OF THE UUMAN FAMILY. 403 



a different form — to descriptive phrases in the phice of original terms — whicli 

 recognize a difference in relationship, but without expressing it in the concrete. In 

 the Hindi an elder brother is described as hara bJuii, greater brother, and younger 

 brother as cJiota bhai, lesser brother ; and elder and younger sister by the feminine 

 form of these terms. An explanation of this form appears to be foiuid in the Ben- 

 gali, in which a younger brother calls his oldest brother burro dada, the next to 

 the oldest ntajo dada, third sliejo dada, and the fourth mo7io dada, wliilst the oldest 

 brother calls the youngest by his personal name. Sisters arc distinguished from 

 each other in the same manner. Whether the youngest brother and sister are dis- 

 tinguished by descriptive phrases to be used at the option of the speaker does not 

 appear. As a method of discriminating these relationships, it is radically different 

 from the Tamilian. In the Marathi, however, the regular form is found, namely, 

 agmz, elder brother ; agraza, elder sister ; amiz, younger brother ; and aicarza, 

 younger sister. But we have words from the same root in the Sanskrit system of 

 relationship previously given, namely, agrajar, elder brother ; agrajri, elder sister ; 

 amvjar, younger brother ; and amnjri, younger sister. Whether these terms were 

 indigenous in the Marathi dialect, and were borrowed thence into the Sanskrit, or 

 were derived from pure Sanskrit roots, I am unable to state. From the absence of 

 this method of discriminating the fraternal and sororal relationships in the Aryan 

 family, and its general prevalence among the non-Aryan Asiatic nations, the pre- 

 sumption would be strongly in favor of their origin in the aboriginal language. 



Another peculiarity in the Gaura system is the absence of any difference in the 

 relationships of the same persons with a change of the sex of Ego. This striking 

 feature of the Turanian system, and which produces its principal diversities, has 

 been entirely eradicated from the Gaura form, if it ever formed a part of its 

 structure. The terms used, however, are sometimes different. 



In the first collateral line male, in the Hindi system, my brother's son and 

 daughter are my nephew and niece, Bhaiija and Bhavji, and their children are my 

 grandchildren, Pota and Poti. 



In the female branch my sister's son and daughter are my nephew and niece, 

 but different terms are used. Bhauja and Bhavji with Ego a male, and Bahinauta 

 and Bahinauti, with Ego a female. The children of each are my grandchildren. 



The wives of these several nephews are my daughters-in-law, and the husbands 

 of these several nieces are my sons-in-law ; but these relationships are qualified by 

 prefixing the terms for nephew and niece, to indicate the precise manner of the 

 connection, e. g., Batij Damad, nephew-son-in-law. The recognized relationship is 

 seen to be Turanian, but the qualification, as well as the terms, are Sanskritic. 



In the second collateral line my father's brother is my uncle, Chachd. This is 

 one of the few terms in the nomenclature which is not Sanskritic but aboriginal. 

 The Vaisyas often use Tdu, and the Kshatriyas Dad in its place. If the Sudras 

 also used the latter term, it would at least suggest the probability that it was the 

 aboriginal term for father, which was retained as an appellative for father's brother 

 after the Sanskrit pita had become substituted to distinguish an own father. In 

 addition to the term Chachd, which expresses the recognized relationship, he is 

 also called, by courtesy, " great" or " little" father, as he is older or younger than 



