SWANTON ] TUNICA, CHITIMACHA, AND ATAKAPA LANGUAGES 19 
Comparing the three verb plans we find in the main a striking 
agreement. The principal stem is placed in practically the same posi- 
tion in all. The relative position of the locative and pronominal pre- 
fixes differs, it is true, but this is explained by the fact that in Chiti- 
macha the independent pronouns take the place of the pronominal pre- 
fixes and naturally come before all, and also by the apparently recent 
adoption of the Tunica locatives. Still this does not explain why the 
locative prefixes in Atakapa are placed between the stem and the pro- 
nominal prefixes. The loose attachment to the stem exhibited by all 
of the prefixes prevents us from giving any great weight to this point 
of divergence. This loose attachment enters to a considerable extent 
into the question of order among suffixes, and probably accounts for 
certain anomalies. Thus the negative suffixes in Chitimacha and 
Atakapa and several of the auxiliaries may be used apart from any 
principal stem, thus being in effect independent stems themselves. 
There are also reasons for thinking that the future suffixes in the same 
languages may have been derived from the verb “‘to go,”’ with which 
they are identical in each case, the native idea being similar to that in 
such English expressions as ‘‘I am going to see him.” At any rate, all 
but one of the irregularities which occur hang upon the position of 
the negative and future suffixes and the auxiliaries in the complex. 
It is true that the suffix which usually performs the function of a 
continuative in Chitimacha is much nearer the end of the complex than 
the suffixes of corresponding meaning in Tunica and Atakapa, but 
it is practically certain that it represents a late development. ‘There 
is another suffix genetically connected with the Tunica and Atakapa 
continuatives. 
In Atakapa the perfect suffix agrees neither in form nor position 
with the Tunica and Chitimacha perfects, but there is some doubt 
regarding its exact significance, and some reason to think that it may 
be a broken-down auxiliary, related, perhaps, to the Tunica auxiliary 
“to do.”” What appears to be the most remarkable displacement oc- 
curs in the case of the so-called infinitive suffix. In Chitimacha it is 
always at the very end of the verb complex, the interrogative particle 
not being actually a part of the verb, while in Atakapa it is invariably 
close to the stem, being preceded by the plural and usitative suffixes 
only. At the same time the formal identity and identity in meaning 
and in use in a great many situations place the relationship of the two 
practically beyond question; that is, of course, if there is any rela- 
tionship between the two languages to which they belong. Otherwise 
we must suppose the resemblance to be the result of a most unusual 
accident. Finally there must be left out of consideration certain 
suffixes which are not represented in all three languages. Thus Tunica 
is the only one of them in which the verb takes the numerals and one 
or two other adjectives as suffixes. On the other hand, it contains, so 
