precisely the
same principles as Mr. Macgillivray's Kowrarega; indeed, some of the
details coincide.

(*Footnote. Given to Mr. Macgillivray by Mr. James Macarthur, and
prefixed to the manuscript Port Essington Vocabulary, alluded to in
Volume 1.)

Thus, the Limbakarajia personal pronouns are:

I = nga-pi.
We = ngari.
Thou = noie.
We two = arguri.
He, she, it = gianat.
Ye = noie.
They = ngalmo.

Here the pi in nga-pi is the po in the Aiawong nga-ppo; the gian in
gian-at being, probably, the in in the Kowrarega ina = that, this.
Ngalmo, also, is expressly stated to mean many as well as they, a fact
which confirms the view taken of tana.

As for the tenses of the verbs, they are evidently no true tenses at all,
but merely combinations of the verbal root, and an adverb of time. In
Limbakarajia, however, the adverbial element precedes the verbal one. In
Kowrarega, however, the equivalent to this adverbial element (probably a
simple adverb modified in form so as to amalgamate with its verb, and
take the appearance of an inflexion) follows it--a difference of order,
sequence, or position, upon which some philologists will, perhaps, lay
considerable stress. On the contrary, however, languages exceedingly
similar in other respects, may differ in the order of the parts of a
term; e.g. the German dialects, throughout, place the article before the
noun, and keep it separate: whereas the Scandinavian tongues not only
make it follow, but incorporate it with the substantive with which it
agrees. Hence, a term which, if modelled on the German fashion, should be
hin sol, becomes, in Scandinavian, solen = the sun. And this is but one
instance out of many. Finally, I may add that the prefix apa, in the
present tense of the verb = cut, is, perhaps, the same affix eipa in the
present tense of the Kowrarega verbs.

Another point connected with the comparative philology of Australia is
the peculiarity of its phonetic system. The sounds of f and s are
frequently wanting. Hence, the presence of either of them in one dialect
has been considered as evidence of a wide ethnological difference. Upon
this point--in the case of s--the remarks on the sound systems of the
Kowrarega and Gudang are important. The statement is, the s of the one
dialect becomes ty or tsh (and ch) in the other. Thus the English word
breast = susu, Kowrarega; tyu-tyu, Gudang, and the English outrigger
float = sarima, Kowrarega; charima, Gudang, which of these two