If 



ET/IKOLOGT OF THE IXDO PACIfie I8I.ANM. 



tSve jiordei and by (he inflat;ni:?e of the anrroundUi^ BitoMana, Tarfari and 

 Chinese. For the pri^t^ent we must be u<-aii!>fi*f(i with the conclufiion liial 

 the Si fa r» and the OltrBimfn-GarJgeiic H'ulHrN .ire all snb-varietieti of on» 

 E^st Tibetan dialt'el', but that innny of the UUrairxfu-Ciiin^etii'! hAve; bfea 

 iTto^or les^ modified by (lie inftupofe of Bhutiuti ftinre (bey fir«»( (*pread 

 Into the bariin^ of thi" Irawudi, iIir HrjihmupiKjra, ibe Gang^ea ami the up< 

 per Satlfj, Sotne li*h( wilt betiirowrt nn the srK.*ce!<jiive pbusea and im'- 

 grationfi of the POiithern dialects by our glofflarial coinparitioni. 



The Utile (hdt U known uf the slructurii of ibu Sifon dialecU 

 ha4 heen fs'uven in the firerinling Sei-'lionft All th^ Irsiiifl diat 



d)4lin^u!i^h (hem frdtit Bbiiiinp are found in tJit> Ujlraindn^Gdn* 

 jjeiiii la OS nasef Tbe principal in the /arge u>e of yoralifje'd pre- 

 ijxe*. Thij identily in these prefixes, in the nan-Bbolian pronnwnt 

 mnd In the partitderf g^fnerally, bHon^a to the plosoarial eoHipari. 

 -»oa. Tb^ floiuewhdt iitortf St-yilnc character of (be plmnolopy alfo Ptin. 

 nectfl the Sffan, vr at least the {jj'arun^. with \he luore bannonic of the 

 aouthern l.'i«'guaoe«, as (he Bodo and DhifiiaL Tbe posiJixual a^gluti- 

 Dftllon of tilt! pronouns is a i^cylhU* trait, whii h niuat now hp considered 

 ai orSilan, atsd not of DrEU'iridn, origin, in (he Dliiiiial and N»pB dialert* 

 in wbicb it ha» been founfl. The existence of a dual or incls pive plural 

 of (be l^t pron. 5q Manjalc nod Thorliu connects the fiifan idiom witfe 

 the xSovtbio oa (be one <*(de and tbii DrHviru-AustraHan on theoiher. 

 iAr. Hndgson has found it in the Himalayan dblectA of Kuijwar, Hayu 

 and Kiranti (Joum, Aa. Soc. Ueng. 1863 p. (52), no that it may prove to 

 have been carried by the Sifan tribes (o the southward. The Ha, San. 

 thai and Urtion forms to whhib Mr, Hodgson also refers, are Dravirian, 

 not Munyak, Tbocbn or 8<*y*bic. 



In referring to chap, IV. it wilt be born in mind that the Sifan voeabu- 

 lariea have now preatly increaued the aricertained Tibetan element in 

 Gansefn-Ultcaindtan, and, a* a conaetjuence, diinioished what T had 

 ieon«idered the Dpavirian. The phono Inpy and pronouns may now bo 

 held an taainly Si/an, although some Dravirian ipgredieiita are alill re- 

 cogni/dble C*eB chap. V. sec. 11). 



The general ethnological inferencea may bB briefly adTerted to im 

 tb IB place, 



Tha first eoncJuiiioiJ to he drtwn htm the a«eerlaio#d fscti is thai 

 during an fra iobspqui'ni to thai in which ihe Mon-An^ii] forniatioii 

 beeame prpdnfftinant in Uliraindia, Tibetaita er* net'd the Himalsysi io 

 )ar(f« nnroherH ard Hrquired an eiiinic pr.«iijon and if fluence in Ni ribfra 

 Ultraindia and the tian(?euc basiR. The Tihelsn Jap^tiinfre in iin rnleitiiy 

 Wfla tran*poitfd to ihi« aide tif ibf BunwF, and, thn viph ihf diFiper«iotl 

 of the Tihplan tribe** f ava rltsr m r^ew diajfctP, and deeply ard varifitjily 

 iflefttfd the prior Cianuetf-UltTaindii>n Ifitpuapfs. In ii?anv of tbj 

 txittinj? cii.-Hiaialayati dialee(8 we find Tibpfnn pivtir<m.», paniclfH and 

 ideologie osaeeB, while (he roTScellanef^na trrahlen ferric an ia* 



Uradieat. ffpoemlly vety cnnsiderahle, in ihe eloFEBrtee of al! ihe Ulirain* 

 do Gangetic tODjjOpa. Althoofih so eiugle mixed Tocabulary appeari to 

 be more thao one heU TiheiBii, it is ptohahle thai ihe ^rtater part 

 of ibe Tibetan elnsaary waa at eoe lime currepi in (he footheTn dialeeta 

 or w%% interfonFd amoDK«t the digVrent native tanfiuasea mhkh caiae 

 pDder their indaenre. ^ 



M ioflueaee lo ^rett, and embrtciDg^io mifiy JiDgsagce htm thi 



