to identity, but the servile particles are so likewise, and that as well in themselves as in the uses made of them, and in the mutations to which they are liable. It should be added that the resemblances cited are drawn not from "ransacked dictionaries," but from vocabularies of less than 300 words for each tongue. To those who, not content with this abstract, shall refer to the original documents, I may offer two remarks suggested by their study to myself. Ist. The extraordinary extent to which the presently contemplated affinities hold good has been made out by the helps afforded by the series of cognate tongues, whereby the synonyma defective in one tongue are obtained from another, whilst the varying degrees and shades of deviation are a clue to the root or basis.t 2d. The other remark suggested by the comparison of the vocabularies is, that it is the nouns and verbs, and not the pronouns and numerals, which constitute the enduring part of these languages; and that consequently, whatever may be the case in regard to the Arian group of tongues, we must not always expect to find the best evidence of family connection in regard to the Turanian languages among the pronouns and numerals. Indeed the confused character of these parts of speech seems to be a conspicuous feature of the Mongolian tongues. Comparison of Tibetan and Himálayan tongues on one hand, and of the Indo-Chinese on the other. Blood.-Thak in Bhotia, Thyak in Lhópa, Vi in Lepcha.‡ Thwé in Burmese, Thé in Sák, Ka-thí in Khyeng, A-ti in Kámi, Wi in Mrú. Boat.-Thú in Sérpa. Thé in Burmese. • In order to appreciate this remark and to trace the elements of the vocables, see analytic observations of the following paper on Caucasian and Mongolian Words, appended to the list of those words. + Take the radical word for dog, as a sample. We have khyi, khiá, khí, kỉ, khvé, kwé, kw, kú, kí-chá, kí-chủ, khó, kyó, choi. For the appended particles and their mutations I must refer to the original documents, and to the future confirmations to be supplied by my Sifánese series of words. The first line gives the Northern series, the second the Southern. Cat.-Si-mi in Bhotia, Si-mi in Sokpa. Min in Khyeng, Min in Kámi. O'-á in Kúmi, Wá á in Kámi and in Mrú. Dog.—Khyi in Bhotia, Khi in Lhópa, Kú-chú in Kiránti, Khwé in Burmese, Ta-kwi in Mrú, Kú in Sák. Ear.-Ná in Bhotia, Na-vo in Lhópa. Ná in Burmese, Ka-ná in Sák. Eye.-Mig in Bhotia, A-mik in Lepcha, Mó in Múrmi and Myé-tsi in Burmese, A-mi in Kámi and Sák, Min in Father.—Phá in Bhotia, Amba in Limbú. Phá é in Burmese, Ampa in Kumi. Fire-Mé or Mi in Bhotia, and in all Himálayan tongues. Fish.-Nyá in Bhotia, Ngyá in Lhópa, Ngó in Lepcha, Nyau in Ngá in Burmese, Ngú in Khyeng, Nghó in Kám. Foot.-Káng in Bhotia, Káng in Lhópa, Khwe-li in Súnwár. Khyé in Burmese, Ká-kó in Khyeng, Khou in Kúmi. Goat.-Rá in Bhotia. Ta-rá in Mrú. Hair.-A-chóm in Lepcha, Chúm in Magar. A-shám in Kámi, Shám in Mrú and Kúmi. Head.-Gó in Bhotia. Ghóng in Burmese. Hog.-Phak in Bhotia and Lhópa and Kiránti, Wak in Magar. A kyi in Khyeng, A-rúng in Sák. Horse.-Tá in Bhotia and Lhópa, Sa la in Newári. Tá-phú (phú, male suffix) in Kámi, Sapú in Sák (púidem). House.-Khyim in Bhotia and Lepcha. Yúm in Magar. Kyim in Sák, Kim in Mrú, Um in Kúmi. Man-Mi in Bhotia and most Himálayan tongues, Maro in Ka-mi in Kámi, Mrú in Mrú dialect. Moon.-Lá-va in Bhotia, Lhópa, Lepcha, &c., &c. Ta-kún in Kámi, Name.-Ming in Bhotia and Lhópa and Limbú and Múrmi, Náng in Newári A-mí in Burmese, A-mín in Kámi, Na-mí in Khyeng. Night.-Sa-náp in Lepcha. Nyá in Burmese. Oil. Si-di in Magar. Shi in Burmese and Kámi and Mrú, Si-dak in Sák. Road.-Lam in Bhotia, and all the Himálayan tongues. Lam in Burmese, Khyeng, Kámi, and Sák. Salt.-Tshá in Bhotia and Lhôpa, Chhá in Himálayan tongues (most) Súng in Bódó.* Shá in Burmese, Tsi in Khyeng, Súng in Sák. Skin.-Pá-kó in Lhópa, Dhi in Gúrúng, Di in Múrmi. Pé in Kúmi, Pi in Mrú. Sky.-Mú in Múrmi, Mún in Gúrúng. Mú in Mrú, Mó in Burmese. Phúl in Khyeng, Pú-vi in Kúmi. Stone.-Lóng in Lepcha, Lúng in Limbú, Lhúng in Magar. In the verbs, again, we have Eat. Sá in Lhópa, Zó, Só, in Bhotia, Ché in Limbú, Chó in Kiránti Sá in Burmese, Tsá in Kámi, Tsá in Kúmi. Drink.—Thúng in Bhotia, Thông in Lhópa, Thúng in Limbú and Múrmi, &c. Thouk in Burmese. • My Bódó and Dhimál vocabularies will be found in the Journal, as well as the Himalayan series. I take this occasion to intimate my now conviction that the Bódó, Dhimál, and Kócch tribes belong to the Tibetan and Himálayan stock rather than to the Tamilian; that is, with reference to India, to the more recent race of Tartar immigrants, not to the more ancient and more altered. Sleep.-I'p in Súnwár, I'p in Limbú, Im in Kiránti. I'p in Khyeng, I' in Kámi, I' in Kúmi. Laugh.-Yé in Limbú, Nyé in Múrmi, Nhyú in Newári. Yé in Burmese, A-nwi in Khyeng, Am-nhwi in Kúmi. Weep.—Nú, ngó, in Bhotia, ngủ in Lhópa and Sérpa, Khwó in Newári. Ngó in Burmese, and Khá in Kámi. Say, tell.-Shód in Bhotia. Shó in Burmese. Come.-Wá in Newári. Vá in Kámi. Go.-Lau in Súnwár. Lá in Kámi and in Kúmi. Sit down.—Det in Sérpa, Ngủ-ná in Magar. Move, Walk.-Dyú in Lhópa. Kyú in Burmese. Run.-Chóng in Sérpa, Lóyá in Kiránti. Chó-né in Khyeng, Lei in Kúmi. Give.-Bin in Bhotia and Lhópa, Pí in Limbú, Pai in Kiránti, Pen in Gúrúng. Pé in Burmese, Pé gé in Khyeng, Pei in Kúmi. (Ná pú in Kami = Náng in Bhotia, asks for self.) Take.-Yá in Bhotia, Lyo in Lepcha, Lé in Limbú. Yú in Burmese, Lá in Kámi, Ló in Kúmi. Kill.-Thód in Gúrúng, That in Bódó. That in Burmese. Hear, attend.-Nyen in Bhotia and Lhópa and Lepcha, Nyo in Newári. Né in Khyeng, Ka-ná-i in Kámi. Remark, the materials for the above striking comparative view are derived from my own original vocabularies for the Northern tongues, as published in the Journal, No. 185, for December 1847, and from Captain Phayre's for the Southern tongues, hereto appended. It is seldom that vocabularies so trustworthy can be had, and had in series, for comparison; and yet it is abundantly demonstrable that everything in regard to the discovery of the larger ethnic affinities of dispersed races depends upon such a presentation of these materials, the distinction of roots and of servile particles, as well as the range of synonymous variation, in each of these classes of words, being thus only testable, and these points being all important as diagnostics, even more so than grammatical peculiarities which, at least in our sense, are apt to be excessively vague, or else palpably borrowed, among the Mongolida. Syntactic poverty and crudity and etymological refinement and abundance seem to be the characteristics of this vast group of tongues, and hence the importance of its vocables and the necessity of obtaining them in a state accurate enough for analysis, and copious enough to embrace the average range of synonyms. A common stock of primitive roots and of serviles, similarly employed, indicates unmistakably a common lineage and origin among the several races to which such stock belongs; preference for this or that synonym among the radicals, as well as various degrees and modes in the employment of serviles, whether prefixed, infixed, or postfixed, indicates as unmistakably the several branches from the same family stem with the relative ages and distances of their segregation. By the above comparison of vocabularies I purpose to illustrate the common lineage of tribes now and for ages most widely dispersed, and of which the intimate relationship is ordinarily overlooked; by a subsequent and more detailed examination somewhat differently conducted, I will endeavour to illustrate the true character of the minor distinctions of race, showing that these distinctions are by no means inconsistent with the common lineage and family relationship now exhibited. VOL. IL с |