an it resembles the Chippewa. The similarities
of the Dakota suffixes, pronouns and prepositions to those given by
Bopp, and the general resemblance of Dakotan languages to Sanskrit,
Gothic, etc., in vocabulary, made me certain of relationship before I
ever saw Fick's dictionary. Yet as I turned over his pages I was amazed
at the similarity of the I. E. roots to the Dak roots. The Slav Teut
bases of Fick seem to me most similar to the Dak. I am certain that
neither the Teutonic or Graeco-Italic dictionaries resemble the Dakota
as much as do the European, Indo. European and Aryan dictionaries. The
I. E. consonants are represented in Dakota, Santee and Titon dialects,
and in Minnetaree in accordance with the following table. I omit
representatives concerning which I am doubtful. I have too little
material on the other languages to justify me in including them.

---+----------------+---------+------------+----+---------+---------+------
I E| k | g | gh | p | bh | m | w
| | | | | | |
S | k, h, kh, sh[A]| k, h[B] | gh, kh, zh | p | m, b, w | m | w, p
| | | | | | |
T |k, h, g[B], khsh| k, g[B] | gh, kh, zh | p | b, w | m, b[C] | w, p
| | | | |---------+---------+------
M |k, h, gh[D], sh | k | gh[D] | p | m[F] (b, w) p
+------+---------+---------+---+--------+----+--------------------------
I E| t | d | dh | n | r, l[E]|y[E]| s
| | | | | | |
S | t, n | t, d, n | d | n | n, d |y, z| s, sh, z, zh, t
| | | | | | |
T | t, n | t, l, n | l | n | n, l |y, z| s, sh, z, zh, t
| +---------+---------+---+--------+----+--------------------------
M | t, d | t d[F] (l, n, r) ts | ts, sh, t
---+------+-------------------------------------+--------------------------

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote A: Chiefly, probably not always, for Fick's second
k, Lith sz (pron sh), Slav s. The k's and g's liable to
labialization in Eu. languages appear to be occasionally
labialized in Dakotan languages.]

[Footnote B: In S. hd, Yankton kd, T. gl; S. hn, Y. kn, T. gn
or gl; S. hm, Y. km, T. gm.]

[Footnote C: In S. md, Y. bd, T. bl.]

[Footnote D