1856.] Aborigines of the Nilgiris. 507 



least in the separate pronouns and in the personal endings of the 

 verb. Irula has not even the latter. In the Himalayan tongues it 

 is often difficult to make out distinct dual and plural forms of the 

 substantive, even when the distinct and conjunct pronouns exhibit 

 an exclusive and inclusive form both of the dual and of the plural 

 of the first person, with correspondent verb forms as is the case in 

 the Kiranti language. The source of the defective plural sign of 

 nouns is to be sought in the fact that Turanian vocables generally 

 in their crude state bear the largest and specific or generic meaning 

 — a peculiarity well exemplified by the English word, sheep. In 

 the Nilgiri tongues neuter nouns always lack, says Mr. Metz, a 

 plural form. Masculine nouns form it occasionally by changing 

 final n into r in Toda (Kullan, a thief; kullar, thieves) or by adding 

 the plural sign kal vel gal in Badaga and Irula. 



Pronouns. 



Pronouns and pronominal forms are greatly developed in the Nil- 

 girian languages, as in all the Turanian tongues, reminding us, when 

 viewed in connexion with the paucity of true conjugational forms, 

 of the fine remark that " rude people think much more of the actors 

 than of the action." We have in the Nilgiris, 1st, personal and 

 possessive forms ; 2nd, among the former, forms excluding and 

 including the person addressed (we — not you ; and we — including 

 you) ; 3rd, among the latter or possessives, two complete series 

 according as the pronouns are used conjunctively or disjunctively. 

 I have given all these ; and their forms, changes of form and uses, 

 would alone suffice to prove the perfect identity of the Nilgirian 

 tongues with those of the cultivated Dravirian class. The conjunct 

 pronouns are prefixed to nouns, suffixed to verbs. But those which 

 denote genders (proper to the 3rd person only) are used suffixually 

 with all qualitive nouns, which thus pass from the adjectival to the 

 substantival category. This latter peculiarity is common to the 

 Himalaya and Tibet, and is found even among the nonpronome- 

 nalized tongues, such as written Tibetan and Newari, aud likewise 

 among the Indo-Chinese tongues, whose wong, pong is clearly the 

 Dravirian van. The former also is found in the Himalaya, but of course 

 among the pronoinenalized languages only. But among them we 

 have samples of the conjunct prououn being used prefixually with 



3 u 2 



