The wombat. 77 



That bang is rightly present in the compounds seems 

 well assured. F. Tuckfield shows it in the Wod- 



dowro, { ^.peSf.rcT' I = you are a person of letters, 

 and in, j GmrenbopMn Kararanuk bangik j = Kararanuk loves 



' ( Loves ,, me ) 



me. Moreover, by four independent inquirers, Tuckfield, 

 Wedge, Parker, and Lloyd, it has been obtained, seemingly 

 as the principal word, in examples of the pronouns of the first 

 person. 



" Max Muller has in his Lectures (Second Series 1864, 

 p. 32) given an excellent illustration of the way in which the one 

 class of words may be transplanted into the place of the other. 

 ' The pronoun of the first person in Cochin Chinese is not a 

 pronoun, but means ' servant.' I love is expressed in that 

 civil language by servant loves.' If the word servant in this 

 case is not a pronoun, it is at least in a fair way of becoming 

 so. Already ' your humble servant,' when used playfully as 

 a substitute for I, is a pronoun ; as much as your Honour, 

 your Lordship, your Grace, your Highness, your Majesty. 

 That all these have passed or at least are passing, into the 

 region of the symbolic, there can be little doubt." 



Again, in Lenape, an American dialect of the Algonquin 

 group, the sentence, / am a man, is expressed by a man my 

 body. 



Now regarding the compounds in Woddowro as the 

 resultant of a lexical makeshift, the transplanting of words, 

 this dialect if using phrases such as : — 



This it, I, 



This here it, Thou, 



This there it*, He, 



would clearly have the same word appearing in /and thou 

 just as bang does. But let it be said at once that bangik (I) 

 is not to be taken as Woddowro for " this it." The above 

 example is merely by way of illustration. Nor are similar 

 examples lacking in the dialects spoken in the neighbourhood 

 of Woddowro. The Kolijon gives gnud, in gnud-duk, I, and 

 in gnud-dok, thou. The Yarra, murrum or miirrumb, in 

 murrumbeek, I, and in murrumbinner, thou. The Ta- 

 oungurong, murrumb, in murrumbik, I, and in murrumbyen, 

 you. The Pine Plain, Walloon, in walloonoongeek, me, and 

 in walloongin, thee. 



Here we see, though the suffixes, and the materials of the 

 first part of most of these compounds differ, that in the five 

 dialects the principle of construction remains the same. May 

 we infer that this same synthetic method springs from the 

 expedient of taking words of another class and attaching to 

 them suffixes to form pronouns ? 



*Suggested by the French demonstrative pronouns celui, celui-ci, celvi-la. 



