If this review of my own work in the field of American Linguistics requires an apology, I may say that the preparation of it was suggested to me by my late friend, Mr. James Constantine Pilling, whose admirable volumes on the bibliography of American Aboriginal Languages are familiar to all students. He had experienced the difficulty of cataloguing the articles of writers whose contributions extend over many years, and have been published in different journals, proceedings of societies and volumes, and was impressed with the advantage of an analytical list composed by the author himself.

With this in view, I have arranged the present survey of my writings in this branch of science, extending over a period of two score years. They are grouped geographically, and sufficient reference to their contents subjoined to indicate their aims and conclusions.

D. G. Brinton.

Media, Penna., November, 1898.

I. General Articles and Works

1. The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages as set forth by Wilhelm von Humboldt; with the translation of an unpublished Memoir by him on the American Verb. pp. 51. In

Proceedings

of the American Philosophical Society, 1885.

2. On Polysynthesis and Incorporation as characteristics of American Languages. pp. 41. In

Proceedings

of the American Philosophical Society, 1885.

3. Characteristics of American Languages.

American Antiquarian

, January, 1894.

4. On certain morphologic traits in American Languages.

American Antiquarian

, October, 1894.

5. On various supposed relations between the American and Asiatic Races.

Memoirs

of the International Congress of Anthropology, 1893.

6. The Present Status of American Linguistics.

Memoirs

of the International Congress of Anthropology, 1893.

7. American Languages and why we should Study them. An address delivered before the Pennsylvania Historical Society. pp. 23. In

Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography

, 1885.

8. The Rate of Change in American Languages. In

Science

, Vol. X., 1887.

9. Traits of Primitive Speech, illustrated from American languages. In

Proceedings

of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, August, 1888.

10. The Language of Palæolithic Man. pp. 14. In

Proceedings

of the American Philosophical Society, October, 1888.

11. The American Race: A Linguistic Classification and Ethnographic Description of the Native Tribes of North and South America. pp. 392. New York, 1891.

12. The Standard Dictionary (Indian Words in). New York, 1894.

13. Aboriginal American Authors and their Productions, especially those in the Native Languages. pp. 63. Philadelphia, 1883.

14. American Aboriginal Poetry. pp. 21. In

Proceedings

of the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, 1883.

15. The Conception of Love in some American Languages. pp. 18. In

Proceedings

of the American Philosophical Society, November, 1886.

The earlier numbers, (

1-4

,) in the above list are occupied with the inquiry whether the native American languages, as a group, have peculiar morphological traits, which justify their classification as one of the great divisions of human speech. In this question, I have been a disciple of Wilhelm von Humboldt and Professor H. Steinthal, and have argued that the phenomenon of Incorporation, in some of its forms, is markedly present in the vast majority, if not in all, American tongues. That which has been called “polysynthesis” is one of these forms. This is nothing more than a familiar, nigh universal, grammatic process carried to an extreme degree. It is the

dvanda

of the Sanscrit grammarians, an excellent study of which has recently appeared from the pen of Dr. H. C. Müller.

Beiträge zur Lehre der Wortzusammensetzung.

Leiden. 1896.

In its higher forms Incorporation subordinates the nominal concepts of the phrase to those of time and relation, which are essentially verbal, and this often where the true verbal concept, that of abstract action, is lacking, and the verb itself is in reality a noun in the possessive relation.

In this connection I would refer students to an instructive passage of Heinrich Wrinkler on “Die Hauptformen in den Amerikanischen Sprachen,” in his work

Zur Sprachgeschichte

(Berlin, 1887) and to his essay on the Pokonchi Language in his

Weiteres zur Sprachgeschichte

, (Berlin, 1889).

Even extremely simple American languages, such as the Zoque, display the tendency to energetic synthesis;

See my remarks on this tongue in the

American Anthropologist

, August, 1898, p. 251.

while many of them carry the incorporative quality to such a degree that the sentence becomes one word, a good example of which is the Micmac.

Interesting examples in the Preface to S. T. Rand’s

Micmac Dictionary

(Halifax, 1888).

Some American and French writers have misunderstood the nature of this trait, and have denied it; but the student who acquaints himself thoroughly with the authors above mentioned, will not be misled.

Notably with Steinthal’s

Charakteristik des hauptsächlichsten Typen des Sprachbaues.

The MS. of the Memoir by W. von Humboldt I obtained from the Berlin Library. Even Professor Steinthal, in his edition of Humboldt’s linguistic Works, had overlooked it. It is a highly philosophic analysis of the verb, as it occurs in the languages of the following tribes: Abipones, Achaguas, Betoyas, Caribs, Huastecas, Lules, Maipures, Mayas, Mbayas, Mexicans (Nahuas), Mixtecas, Mocovis, Omaguas, Otomis, Tamanacas, Totonacos, Tupis, Yaruros.

In (

) I have examined the various alleged affiliations between American and Asiatic tongues, and showed they are wholly unfounded.

In (<a href="#ref