m 



ETHKOr.OOY OF THE iNDo-PArrrrc i»i,\sm. 

 11. NuMfKALS, 



As nuTnGrflJ«i arc ba^^wl on cK^fiiiitivpfl, tha [wmdiphl trsi aftlunr 

 antiquity in a particuliir iaiiguage is their niuHiul (irpendfliico, ami 

 timr relation to the tk-fiuitives jjreserveil in pronoima, suhstsuUival 

 pretixes or postfixes, di recti v<fs &c. If tlieir clenienta am l\m 

 same llmt ocDur in tUasQ parti (;los, and if iUq terms for Urn higher 

 iiuiubers are coniiected by coinpoHiiion or flexfon with ihoae for 

 tlie Jowor, it may be conclnded thai th<i numerals are native, tfiat 

 iHf hdonff to thfi earliest era of tlte languugpf?, or of ilie fonnariofi 

 of which it h a memljifr or dorivaflvf*. If the differgnt terms Ijitve 

 no connection with tSm other particles of the language, it irtav bo 

 inferred that they arc extrancoiH or of forettrn origin j and this 

 inference will he greatly strengthened if there ia also an absence 

 of contieclion timongst the immerats themsidvea. But, in the 

 latter case, the heterogencons character may he either that which 

 tficy had in the siuglo foreign laii^iage of their iin mediate ori- 

 gin, or it. may be a consequence of successive dispkcemetit^ 

 of old terms by new one« derived from several influential foreign 

 langnages. Tried by this test the DravirtJin numerals must be 

 considered as very archaic, and as natire in the linguistic formation to 

 which the ancient Indian languages belong. It may be remarked 

 amongst their archaic characters that they are not only qnalitive 

 as in other systems, but the roots nre always do tlied wiih a posses- 

 fsive or qualitive postfix, so that the series is literally " oiie-of," 

 *Hwo-cf", " three-of" fiec* 



• Appendix A. Cotnparnlivft VoratmlijTy ofMiP KiiinmliV oflli* Dravirkn 

 F(»r»jati<>a, TliB lotlDwiiig suv i:x:ii:iijj|e? ol'iln" k'rfti!*. 



