KTIINOLOOY OF THE IMBO-PACIKIR TSL4KDf. 



"cat" Gafaf, (the same form with the Seraitico-Libyan fem. postf.) 

 Bil, bi-r, bi-a (bi-t) and hl-k appear to be the mme root with the 

 ordinary Scythic range ofcommutabb ifinals. 



5. The Karp riari, Malay akm niri "tiger," Bur man nira, is 

 Korean^ nal-^t (Amharia nabar). 



DOO. 



1, In the most common Dravsrian term thf* root appears to b© 

 t]B| la, ra, (nay?, ua^tr, nat, not, slay, /fla, era). It is related to 

 the Gangetic nangi, nagi, nagyu, ncko, anfi to the Savo ngaka 

 and Australian nagi, nago, these Asonesian terrna being evidently 

 of Gangetic derivation. In the vocabulary I have considered it 

 doubtful whether na be a rout or a prefix in these terms, and leant 

 to the opinion that nagi &c. was a softening or con true J ion ofnangi, 

 jiagi. From the analogy of other Dravirian t»^rrtis T now consider 

 ft clear that pi, ^o; is merely a definitive postfix, and na^ la, ra, 

 the root. It is Australian aW\t (allay Male), alii. [The Poly- 

 neaian uti is a contraction of Ictilt, similar elisions of the como- 

 nantal initial of * syllable biding commoir in that bnguagf*]. The 

 DravirO'Asonestan root is Ctrcasian lah, Georgian laki [=na«gL 

 Gangetico- Austral.] and N. S. Asian /nu/Aino, Japanese, The 

 Bisayan {ru is probable of modern Japanese, and not of archaio 

 Draviro- Australian origin The Tung nsian nyin, nenaki, nenakin, 

 Mongol nokoi, nogai [Samoiede weneku, bu-nike, knnak] appear 

 to be related both to tlie Aino, Japanese and Dravirian, and to the 

 Caucasian and Gangotico- Australian varieLies. The term is not a 

 common one, and it appears hi the Dravirian-Australian family to 

 be older than the Scythico-Iranian era of its glossology, when 

 other vocables for " dog " were widely spread over middle and 

 western Asia. It may either belong to the primary glositariJil 

 basis, of a N.E. Asian character, or to the allied Semitico-African 

 for it is found in both. Hrtttentot ariefe masc. arie« fem., Serakoli 

 uley, Gal la lurn-tai, lurul-tai. The close resemblance between the 

 archaic African ari orarie and nley and the Male-Anstralian alay, 

 alai, ali, renders it probable that the latter is of the Semitico-Afri- 

 c&n .era of Scythic or proto-Scytbic like so many other archaic 

 Asonesian vocables. 



2. The Telugn kukka is exceptional in the South and probably 



