•158 APPENDIX. 



number. But there are, probably, few wbicb. furnisTi so many 

 modes of indicating it, as the Odjibwai. There are as many modes 

 of forming the plural, as there are vowel sounds, yet there is no 

 distinction between a limited and unlimited plural ; although there 

 is, in the pronoun, an inclusive and an exclusive plaral. Whether 

 we say mcin or men^ two men or twenty men, the singular inin'i, and 

 the plural inin'iiuuff, remains the same. But if we say ive, or us, 

 or our 7nen (who are present), or lue, or tts, or our Indians (in gene- 

 ral), the pkiral we, and ics, and our — for they are rendered by the 

 same form — admit of a change to indicate whether the objective 

 person be included or excluded. This principle, of which full ex- 

 amples will be given under the appropriate head, forms a single 

 and anomalous instance of the use of particular plurals. And it 

 carries its distinctions, by means of the pronouns, separable and 

 inseparable, into the verbs and substantives, creating the necessity 

 of double conjugations and double declensions, in the plural forms 

 of the first person. Thus, the term for " Oar Father," which, in 

 the inclusive form is Kosindn, is, in the exclusive, N6sindn. 



The particular plural, which is thus, by the transforming power 

 of the language, carried from the pronoun into the texture of the 

 verb and substantive, is not limited to any fixed number of per- 

 sons or objects, but arises from the operations of the verb. The 

 general plural is variously made. But the plurals making inflec- 

 ,tions take upon themselves an additional power or sign, by which 

 substantives are distinguished into animate and inanimate. With- 

 out this additional poAver, all nouns plural would end in the 

 vowels a, e, i, o, u. But to mark the gender, the letter g is added 

 to animates, and the letter n to inanimates, making the plurals 

 of the first class terminate in drj, eeg, ig, og, ug, and of the second 

 class in an, een, in, on, un. Ten modes of forming the plural are 

 thus provided, five of which are animate, and five inanimate 

 plurals. A strong and clear line of distinction is thus drawn be- 

 tween the two classes of words; so unerring, indeed, in its applica- 

 tion, that it is only necessary to inquire how the plural is formed, 

 to determine whether it belonged to one or the other class. The 

 distinctions which we have endeavored to convey will, perhaps, 

 be more clearly perceived, by adding examples of the use of each 

 of the plurals. 



