246 CLASSIFICATION OF ALGONQUIAN TRIBES [ETH. ANN. 28 
tion of the consonantic clusters sk, sp, st constitute important points 
of contact between Cree and Eastern Algonquian. The Natick present 
subjunctive approximates closely to the Fox present subjunctive and 
so agrees to a certain extent with Cree, but it should be noticed that 
practically all the forms with the third person animate, singular and 
plural, as subject are entirely different in structure from either the 
Cree or the Fox correspondents. The Delaware subjunctive shows 
marked peculiarities of its own and therefore presents few points of 
agreement with Cree, none in fact which are not shared by other 
Central Algonquian languages. 
The discussion of the second table of Fort Totten Cree must neces- 
sarily be brief, as the sole object of its introduction is to illustrate 
the variant forms of East Main Cree with the third person plural as 
subject and object in the present subjunctive, and the correspondents 
in Menominee and Ojibwa. As is stated above, the table really corre- 
sponds with Horden’s future tense of the subjunctive and Lacombe’s 
“suppositif”” of the “subjonctif.””. The forms for Hr, THEY an.— 
us (excl. and incl.), you are certainly passives in formation (cf. the 
Ottawa correspondents of the subjunctive); but in every case 
Lacombe gives variants which are actives, and Horden gives these 
alone. Again the variants given by Lacombe for we (excl. and incl.) 
—HIM, THEM an.; YE—HIM, THEM an. (which alone are given by 
Horden) in structure have the same formation as the correspond- 
ents of the present subjunctive. The Fort Totten Cree forms are 
composed of the respective intransitive subjects combined with the 
common objective form of the third person animate, namely @, which 
undergoes phonetic change before the initial y of the suffixes (the 
forms given by Lacombe do not show this change). The forms of 
the Fort Totten Cree in which the animate objects are plural exhibit 
the identical formation but have the characteristic w suffix. (The 
form given in the table for yse—THEM an. is reconstructed by the 
writer; the form -atwawi, obtained by direct questioning, is surely 
due to some misunderstanding, as it patently is the form for THou— 
THEM an. It should be noticed that in the forms for we (excl. and 
incl.) —HIM; WE (excl.)—THEE, YOU; THOU, YE—Us (excl.) Lacombe’s 
Cree terminates in -i, not -was Fort Totten Cree does. In the forms 
for we (excl. and incl.) intransitive, WE (excl. and incl.)—1T, THEM 
(inan.), Lacombe gives forms with both -i and -u. Horden gives 
only the forms with -a@ (his transcription for long close @) corre- 
sponding to Lacombe’s -i. Fort Totten Cree in these personal 
terminations has -w, and this only. It should be mentioned that 
corresponding to Horden’s ¢ before -@ (his symbol for long close 
2), the Cree of Lacombe and of Fort Totten have te (tj in Lacombe) 
before -i throughout. Again, Horden’s Cree in the form for YE 
