ETHNOLOGY OP TtTB INDO-FACITIC fSLANDS. 



3, Fronoum. 



The Bhotian pronoun of the Ist person, nga^ na, preraila in moat of 

 the Himiiiaynn iHri^uagea rikJ iu Ultrauulta, but as it ia not comuion in 

 the N*iga 'iialett!*, it is iiuprolipble tliat the Uitriiilffian nga is ot iin- 

 meiliatu Bhotian origin. I shouk) rather have su|i[ioseLl iliut in aonieof 

 the eftstern HimaJayftn dialecta it waa of Ultraindimn and not oi' Bho* 

 tifin (ierivatioN. The influence of the Qangetio Hhotran of the Pal *ra 

 on the Burni^ii fattiily was far too slis:ht to Lave extirpated the ancient 

 Burinnn pronoun of tlie lat person tirrnughout all the Burmun diaJectSi 

 Thf Barman pronoun agrees with tha Bliotiwn and Chinese (nffo) he- 

 cause all ImvB ultimately deiiveJ it from the same motlier Ibrtnutiun. 



The origin ot the Uitraiiido-Gaugetic nga, aa &c. hv^i now been Bet at 

 rest hy the !?ilan vocabularies, 



Th« Hhotifin pronoun, khyody khifo, AA#, has been carried by 

 the Bhoiians into most of the HimaJtiyan Janguflges, but not beyond 

 them, 'fins pronoun ia of itself almost decisive aa to the relation of the 

 UJtrainihim tu the Bhotian, and of each .0 tho Uangetic languagea. 

 The tiurinrm ;m?i^, na is found in isevcral of the Naga Jaitguagps, in 

 Garo, Bodo, Dliimal, Abor, Miri {nOf mn), Daphla (no), and even ia 

 MKgMr(»ami). one of many proofs of the connection between the pre- 

 Bhotian llJnuilayuna and the Bnrman family. The Mon and Kambo- 

 jan pronouns, the tbrnaer of which hare apread into the MaJay penin- 

 sula, are distinct. 



The 0 hot inn 3rd pronoun, hhOf khUj is (bund in fieveral of tha Hinaa- 

 layan vocabularies, but not in Dhimal, Bodo, Garo, Naga or Burnian, 

 the prevalent forma being Sifim and Draviroid. The Sing|dm hhi ia 

 TtRrhnps Hliotian, but as a similar partiele h a common delinitive (*. g. 

 Kasia ka singular, hi plural ) thi.<i is uncertain. 



The Bhotian plural particle* uam, chag^ dag do not appear to have 

 made much j)rogresa in India, unleas the Bengali dig is a derivHtive 

 from the last. * The postfixed dehnitivcs^, mo Ate, are lound iu several 

 of tho lli tnalftyan and Gangetic languHges but not in the Ultraindian, 

 Mo5t of the Himalayan possessivea are ajtparently modifications of the 

 Bliotian, but some may be Dravirian, the latter having a wide range 

 of possessive fmrticles. The extent to which Bhotian Ibrma and parti* 

 cles hftvf Imi'ii engrafted on the Gangetic languagea appears sufficiently 

 from chap, IV,, so that it is needless to puraue tlie subject here. 



From the evidence of the pronouns it may be inferred that the Bho- 

 tian dialect intruded on achuin of Gatigeto-Ultraindian .dinlecta which 

 pnssesaed the t^ifan forms of the Cliincae. Save in tho vicinity of the 

 souUiern Bhotian dialects, the Bhotian pronouns have niaiie little pro- 

 greas. Even the Ifighly lihotian Takpa retains the bitan-Ultraindian 

 2nd pronoun and has not borrowed the Bhotian one fronj Lhopa. 

 Chan""lo, like Bodo, Dhimal, Abnr and all the proper Uitrnindiaii dia- 

 lects, has ike Sifan pronoun, and in the .sub-Ilinmlnyiin bajitl (be Bho- 

 tian appears not to be found to tho eastward of Ni|>al, '1 hat the tJitan 

 braofdi prGc«''Jed the Bhotian even there and further to the westward, 

 appears from Tibarkliaft preserving the Sifan pronoan. 



A lull comparative list of the Sifan and of ihe allied Ultraindo-Gan- 

 getic pronouns has already been given in chap, V. sec. 11. Among 



• Magar ku-rik, (Seecbap.V, aec, 1J)» 



