40 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 40 



The occurrence of such clusters as -Vn- must not for a moment be 

 interpreted as a contradiction of the non-occurrence of the same clus- 

 ters initially or finally, as they are not, syllabically speaking, clusters 

 at all. Had such combinations as, say, -t'gn- (in which -V would be 

 the final of one syllable and gn- the initial of the next) occurred, we 

 should be justified in speaking of an inconsistency in the treatment 

 of clusters; but the significant thing is, that such clusters are never 

 found. A Takelma word can thus ordinarily be cut up into a definite 

 number of syllables : 



gaiVna^ when he ate it ( = galk'-na^) 

 yo'Vyan I shall know it ( = yo'V-yan) 



but these syllables have only a phonetic, not necessarily a morpho- 

 logic value (e. g., the morphologic division of the preceding forms is 

 respectively gai-Y-na^ and yoYy-an). The theory of syllabification 

 implied by the phonetic structure of a Takelma word is therefore at 

 complete variance with that found in the neighboring Athapascan 

 dialects, in which the well-defined syllable has at least a relative 

 morphologic value, the stem normally consisting of a distinct syllable 

 in itself. 



One important phonetic adjustment touching the medial combina- 

 tion of consonants should be noted. If the first syllable ends in a 

 voiceless spirant or aspirated surd, the following syllable, as far as 

 initial stops are concerned, will begin with a media (instead of aspi- 

 rated surd) or aspirated surd + media; i. e., for a cluster of stops in 

 medial position, the last can be a media only, while the others are 

 aspirated surds. As also in the case of single consonants, this adjust- 

 ment often brings about a variation in the manner of articulation 

 of the final consonant in the cluster, according to whether its position 

 in the word is medial or final. Thus we have: 



xep'ga^ I did it; xep'V he did it 

 Contrast, with constant -V-: 



alxl'^Va^ I saw it; alxl'^V^ he saw it 

 the -g- of the first form and the ~V of the second being the same mor- 

 phological element; the -p' of both forms is the syllabically final & 

 of the stem xe^h- do, so that xe'pga^ stands for a theoretical "^xehVa^^ 

 a phonetically impossible form. Other examples are: 



1 This form is distinct from alxl'^k' 1.00K at it!, quoted before. The imperative theoretically = *aM'fc/ 

 the text form = *alxi'k!k'. 



§ 17 



