OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. 175 



grandchild, Me-td'-l-o-zhd. All above the former are grandfathers and grand- 

 mothers, and all below the latter are grandchildren. 



The fraternal and sororal relationships are in the twofold form of elder and 

 younger, for which there is a double set of terms, one of which is used by the males 

 and the other by the females ; for brother and sister in the abstract there is no 

 term in the dialect, except in the plural number. There arc two terms for cousin 

 (male and female), used by the males, and two for the same used by the females. 



The following are the indicative relationships in the Yankton-Dakota system : — 



First Indicative Feature. My brother's son and daughter, with E(jo a male, are my 

 son and daughter, Mc-ch'mk' -she and Me-chounh' she ; with Ego a female they are 

 my nephew and niece. 



Second. My sister's son and daughter. Ego being a male, are my nephew and 

 niece, Me-to-us'-M and Me-to-us'-zd ; yiithEgo a female they are my son and daughter. 



Third. My father's brother is my father, Ah-ta' . 



Fourth. My father's brother's son is my elder or younger brother Che-a or 

 Me-soh'-lca, as he is older or younger than myself ; and his daughter is my elder or 

 younger sister. Ton-lid! or Me-tank'-she. 



Fifth. My father's sister is my aunt, Toh'-xoe. 



Sixth. My mother's brother is my uncle, Dahe'-she. 



Seventh. My mother's sister is my mother, E'-nah. 



Eighth. My mother's sister's son is my elder or younger brother, and her 

 daughter is my elder or younger sister. 



Ninth. My grandfiither's brother is my grandfather, Toon-led' -zhe-nd. 



Tenth. The grandchildren of my brothers and sisters, and the grandchildren of 

 my collateral brothers and sisters, and of my cousins are my grandchildren without 

 distinction. This merges the several collateral lines in the lineal line. 



In these the indicative relationships, the Yankton and Seneca are identical. It 

 may be stated in addition that the children of my uncle and aunt are m'y cousins ; 

 that the children of my collateral brothers, and of my male cousins, Ego being a 

 male, are my sons and daughters, and that the children of my collateral sisters, and of 

 my female cousins, are my nephews and nieces ; with Ego a female, these relation- 

 ships are reversed. A comparison of the two forms, as they are found at the end 

 of Chapter II, will show that they are in minute agreement throughout, the mar- 

 riage relationships included. 



It has before been stated that the system of relationship of the remaining 

 Dakota nations is the same in all material respects as the Yankton. A reference 

 to the Table will show how entirely they agree, not only in general characteristics, 

 but also in minute details. It will also be noticed that the terms of relationship 

 are the same words, in nearly every instance, under dialectical changes. This 

 shows that the terms have come down to each nation as a part of the common 

 language ; and that the system, also, was derived by each from the common source 

 of the language. The system is thus made coeval with the period when these 

 nations spoke a single dialect, and were one people. 



The Asiniboines, as has been elsewhere remarked, had become detached from 

 the Dakotas when first known to Europeans. Their range was from near the 



