The languages of all the clans dealt with in this monograph, except the Lakher, are very similar, and also bear a strong resemblance to those of their neighbours.

Dr. Grierson, in the “Linguistic Survey of India,” uses the term “Kuki-Chin” to describe all the languages spoken by the clans I have dealt with and their cognates, but he adds:—“Meithei-Chin would be a better appellation, as the whole group can be sub-divided into two sub-groups, the Meitheis (Manipuris) and the various tribes which are known to us under the names of Kuki and Chin.” Dr. Grierson considers that all the Kuki-Chin languages belong to the Burmese branch of the Tibeto-Burman family, and he subdivides them as follows:—

I. Meithei,*1 or Manipuri.

II. Chin languages—

• 1. Northern group: Thado, Sokte,* Siyin,* Ralte, and Paite or Vuite.
• 2. Central group: Tashon,* Lai,* Lakher, Lushai, Banjogi,* and Pankhu.*
• 3. Old Kuki group: Rhangkhol, Bete (Biate), Hallam, Langrong, Aimol, Anal, Chiru, Lamgang, Kolren (Kolhen), Kom, Purum, Mhar (Hmar or Khawtlang), and Cha.*
• 4. Southern group: Chinme,* Welaung,* Chinbok,* Yindu,* Chinbon,* Khyang or Sho,* Khami.*

With reference to the connection between the different clans, Dr. Grierson writes:—“The terms Old Kuki and New Kuki are apt to convey the idea that the tribes so denoted are closely related to each other. But that is not the case. Not only do their customs and institutions differ considerably, but their languages are separated by a large group of dialects in the Lushai and Chin Hills, and the so-called New Kukis (Thados) are, so far as we can see, a Chin tribe, most closely connected to the inhabitants of the northern Chin Hills, while the Old Kukis are related to tribes more to the south.”

The account of the causes of the Old and New Kuki incursions into Cachar, given in Part I, Chap. I, Section 3, which was written before I had read Dr. Grierson’s book, agrees entirely with his conclusions.

A detailed account has been given in Part I of the Lushai language, and, considering the full manner in which the dialects of all these tribes have been dealt with by Dr. Grierson in the “Linguistic Survey of India,” it seems superfluous to attempt to give outlines of them, and therefore I propose only to draw attention to the many points of similarity between them. The works I have consulted are:—“The Linguistic Survey of India,” Vol. II, Part III, Lorrain and Savidge’s “Grammar and Dictionary of the Lushai Language,” Mr. T. C. Hodson’s “Grammar and Small Vocabulary of Thado,” and the appendix to Lieutenant Stewart’s “Notes on Northern Cachar,” 1855.

In going through Mr. Hodson’s vocabulary of the Thado language, the first thing that struck me was the absence of the letter R. Further examination showed that where R is used in Lushai and certain other languages G or Gh is substituted in Thado. Many instances of this will be found in the following comparative vocabulary.

In many cases F in Lushai, Rhangkhol, and Langrong is replaced by Ch, sometimes softened into S in Thado, Manipuri, and some Old Kuki dialects. I have so far only found the following examples, but the material at my disposal is very insufficient, and I have no doubt that, given complete vocabularies, many more would be found:—

“Fa” in Lushai, “cha” in Manipuri and Thado, meaning “child.”

“Far-nu” in Lushai and Langrong, “char-nu” in Aimol, Kolhen and Lamgang, “sar-nu” in Chiru, Kom, and Hallam, meaning “sister.”

“Fak” in Langrong, “chak” in Manipuri, “cha” in Aimol, Anal, Kolhen, Lamgang, “shak” in Chiru, meaning “to eat.” In Lushai we have “chaw-fak-hun,” “rice-eat-time.” Until I found that “fak” meant “to eat” in Langrong, the Lushai equivalent for dinner-time had always puzzled me, as the Lushai word for “to eat” is “ei.”

“Fawp” in Lushai, “chop” in Thado, “chup” in Purum, meaning “to kiss.”

“Fang” in Bete, “chang” in Thado, meaning “paddy,” while “fang” in Lushai means “a grain.”

“Fep” in Lushai, “chep” in Thado, meaning “to suck,” as sugar-cane.

“Feh” in Lushai, “to go to the jhums,” “feh” in Rhangkhol, “to go”; “che” in Thado, Aimol, and Anal, and “chatpa” in Manipuri have the same meaning.

“Fing” in Lushai, “ching” in Thado, “singba” in Manipuri, mean “wise.”

“Fu” in Lushai, “chu” in Thado mean “sugar-cane.”

“Fang-hma” in Lushai, “fung-mat” in Bete, “chung-mai” in Thado, mean “a pumpkin.”

N in Lushai sometimes becomes “shi” in Lai or Haka dialect, as “ni” in Lushai and “shi” in Lai, meaning both “to be” and “aunt.”

G and K are often interchanged and also R, L, and N.

In Lushai we have “lung” meaning both “stone” and “heart,” while in Manipuri we have “nung” meaning “stone,” and though “heart” is translated by “puk,” we have “nung-siba” “to be sad,” evidently composed of “nung” and “siba,” “to die,” and also “nung-ngaiba,” meaning “happy,” showing that “nung” once meant heart.

In many of these languages, similar words are used but have slightly different meanings. For instance, “shang” in Lushai means “tall,” while in Thado and Manipuri we have “sang” meaning “long.”

“Leng” in Lushai means “to stroll,” and “lengba” in Manipuri means “to walk,” but is only used of important personages who would be likely to move slowly and in a dignified manner.

In Lushai “shat” means “to cut,” but as a Lushai’s house consists of timber and bamboos, he always uses “shat” when he speaks of building a house, and we find “sha” in Thado and “saba” in Manipuri mean “to make,” “to build.”

In Lushai the verb “ni,” “to be,” is conjugated completely, but in Manipuri “ni” means “is” and has no other tenses.

The following comparative vocabulary gives in the first two columns the Thado and English words as given by Mr. Hodson. The first word in the column of remarks is always Lushai, and where it has not exactly the same meaning as the Thado word the correct meaning is given; then follow, where necessary, the equivalents in other dialects.

About one word in every three given in Mr. Hodson’s vocabulary has been found to resemble closely the Lushai word having the same or a similar meaning. Mr. Hodson’s vocabulary has no pretensions to be a complete dictionary of the Thado language. Were such available I believe the number of similar words in the two dialects would be found to be even greater. As regards the Old Kuki dialects the information available is not sufficient to make a thorough comparison. It is clear that they are very closely allied to Lushai and Thado and to each other. The connection between Manipuri and what Dr. Grierson calls the Chin languages will, I believe, be found on further enquiry to be closer than at first appears.