The verbs of the fourth conjugation differ from those of the third, in being polysyllabic. They form the preterite by adding tah, and the future by adding to the body of the verb. If the infinitive end in tah, the preterite remains the same. Some examples follow:—

Kabatah,kabatah,kabaté,to number;
Kuul,kuultah,kuulté,to worship;
Lolobthan,lolobthantah,lolobthanté,to curse;
Nenol,nenoltah,nenolté,to contemplate;
Tzolthan,tzolthantah,tzolthanté,to interpret;
Zinché,zinchétah,zinchété,to crucify.

The irregular verbs, of which there are about as many as in our own language, are to be learned only from practice. The auxiliary verbs likewise require much attention, to enable the student to conjugate the regular verbs. They are used in the different tenses and modes precisely as the auxiliaries in the modern European languages, except that they sometimes follow the participles in place of preceding them. We give the reader a specimen of the mode of conjugating a verb of the second conjugation in the present and imperfect tenses, our limits not allowing us to give all its modifications.

PRESENT INDICATIVE.

Ten cambezic,I teach;
Tech cambezic,Thou teachest;
Lay cambezic,He teaches.
Toon cambezic,We teach;
Teex cambezic,Ye teach;
Loob cambezic,They teach.

IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.

Ten cambezic cuchi,I was teaching;
Tech cambezic cuchi,Thou wast teaching;
Lay cambezic cuchi,He was teaching.
Toon cambezic cuchi,We were teaching;
Teex cambezic cuchi,Ye were teaching;
Loob cambezic cuchi,They were teaching.

Were we to give the remaining portions of this verb, as conjugated by Father Beltran, the reader would be filled with admiration at the clearness and simplicity of his arrangement, and perceive how much his labors have facilitated the acquisition of this language.

The great obstacle, however, to the perfect knowledge of the Maya, and which can only be removed by continual converse with the natives themselves, is the frequent use of elisions and syncopes. The author has devoted several pages to this part of his subject, and has laid down many rules to guide the learner; but finally he is obliged to confess that no written directions can be given to embrace every case. The Maya tongue, in this respect, resembles many other Indian languages, in which words are elided, syncopated, and consolidated together, until the grammatical construction can only be conjectured by the philologist, and the radices become jumbled up and difficult to distinguish. The utmost that the grammarian can accomplish, is to separate the different parts of speech, and to classify them scientifically. A spoken language is always more or less elided in conversation, however distinctly the words may be written in books; but the written languages of South America present consolidated masses of words truly formidable to behold, and which tend utterly to discourage the most patient philologist. Humboldt mentions the word Notlazomahuiztespixcalatzin, signifying “venerable priest, whom I cherish as my father,” as used by the Mexicans when speaking to the curates; and the vocabularies of Indian languages, both of North and South America, exhibit words of even greater longitude. It is evident that so long as the words of a language are, as it were, fused together, almost according to the fancy of the speaker, grammatical rules will be of little practical use to guide the scholar, and that he must acquire the language mostly by the ear. This perhaps accounts for the disappearance of all grammars and vocabularies of the Maya tongue from the peninsula of Yucatan, the priests finding it much easier to learn the language directly from the Indian, than to acquire it from books. I offer this, however, as a suggestion, rather than as an explanation.

The brief sketch we have given of some of the features of the Maya tongue, naturally leads to speculations concerning its origin, and that of the nation by which it is spoken.