THE WOMBAT. 



Again, etuk, like ik, may perhaps take its place in the 

 pronouns independent of person, case or number ; for, after 

 undergoing a probable phonetic change, it appears to be 

 present, abridged to uk, ok, duk andjok, in bangnuk, bang- 

 bublok, bang-go-de-bu/o£, bang-go-de-duk, bang- wod-j ok and 

 bang-a-wod-jo£. 



We will now consider a few remarks as to the possible 

 change in these six examples. At the outset the question 

 arises, Why do we look for the appearance of etuk as a suffix 

 in these compounds ? It is because ik and etuk most probably 

 perform a similar function in the pronouns, e.g. bang-£&. I ; 

 ba.ng-etuk, we. Granting this, and seeing how frequently ik 

 crops up in the compounds, it is quite reasonable to suppose 

 that etuk may also reappear. 



As to the abridgment. That the suffix may be contracted 

 is shown by the contraction oigorok, in dajorongbu/o&— dajorong, 

 implying priority of birth ; bidlaid, two ; gorok, female = the 

 eldest of two sisters. 



That uk may be written ok is shown by Francis Tuckfield's 

 marked vowels, which give lok with the vowel having the 

 sound of in ' move.' In fact the Woddowro suffix is written 

 etok ; mor-rok gnet-ok,* head. It is to be remembered also 

 that in Woddowro t and d are interchangeable ; and an 

 example analogous with the further change of the mutes t d g 

 and 7 is found in the aboriginal for foot : tinnan, dinan,genong, 

 jeenong. The first, second, and third, given respectively by 

 E. Stone Parker, F. Tuckfield, and J. H. Wedge, are 

 Woddowro. The forms of the pronoun me, dik, gik, as given 

 by Tuckfield, also afford a limited illustration. Two forms 

 of the Woddowro word ' tongue ' may also be cited : tellany, 

 jellang. So, admitting these changes, the primal vowel oietuk 

 being lopped off, just as by apherisis the component but or 

 bull of the dual pronouns becomes ul or ull (bang-ul, we; 

 bang-ullen, us, also bang bullen), the terminations duk and 

 jok in the pronouns bang-go-de-duk, bang-wod-jok and bang- 

 a-wod-jok may perhaps be variants of tuk. 



But if in bangrcuk (the first of the six examples) the suffix 

 etuk is contracted to uk may it be possible that some other 

 element has been worn away, and is now represented only 

 by the intercalated letter n ? Or observing the law of least 

 effort, does etuk appear in this particular compound as nuk ? 

 Some evidence that might help to incline one to favour the 

 supposition that nuk may be but a variant of etuk is found by 

 comparing Mossman's and Tuckfield's f forms of this suffix, 



* Eyre's " Journals of Discovery " Vol. ii. p. 400. 

 f Tuckfield gives both forms in the word Spirit, Movowetuh, Mnromwufc. 



