to eat with him." A stronger feature of resemblance in point of grammatical construction between the idioms of nations placed at such an immense distance from each other, cannot, I think, be exhibited, and with this and the references I have above made, I believe I may, for the present, rest ratisfied. If I have shewn it to be, at least, sufficiently probable, that polysynthetic forms are the general characteristic of the American Indian languages, I need only refer to Mr. Heckewelder's correspondence, to prove that those forms, as exemplified by him in the Delaware, are such as I have described them; that they are rich, copious, expressive, and particularly that the greatest order, method and analogy reign through them. To endeavour to give better proof of this fact, than those which that learned gentleman has given, would be a waste of labour and time. Indeed, from the view which he offers of the Lenni Lenape idiom, it would rather appear to have been formed by philosophers in their closets, than by savages in the wilderness. If it should be asked how this can have happened, I can only answer, that I have been ordered to collect and ascertain facts, not to build theories. There remains a great deal yet to be ascertained, before we can venture to search into remote causes. As the Delaware appears in the delineations which Mr. Heckewelder has given of it, so the other languages, formed on the same model, have appeared to me; and indeed it can hardly be supposed that with similar means, different effects will be produced. Wherever the polysynthetic form of language prevails, it is natural to presume that it is accompanied with all its inherent qualities, which are those which I have above described. The manner in which words are compounded in that particular mode of speech, the great number and variety of ideas which it has the power of expressing in one single word, (particularly by means of the verbs,) all these stamp its character for abundance, strength, and comprehensiveness of expression, in such a manner, that those accidents must be considered as included in the general descriptive term polysynthetic. Nor can this class of languages be divested even in imagination, of the admirable order, method and regularity, which pervade them; for it is evident that without these, such complicated forms of language could not subsist, and the confusion which would follow would render them unfit even for the communication of the most simple ideas. A simple language may be, perhaps, unmethodical; but one which is highly complicated, and in which the parts of speech are to a considerable degree interwoven with each other, I humbly conceive, never can. Still, I am aware that this statement of facts will have many prejudices to encounter. It has been said, and will be said again, that "Savages having but few "ideas, can want but few words, and therefore that "their languages must necessarily be poor." Whether savages have or have not many ideas, it is not my province to determine: all I can say is, that if it is true that their ideas are few, it is not less certain that they have many words to express them. I might even say that they have an innumerable quantity of words, for, as Colden very unjustly observes, "they have the "power and the means of compounding them without "end."* Permit me, Sir, to add to the numerous proofs which Mr. Heckewelder has given of the copiousness of the Indian languages, a strong example, taken, not from the Delaware, but from the Iroquois, idiom. Of this we knew very little until the grammatical works of Pyrlæ us and Zeisberger, and the dictionary of the latter, which were thought irretrievably lost, were fortunately recovered. By the liberality of the venerable Society of the United Brethren at Bethlehem, this dictionary is now deposited in our Society's Library. It is German and Indian, beginning with the German: the counter * See Heckewelder's Correspondence, page 390. part, it seems, never was undertaken; at least, no traces of it are to be found. But the part that we have fills alone seven quarto manuscript volumes, containing together not less than two thousand three hundred and sixty-seven pages. It is true, that one-half of each page is left blank for a margin; but allowing one-fourth as the usual space for that purpose, it still leaves one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five pages of writing, consisting of German words and phrases, with their translation into Indian. It must be acknowledged that there are not many dictionaries of this size; and if this is filled (as there is no reason to doubt) with genuine Iroquois, it is in vain to speak of the poverty of that language. I wish to avoid as much as possible entering into tedious details; but perhaps it will not be amiss, by way of example, to make one or two short extracts out of this book, to shew that the ideas and words of Indians are not, as many suppose, confined to the expression of things relating to their usual occupations and physical existence. In the first volume, under the letter B and the German word Bankerott, we find: Er hat bunkerott gemachat He is a bankrupt, or has become bankrupt. In Iroquois, And in the third volume, under the letter I, and the German word Inwendig, inward, inwardly. Inwardly, Inward heat, Nacu, gajatacu. Otariche gajatacu. Jonigochrio, Scano agonochtonnie gajatacu. What is inwardly concealed Nonahote nacu ne sechta. The committee have now the means of judging whether the Indians have few ideas, and few words to express them." For my part, I confess that I am lost in astonishment at the copiousness and admirable structure of their languages, for which I can only account by looking up to the GReat first cause. SECOND QUESTION. SIMILARITY OF THE INDIAN LANGUAGES WITH EACH OTHER, IN RESPECT OF GRAMMATICAL FORMS. I have already taken a general view of this question in my examination of the first, and it was impossible not to do so, as they are so very intimately connected together. I have endeavoured to shew that the forms which I call polysynthetic are found in the languages of various nations, situated at immense distances from each other, in the northern, middle, and southern parts of this continent. I am now to inquire still further whether those forms exist in all the languages of the American Indians. The committee will immediately perceive that it is impossible to decide this question in its full extent, as most of those languages are unknown to us, and many are yet but imperfectly known. We can therefore only speak of our actual knowledge, and as far as the means that we have in our power enable us so to do, endeavour to judge, by what is open to our view, of what is still concealed from us. An hypothetical theory is the utmost point to which the most laborious researches can at present lead us; it will not be unimportant, however, to ascertain, as far as we can, the facts within our reach, and if we should find a striking similarity in the construction of those Indian languages that we are best acquainted with, it will afford much matter for present wonder and future investigation. I have explained elsewhere what I mean by a polysynthetic or syntactic construction of language.* It is that in which the greatest number of ideas are comprised in the least number of words. This is done principally in two ways. 1. By a mode of compounding Correspondence with Mr. Heckewelder, p. 401.. locutions which is not confined to joining two words together, as in the Greek, or varying the inflection or termination of a radical word as in most European languages, but by interweaving together the most significant sounds or syllables of each simple word, so as to form a compound that will awaken in the mind at once all the ideas singly expressed by the words from which they are taken. 2. By an analogous combination of the various parts of speech, particularly by means of the verb, so that its various forms and inflections will express not only the principal action, but the greatest possible number of the moral ideas and physical objects connected with it, and will combine itself to the greatest extent with those conceptions which are the subject of other parts of speech, and in other languages require to be expressed by separate and distinct words. Such I take to be the general character of the Indian languages. Their most remarkable external appearance is that of long polysyllabic words, which, being compounded in the manner I have stated, express much at once. Another striking trait which may be generally observed in their construction, is the frequent combination of the possessive pronoun and of different prepositions with the substantive, and above all the transitive form of the verb, which combines in the same word the ideas of the governing pronoun and of that which is governed. Wherever in Indian languages I have found these distinctive signs, and have had the means of investigating farther, I have generally discovered the whole polysynthetic system in the construction of the particular idiom. But in many instances I have not had those means of investigation at command. Among those who have pretended to give information on these subjects, there have been few Abbé Molinas, few Egedes, few Zeisbergers, few Heckewelders. Nor can we expect that the Adelungs, the Vaters, and the Humboldts, will visit this country to study the languages of our Indians; though we have reason to believe that were VOL. II. F |