244 CLASSIFICATION OF ALGONQUIAN TRIBES [BTH. ANN. 28 
YE—THEM an. agreement with Men., D. (one form); ef. also Oj. 
AwiS:, N; : 
YE—1T no correspondent; cf. Oj., A., S. 
YE—THEM inan. formation the same as YE—IT. 
HE—Uvs (excl.) agreement with F., Oj., A., D. (one form). 
HE—Us (incl.; Horden) agreement with Men. 
HE—US (incl.; Fort Totten) agreement with F., Oj., A. (D.%). 
HE—yYOU agreement with F., Men. 
HE—HIM agreement with F., Men. (N. 2). 
HE—THEM an. agreement with F., Men. 
HE—IT agreement with F., Men., P., Oj. (one form). 
HE—THEM inan. agreement with F., Men., P. 
THEY an.—ws (excl.) agreement with F., Oj., A., N., D. (one form). 
THEY an.—ws (incl.; Horden) agreement with Men. 
THEY an.—ws (incl.; Fort Totten) agreement with F., Oj., D. 
THEY an.—you agreement with F., Men., D. 
THEY an.—HIM agreement with F., Men. 
THEY an.—THEM an. agreement with F., Men. 
THEY an.—1ir agreement with F., Men., P. 
THEY an.—THEM inan. agreement with F., Men., P. 
THEY inan. no correspondent. 
Common Central Algonquian agreements are naturally not included 
in the above statistics. Phonetic changes have caused certain termi- 
nations to resemble Ojibwa rather than Fox, e. g., HE—ME, THER, but 
these are not included, as the formation is identical. The customary 
final n is not here added to the forms for t and THov when intransitive, 
as it seems to be purely a phonetic product. The forms for THEY 
an.—ME, THEE look strange in comparison with other Algonquian 
languages, but in the writer’s opinion a phonetic archaism is the dis- 
turbing factor. 
Tt may be mentioned here that in the statistics given in the dis- 
cussion of other Central Algonquian languages THEY inan. intrans. is 
not noted, as all agree (so far as material is available), as opposed to 
Cree. It will be seen that the greatest number of agreements is with 
Menominee, with Fox (Sauk and Kickapoo) second, and Delaware, 
Ojibwa, and Algonkin about equal, in the third place. The statistics 
likewise show that the unity of Cree-Montagnais, Menominee, Sauk, 
Fox, Kickapoo, and Shawnee mentioned on page 238 applies espe- 
cially to Cree-Montagnais, Menominee, Sauk, Fox, and Kickapoo. It 
is due almost entirely to the very intimate relationship between Sauk, 
Fox, Kickapoo on the one hand and Shawnee on the other (see 
pp. 252, 258) that the last-mentioned language must be attached to 
the group. (Sauk, Fox, Kickapoo are practically one language, with 
slight variations (see pp. 252, 258). In the entire discussion of the 
