1885.] 83 [Brinton. 



and the other objective, several of which cannot be employed in 

 any other construction.* This is almost diagnostic of the holo- 

 phrastic method of speech. The pronouns in such cases are 

 evidently regarded by the language-faculty as subordinate acces- 

 sories to the verbal, and whether they are phonetically merged 

 in it or not is a secondary question. 



The Tupi pronouns (confining myself* to the singular number 

 for the sake of brevity) are as follows : 



Independent personals. Possessives. Verbal affixes. 



Subject. Object. 



ixe or xe. se or xe. a. xe. 



inde or ne. ne or re. re, yepe. oro. 



ae or o. ae or i. o. ae or i. 



The verbal affixes are united to the theme with various pho- 

 netic changes and so intimately as to form one word. The gram- 

 mars give such examples as : — 



areco, I hold ; guereco, they hold him. 



ahenoi, I call ; xerenoi, they call me. 



ayaca, I dispute him ; oroaca, I dispute thee. 

 In the first person, singular, the two pronominal forms xe and 

 a are usually merged in the synthesis xa ; as, xamehen, I love. 



Another feature pointing to the incorporative plan is the loca- 

 tion of the object. The rule in the old language was to place 

 the object in all instances before the verb, that is, between the 

 verb and its subject when the latter was other than a personal 

 suffix. Dr. Cavalcanti says that this is now in a measure 

 changed, so that when the object is of the third person it is 

 placed after the verb, although in the first and second persons 

 the old rule still holds good.f Thus the ancient Tupis would 

 say: 



boia ae o-sou, 

 snake him he-bites. 



* See Anchieta, Arte de Grammatica, etc., p. -52-. 

 t The Brazilian Language, etc,'p. 111. 



