334 APPENDIX. 



lect of the River Darling where allewa=we two. Arri= 

 us, is also the first syllable in the Western Australian form 

 ar-lingul=^we ; or^ rather it is ar-limjul in a simpler and 

 less compounded form. In a short specimen of Mr. 

 Eyre's from the head of the Great Australian Biglit_, the 

 form in a appears in the singular number, ciJjo=I and me. 

 The root tana=they, is not illustrated without going as far 

 as the Western Australian of Mr. Eyre. Here, however, 

 we find it in the compound word par-tanna=many . Its 

 original power is probably others; and it is most likely a 

 widely diflPused Australian root. 



The pronouns in question are compound rather than 

 simple ; i. e. instead of nga^^^me, and ngi^^thee, we have 

 nga-tu and ngi-du. What is the import and explanation 

 of this? It may safely be said, that the termination in the 

 Austrahan is not a termination like the Latin met in ego- 

 met, inasmuch as this last is constant throughout the three 

 persons {ego-met, tute-met, se-met), whereas, the former 

 varies with the pronoun to which it is appended {nga-tu, 

 and ngi-du). I hazard the conjecture that the two forms 

 correspond with the adverbs her^ and there; so that nga-tu 

 =1 here, and ngi-du^thou there, and nu-du=h.e there. In 

 respect to the juxta-position of the simple forms {/igai, ngi, 

 and nue) of the Gudang with the compound ones {nga-tu, 

 ngi-du, and nu-du) of the Kowrarega, it can be shewn 

 that the same occurs in the Parnkalla of Port Lincoln ; 

 where Mr. Eyre gives the double form ngai and nga-ppo 

 each =/ or me. 



Now, this analysis of the Kowrarega personals has ex- 

 hibited the evolution of one sort of pronoun out of another, 

 with the addition of certain words expressive of number, 

 the result being no true inflexion but an agglutination or 

 combination of separate words. It has also shewn how 

 the separate elements of such combinations may appear in 



