BEEZ SISSANO. 
Here we have a case which seems unmistakable. A stem au repro- 
duces as well as may be in human speech the voice of the barking 
dog, and because the dog’s bark is insistent, repetitive, we shall designate 
this familiar domestic tone by duplication as au-au. Now, those of 
us who do not take Mrs. General’s pains to prune and prism our enun- 
ciation—certainly those who employ the primitive speech of the child- 
hood of advanced culture, and equally those who as primitives in cul- 
ture employ a speech altogether under the childish rule—find that the 
enunciation of au-au by reason of the vowel strength becomes auwau 
This is clearly the form which we have listed as 28 auwou. 
In our own speech the name of the voice of the dog is bowwow. 
We are well instructed that no animal short of human elevation is 
able to employ consonants; even among men we see in these studies 
that not all of them have attained to facility in the use of the lips in 
speech. We can certify ourselves that no dog can frame the labial b, 
yet in reproducing the character of his voice we employ the labial to 
represent something which our ear mistakes for consonant, an appulse. 
Elsewhere I have been sedulous (Subanu, 68) in dealing with this 
principle; I have defined it as the initial of all sound, the beginning 
of the characteristic vibration from a state of rest. Loosely we 
employ bowwow; any person curious in such matters who will practise 
the phonation of au-au with a strong initial movement of the dia- 
phragm will see for himself that it is possible to reproduce the appulse 
without any suggestion of the labial; but as we lack any alphabetic 
or diacritical character which shall give the direction to make a strong 
movement of the diaphragm, it has been found convenient to approxi- 
mate this result by employing the labial initial. In our present 
material we find this labial in 29 bwauwa. 
As between dog and dog we have not taken general pains to dif- 
ferentiate the voice in any marked degree, although we do preserve a 
distinction between the bay of the mastiff and other bass dogs and the 
yap of the tenor terriers. In bowwow the b and the w interpret an 
appulse which may best be rendered by labial expression. In yap 
we find a semivocalic interpretation of a less-prolonged appulse which 
may best be interpreted by palatal expression. ‘That this appulse 
attains the k value is indicated by two words, kiyi (kaiyai) which has 
been allowed to occupy a grudging position in the dictionaries, and 
kiyoodle (kaiyudl), which exists in speech below the dictionary plane. 
It is not in the least improbable that the same palatal type of appulse 
exists in coyote (kaiyote) from the Mexican coyotl. From material 
familiar to our own speech system we have established the k value of 
the appulse; therefore we need have no hesitation in the appulse in- 
terpretation of the assumed initial in the kau series. 
Adriani and Friederici affirm with positiveness that kau and asu can 
by no means be associated. I am not prepared to contravene their 
