184 On some alleged specimens of Indian Onomatopo'.ia. 



Tlie King-bird, Tyrannus mtrepidus^ was called by the Narragan- 

 setts and other New England tribes, " the Sachem." 



Examples might be multiplied to hundreds, but enough have been 

 given to answer the present piirpose. 



If time permitted, I would direct attention to some curious features 

 of Indian nomenclature of animals and plants that are not without 

 interest to students of language. Just now, I will mention only one 

 of these, namely, the generic affix, or formative, by means of which a 

 specific or individual name is referred to a known class, family or 

 group. For example ; the names of certain aquatic air-breathing 

 animals, such as the Beaver, the Otter, the Muskrat, &c., receive, in 

 some dialects, a common suffix, derived from a verb which signifies 

 " to put the head oiit of water " or " to come to the surface ," some 

 rodents are characterized by a generic affix as " biters," and others 

 are, in the same way, classed with " scratchers " or " tearers." In 

 the Algonkin, these generics follow, in some other languages they 

 are prefixed to the sjjecific names. Thus, in Dakota nouns, the prefix 

 ta- limits the signification to ruminating animals ; loa-, to animals of 

 ' bear kind ;' ho-, to ' fish kind.'* Similar affixes are employed for 

 the classification of vegetables and plants. One distinguishes such 

 fruits (melons, cucumbers, squashes, etc.) as may be ' eaten i-aw ' or 

 'before they are ripe;' another [min or minne), which may be 

 regarded as an inseparable noun-generic, makes part of the names 

 of edible ripe fruit, grain, nuts, &c., — especially of herries and other 

 small fruit ; a third refers to one class all plants which produce edible 

 tubers, (potatoes, the several species of ground-nuts, &c.) ; and so on. 

 It is true that the American languages are deficient in general names, 

 but it is likewise true that this deficiency is in great measure com- 

 pensated by the number of inseparable generics which enter into the 

 composition of specific names. Sometimes this affix is purely gram- 

 matical, — the formative of the participial or verbal which is used as 

 a noun, — and has no independent significance. Such is the termina- 

 tion -gun or -jegun, which characterizes a numerous class of nouns in 

 the Chippewa and other nearly-related languages. This is the forma- 

 tive of a participle of causative verbs, and denotes the instrument by 

 which the action of the verb is caiised or effected. Mr. Schoolcraft 

 was led into the error of regarding this terminal -gun or -jegun as a 

 primitive noun, " denoting, in its modified forms, the various senses 

 implied by our words ' instrument,' ' contrivance,' ' machine,' &c.* 



* Riggs, Dakota Grammar, § 62. 



f Information respecting tlie Indian Tribes, &e., vol. ii, p. 390. 



