Tlie distinctive vowel u is found in ttie Tamil singular also («.n), • 

 Dravti-i^u pronouns and pronominal trails are atso found in tka 

 Gangetic and North Ultraindian languagea But as tjie Tibetor 

 Ultra! ndian pt'onoiina are tlieraselves radicafly the same the 

 Draviro-Australian, and as tliii radical agreement belongs to ilm 

 most archaic jliSSfidian affinities of Dravtrian, it will be noticed 

 in connection with these. For Tariouij example!? of Dravirian 

 traits in the Gangctico-Ultraindia^ systems I may refer tochap. IV • 

 Here I shall only uientiou one, as it is illustrative of the archaiq 

 use of m as a plural definitive. 



The Na^a pronominal system— which is a Tibetn-Burnaan super-* 

 structure on a Dravirian basis — preserves the Dravirian plural 

 postfix in Namsangya ni-ma "we," ne -ma "you." The possess! vq 

 of the lal pron. ging. and pi. is i (from ni "I/' orlginaUy posses- 

 si vij now replaced by the Tibeto-Burman nga aa a separate agen- 

 live terra) but ihat of the 2nd pron. sing, as well as pL is ma 

 (from ne-ma). In Tengsa Naga me occurs as the 2nd pronoun itj 

 the posst'sstve mechif — the separate form being the common Eaat 

 Tibetan nang. In Joboka Naga m i;^ retained as the plumi postfix 

 althou^jh the roots are changed, 1st ku Sing, ketn Pl.j 2nd nang 

 Sing, h&nzain PI, j 3rd chua Sing. ho?7i PL It will be remarked 

 that while Namsangya like the Dravirian languages in general 

 restricts m to the proper pronouns, Joboka like Toda extends it to 

 the 3rd also. The only other Gangetico-Ultraindian language 

 in which this particle appears to be found is the Gurung which 

 has it in all the three pronouns under the form -mo! The Newar 

 -ping is probably another variety of it. The Mozome Angami 

 Naga -we of the 1st pronoun resembles Kol forms. In Angami 

 ma appears to be combined with the liquif^lural particle of Dra- 

 virian in all the pronouns -ra -ma. In Gai'o mong (comp. Gurung 

 mo) and ma occur as plural elements, and the Burman labial 

 plural may be the same pa;rticle. 



• [Prof. Max Muller'rt ttiblc of prononns supplirst two aiJiJitiuntil example* of 

 tfaa use of thU form. In tJie Malabar dialect uf Mulayalnm, tlu- oblique fornmt' 

 the singular is urti-^wJtli prvattlxes), while tl*n plunil litis both un mid uni. In, 

 Brahii! the mminntwe pJiiml iu num ((>Wii|ue nuiua). It Ij ubun.ia'itly evjdont 

 that boih ni and nu must have been currwit tu> fnnm of tha seennJ fimnoun from a 

 very remott; em of the Dnivirian form at ion, an-l that the Kol forms and ihtit 

 Ultrflindian I'erivativea, so far frotn bidnu nmliy exceptional, ure more di^tincrively 

 aniJ unUoubteiily Dravirian than they might have been considered hitd tbey 

 Adhered to the common agetttiva forms of tho South, and thus rorembled the 

 Tilwto-Uitrainfiian forms wiiii which ihej are intcruiixed in wvtxdl Gangfltic aAd 

 Uh riitndian ianjju^:;<» . ] 



0 



