Chapter XLIII: Appendix: 1. Indian Language (2)

The number of words to which the idea of sex is attached, in the usual acceptation, is limited. The following may be enumerated.

MASCULINE. FEMININE.

Inin´i, A man. Ekwai´, A woman.
Kwee´wizais, A boy. Ekwa´zais, A girl.
Oskinahwai, A young man. Oskineegakwai, A young woman.
Akiwaizi, An old man. Mindimô´ed, An old woman.
Nôsai, My father. Nin Gah, My mother.
Ningwisis, My son. Nin dânis, My daughter.
Ni ningwun, My son-in-law. Nis sim, My daughter-in-law.

MASCULINE. FEMININE.

Ni nâbaim, My husband. Nimindimôimish, My wife.
Nimieshomiss, My grandfather. Nôkômiss, My grandmother.
Ogimâ, A chief. Ogemâkwâ, A chiefess.
Addik, A reindeer. Neetshâni, A doe.
Annimoosh, A dog. Kiskisshâi, A bitch.

The sex of the brute creation is most commonly denoted by prefixing the words _Iâbai_, male, and _Nôzhai_, female.

6. _Reciprocal Changes of the Noun._--The pronominal particles with which verbs as well as substantives are generally encumbered, and the habit of using them in particular and restricted senses, leave but little occasion for the employment of either the present or past infinitive. Most verbs are transitives. A Chippewa does not say I love, without indicating, by an inflection of the verb, the object beloved: and thus the expression is constantly, I love him, or her, &c. Neither does the infinitive appear to be generally the ultimate form of the verb.

In changing their nouns into verbs, it will not, therefore, be expected that the change should uniformly result in the infinitive, for which there is so little use, but in such of the personal forms of the various moods as circumstances may require. Most commonly, the third person singular of the indicative, and the second person singular of the imperative, are the simplest aspects under which the verb appears; and hence these forms have been sometimes mistaken for, and reported as the present infinitive. There are some instances in which the infinitive is employed. Thus, although an Indian cannot say I love, thou lovest, &c., without employing the objective forms of the verb to love, yet he can say I laugh, I cry, &c.; expressions in which, the action being confined to the speaker himself, there is no transition demanded. And in all similar instances the present infinitive, with the proper pronoun prefixed, is employed.

There are several modes of transforming a substantive into a verb. The following examples will supply the rules, so far as known, which govern these changes:--

INDICATIVE. IMPERATIVE.

Chimân, a canoe. Chimai, he paddles. Chimain, paddle thou.
Pashkizzigun, a gun. Pashkizzigai, he fires. Pashkizzigain, fire
thou.
Jeesidyigun, a broom. Jeesidyigai, he sweeps. Jeesidyigain, sweep
thou.
Weedjeeagun, a helper. Weedôkagai, he helps. Weedjeei-wain, help
thou.
Ojibwâi, a Chippewa. Ojibwâmoo, he speaks Ojibwâmoon, speak thou
Chippewa. Chippewa.

Another class of nouns is converted into the first person, indicative, of a pseudo-declarative verb, in the following manner:--

Monido, A spirit. Ne Monidôw, I (am) a spirit.
Wassaiâ, Light. Ne Wassaiâw, I (am) light.
Ishkodai, Fire. Nin Dishkodaiw, I (am) fire.
Weendigô, A monster. Ni Weendigôw, I (am) a monster.
Addik, A deer. Nin Daddikoow, I (am) a deer.
Wakyigun, A house. Ni Wakyiguniw, I (am) a house.
Pinggwi, Dust, ashes. Nim Binggwiw, I (am) dust, &c.

The word _am_, included in parenthesis, is not in the original, unless we may suppose the terminals _ow_, _aw_, _iw_, _oow_, to be derivatives from _Iaw_. These changes are reciprocated by the verb, which, as often as occasion requires, is made to put on a substantive form. The particle _win_, added to the indicative of the verb, converts it into a substantive. Thus--

Keegido, He speaks. Keegidowin, Speech.
Pâshkizzigai, He fires. Pashkizzigaiwin, Ammunition.
Agindasoo, He counts. Agindasoowin, Numbers.
Wahyiâzhinggai, He cheats. Wahyiâzhinggaiwin, Fraud.
Minnikwâi, He drinks. Minnikwâiwin, Drink.
Kubbâshi, He encamps. Kubbâishiwin, An encampment.
Meegâzoo, He fights. Meegâzoowin, A fight.
Ojeengai, He kisses. Ojeendiwin, A kiss.
Annôki, He works. Annôkiwta, Work.
Pâpi, He laughs. Pâpiwin, Laughter.
Pimâdizzi, He lives. Pimâdoiziwin, Life.
Onwâibi, He rests. Onwâibiwin, Rest.
Annamiâ, He prays. Annamiâwin, Prayer.
Nibâ, He sleeps. Nibâwin, Sleep.
Odâwai, He trades. Odâwaiwin, Trade.

Adjectives are likewise thus turned into substantives:--

Keezhaiwâdizzi, He generous. Keezhaiwâdizziwin, Generosity.
Minwaindum, He happy. Minwaindumowin, Happiness.
Keezhaizeâwizzi, He industrious. Keezhaizhâwizziwin, Industry.
Kittimâgizzi, He poor. Kittimâgizziwin, Poverty.
Aukkoossi, He sick. Aukkoossiwin, Sickness.
Kittimishki, He lazy. Kittimishkiwin, Laziness.
Nishkâdizzi, He angry. Nishkâdizziwin, Anger.
Baikâdizzi, She chaste. Baikâdizziwin, Chastity.

In order to place the substantives thus formed in the third person, corresponding with the indicative from which they were changed, it is necessary only to prefix the proper pronoun. Thus, _Ogeezhaiwâdizziwin_, his generosity, &c.

7. _Compound Substantives._--The preceding examples have been given promiscuously from the various classes of words, primitive and derivative, simple and compound. Some of these words express but a single idea, as, _ôs_, father--_gah_, mother--_môz_, a moose--_kâg_, a porcupine--_mang_, a loon--and appear to be incapable of further division. All such words may be considered as primitives, although some of them may be contractions of dissyllabic words. There are also a number of dissyllables, and _possibly_ some trisyllables, which, in the present state of our analytical knowledge of the language, may be deemed both simple and primitive. Such are _neebi_, water; _ossin_, a stone; _geezis_, the sun; _nodin_, wind. But it may be premised, as a principle which our investigations have rendered probable, that all polysyllabic words, all words of three syllables, _so far as examined_, and most words of two syllables, are compounds.

The application of a syntax, formed with a view to facilitate the rapid conveyance of ideas by consolidation, may, it is presumable, have early led to the coalescence of words, by which all the relations of object and action, time and person, were expressed. And in a language which is only spoken, and not written, the primitives would soon become obscured and lost in the multiform appendages of time and person, and the recondite connection of actor and object. And this process of amalgamation would be a progressive one. The terms that sufficed in the condition of the simplest state of nature, or in a given latitude, would vary with their varying habits, institutions, and migrations. The introduction of new objects and new ideas would require the invention of new words, or what is much more probable, existing terms would be modified or compounded to suit the occasion. No one who has paid much attention to the subject, can have escaped noticing a confirmation of this opinion, in the extreme readiness of our western Indians to bestow, on the instant, names, and appropriate names--to any new object presented to them. A readiness not attributable to their having at command a stock of generic polysyllables--for these it would be very awkward to wield--but, as appears more probable, to the powers of the syntax, which permits the resolution of new compounds from existing roots, and often concentrates, as remarked in another place, the entire sense of the parent words, upon a single syllable, and sometimes upon a single letter.

Thus it is evident that the Chippewas possessed names for a living tree, _mittig_, and a string, _aiâb_, before they named the bow _mittigwâb_--the latter being compounded under one of the simplest rules from the two former. It is further manifest that they had named earth _akki_, and (any solid, stony, or metallic mass) _âbik_, before they bestowed an appellation upon the kettle, _akkeek_, or _akkik_, the latter being derivatives from the former. In process of time these compounds became the bases of other compounds, and thus the language became loaded with double, and triple, and quadruple compounds, concrete in their meaning and formal in their utterance.

When the introduction of metals took place, it became necessary to distinguish the clay from the iron pot, and the iron from the copper kettle. The original compound, _akkeek_, retained its first meaning, admitting the adjective noun _piwâbik_ (itself a compound) iron, when applied to a vessel of that kind, _piwâbik akkeek_, iron kettle. But a new combination took place to designate the copper kettle, _mishwâkeek_, red metal kettle; and another expression to denote the brass kettle, _ozawâbik akkeek_, yellow metal kettle. The former is made up from _miskôwâbik_, copper (literally _red-metal_--from _miskwâ_, red, and _âbik_, the generic above mentioned), and _akkeek_, kettle. _Ozawâbik_, brass, is from _ozawâ_, yellow, and the generic _âbik_--the term _akkeek_ being added in its separate form. It may, however, be used in its connected form of _wukkeek_, making the compound expression _ozawâbik wukkeek_.

In naming the horse _paibâizhikôgazhi, i. e._ the animal with solid hoofs, they have seized upon the feature which most strikingly distinguished the horse from the cleft-footed animals, which were the only species known to them at the period of the discovery. And the word itself affords an example, at once, both of their powers of concentration, and brief, yet accurate description, which it may be worth while to analyze. _Paizhik_ is one, and is also used as the indefinite article--the only article the language possesses. This word is further used in an adjective sense, figura-tively indicating, united, solid, undivided. And it acquires a plural signification by doubling, or repeating the first syllable, with a slight variation of the second. Thus, _Pai-baizhik_ denotes not _one_, or _an_, but several; and when thus used in the context, renders the noun governed plural. _Oskuzh_ is the nail, claw, or horny part of the foot of beasts, and supplies the first substantive member of the compound _gauzh_. The final vowel is from _ahwaisi_, a beast; and the marked _o_, an inseparable connective, the office of which is to make the two members coalesce, and harmonize. The expression thus formed becomes a substantive, specific in its application. It may be rendered plural like the primitive nouns, may be converted into a verb, has its diminutive, derogative, and local form, and, in short, is subject to all the modifications of other substantives.

Most of the modern nouns are of this complex character. And they appear to have been invented to designate objects, many of which were necessarily unknown to the Indians in the primitive ages of their existence. Others, like their names for a copper-kettle and a horse, above mentioned, can date their origin further back than the period of the discovery. Of this number of nascent words, are most of their names for those distilled or artificial liquors, for which they are indebted to Europeans. Their name for water, _neebi_, for the fat of animals, _weenin_, for oil or grease, _pimmidai_, for broth, _nâbôb_, and for blood, _miskwi_, belong to a very remote era, although all but the first appear to be compounds. Their names for the tinctures or extracts derived from the forest, and used as dyes, or medicines, or merely as agreeable drinks, are mostly founded upon the basis of the word _âbo_, a liquid, although this word is never used alone. Thus--

Shomin-âbo, Wine, From Shomin, a grape, âbo, a liquor.
Ishkôdâi-wâbo, Spirits, From Ishkôdâi, fire, &c.
Mishimin-âbo, Cider, From Mishimin, an apple, &c.
Tôtôsh-âbo, Milk, From Tôtôsh, the female breast, &c.
Sheew-âbo, Vinegar, From Sheewun, sour, &c.
Annibeesh-âbo, From Annibeeshun, leaves, &c.
Ozhibiegun-aubo, From Ozhibiêgai, he writes, &c.

In like manner their names for the various implements and utensils of civilized life, are based upon the word _Jeegun_, one of those primitives, which, although never disjunctively used, denotes, in its modified forms, the various senses implied by our words instrument, contrivance, machine, &c. And by prefixing to this generic a substantive, verb, or adjective, or parts of one or each, an entire new class of words is formed. In these combinations, the vowels e and o are sometimes used as connectives.

Keeshkeebô-jeegun, A saw, From Keeshkeezhun, v. a. to
cut.
Seeseebô-jeegun, A file, From Seesee, to rub off, &c.
Wassakoonen-jeegun, A candle, From Wassakooda, bright,
biskoona, flame, &c.
Beeseebô-jeegun, A coffee-mill, From Beesâ, fine grains, &c.
Minnikwâd-jeegun, A drinking-vessel, From Minnekwâi, he drinks,
&c.
Tâshkeebôd-jeegun, A saw-mill, From Taushkâ, to split, &c.
Mudwâiabeed-jeegun, A violin, From Mudwâwâi, sound, âiâb, a
string, &c.

Sometimes this termination is shortened into _gun_, as in the following instances:--

Onâ-gun, A dish.
Tikkina-gun, A cradle.
Neeba-gun, A bed.
Puddukkyi-gun, A fork.
Puggimmâ-gun, A war-club.
Opwâ-gun, A pipe.
Wassâitshie-gun, A window.
Wakkyi-gun, A house.
Pôdahwâ-gun, A fire-place.
Sheema-gun, A lance.

Another class of derivatives is formed from _wyân_, indicating, generally, an undressed skin. Thus--

Muk-wyân, A bear skin, From Mukwah, a bear, and wyaun, a
skin.
Wazhusk-wyân, A muskrat skin, From Wazhusk, a muskrat, &c.
Wabôs-wyân, A rabbit skin, From Wabôs, a rabbit, &c.
Neegik-wyân, An otter skin, From Neegih, an otter, &c.
Ojeegi-wyân, A fisher skin, From Ojeeg, a fisher, &c.
Wabizhais-ewyân, a martin skin, from wabizhais, a martin, &c.

_Wâbiwyân_, a blanket, and _bubbuggiwyân_, a shirt, are also formed from this root. As the termination _wyân_, is chiefly restricted to undressed skins, or peltries, that of _waigin_ is, in like manner, generally applied to dressed skins or to cloths. Thus--

Monido-waigin, Blue cloth, shrouds, From Monido, spirits, &c.
Misk-waigin, Red cloth, From Miskwâ, red, &c.
Nondâ-waigin, Scarlet.
Peezhiki-waigin, A buffalo robe, From Peezhiki, a buffalo,
&c.
Addik-waigin, A cariboo skin, From Addik, a cariboo, &c.
Ozhauwushk-waigin, Green cloth, From Ozhâwushkwâ, green.

An interesting class of substantives is derived from the third person singular of the present indicative of the verb, by changing the vowel sound of the first syllable, and adding the letter d to that of the last, making the terminations in _aid_, _âd_, _eed_, _id_, _ood_. Thus, _Pimmoossâ_, he walks, becomes _pâmmoossâd_, a walker.

aid.

Munnissai, He chops. Mânissaid, A chopper.
Ozhibeigai, He writes. Wâzhibeigaid, A writer.
Nundowainjeegai, He hunts. Nândowainjeegaid, A hunter.

âd.

Neebâ, He sleeps. Nâbâd, A sleeper.
Kwâbahwâ, He fishes (with Kwyâbahwâd, A fisher (with
scoop net). scoop net).
Puggidowâ, He fishes (with Pâgidowâd, A fisher (with
seine). seine).

eed.

Annokee, He works. Anokeed, A worker.
Jeessakea, He juggles. Jossakeed, A juggler.
Munnigobee, He pulls bark. Mainigobeed, A bark puller.

id.

Neemi, He dances. Nâmid, A dancer.
Weesinni, He eats. Wâssinid, An eater.
Pimâdizzi, He lives. Paimaudizzid, A living being.

ood.

Nugamoo, He sings. Naigumood, A singer.
Keegido, He speaks. Kâgidood, A speaker.
Keewonimoo, He lies. Kâwunimood, A liar.

This class of words is rendered plural in _ig_--a termination, which, after _d_ final in the singular, has a soft pronunciation, as if written _jig_. Thus, _Nâmid_, a dancer, _nâmidjig_, dancers.

The derogative form is given to these generic substantives by introducing _ish_, or simply _sh_, in place of the _d_, and changing the latter to _kid_, making the terminations in _ai_, _aishkid_, in _â_, _âshkid_, in _e_, _eeshkid_, in _i_, _ishkid_, and in _oo_, _ooshkid_. Thus, _naindowainjeegaid_, a hunter, is changed to _naindowainjeegaishkid_, a bad or unprofitable hunter. _Naibâd_, a sleeper, is changed to _naibâshkid_, a sluggard. _Jossakeed_, a juggler, to _jossakeeshkid_, a vicious juggler. _Wâsinnid_, an eater, to _wâssinishkid_, a gormandizer. _Kâgidood_, a speaker, _kâgidooshkid_, a babbler. And in these cases the plural is added to the last educed form, making _kâgidooshkidjig_, babblers, &c.

The word _nittâ_, on the contrary, prefixed to those expressions, renders them complimentary. For instance, _nittâ naigumood_, is a fine singer, _nittâ kâgidood_, a ready speaker, &c.

Flexible as the substantive has been shown to be, there are other forms of combination that have not been adverted to--forms, by which it is made to coalesce with the verb, the adjective, and the preposition, producing a numerous class of compound expressions. But it is deemed most proper to defer the discussion of these forms to their several appropriate heads.

Enough has been exhibited to demonstrate its prominent grammatical rules. It is not only apparent that the substantive possesses number and gender, but it also undergoes peculiar modifications to express locality and diminution, to denote adjective qualities and to indicate tense. It exhibits some curious traits connected with the mode of denoting the masculine and feminine. It is modified to express person and to distinguish living from inanimate masses. It is rendered possessive by a peculiar inflection, and provides particles, under the shape either of prefixes or suffixes, separable or inseparable, by which the actor is distinguished from the object--and all this, without changing its proper substantive character, without putting on the aspect of a pseudo adjective, or a pseudo verb. Its changes to produce compounds are, however, its most interesting, its most characteristic trait. Syllable is heaped upon syllable, word upon word, and derivative upon derivative, until its vocabulary is crowded with long and pompous phrases, most formidable to the eye.

So completely transpositive do the words appear, that like chessmen on a board, their elementary syllables can be changed at the will of the player, to form new combinations to meet new contingencies, so long as they are changed in accordance with certain general principles and conventional rules; in the application of which, however, much depends upon the will or the skill of the player. What is most surprising, all these changes and combinations, all these qualifications of the object, and distinctions of the person, the time, and the place, do not supersede the use of adjectives, and pronouns, and verbs, and other parts of speech woven into the texture of the noun, in their elementary and conjunctive forms.

III.

_Principles Governing the Use of the Odjibwa Noun-Adjective._

INQUIRY 3.

Observations on the adjective--Its distinction into two classes
denoted by the presence or absence of vitality--Examples of the
animates and inanimates--Mode of their conversion into
substantives--How pronouns are applied to these derivatives, and
the manner of forming compound terms from adjective bases to
describe the various natural phenomena--The application of these
principles in common conversation, and in the description of
natural and artificial objects--Adjectives always preserve the
distinction of number--Numerals--Arithmetical capacity of the
language--The unit exists in duplicate.

1. It has been remarked that the distinction of words into animates and inanimates, is a principle intimately interwoven throughout the structure of the language. It is, in fact, so deeply imprinted upon its grammatical forms, and is so perpetually recurring, that it may be looked upon, not only as forming a striking peculiarity of the language, but as constituting the fundamental principle of its structure, from which all other rules have derived their limits, and to which they have been made to conform. No class of words appears to have escaped its impress. Whatever concords other laws impose, they all agree, and are made subservient in the establishment of this.

It might appear to be a useless distinction in the adjective, when the substantive is thus marked; but it will be recollected that it is in the plural of the substantive only that the distinction is marked; and we shall, presently have occasion to show that redundancy of forms is, to considerable extent, obviated in practice.

For the origin of the principle itself, we need look only to nature, which endows animate bodies with animate properties and qualities, and _vice versâ_. But it is due to the tribes who speak this language, to have invented one set of adjective symbols to express the ideas peculiarly appropriate to the former, and another set applicable exclusively to the latter; and to have given the words good and bad, black and white, great and small, handsome and ugly, such modifications as are practically competent to indicate the general nature of the objects referred to, whether provided with, or destitute of, the vital principle. And not only so, but, by the figurative use of these forms, to exalt inanimate masses into the class of living beings, or to strip the latter of its properties of life--a principle of much importance to their public speakers.

This distinction is shown in the following examples, in which it will be observed that the inflection _izzi_ generally denotes the personal, and _au_, _un_, or _wud_, the impersonal forms.

ADJ. INANIMATE. ADJ. ANIMATE.

Bad, Monaudud, Monaudizzi.
Ugly, Gushkoonaugwud, Gushkoonaugoozzi.
Beautiful, Bishegaindaugwud, Bisheguindaugoozzi.
Strong, Söngun, Söngizzi.
Soft, Nökun, Nökizzi.
Hard, Mushkowau, Mushkowizzi.
Smooth, Shoiskwau, Shoiskoozzi.
Black, Mukkuddäwau, Mukkuddäwizzi.
White, Waubishkau, Waubishkizzi.
Yellow, Ozahwau, Ozahwizzi.
Red, Miskwau, Miskwizzi.
Blue, Ozhahwushkwau, Ozhahwushkwizzi.
Sour, Sheewun, Sheewizzi.
Sweet, Weeshköbun, Weeshköbizzi.
Light, Naugun, Naungizzi.

It is not, however, in all cases, by mere modifications of the adjective that these distinctions are expressed. Words totally different in sound, and evidently derived from radically different roots, are, in some few instances, employed; as in the following examples:--

ADJ. INANIMATE. ADJ. ANIMATE.

Good, Onisheshin, Minno.
Bad, Monaudud, Mudjee.
Large, Mitshau, Mindiddo.
Small, Pungee, Uggaushe.
Old, Geekau, Gitizzi.

It may be remarked of these forms, that, although the impersonal will, in some instances, take the personal inflections, the rule is not reciprocated, and _minno_, and _mindiddo_, and _gitizzi_, and all words similarly situated, remain unchangeably animates. The word _pungee_ is limited to the expression of quantity, and its correspondent, _uggaushi_, to size or quality. _Kishedä_ (hot) is restricted to the heat of a fire; _keezhautä_, to the heat of the sun. There is still a third term to indicate the natural heat of the body; _kizzizoo_. _Mitshau_ (large) is generally applied to countries, lakes, rivers, &c.; _mindiddo_, to the body; and _gitshee_, indiscriminately. _Onishishin_, and its correspondent, _onishishshä_, signify handsome or fair, as well as good. _Kwonaudy_, a. a., and _kwonaudyewun_, a. i., mean, strictly, handsome, and imply nothing further. _Minno_ is the appropriate personal form for good. _Mudjee_ and _monaudud_ may reciprocally change genders, the first by the addition of _iee_, and the second by altering _ud_ to _izzi_.

Distinctions of this kind are of considerable importance in a practical point of view, and their observance or neglect is noticed with scrupulous exactness by the Indians. The want of inanimate forms to such words as happy, sorrowful, brave, sick, &c., creates no confusion, as inanimate nouns cannot, strictly speaking, take upon themselves such qualities; and when they do--as they sometimes do--by one of those extravagant figures of speech which are used in their tales of transformations, the animate form answers all purposes; for in these tales the whole material creation may be clothed with animation. The rule, as exhibited in practice, is limited, with sufficient accuracy, to the boundaries prescribed by nature.

To avoid a repetition of forms, were the noun and the adjective both to be employed in their usual relation, the latter is endowed with a pronominal or substantive inflection; and the use of the noun in its separate form is thus wholly superseded. Thus, _onishishin_, a. i., and _onishishsha_, a. a., become _wänishishing_, "That which is good or fair," and _wänishishid_, "He who is good or fair." The following examples will exhibit this rule under each of its forms:--

COMPOUND OR NOUN-ADJECTIVE ANIMATE.

Black, Mukkuddawizzi, Mäkuddäwizzid.
White, Waubishkizzi, Wyaubishkizzid.
Yellow, Ozahwizzi, Wäzauwizzid.
Red, Miskwizzi, Mäskoozzid.
Strong, Söngizzi, Swöngizzid.

NOUN-ADJECTIVE INANIMATE.

Black, Mukkuddäwau, Mäkuddäwaug.
White, Waubishkau, Wyaubishkaug.
Yellow, Ozahwau, Wäzhauwaug.
Red, Miskwau, Maiskwaug.

The animate forms, in these examples, will be recognized as exhibiting a further extension of the rule, mentioned in the preceding Inquiry, by which substantives are formed from the indicative of the verb by a permutation of the vowels; and these forms are likewise rendered plural in the manner there mentioned. They also undergo changes to indicate the various persons. For instance, _onishisha_ is thus declined to mark the person:--

Wänishish-eyaun, I (am) good or fair.
Wänishish-eyun, Thou (art) good or fair.
Wänishish-id, He (is) good or fair.
Wänishish-eyaung, We (are) good or fair. (ex.)
Wänishish-eyung, We (are) good or fair. (in.)
Wänishish-eyaig, Ye (are) good or fair.
Wänishish-idjig, They (are) good or fair.

The inanimate forms, being without person, are simply rendered plural by _in_, changing _maiskwaug_ to _maiskwaug-in_, &c. &c. The verbal signification which these forms assume, as indicated in the words am, art, is, are, is to be sought in the permutative change of the first syllable. Thus, _o_ is changed to _wä_, _muk_ to _mäk_, _waub_ to _wy-aub_, _ozau_ to _wäzau_, _misk_ to _maisk_, &c. The pronoun, as is usual in the double compounds, is formed wholly by the inflections _eyaun_, _eyun_, &c.

The strong tendency of the adjective to assume a personal or pronomico-substantive form, leads to the employment of many words in a particular or exclusive sense; and, in any future practical attempts with the language, it will be found greatly to facilitate its acquisition, if the adjectives are arranged in distinct classes, separated by this characteristic principle of their application. The examples we have given are chiefly those which may be considered strictly animate or inanimate, admit of double forms, and are of general use. Many of the examples recorded in the original manuscripts employed in these inquiries, are of a more concrete character, and, at the same time, a more limited use. Thus, _shaugwewe_ is a weak person; _nökaugumme_, a weak drink; _nökaugwud_, a weak or soft piece of wood. _Sussägau_ is fine, but can only be applied to personal appearance; _beesau_, indicates fine grains. _Keewushkwä_ is giddy, and _keewushkwäbee_, giddy with drink--both being restricted to the third person. _Söngun_ and _songizzi_ are the personal and impersonal forms of strong, as given above, but _mushkowaugumme_ is strong drink. In like manner, the two words for hard, as above, are restricted to solid substances. _Sunnuhgud_ is hard (to endure). _Waindud_ is easy (to perform). _Söngodää_ is brave; _shaugedää_, cowardly; _keezhinghowizzi_, active; _kizheekau_, swift; _onaunegoozzi_, lively; _minwaindum_, happy; _gushkaindum_, sorrowful; but all these forms are confined to the third person of the indicative, singular. _Pibbigwun_ is a rough or knotted substance; _pubbiggozzi_, a rough person. _Keenwau_ is long or tall (any solid mass). _Kaynozid_ is a tall person. _Tahkozid_ a short person. _Wassayau_ is light; _wassaubizzoo_, the light of the eye; _wasshauzhä_, the light of a star or any luminous body. _Keenau_ is sharp; _keenaubikud_, a sharp knife or stone. _Keezhaubikeday_ is hot metal, a hot stove, &c. _Keezhaugummeday_ is hot water. _Uubudgeetön_ is useful, a useful thing. _Wauweeug_ is frivolous, anything frivolous in word or deed. _Tubbushish_ appears to be a general term for low. _Ishpimming_ is high in the air. _Ishpau_ is applied to any high fixture, as a house, &c. _Ishpaubikau_ is a high rock. _Taushkaubikau_, a split rock.

These combinations and limitations meet the inquirer at every step; they are the current phrases of the language; they present short, ready, and often beautiful modes of expression; and, as they shed light both upon the idiom and genius of the language, I shall not scruple to add further examples and illustrations. Ask a Chippewa the name for a rock, and he will answer _awzhebik_. The generic import of _awbik_ has been explained. Ask him the name for red rock, and he will answer _miskwaubik_; for white rock, and he will answer _waubaubik_; for black rock, _mukkuddäwaubik_; for yellow rock, _ozahwaubik_; for green rock, _ozhahwushkwaubik_; for bright rock, _wassayaubik_; for smooth rock, _shoishkwaubik_, &c.--compounds in which the words red, white, black, yellow, &c., unite with _aubik_. Pursue this inquiry, and the following forms will be elicited:--

Impersonal.

Miskwaubik-ud, It (is) a red rock.
Waububik-ud, It (is) a white rock.
Mukkudäwaubik-ud, It (is) a black rock.
Ozahwaubik-ud, It (is) a yellow rock.
Wassayaubik-ud, It (is) a bright rock.
Shoiskwaubik-ud, It (is) a smooth rock.

Personal.

Miskwaubik-izzi, He (is) a red rock.
Waububik-izzi, He (is) a white rock.
Mukkudäwaubik-izzi, He (is) a black rock.
Ozahwaubik-izzi, He (is) a yellow rock.
Wassayaubik-izzi, He (is) a bright rock.
Shoiskwaubik-izzi, He (is) a smooth rock.

Add _bun_ to these terms, and they are made to have passed away; prefix _tah_ to them, and their future appearance is indicated. The word "is" in the translations, although marked with parentheses, is not deemed wholly gratuitous. There is, strictly speaking, an idea of existence given to these compounds, by the particle _au_, in _aubic_, which seems to be indirectly a derivative from that great and fundamental root of the language _Iau_. _Bik_ is apparently the radix of the expression for "rock."

Let this mode of interrogation be continued, and extended to other adjectives, or the same adjectives applied to other objects, and results equally regular and numerous will be obtained. _Minnis_, we shall be told is an island; _miskominnis_, a red island; _mukkuddäminnis_, a black island; _waubeminnis_, a white island, &c. _Annokwut_, is a cloud; _miskwaunakwut_, a red cloud; _mukkuddawukwut_, a black cloud; _waubahnokwut_, a white cloud; _ozahwushkwahnakwut_, a blue cloud, &c. _Neebe_ is the specific term for water; but is not generally used in combination with the adjective. The word _guma_, like _aubo_, appears to be a generic term for water, or potable liquids. Hence, the following terms:--

Gitshee, Great. Gitshiguma, Great water.
Nokun, Weak. Nökauguma, Weak drink.
Mushkowau, Strong. Mushkowauguma, Strong drink.
Weeshkobun, Sweet. Weeshkobauguma, Sweet drink.
Sheewun, Sour. Sheewauguma, Sour drink.
Weesugun, Bitter. Weesugauguma, Bitter drink.
Minno, Good. Minwauguma, Good drink.
Monaudud, Bad. Mahnauguma, Bad drink.
Miskwau, Red. Miskwauguma, Red drink.
Ozahwau, Yellow. Ozahwauguma, Yellow drink.
Weenun, Dirty. Weenauguma, Dirty water.
Peenud, Clean. Peenauguma, Clean water.

From _minno_, and from _monaudud_, good and bad, are derived the following terms: _Minnopogwud_, it tastes well; _minnopogoozzi_, he tastes well; _mawzhepogwud_, it tastes bad; _mawzhepogoozzi_, he tastes bad. _Minnomaugwud_, it smells good; _minnomaugoozzi_, he smells good;_ mauzhemaugud_, it smells bad; _mauzhemaugoozzi_, he smells bad. The inflections _gwud_, and _izzi_, here employed, are clearly indicative, as in other combinations, of the words _it_ and _him_.

_Baimwa_, is sound; _baimwäwa_, the passing sound; _minwäwa_, a pleasant sound; _maunwäwa_, a disagreeable sound; _mudwayaushkau_, the sound of waves dashing on the shore; _mudwayaunnemud_, the sound of winds; _mudwayaukooshkau_, the sound of falling trees; _mudwäkumigishin_, the sound of a person falling upon the earth; _mudwaysin_, the sound of any inanimate mass falling on the earth. These examples might be continued _ad infinitum_. Every modification of circumstances, almost every peculiarity of thought, is expressed by some modification of the orthography. Enough has been given to prove that the adjective combines itself with the substantive, the verb, and the pronoun, that the combinations thus produced are numerous, afford concentrated modes of conveying ideas, and oftentimes, happy turns of expression. Numerous and prevalent as these forms are, they do not, however, preclude the use of adjectives in their simple forms. The use of the one or the other appears to be generally at the option of the speaker. In most cases brevity or euphony dictates the choice. Usage results from these applications of the principles. There may be rules resting upon a broader basis; but if so, they do not appear to be very obvious. Perhaps the simple adjectives are often employed before verbs and nouns, in the first and second persons singular.

Ningee minno neebau-nabun, I have slept well.
Ningee minno weesin, I have eaten a good meal.
Ningee minno pimmoossay, I have walked well, or a good
distance.
Kägät minno geezhigud, It (is) a very pleasant day.
Kwanaudy ningödahs, I have a handsome garment.
Ke minno iau nuh, Are you well?
Auneende ain deyun, What ails you?
Keezhamonedo aupädush shäwainemik, God prosper you.
Aupädush shäwaindaugoozzegun, Good luck attend you.
Aupädush nau kinwainzh pimmaudizziyun, May you live long.
Onauneegoozzin, Be (thou) cheerful.
Ne minwaindum waubumenaun, I (am) glad to see you.
Kwanaudj kweeweezains, A pretty boy.
Kägät söngedää, He (is) a brave man.
Kägät onishishsha, She (is) handsome.
Gitshee kinözee, He (is) very tall.
Uggausau bäwizzi, She (is) slender.
Gitshee sussaigau, He (is) fine dressed.
Bishegaindaugoozzi-wug meegwunug, They (are) beautiful feathers.
Ke daukoozzinuh, Are you sick?
Monaudud muundun muskeekee, This (is) bad medicine.
Monaudud aindauyun, My place of dwelling (is) bad.
Aindauyaun mitshau, My place of dwelling (is) large.
Ne mittigwaub onishishsha, My bow (is) good.
Ne bikwukön monaududön, But my arrows (are) bad.
Ne minwaindaun appaukoozzegun, I love mild or mixed tobacco.
Kauweekau neezhikay ussämau ne But I never smoke pure tobacco.
suggus-wannausee,
Monaudud maishkowaugumig, Strong drink (is) bad.
Keeguhgee budjeëgonaun, It makes us foolish.
Gitshee Monedo neebe ogee özhetön, The Great Spirit made water.
Ininewug dush ween ishködäwaubo ogee But man made whiskey.
oz-hetönahwau,

These expressions are put down promiscuously, embracing verbs and nouns as they presented themselves, and without any effort to support the opinion, which may or may not be correct, that the elementary forms of the adjectives are most commonly required before verbs and nouns in the first and second persons. The English expression is thrown into Indian in the most natural manner, and, of course, without always giving adjective for adjective or noun for noun. Thus, God is rendered, not _monedo_, but _Geezha monedo, merciful spirit_. Good luck is rendered by the compound phrase, _shäwaindaugoozzegun_, indicating in a very general sense, the influence of kindness or benevolence on _success in life_. _Söngedää_ is, alone, _a brave man_, and the word _kägät_ prefixed, is an adverb. In the expression "mild tobacco," the adjective is entirely dispensed with in the Indian, the sense being sufficiently rendered by the compound noun _appaukoozzegun_, which always means the Indian weed or smoking mixture. _Ussämau_, on the contrary, without the adjective, signifies pure tobacco. _Bikwukön_, signifies blunt or lumpy-headed arrows; _assowaun_, is the barbed arrow. _Kwonaudj kweeweezains_ means, not simply "pretty boy," but _pretty little boy_; and there is no mode of using the word boy but in this diminutive form, the word itself being a derivative _kewewe coryugal_, with the regular diminutive in _ains_. _Onauneegoozzin_, embraces the pronoun, verb, and adjective, _be thou cheerful_. In the last phrase of the examples, "man" is rendered men (_inineewuy_) in the translation, as the term _man_ cannot be employed in the general plural sense it conveys in this connection in the original. The word "whiskey" is rendered by the compound phrase, _ishködawaubo_, literally _fire-liquor_, a generic for all kinds of ardent spirits.

These aberrations from the literal terms will convey some conceptions of the difference of the two idioms, although, from the limited nature and object of the examples, they will not indicate the full extent of the difference. In giving anything like the spirit of the original, much greater deviations in the written forms must appear. And in fact, not only the structure of the language, but the mode and _order of thought_ of the Indians is so essentially different, that any attempts to preserve the English idiom, to give letter for letter, and word for word, must go far to render the translation pure nonsense.

2. Varied as the adjective is in its changes, it has no comparative inflection. A Chippewa cannot say that one substance is hotter or colder than another, or of two or more substances unequally heated, that this or that is the hottest or coldest, without employing adverbs or accessory adjectives; and it is accordingly by adverbs and accessory adjectives that the degrees of comparison are expressed.

_Pimmaudizziwin_, is a very general substantive expression, indicating the _tenor of being or life_. _Izzhewäbizziwin_, is a term near akin to it, but more appropriately applied to the _acts_, _conduct_, _manner_, or _personal deportment_ of life. Hence the expressions--

Nem bimmaudizziwin, My tenor of life.
Ke bimmaudizziwin, Thy tenor of life.
O pimmaudizziwin, His tenor of life, &c.
Nin dizhewäbizziwin, My personal deportment.
Ke dizhewäbizziwin, Thy personal deportment.
O Izzhewäbizziwin, His personal deportment, &c.

To form the positive degree of comparison from these terms, _minno_, good, and _mudjee_, bad, are introduced between the pronoun and verb, giving rise to some permutations of the vowels and consonants, which affect the sound only. Thus--

Ne minno pimmaudizziwin, My good tenor of life.
Ke minno pimmaudizziwin, Thy good tenor of life.
Minno pimmaudizziwin, His good tenor of life.
Ne mudjee pimmaudizziwin, My bad tenor of life.
Ke mudjee pimmaudizziwin, Thy bad tenor of life.
Mudjee pimmaudizziwin, His bad tenor of life.

To place these forms in the comparative degree, _nahwudj_, _more_, is prefixed to the adjective; and the superlative is denoted by _mahmowee_, an adverb or an adjective as it is variously applied, but the meaning of which is, in this connection, _most_. The degrees of comparison may be, therefore, set down as follows:--

Positive, Kishedä. Hot (restricted to the heat of a fire),
Comparative, Nahwudj kishedä. More hot,
Superlative, Mahmowee kishedä. Most hot.

Your manner of life is good, Ke dizzhewäbizziwin onishishin.
Your manner of life is better, Ke dizzhewäbizziwin nahwudj onishishin.
Your manner of life is best, Ke dizzhewäbizziwin mahwoweé onishishin.
His manner of life is best, Odizzhewäbizziwin mahmowee onishishinine.
Little Turtle was brave, Mikkenoköns söngedääbun.
Tecumseh was braver, Tecumseh nahwudj söngedääbun.
Pontiac was bravest, Pontiac mahmowee söngedääbun.

3. The adjective assumes a negative form when it is preceded by the adverb. Thus, the phrase _songedää_, he is brave, is changed to _kahween söngedääsee_, he is not brave.

POSITIVE.

Neebwaukah, He is wise.
Kwonaudjewe, She is handsome.
Oskineegee, He is young.
Shaugweewee, He is feeble.
Geekkau, He is old.
Mushkowizzi, He is strong.

NEGATIVE.

Kahween neebwaukah-see, He is not wise.
Kahween kwonaudjewee-see, She is not handsome.
Kahween oskineegee-see, He is not young.
Kahween Shaugweewee-see, He is not feeble.
Kahween Geekkau-see, He is not old.
Kahween Mushkowizzi-see, He is not strong.

From this rule the indeclinable adjectives, by which is meant those adjectives which do not put on the personal and impersonal forms by inflection, but consist of radically different roots, form exceptions.

Are you sick? Ke dahkoozzi nuh?
You are not sick! Kahween ke dahkoozzi-see.
I am happy, Ne minwaindum.
I am unhappy, Kahween ne minwainduz-see.
His manner of life is bad, Mudjee izzhewabizzi.
His manner of life is not bad, Kahween mudjee izzhewabizzi-see.
It is large, Mitshau muggud.
It is not large, Kahween mitshau-seenön.

In these examples, the declinable adjectives are rendered negative in _see_; the indeclinable, remain as simple adjuncts to the verbs; and the _latter_ put on the negative form.

4. In the hints and remarks which have now been furnished respecting the Chippewa adjective, its powers and inflections have been shown to run parallel with those of the substantive, in its separation into animates and inanimates; in having the pronominal inflections; in taking an inflection for tense--a topic which, by the way, has been very cursorily passed over--and in the numerous modifications to form the compounds. This parallelism has also been intimated to hold good with respect to number--a subject deeply interesting in itself, as it has its analogy only in the ancient languages--and it was therefore deemed best to defer giving examples, till they could be introduced without abstracting the attention from other points of discussion.

_Minno_ and _mudjee_, good and bad, being of the limited number of personal adjectives which modern usage permits being applied, although often improperly applied to inanimate objects, they, as well as a few other adjectives, form exceptions to the use of number. Whether we say "a good man" or "a bad man," "good men" or "bad men," the words _minno_ and _mudjee_ remain the same. But all the declinable and coalescing adjectives--adjectives which join on, and, as it were, _melt into_ the body of the substantive--take the usual plural inflections, and are governed by the same rules in regard to their use, as the substantive; personal adjectives requiring personal plurals, &c.

ADJECTIVES ANIMATE.

Singular.

Onishishewe mishemin, Good apple.
Kwonaudjewe eekwä, Handsome woman.
Songedää inine, Brave man.
Bishegaindaugoozzi peenasee, Beautiful bird.
Ozahwizzi ahmo, Yellow bee.

Plural.

Onishishewe-wug mishemin-ug, Good apples.
Kwonaudjewe-wug eekwä-wug, Handsome women.
Songedää-wug inine-wug, Brave men.
Bishegaindaugoozzi-wug peenasee-wug, Beautiful birds.
Ozahwizzi-wug ahm-ög, Yellow bees.

ADJECTIVES INANIMATE.

Singular.

Onishishin mittig, Good tree.
Kwonaudj tshemaun, Handsome canoe.
Monaudud ishkoda, Bad fire.
Weeshkobun aidetaig, Sweet fruit.

Plural.

Onishishin-ön mittig-ön, Good trees.
Kwonaudjewun-ön tshemaun-un, Handsome canoes.
Monaudud-ön ishkod-än, Bad fires.
Weeshkobun-ön aidetaig-in, Sweet fruits.

Peculiar circumstances are supposed to exist in order to render the use of the adjective, in this connection with the noun, necessary and proper. But, in ordinary instances, as the narration of events, the noun would precede the adjective; and oftentimes, particularly where a second allusion to objects previously named became necessary, the compound expressions would be used. Thus, instead of saying "the yellow bee," _wazzahwizzid_ would distinctly convey the idea of that insect, _had the species been before named_. Under similar circumstances, _kain-waukoozzid_, _agausheid_, _söngaunemud_, _mushkowaunemud_, would respectively signify, "a tall tree," "a small fly," "a strong wind," "a hard wind." And these terms would become plural in _jig_, which, as before mentioned, is a mere modification of _ig_, one of the five general animate plural inflections of the language.

_Kägät wahwinaudj abbenöjeeug_, is an expression indicating they are _very handsome children_. But _beeweezheewug monetösug_ denotes _small insects_. _Minno neewugizzi_, is "good tempered," "he is good tempered." _Mawshininewugizzi_, is "bad tempered," both having their plural in _wug_. _Nin nuneenahwaindum_, "I am lonesome." _Nin nuneenahwaindaumin_, "we (excluding you) are lonesome." _Waweea_, is a term generally used to express the adjective sense of round. _Kwy_, is the scalp; _weewikwy_, his scalp. Hence, _weewukwon_, "hat," _wayweewukwonid_, "a wearer of the hat;" and its plural, _wayweewukwonidjig_, "wearers of the hats"--the usual term applied to Europeans, or white men generally. These examples go to prove that under every form in which the adjective can be traced, whether in its simplest or most compound state, it is susceptible of number.

The numerals of the language are converted into adverbs by the inflection _ing_, making one, _once_, &c. The unit exists in duplicate.

Päzhik, One, _general unit_. } Aubeding, Once.
Ingoot, One, _numerical unit_. }
Neesh, Two. Neeshing, Twice.
Niswee, Three. Nissing, Thrice.
Neewin, Four. Neewing, Four times.
Naunun, Five. Nauning, Five times.
N'goodwaswä, Six. N'goodwautsking, Six times.
Neeshwauswä, Seven. Neeshwautshing, Seven times.
Shwauswe, Eight. Shwautshing, Eight times.
Shongusswe, Nine. Shongutshing, Nine times.
Metauswe, Ten. Meetaushing, Ten times.

These inflections can be carried as high as they can compute numbers. They count decimally. After reaching ten, they repeat, ten and one, ten and two, &c. to twenty. Twenty is a compound signifying two tens; thirty, three tens, &c.; a mode which is carried up to one hundred--_n'goodwak_. _Wak_ then becomes the word of denomination, combining with the names of the digits until they reach a thousand, _meetauswauk_, literally _ten hundred_. Here a new compound term is introduced, made by prefixing twenty to the last denominator, _neeshtonnah duswak_, which doubles the last term, thirty triples it, forty quadruples it, &c. till the computation reaches to ten thousand, _n'goodwak dushing n'goodwak_, one hundred times one hundred. This is the probable extent of all certain computation. The term _gitshee_ (great), prefixed to the last denomination, leaves the number indefinite.

There is no form of the numerals corresponding to second, third, fourth, &c. They can only further say, _nittum_, first, and _ishkwaudj_, last.

IV.

_Some Remarks respecting the Agglutinative Position and Properties of the Pronoun._

INQUIRY 4.

Nature and principles of the pronoun--Its distinction into
preformative and subformative classes--Personal pronouns--The
distinction of an inclusive and exclusive form in the number of
the first person plural--Modifications of the personal pronouns to
imply existence, individuality, possession, ownership, position,
and other accidents--Declension of pronouns to answer the purpose
of the auxiliary verbs--Subformatives, how employed to mark the
persons--Relative pronouns considered--Their application to the
causative verbs--Demonstrative pronouns--Their separation into two
classes, animates and inanimates--Example of their use.

Pronouns are buried, if we may so say, in the structure of the verb. In tracing them back to their primitive forms, through the almost infinite variety of modifications which they assume, in connection with the verb, substantive, and adjective, it will facilitate analysis to group them into preformative and subformative, which include the terms that have already been made use of--pronominal prefixes, and suffixes--and which admit of the further distinction of separable and inseparable. By separable, is intended those forms which have a meaning by themselves, and are thus distinguished from the inflective and subformative pronouns, and pronominal particles, significant only in connection with another word.

1. Of the first class, are the personal pronouns _Neen_ (I), _Keen_ (Thou), and _Ween_ or _O_ (He or She). They are declined, to form the plural persons, in the following manner:--

I, Neen. We, Keen owind. (in.)
We, Neen owind. (ex.)
Thou, Keen. Ye, Keen owau.
He or she, Ween or O. They, Ween owau.

Here the plural persons are formed by a numerical inflection of the singular. The double plural of the first person, of which both the rule and examples have been incidentally given in the remarks on the substantive, is one of those peculiarities of the language which may, perhaps, serve to aid in a comparison of it with other dialects, kindred and foreign. As a mere conventional agreement for denoting whether the person addressed be included or excluded, it may be regarded as an advantage to the language. It enables the speaker, by the change of a single consonant, to make a full and clear discrimination, and relieves the narration from doubts and ambiguity, where doubts and ambiguity would otherwise often exist. On the other hand, by accumulating distinctions, it loads the memory with grammatical forms, and opens a door for improprieties of speech. We are not aware of any inconveniences in the use of a general plural; but, in the Indian, it would produce confusion. And it is, perhaps, to that cautious desire of personal discrimination, which is so apparent in the structure of the language, that we should look for the reason of the duplicate forms of this word. Once established, however, and both the distinction, and the necessity of a constant and strict attention to it, are very obvious and striking. How shall he address the Deity? If he say, "Our Father who art in heaven," the inclusive form of _our_ makes the Almighty one of the suppliants, or family. If he use the exclusive form, it throws him out of the family, and may embrace every living being but the Deity. Yet, neither of these forms can be used very well in prayer, as they cannot be applied directly _to_ the object addressed. It is only when speaking _of_ the Deity, under the name of father, to other persons, that the inclusive and exclusive forms of the word _our_ can be used. The dilemma may be obviated by the use of a compound descriptive phrase, _Wä ö se mig o yun_, signifying, "Thou, who art the father of all," or "universal father." In practice, however, the question is cut short by those persons who have embraced Christianity. It has seemed to them that, by the use of either of the foregoing terms, the Deity would be thrown into too remote a relation to them; and I have observed that in prayer they invariably address Him by the term used by children for the father of a family--that is, _nosa_, "my father."

The other personal pronouns undergo some peculiar changes when employed as preformatives before nouns and verbs, which it is important to remark. Thus _neen_, is sometimes rendered _ne_, or _nin_, and sometimes _nim_. _Keen_, is rendered _ke_, or _kin_. In compound words, the mere signs of the first and second pronouns, _N_ and _K_, are employed. The use of _ween_ is limited; and the third person, singular and plural, is generally indicated by the sign _O_.

The particle _suh_, added to the complete forms of the disjunctive pronouns, imparts a verbal sense to them; and appears, in this instance, to be a succedaneum for the substantive verb. Thus _Neen_, I, becomes _neensuh_, it is I. _Keen_, thou, becomes _keensuh_, it is thou; and _ween_, he or she, _weensuh_, it is he or she. This particle may be also added to the plural forms.

Keenowind suh, It is we. (in.)
Neenowind suh, It is we. (ex.)
Keenowau suh, It is ye, or you.
Weenowau suh, It is they.

If the word _aittah_, be substituted for _suh_, a set of adverbial phrases are formed:--

Neen aittah, I only. Neen aittah wind, We, &c. (ex.)
Keen aittah wind, We, &c. (in.)
Keen aittah, Thou only. Keen aittah wau, You, &c.
Ween aittah, He or she only. Ween aittah wau, They, &c.

In like manner, _nittum_, first, and _ishkwaudj_, last, give rise to the following arrangement of the pronoun:--

Neen nittum, I first.
Keen nittum, You or thou first.
Ween nittum, He or she first.
Keen nittum ewind, We first. (in.)
Neen nittum ewind, We first. (ex.)
Keen nittum ewau, Ye or you first.
Ween nittum ewau, They first.

ISHKWAUDJ.

Neen ishkwaudj, I last.
Keen ishkwaudj, Thou last.
Ween ishkwaudj, He or she last.
Keenowind ishkwaudj, We last. (in.)
Neenowind ishkwaudj, We last. (ex.)
Keenowau ishkwaudj, Ye or you last.
Weenowau ishkwaudj, They last.

The disjunctive forms of the pronoun are also sometimes preserved before verbs and adjectives.

NEEZHIKA. Alone, (_an._)

Neen neezhika, I alone.
Keen neezhika, Thou alone.
Ween neezhika, He or she alone.
Keenowind neezhika, We alone. (in.)
Neenowind neezhika, We alone. (ex.)
Keenowau neezhika, Ye or you alone.
Weenowau neezhika, They alone.

To give these expressions a verbal form, the substantive verb, with its pronominal modifications, must be superadded. For instance, _I am_ alone, &c. is thus rendered:--

Neen neezhika nindyau, I am alone + aumin.
Keen neezhika keedyau, Thou art alone + aum.
Ween neezhika iyau, He or she is alone, &c. + wug.

In the subjoined examples, the noun OW, body, is changed to a verb, by the permutation of the vowel, changing OW, to AUW; which last takes the letter _d_ before it when the pronoun is prefixed:--

I am a man, Neen nin dauw.
Thou art a man, Keen ke dauw.
He is a man, Ween ah weeh.
We are men, (in.) Ke dauw we min.
We are men, (ex.) Ne dauw we min.
Ye are men, Ke dauw mim.
They are men, Weenowau ah weeh wug.

In the translation of these expressions, "man" is used as synonymous with "person." If the specific term _inine_ had been introduced, in the original, the meaning thereby conveyed would be, in this particular connection, "I am a man," with respect to _courage_, &c. in opposition to effeminacy. It would not be simply declarative of _corporeal existence_, but of existence in a _particular state or condition_.

In the following phrases, the modified forms, or the signs only, of the pronouns are used:

N'debaindaun, I own it.
Ke debaindaun, Thou ownst it.
O debaindaun, He or she owns it.
N'debaindaum-in, We own it. (ex.)
Ke debaindaum-in, We own it. (in.)
Ke debaindaun-ewau, Ye own it.
O debaindaun-ewau, They own it.

These examples are cited as exhibiting the manner in which the _prefixed_ and preformative pronouns are employed, both in their full and contracted forms. To denote possession, nouns specifying the things possessed are required; and, what would not be anticipated had not full examples of this species of declension been given in another place, the purposes of distinction are not affected by a simple change of the pronoun, as _I_ to _mine_, &c., but by a subformative inflection of the _noun_, which is thus made to have a reflective operation upon the pronoun speaker. It is believed that sufficient examples of this rule, in all the modifications of inflection, have been given under the head of the substantive. But as the substantives employed to elicit these modifications were exclusively _specific_ in their meaning, it, may be proper here, in further illustration of an important principle, to present a generic substantive under their compound forms.

I have selected for this purpose one of the primitives. IE-AU´, is the abstract term for matter. It is in the animate form. Its inanimate correspondent is IE-EE´. These are two important roots. And they are found in combination, in a very great number of derivative words. It will be sufficient here, to show their connection with the pronoun, in the production of a class of terms in very general use.

Animate Forms.

Possessive.

SINGULAR. PLURAL.

Nin dyë aum, Mine. Nin dyë auminaun, Ours. (ex.)
Ke dyë auminaun, Ours. (in.)
Ke dyë aum, Thine. Ke dyë aumewau, Yours.

Objective.

O dyë aum-un, His
or Hers. O dyë aumewaun, Theirs.

Inanimate Forms.

Possessive.

SINGULAR. PLURAL.

Nin dyë eem, Mine. Nin dyë eeminaun, Ours. (ex.)
Ke dyë eeminaun, Ours. (in.)
Ke dyë eem, Thine. Ke dyë eemewau, Yours.

Objective.

O dyë eem. His
or Hers. O dyë eemewau, Theirs. (pos. in.)

In these forms the noun is singular throughout. To render it plural, as well as the pronoun, the appropriate general plurals _ug_ and _un_, or _ig_ and _in_, must be superadded. But it must be borne in mind, in making these additions, "that the plural inflection to inanimate nouns (which have no objective case), forms the objective case to animate, which have no number in the third person." (p. 461.) The particle _un_, therefore, which is the appropriate plural for the inanimate nouns in these examples, is only the objective mark of the animate.

The plural of I, is _naun_, the plural of thou and he, _wau_. But as these inflections would not coalesce smoothly with the possessive inflections, the connective vowels _i_ and _e_ are prefixed, making the plural of I, _inaun_, and of thou, &c., _ewau_.

If we strike from these declensions the root IE, leaving its animate and inanimate forms AU and EE, and adding the plural of the noun, we shall then, taking the _animate_ declension as an instance, have the following formula of the pronominal declensions:

---+---+-----+----+---+------+---+----
Pronoun singular.
| Place of the noun.
| | Possessive inflection.
| | | Objective inflection to the noun singular.
| | | | Connective vowel.
| | | | | Plural inflection of the
| | | | | pronoun.
| | | | | | Objective inflection,
| | | | | | noun plural.
| | | | | | | Plural of the noun.
---+---+-----+----+---+------+---+----
Ne | | aum | | i | naun | | ig
Ke | | aum | | e | wau | | g
O | | aum | un | | | |
O | | aum | | e | wau | n |
---+---+-----+----+---+------+---+----

To render this formula of general use, six variations (five in addition to the above) of the possessive inflection are required, corresponding to the six classes of substantives, whereby _aum_ would be changed to _äm_, _eem_, _im_, _öm_, and _oom_, conformably to the examples heretofore given in treating of the substantive. The objective inflection would also be sometimes changed to _een_, and sometimes to _oan_.