MICHELSON] ALGONQUIAN LINGUISTIC GROUPS 259 
the discussion of that language, p. 269), and this feature forces us to 
rank it as more distant from Fox than is Shawnee. The consonantic 
clusters of Passamaquoddy, even if for the greater part these are 
secondary and due to the phonetic elimination of vowels (see the 
discussion of Eastern subtype, p. 283), also point in this direction. 
The fact that Piegan in certain persons of the independent mode 
shows distinct affinities to Fox has been briefly mentioned above 
and is treated more fully in the discussion of Piegan (p. 231). 
We have seen that Ojibwa is connected only remotely with Fox, 
but it may be noted that the Ojibwa subjunctive mode of the dubi- 
tative conjugation corresponds to the Fox interrogative subjunctive; 
but to what an extent the transitive forms agree is questionable, as 
these are not given by Doctor Jones. 
Peoria undoubtedly belongs with the Ojibwa group of Central 
Algonquian languages; still there are some points of contact with 
Fox. It should be noted that the sibilant is not retained before p 
as in Ojibwa, e. g. Ojibwa ishpiming, Shawnee spemegi, Fox a‘ pemegi, 
Peoria pémingi ABOVE, IN THE SKY. The fact that Peoria is in cer- 
tain respects phonetically more archaic than Ojibwa makes certain 
terminations of the indicative seem to resemble Fox rather than 
Ojibwa (see the section on Ojibwa, ete., pp. 267, 271); but there is one 
termination, namely, that for THEY an.—iT, THEM inan., in which the 
question of phonetics does not arise and which agrees entirely with 
Fox as opposed to Ojibwa. 
The relation of Natick to Fox is not particularly close. In the 
discussion of the former language it is pointed out that most of 
the present suppositive. mode corresponds to the Fox present sub- 
junctive and that certain persons of the ‘‘preter’’ suppositive mode 
correspond to the Fox potential subjunctive. 
From the statistics given in the discussion of Menominee it will be seen 
that there are no certain agreements with Fox (Sauk, Kickapoo) that 
are not shared also by Cree and Montagnais, while Menominee shares 
quite afew terminations with Cree and Montagnais which are not shared 
by Fox. Theforms that are peculiar to these four languages, with the 
possible exception of Natick in the first two—the orthography is not 
clear—are HE—HIM, THEM an., THEY aN.—HIM, THEM. The agree- 
ment of Delaware (one form) with these four dialects in the forms 
for I—HIM, THEM an., THOU—HIM, THEM an. is noteworthy. The 
fact that the imanimate plural in the objective forms of the inde- 
pendent mode in Cree-Montagnais, Menominee, Sauk, Fox, Kickapoo 
is expressed by the same forms as the inanimate singular as opposed 
to Ojibwa, Algonkin, Ottawa, Potawatomi, and Shawnee, is remark- 
able. Peoria presumably agrees with the first group. 
The agreement of Ojibwa, Fox, Cree, and Montagnais in the form 
for THEY an.—us (incl.) of the independent mode may be noted, as also 
