90 Notes 071 the Hill Inhahilants of the Goomsoor Mountains. [Jan. 



**The Ooriali language has closer affinitj^ to the Khond perhaps than 

 any other, and all the Deegalloo (Khond village accountants) speak 

 and write Ooriah, as do many others among the Khonds. 



" The Khond is not a written language but they readily understand 

 Khond written in the Ooriah characters, a method frequently adopted 

 during the late operations. 



" I may also remark that I have learnt from both the Collector of 

 Pooree and the Commissioners in Cuttack that/>Mrc Ooriah is spoken 

 in only a very small tract of country — being generally mixed with 

 Hindostanee on the Bengal side, and with Telinga in the Madras pro- 

 vinces. 



" With a common acquaintance with Hindostanee, one can under- 

 stand many common-place sentences of Ooriah, as spoken in the Pooree 

 Collectorate. 



" The above is exemplified in Dr. Maxwell's list — as, for " man," the 

 Wodiah is put as manusha, evidently the Telinga manchee. The 

 Ooriah for man is " wondera." The Ooriah for " o?ie" is " gotteeP 

 " Ekke^' is evidently the Hindostanee word — these are in common use 

 in Ganjam^ but are not Ooriah. 



" The word for milk is an adopted Telinga word ; but Doodh, with a 

 strong aspirate, is more common — from the Hindostanee. 



" There is a strong resemblance, in sound at all events, between the 

 Ooriah mal and maliah, signifying a hill, and a hill district, to the Mal- 

 ly of the south. 



" I am no linguist, but get my information from a Brahmin who 

 speaks and writes all the languages spoken here." 



' The contents of this paper may be briefly adverted to. The mere 

 difference of the vowel sounds in short o, and u, when the ear only is 

 in question, is insignificant. Even an ear somewhat disciplined to dis- 

 tinguish between articulate sounds, will fail in this particular discri- 

 mination, if attempting to write down a proper name as enunciated by 

 a native of India, when those vowels occur, and a reference to the 

 written letter, when available, is always requisite for precision. For 

 example, a person v^riting by ear, would be as likely to write B^huiijo, 

 as Blionju, though the latter is correct according to the orthography 

 of the name. The mere difference in pronunciation between Khonds^ 

 and Khunds, on different sides of a frontier seems unimportant. As to 

 the singular and plural in Telugu, u and lu, the remark must be fami- 

 liar to the merest tyro in that language. In the paper in question, 



