Part 2 — LETTER XXVI. FROM MR. HECKEWELDER.
Reading edition
Bethlehem, 10th October, 1816.
Dear Sir.—I have hesitated whether I should answer your favour of the 1st inst., being very soon to set out for Philadelphia, where I shall be able to explain to you verbally everything that you wish to know in a much better manner than I can do in writing. As there are, however, but few questions in your letter, and those easily answered, I sit down to satisfy your enquiry, which will for the present close our correspondence. If you think proper to resume it after my return to this place, you will find me as ready as ever to continue our Indian disquisitions.
In the first place, it cannot, I think, properly be said that substantives in general in the Delaware language have a passive mood; but there are substantives which express a passive situation, like those which you have cited, after Mr. Zeisberger. I do not know of any words which express the same thing actively, except the infinitives of active verbs, which are in that case substantively used. Such are,
Shingalgundin, to hate; or the hating. Machelemuxundin, to honour; or the honouring. Mamachkimgundin, to insult (by words); or the insulting.
The diminutive forms in the Indian are tit and es; the former is generally applied to animate, and the latter to inanimate things. Thus we say lennotit, a little man; amementit, a little child; wiquames, a small house; and amocholes, a small canoe. This rule does not hold, however, in all cases; for the little fawn of a deer, although animate, is called mamalis, and a little dog among the Minsi is called allumes, (from allum, a dog.) Chis or ches, is also a diminutive termination, which is sometimes applied to beasts; achtochis and achtoches, “a small deer.”
Augmentatives are compounded from the word chingue, which signifies large; and sometimes the two words are separately used.
Chingue, or m’chingue puschis, a large cat. Chingewileno (for chingue lenno), a tall stout man. Chingotæney (for chingue otæney), a large town. Chingi wiquam, a large house. Chingamochol, a large canoe. Chingachgook, a large snake, &c.
There are a few augmentatives formed in a different manner; for instance, from pachkshican or kshican, “a knife,” are formed pachkschicanes, “a small knife,” and m’chonschicanes,311 “a large knife;” still it is easy to see that m’chon, in the latter word, is derived from chingue, large or great, which, with a little variation, brings it within the same rule with the others.
You have, no doubt, observed in Zeisberger the terminations ink and unk, which express the idea of locality, coupled with a substantive, as for instance:
Utenink, or otænink, from otæney, a town; in the town. Utenink n’da, I am going to town, or into the town. Utenink noom, I am coming from within the town. Sipunk, (from sipo) to or into the river. M’bink, (from m’bi) in the water. Hakink, (from hacki) in or on the earth. Awossagamewunk, (from awossageme), in heaven. Wachtschunk n’da, I am going up the hill. Wachtschunk noom, I come from the hill. Hitgunk, on or to the tree. Ochunk, at his father’s.
As you must have observed that many of our Indian names of places end with one or other of these terminations, such as Minisink, Moyamensing, Passyunk, &c., you will understand that all these names are in what we might call the local case, which accounts for the great number of those which end in this manner.
I beg you will not write to me any more for the present, as I do not know how soon I may have the pleasure of seeing you. I anticipate great satisfaction from your acquaintance, and hope it will be improved into a true Indian friendship.
I am, &c. J. HECKEWELDER.
