Neen a Neen a Ta we ya Bai bwau As shau dau Wa ke ge naun, (I alone &c., the whole being a O shau wush ko, geezhig oong a. 5. THE RAVEN AND WOODPECKER. A still farther view of Indian manners and opinions is hid under this simple chant. Opinion among the forest race, makes the whole animated creation cognizant and intelligent of their customs. A young married woman is supposed to go out from the lodge, and busy herself in breaking up dry limbs, and preparing wood, as if to lay in a store for a future and approaching emergency. A raven, perched on a neighbouring tree, espies her, at her work, and begins to sing; assuming the expected infant to be a boy. In dosh ke zhig o mun In dosh ke zhig o mun In dosh ke zhig o mun My eyes! my eyes! my eyes! Alluding to the boy (and future man) killing animals as well as men, whose eyes will be left, as the singer anticipates, to be picked out by ravenous birds. So early are the first notions of war implanted. A woodpecker, sitting near, and hearing this song, replies; assuming the sex of the infant to be a female. Ne mos sa mug ga Ne mos sa mug ga Ne mos sa mug ga. My worms! my worms! my worms! Alluding to the custom of the female's breaking up dry and dozy wood, out of which, it could pick its favourite food, being the mösa or wood-worm. Want of space induces the writer to defer, to a future number, the remainder of his collection of these cradle and nursery chants. They constitute in his view, rude as they are, and destitute of metrical attractions, a chapter in the history of the human heart, in the savage phasis, which deserves to be carefully recorded. It has fallen to his lot, to observe more perhaps, in this department of Indian life, than ordinary, and he would not acquit himself of his duty to the race, were he to omit these small links out of their domestic and social chain. The tie which binds the mother to the child, in Indian life, is a very strong one, and it is conceived to admit of illustration in this manner. It is not alone in the war-path and the council, that the Red Man is to be studied. To appreciate his whole character, in its true light, he must be followed into his lodge, and viewed in his seasons of social leisure and retirement. If there be any thing warm and abiding in the heart or memory of the man, when thus at ease, surrounded by his family, it must come out here; and hence, indeed, the true value of his lodge lore, of every kind. It is out of the things mental as well as physiological, that pertain to maternity, that philosophy must, in the end, construct the true ethnological chain, that binds the human race, in one comprehensive system of unity. (To be continued.) LANGUAGES OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS. The Polynesian languages, like those of the Algonquin group of North America, have inclusive and exclusive pronouns to express the words we, ours, and us. They have also causative verbs such as, to make afraid, to make happy, &c., but while there appears this analogy in grammatical principles, there are some strong points of disagreement, and there appears to be no analogy whatever in the sounds of the language. There are eight well characterized dialects in the Polynesian family. They are the Tahitian, the Owyhee, [Hawaiian] Marquesan, or Washingtonian, Austral island, Hervey island, Samoan, Tongatabu, and New Zealand. In seven of these, the name for God is Atua, in the eighth, or Tongua dialect, it is Otua. Great resemblances exist in all the vocabularies. Much of the actual difference arises from exchanges of the consonants r and 1, h and S, and a few others. They possess the dual number. The scheme of the pronouns is very complete, and provides for nearly all the recondite distinctions of person. Where the vocabulary fails in words to designate objects which were unknown to them before their acquaintance with Europeans, the missionaries have found it to fall in better with the genius of the language, to introduce new words from the Greek, with some modifications. Thus they have introduced hipo for horse, arenio for lamb, areto for bread, and baptizo for baptism. To continue faithful during a course of prosperity, says Xenophon, hath nothing wonderful in it, but when any set of men continue steadily attached to friends in adversity, they ought, on that account, to be eternally remembered. There are but two sources only, says Polybius, from whence any real benefit can be derived, our own misfortunes and those that have happened to other men. One wise counsel, says Euripides, is better than the strength of many. GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF THE INDIAN LANGUAGES. LECTURE IV. 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 connexion with the verb, substantive and adjective, it will facilitate analysis, to group them into preformative and subformative, which include the 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: They Keen owau. Ween owau. He or She, Ween or O. 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 inconveniencies 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 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 also be added to the plural forms. If the word aittah be substituted for suh, a set of adverbial phrases are The disjunctive forms of the pronoun are also sometimes preserved before verbs and adjectives. 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, X aumin. Ween neezhika Iyau, In the subjoined examples the noun ow, body, is changed to a verb, by Thou art alone, × aum. |