APPEXDIX. 471 



Much of the flexibility of the substantive is derived from these 

 properties, and they undoubtedly add much to the figurative 

 character of the language. Some of them have been thought 

 analogous to case, particularly that inflection of the noun which 

 indicates the locality of the object. But if so, then there would 

 be equally strong reasons for establishing an adjective^ and an 

 adverbial^ as well as a local case, and a plurality of forms in each. 

 But it is believed that no such necessity exists. There is no 

 regular declension of these forms, and they are all used under 

 limitations and restrictions incompatible with the true principles 

 of case. 



It is under this view of the subject, that the discussion of these 

 forms has been transferred, together with the other accidents of 

 the substantive just adverted to, and reserved as the subject- 

 matter of a separate inquiry. And in now proceeding to express 

 the conclusions at which we have arrived touching these points, 

 it will be an object so to compress and arrange the materials 

 before us, as to present within a small compass the leading facts 

 and examples upon which each separate position depends. 



1. That quality of the noun which, in the shape of an inflec- 

 tion, denotes the relative situation of the object, by the contiguous 

 position of some accessory object, is expressed in the English lan- 

 guage by the prepositions w?, into^ at, or on. In the Indian, they 

 are denoted by an inflection. Thus, the phrase " In the box," is 

 rendered in the Indian by one word, mukulcoong. Of this word, 

 muhulc, simply, is box. The termination, oong, denoting the 

 locality, not of the box, but of the object sought after. The ex- 

 pression appears to be precise, although there is no definite article 

 in the language. 



The substantive takes this form, most commonly, after a ques- 

 tion has been put, as Anindl ni mohovian-ais ? " Where is my pen- 

 knife?" MukidMong (in the box), add6])oiom-%nrj (on the table), 

 are definite replies to this question. But the form is not restricted 

 to this relation. Chimdn-ing n^guh p6z, "I shall embark in the 

 canoe ;" ivakyigum ii'ghu izhd, " I shall go into the house," are 

 perfectly correct, though somewhat formal expressions, when the 

 canoe or the house are present to the speaker's view. 



The meaning of these inflections has been restricted to in, into, 



