made to a specimen of the Mohegan language (taken from the mouth of an educated native by the Rev. William Jenks) which is published in the Historical Collections, vol. ix. p. 98, First Series, and in which the word for father is given without any pronominal affix. Mr. Daggett's reply was as follows-"I am satisfied, that there is no word in any of the Indian languages used in the Foreign Missionary School, by which to express in the abstract the relation of Father and most of the other social relations. Adam was the father of all men' is a sentence, which my Indian scholars say they cannot translate without a change of expression. The Choctaws brought me the following -Adam quo-hut-tuk-moomah Ing-ka yut-tok; but they observed that Ing-ka had the pronominal prefix of the third person singular, which they said was unavoidable." * To these remarks it is only necessary to add one other, respecting the Delaware word ooch, above mentioned. It must not be supposed (as has been conjectured) that this word, like the Cherokee term Ing-ka, may comprehend an affix of the third person singular; for the Delaware has a distinct form for the third person singular, which is, "oochwall, his or her father." Zeisberger's MS. Gram. P. 14. 66 NOTE 9. The Verb To BE. They have no verb substantive in all their lan guage." The want of this verb in many of the American languages, is one of their most remarkable characteristicks. The fact here stated by Edwards, in respect to the Mohegan, corresponds with what Eliot had observed, a century and an half before, in the Massachusetts, and with what the Rev. Mr. Heckewelder has lately said of the common stock of both those dialects, the Delaware; in which, says he, "the late Mr. Zeisberger and myself sought many years in vain for this substantive verb.....I cannot find a single instance in the language, in which the verb I am is used by itself, that is to say, uncombined with * The resemblance between this Choctaw word for Father and the Peruvian Inca (which was first suggested by Mr. Du Ponceau) is a little remarkable. the idea of the act to be done." Mr. Hecke welder, in addition to Mr. Zeisberger's and his own opinion, gives also that of the Rev. Mr. Dencke to the same effect, in regard to the Chippeway as well as the Delaware.* Mr. Du Ponceau, who has extended his inquiries to many other dialects both of North and South America, was originally inclined to believe, that "the want of the substantive verb was a general rule in the Indian languages." But subsequent researches (as he observes in a late letter to the Editor) have led him to doubt, whether that will prove to be the case, to the extent in which his remarks will naturally have been understood by his readers. This question is briefly discussed in the Notes on Eliot's Indian Grammar, published in the preceding volume of these Collections; to which the reader is referred. But it may not be without use, at the present early period of these investigations, to add in this place, by way of caution to the student, some further remarks upon the subject. We must not suddenly infer, that the American languages have a verb substantive, because we happen to find in some of the grammars a certain verb under that name, and a conjugation of it in due form, just as would be found in the languages of the European authors of those works. Every man, who has studied the modern languages, knows, that several of them have two distinct verbs (derived from the Latin stare and esse respectively) in the use of which there is a well-settled distinction, that prevents their ever being confounded in the languages to which they belong, but yet in translating, either from or into, a foreign language, this distinction is continually disregarded; as in English, for example, we should render them both by our single verb to be, though this would often be an incorrect representation of their true import. Every one, also, (as Mr. Du Ponceau has justly observed) must "know too well the inclination of grammarians to assimilate those [Indian] idioms to their own, to be shaken by paradigms, in which the verb sto, for instance, might be translated by sum, or I am, for want of sufficient attention to the shade of difference between them." In order, therefore, to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on this point, it becomes necessary for us to do something more than adopt the general remarks of grammarians, or the loose translations of interpreters; we must examine critically some of the principal dialects of each stock of languages in the different parts of the continent. With a view to this object, the * Letter to Mr. Du Ponceau, in the Notes on Eliot's Gram. p. xxvii. + Ibid. p. xxvi, Editor has thought it might be useful, at the present time, to take a very brief review of some of the facts, which have been ascertained in this case, in respect to a few of the Northern as well as the Southern languages of this continent. 1. The North American Languages. In respect to some of the languages of North America, we are already possessed of all the information that can be desired on this point; and the question may be considered as fully settled; but of others, we cannot yet speak with so much certainty. The Delaware, which, according to Mr. Heckewelder, is the most widely extended of any on this side of the Mississippi, is ascertained to have no substantive verb. This we have upon the authority of Mr. Zeisberger and Mr. Heckewelder; neither of whom, after the strictest examination, could discover such a verb in the language. To these may also be added the authority of the Rev. Mr. Dencke, the missionary of the United Brethren in Upper Canada.* Of the numerous dialects of this stock, our information is also entirely satisfactory in respect to the Massachusetts, the Mohegan and the Chippeway, the last of which is very extensively spoken among the northern tribes. For the first of these, we have the authority of Eliot; for the second, that of Edwards; and for the last, that of Mr. Dencke. From what we thus find to be the case in the Delaware stock itself, as well as in the three dialects just mentioned, there seems to be no hazard, then, in making the inference, that its other various dialects will also be found to have no substantive verb. The Iroquois stock (if we may judge of all the dialects by those which have been the subject of inquiry) seems to be also destitute of this verb. The inquiries made by the Rev. Mr. Daggett of the different Indian pupils of that stock, who are under his care at the Foreign Missionary School in Connecticut, (the result of which was published by the Editor in the Notes on Eliot's Grammar) seem to leave little or no room for doubt in respect to this family of languages. The particular dialects examined by him were, the Oneida, Tuscarora and Caughnewaga. Of the Floridian family (as Mr. Heckewelder denominates it, meaning to comprehend the dialects spoken by the Indians on the southern frontier of the United States) we have not so ample information as of the languages already mentioned; but from the inquiries made at the Missionary School respecting two of its dialects (the Choctaw and Cherokee) it should seem, that the substantive verb is wanting. Yet, on the other hand, the Rev. *Notes to Eliot's Grammar, p. xxviii. ↑ Ibid. Mr. Buthrick, the present missionary among the Cherokees (in one of his early communications on this subject, for which the Editor is indebted to a learned friend) expressly mentions a peculiar manner of using what he calls the substantive verb; observing, that "the verb to be is not used in the present tense, and I think not in the imperfect. Instead of this, changes are made in the beginning of the word, which would otherwise follow it; as, a ski yŭ, man-tse ski yŭ, I am a man," &c. Whether his subsequent study of the language has confirmed this observation or not, the Editor is unable to state.* 2. The South American Languages. Some of these appear to have the substantive verb, though it seems to be more limited in its use, than is the case in the European languages; while in others, the same mode of expressing it is adopted, which is found in the languages of the North; that is, annexing a syllable or particle to the noun, which changes it into a verb. Gilij, after observing that every language must have its peculiarities, its excellencies and defects, makes the following general remarks on the verb substantive of the Orinokese dialects: "These same reasons are most conclusive against those persons, who would have, in some of the American languages, the verb sum precisely as it is in the Latin. I say in some, and not all of them, as many boast. In the Tamanacan (to speak of one which is best known to me) there is the verb uoccilì, a substantive verb like esse in Latin; uocci, I was; uoccicci, I shall be, &c. But he, who should expect to find it in every tense, as in Italian or Latin, would be egregiously mistaken. All the Indians known to me (and not merely the Tamanacans) make no use of the substantive verb in the signification of the present. The following are examples from three of their languages. In the Tamanacan, patcurbe ure; in the Maipuri, sonirri canà; in the Pajuri, repè ju, all signify merely, 1 good."† This author, in another place, observes, that "the abovementioned verb substantive becomes equivalent to the Latin fio, wherever, instead of uocciri, they say uoic tari; and it is thus the root, if I may so speak, of the verbs that end in tarì; v. g. Ponghèmtari, to become a Spaniard; Tamanàcutari, to become a Tamanacan." In the Guaranese language, he says, that one class of neuter verbs "is formed by noun substantives or adjectives united to the pronouns ce, nde, &c. ; v. g. ce márángatù, * It is a curious fact, that this very mode of using what is considered as the substantive verb, is found in some of the South American languages. See the observation of Gilij, respecting the Orinokese dialects, in the following pages. + Ibid. p. 180. + Saggio, &c. p. 302. I good; nde márángatù, thou good. And this (says my author) is precisely the conjugation of the verb substantive essere, to be. In fact, all nouns united (or conjugated) with the pronouns become verbs, and include the verb substantive.”* In the Maipuri language he also speaks of the passive voice being formed by the termination au, which they take from "the substantive verb caniacàu; but he says, at the same time, that this verb is the Italian essere or stare; and in another place he renders the same verb by the Italian stare alone, and not by essere. † On crossing the continent of America from the Orinoco country into Peru, we find in the Quichuan, or General Language of the latter region, a verb called by grammarians the substantive verb of that language; that is, cani, which is conjugated at large in the valuable Grammar of Father Torres Rubio, and has every appearance of the true substantive verb. In addition to this, it may be remarked, that this verb is also used in forming the passive voice of other verbs, by being joined with their participles. Yet it will be observed that this same verb cani seems to have the signification of stare as well as esse. The author at fol. 151 of his Vocabulario, or Dictionary, gives this example: "Cani, I am [i. e. sum vel sto] as, Cozcopi cani, I am [sum vel sto] at Cuzco." Nor does there appear to be, in this work any distinct word for the verb stare. But whatever may be the true character of this Quichuan verb, we find that in the language of the Province of Chiquitos "the verb substantive is wholly wanting; and they supply its place by means of the pronouns and in other ways." Proceeding still farther south, however, we again find, in the language of Chili, the substantive verb; for so the grammarians of that language denominate it. Father Febrès says, " Abstract nouns, as goodness, whiteness, &c. are formed by annexing gen (which is the verb sum, es, est) to adjectives or substantives; v. g. cùmegen, goodness; lighgen, whiteness," || &c. Yet the author, in one of his dictionaries (annexed to the Grammar) renders the Spanish verbs haver and tener, as well as the substantive verb ser, by this same Chilese word gen; and, in his other dictionary, he explains the Chilese gen by the several Spanish verbs ser, estar, haber, tener, and nacer. The Editor || Arte, &c p. 51. Qu. if this Chilese word gen has any affinity with the Quichuan cani? § P. 494. |