, _ômun_,oomun, and the variation of the first vowel sound, _âmun_. Thus, to furnish an example of the second declension,bizhiki, a bison, changes its forms tonim,bizhik-im, my bison—ke bizhik-im, thy bison,O bizhik-imun, his bison, or bisons.The cause of this double inflection in the third person, may be left for future inquiry. But we may add further examples in aid of it. We cannot simply say, "The chief has killed a bear," or, to reverse the object upon which the energy of the verb is exerted, "The bear has killed a chief." But,ogimâ ogi nissân muk-wun, literally, "Chief he has has killed him bear," or,mukwah oginissân ogimân, "Bear he has killed him chief." Here the verb and the noun are both objective inun, which is sounded _ân_, where it comes after the broad sound ofa, as innissân, objective of the verb to kill. If we confer the powers of the English possessive (_'s_), upon the inflectionsaim,eem,im, _ôm_,oom, and _âm_, respectively, and the meaning ofhim, and of coursehe,her,his,hers,they,theirs(as there is no declension of the pronoun, and no number to the third person), upon the objective particleun, we shall then translate the above expression,o bizhik-eemum, his bison's hisn. If we reject this meaning, as I think we should, the sentence would read, "His bison," him, a mere tautology.It is true, it may be remarked, that the noun possessed, has a corresponding termination, or pronominal correspondence, with the pronoun possessor, also a final termination indicative of its being theobjecton which the verb exerts its influence—a mode of expression, which, so far as relates to the possessive, would be deemed superfluous, in modern languages; but may have some analogy in the Latin accusativesam,um,em.It is a constant and unremitting aim in the Indian languages to distinguish the actor from the object, partly by prefixes, and partly by inseparable suffixes. That the terminationun, is one of these inseparable particles, and that its office, while it confounds the number, is to designate the object, appears probable from the fact, that it retains its connection with the noun, whether the latter follow or precede the verb, or whatever its position in the sentence may be.Thus we can, without any perplexity in the meaning say,Waimittigôzhiwug ogi sagiân Pontiac-un, "Frenchmen, they did love Pontiac him." Or to reverse it,Pontiac-un Waimittigôzhiwug ogi sagiân, "Pontiac, he did Frenchmen he loved." The terminationun, in both instances, clearly determines the object beloved. So in the following instance,Sagunoshug ogi sagiân Tecumseh-un, "Englishmen, they did love Tecumseh," orTecumseh-un Sagunoshug oji sagiân, "Tecumseh, he did Englishmen he loved."In tracing the operation of this rule, through the doublings of the language, it is necessary to distinguish every modification of sound, whether it is accompanied or not accompanied by a modification of the sense. The particleun, which thus marksthe third person and persons, is sometimes pronouncedwun, and sometimesyun, as the harmony of the word to which it is suffixed may require. But not the slightest change is thereby made in its meaning.Wâbojeeg ogi meegân-ân nâdowaisi-wun.Wâbojeeg fought his enemies. L.[271]W. he did fight them, his enemy, or enemies.O sâgi-ân inini-wun.He, or she, loves a man. L. He, or she, loves him-man, or men.Kigo-yun waindji pimmâdizziwâd.They subsist on fish. L. Fish or fishes, they upon them, they live.Ontwa o sagiân odi-yun.Ontwa loves his dog. L. O. he loves him, his dog, or dogs.In these sentences, the letterswandyare introduced before the inflectionun, merely for euphony's sake, and to enable the speaker to utter the final vowel of the substantive, and the inflective vowel, without placing both under the accent. It is to be remarked in these examples, that the verb has a corresponding inflection with the noun, indicated by the final consonantn, as insagiâ-n, objective of the verbto love. This is merely a modification ofun, where it is requisite to employ it after broada(aw), and it is applicable to nouns as well as verbs whenever they end in that sound. Thus, in the phrase, "He saw a chief,"O wâbumâ-n O gimâ-n, both noun and verb terminate inn. It is immaterial to the sense, which precedes. And this leads to the conclusion, which we are in some measure compelled to state in anticipation of our remarks on the verb: That verbs must not only agree with their nominatives in number, person, andgender(we use the latter term for want of a more appropriate one), but also with their objectives. Hence, the objective signnin the above examples. Sometimes this sign is removed from the ending of the verb, to make room for the plural of the nominative person, and is subjoined to the latter. Thus,O sagiâ(wâ)n.They love them (him or them).In this phrase, the interposed syllable (wâ) is, apparently, the plural—it is a reflective plural—ofhe—the latter being indicated, as usual, by the signO. It has been observed, above, that the deficiency in number, in the third person, is sometimes supplied "by numerical inflections in the relative words of the sentence," and this interposed particle (wâ) affords an instance in point.The number of the nominative pronoun appears to be thus rendered precise, but the objective is still indefinite.When two nouns are used without a verb in the sentence, or when two nouns compose the whole matter uttered, being in the third person, both have the full objective inflection. Thus,Os-(un). Odi-(yun).His father's dog. L. His father—his dog or dogs.There are certain words, however, which will not admit the objectiveun, either in its simple or modified forms. These are rendered objective ineen, or _ôn_.O wâbumâ-(n), ossin-(een).He sees the stone. L. He sees him—stone or stones.O wâbumâ-(n) mittig o mizh-(een). L. He sees him, tree or trees.He sees an oak tree.O mittig wâb (een), gyai o bikwuk-(ôn).His bow and his arrows. L. His bow him, and his arrows, him or them.Odyâ | wâ | wâ (n), akkik-(ôn).They possess a kettle. L. They own them, kettle or kettles.The syllablewâ, in the verb of the last example included between bars (instead of parentheses), is the reflective pluraltheypointed out in a preceding instance.I shall conclude these remarks, with full examples of each pronominal declension.a.First declension, forming the first and second persons inaim, and the third inaimun.Nominative.Pinâi,a partridge.Pinâi-wug,partridges.First and second person.My,Nim Bin-aim.Thy,Ki Bin-aim.Our,Ki Bin-aim inân.Inclusive plural.Our,Ni Bin-aiminân.Exclusive plural.Your,Ki Bin-aim wâ.Third person.His,O Bin-aim (un).Their,O Bin-aim iwâ (n).e.Second declension forming the first and second persons in eem, and the third ineemun.Nominative.Ossin,a stone.Ossineen,stones.First and second persons.My,Nin Dossin-eem.Thy,Ki Dossin-eem.Our,Ki Dossin-eeminân. (in.)Our,Ni Dossin-eeminân. (ex.)Your,Ke Dossin-eemewâ.Third person.His,O Dossin-eem(un).Their,O Dossin-eemewâ (n).i.Third declension forming the first and second persons inim, and the third inimun.Nominative.Ais,a shell.Aisug,shells.First and second persons.My,Nin Dais-im.Thy,Ki Dais-im.Our,Ki Dais-iminân. (in.)Our,Ni Dais-iminân. (ex.)Your,Ki Dais-imiwâ.Third person.His,O Dais-im (un).Their,O Dais-imewâ (n).o.Fourth declension forming the first and second persons in _ôm_, and the third in _ômun_.Nominative.Monidô,a Spirit.Monidôg,Spirits.First and second persons.My,Ni Monid-ôm.Thy,Ki Monid-ôm.Our,Ki Monid-ôminân. (in.)Our,Ni Monid-ôminân. (ex.)Your,Ki Monid-ômiwâ.Third person.His,O Monid-ôm (un).Their,O Monid-ômewâ (n).u.(oo) Fifth declension forming the first and second persons inoom, and the third inoomun.Nominative.Môz,a Moose.Môzôg,Moose.First and second persons.My,Ni Môz-oom.Thy,Ki Môz-oom.Our,Ki Môz-oominân. (in.)Our,Ni Môz-oominân. (ex.)Your,Ki Môz-oomiwu.Third person.His,O Môz oom (un).Their,O Môz oomiwâ (n).aw.Additional declension, required when the noun ends in the broad, instead of the long sound of a, forming the possessive in _âm_, and the objective in _âmun_.Nominative.Ogimâ,a Chief.Ogimâg,Chiefs.First and second persons.My,Ni Dôgim âm.Thy,Ki Dôgim âm.Our,Ki Dôgim âminân. (in.)Our,Ni Dôgim âminân. (ex.)Your,Ki Dôgim âmiwâ.Third person.His,O Dôgim âm (un).Their,O Dôgim âmiwâ (n).The abbreviations,in., andex., in these declensions, mark the inclusive and exclusive forms of the pronoun plural. The inflection of the third person, as it is superadded to the first and second, is included between parentheses, that the eye, unaccustomed to these extended forms, may readily detect it.Where the inseparable, instead of the separable pronoun is employed, the possessive inflection of the first and second person is dispensed with, although the inflection of the third is still retained.Os: Father.S. singular.Nos.My father.Kos.Thy father.Os-un.His father.Sing. and plural.Nos-inân.Our father.(ex.)Kos-inân.Our father.(in.)Kos-iwâ.Your father.Os-iwân.Their father.Sing. and plural.S. plural.Nos-ug.My fathers.Kos-ug.Thy fathers.Os-un.His fathers.Sing. and plural.Nos.-inân ig.Our fathers.(ex.)Kos.-inân ig.Our fathers.(in.)Kos-iwâg.Your fathers.Os-iwân.Their fathers.Sing. and plural.The word dog, and this word alone, is declined in the following manner.Annimoosh: a Dog.S. singular.NinDy (or Di)My dog.KiDyThy dog.ODy-unHis dog or dogs.KiDy-inânOur dog. (in.)NiDy-inânOur dog. (ex.)KiDy-iwâYour dog.ODy-iwânTheir dog, &c.S. plural.NinDy-ugMy dogs.KiDy-ugThy dogs.ODy-unHis dogs, &c.KiDy-inânigOur dogs. (in.)NiDy-inânigOur dogs. (ex.)KiDy-iwâgYour dogs.ODy-iwânHis dogs, &c.The wordDy, which supplies this declension, is derived fromIndyiâmmine.pron. an.—a derivative form of the word, which is, however, exclusively restricted, in its meaning, to the dog. If the expressionNin DyorN' Dy, is sometimes applied to the horse, it is because it is thereby intended to call him, my dog, from his being in a state of servitude similar to that of the dog. It must be borne in mind, as connected with this subject, that the dog, in high northern latitudes, and even as far south as 42 degrees, is both a beast of draught and of burden. He is compelled during the winter season to draw theodâban, or Indian sleigh; and sometimes to support the burden upon his back, by means of a kind of drag constructed of slender poles.A review of the facts which have been brought together respecting the substantive, will show that the separable or inseparable pronouns under the form of prefixes, are throughout required. It will also indicate, that the inflections of the first and second persons which occupy the place of possessives, and those of the third person, resembling objectives, pertain to words, which are either primitives, or denote but a single object, asmoose,fire. There is, however, another class of substantives, or substantive expressions, and an extensive class—for it embraces a great portion of the compound descriptive terms—in the use of which no pronominal prefixes are required. The distinctions of person are, exclusively, supplied by pronominal suffixes. Of this character are the words descriptive of country, place of dwelling, field of battle, place of employment, &c. The following example will furnish the inflections applicable to this entire class of words:—Aindâd: Home, or place of dwelling.S. singular.Aindâ-yân.My home.Aindâ-yun.Thy home.Aindâ-d.His home.Aindâ-yâng.Our home.(ex.)Aindâ-yung.Our home.(in.)Aindâ-yaig.Your home.Aindâ-wâd.Their home.S. plural.Aindâ-yân-in.My homes.Aindâ-yun-in.Thy homes.Aindâ-jin.His homes.Aindâ-yâng-in.Our homes.(ex.)Aindâ-yung-in.Our homes.(in.)Aindâ-yaig-in.Your homes.Aindâ-wâdjin.Their homes.By these examples, it is perceived that the finaldinaindâdis not essential to its primitive meaning; and that the place of the pronoun is, in respect to this word, invariably a suffix.Aindâdmeans, truly, not home, but his home. The plural is formed by the inflectionin, except in the third person, where the sound ofdsinks inj.Inquiry2.Further remarks on the substantive—Local, diminutive, derogative, and tensal inflections—Mode in which the latter are employed to denote the disease of individuals, and to indicate the past and future seasons—Restricted or sexual terms—Conversion of the substantive into a verb, and the reciprocal character of the verb by which it is converted into a substantive—Derivative and compound substantives—Summary of the properties of this part of speech.In the view which has been taken of the substantive in the preceding Inquiry, it has been deemed proper to exclude several topics, which, from their peculiarities, it was believed could be more satisfactorily discussed in a separate form. Of this character are those modifications of the substantive by which locality, diminution, a defective quality, and the past tense are expressed; by which various adjective and adverbial significations are given; and, finally, the substantives themselves converted into verbs. Such are also the mode of indicating the masculine and feminine (both merged, as we have shown, in the animate class), and those words which are of a strictlysexualcharacter, or are restricted in theiruseeither to males or females. Not less interesting is the manner of forming derivatives, and of conferring upon the derivatives so formed apersonality, distinguished as either animate or inanimate, at the option of the speaker.Much of the flexibility of the substantive is derived from these properties, and they undoubtedly add much to the figurative character of the language. Some of them have been thought analogous to case, particularly that inflection of the noun which indicates the locality of the object. But if so, then there would be equally strong reasons for establishing anadjective, and anadverbial, as well as alocalcase, and a plurality of forms in each. But it is believed that no such necessity exists. There is no regular declension of these forms, and they are all used under limitations and restrictions incompatible with the true principles of case.It is under this view of the subject, that the discussion of these forms has been transferred, together with the other accidents of the substantive just adverted to, and reserved as the subject-matter of a separate inquiry. And in now proceeding to express the conclusions at which we have arrived touching these points, it will be an object so to compress and arrange the materials before us, as to present within a small compass the leading facts and examples upon which each separate position depends.1. That quality of the noun which, in the shape of an inflection, denotes the relative situation of the object, by the contiguous position of some accessory object, is expressed in the English language by the prepositionsin,into,at, oron. In the Indian, they are denoted by an inflection. Thus, the phrase "In the box," is rendered in the Indian by one word,mukukoong. Of this word,mukuk, simply, is box. The termination,oong, denoting the locality, not of the box, but of the object sought after. The expression appears to be precise, although there is no definite article in the language.The substantive takes this form, most commonly, after a question has been put, asAnindi ni môkoman-ais?"Where is my penknife?"Mukukoong(in the box),addôpowin-ing(on the table), are definite replies to this question. But the form is not restricted to this relation.Chimân-ing n'guh pôz, "I shall embark in the canoe;"wakyigum n'ghu izhâ, "I shall go into the house," are perfectly correct, though somewhat formal expressions, when the canoe or the house are present to the speaker's view.The meaning of these inflections has been restricted toin,into,at, andon, but they are the more appropriate forms of expressing the first three senses, there being other modes besides these of expressing the prepositionon. These modes consist in the use of prepositions, and will be explained under that head. The choice of the one or the other is, however, with the speaker. Generally, the inflection is employed when there is some circumstance or condition of the noun either concealed or not fully apparent. Thus,Muzzinyigun-ing, is the appropriate term for "In the book," andmayalso be used to signify "On the book." But if it is meant only to signifyonthe book, something visible being referred to, the prepositionogidjwould be used, that word indicating with certaintyon, and neverin.Wakyigun-ingindicates with clearness "In the house;" but if it is necessary to say "On the house," and it be meant at the same time to exclude any reference to the interior, the expression would be changed toogidj wakyigun.It will be proper further to remark in this place, in the way of limitation, that there is also a separate preposition signifyingin. It ispinj. But the use of this word does not, in all cases, supersede the necessity of inflecting the noun. Thus, the expressionpindigain, is literally walk in, or enter. But if it is intended to say, "Walk in the house," the local, and not the simple form of house must be used; and the expression is,Pindigain waky'igun-ing, "Enter in the house," the verbal form which this prepositionpinjputs on, having no allusion to the act ofwalking, but merely implying position.The local inflection, which, in the above examples, isingandoong, is further changed toaingandeeng, as the ear may direct—changes which are governed chiefly by the terminal vowel of the noun. Examples will best supply the rule, as well as the exceptions to it.SIMPLE FORM.LOCAL FORM.a. First inflection inaing.IshkodaiFireIshkod-aingIn, &c. the fire.MuskodaiPrairieMuskod-aingIn, &c. the prairie.MukkuddaiPowderMukkud-aingIn, &c. the powder.PimmedaiGreasePimmid-aingIn, &c. the grease.e. Second inflection ineeng.[272]SeebiRiverSeeb-eengIn, &c. the river.NeebiWaterNeeb-eengIn, &c. the water.MiskwiBloodMiskw-eengIn, &c. the blood.UnneebElmUnneeb-eengIn, &c. the elm.i. Third inflection ining.KônSnowKôn-ingIn, &c. the snow.MinBerryMeen-ingIn, &c. the berry.ChimânCanoeChimân-ingIn, &c. the canoe.Muzziny´egunBookMuzziny´egun-ingIn, &c. the book.o. Fourth inflection inoong.AzhibikRockAzhibik-oongIn, &c. the rock.GizhigSkyGizhig-oongIn, &c. the sky.KimmiwunRainKimmiwun-oongIn, &c. the rain.AkkikKettleAkkik-oongIn, &c. the kettle.Throw it in the fire.1.Puggidôn ishkod-aing.Go into the prairie.2.Muskôdaing izhân.He is in the elm.3.Unnib-eeng iâ.It is on the water.4.Nib-eeng attai.Put it on the table.5.Addôpôwin-ing attôn.Look in the book.6.Enâbin muzziny´igun-ing.You stand in the rain.7.Kimmiwun-oong ki nibow.What have you in that box?8.Waigonain aitaig mukuk-oong?Put it in the kettle.9.Akkik-oong attôn, or Pôdawain.My bow is not in the lodge; neither is it in the canoe, nor on the rock.10.Kâwinpindiqiâsi ni mittigwâb; kâwiuh gyai chimân-ing; kâwin gyai âzhibik-oong.An attentive inspection of these examples will show that the local form pertains either to such nouns of the animate class as are in their nature inanimate, or at most possessed of vegetablelife. And here another conclusion presses upon us; that where these local terminations, in all their variety, are added to the names of animated beings, when such names are the nominatives of adjectives or adjective-nouns, these words are converted into terms of qualification, indicatinglike,resembling,equal. Thus, if we wish to say to a boy, "He is like a man," the expression is,Inin-ing izzhinâgozzi; or, if to a man, "He is like a bear,"Mukk-oong izzhinâgozzi; or, to a bear, "He is like a horse,Pabaizhikogâzh-ing izzhinâgozzi. In all these expressions, the wordizzhiis combined with the pronominal inflection _â_ (ornâ) and the animate terminationgozzi. And the inflection of the nominative is merely an adjective corresponding withizzhi—a term indicative of the general qualities of persons or animated beings. Where a comparison is instituted, or a resemblance pointed out, between inanimate instead of animate objects, the inflectiongozziis changed togwud, rendering the expression, which was, in the animate form,izzhinâgozzi, in the inanimate formizzhinâzgwud.There is another variation of the local form of the noun, in addition to those above instanced, indicative of locality in a more general sense. It is formed byongornong—frequent terminations in geographical names. Thus, fromOjibwai, Chippewa, is formedOjibwainong, "Place of the Chippewas." FromWamattigozhiwug, Frenchmen, is formedWamittigozhinong, "Place of Frenchmen." FromIshpatinâ, Hill,Ishpatinong, "Place of the hill," &c. The terminationing, is also sometimes employed in this more general sense, as in the following names of places:—

Tenses are formed by addinggeeto the pronoun for the perfect, andgahfor the future, andgahgeefor the second future. These terms play the part, and supply the want of, auxiliary verbs. The imperative is made ingah, and the potential indauwhere the second future isdaugee. The subjunctive is made by prefixing the wordkishpin, meaning if. The inflectionnuh, asks a question, and as it can be put to all the forms of the conjugation, it establishes an interrogative mood. The particle see, negatives the verb, and thus all verbs can be conjugated positively and negatively.

To constitute the plural, the lettergis added to the conjugations; thus,nesaugeaugmeans, I love them. But this is an animate plural, and can only be added to words of the vital class. Besides, if the verb or noun to be made plural does not end in a vowel, but in a consonant, thegcannot be added without interposing a vowel. It results, therefore, that the vowel class of words have their plurals in _äg_,eeg,ig,og, orug. But, if the class of words be non-vital and numerical, the plural is made in the lettern. But this letter cannot, as in the other form, be added, unless the word terminate in a vowel, when the regularplurals are _än_,een,in,on, orun. This simple principle clears up one cause of perplexity in the conjugations, and denotes a philosophical method, which divides the whole vocabulary into two classes; while this provisionsupersedes, it answers the purpose ofgender. There is, in fact, no gender required by the conjugations, it being sufficient to denote thevitalityornon-vitalityof the class. Nothing can be clearer. This is one of the leading traits of the grammar of the language, upon the observance of which the best speakers pride themselves.

It does not, however, result that, because there is no gender required in the conjugations, the idea of sexuality is unknown to the nomenclature. Quite the contrary. The tenses for male and female, in the chief orders of creation, areiabaandnozha. These words prefixed to the proper names of animals, produce expressions of precisely the same meaning, and also the same inelegance; as if we should say, male goose, female goose, male horse, and female horse, male man and female man. The term for man (inini) is masculine, and that for woman (equa) feminine in its construction. It is only in the conjugations that the principle of gender becomes lost in that of vitality.

7.Active and passive voices.—The distinction between these two classes of verbs is made by the inflectionego. By adding this form to the active verb, its action is reversed, and thrown back on the nominative. Thus, the verb to carry isnim bemön, I carry;nim bemön-ego, I am carried.Adowawais the act of thumping, as a log by the waves on the shore._ Adowawa-ego_ is a log that is thumped by the waves on shore.Nesaugeah, I love;Nesaugeigo, I am loved. In the latter phrase, the personal termauis dropped, and the long sound ofeslips intoi, which converts the inflection intoigoinstead ofego.

8.Participles.—My impression is, that the Indians are in the habit of using participles, often to the exclusion of other proper forms of the verb. The vocabulary contains abundantly the indicative forms of the verb. To run, to rise, to see, to eat, to tie, to burn, to strike, to sing, to cry, to dance, are the common terms of parlance; but as soon as these terms come to be connected with the action of particular persons, this action appears to be spoken of as if existing—both the past and future tenses being thrown away; and the senses appear to be, I, you, he, or they; running, rising,seeing, eating, tying, burning, striking, singing, crying, dancing. At least, I have not been able to convince myself that the action is not referred to as existing. When the participles should be used, they, on the contrary, employ the indicative forms, by which such sentences are made as, he run, he walk, for running, walking.

The general want of the substantive verb, in their colloquial phrases, constantly leads to imperfect forms of syntax. Thus,nëbäis the indicative, first person of the verb to sleep; but if the term, I am sleeping, be required, the phrase isne nëbä, simply, I sleep. So, too,tshägizis the first person indicative to burn; but the colloquial phrase, I am burned, or burning, isnen tshägiz—the verb remaining in the indicative, and not taking the participle form.

It is not common to address persons by their familiar names, as with us—as John, or James. The very contrary is the usage of Indian society, the object being to conceal all personal names, unless they be forced out. If it be required to express this sentence, namely: Adario has gone out (or temporarily departed), but will soon return; the equivalent isOgima,ke mahjaun,panema,ke takooshin. This sentence literally retranslated is, Chief, he gone; by and by, he (will) return—the noun chief being put for the personal noun Adario. It will be perceived that the pronounkeis repeated after the noun, making, chief, he gone.Panemais an adverb which is undeclinable under all circumstances, andtahkooshin, the future tense of the verb to arrive, or come (by land). The phraseology is perfectly loaded with local or other particulars, which constantly limit the action of verbs to places, persons, and things.

A Vocabulary of the Odjibwa Algonquin Language.By H. R. Schoolcraft.

On referring to the manuscript of this vocabulary, it is found to fill a large folio volume, which puts it out of my power to insert it in this connection. It is hoped to bring it into the series of the Ethnological volumes, now in the process of being published at Philadelphia, under the auspices of Congress.

APPENDIXNo. 2.THE EXPEDITION TO ITASCA LAKE IN 1832.

[450]

SYNOPSIS.

Inquiry1.

Observations on the Ojibwai substantive. 1. The provision of the language for indicating gender—Its general and comprehensive character—The division of words into animate and inanimate classes. 2. Number—its recondite forms, arising from the terminal vowel in the word. 3. The grammatical forms which indicate possession, and enable the speaker to distinguish the objective person.

Most of the researches which have been directed to the Indian languages, have resulted in elucidating the principles governing the use of the verb, which has been proved to be full and varied in its inflections. Either less attention has been paid to the other parts of speech, or results less suited to create high expectations of their flexibility and powers have been attained. The Indian verb has thus been made to stand out, as it were in bold relief, as a shield to defects in the substantive and its accessories, and as, in fact, compensating, by its multiform appendages of prefix and suffix—by its tensal, its pronominal, its substantive, its adjective, and its adverbial terminations, for barrenness and rigidity in all other parts of speech. Influenced by this reflection, I shall defer,in the present inquiry, the remarks I intend offering on the verb, until I have considered the substantive, and its more important adjuncts.

Palpable objects, to which the idea of sense strongly attaches, and the actions or condition, which determine the relation of one object to another, are perhaps the first points to demand attention in the invention of languages. And they have certainly imprinted themselves very strongly, with all their materiality, and with all their local, and exclusive, and personal peculiarities upon the Indian. The noun and the verb not only thus constitute the principal elements of speech, as in all languages; but they continue to perform their first offices, with less direct aid from the auxiliary parts of speech, than would appear to be reconcilable with a clear expression of the circumstances of time and place, number and person, quality and quantity, action and repose, and the other accidents, on which their definite employment depends. But to enable the substantives and attributives to perform these complex offices, they are provided with inflections, and undergo changes and modifications, by which words and phrases become very concrete in their meaning, and are lengthened out to appear formidable to the eye. Hence the polysyllabic, and the descriptive character of the language, so composite in its aspect and in its forms.

To utter succinctly, and in as few words as possible, the prominent ideas resting upon the mind of the speaker, appear to have been the paramount object with the inventors of the language. Hence, concentration became a leading feature. And the pronoun, the adjective, the adverb, and the preposition, however they may be disjunctively employed in certain cases, are chiefly useful as furnishing materials to the speaker, to be worked up into the complicated texture of the verb and the substantive. Nothing, in fact, can be more unlike, than the language, viewed in its original, elementary state—in a vocabulary, for instance, of its primitive words, so far as such a vocabulary can now be formed, and the same language as heard under its oral, amalgamated form. Its transpositions may be likened to a picture, in which the copal, the carmine, and the white lead, are no longer recognized as distinct substances, but each of which has contributed its share towardsthe effect. It is the painter only who possesses the principle, by which one element has been curtailed, another augmented, and all, however seemingly discordant, made to coalesce.

Such a language may be expected to abound in derivatives and compounds; to afford rules for giving verbs substantive, and substantives verbal qualities; to concentrate the meaning of words upon a few syllables, or upon a single letter, or alphabetical sign; and to supply modes of contraction and augmentation, and, if I may so say,short cuts, andby-pathsto meanings, which are equally novel and interesting. To arrive at its primitives, we must pursue an intricate thread, where analogy is often the only guide. We must divest words of those accumulated syllables, or particles, which, like the molecules of material matter, are clustered around the primitives. It is only after a process of this kind, that theprinciple of combination—that secret wire, which moves the whole machinery can be searched for, with a reasonable prospect of success. The labor of analysis is one of the most interesting and important, which the subject presents. And it is a labor which it will be expedient to keep constantly in view, until we have separately considered the several parts of speech, and the grammatical laws by which the language is held together; and thus established principles and provided materials wherewith we may the more successfully labor.

1. In a general survey of the language as it is spoken, and as it must be written, there is perhaps no feature which obtrudes itself so constantly to view, as the principle which separates all words, of whatever denomination, into animates and inanimates, as they are applied to objects in the animal, vegetable, or mineral kingdom. This principle has been grafted upon most words, and carries its distinctions throughout the syntax. It is the gender of the language; but a gender of so unbounded a scope, as to merge in it the common distinctions of a masculine and feminine, and to give a twofold character to the parts of speech. The concords which it requires, and the double inflections it provides, will be mentioned in their appropriate places. It will be sufficient here to observe, that animate nouns require animate verbs for their nominatives, animate adjectives to express their qualities, and animate demonstrative pronouns to mark the distinctions of person. Thus, if we say, "I see a man; I see a house," the termination of the verb must be changed. What was in the first instancewâb imâ, is alteredtowâb indân.Wâb, is here the infinitive, but the root of this verb is still more remote. If the question occurs "Is it a good man, or a good house," the adjective, which, in the inanimate form isonishish-í, is, in the animateonishish-i[n']. If the question be put, "Is it this man, or this house," the pronounthis, which ismâ bum, in the animate, is changed tomâ ndun, in the inanimate.

Nouns animate embrace the tribes of quadrupeds, birds, fishes, insects, reptiles, crustacæ, the sun, and moon, and stars, thunder, and lightning, for these are personified; and whatever either possesses animal life, or is endowed, by the peculiar opinions and superstitions of the Indians, with it. In the vegetable kingdom, their number is comparatively limited, being chiefly confined to trees, and those only while they are referred to, as whole bodies, and to the various species of fruits, and seeds, and esculents. It is at the option of the speaker to employ nouns, either as animates or inanimates: but it is a choice seldom resorted to, except in conformity with stated exceptions. These conventional exceptions are not numerous, and the more prominent of them, may be recited. The cause of the exceptions it is not always easy to perceive. It may, however, generally be traced to a particular respect paid to certain inanimate bodies, either from their real or fancied properties—the uses to which they are applied, or the ceremonies to which they are dedicated. A stone, which is the altar of sacrifice to their Manitoes; a bow, formerly so necessary in the chase; a feather, the honored sign of martial prowess; a kettle, so valuable in the household; a pipe, by which friendships are sealed and treaties ratified; a drum, used in their sacred and festive dances; a medal, the mask of authority; vermilion, the appropriate paint of the warrior; wampum, by which messages are conveyed, and covenants remembered. These are among the objects, in themselves inanimates, which require the application of animate verbs, pronouns, and adjectives, and are thereby transferred to the animate class.

It is to be remarked, however, that the names for animals, are only employed as animates, while the objects are referred to as whole and complete species. But the gender must be changed, when it becomes necessary to speak of separate numbers. Man, woman, father, mother, are separate nouns, so long as the individualsare meant; but hand, foot, head, eye, ear, tongue, are inanimates. Buck, is an animate noun, while his entire carcass is referred to, whether living or dead; but neck, back, heart, windpipe, take the inanimate form. In like manner, eagle, swan, dove, are distinguished as animates; but beak, wing, tail, are arranged with inanimates. So oak, pine, ash, are animate; branch, leaf, root, inanimates.

Reciprocal exceptions, however, exist to this rule—the reasons for which, as in the former instance, may generally be sought, either in peculiar opinions of the Indians, or in the peculiar qualities or uses of the objects. Thus the talons of the eagle, and the claws of the bear, and of other animals, which furnish ornaments for the neck, are invariably spoken of, under the animate form. The hoofs and horns of all quadrupeds, which are applied to various economical and mystic purposes; the castorum of the beaver, and the nails of man, are similarly situated. The vegetable creation also furnishes some exceptions of this nature; such are the names for the outer bark of all trees (except the birch), and the branches, the roots, and the resin of the spruce, and its congeners.

In a language, which considers all nature as separated into two classes of bodies, characterized by the presence or absence of life; neuter nouns will scarcely be looked for, although such may exist without my knowledge. Neuters are found amongst the verbs and the adjectives, but it is doubtful whether they render the nouns to which they are applied neuters, in the sense we attach to that term. The subject in all its bearings is interesting, and a full and minute description of it would probably elicit new light respecting some doubtful points in the language, and contribute something towards a curious collateral topic—the history of Indian opinions. I have stated the principle broadly, without filling up the subject of exceptions as fully as it is in my power, and without following its bearings upon points which will more properly come under discussion at other stages of the inquiry. A sufficient outline, it is believed, has been given, and having thus met, at the threshold, a principle deeply laid at the foundation of the language, and one which will be perpetually recurring, I shall proceed to enumerate some other prominent features of the substantive.

2. No language is perhaps so defective, as to be totally withoutnumber. But there are, probably, few which furnish so many modes of indicating it, as the Odjibwa. There are as many modes of forming the plural, as there are vowel sounds, yet there is no distinction between a limited and unlimited plural; although there is, in the pronoun, aninclusiveand anexclusiveplural. Whether we saymanormen,two menortwenty men, the singularinin´i, and the pluralnin´iwug, remains the same. But if we saywe, orus, orour men(who are present), orwe, orus, orour Indians(in general), the pluralwe, andus, andour—for they are rendered by the same form—admit of a change to indicate whether the objective person beincludedorexcluded. This principle, of which full examples will be given under the appropriate head, forms a single and anomalous instance of the use of particular plurals. And it carries its distinctions, by means of the pronouns, separable and inseparable, into the verbs and substantives, creating the necessity of double conjugations and double declensions, in the plural forms of the first person. Thus, the term for "Our Father," which, in the inclusive form isKósinân, is, in the exclusive,Nósinân.

The particular plural, which is thus, by the transforming power of the language, carried from the pronoun into the texture of the verb and substantive, is not limited to any fixed number of persons or objects, but arises from the operations of the verb. The general plural is variously made. But the plurals making inflections take upon themselves an additional power or sign, by which substantives are distinguished into animate and inanimate. Without this additional power, all nouns plural would end in the vowelsa,e,i,o,u. But to mark the gender, the lettergis added to animates, and the letternto inanimates, making the plurals of the first class terminate in _âg_,eeg,ig, _ôg_,ug, and of the second class in _ân_,een,in, _ôn_,un. Ten modes of forming the plural are thus provided, five of which are animate, and five inanimate plurals. A strong and clear line of distinction is thus drawn between the two classes of words; so unerring, indeed, in its application, that it is only necessary to inquire how the plural is formed, to determine whether it belonged to one or the other class. The distinctions which we have endeavored to convey will, perhaps, be more clearly perceived, by adding examples of the use of each of the plurals.

Where a noun terminates with a vowel in the singular, the addition of theg, orn,shows at once, both the plural and the gender. In other instances, as inpeenai, a partridge—seebi, a river—it requires a consonant to precede the plural vowel, in conformity with a rule previously stated. Thus,peenai, is renderedpeenai-wug—andseebi,seebi-wun. Where the noun singular terminates in the broad, instead of the long sound ofa, as inogimâ, a chief,ishpatinâ, a hill, the plural isogim-ag,ishpatinân. But these are mere modifications of two of the above forms, and are by no means entitled to be considered as additional plurals.

Comparatively few substances are without number. The following may be enumerated:—

Others may be found, and indeed, a few others are known. But it is less an object, in this lecture, to pursue exceptions into their minutest ramifications, than to sketch broad rules, applicable, if not to every word, to at least a majority of words in the language.

There is, however, one exception from the general use of number, so peculiar in itself, that not to point it out would be an unpardonable remissness in giving the outlines of a language, in which it is an object neither to extenuate faults nor to overratebeauties. This exception consists in the want of number in thethird personof the declensions of animate nouns, and the conjugation of animate verbs. Not that such words are destitute of number, in their simple forms, or when used under circumstances requiring no change of these simple forms—no prefixes and no inflections. But it will be seen, at a glance, how very limited such an application of words must be, in a transpositive language.

Thusmangandkâg(loon and porcupine) take the plural inflectionwug, becomingmang wugandkâg wug(loons and porcupines). So, in their pronominal declension:—

But his loon, or loons (o many oom un), his porcupine or porcupines (o gâg oom un), are without number. The rule applies equally to the class of words in which the pronouns are inseparable. Thus, my father and thy father,nôsandkôs, become my fathers and thy fathers, by the numerical inflectionug, formingnôsugandkôsug. But _ôsun_, his father or fathers, is vague, and does not indicate whether there be one father or twenty fathers. The inflectionun, merely denotes theobject. The rule also applies equally to sentences in which the noun is governed by or governs the verb. Whether we say, "I saw a bear,"ningi wâbumâ mukwah, or "a bear saw me,"mukwah ningi wâbumig, the noun, itself, undergoes no change, and its number is definite. Butogi wâbumân muk-wun, "he saw bear," is indefinite, although both the verb and the noun have changed their endings. And if the narrator does not subsequently determine the number, the hearer is either left in doubt, or must resolve it by a question. In fine, the whole acts of the third person are thus rendered questionable. This want of precision, which would seem to be fraught with so much confusion, appears to be obviated in practice, by the employment of adjectives, by numerical inflections in the relative words of the sentence, by the use of the indefinite article,paizhik, or by demonstrative pronouns. Thus,paizhik mukwun ogi wâbumân,conveys with certainty the information "he sawabear." But in this sentence both the noun and the verb retain the objective inflections, as in the former instances. These inflections are not uniformlyun, but sometimeseen, as inogeen, his mother, and sometimes _ôn_, as inodakeek-ôn, his kettle, in all which instances, however, the number is left indeterminate. It may hence be observed, and it is a remark which we shall presently have occasion to corroborate, that the plural inflection to inanimate nouns (which have no objective form), forms the objective inflection to animate nouns, which have no number in the third person.

3. This leads us to the consideration of the mode of forming possessives, the existence of which, when it shall have been indicated by full examples, will present to the mind of the inquirer, one of those tautologies in grammatical forms, which, without imparting additional precision, serve to clothe the language with accumulated verbiage. The strong tendency to combination and amalgamation, existing in the language, renders it difficult, in fact, to discuss the principles of it in that elementary form which could be wished. In the analysis of words and forms we are constantly led from the central point of discussion. To recur, however, from these collateral unravellings to the main thread of inquiry, at as short and frequent intervals as possible, and thus to preserve the chain of conclusions and proofs, is so important, that, without keeping the object distinctly in view, I should despair of conveying any clear impressions of those grammatical features which impart to the language its peculiar character.

It has been remarked that the distinctions of number are founded upon a modification of the five vowel sounds. Possessives are likewise founded upon the basis of the vowel sounds. There are five declensions of the noun to mark the possessive, ending in the possessive in _âm_,eem,im, _ôm_,um,oom. Where the nominative ends with a vowel, the possessive is made by adding the letterm, as inmaimai, a woodcock,ni maimaim, my woodcock, &c. Where the nominative ends in a consonant, as inais, a shell, the full possessive inflection is required, makingnin daisim, my shell. In the latter form, the consonantdis interposed between the pronoun and noun, and sounded with the noun, in conformity with a general rule. Where the nominative ends in the broad in lieu of the long sound ofa, as inogimâ, a chief, thepossessive is _âm_. The sound ofi, in the third declension, is that ofiin pin, and the sound ofu, in the fifth declension, is that ofuin bull. The latter will be uniformly represented byoo.

The possessive declensions run throughout both the animate and inanimate classes of nouns, with some exceptions in the latter, as knife, bowl, paddle, &c.

Inanimate nouns are thus declined.

Those words which form exceptions from this declension, take the separable pronouns before them as follows:—

Animate substantives are declined precisely in the same manner as inanimate, except in the third person, which takes to the possessive inflections,aim,eem,im, _ôm_,oom, the objective particleun, denoting the compound inflection of this person, both in the singular and plural,aimun,eemun,imun, _ômun_,oomun, and the variation of the first vowel sound, _âmun_. Thus, to furnish an example of the second declension,bizhiki, a bison, changes its forms tonim,bizhik-im, my bison—ke bizhik-im, thy bison,O bizhik-imun, his bison, or bisons.

The cause of this double inflection in the third person, may be left for future inquiry. But we may add further examples in aid of it. We cannot simply say, "The chief has killed a bear," or, to reverse the object upon which the energy of the verb is exerted, "The bear has killed a chief." But,ogimâ ogi nissân muk-wun, literally, "Chief he has has killed him bear," or,mukwah oginissân ogimân, "Bear he has killed him chief." Here the verb and the noun are both objective inun, which is sounded _ân_, where it comes after the broad sound ofa, as innissân, objective of the verb to kill. If we confer the powers of the English possessive (_'s_), upon the inflectionsaim,eem,im, _ôm_,oom, and _âm_, respectively, and the meaning ofhim, and of coursehe,her,his,hers,they,theirs(as there is no declension of the pronoun, and no number to the third person), upon the objective particleun, we shall then translate the above expression,o bizhik-eemum, his bison's hisn. If we reject this meaning, as I think we should, the sentence would read, "His bison," him, a mere tautology.

It is true, it may be remarked, that the noun possessed, has a corresponding termination, or pronominal correspondence, with the pronoun possessor, also a final termination indicative of its being theobjecton which the verb exerts its influence—a mode of expression, which, so far as relates to the possessive, would be deemed superfluous, in modern languages; but may have some analogy in the Latin accusativesam,um,em.

It is a constant and unremitting aim in the Indian languages to distinguish the actor from the object, partly by prefixes, and partly by inseparable suffixes. That the terminationun, is one of these inseparable particles, and that its office, while it confounds the number, is to designate the object, appears probable from the fact, that it retains its connection with the noun, whether the latter follow or precede the verb, or whatever its position in the sentence may be.

Thus we can, without any perplexity in the meaning say,Waimittigôzhiwug ogi sagiân Pontiac-un, "Frenchmen, they did love Pontiac him." Or to reverse it,Pontiac-un Waimittigôzhiwug ogi sagiân, "Pontiac, he did Frenchmen he loved." The terminationun, in both instances, clearly determines the object beloved. So in the following instance,Sagunoshug ogi sagiân Tecumseh-un, "Englishmen, they did love Tecumseh," orTecumseh-un Sagunoshug oji sagiân, "Tecumseh, he did Englishmen he loved."

In tracing the operation of this rule, through the doublings of the language, it is necessary to distinguish every modification of sound, whether it is accompanied or not accompanied by a modification of the sense. The particleun, which thus marksthe third person and persons, is sometimes pronouncedwun, and sometimesyun, as the harmony of the word to which it is suffixed may require. But not the slightest change is thereby made in its meaning.

Wâbojeeg ogi meegân-ân nâdowaisi-wun.Wâbojeeg fought his enemies. L.[271]W. he did fight them, his enemy, or enemies.O sâgi-ân inini-wun.He, or she, loves a man. L. He, or she, loves him-man, or men.Kigo-yun waindji pimmâdizziwâd.They subsist on fish. L. Fish or fishes, they upon them, they live.Ontwa o sagiân odi-yun.Ontwa loves his dog. L. O. he loves him, his dog, or dogs.

In these sentences, the letterswandyare introduced before the inflectionun, merely for euphony's sake, and to enable the speaker to utter the final vowel of the substantive, and the inflective vowel, without placing both under the accent. It is to be remarked in these examples, that the verb has a corresponding inflection with the noun, indicated by the final consonantn, as insagiâ-n, objective of the verbto love. This is merely a modification ofun, where it is requisite to employ it after broada(aw), and it is applicable to nouns as well as verbs whenever they end in that sound. Thus, in the phrase, "He saw a chief,"O wâbumâ-n O gimâ-n, both noun and verb terminate inn. It is immaterial to the sense, which precedes. And this leads to the conclusion, which we are in some measure compelled to state in anticipation of our remarks on the verb: That verbs must not only agree with their nominatives in number, person, andgender(we use the latter term for want of a more appropriate one), but also with their objectives. Hence, the objective signnin the above examples. Sometimes this sign is removed from the ending of the verb, to make room for the plural of the nominative person, and is subjoined to the latter. Thus,

O sagiâ(wâ)n.They love them (him or them).

In this phrase, the interposed syllable (wâ) is, apparently, the plural—it is a reflective plural—ofhe—the latter being indicated, as usual, by the signO. It has been observed, above, that the deficiency in number, in the third person, is sometimes supplied "by numerical inflections in the relative words of the sentence," and this interposed particle (wâ) affords an instance in point.The number of the nominative pronoun appears to be thus rendered precise, but the objective is still indefinite.

When two nouns are used without a verb in the sentence, or when two nouns compose the whole matter uttered, being in the third person, both have the full objective inflection. Thus,

Os-(un). Odi-(yun).His father's dog. L. His father—his dog or dogs.

There are certain words, however, which will not admit the objectiveun, either in its simple or modified forms. These are rendered objective ineen, or _ôn_.

O wâbumâ-(n), ossin-(een).He sees the stone. L. He sees him—stone or stones.O wâbumâ-(n) mittig o mizh-(een). L. He sees him, tree or trees.He sees an oak tree.O mittig wâb (een), gyai o bikwuk-(ôn).His bow and his arrows. L. His bow him, and his arrows, him or them.Odyâ | wâ | wâ (n), akkik-(ôn).They possess a kettle. L. They own them, kettle or kettles.

The syllablewâ, in the verb of the last example included between bars (instead of parentheses), is the reflective pluraltheypointed out in a preceding instance.

I shall conclude these remarks, with full examples of each pronominal declension.

a.First declension, forming the first and second persons inaim, and the third inaimun.

e.Second declension forming the first and second persons in eem, and the third ineemun.

i.Third declension forming the first and second persons inim, and the third inimun.

o.Fourth declension forming the first and second persons in _ôm_, and the third in _ômun_.

u.(oo) Fifth declension forming the first and second persons inoom, and the third inoomun.

aw.Additional declension, required when the noun ends in the broad, instead of the long sound of a, forming the possessive in _âm_, and the objective in _âmun_.

The abbreviations,in., andex., in these declensions, mark the inclusive and exclusive forms of the pronoun plural. The inflection of the third person, as it is superadded to the first and second, is included between parentheses, that the eye, unaccustomed to these extended forms, may readily detect it.

Where the inseparable, instead of the separable pronoun is employed, the possessive inflection of the first and second person is dispensed with, although the inflection of the third is still retained.

The word dog, and this word alone, is declined in the following manner.

The wordDy, which supplies this declension, is derived fromIndyiâmmine.pron. an.—a derivative form of the word, which is, however, exclusively restricted, in its meaning, to the dog. If the expressionNin DyorN' Dy, is sometimes applied to the horse, it is because it is thereby intended to call him, my dog, from his being in a state of servitude similar to that of the dog. It must be borne in mind, as connected with this subject, that the dog, in high northern latitudes, and even as far south as 42 degrees, is both a beast of draught and of burden. He is compelled during the winter season to draw theodâban, or Indian sleigh; and sometimes to support the burden upon his back, by means of a kind of drag constructed of slender poles.

A review of the facts which have been brought together respecting the substantive, will show that the separable or inseparable pronouns under the form of prefixes, are throughout required. It will also indicate, that the inflections of the first and second persons which occupy the place of possessives, and those of the third person, resembling objectives, pertain to words, which are either primitives, or denote but a single object, asmoose,fire. There is, however, another class of substantives, or substantive expressions, and an extensive class—for it embraces a great portion of the compound descriptive terms—in the use of which no pronominal prefixes are required. The distinctions of person are, exclusively, supplied by pronominal suffixes. Of this character are the words descriptive of country, place of dwelling, field of battle, place of employment, &c. The following example will furnish the inflections applicable to this entire class of words:—

By these examples, it is perceived that the finaldinaindâdis not essential to its primitive meaning; and that the place of the pronoun is, in respect to this word, invariably a suffix.Aindâdmeans, truly, not home, but his home. The plural is formed by the inflectionin, except in the third person, where the sound ofdsinks inj.

Inquiry2.

Further remarks on the substantive—Local, diminutive, derogative, and tensal inflections—Mode in which the latter are employed to denote the disease of individuals, and to indicate the past and future seasons—Restricted or sexual terms—Conversion of the substantive into a verb, and the reciprocal character of the verb by which it is converted into a substantive—Derivative and compound substantives—Summary of the properties of this part of speech.

In the view which has been taken of the substantive in the preceding Inquiry, it has been deemed proper to exclude several topics, which, from their peculiarities, it was believed could be more satisfactorily discussed in a separate form. Of this character are those modifications of the substantive by which locality, diminution, a defective quality, and the past tense are expressed; by which various adjective and adverbial significations are given; and, finally, the substantives themselves converted into verbs. Such are also the mode of indicating the masculine and feminine (both merged, as we have shown, in the animate class), and those words which are of a strictlysexualcharacter, or are restricted in theiruseeither to males or females. Not less interesting is the manner of forming derivatives, and of conferring upon the derivatives so formed apersonality, distinguished as either animate or inanimate, at the option of the speaker.

Much of the flexibility of the substantive is derived from these properties, and they undoubtedly add much to the figurative character of the language. Some of them have been thought analogous to case, particularly that inflection of the noun which indicates the locality of the object. But if so, then there would be equally strong reasons for establishing anadjective, and anadverbial, as well as alocalcase, and a plurality of forms in each. But it is believed that no such necessity exists. There is no regular declension of these forms, and they are all used under limitations and restrictions incompatible with the true principles of case.

It is under this view of the subject, that the discussion of these forms has been transferred, together with the other accidents of the substantive just adverted to, and reserved as the subject-matter of a separate inquiry. And in now proceeding to express the conclusions at which we have arrived touching these points, it will be an object so to compress and arrange the materials before us, as to present within a small compass the leading facts and examples upon which each separate position depends.

1. That quality of the noun which, in the shape of an inflection, denotes the relative situation of the object, by the contiguous position of some accessory object, is expressed in the English language by the prepositionsin,into,at, oron. In the Indian, they are denoted by an inflection. Thus, the phrase "In the box," is rendered in the Indian by one word,mukukoong. Of this word,mukuk, simply, is box. The termination,oong, denoting the locality, not of the box, but of the object sought after. The expression appears to be precise, although there is no definite article in the language.

The substantive takes this form, most commonly, after a question has been put, asAnindi ni môkoman-ais?"Where is my penknife?"Mukukoong(in the box),addôpowin-ing(on the table), are definite replies to this question. But the form is not restricted to this relation.Chimân-ing n'guh pôz, "I shall embark in the canoe;"wakyigum n'ghu izhâ, "I shall go into the house," are perfectly correct, though somewhat formal expressions, when the canoe or the house are present to the speaker's view.

The meaning of these inflections has been restricted toin,into,at, andon, but they are the more appropriate forms of expressing the first three senses, there being other modes besides these of expressing the prepositionon. These modes consist in the use of prepositions, and will be explained under that head. The choice of the one or the other is, however, with the speaker. Generally, the inflection is employed when there is some circumstance or condition of the noun either concealed or not fully apparent. Thus,Muzzinyigun-ing, is the appropriate term for "In the book," andmayalso be used to signify "On the book." But if it is meant only to signifyonthe book, something visible being referred to, the prepositionogidjwould be used, that word indicating with certaintyon, and neverin.Wakyigun-ingindicates with clearness "In the house;" but if it is necessary to say "On the house," and it be meant at the same time to exclude any reference to the interior, the expression would be changed toogidj wakyigun.

It will be proper further to remark in this place, in the way of limitation, that there is also a separate preposition signifyingin. It ispinj. But the use of this word does not, in all cases, supersede the necessity of inflecting the noun. Thus, the expressionpindigain, is literally walk in, or enter. But if it is intended to say, "Walk in the house," the local, and not the simple form of house must be used; and the expression is,Pindigain waky'igun-ing, "Enter in the house," the verbal form which this prepositionpinjputs on, having no allusion to the act ofwalking, but merely implying position.

The local inflection, which, in the above examples, isingandoong, is further changed toaingandeeng, as the ear may direct—changes which are governed chiefly by the terminal vowel of the noun. Examples will best supply the rule, as well as the exceptions to it.

An attentive inspection of these examples will show that the local form pertains either to such nouns of the animate class as are in their nature inanimate, or at most possessed of vegetablelife. And here another conclusion presses upon us; that where these local terminations, in all their variety, are added to the names of animated beings, when such names are the nominatives of adjectives or adjective-nouns, these words are converted into terms of qualification, indicatinglike,resembling,equal. Thus, if we wish to say to a boy, "He is like a man," the expression is,Inin-ing izzhinâgozzi; or, if to a man, "He is like a bear,"Mukk-oong izzhinâgozzi; or, to a bear, "He is like a horse,Pabaizhikogâzh-ing izzhinâgozzi. In all these expressions, the wordizzhiis combined with the pronominal inflection _â_ (ornâ) and the animate terminationgozzi. And the inflection of the nominative is merely an adjective corresponding withizzhi—a term indicative of the general qualities of persons or animated beings. Where a comparison is instituted, or a resemblance pointed out, between inanimate instead of animate objects, the inflectiongozziis changed togwud, rendering the expression, which was, in the animate form,izzhinâgozzi, in the inanimate formizzhinâzgwud.

There is another variation of the local form of the noun, in addition to those above instanced, indicative of locality in a more general sense. It is formed byongornong—frequent terminations in geographical names. Thus, fromOjibwai, Chippewa, is formedOjibwainong, "Place of the Chippewas." FromWamattigozhiwug, Frenchmen, is formedWamittigozhinong, "Place of Frenchmen." FromIshpatinâ, Hill,Ishpatinong, "Place of the hill," &c. The terminationing, is also sometimes employed in this more general sense, as in the following names of places:—

Back to IndexNext