ON THE ETHNOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA. 511 



'n sle kuKiis num, I want to go. 



hauq kunsle'as kuEns nam, I don't want to go. 



nEtl untca koee' st'kai'u ? which is your liorse ? 



tcin-tEm-cEn, I cut my foot (with axe). 



tcin-tlatc-cEn, I cut my foot (with glass, &c.) 



tcina'tli, I hurt myself. 



tcin-maqtl, I am hurt. 



tcin-i-e'tlEns, I made him eat it. 



tcin-i-kwi'at, I made him stop.J 



tcin-mEn-tcisEn, I made him go. 



tcin-I-Gm kuEns nB weuk tEn, I made him tell me. 



PARTICLES, 



Of the various particles which enter into verbal syntheses, there are two in 

 particular which deserve special mention. These are he and nvq. The former has 

 an independent existence as an adverb of place, meaning ' there.' The latter I have 

 not found apart from the verb. The functions of he are various, and at the outset 

 of my studies I found it very perplexing. It marks, like than in the N'tlaka'pamuQ, 

 the absence of the thing spoken of ; it marks absence in the third persons when they 

 are the subjects of conversation, and it marks absence in time also, both past and 

 future. As may be seen from the paradigms of the verbs, it is the regular sign of 

 the past indefinite. It occurs also in such phrases as ' next morning ' =: iiE-h od'il. 

 Nvq was also a source of trouble to me at first. In writing down phrases to bring 

 out the inflections of the traneitive verb, I found that the verb ' to strike ' {kukotEs') 

 was sometimes given to me as ku'kot, and sometimes as ku'kEnuq. The explanation 

 given me by one of my informants only misled me. She did not understand it 

 herself. After further study and comparison it became perfectly clear. I found 

 that nuq could be affixed to every transitive verb. Its functions are exceedingly 

 interesting. Primarily it is employed by the speaker to inform you that the action 

 spoken of took place without his knowledge or observation if done by yourself, and 

 if done by some one or something else without your knowledge or observation as 

 well. For example, I may desire to tell you that I have hurt my face when doing 

 something. If you are jaresent at the time and observed the accident I should use 

 the form e-tcm-maqtlos, but if you had not observed it or were not present when it 

 happened and I wished to tell you of it, I must then say, e-tcin-nuq-viaqtl-os. Again 

 if I desired to tell you that I killed ten deer yesterday when you were absent, I 

 must say tcin-kui-7i'uq ts OpEti, &c. Or, again, I have just been told, it may be, that 

 some one dear to me is dead of whose sickness or condition I was unaware. I am 

 sad in consequence. If I am questioned as to my sad looks I must reply tein-pEna- 

 miq tE a skua'lEwan, which literally rendered means, ' I have just become possessed 

 of a sore heart.' If my sadness had been of long standing, the cause of which was 

 known, I should answer tcin-c-apis tE a skua'lEwan, which signifies that ' I am 

 holding all the while a sore heart.' Other interesting examples may be seen in the 

 story of the Smai'lEtl, given below, page 512, in the Sk-qo'mic text. In the 

 paragraph where we are told that the girl saw the following morning that the slave 

 bore the imprints of her painted hands upon his shoulders, the nE-kwatc-7i«(7-iia-s 

 form is employed to express the surprise of the girl in learning that it was the 

 slave's back she had painted. She had placed her hands knowingly on her ravisher's 

 shoulders in the dark without knowing who he was, hence niiq was necessary here 

 to mark her surprise. Another good instance is seen in the paragraph which tells 

 of the chiefs perception of his Daughter's condition, 7ifiq bei g necessary here to 

 show that up to this time he had been miaware of what had taken place. A somewhat 

 different function is given to it in the concluding paragrapl) of the story, where the 

 descendants of the pair are said tn be very keen-scenttd, the term nuq-B'vEks-WKt 

 here literally meaning that they are alile to smell things before they can see them 

 or otherwise know of their presence. One of my informants gave me to understand 

 that the ' kokot ' form signified an accidental striking, and that ' k'ok Enuq ' implied 

 intentional or purposive action. I doubt much if this is correct, as the language 

 contains regular purposive and accidental particles. For example, if I desire to 

 say that I have been purposely struck by some one, I must use the following form of 

 expression : 'ntsa-ansas, ' he struck me with intention.' If accidentally struck then 

 I say 'ntsa-numcis, ' he accidentally struck me.' Again, ' he struck me with a stick in- 

 tentionally ' is rendered by nE k-Ok-otsis ; but ' he struck me with a stick by accident ' 



