which means “him whom I teach” or “that which I teach.” Its theme is the verbal mboe, which in the extract I have above made from Montoya is shown to be a synthesis of the three elementary particles ñe, mo, and e; xe is the possessive form of the personal pronoun, “my”; it is followed by the participial expression temi or tembi, which, according to Montoya, is equivalent to “illud quod facio;” its terminal vowel is syncopated with the relative y or i, “him, it”; so the separate parts of the expression are:—
xe + tembi + y + ñe + mo + e.
I shall not pursue the examination of the Tupi further. It were, of course, easy to multiply examples. But I am willing to leave the case as it stands, and to ask linguists whether, in view of the above, it was not a premature judgment that pronounced it a tongue neither polysynthetic nor incorporative.
THE MUTSUN.
This is also one of the languages which has been announced as “neither polysynthetic nor incorporative,” and the construction of its verb as “simple to the last degree.”[[327]]
We know the tongue only through the Grammar and Phrase-Book of Father de la Cuesta, who acknowledges himself to be very imperfectly acquainted with it.[[328]] With its associated dialects, it was spoken near the site of the present city of San Francisco, California.
Looking first at the verb, its “extreme simplicity” is not so apparent as the statements about it would lead us to expect.
In the first place, the naked verbal theme undergoes a variety of changes by insertion and suffixes, like those of the Quiche and Qquichua, which modify its meaning. Thus:
| Ara, | to give. |
| Arsa, | to give to many, or to give much. |
| Arapu, | to give to oneself. |
| Arasi, | to order to give, etc., etc. |
Again: