258 CLASSIFICATION OF ALGONQUIAN TRIBES [ETH, ANN, 28 
the same time a goodly number of terminations with Ojibwa as opposed 
to Fox—certainly pointsin the same direction. For Cree (Fort Totten) 
likewise shares the terminations for HE—Uws (excl. and incl.) and THEY 
an.— us (excl. and inel.) with Ojibwa and Fox. Now Ojibwa shares 
in the independent mode no terminations with Fox as opposed to Cree, 
while the latter shares a number with Fox as opposed to Ojibwa 
(see below), at the same time having some points in common with 
Ojibwa as opposed to Fox (see the discussions of Cree and Ojibwa, 
pp. 247, 267, 268). Therefore the fact that Ojibwa shares with both 
Cree and Fox the terminations mentioned may be pure chance. Now 
if Ojibwa and Fox are only remotely connected, it is improbable on 
the face of it that Shawnee, which is most intimately related to Fox, 
should be closely connected with Ojibwa also. Consequently, there 
remain but few points of contact between Ojibwa and Shawnee 
that are certain. 
SAUK, FOX, AND KICKAPOO 
We have seen above that Sauk, Fox, and Kickapoo! differ from 
one another by very trifling modifications of pronunciation, vocabu- 
laries, and idioms, and that Shawnee is intimately related to them. 
The close connection of the Eastern Algonquian dialects is to be 
noted. It may be well to show that the Shawnee forms for THEY an- 
—ws (excl. and incel.), you (pl.) are much closer to the Fox forms than 
the corresponding forms of Passamaquoddy are to the latter, even 
if the Shawnee forms are not absolutely identical with the Fox corre- 
spondents. On the other hand, Passamaquoddy shares absolutely 
with Fox the terminations in -pena which Shawnee only approxi- 
mates. Yet Passamaquoddy shares the ban preterite of Ojibwa (see 
1 The first two are somewhat more closely related than either is to the third. In the discussions of the 
interrelations of Algonquian languages it is to be understood that Sauk and Kickapoo agree with Fox, 
though this is rarely mentioned. 
Characteristic of Sauk is the use of the singular for the plural alsoin the obviative (objective) case, andin pos- 
sessive pronouns of the third person (singularand plural). Thus Sauk wtAnemohani pydniwaAni means either 
HIS DOG IS COMING or HIS DOGS ARE COMING. The Fox expressions for these are, respectively, uta ncmdhe- 
mAni pydniwani, utAnemohema'i pydniwa‘t (by chancein the phrase Sauk utAnemohani lacks the m suffix 
which Fox has; but even in Sauk the writer has heard the word with the m suffix, though (purely by acci- 
dent) notin this particular phrase). Note,too,Sauk i’kwdawa neskinawawe neniwani cemameg" dine tamagutct 
usimehani, which means either THE WOMAN HATED THE MAN BECAUSE HER YOUNGER BROTHER HAD BEEN 
SLAIN BY HIM, 0r THE WOMAN HATED THE MAN BECAUSE HER YOUNGER BROTHERS HAD BEEN SLAIN BY HIM, oF 
THE WOMAN HATED THE MEN BECAUSE HER YOUNGER BROTHER HAD BEEN SLAIN BY THEM, Or THE WOMAN 
HATED THE MEN BECAUSE HER YOUNGER BROTHERS HAD BEEN SLAIN BY THEM. In Fox such ambiguity 
is impossible. See sections 34, 45 of the Algonquian sketch in the Handbook of American Indian Lan- 
guages (Bulletin 40, part 1, of the Bureau of American Ethnology). HER YOUNGER BROTHER and HER 
YOUNGER BROTHERS are distinguished by the respective terminations -ani and -a‘?; the obviatives MAN 
and MEN would be kept apart by the identical respective suffixes; but the subordinate verb would never- 
theless have the ending -tc?. 
Kickapoo agrees with Fox against Sauk in these respects, and so must be counted as nearer the former 
than the latter. Nevertheless in phonetics Kickapoo is further apart from them than either is from the 
other. In Kickapoo a special feature is a weak w which is either heard as full sounding, as h, or not at all. 
Doctor Jones’s and the writer’s texts exhibit these variations, and strangely enough agree in such varia- 
tions for the greater part. An example is ugimawe, ugimaha, ugimaa cuter (selected from Doctor Jones's 
texts; Sauk and Fox ugimawc), In their native syllabary Kickapoo exhibit the variation of recording 
and not recording the w. 
