Moreton BaymurrahKaraulamarraSydneyda-moraMudjemaraWellingtonmurraLiverpoolta-muraCoriofar-onggnetokJhongworongfar-okgnataMurrumbidjemur-ruganMolonglomar-rowlaHead of BightmerrerParnkallamarra
All this differs from the Port Essington terms.Elbow, however, in the dialects there spoken, =waare; andforearm=am-ma-woor;wier, too, =palmin Kowrarega.
To complete the evidence for this latter word being the same as them-rof the other dialects and languages, it would be necessary to shew, by examples, how the sounds ofmandwinterchange; and also to shew (by examples, also) how the ideas ofelbow,forearm, andhanddo so. But as the present remarks are made for the sake of illustrating a method, rather than establishing any particular point, this is not necessary here; a few instances taken from the names of the parts of the human body being sufficient to shew the general distribution of some of the commoner Australian roots,and the more special fact of their existence in the northern dialects:
EnglishhandTerrutongmanawiyePeel RivermaRaffles Baymaneiya
EnglishfootMoreton IslandtenangPeel RivertinaMudjedinaWellingtondinnungLiverpooldanaBathurstdinaBoraipartchin-nang-yLake Hindmarshjin-nerrMurrumbidjetjin-nukMolonglotjin-y-gyPinegorinegenaGnurelleangen-ong-be-gnen-aMoreton BaychidnaKaraulatinnaLake MacquarietinaJhongworonggnen-ong-gnat-aCoriogen-ong-gnet-okColackken-ong-gnet-okBight HeadjinnaParnkallaidnaAiawongdtunK. George's SoundtianGoold Islandpinyunandpinkan
Englishhair, beardMoreton IslandyerrengBijenelumboyirkaRegent's LakeooranLake MacquariewurungGoold IslandkiaramWellingtonuranKaraulayerrySydneyyarenPeel RiverieraiMudgeyarai
EnglisheyeMoreton IslandmelMoreton BaymillGudangemeri=eyebrowBijenelumbomerde=eyelidRegent's LakemilKaraulamilMudjemirCoriomer-gnet-okColackmer-gnen-okDautgartmer-gna-nenJhongworongmer-ing-gna-taPinegorinemaGnurelleanmer-e-gnen-aBoraiparmer-ring-yLake HindmarshmerLake Mundymeer-rangMurrumbidjemitBight HeadmailK. George's Soundmial
EnglishtoothMoreton IslandtiyaMoreton BaydeerLake MacquarietinaSydneyyeraWellingtonirangMurrumbidjeyeeranGoold Islandeera
EnglishtongueMoreton BaydalanRegent's LaketallengKaraulatalleyGoold IslandtalitLake MacquarietalanSydneydalanPeel RivertaleK. George's Soundtalien
EnglishearKowraregakowraSydneykureLiverpoolkureLake MacquariengureongMoreton BaybidnaKaraulabinnaPeel RiverbineBathurstbenang-areiGoold Islandpinna
The Miriam Vocabulary belongs to a different class, viz. the Papuan. It is a dialect of language first made known to us through the Voyage of the Fly, as spoken in the islands Erroob, Maer, and Massied. Admitting this, we collate it with the North Australian tongues, and that, for the sake ofcontrastrather thancomparison. Here, the philologist, from the extent to which the Australian tongues differ from each other, notwithstanding their real affinity, is prepared to find greater differences between anAustralianand aPapuanlanguage than, at the first glance, exists. Let us verify this by reference to some words which relate to the human body, and its parts.
English.Erroob.Massied.Kowrarega.Gudang.Nosepitpichipiti——Lips——anka——angkaCheekbaag——bagabagaChin,jawibaibuibuebuNavelkopor,kuporkuporkuparkopurraEye——danadanadanaSkinegur————equoraVeinkererkirerkerurkerurBonelid——rida——Sorebada——bada——
Few Australian vocabularies are thus similar—a fact which may be said to prove too much; since it may lead to inference that the so-called Papuan tongue of Torres Strait is really Australian. Nevertheless, although I do not absolutely deny that such is the case, the evidence of the whole body of ethnological facts—e. g.those connected with the moral, intellectual, and physical conformation of the two populations—is against it.
And so is the philology itself, if we go further. The Erroob pronouns are,
Me=kayou=mahis=elaMine=ka-rayour=ma ra
all of which are un-Australian.
Are we then to say that all the words of the table just given are borrowed from the Australian by the Papuans, orvice versâ? No. Some belong to the common source of the two tongues,pit=nosebeing, probably, such a word; whilst others are the result of subsequent intercourse.
Still, it cannot absolutely be said that the Erroob or Miriam tongue is not Australian also, orvice versâ. Still less, is it absolutely certain that the former is not transitional between the New Guinea language and the Australian. I believe, however, that it is not so.
The doubts as to the philological position of the Miriam are by no means diminished by reference to the nearest unequivocally Papuan vocabulary, viz. that of Redscar Bay. Here the difference exceeds rather than falls short of our expectations. The most important of the few words which coincide are
English.Redscar Bay.Erroob.HeadquaraheremMouthmaomit=lipsTesticlesabueba=penisShoulderpagapagas=upper arm
On the other hand, the Redscar Bay word forthroat,kato, coincides with the Australiankartaof the Gudang of Cape York. Again, a complication is introduced by the wordbuni-mata=eyebrow. Heremata=eye, and, consequently,buni= brow. This root re-appears in the Erroob; but there it means theeyeball, as shewn by the following words from Jukes' Vocabulary.
EyeirkeepEyebrowirkeep moos=eye-hairEye ballponiEyelidponi-pow=eyeball-hair
Probably the truer meaning of the Redscar Bay word iseyeball.
No inference is safer than that which brings the population of the Louisiade Archipelago, so far, at least, as it is represented by the Vocabularies of Brierly Island and Duchateau Island, from the eastern coast of New Guinea. What points beyond were peopled from Louisiade is another question.
For the islands between New Ireland and New Caledonia ourdataare lamentably scanty; the list consisting of—
The collation of these with the Louisiade has led me to a fact which I little expected. As far as the very scantydatago, they supply the closest resemblance to the Louisiade dialects, from the two New Caledonian vocabularies. Now New Caledonia was noticed in the Appendix to the Voyage of the Fly (vol. ii. p. 318) asapparentlyhaving closer philological affinities withVan Diemen's Land, than that country had with Australia; an apparent fact which induced me to write as follows: "A proposition concerning the Tasmanian language exhibits an impression, rather than a deliberate opinion. Should it, however, be confirmed by future researches, it will at once explain the points of physical contrast between the Tasmanian tribes and those of Australia that have so often been insisted on. It is this—that the affinities of language between the Tasmanian and the New Caledonian are stronger than those between the Australian and Tasmanian. This indicates that the stream of population for Van Diemen's Land ranroundAustralia, rather than across it." Be this as it may, the remark, with our present scanty materials, is, at best, but a suggestion—a suggestion, however, which would account for the physical appearance of the Tasmanian being more New Caledonian than Australian.
The chief point of resemblance between the Louisiade and the New Caledonian is taken from the numerals. In each system there is aprefix, and in each that prefix beginswith a labral letter—indeed thewaof New Caledonia and thepahiof Louisiade seem to be the same roots.
1.2.Brierly Islandpaihe-tiapahi-woCook's New Caledoniawa-geeaingwa-rooLa Billardiere's do.oua-naitoua-dou3.4.Brierly Islandpaihe-tuanpaihe-pakCook's New Caledoniawa-teenwa-mbaeekLa Billardiere's do.oua-tguienoua-tbait5.6.Brierly Islandpaihe-limapaihe-wonCook's New Caledoniawa-nnimwa-nnim-geeekLa Billardiere's do.oua-nnaimou-naim-guik7.8.Brierly Islandpahe-pikpaihe-wanCook's New Caledoniawa-nnim-noowa-nnim-gainLa Billardiere's do.oua-naim-douou-naim-guein9.10.Brierly Islandpaihe-siwopaihe-awataCook's New Caledoniawa-nnim-baeekwa-nnoon-aiukLa Billardiere's do.oua-naim-baitoua-doun-hic
The Redscar Bay numerals are equally instructive. They take two forms: one with, one without, the prefix inow, as recorded by Mr. Macgillivray.
This system of prefix is not peculiar. The Tanna and Mallicollo numerals of Cook are—
English.Tanna.Mallicollo.Oner-eedeetsee-kaeeTwoka-rooe-ryThreeka-hare-reiFourkai-phare-batsFivek-reerume-reeumSixma-r-eedeetsookaeeeSevenma-k-roogooyEightma-ka-harhoo-reyNinema-kai-phargood-batsTenma-k-reerumsenearn
Here, although the formations are not exactly regular, the prefixion of an initial syllable is evident. So is the quinary character of the numeration. The prefix itself, however, in the Tanna and Mallicollo is nolabial, as in the Louisiade and New Caledonian, but eitherkor a vowel.
The next fact connected with the Louisiade vocabularies is one of greater interest. Most of the names of the differentparts of the bodyend inda. In the list in question they were marked in italics; so that the proportion they bear to the words not so ending was easily seen. Now it is only the words belonging to this class that thus terminate. Elsewhere the endingdais no commoner than any other.
What does this mean? If we look to such words asmata-da= eyes,sopa-da= lips,maka-da= teeth, and some other naturallypluralnames, we should infer that it was a sign ofnumber. That this, however, is not the case is shewn by the equivalents totongue,nose, and othersinglemembers where the affix is equally common. What then is its import? TheAmericantongues help us here.
EnglishMbayaAbiponiMokobiHeadna-guilone-maiat——Eyeni-gecogena-toeleni-coteEarna-pagate————Noseni-onige————Tongueno-gueligi————Hairna-modine-etiguicna-ecutaHandni-baagadina-pakenina-poguenaFootno-gonagi————
EnglishMoxa(1)[28]Moxa(2)Moxa(3)Headnu-ciutinu-chutinu-chiutiEyenu-chi——nu-kiEarnu-cioca————Nosenu-sirinu-siri——Tonguenu-nenenu-nenenu-neneHandnu-borenu-boupenu-boreFootni-bope——ni-bope
Now in these, and in numerous other American tongues, the prefix is thepossessive pronoun; in other words, there is a great number of American languages where the capacity for abstracting the thing possessed from the possessor is so slight as to make it almost impossible to disconnect the noun from its pronoun. I believe, then, the affixes in questionhave apossessivepower; and am not aware thatpossessiveadjuncts thus incorporated have been recognised in any of the languages for these parts; indeed, they are generally considered as American characteristics.
How far does their presence extend? In the New Caledonian vocabulary of La Billardiere we find it. The names of the parts of the body all take an affix, which no other class of words does. This isgha,guai, orghai, or other similar combination ofgwith a vowel. In Van Diemen's Land, an important locality, we find the following series of words, which are submitted to the judgment of the reader.
English.Western Tasmanian.FootlulaLegpeea = piya = posteriors, Brumer I.Thightula = turi = knee, Brumer I.Bellycawara-nyNeckdeniaEarslewli-naNoseme-naEyespollatoola = matara-pulupulura = eyelashes, Brierly I.Hairpareata——palani-naFacemanrableMouthca-niaTeethyannalople = yinge-da, Brierly I.Tonguetulla-naArmalreeFistreannema-naHeadpulbea-ny
Here the terminationnaappears elsewhere, as inmemana= fight,nabagee-na= sun; but by no means so frequently; nor yet with such an approach to regularity.
English.Circular Head.HairparbaHandrabal-gaFootrabuc-kaHeadewuc-kaEyemameric-caNoserowari-gaTonguemamana = mimena, Brumer I.TeethcawnaEarcowanrig-ga
Here however, it must not be concealed that the termination ka, or ga, occurs in other words, such as tenal-ga= laugh, tar-ga = cry, teiri-ga = walk, lamunika = see. These, however, are verbs; and it is possible (indeed probable) that thekorgis the same as in the preceding substantives, just as theminsu-mandεἰ-μιis theminmeus,me, andἐμι. Still, this will not apply throughout;e. g.the words like lalli-ga = kangaroo, para-ka = flower, and others.
English.Eastern Tasmanian.Eyelepe-naEarpelverataElbowrowellaFootlanga-naFisttrewHeadpathe-na-naddiHaircetha-naHandanama-na = nema-da, Brumer I.Kneenannabena-naLeglathana-maTeethyan-na = yinge-da, Brierly I.Tongueme-na = mime-na, Brumer I.Chincame-naNeckleperaBreastwagley
Here, the number of other words ending innais very considerable; so considerable that, if it were not for the cumulative evidence derived from other quarters, it would be doubtful whether thenacould legitimately be considered as a possessive affix at all. It may, however, be so even in the present instance.
To these we may add two lists from the Lobo and Utanata dialects of the south-western coast of New Guinea.
EnglishUtanataLoboArmstoonima-ngoBackurimirusuko-ngoBeard——minooroBellyimauwkamboro-ngoBreast-femaleauw}gingo-ngoBreast-malepaietyCheeksawamuwafiwirio-ngoEarsianie——Eyebrows——matata-ngo-waruEyesmamematatoto-ngoFingers——nima-nga-soriFootmouwkai-ngoHandstoe-marenima-ngo-utaHairoeiriemono-ng-furuHeadoepauwmono-ngo or umumKneeiripukai-ngo-wokoMouthirieorie-ngoNosebirimboesikaio-ngoNeckemagara-ngTonguemarekario-ngoThighaiwillanimaTeethtitiriwoto-ngoToes——nisora
Finally, we have the long, and evidently compound forms of the Corio, Colack, and other Australian dialects; long and evidently compound forms which no hypothesis so readily explains as that of the possessive adjunct; a phenomenon which future investigation may shew to be equally Oceanic and American.
The vocabularies of the Rattlesnake are (1) Australian, (2) Papuan.
The former were for the parts about Cape York,i. e.the Northernmost part of Australia, and also the part nearest the Papuan area. The Kowrarega was the form of speech best illustrated.
The Papuan vocabularies were for the Louisiade Archipelago; wholly new asdatafor a very important and interesting area.
The following paper, connected with the remarks on the incorporation of the possessive pronoun with certain substantives, though on an Asiatic language may find place here.
READBEFORE THE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY.
MAY THE 23RD.
The following vocabulary is one taken by Dr. H. Sandwith from a Kurd of the Zaza tribe, one of the rudest of the whole Kurd family, and one for which we have no philological specimens.
English.Zaza.headsèrè-min.eyestchim-emin.eyebrowsburuè-min.nosezinjè-min.moustachesimile-min.beardardishè-min.tonguezoanè-min.teethdildonè-min.earsgushè-min.fingersingishtè-min.armpaziè-min.legshíngè-min.fatherpie-min.mothermai-min.sisterwai-min.brotherbraimin.the backpashtiai-min.hairporè-min.coldserdo.hotauroghermo.sunrojshwesho.moonhashmè.starsterrai.mountainkhoo.seaaho.valleyderèi.eggshoiki.a fowlkerghi.welcometebèxairomè.comebèiri.stayrōshè.breadnoan.waterāwè.childkatchimo.virginkeinima.orphanlajekima.morningshaurow.treedori.ironasin.hareaurish.greyhoundtaji.pigkhooz.earthert.fireadir.stonesee.silversém.strengthkote.swordshimshir.a foxkrèvesh.stagkivè.partridgezaraj.milkshut.horseistor.maremahinè.grapeseshkijshi.a housekè.greenkesk.crimsonsoor.blacksiah.whitesupèo.sleeprausume.goshoori.
The meaning of the termination-minhas been explained by Pott and Rödiger in theirKurdische Studien. It is the possessive pronoun of the first person =my=meus=ἐμὸς, &c.; so that sèrè-min= caput-meum(ormei), and pie-min= pater-meus(ormei).
So little was the Zaza who supplied Dr. Sandwith with the list under notice able to conceive ahandorfather, except so far as they were related to himself, or something else, and so essentially concrete rather than abstract were his notions, that he combined the pronoun with the substantive whenever he had apart of the human bodyor adegree of consanguinityto name. It is difficult to say how far this amalgamation is natural to the uncultivated understanding,i. e.it is difficult to say so onà priorigrounds. That the condition of a person applied to for the purpose of making a glossary out of his communications is different from that under which we maintain our ordinary conversation, is evident. Ordinary conversation gives us a certain number of words, and a context as well. A glossary gives us words only, and disappoints the speaker who is familiar with contexts.
If this be true, imperfect contexts, like the combinationspie-min, &c. should be no uncommon occurrences. Nor are they so. They are pre-eminently common in the American languages. Thus in Mr. Wallace's vocabularies from River Uapes the list run thus:—
English.Uainambeu.Juri.Barrè.head(my)eri-bidatcho-kereuno-dusiamouth(my)eri-numatcho-iano-nunia.&c.&c.&c.&c.
similar illustrations being found in almost every American glossary.
In his Appendix to Macgillivray's Voyage of the Rattlesnake, the present writer has pointed out instances of this amalgamation in the languages of the Louisiade. He nowadds, that he has also found it in some of the samples of the ordinary Gipsy language of England, as he has taken it from the mouth of English Gipsies.
He considers it to be a personal rather than a philological characteristic, certain individuals having aminimumamount of abstracting power, and such individuals being inordinately common amongst the American Indians.
BY THE REVEREND C. ABRAHAM.
COMMUNICATED WITH REMARKSTO THE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETYby Dr. R. G. LATHAM.
April 22. 1853.
Mallicolo.English.Inau,I.khai-im,you.na-ü,he.na-mühl,}we two.{exclus.drivaninclus.kha-mühl,you two.na-taroi,you three.na-tavatz,you four.dra-tin,we three.dra-tovatz.we four.si-kat,one.e-ua,two.e-roi,three.e-vatz,four.e-rima,five.su-kai,six.whi-u,seven.o-roi,eight.whi-vatz,nine.singeap,ten.urare,child.aramomau,father.nebök,a man.bauenunk,a male.rambaiük,a female.marīu,the sun, also their name for God.tepe,worship.nakambu,fire.ewoi,yes.emwe,not.nelumbai,}know.tatanini,dratiban,go.utoi,language.ampreusi,see.tipen agene,shoot arrows.to perito na bara,throw stones.no kani wangas isank,I eat good food.