ETTTXOT.onT or TIJ-E TTTDO-PACTFIC TaLANDa. 



201 



The habit of troaliiisr word? as crmkfl, of placing^ a series of cnnlcs 

 tog^eilwr and iridlcaiing^ tlin common relailon by n single pofitposed 

 partiole is CJunesc a** well as Scvtbic. Even 1 be compounding 

 of pai'ticles is but a remnant of (lie crude CliinrBC stage wbrn the. 

 iormativos and fleJEions did not exht, and wlieti cornplex iclii lions 

 were indicated by several nneonneotetl crudes or particles. Some 

 of the ordinary Chinese dcsfiailivcB and prepositions are double^ and 

 re petit ion and cumulation are much used in tbe general structure 

 of the language, Ttie Tibetan languages generally may be des- 

 cribed as sister dialects of the Chinese, iti some traits stand ing" 

 between Chino^e and the Mon-Anam family, but in their general 

 structure Scythico-Cbiaese, the distinctive Scytbic traits beii>j^ 

 probably secondary or acquircii. If the pronouns and pai'iiclea 

 had been Scythic more than Chinese we might have recogniBcd in 

 Tibetan the genealogical link between the former and the latter. 

 But as the J*e verse is the case, the glossarial basis Of Scytbic must 

 be cont»i(lered as representing that archaic <iialect — allied to the 

 Chino-Tihetan but distinct from it — iu wliich the inveraive structure 

 was developed, and from which it was transmitted to the western 

 or outlying branch of the Chi no-Tibetan family. 



Sec* 3. PRONouNi!. 

 1 Wtotian. 



The 1st . pronoun of Bholian, uga, na is Chinese, ngo, ngai &c, 

 and although not now a prevalent Turanian form its wide difFusion 

 in archaic eras is proved by our fiudiug it in the Draviro-Austra- 

 lian, Caucasian and Semitico- Libyan formations, and in N. E. 

 Asian, and American formations. Other formations are also used. 

 Tlie honorific nger/, is distinguished by the slender vowel and the 

 dental postfix found also in the 2d pron. Tiie form nge occurs in 

 the Lbopa oblique forms nge-^/, in the aJjsicent Tukpa as the 

 regular form nge, ako softened to nye, atul in the oblique form of 

 Sing^pho, nge-«a. It is not probable ihiit in the Tiholo-Ultrain- 

 dian province the e form originated in Bhotian and in Tibet was 

 confined to that dialect. It appeara to have been an archaic 

 Tibetan form current with nga and no;o. Ngo itself, the current 

 Chinese form, is no longer found in Tibet, but its former existence 

 ibera and its antiquity arc attested by the Abor-Miri ufjo, Lepcha 



