examples of the process, examples in which it has assumed a more clearly defined function than in these Latin and Greek cases.  It is particularly prevalent in many languages of southeastern Asia and of the Malay archipelago.  Good examples from Khmer (Cambodgian) are tmeu “one who walks” and daneu “walking” (verbal noun), both derived from deu “to walk.”  Further examples may be quoted from Bontoc Igorot, a Filipino language.  Thus, an infixed _-in-_ conveys the idea of the product of an accomplished action, e.g., kayu “wood,” kinayu “gathered wood.”  Infixes are also freely used in the Bontoc Igorot verb.  Thus, an infixed _-um-_ is characteristic of many intransitive verbs with personal pronominal suffixes, e.g., sad- “to wait,” sumid-ak “I wait”; kineg “silent,” kuminek-ak “I am silent.”  In other verbs it indicates futurity, e.g., tengao- “to celebrate a holiday,” tumengao-ak “I shall have a holiday.”  The past tense is frequently indicated by an infixed _-in-_; if there is already an infixed _-um-_, the two elements combine to _-in-m-_, e.g., kinminek-ak “I am silent.”  Obviously the infixing process has in this (and related) languages the same vitality that is possessed by the commoner prefixes and suffixes of other languages.  The process is also found in a number of aboriginal American languages.  The Yana plural is sometimes formed by an infixed element, e.g., k’uruwi “medicine-men,” k’uwi “medicine-man”; in Chinook an infixed _-l-_ is used in certain verbs to indicate repeated activity, e.g., ksik’ludelk “she keeps looking at him,” iksik’lutk “she looked at him” (radical element _-tk_).  A peculiarly interesting type of infixation is found in the Siouan languages, in which certain verbs insert the pronominal elements into the very body of the radical element, e.g., Sioux cheti “to build a fire,” chewati “I build a fire”; shuta “to miss,” shuunta-pi “we miss.”

A subsidiary but by no means unimportant grammatical process is that of internal vocalic or consonantal change.  In some languages, as in English (sing, sang, sung, song; goose, geese), the former of these has become one of the major methods of indicating fundamental changes of grammatical function.  At any rate, the process is alive enough to lead our children into untrodden ways.  We all know of the growing youngster who speaks of having brung something, on the analogy of such forms as sung and flung.  In Hebrew, as we have seen, vocalic change is of even greater significance than in English.  What is true of Hebrew is of course true of all other Semitic languages.  A few examples of so-called “broken” plurals from Arabic[37] will supplement the Hebrew verb forms that I have given in another connection.  The noun balad “place” has the