The American Indians / Their History, Condition and Prospects, from Original Notes and Manuscripts

by Henry Rowe Schoolcraft

I am a man,	Neen nin dauw.
Thou art a man,	Keen ke dauw.
He is a man,	Ween ah weeh.
We are men, (in.)	Ke dauw we min.
We are men, (ex.)	Ne dauw we min.
Ye are men,	Ke dauw min.
They are men,	Weenowau ah weeh wug.

In the translation of these expressions "man" is used as synonymous with person. If the specific term inine, had been introduced in the original, the meaning thereby conveyed would be, in this particular connexion, I am a man with respect to courage &c., in opposition to effeminacy. It would not be simply declarative of corporeal existence, but of existence in a particular state or condition.

In the following phrases, the modified forms, or the signs only, of the pronouns are used:

N´ debaindaun,	I own it.
Ke debaindaun,	Thou ownest it.
O debaindaun,	He or she owns it.
N´ debaindaun-in,	We own it (ex.)
Ke debaindaun-in,	We own it (in.)
Ke debaindaun-ewau.	Ye own it.
O debaindaun-ewau,	They own it.

These examples are cited as exhibiting the manner in which the prefixed and preformative pronouns are employed, both in their full and contracted forms. To denote possession, nouns specifying the things possessed, are required; and, what would not be anticipated, had not full examples of this species of declension been given in another place, the purposes of distinction are not effected by a simple change of the pronoun, as I to mine, &c., but by a subformative inflection of the noun, which is thus made to have a reflective operation upon the pronoun-speaker. It is believed that sufficient examples of this rule, in all the modifications of inflection, have been given under the head of the substantive. But as the substantives employed to elicit these modifications were exclusively specific in their meaning, it may be proper here, in further illustration of an important principle, to present a generic substantive under their compound forms.

I have selected for this purpose one of the primitives. Ie-aú, is the abstract term for existing matter. It is in the animate form and declarative. Its inanimate correspondent is IE-EÉ. These are two important roots. And they are found in combination, in a very great number of derivative words. It will be sufficient here, to show their connexion with the pronoun, in the production of a class of terms in very general use.

Animate Forms.
		Singular.		Plural.
Poss.	{	Nin dyë aum,	Mine.	Nin dyë auminaun,	Ours, (ex.)
				Ke dyë auminaun,	Ours, (in.)
		Ke dyë aum,	Thine.	Ke dyë aumewau,	Yours.
Obj.		O dyëaum-un,	His or Hers.	O dye aumewaun,	Theirs.
Inanimate Forms.
		Singular.		Plural.
Poss.	{	Nin dyë eem,	Mine.	Nin dyë eeminaun,	Ours, (ex.)
				Ke dyë eeminaun,	Ours, (in.)
		Ke dyë eem,	Thine.	Ke dyë eemewau,	Yours.
Obj.	x	O dyë eem-un,	His or Hers.	O dyë eemewaun,	Theirs. Poss. in.

In these forms the noun is singular throughout. To render it plural, as well as the pronoun, the appropriate general plurals ug and un or ig and in, must be superadded. But it must be borne in mind, in making these additions, "that the plural inflection to inanimate nouns (which have no objective case,) forms the objective case to animates, which have no number in the third person," [p. 30.] The particle un, therefore, which is the appropriate plural for the inanimate nouns in these examples, is only the objective mark of the animate.

The plural of I, is naun, the plural of thou and he, wau. But as these inflections would not coalesce smoothly with the possessive inflections, the connective vowels i. and e. are prefixed, making the plural of I, inaun, and of thou, &c., ewau.

If we strike from these declensions the root IE, leaving its animate and inanimate forms AU, and EE, and adding the plural of the noun, we shall then,—taking the animate declension as an instance, have the following formula of the pronominal declensions.