LINGUISTIC NOTES ON THE INDIAN TEXT. 
Elaborate linguistic notes on the Indian text contained in this 
paper are uncalled for since a grammatical sketch of Fox has been 
published in the Handbook of ‘American Indian Languages (Bull. 40, 
B. A. E.), and from time to time I have supplemented this in easily 
accessible periodicals and publications of the Bureau. See also this 
volume, p. 282 et seq., p. 345 et seq., p. 493 et seq., p. 538 et seq. 
Moreover, it has become abundantly clear that the above-mentioned 
sketch needs a thorough overhauling and that sooner or later a new 
and (let us hope) a more accurate grammar of Fox must be published. 
Nevertheless the following notes are added as an aid to the comprehen- 
sion of the Indian text. When paragraph numbers are given, they 
refer to the above-mentioned sketch. 
§ 21. Double instrumental particles are very uncommon; an exam- 
ple may be seen in aé'wipikakanoneti’egu“tc" (602.40). 
§ 28. At 572.12 there is an anomalous form of the future of the 
independent mode. I do not know whether it is purely an error or 
whether it is induced by the particle ma’. 
§ 29. The following remarks apply not only to the Indian texts 
contained in this volume but others as well: (a) when 4’- or wi- is 
not used and there is no ‘change’ the conjunctive syntactically is 
equivalent to the present subjunctive; (b) when a’- or wi- is not 
used and there is “change” a “when” clause of actual or immediate 
past occurrence is meant (pyiiya- appearing for pyii-); (c) when a 
negative is not used but final -ni is added, a “whenever” clause is 
the meaning. [This note is a slight modification of rules kindly 
furnished by Prof. Leonard Bloomfield.] 
§ 30. The termination -‘kani (prohibitive) is used with the force 
of a potential at 582.21 and a few other times. Similarly, Kickapoo. 
§ 32. Note the peculiar syntactical use of the future conjunctive 
of the interrogative mode in wi apwi‘eti’gwia'igi (582.6) why, they 
may wait for each other. A rare obviative of a participial of the 
interrogative mode is to be seen in wiwiwiwa’ni'in™” (572.13) whom- 
ever you may marry. Note the obviative pl. -nigwiini at 566.18. 
§ 35.3. It may be noted that kanagwa (short for agwi kanagwa) 
is construed with the conjunctive but without the expected addition 
of -ni. See 594.8, 600.22. 
§ 35.4. Present subjunctive with i-, having the force of the inde- 
pendent mode, instead of 4- and the past subjunctive. A couple of 
examples are to be found at 604.15, 604.16. 
§ 35.4. Present subjunctive (without &- or wi-) construed with 
keya‘apa, instead of past subjunctive (with a- [?], wi-). An example 
612 
