MICHELSON. ] LINGUISTIC NOTES. 285 
. 
that dnine’matina “he that would be thought of,’’ 276.20, is a par- 
ticipial bearing the same relationship to the mode of nesatini (both 
written with full-sounding terminal vowel) as -agwina does to 
-agwini. [Both nesatiini and iniéne’matina are actives, not pas- 
sives; the translation given above is merely one of convenience. It 
may be added that Jones’s translation of the former as having a 
plural subject is wrong.] 
§ 34. Distinction of third persons animate in the independent 
mode. Corresponding to -ni‘tci we have -niwani as is shown by 
i/miwan(i) “he said,’’ 176.45, as compared with ‘i’w¥*' ‘he said”’ 
(i’wa' at 176.42 is rhetorical for this). 
§ 34. Form of the obviative terminations. The endings should 
have been given as -An‘’ [-An™' in my transcription] and -a‘“ as can be 
seen from not only Jones’s own texts but these as well. 
§ 34. Possessed noun of the third person as subject. A novel form 
of the verb, namely, -Aminiwani of the independent mode, occurs in 
the texts, e. g., u’gwi'san a’ kwamatami’niwan™ “his son is sick,” 
150.39. This obviously corresponds to -Amini‘tei of the conjunctive 
mode. An explanation showing why possessed nouns of the third 
person as subjects have the construction under discussion should 
have been given: it is simply that the u- pronominal element pre- 
supposes an understood third person with the result that to keep 
the third persons apart the obviative construction must be resorted to. 
§ 34. -Amaw-, -Am6-, -Am&-. These are found in the manner 
described in the sketch. The following novel points may be noted: 
(a) -ama- before the refiexive suffix: dgwi ... a ckunamati- 
‘soyanin “TI did not save it for myself,’ 80.14-15. That this is an 
ancient type is shown by Algonkin, Ojibwa, and Montagnais: see 
Cuoq, Grammaire de la language Algonquine, § 225, Baraga, Diction- 
ary of the Otchipwe Language, under wabandamadis (nin), Lemoine, 
Grammaire Montagnaise, 53 bottom. 
(b) -ama- before the secondary connective stem -gi-: ii’me'sine 
tama’giiyag*ve’ “we have gotten good from it,” 190.8; winata- 
wine tama’giiyani ‘you might cause them to be killed,” 154.26-27. 
I confess that I do not see the difference in meaning between the first 
example and a me'siine’tamag*”", 188.44. The composition is ancient 
as is vouched by the evidence of Algonkin: see Cuogq, |. ¢., § 225 
(nitamagek ‘they kill for another”’). 
(ce) -Am6- before the secondary connective stem -'ki-: a° kwamata’- 
mo'kiiw¥“* “his family has a sickness,’’ 150.31-32 (see the note on 
§ 20). 
(d) -amo- before the secondary connective stem -migat-: ke'kine- 
tamomigatwi “it has consciousness thereof,” 160.31. For -migat- see 
§§ 20, 28. 
