Ohs, OH the Distribfition of the term. 



The Semitic 6 is exceptional in its formation as 3, 3. It is Iwjio-Sey- 

 thic and not African. 



Oi' the tbreft Stimi to-Libyan term^ for 3, — s-m ; s-l ; and s-o, 8*t, t-t ice; 

 the first is ol)rfolete in Uie Sernitie 3, but i^ preserved ia the Egyptian 3, the 

 fieiflitic 5, and the Semitic tinci E;^_vptijui The E^yptiAn'6 may be a 

 remnmit of it, and from the do^e r^^scrabligice of the Kong-o-Angola forms 

 for 0 to the 8enii to-Nilotic for 8, it uppears certain that the former ia tli« 

 archaic Semito-Libyan s-m furui of 3. The<Jadsagft tumu appears to l» 

 a distinct remuant. From the position of thi* dialect on the benegal| its 

 proximity to th-i North- At riuiin rminiii^tic pi-ovinw, the North-Atncaa 

 affinitiea'of its other mimeraldj and the 8eiu)to-BerUer form of tumu, it 

 U evidendy of tlie smnB era as the Egyptiaa 3, sht>~m, and lJerber~Tim- 

 maiii 5 su-mu, tu-m. 



The second form s-1, s-r &c. is the carrent Semitic 5, and one of thi 

 2imbian formf. As 3 it k foimd in tionga and a fe^ of the Chadda- 

 Kitjierian Tof*abulai-ies. 



Ilie tliird form h the Himyaro-Nilolie 3, eomnjon abo in Zimbian. 

 It Is the current Semitic 6. In Africa it is not coiumoB. Some of th« 

 Korthera forms are Arabic and evidently modern. But the Ivalahi, 

 Shillah and Bode mark the ancient pre.^ence of the Babylono-IIimyaritac 

 form of Sumitie in K.Africa, Some of the E. Zimbiaa terms are also 

 formed in the Semitic mode, 



IVith hardly any other exceptions the African t«rma are quinary, 

 <§BinaiT terms are found in most of the proper Nilotic langTiag-es, and 

 Bjmilar forms are, as uaual, traceable in tbe Wtst Nilotic or Nubian voca- 

 bulariea. The 2v'igerian 1 in most of the prroupa is the Nilotic Hqnid j and 

 the 6 of the Grebo as of Dalla had the Dalla-Niguriau form of 1 j 

 Bomm has the Agnu form in 6 in I4 and the Bullum gr. haa th« 

 Kubiiui. The Fnlah guttural 1 of 1 and 6 — prcber\'ed in 11 of the Akn- 

 IgnU j^Toup mo~kOf wy-ko, mo-ka (lciie*ii has it in 1 also a-kn), 1 of 

 Ashanti tr-ko, and in some of the Calabar— t J aboon dialects pii-k&f /uo-kOf 

 ^ff-ko &c. — is the Ic^emitic fl-kha "[^jrw-kha] in one of its archaic African 

 lorms. The E. Zimbian quinary terras are ibrmed tiom the current 5 

 and If and do not appear to have ^^pread. The W. ^mbiau 5f 1, and 3 

 dtialj are also eonJdned Co that g'raup, 



^ Seven, 



The terms ar© quinary (5, S, oraimply 5 or 2). 



The Semito-Egyptiim 7 k the unit in tlie 3 and 6 form with the labial 

 poattix, and at pr?. I conisidered it to be tt ford, I, — them being" no traces 

 of the Zimbiau sjubtmctive uamiiiir iu Semitic to admit of itd bein^ ex- 

 |>laiiied us 3 (irora 10). Mr. ICodJe'd Zimbian vocabularies, and the iden- 

 tificatiun the}* have enabled me to make of the names for 5 and 3, show 

 that the Semitic 7 is not an exceptional tiinal terra, hut quinary like the 

 African ones. It is a contraction of 2; and as 3 was itatdf 3, 2, 

 and is represented in 7 by its tir.st element, 3, the term ia identical with 

 fonus of 5. Further, 3 wan radically 1 , -J, so that in the fall ori^ial form 

 the root for 2 mast have occurred thric^a [(1 X 2) + 2] X 2. The tiret element 

 representiug- G ia tlie ordinary 1 iu itg Eiibiknt form ^a, the m-coud elifment, 

 the kbial bti representing 2,, ia iiom tiie kbio-jj^isal 2 cuuuyioa. ia MoGk 

 tad pieaer?€d iu the H&m\k 4. 



