The Lule language confines this notation to participials, and expresses by it the condition of the action and also its time; [TN-7]_mil quis 1 2 3 amaiciton_, you (are) me loving. The affixed pronouns are either special, confined to these expressions, or if elsewhere in the tongue, are not employed with verbs, or not in this manner; or they are the pronominal affixes of the verb itself. The Maya or Yucatecan language has a special pronoun which added to any noun forms a sentence with it, and possesses the power to add the idea of the verb; _Pedro en_, I am Pedro. But when it stands alone, without a predicate, it loses this power, as _en_ alone does not mean, “I am.” In the Beto language there is, indeed, no special pronoun of this kind, as the one used is also a possessive. Its position, however, makes the difference. When it is prefixed, it is the possessive, but when suffixed it carries with it the power of the verb: _humani rru_, man I (am); _fofei rru_, bad I (am). In a similar manner this tongue forms a substantive verb, _ajoi rru_. The meaning of the root is not given, but it seems to mean something present, at hand. It is suggestive that in these phrases the accent is always on the pronoun, as if to signify that that is the important element. It is very common in American languages to find the noun and the verb using the same pronouns, with the former to indicate possession, with the latter the subject. This might be explained by supposing that the action is regarded as the possession of the agent. But it is simpler to suppose that in each case the connection of the person with the noun and the verb is in the thoughts, and this relation is recognized in expression. In this way the Mbaya language has a sort of descriptive conjugation; connecting the participles with possessive pronouns; _i-iligodi_, I (am) explaining; but no doubt less definitely, “my explaining,” “I to explain.” The language of the Abipones slightly alters the possessive pronouns in some persons and uses them in a similar manner: _ri-aal_, I am lazy; _yo-amkata_, he is good. When the verbal pronoun is used in such expressions, it is entirely identical with the verb. This is the case with the Mexican, where the verbal pronoun united to the participle forms a sentence: _ni-tlaçotlani_, I (am) a lover. This expression differs from the present indicative only in the form of the root-word, _ni-tlaçotla_; but it cannot form another tense or mode. The grammarians call such an expression a tense indicating habit. This, however, would not be a tense but a mode, and, in fact, the term rests on a misunderstanding. That such expressions indicate habit is shown by the fact that they do not apply, like the present of the verb, to the temporary action, but convey that it is a custom, or a business; not that I am loving just now, but that I am habitually a lover.