« PreviousContinue »
same as the Circassian one; that is, ú or w; and this pronoun has, in both tongues alike, a separate, full, and a concrete contracted form. Moreover, in the Gyárúng tongue the forms and uses of this demonstrative afford a perfect elucidation both of its strange metamorphosis (w to t) and of its anomalous suffix (i) in Circassian; for “watú" is the complete separate form in Gyárúng; whilst “wa," the contracted form, alone used in composition, constantly takes í, which is really a genitive sign and recognised as such in Tibetan, but is a mere “particule morte” in Gyárúng as in Circassian. Take the following samples from Gyárúng: Watú, he, iste, ille: Wapé, his father : Womo,* his mother: Waimyek, wa-i-myek, his eye (myek, eye) : Shaimek, shai-i-mek, leaf of tree (shi, tree, mek, leaf); and then turn to the Circassian samples in Latham, ú-í, he; t-ab, his father ;t 1-kwisloit, he rides, and you will perceive that (ú being the same with w) the nominal t and the verbal í of Circassian are the secondary or suffix portions of the full Gyárúng pronoun exalted into primaries in order to difference the third person from the second, the second already having the wa or ú (wab, thy father; ú-kwisloit, thou ridest) form. And that such substitution of the secondary for the primary part of a word is no arbitrary assumption of mine, but a regular principle of the Caucasian and of the Mongolian tongues, may be seen by the numerous examples of it occurring in the subjoined list of vocables. The above elucidations of Circassian pronouns for which I am entirely answerable, are so thoroughly in the spirit of Bopp's system that I trust they may find favour
• The change of wa into wo, in wapé and womo, is an instance of that vocalic harmony which these languages so much affoct, and which has been erroneously supposed to be peculiar to Turki. Wo baro abundant allitoration both vocalic and consonantal out of, or boyond the Turki branch of, tbo Mongolian tongues
Slaimek, from shi and mek, has other peculiarities precisely similar to what occur in the Altaic tonguen, testo Romuust.
+ In the supplement to this paper will be found an exact and beautiful pendant for this Circassian sample, derived from the Tamuliaa tongues, the Sontal language having 6 and I for the third personal, and these commutable in com. position into the conjunct form of the precisely us in the Circussian tongue. From the Gondi tonguio is there given another example of the commutation of u to t, so that my exposition from the Gyarung instance is placed beyond doubts whilst some fresh and beautiful links are added to the chain of affinities, u to which soo prior note.
in his eyes, though I have ventured to demur to his Arianising of the Tartars by too strained applications of that system.
I know not if Rosen at all explains the peculiarities of the pronouns in Circassian, but Latham does not; and it will therefore be felt as a truly interesting circumstance that the explanation just given, like that of the Ra suffix, have been fetched from Lhasa and Litháng! The cultivated tongue of Tibet proper continues, it will be seen, to afford the clue to the labyrinth; and that it does so, is surely a strong presumptive proof, as well of its superior antiquity as of its superior completeness. So judging, I cannot moreover doubt that the Circassian preterite sign is the same with the Tibetan preterite sign (chen-tshar), though this be beside the mark of pronominal expositions—and to these I must confine myself, or I shall not know where to stop, so constantly do these Tartarian illustrations of the Caucasian tongue flow in upon
I am unaware whether the Circassian language is distinguished, like the Gyárúng, by a very ample employment of those prefixes which, as more or less employed, characterise so many of the Mongolian tongues, and which are dropped in composition, like the Ra suffix. Thus, tarti, & cap, in Gyárúng, is compounded of ti the root, and tar * the prefix; but if we join a noun or pronoun to this word the prefix disappears, and “his cap,” for example, is wárti, compounded of the wá above mentioned and the radical ti. In like manner taimek, a leaf, when compounded with shí, a tree, drops the tá prefix and becomes shaimek, as tápé, father, becomes ngapé, my father.t Rosen, should this paper fall under his eye, or
• To, the common form, becomes tor, differentially u timi, fire ; tirmi, man, root mi, uod in both sepsea. In tirmi, tarti, warti, we bave the na particle, wbieb remains in its conjunct form us medial, whilst the usual prefix ta disappears. The re, too, would disappear in a compound of roots if not needed to differentials and mark the special sense of such rooto, or one of them, or if the root commenced with other than a labial consonant, its prefis being servilo.
+ It has been queried whether tho polynyathotic words of the American tongue quoad their principle of construction, as to which there is so much doubt, bo pot compiled from radical particles only. Judging by the method of furming ordinary compounds in Gyárúng and its allies, I should say, Yea, certainly tbey are to a great extent, though not exclusively, for the cumulative principle ill brooke control, revelling in reiterations and transpositions of root alike, and of Latham perhaps, whose quick eye will not fail to catch it, will be able to tell whether the same peculiarity distinguishes the Circassian tongue. For myself I doubt not it will so prove, because the rule for nouns is but another phase of the rule for pronouns.
In the meantime, the striking grammatical analogies * I have pointed out stand in no need of further elucidation, and these analogies, together with the explanation from the Tibetan of the widely-used but heretofore unexplained Ra suffix, constitute in themselves, and as sustaining all those numerous identities of the primitive vocables which have been adverted to, something very like a demonstration of the Mongolidan affinities of the Caucasians, though I would be understood to speak with a due sense of the disqualifications inseparable from my secluded position and want of access to books. I subjoin Latham's sample of the construction of the Circassian language, with its equivalent in Gyárúng.
“I give to my father the horse.” Circassian.-Sara s-ab
my father horse Gyárúng.–Ngarét nga-pé boroh I
“In the house are two doors ” is, in like manner, “house two doors" in the Circassian and Gyárúng tongues.
its servilo adjuncts, though clearly, as to simple compounds, constantly observing the rules of contraction and of substitution noted in the text. lo the Gyárúng sentence, Tizócazé papun, he summoned them to feast, the word for to feast shows the root repeated twice, and each time with a separate servile, though we havo bere only ono verb, not two verbo ; and in kalarlar, round, still no com. pound, we have the root repeated, but yet with a servile, though only one, being tho prefix ka. In such cases that servilo is usually omitted, as kaks sky; pyepyo, bird; chacha, bot.
Those analogies might now bo largely extended did health and time permit. Tako the following instances :-Tam-bus, father; imbas, my father, in Urod. Sampa, fatber; ampa, my father, in Kiránti, Ku-kos, child ; ing-kos, my child, U'raon. Tam, eam, ku, orrvileg, replaced by the pronouns ; compare Malayan sain-pigan, un-diri, kan-diri, ke-magus, k'apak, &c.
+ Ra suffis subjoined for illustration though not in uso with this person. See prior Dole.
The plural sign, kwé in Circassian, myé or kamyé * in Gyárúng, is in both languages alike “the beginning and end of declension."
The following list of Circassian and Gyárúng pronouns may facilitate the reader's apprehension.
U-1 Gyárúng pronouns-Nga Nan-ré Wa-tu
The same conjoined with a noun. Circassian.t-S-ab
T-ab Gyaróng.-Nga-pe Na-pé
Wape}My, Thy, His, father.
COMPARISON AND ANALYSIS OF CAUCASIAN AND
Man.-K'mari in Georgian
Maré in Suanic
Múa-máre nomen gentis
Le-og in Burmese
Lok-pe in Tai
K, prefix, servile, as in Indo-Chinese k'lun, a
man, and Malayan k'anak, a child ; a sort
of article and equivalent to tho suffixed k. Mé, with the customary change of vowel (see
on to mo-i and mi), is the root throughout, and it takes the common ra suffis, likewise with the usual vocalic diversity. But observe that in m'ru this servile absorbe the rowel of the root, as in m'ne, Georgian
for mé-se, voce fire. This is the first of numerous samples in wbich
the name of the species is that of a tribe. Means busband. Means male, especially human, lên, the root,
baring the sense of mankind, or both sexen. K suffix, servilo articular like tbe g in lé.8
aud 16-8. Nyu, a synonym. Comparo k'amari and k'anak. Lá root. No
men gentis necnon bominis.
u in man.
• Ks is the prefs, appended uunal. I bave already remarked that the Gydrún tongue to distinguisbed among its allies by its extendre employment of tbla class of particles. The Burmene longue make leu uso of tbem, and in ito mys, much, many, we baro the Gysring plural agu, mye, or ka-mye The Buante mart and Georgian k'mart for man, adoni precios Caucasian equivalent quand the wrollo ko, abowing it to be dropped or retained scoording to drcumstances or to dialects in Caucasus.
t Ab, facher--pt, lutber, low tbo pretz.
Lúk-wan in Tai
Bitshi in Georof either sex
Bi-shi in Lazic
Lú root with articular, k suffixed. Wan,
doubtful. Compare wak, in Armenian, sáo wak, a child ; sa in Burmese having the
root only. Shi, euphonised sha = sa and cha and za, in
the following words ; or it may be bi, bo, bu, junior, and shi, human. Means daughter. Zo = za = sa and cha, the common diminu.
tive, eupbonised to vowel of root. Male and female respectively. The diminutive cha is seen in the conjunct
form in Osetic sa.ch voce earth. Zo servile, as in Lazic bo.zo. Z = S, alike in Caucasian and Mongolian