tie 



KTUKOLOffT 01 TUB INDO-PACITIC ISlANDS. 



Sec. 7, 



ThB FOUiri AND BlBTRlDTJTIOJf OF TftE Ch1XO-HiMATJ.I0 KuMBAlrf 



IF CaisA, Tibet, t»D|A asd ULTiLiiyDiA, co5»i»BaH0 as illiistba- 



IITE OF THE ASCIE.TT JlBLATtOSS AS D MOVEMBXTB OF THE TRUlJ* Of 

 TBlIt PaOYi:)iC£} A5D Of ;CU£ g]£CUI<AB CMA.^OXB I£t THBIU 6M>b6AHl£8. 



Any further remarks on tH© distribution of the numem^s must be chief- 

 ly ftuj>|)lernei»ttiry tu thut>e which huve nhwidy ht>et\ offered. But tforae 

 g:eneraJ lit iiit*ije-*t lire hrou^lit out by n uiiMer eotapurifoii ofthai 



southern ibnm with eadi other uuil with the Til>erttn and tAmw^R, 



It is dear t)int eiich of tli*- (muuiry iminerai elenieitt.-*— ilt-Lliiitiveft— Iiftrf 

 asisumed a grml dim-sity ol' i'orin* ijj ditfcrent era**, or in different diiiIeota» 

 The most jireTOhfut Chinese und Tibetnii torrna are not thow which ufH 

 pSttr to have bo(3n so at tbi; ^HTtchi* of the lirst diffusion the ChineiW 

 Auraemls ill Tibm iifid of thti Tibetiui in llUmindin, But as the vowel 

 proffcihly varied ti'oiu fl vfxy remote period, the subject does not Jtdintt of 

 our ottjiiniutf |iositive I'esultij Ijeyond u fertjui exfeeiit- 



U|!tiii the wiioit; nvidtm-Qj dii'yct aud coilatend, it may be concluded 

 that biHJiui tbrnia of Urn ^uttunil or deiitid definiti^'e were uj^ed tis th« 

 eorlient unit, aiid in higher numbers foiined from the unit j and that tiu 

 Chine*M3 serier* wai> — 



(^) - 1* 



(II) ^ 2. 



<in.) 2 + 1, . contractiug to 1, 



(IV.) 2 + 2, „ „ 2. 



(V.) 3 + 2, i.e. 2 + lauds „ „ 2. 



{\L) 5 + 1, „ „ 1. 



( VIU) 8 + I », 1. 



( VllL) 10-2 (10 being I) . . „ „ 1 or 2, or 2, 1» 



(iX.) 10-1 ............... „ „ 1. 



(X.) 



Ill SLT. 4, 1 wmsidei-eil it pobahip, trom ynalosy, that G wflft 1^ 

 thoufjb ditfi'riiijr in form from all the dt-liiJitivei* vu^d inth*'- hwt-r !iu.j*i.»e,rsj 

 eiuv*^ one of thi* varieties of 2. Thm it h tvuHy 2 will upji^-ur oii it wm* 

 puiiduu of fiiS the tormH, The root tor (j uinitMired exwjttuni«l, audit wai 

 coui»ideretl us In inj; nn an?hiiic N. E. Aftinn temnry t^?nu, -If tor Ti, Ai 

 3 in 1, the root, whcTher cini^idered as 5 + 1 or o + 3, would \m- ihtf sara« 

 . iu tm-in, no ]ang m i ho two detiuuiveft Wi^ed m 1 niui 2 torni»'d higher 

 numbt-ra bv ^iiiif>ie vp]U'tiiion ivithoiit ogglutijiatioii or fontnirnou. I 

 BOW think 't)iiit Juk titan he explained a* r» nonnal Ciiitn»-Tibeuiti form 

 of 1. The Chinese 7 w iis shown tn be 1 (tor ti + I)j hut rbu 'I'ilietan, 

 with the excejiliiin of Tliocbu nnd Maovnk, to he quEnrtry. The Chkn-de 

 g was Hhuivn to lio 10 (for i^, 10 J; btit the TilH-tuti B wa.s i:on*iiderfd to he 

 4, 2, for 4 tho '2dr liT aeveml of the Southern dialeeta tJie name ior 

 © j- r ot for 10, f J'HE for 2 heiriflr ^ost- Sinfrpho ma-t^mt, Bodojat, 

 Arm^ (i-eat, :>aiai*uig t-flat, Tabloog tliatb, Myeug sat, Xoimg-thu 



