Page:Archæologia Americana—volume 2, 1836.djvu/231

 SECT. VI.] INDIAN LANGUAGES. 195 is necessary, in order to prevent confusion, to resort to a form derived from the first transition. Some cases remain, in which the same form expresses two or more distinct combinations of the pronouns in the nomina- tive and objective case; such as I-thee and he-thee', thou-me and he-me. The confusion falls generally as usual on the third person: and, upon the whole, the plan is inferior to that of the Choctaw, both in simplicity and precision. The simple conjugations and the transitions of the Sioux consist altogether of combinations of the pronouns with the root of the verb. They always precede it ; but the general sign of the plural, pee, is affixed as a final termination when- ever either of the pronouns or both are in the plural number. It seems, that in the two first persons singular the objective case of the pronoun is distinguished from the nominative, and the plural from the singular in the nominative of the first and in the objective case of the third person : 'I,' wah; 'me,' mah; 1 we/ ' us,' oan ; ' them, 5 wectsha ; * ' thou,' ' ye,' ecah ; ' thee,' e you,' nee. The plan is extremely simple; but the apparent want of distinction between the nominative and objective case, in the plural of the first, and in the plural and singular of the second person, produces ambiguity in some instances. Thus nee tsheeng pee means equally, 'he loves you,' ' they love thee,' 1 they love you ' ; and oan tsheeng pee, ' we love thee,' ' we love you,' ' he loves us.' We have however too few paradigms of the verbs of the Sioux languages to form a definitive opinion. The information respecting the Iroquois languages is still more incomplete. We have no paradigms of their transitions. It appears from those of the simple conjugation of the Ononda- go, given by Zeisberger, that it is founded, both in the active and passive voice, on pronominal inflections, that the pronouns are always prefixed to the root of the verb, and that there are several varieties of pronouns for each person. This last fea- ture is peculiar to the languages of that family ; and it seems probable, that the selection depends on the termination of the verb. Egede's Grammar of the Eskimau, which is said to give full information respecting that language, could not be obtained ; and the paradigm inserted in his account of Greenland is only the present indicative of the verb " I wash." It is, however,
 * 1) Apparently abbreviated from iveetshashtah, i man.'