The American Indians Part 32

N' debaindaun, I own it.

Ke debaindaun, Thou ownest it.

O debaindaun, He or she owns it.

N' debaindaun-in, We own it (ex.) Ke debaindaun-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 p.r.o.nouns are employed, both in their full and contracted forms. To denote possession, nouns specifying the things possessed, are required; and, what would not be antic.i.p.ated, had not full examples of this species of declension been given in another place, the purposes of distinction are not effected by a simple change of the p.r.o.noun, as _I_ to _mine_, &c., but by a subformative inflection of the _noun_, which is thus made to have a reflective operation upon the p.r.o.noun-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 ill.u.s.tration 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 existing matter. It is in the animate form and declarative. 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 connexion with the p.r.o.noun, in the production of a cla.s.s of terms in very general use.

Animate Forms.

_Singular_. _Plural_.

{Nin dye aum, Mine. Nin dye auminaun, Ours, (ex.) Poss. { Ke dye auminaun, Ours, (in.) {Ke dye aum, Thine. Ke dye aumewau, Yours.

Obj. O dyeaum-un, His or Hers. O dye aumewaun, Theirs.

Inanimate Forms.

_Singular_. _Plural_.

{Nin dye eem, Mine. Nin dye eeminaun, Ours, (ex.) Poss. { Ke dye eeminaun, Ours, (in.) {Ke dye eem, Thine. Ke dye eemewau, Yours.

Obj. O dye eem-un, His or O dye eemewaun, Theirs.

Hers. _Poss. in._

In these forms the noun is singular throughout. To render it plural, as well as the p.r.o.noun, 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 animates, which have no number in the third person," [p. 30.] 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 p.r.o.nominal declensions.

_______________________________________________________________________ Obj. Plu. Place inflec. inflec. Obj. Plural p.r.o.n. of the Possessive to the Connect. of the inflec. of the Sing. Noun. inflection. noun sing. vowel. p.r.o.noun. n. plu. 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 cla.s.ses of substantives, whereby aum would be changed to am, eem, im, om, 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_.

Having thus indicated the mode of distinguis.h.i.+ng the person, number, relation, and gender--or what is deemed its technical equivalent, the mutation words undergo, not to mark the distinctions of _s.e.x_, but the presence or absence of _vitality_, I shall now advert to the inflections which the p.r.o.nouns take for _tense_, or rather, to form the auxiliary verbs, have, had, shall, will, may, &c. A very curious and important principle, and one, which clearly demonstrates that no part of speech has escaped the transforming genius of the language. Not only are the three great modifications of time accurately marked in the verbal forms of the Chippewas, but by the inflection of the p.r.o.noun they are enabled to indicate some of the oblique tenses, and thereby to conjugate their verbs with accuracy and precision.

The particle _gee_ added to the first, second, and third persons singular of the present tense, changes them to the perfect past, rendering I, thou, He, I did--have--or had. Thou didst,--hast--or hadst, He, or she did--have, or had. If _gah_, be subst.i.tuted for _gee_, the first future tense is formed, and the perfect past added to the first future, forms the conditional future. As the eye may prove an auxiliary in the comprehension of forms, which are not familiar, the following tabular arrangement of them, is presented.

_First Person, I._ Nin gee, I did--have--had.

Nin gah, I shall--will.

Nin gah gee, I shall have--will have.

_Second Person, Thou._ Ke gee, Thou didst--hast--hadst.

Ke gah, Thou shalt--wilt.

Ke gah gee, Thou shalt have--wilt have.

_Third Person, He, or She._ O gee, He or she did--has--had.

O gah, He or she did--has--had.

O gah gee, He or she shall have--will have.

The present and imperfect tense of the potential mood, is formed by _dau_, and the perfect by _gee_, suffixed as in other instances.

_First Person, I._ Nin dau, I may--can, &c.

Nin dau gee, I may have--can have, &c.

_Second Person, Thou._ Ke dau, Thou mayst--canst, &c.

Ke dau gee, Thou mayst have--canst have, &c.

_Third Person, He, or She._ O dau, He or she may--can, &c.

O dau gee, He or she may have--can have, &c.

In conjugating the verbs through the plural persons, the singular terms for the p.r.o.noun remain, and they are rendered plural by a retrospective action of the p.r.o.nominal inflections of the verb. In this manner the p.r.o.noun-verb auxiliary, has a general application, and the necessity of double forms is avoided.

The preceding observations are confined to the formative or _prefixed_ p.r.o.nouns. The inseparable suffixed or subformative are as follows--

Yaun, My.

Yun, Thy.

Id, or d, His, or hers.

Yaung, Our. (ex.) Yung, Our. (in.) Yaig, Your.

Waud, Their.

These p.r.o.nouns are exclusively employed as suffixes,--and as suffixes to the descriptive compound substantives, adjectives and verbs. Both the rule and examples have been stated under the head of the substantive, p.

43. and adjective, p. 81. Their application to the verb will be shown, as we proceed.

2. Relative p.r.o.nouns. In a language which provides for the distinctions of person by particles prefixed or suffixed to the verb, it will scarcely be expected, that separate and independent relative p.r.o.nouns should exist, or if such are to be found, their use, as separate parts of speech, must, it will have been antic.i.p.ated, be quite limited--limited to simple interrogatory forms of expression, and not applicable to the indicative, or declaratory. Such will be found to be the fact in the language under review; and it will be perceived, from the subjoined examples, that in all instances, requiring the relative p.r.o.noun _who_, other than the simple interrogatory forms, this relation is indicated by the inflections of the verb, or adjective, &c. Nor does there appear to be any declension of the separate p.r.o.noun, corresponding to _whose_, and _whom_.

The word Ahwaynain, may be said to be uniformly employed in the sense of _who_, under the limitations we have mentioned. For instance.

Who is there? Ahwaynain e-mah ai-aud?

Who spoke? Ahwaynain kau keegoedood?

Who told you? Ahwaynain kau ween dumoak?

Who are you? Ahwaynain iau we yun?

Who sent you? Ahwaynain waynonik?

Who is your father? Ahwaynain kos?

Who did it? Ahwaynain kau todung?

Whose dog is it? Ahwaynain way dyid?

Whose pipe is that? Ahwaynain dopwaugunid en-eu?

Whose lodge is it? Ahwaynain way weegewomid?

Whom do you seek? Ahwaynain nain dau wau b.u.mud?

Whom have you here? Ahwaynain oh omau ai auwaud?

Not the slightest variation is made in these phrases, between who, whose, and whom.

Should we wish to change the interrogative, and to say, he who is there; he who spoke; he who told you, &c., the separable personal p.r.o.noun ween (he) must be used in lieu of the relative, and the following forms will be elicited.

Ween, kau unnonik, He (who) sent you.

Ween, kau geedood, He (who) spoke.

Ween, _ai_-aud e-mah, He (who) is there.

Ween, kau weendumoak, He (who) told you.