Murray, George W.: An English-Nubian comparative dictionary (London [u.a.]: H. Milford, Oxford University Press, 1923)

xxxvi Nubian Grammar
compared with it. In the existence of the variant el, one is tempted to see a parallel
with Niloto-Hamitic
Mas. el-le fem. en-na this. Nub. el, in this
Ba. Io fem. na
while in Nilotic we have the Shilluk method of suffixing a final -n.1
(c) Interrogative Pronouns.
The interrogative pronoun who ? appears in the following forms :
ni KD; na, nay M.; naa Dai. and ku-r (for hu-r) -Mid.
All these seem referable to an original form commencing with h and cognate with
the interrogative pronouns of the other Nilotic languages. Compare

(i) Bari
ha
who ?
hyo what?
Masai
anae
who ?
Suk
110
who ?
ne what?
Nandi
no
who ?
ne what? ah what sort of?
(ii) Dinka
ha
who ?
hu what?
Shilluk
a-ho
which
? what ?
Barea
na
ivlio ?
Kunama
na
who ?

Reinisch explains the form nay M. as a compound nahi, na-si where the latter
half is an interrogative particle si, which occurs independently as si, isai. This last
form suggests comparison with A. E. ’isy ; Galla isa where? isai whence? Hamitic
parallels to the forms above are :
Bedauye na which? and in Agau the interrogative particle (Bil., Kham., Qu.) -ni, -n.
The interrogative pronoun what? appears as min KDM. Compare :
Semitic, Ar. min, Ge’ez men-t, Amharic men who? what?
Hamitic, Galla man, mal what?
Nilotic, Shilluk a-men who?
III. The Verb.
(a) The Nubian verb, as is the case with the language generally, retains features
characteristic of the various stages through which it has passed; though the earliest
of all these, the pure Nilotic, has left little trace but the prevalence of monosyllabic
roots conforming to the scheme of phonology already outlined.
(&) In the second stage, when a foreign influence not identifiable with any

1 Westermann, Shilluk People, p. 64.