5Q Gr. E. Fryer — On the Khyeng people of Sandoway, Aralcan. [Xo. 1, 



The construction of the language is simple and inartificial. In a sen- 

 tence the nominative usually comes first, the object next, the verb last. 

 The language is remarkable for its three numbers and its system of prefixed 

 pronouns. It is probable that both these peculiarities exist in the Khumi and 

 Kyo, and possibly may be discovered in the other hill tongues of Northern 

 Arakan. In his sketch of the Khumis and Kyos,* Capt. Latter speaks of 

 the exponent particles (termed by him numeral generic affixes) as being 

 entirely wanting, though he suspected a better acquaintance with those 

 dialects would reveal them. Colloquially a Khyeng rarely uses them, and 

 as he possesses a dual number, one is at first led to imagine that his lan- 

 guage does not possess them ; possibly a latent dual together with a like 

 infrequent use of those particles by the Khumis- and Kyos may have led 

 Capt. Latter to imagine they were wanting in those languages. Again, he 

 says the Khumis form their future by " the addition of the affix ' nak', which, 

 when the roots end with a mute consonant often has the euphonic vocal ' ga' 

 intervening : ' Kai tchek ga nak' I go or toill go." As regards the Kyos, he 

 says, — " Ka is the nominative affix, chiefly used with the noun in construction 

 with a verb in the present tense. In which case the verb dispenses with its 

 own affix of time." The vocal ' ga' in the one case and the nominative affix 

 ' ka' in the other, seem to indicate the existence of a similar system of pre- 

 fixed contracted pronouns in those tongues. 



A fable well known to Burmese scholars rendered into Khyeng and a 

 series of short sentences are appended in the hope that they will afford an 

 insight into the grammatical structure of the language. 



Fable of the two wild dogs and the tiger. 

 In the olden time, two wild dogs lived in a forest, and after a while had 

 three young ones, a male and two females. Subsequently they quarrelled, and 

 on dividing (their property) each took one of the females. The male which 

 remained, the mother claimed saying, " He is my share, I have borne him 

 about with me, with great suffering, therefore I ought to have him." The 

 father said, " I being the husband and lord over my wife, ought to have 

 him." Thus disputing they went to the abode of a tiger (to have their 

 case decided). On arriving there, the tiger said, " So you are come to me, are 

 you !" and having given one of the young ones to the father, and one to 

 the mother, he cut the remaining male down the middle, and gave half to 

 each of them. The parents looking on the dead body of their young one, 

 lamented bitterly and said, " My lord tiger, you have indeed made a divi- 

 sion, but not thus cruelly, alas, ought you to have done it!" Then they 

 threw down the dead body of their young one before the tiger, and went 

 their way. 



* Joum., As. Soc. Beng-., 1846. 



