The futures of some verbs will reveal the difficulties of this tense:—
To burn, _i-nyor-ka_; future, _i-nyor-wane-ka_. To cook, _i-lu’_; ” _i-lu’_. To start, _i-bete_; ” _i-bete_. To want, _i-ki-ana_; ” _i-kie_. To count, _ishtaung_; ” _mia shta’we_.
In the last example _mia_ is the future of the verb _imia_, to go, and is used as an auxiliary.
The explanation I have to suggest for these varying forms is, either that they represent in fact that very “multiplicity of tense-formations” which Humboldt alluded to, and which were too subtle to be apprehended by Mr. Gabb within the time he devoted to the study of the language; or that they are in modern Bri-Bri, which I have shown is noticeably corrupted, survivals of these formations, but are now largely disregarded by the natives themselves.
Signs of the incorporative plan are not wanting in the tongue. Thus in the objective conjugation not only is the object placed between subject and verb, but the latter may undergo visible synthetic changes. Thus:
_Je be sueng._ I thee see. _Ke je be wai su-na._ Not I thee (?) see-did.
In the latter sentence _na_ is the sign of the past aorist, and the verb in synthesis with it drops its last syllable. The _wai_ Gabb could not explain. It will be noticed that the negative precedes the whole verbal form, thus indicating that it is treated as a collective idea (holophrastically).
Prepositions always appear as suffixes to nouns, which, in composition, may suffer elision. This is strictly similar to the Nahuatl and other synthetic tongues.
Other examples of developed synthesis are not uncommon, as—
away, _imibak_, from _imia_ to go, _jebak_, already. very hot, _palina_, from _ba_ + _ilinia_.
The opinion that the Bri-Bri is at present a considerably corrupted and worn-down dialect of a group of originally highly synthetic tongues is borne out by an examination of the scanty materials we have of its nearest relations.
Thus in the Terraba we find the same superfluous richness of pronominal forms which occurs in many South American tongues, one indicating that the person is sitting, another that he is standing, a third that he is walking.[315]
The Brunka has several distinct forms in the present tense: