siOBX; - Smithsonian Institution

90 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 103
who must use a term belonging to the j^ounger generation. This de-
vice is the employment of the pronominal prefix indicating the in-
direct object in the former terms and the employment of the pronominal
prefix indicating the direct object in the latter. The follow-
ing comparative table will illustrate:
Taking the Indirect pronominal prefix Taking the direct pronominal prefix
imafo, grandfather |
1 ipok, granddaughter.
jppokni, grandmother__J 1 ipok nakni, grandson.
i-ki, father
iso tek, child (alsoimalla).
iso, .
ishki,
,, . ,
mother J
imanni, elder brother or sister inakflsh, younger brother or sister.
immoshi, uncle
, . , , ,
ippokni, aunt (w. sp.)
] . r-v, i, „
ibaiyi, nephew,
[.^.
^^^^ ^.^^^
1 hukni, aunt (m. sp.).J
i°hatak, husband itekchi, wife.
imombalaha, husband's brother ihaiya, brother's wife.
In the last two cases there is no apparent difference in the genera-
tion to which the two belonged. Also, in the case of a woman speak-
ing, ipo, husband's sister, and ihaij^a, brother's wife, would be
reciprocals, yet both take the direct object. Imalak, sister's husband,
and imalakosi, wife's brother, are also reciprocals but they take the
indirect object, being in fact the same word with the diminutive
sufRx placed after one of them. Aside from imalla, one term used
for " child," the only flat contradiction we meet is in the father-in-
law-son-in-law relation in which ipochi and iyup both take the
direct object, but there may be some special ceremonial cause here.
I have spoken above of the endearing term in use between a father-
in-law and son-in-law. My belief is that the indirect object carried
a note of deference, such as other languages express in using the
third person for the second. Chickasaw usage is practically identical
with Choctaw, but in Muskogee the direct object is the one commonly
employed. The principal exceptions are the terms for " grandchild,"
nephew, niece, daughter's husband, sister's husband (m. sp.), wife's
brother, father-in-law, and mother-in-law. Here are certain rela-
tions considered very close in Choctaw and Chickasaw. As the
background of the relationship system, and much of the foreground,
is now lost, it will probably be impossible to determine the cause of
this custom in any other way than inferentially.
GOVERNMENT
Some information on this subject has already been introduced.
The greatest illumination on the ancient form of government is given
in the following paragraph from the Anonymous French Memoir : ^^^
This nation is governed by a head chief whose power is absolute only so
far as he knows how to make use of his authority, but as disobedience is
fi^bAppendix, pp. 24S-244 ; Mem. Amer. Anthrop. Assn., v. No. 2, pp. 54-55.