2. The diminutive forms of the noun are indicated by ais, eas, _ôs_, and aus, as the final vowel of the word may require. Thus, Ojibwai, a Chippewa, becomes Ojibw-ais, a little Chippewa: Inin´i, a man, inin-ees, a little man: Amik, a beaver, amik-ôs, a young beaver: Ogimâ, a chief, ogim-âs, a little chief, or a chief of little authority. Further examples may be added.

SIMPLE FORM.		DIMINUTIVE FORM.
—ais.
A woman	Eekwâ	Eekwâz-ais.
A partridge	Pinâ	Pin-ais.
A woodcock	Mâimâi	Mâim-ais.
An island	Minnis	Minnis-ais.
A grape	Shômin	Shômin-ais.
A knife	Môkoman	Môkoman-ais.
—ees.
A stone	Ossin	Ossin-ees.
A river	Seebi	Seeb-ees.
A pigeon	Omimi	Omim-ees.
A bison	Pizhiki	Pizhik-ees.
A potato	Opin	Opin-ees.
A bird	Pinâisi	Pinâish-ees.
—ôs.
A moose	Môz	Môz-ôs.
An otter	Nigik	Nigik-ôs.
A reindeer	Addik	Addik-ôs.
An elk	Mushkôs	Mushkôs-ôs.
A hare	Wâbôs	Wâbôs-ôs.
A box	Mukuk	Mukuk-ôs.
—aus.
A bass	Ogâ	Og-âs.
A medal	Shôniâ	Shôni-âs.
A bowl	Onâgun	Onâg-âns.
A bed	Nibâgun	Nibâg-aûns.
A gun	Pâshkizzigun	Pâshkizzig-âns.
A house	Wakyigun	Wakyig-âns.

In the last four examples, the letter n, of the diminutive, retains its full sound.

The use of diminutives has a tendency to give conciseness to the language. As far as they can be employed they supersede the use of adjectives, or prevent the repetition of them. And they enable the speaker to give a turn to the expression, which is often very successfully employed in producing ridicule or contempt. When applied to the tribes of animals, or to inorganic objects, their meaning, however, is, very nearly, limited to an inferiority in size or age. Thus, in the above examples, pizhik-ees, signifies a calf; omim-ees, a young pigeon; and ossin-ees, a pebble, &c. But inin-ees, and ogim-âs, are connected with the idea of mental or conventional as well as bodily inferiority.

Some of these sentences afford instances of the use, at the same time, of both the local and diminutive inflections. Thus, the word minnisainsing, signifies literally, "in the little island;" seebees-ing, "in the little stream;" addôpowinais ing, "on the small table."

3. The preceding forms are not the only ones by which adjective qualities are conferred upon the substantive. The syllable ish, when added to a noun, indicates a bad or dreaded quality, or conveys the idea of imperfection or decay. The sound of this inflection is sometimes changed to eesh, oosh, or aush. Thus, Chimân, a canoe, becomes Chimânish, a bad canoe; Ekwai, a woman, Ekwaiwish, a bad woman; nibi, water, becomes nibeesh, turbid or strong water; mittig, a tree, becomes mittigoosh, a decayed tree; akkik, a kettle, akkikoosh, a worn-out kettle. By a further change, wibid, a tooth, becomes wibidâsh, a decayed or aching tooth, &c. Throughout these changes the final sound of sh is retained, so that this sound alone, at the end of a word, is indicative of a faulty quality.

In a language in which the expressions bad-dog and faint-heart are the superlative terms of reproach, and in which there are few words to indicate the modifications between positively good and positively bad, it must appear evident that adjective inflections of this kind must be convenient, and sometimes necessary modes of expression. They furnish a means of conveying censure and dislike, which, though often mild, is sometimes severe. Thus, if one person has had occasion to refuse the offered hand of another—for it must be borne in mind that the Indians are a hand-shaking people as well as the Europeans—the implacable party has it at his option, in referring to the circumstance, to use the adjective form of hand, not onindj, but oninjeesh, which would be deemed contemptuous in a high degree. So, also, instead of odâwai winini, a trader, or man who sells, the word may be changed to odâwai wininiwish, implying a bad or dishonest trader. It is seldom that a more pointed or positive mode of expressing personal disapprobation or dislike is required; for, generally speaking, more is implied by these modes than is actually expressed.

The following examples are drawn from the inorganic as well as organic creation, embracing the two classes of nouns, that the operation of these forms may be fully perceived.

	SIMPLE FORM.	ADJECTIVE FORM.
—ish.
A bowl	Onâgun	Onâgun-ish.
A house	Wakyigun	Wakyigun-ish.
A pipe	Opwâgun	Opwâgun-ish.
A boy	Kweewizais	Kweewizais-ish.
A man	Inini	Ininiw-ish.
—eesh.
Water	Neebi	Neeb-ish.
A stone	Ossin	Ossin-eesh.
A potato	Opin	Opin-eesh.
A fly	Ojee	Oj-eesh.
A bow	Mittigwâb	Mittigwâb-eesh.
—oosh.
An otter	Neegik	Neegik-oosh.
A beaver	Ahmik	Ahmik-oosh.
A reindeer	Addik	Addik-oosh.
A kettle	Akkeek	Akkeek-oosh.
An axe	Wagâkwut	Wagâkwut-oosh.
—aush.
A foot	Ozid	Ozid-âsh.
An arm	Onik	Onik-âsh.
An ear	Otowug	Otowug-âsh.
A hoof	Wunnussid	Wunnussid-âsh.
A rush mat	Appukwa	Appukw-âsh.

These forms cannot be said, strictly, to be without analogy in the English, in which the limited number of words terminating in ish, as saltish, blackish, furnish a correspondence in sound with the first adjective form.

It may subserve the purposes of generalization to add, as the result of the foregoing inquiries, that substantives have a diminutive form, made in ais, ees, _ôs_, or _âs_; a derogative form, made in ish, eesh, oosh, or _âsh_; and a local form, made in aing, eeng, ing, or oong. By a principle of accretion, the second or third may be added to the first form, and the third to the second.

EXAMPLE.
Serpent, s.	Kinai´bik.
—— s. diminutive.	——ôns,	implying Little serpent.
—— s. derogative.	——ish,	"Bad serpent.
—— s. local.	——ing,	"In (the) serpent.
—— s. dim. and der.	——ônsish,	"Little bad serpent.
—— s. dim. and lo.	——ônsing,	"In (the) little serpent.
—— s. dim. der. and lo.	——ônsishing,	"In (the) little bad serpent.

4. More attention has, perhaps, been bestowed upon these points than their importance demanded; but, in giving anything like a comprehensive sketch of the substantive, they could not be omitted; and, if mentioned at all, it became necessary to pursue them through their various changes and limitations. Another reason has presented itself. In treating of an unwritten language, of which others are to judge chiefly from examples, it appeared desirable that the positions advanced should be accompanied by the data upon which they respectively rest—at least, by so much of the data employed as to enable philologists to appreciate the justice or detect the fallacy of our conclusions. To the few who take any interest in the subject at all, minuteness will not seem tedious, and the examples will be regarded with deep interest.

As much of our time as we have already devoted to these lesser points of inquiry, it will be necessary, at this place, to point out other inflections and modifications of the substantive, to clear it from obscurities, that we may go into the discussion of the other parts of speech unincumbered.

Of these remaining forms, none is more interesting than that which enables the speaker, by a simple inflection, to denote that the individual named has ceased to exist. This delicate mode of conveying melancholy intelligence, or alluding to the dead, is effected by placing the object in the past tense.

Aiekid-ôpun aieko Garrangula-bun.
So the deceased Garrangula spoke.

The syllable bun, in this sentence, added to the noun, and _ôpun_ added to the verb, place both in the past tense. And, although the death of the Indian orator is not mentioned, that fact would be invariably inferred.

Names which do not terminate in a vowel sound, require a vowel prefixed to the tensal inflection, rendering it _ôbun_ or ebun. Inanimate as well as animate nouns take these inflections.

PRESENT.	PAST FORM.
Tecumseh,	Tecumsi-bun.
Tammany,	Tamani-bun.
Skenandoah,	Skenandoa-bun.
Nôs (my father),	Nos-êbun.
Pontiac,	Pontiac-ibun.
Waub Ojeeg,	Waub Ojeeg-ibun.
Tarhe,	Tarhi-bun.
Mittig (a tree),	Mittig-ôbun.
Akkik (a kettle),	Akkik-ôbun.
Môz (a moose),	Môz-ôbun.

By prefixing the particle Tah to these words, and changing the inflection of the animate nouns to iwi, and the inanimates to iwun, they are rendered future. Thus, Tah Pontiac-iwi; Tah Mittig-iwun, &c.

The names for the seasons only come under the operation of these rules, when the year before the last, or the year after the next, is referred to. The last and the ensuing season are indicated as follows:—

	PRESENT.	LAST.	NEXT.
Spring,	Seegwun,	Seegwun-oong,	Seegwung.
Summer,	Neebin,	Neebin-oong,	Neebing.
Autumn,	Tahgwâgi,	Tahgwâg-oong,	Tahgwâgig.
Winter,	Peebôn,	Peebôn-oong,	Peebông.
	I spent last winter in hunting.
	Ning´i nunda-wainjigai peebônoong.
	I shall go to Detroit next spring.
	Ninjah izhâ Wâwiâ´tunong seegwung.

5. Sexual Nouns.—The mode of indicating the masculine and feminine having been omitted in the preceding Inquiry, as not being essential to any concordance with the verb or adjective, is, nevertheless, connected with a striking peculiarity of the language—the exclusive use of certain words by one or the other sex. After having appeared to the founders of the language a distinction not necessary to be engrafted in the syntax, there are yet a limited number of words to which the idea of sex so strongly attaches, that it would be deemed the height of impropriety in a female to use the masculine, and in a male to use the feminine expressions.

Of this nature are the words Neeji and Nindongwai, both signifying my friend, but the former is appropriated to males and the latter to females. A Chippewa cannot, therefore, say to a female, my friend; nor a Chippewa woman to a male, my friend. Such an interchange of the terms would imply arrogance or indelicacy. Nearly the whole of their interjections—and they are numerous—are also thus exclusively appropriated; and no greater breach of propriety in speech could be committed, than a woman's uttering the masculine exclamation of surprise, Tyâ! or a man's descending to the corresponding female interjection, N'yâ!

The word Neenimoshai, my cousin, on the contrary, can only be applied, like husband and wife, by a male to a female, or a female to a male. If a male wishes to express this relation of a male, the term is Neetowis; and the corresponding female term Neendongwooshai.

The terms for uncle and aunt are also of a twofold character, though not restricted like the preceding in their use. Neemishomai, is my uncle by the father's side; Neezhishai, my uncle by the mother's side. Neezigwoos, is my paternal aunt; Neewishai, my maternal aunt.

There are also exclusive words to designate elder brother and younger brother; but, what would not be expected after the fore going examples, they are indiscriminately applied to younger brothers and sisters. Neesgai, is my elder brother, and neemissai, my elder sister. Neeshemai, my younger brother or younger sister, and may be applied to any brother or sister except the eldest.

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.
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.

span class="pagenum">[483] 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 scoop net).	Kwyâbahwâd,	A fisher (with scoop net).
Puggidowâ,	He fishes (with seine).	Pâgidowâd,	A fisher (with 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 suggus-wannausee,	But I never smoke pure tobacco.
Monaudud maishkowaugumig,	Strong drink (is) bad.
Keeguhgee budjeëgonaun,	It makes us foolish.
Gitshee Monedo neebe ogee özhetön,	The Great Spirit made water.
mIninewug dush ween ishködäwaubo ogee oz-hetönahwau,	But man made whiskey.

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.