bly others; and it is most likely a widely
diffused Australian root.

The pronouns in question are compound rather than simple; i.e. instead of
nga = me, and ngi = thee, we have nga-tu and ngi-du. What is the import
and explanation of this? It may safely be said, that the termination in
the Australian is NOT a termination like the Latin met in ego- met,
inasmuch as this last is constant throughout the three persons (ego-met,
tute-met, se-met), whereas, the former varies with the pronoun to which
it is appended (nga-tu, and ngi-du). I hazard the conjecture that the two
forms correspond with the adverbs here and there; so that nga-tu = I
here, and ngi-du = thou there, and nu-du = he there. In respect to the
juxtaposition of the simple forms (ngai, ngi, and nue) of the Gudang with
the compound ones (nga-tu, ngi-du, and nu-du) of the Kowrarega, it can be
shown that the same occurs in the Parnkalla of Port Lincoln; where Mr.
Eyre gives the double form ngai and nga-ppo each = I or me.

Now, this analysis of the Kowrarega personals has exhibited the evolution
of one sort of pronoun out of another, with the addition of certain words
expressive of number, the result being no true inflexion but an
agglutination or combination of separate words. It has also shown how the
separate elements of such combinations may appear in different forms and
with different powers in different dialects of the same language, and
different languages of the same class, even where, in the primary and
normal signification, they may be wanting in others. The first of these
facts is a contribution to the laws of language in general; the second
shows that a great amount of apparent difference may be exhibited on the
surface of a language which disappears as the analysis proceeds.

In rude languages the Numerals vary with the dialect more than most other
words. We can understand this by imagining what the case would be in
English if one of our dialects counted things by the brace, another by
the pair, and a third by the couple. Nevertheless, if we bear in mind the
Greek forms Thalassa and Thalatta, we may fairly suppose that the
Kowrarega word for two, or quassur, is the same word with the Head of
Australian Bight kootera, the Parnkalla kuttara, and the Western
Australian kardura, having the same meaning.

The difference, then, between the numerals of the Australian
languages--and it is undoubtedly great--is no proof of any fundamental
difference of str