BTHNOtOOT OF THE imQ-TAemc I9LAI»«K 



the aamtf <*rii as fclie siniilar and most prevalent Micftii terma for 8, wwr 



lost in JSfiHitiL*. 



;i. Tlip ZiiiiUkm term (ri>]ieai*s to e<|iiany' andent> Although th* 

 broad sir (fVoni war, hnr &.<■.) is tlie pi-evalent Sermtic form in ij it is pr<H 

 biiiWc tlmf slfiidcr fonn? witi^iiIsq oacepr«iVtdeTit in 4 as !» * 



The broad Zinibinn terms M'ith the labial prefix wbirh prevail in thui 

 Western jTrtaip, watja, wan, A"e-wana, ftj^-wflni), hum, with tbe Felup 

 J^t-imrf-'fjai, have thp f^iuf form an the Malft^nwy f^-far &c. 



4. Th<' othtr n^nm, \sith Hif ex<-eiidi)ii af ('.(«), whiirb is frobably of 

 equal aiitiqujtv witb the Zimbiuii, a]tj)fnirtb beloiif^ t« that era of ^I'lnitic 

 when fern, fiiirnifi bud l.Hig'un to rcjdmje hkwc. Frorn the distribution of 

 tlwfff wnw th*'y a]i|H'nir to be of later iutroduetiun into Africa than the 

 E^y[<tijm, Lialla aud ^falajrasy form. The grfvalpnt Semitic; 4 muy bfi 

 COn^!(lerednftexee[itiiaijil,li«niiis«;it prf'rfprvwth+'RartiP archfiii; nia.H(\ iurni. f 

 The double silalant of Sbanmilla, Afnm ivan prtttwdily that of * 

 Semitic dialect wltii-U had rejilaiutd it by the fera. form, althou^-h all th§ 

 Spmiti<' langriuit;-*^ uftei wardf* lijisiniilati'd in their iiHe itf the nirtsc. form, 

 under the iiiHociice, if may Iw; tsvinni^'ed, of that i'hiL:k* dominant lanfjuag* 

 wliich had prudiicecl m iar^-e jinrl n^markHljle ii niiibirmitv in the Heimda 

 numerals and pronouns, and in much of the ^nml g-lossary also. 



Five. 



The terms for 5 are similar to forms* of the unit 2 found in lower num- 

 ben*, 1, 2, y, and the most eoumiwn, well aa the doiie!*t, uffimties are 

 with formB thui are iij^ed for 3, — as has olrejidy bt^en noticed with i*tereiice 

 to the Eiryptian S and Semitic i^. In the prevalent African ^yntej as 5 

 IB tile hi|rbe::it imnjljcr in the tiriit senes, tiix beiii«f 1, w^ven 5j *2, &c. Ili 

 mifrht therefore be fl fdl ex[irei5sed by one of the names for the unit, 1 hand, 

 or 1 tale, ami the tenn would naninillj have a plural or collectire fomi aa 

 in 2; :Jt, 4. Four haviiij,^bepn exprss^^ed by 2/2, the ctiUeetivi' miitfor woidd 

 probtJbly bit tjikeiilhai* formn used as iJ. But from pomeof the tenuM itmav ra- 

 ther Iw interred that o was oriirinally Ii, 2 or 3, as in some other fnrmaliuns. 

 The t^emitic kha-m-ya, khH-me-nfi* JJerlier su-mo-s &c. is the fom of S 

 ( 1, 2 ) preMervcd in K«yptKUi,riho-n!, sha-inc &c.,fnllitwed by the princijml 

 or fiibilaut numi-ral rout, which may have repre;^ented % or b^*en a remnant 

 of L', she-ne, afh-in &e. Tlie (.litllo-Zijidjian fonu— which only diftet^ 

 from the f^emitic in haviufr the'litjiiid in ]jlace td"the labial seeonrj efeTnent— 

 clw'Hly re.seiidtle?! Semitic and iiimbian forms cjf ;3. Comp. aha-n, sa-nu, 

 ta-nuj ta-iii, ta-ru, m-ln, !a-n, lt>4ti, kv. r>, with she-nej nth-in, sa-ui, 

 8u-nu, zo-le, la-Uj ta-la, pa-la^ taa-la, t*^-ra, sa-ni, ka-nij ka-ru, ku-na 

 ta-njj Ja-lo, Ji*-ro, hi-l, la-n h '■^)- I 



* Koelle ^ves wer-be a* the Aiiihic i:»f Beran. Po^'*ib]y the w is archjiic 



t From f!»>me of the fomiB in hi^'^her numbers friven by Koelie, it 

 appearf! prijtwibli* tliat the sectuid labial w radical alsoj, and that the original 

 SemiHc term wa^ bar-bar or war-biir, i, e. 2, '2. 



t The. Maniljiig-ian gT*«iip prts^ewes stn^end of the Tariatioiii?,— so-lu, 

 eo-li, m-Vi, lo-hi, uu-lu^ ndo-lu, tlu-lu in 5; su-ii, se-ni, su-ra in 6 ; m-m 

 en -In, ntnln, siv-ra hi 7 ; m-n, so-lo &e. m H ikc. in 'A it hm dij^tinot Semitic 

 mui Nubian fWrn*!, sa-ni, isa-rsi-n, wi-a-wa, sa-wa,~5a-g*?iYi Winn^ Hiraya* 

 ritic thrnii;rh A^tui . Tbn o, u uf the liiM-her numbers is the iiri(;httit: t>eimtic 

 form foiuidiu Eg-ypliaii, Berber, Bisharij Ualla&c, 



