APPENDIX. 339 



the gian in gian-at being, probably, the in in the Kowra- 

 rega ina = that, this. Ngalmo, also, is expressly stated to 

 mean many as well as they, a fact which confirms the view 

 taken of tana. 



As for the tenses of the verbs, they are evidently no 

 true tenses at all, but merely combinations of the verbal 

 root, and an adverb of time. In Limbakarajia, however, the 

 adverbial element precedes the verbal one. In Kowrarega, 

 however, the equivalent to this adverbial element (proba- 

 bly a simple adverb modified in form so as to amalgamate 

 with its verb, and take the appearance of an inflexion) 

 follows it — a difference of order, sequence, or position^ 

 upon which some philologists will, perhaps, lay considerable 

 stress. On the contrary, however, languages exceedingly 

 similar in other respects, may differ in the order of the 

 parts of a term ; e. g. the German dialects, throughout, 

 place the article before the noun, and keep it separate : 

 whereas the Soandinavian tongues not only make it follow, 

 but incorporate it with the substantive with which it 

 agrees. Hence, a term which, if modelled on the German 

 fashion, should be hin sol, becomes, in Scandinavian, solen 

 = the sun. And this is but one instance out of many. 

 Finally, I may add that the prefix apa, in the present 

 tense of the verb = cut, is, perhaps, the same affix eipa in 

 the present tense of the Kowrarega verbs. 



Another point connected with the comparative philology 

 of Australia is the pecuUarity of its phonetic system. The 

 sounds of/ and s are frequently wanting. Hence, the 

 presence of either of them in one dialect has been cor^i- 

 dered as evidence of a wide ethnological difference. Upon 

 this point — in the case of s — the remarks on the soimd 

 systems of the Kowrarega and Gudang are important. 

 The statement is, the s of the one dialect becomes ty or 



z 2 



