SJTITNOLOGY OF THE IVDO-PACtrTC fSLANDtf* 



25 



H niu,Ko8ahne,Secli. t-m^Nyambftna /^i-mw-ne, Zulu f-nc,»w!-ne,Bengnela 

 kfva'nUy An^la wa-na, KoiijSfo Aw^-u^ iyrt-pn^nr?~na,tioialio. Jfvf-ija, Embo- 

 na itt-nu, Mjjonpve nui. Compare wim the Soutliern Makua [Tiikwani] 

 aad Mpongwe rorra the Gnbtm terms, — Batanj^i k -nwig Biiiigv* 6a-nai. Pan- 

 we he-ne, Akuong^ mi-nu, Caraancuna wit -h^y, Kerapay <'-nay, Karaba 

 i-na, f-nangr, ftuns;o, Calbm ni, Moko r-nan, Kti.ylee Ji-iian; the Binin 

 nin, Ibo ano, Papah ene, Akripon ne, \V"hidnh 1% Etik inan, "Voriiba jwme, 

 Fantij Akira «nan, Araina //nani, Avekwon rtna, Grcbo liivuh, Kru nie. 

 BiUloin nen-ol, paii-H {pan, ^vr &c. i^* a prt?f, ), Ivisai iul, Woloff 



m-an-ti*, Mandingo iiani, na, Fulah m, nai. Th^ Darfur on^-al, (hi 40 oa- 

 g«-val ) is probably connected with fhi;* Zi in bo- Nigerian form. 



The Yan}>a«i nan of nuu-giri 8 appi-ard to the »nme term. , 

 la the Zimbian 4 the most raclical and p^rdisteut element in the Secai- 

 to^Afritam 2 appears a.-? the orin;'inal term. In 2 it ha^ the fomia in, na, 

 na, Toh, nra Semitic, il, h, le, ri, re., ne, nu, ni, di &e. African. Some or 

 the amphiied tbnns, na-i, najii, nan, i-nan kc, involve the Semitic postfir 

 OS well a^^the radieal eleuient ( ith-ua-wi Arubie), or, as i* more probabkj they 

 are the original dual fonn in tiiU, 2, 'i. . Tbes-e double Ibraw are not found 

 in the E. Jind S. VV', Zimbian diidecf.-*. TUey occur in N. W. Ziiiibiati— 

 fe-ni-n Melon, -?-ui-n Nfroten, Ar-ne-ii I trnwu ; in tbe adjacent Chaddo- 



frov. na-n Ham^ jiv-nyi-n, n\T.-ii Tusi, a-na-r Koro, fi-nye-iu, HYe-ra- 

 Muku^andin the N. 'W. Nigerian ua-ra-^o Gadsag^ jwi-ne-re fiaga, 

 ^a-n-Ie Timani, na^tUj ua-n Mauduigian fri', 



jThe tenn \a jirobtibly s-fjaully ajieient vnih 3 a«d '2, and referable to an 

 era of the Semitic sysf^m when the liquid wa* the proper root of 2, and 

 had not been concreted with the labial mojic. or sibilant fern, definitive, 

 used as a prefix or initial. To tliir* pl-ritMl its atxjuiditiou of a dual and 

 tjience of a plural power ia probnbly to 1m" referred. 



F(>mt)n j{fftiti£ks 



If the African terms for 4 iLre all Semitic of dilFertint periods, and based 

 on Seutitic terind for 2, their forei«j;-n utKnitiei cjin only ha consiideren:! 

 liLtoufi^h Semitic, and as illustratinir its airhaii: condition. ' The only term 

 of intjire^t in tliid respect is tlie Zimbian. i ii ?;everftl N, and E, A&mi 

 ayatauiA the pure hquid detliiitive ir* fuand as 2 and 4, Aino i-ni, Korean 

 ijai, Ugrian ni-bij tii-l &e.,4, ( Stte Beinitie 2). Theae fornifl^ with thojie in 

 which it ottcurs as 2, render it probable that it waa used a numeml 

 element, in Semitic |}rior to the concretiouiirj' era,= — a coneluiiioii that 

 anpported l>y the hintfjry of the laii^ua;:^ generally, wluch carrieg back tha 

 numerabi to the period when thedefijiitives were tree, and capable of btnufj 

 used m \miU. The Zimbinn 4 ap]»eurdto balonff Ut that era of the Semitic 

 system when the liquid root had not become agglutinated with the initial 

 definilives. At the same time it mitst be recoilected that a contracted term 

 existius^ ill one dialect may obtain a wide currency throu[^h the spnnid of 

 au influential race. Tlje labtory of tlie Zimbian I mu^t be conaidtrred in 

 cotiuection with that of the othf;r nnmer.ilrt, which certjnnly favours an 

 an;haicj, and not a recent, derivation from the Semitie system. 



Ohs. on the Dutribntim of tke tenn^. 



1. The contracted hiatorical Semitic forma, including the Himyaridc, 

 iftve made little progreiw. 



a. The Eyypto-Malujffasy terms appear to preserve the full form of 

 the Seaaitic, aiid are praba"biy pre-Uiiajaiitic or archaic Himyaritic, aad o£ 



