“Orthography,” he writes, “though of much importance, did not engage so much of my attention as the construction of the language.  I am not so sanguine as to that performance (the conjugation of the verb to see) as to be anxious to bring forward another.  I am aware that an Indian speaker, who had never studied his own language, would pronounce much of that incorrect (in following a particular system imposed on him), particularly in the characterizing (definitive) form, for in this conjugation the root always undergoes a change.  If the first syllable be short, it is lengthened, as be-moo-za, ba-moo-zad. If it be long, another is added, as ouu-bet, ou-euu-bed.[95] But when a particle is used, as is more generally the case, the root resumes its original form, as guu-ouu-bed. I thought it best to preserve uniformity.  I inserted a note explaining this.  Upon this, principle of euphony, Mr. Evans’ orthography will answer better than may at first appear.  When the towel is short, the final consonant is sharp, as mek, muk, met; but when the vowel is long, it sounds like meeg, seeg, neeg, nuug, meed.”

[Footnote 95:  This is in Mr. Evans’ System of Orthography.]

I had thought of making a collection of words, as a commencement for a lexicon, but there are impediments in jay way for the present:  1st, I want a plan; I want the opinion of those versed in the language, as two roots frequently coalesce and form compound terms, and sometimes two verbs and a noun amalgamate by clipping all; and it requires a skillful hand to dissect them and show the originals.  Should all these compound terms be introduced (in the contemplated lexicon), it would swell the work to a good size.  If this be not done, we must find some rule for compounding the terms, that the learner may be able to do it for himself.  This (the rule) I have not yet ascertained.

“I am favorably situated for making philological observations.  I observe that the Cree, although essentially the same language as the Chippewa, yet drops, or never had, many of the suffix expletive particles of the latter, though the prefix particles are pretty much the same in both.  The Cree has not, I believe, the double negative nor the adverbial and plaintive forms of verbs, as I have termed them.  This renders the language less complex, and much more easy of acquisition than the Chippewa.

“One thought was forcibly impressed on my mind while perusing the publications of the American Antiquarian Society.  In these publications they introduce the names of things in order to show the affinity of different tribes.  From my knowledge of Indian, I am inclined to think that the names of things change the soonest in any language, and that, in order to ascertain the original stock of any tribe or nation by comparing languages, we must descend to the groundwork of the languages and search, not so much for similarity of sound as for the arrangement and essential and peculiar principles of the languages.