20 AFFILIATION OP THE ALGONQUIN LANGUAGES. 



using identical common terms on account of minor differences in 

 grammatical combination. The resemblances between the Algonquin 

 and the Malay-Polynesian vocabularies are the rule, not the exception; 

 and on this ground I believe that an exhaustive analysis of the 

 grammatical forms of the latter will yet exhibit at least a near 

 approach to Algonquin structure. 



In addition to the agglutination of the Tagala and kindred languages, 

 a feature that appeai-s more or less in all the Polynesian tongues, there 

 are many points of resemblance as well as of difference between the 

 Malay-Polynesian and the Algonquin. They agree in the absence of 

 anything like true gender, and in the substitution for it of a distinction 

 of nouns into animate and inanimate. The Algonquin languages, 

 however, have a termination for the plural, while, as far as I am 

 aware, the Malay-Polynesian mark plurality by a prefixed article or 

 particle, or by the suffix of a numeral adjective. The Algonquin 

 nouns have properly speaking ho declension, and this is true of the 

 Malay-Polynesian. But when case is marked in the latter, it is by 

 forms of the article or by prefixed prepositions which frequently 

 coalesce, while in the former the locative is denoted by a suffix. The 

 genitive also precedes the nominative in Algonquin, but follows it in 

 the Malay-Polynesian. The Malay-Polynesian languages have pre- 

 positions, and such are many of the Algonqiiin particles ; but others 

 are postpositions. This would seem, with other points of a similar 

 character, to indicate the position of the Algonquin languages as one 

 midway between the postponing Turanians of Asia and the proposing 

 Malay-Polynesians. The Athabascans, Iroquois, Dacotahs and Choc- 

 taws, who surround the Algonquins on every side, all use postpositions, 

 and their influence in this and other directions may have tended 

 largely to render the Algonquin grammar somewhat Turanian. The 

 substantive and the verb are but feebly distinguished in the two 

 families under consideration, and in many cases not at all. In the 

 formation of derivative nouns the Malay employs a prefix as well as 

 an affix, and has been contrasted with the Algonquin, which makes 

 use of the suffix: only. Thus from Malay tidor, to sleep, comes per- 

 tidor-an, a bed ; while from Cree nipow, to sleep, is derived ni2Jawin, 

 a bed. The Polynesians do not follow the Malays in this respect, 

 for the Tonga mohe, to sleep, gives us mohenga, a bed, in a form that 

 is thoroughly Algonquin. In both families the adjective is invariable, 

 but in the Malay-Polynesian its place is generally after the noun, 



