1888.] 19 [Hale. 
amples will illustrate this signification. Jiiga, small, becomes in the re- 
duplicate form jirjiaga, which refers to small objects of different kinds or 
sizes, Sagi, firm, fast, hard, makes sdsagi or sagizt, Which is employed 
as in the following example: wédhihide sagigihnan kafibdha, 1 wish tools 
that are hard, and of different kinds, them only. Here the suffix Anan ex- 
presses the meaning of ‘‘only;’’ the reduplication of the adjective gives 
the sense expressed by the words ‘‘of different kinds.’’ Sabe, black, 
makes sdsabe, black here and there. Gdhejé, spotted, becomes gdhejaja 
spotted in many places. Piaj’, bad, makes pipiaji, as in uckan pipiajt, 
different bad deeds. Nujiija (apparently a compound or derivative form, 
from jitigd, small), means ‘‘boy,’? “% ¢., small man; nujinjinga, boys of 
different sizes and ages.* It would seem from these examples that in this 
language the reduplication expresses primarily the idea of variety, from 
which that of plurality in many cases follows. This meaning is not indi- 
cated by Mr. Riggs in his Dakota grammar, and it was not detected by 
me in the Tutelo, but it is not impossible that it actually exists in both 
languages. It is deserving of notice that while no inflection of the noun is 
found in the Iroquois to express plurality, this m saning is indicated in the 
adjective by the addition of 8, or hots, affixed to the adjective when it is 
combined with the noun. Thus from kandjisa, house, and wiyo, hand- 
some, we have konoisiyo, handsome house, pl. kanonmsiyos, handsome 
houses. So haretnaksen, bad song, pl. harevinaksens, bad songs ; kanaka- 
res, long pole, pl. kanakareshois, long poles. 
It is also remarkable that the peculiar mode of forming the plural, both 
of substantives and of adjectives, by reduplication of the first syllable or 
portion of the word, is found in several Indian languages spoken west of 
the Rocky Mountains, and belonging to families entirely distinct from one 
another, and from the Dakota. Thus in the Selish language we have 
Wdus, father, pl. lilidus; tana, ear, pl. teéntdna ; sktiliamigo, man, pl. 
shilkeltamigo ; qdest, good, pl. gusqdest. Inthe Sahaptin, pitin, girl, pl. p7- 
pilin ; tahs, good, pl. titahs. Inthe Kizh language, wordit, man, pl. worordt ; 
tcinnt, small, pl. t¢itginnd.} This has been termed, and certainly seems, a 
natural mode of forming the plural. It is therefore somewhat surprising 
to find it restricted in America to a compe iratively small group of linguistic 
families. It is still more noteworthy that in the Polynesian dialects, which 
in their general characteristics differ so widely from the Indian langutger, 
this same method of forming the plural is found, but confined, as in the 
Dakota tongues, to the adjective; thus we have laau tele, large tree, pl. 
lawu tetele, large trees ; taata mattat, good man, pl. taata maitatat, good 
men; mahaki, sick, pl. mahamahakt, sick (persons).{ This is a subject 
in linguistic science which merits further investigatiqn. 
*Tam indebted to Mr, Dorsey’s letters for this and much other information ot 
great interest respecting the western languages of the Dakota stock, forming 
part of his extensive work, which we may hope will soon be published, 
t Ethnography and Philology of the U.S, Exploring Expedition under Chas. 
Wilkes, pp. 534, et seq, 
AY Ibid. Pp. 2h, 
