BOAS] HANDBOOK OF INDIAN LANGUAGES SIUSLAWAN 535 



means of two separate verbal stems — one for singular and the other 

 for plural objects — is not found in Siuslaw.^ One and the same 

 verbal stem is us%d in all cases; and when it becomes necessary to in- 

 dicate that there are more than one recipient of a transitive action, 

 this is accomplished by the use of the numeral particle yaP''xa^ (see 

 § 139) or of the stem i.V°* (see § 133), as may be seen from the follow- 

 ing examples: 



yuwa'yun ants q!a'U he gath- yuwa'tjun ya'^'xa^ ants qfa'%1 (they) 

 ered pitch gathered lots (of) that pitch 



88.5, 6 

 yixa'yun Kite I saw a person y%xa'yun yaf^'xa^ hUc I saw many 



people 

 wa'aHsms ants hUc he said to waa'aHsmE ants L!a!°-^ hltc he said 



his man to all (of) his people 7.1 



L/dxa'xaHsrriE hUohQ BQnthis L/dxa'xaHsrriE hltc L!a'°'^ he sent 

 man many people 30.1, 2 



But if Siuslaw does not employ a distinct grammatical process for the 

 purpose of pointing out pluralit}^ of objects of transitive actions, it 

 has developed devices to indicate collectivity of subjects of intransitive 

 verbs. For that purpose it uses, besides the numeral particle ya/^'xa^ 

 (see § 139) and the stem L!a'°''^ (see § 133), two suffixes {-u^ and -tx) that 

 are added directly to the verbal stem. These suffixes are always added 

 to verbal stems that denote an intransitive act, and their functions may 

 best be compared to the functions exercised by the French on or 

 German man in sentences like on dit and man sagt. 



§ 79. Plural -u^, -uwi 

 This suffix expresses an action that is performed collectively by 

 more than one subject. Etymologically it is the same suffix as the 

 verbal abstract of identical phonetic composition (see § 97), and the use 

 of one and the same suffix in two functions apparently so different 

 may be explained as due to the fact that there exists an intimate psy- 

 chological connection between an abstract verbal idea and the concept 

 of the same act performed in general.^ The following example, taken 



1 1 have found only one case of such a difierentiation. I was told that the stem goo- to entek, to 

 POT IN, refers to singular objects, while the stem Lxaa- can be used with plural objects only. But 

 as this information was convp.yed to me after much deliberation and upon my own suggestion, I am 

 inclined to doubt the correctness of this interpretation. It is rather probable that these two stems 

 are synonymes. 



2 The same phenomenon occurs in Dakota. 



§ 79 



