No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
page 145 note 1 JRAS. 1929, pp. 851–3, 869–70.
page 145 note 2 Linguistic Survey of India, vol. iii, pt. ii, p. 1.
page 145 note 3 Op. cit., p. 36.
page 145 note 4 Hodgson, , Miscellaneous Essays relating to Indian Subjects, vol. i, p. 72Google Scholar, note, writes “Mécch”, i.e. Mêch, with long vowel quantity.
page 145 note 5 For ma here as representing an original mi, compare Rûngchhênbûng ma-nâ “man” for a probable original mâ(-nâ) in agreement with Rai mîn (< mî-n), Thâmi mî, Tibetan mî, etc. See JRAS. 1933, p. 850, n. 1.
page 145 note 6 Hodgson, , op. cit., vol. i, p. 181Google Scholar. The writer also has been given this form as against Khambu (= Kūlung) mîs-sî of the Linguistic Survey (vol. iii, pt. i, p. 411), in which the first s is doubtless due merely to the use of a conjunct consonant in the Nepâli spelling (
for 
).