ard another. I am aware that an Indian
speaker, who had never studied his own language, would pronounce much of
that incorrect (in following a particular system imposed on him),
particularly in the characterizing (definitive) form, for in this
conjugation the root always undergoes a change. If the first syllable be
short, it is lengthened, as _be-moo-za, ba-moo-zad._ If it be long,
another is added, as _ouu-bet, ou-euu-bed._[95] But when a particle is
used, as is more generally the case, the root resumes its original form,
as _guu-ouu-bed._ I thought it best to preserve uniformity. I inserted a
note explaining this. Upon this, principle of euphony, Mr. Evans'
orthography will answer better than may at first appear. When the towel
is short, the final consonant is sharp, as _mek, muk, met_; but when the
vowel is long, it sounds like _meeg, seeg, neeg, nuug, meed_."

[Footnote 95: This is in Mr. Evans' System of Orthography.]

I had thought of making a collection of words, as a commencement for a
lexicon, but there are impediments in jay way for the present: 1st, I
want a plan; I want the opinion of those versed in the language, as two
roots frequently coalesce and form compound terms, and sometimes two
verbs and a noun amalgamate by clipping all; and it requires a skillful
hand to dissect them and show the originals. Should all these compound
terms be introduced (in the contemplated lexicon), it would swell the
work to a good size. If this be not done, _we must find some rule for
compounding the terms_, that the learner may be able to do it for
himself. This (the rule) I have not yet ascertained.

"I am favorably situated for making philological observations. I observe
that the Cree, although essentially the same language as the Chippewa,
yet drops, or never had, many of the suffix expletive particles of the
latter, though the prefix particles are pretty much the same in both.
The Cree has not, I believe, the double negative nor the adverbial and
plaintive forms of verbs, as I have termed them. This renders the
language less complex, and much more easy of acquisition than
the Chippewa.

"One thought was forcibly impressed on my mind while perusing the
publications of the American Antiquarian Society. In these publications
they introduce the names of things in order to show the affinity of
different tribes. From my knowledge of Indian, I am inclined to think
that the names of things change the soonest in any language, a