66o
��AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST
��[n. s., i, 1S99
��uncertainty as to the number of fingers in the human hand (save where the picture is developed from a direct impression). 1
In the dearth of knowledge concerning the original or collat- eral meanings of the Australian number-terms, it is difficult to formulate the concept 01* give it graphic expression ; but a sug- gestion of great inherent interest is found in the Shahaptian numeration, in which, according to Hewitt, the first two integer- terms are denotive or arbitrary merely, while the term for three means Middle or Middle ONE — not middle finger or middle of the hand, but apparently a general (or semi-abstract) Middle like that of the Zufli ritual ; and the suggestion is enforced by correspond- ing expressions in Serian, Iroquoian, and some other Amerindian tongues. In the light of these analogies, the Australian thought- mode, with its numerical and social and fiducial expressions, assumes definite and harmonious shape in a binary-ternary system in which things are arranged in pairs and related subconsciously to the Ego as an interpretative nucleus.
The three number-systems pertaining to prescriptorial culture are essentially distinct from Aryan arithmetic, both in motive
1 Suggestively analogous in form and meaning are certain South American number systems, e. g. , that of the Toba, whose ordinary numeration ends with six (the term meaning also ** many " or " plenty "), though Barcena has traced it to ten. The terms are somewhat variable, and of such form as to imply actual or vestigial connotive char- acter ; as recorded by Quevedo (Arte de la Lengua To6a f por el Padre Alonso Barcena . . . con Vocabularios . . . por Samuel A. Lafone Quevedo, Biblioteca Lin- glifstica del Museo de la Plata, tomo II, 1898, p. 41) they are nathedac, cacayni or nivoca y cacayni lia % nalotapegat ^ nivoca cacainilia (2 + 3), cacayni cacaynMa (2 X 3), natfudac cacayni cacaynilia (1 + 2 X 3), nivoca nalotapegat (2 X 4), nivoca nalotapegat natkedac (2X4 + 1), cacayni nivoca nalotapegat (2X4 + 2). Now, it is noteworthy (1) that none of the terms connotes finger, hand, or man ; (2) that there are alternative terms for two in both simple and composite uses ; (3) that two is the most prominent factor in the composite part of the series ; (4) that one of the terms for two and the term for three are closely similar, and distinguished only by inflection ; (5) that the term for four apparently connotes equality (nalotath = equal) and declaration (na+ptga = they say ; sena-pega = I say, etc.); and (6) that the system is definitively not quinary or decimal. There are suggestions, both in the combinations and connotations of the terms, of two threes of ill-defined numerical character, corresponding respectively to the numerical 2 and 3 ; and that four is an essentially mechanical square. There are also many indications that the 'system is inchoate so far as the strictly numerical aspect is concerned.
�� �� �
