Thus—­let the original form for breast be tutu.  The first change which takes place is the insertion of the sound of y, making tyu-tyu; upon the same principle which makes certain Englishmen say gyarden, kyind, and skyey, for garden, kind, and sky.  The next change is for ty to become tsh.  This we find also in English, where picture or pictyoor is pronounced pictshur, etc.  This being the change exhibited in the Gudang form tyutyu (pr. choochoo, or nearly so) we have a remarkable phonetic phenomenon, namely the existence of a compound sound (tsh) wherein s is an element, in a language where s, otherwise than as the element of a compound, is wanting.  In other words, we have a sound formed out of s, but not s itself; or (changing the expression still further) we have s in certain combinations, but not uncombined.  Let, however, the change proceed, and the initial sound of t be lost.  In this case tsh becomes sh.  A further change reduces sh to s.

When all this has taken place—­and there are many languages wherein the whole process is exhibited—­the sound of a hitherto unknown articulation becomes evolved or developed by a natural process of growth, and that in a language where it was previously wanting.  The phenomenon, then, of the evolution of new simple sounds should caution us against over-valuing phonetic differences.  So should such facts as that of the closely allied dialects of the Gudang and Kowrarega differing from each other by the absence or presence of so important a sound as that of s.

The comparative absence, however, of the sound of s, in Australian, may be further refined on in another way; and it may be urged that it is absent, not because it has never been developed, or called into existence, but because it has ceased to exist.  In the Latin of the Augustan age as compared with that of the early Republic, we find the s of words like arbos changed into r (arbor).  The old High German, also, and the Icelandic, as compared with the Meso-Gothic, does the same.  Still the change only affects certain inflectional sy1lables, so that the original s being only partially displaced, retains its place in the language, although it occurs in fewer words.  In Australian, where it is wanting at all, it is wanting in toto:  and this is a reason for believing that its absence is referrible to non-development rather than to displacement.  For reasons too lengthy to exhibit, I believe that this latter view is NOT applicable to Australian; the s, when wanting, being undeveloped.  In either case, however, the phonetic differences between particular dialects are the measures of but slight differences.

Now—­with these preliminary cautions against the over-valuation of apparent differences—­we may compare the new data for the structure of the Kowrarega and Limbakarajia with the reccived opinions respecting the Australian grammars in general.

These refer them to the class of agglutinate tongues, i.e. tongues wherein the inflections can be shown to consist of separate words more or legs incorporated or amalgamated with the roots which they modify.  It may be said that this view is confirmed rather than impugned.