HANDBOUND AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS MELANESIAN LANGUAGES CODRINOTON HENRY FROWDE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE AMEN CORNER, E.G. 70 1 30 LLL I? o IE- 9 o KLKG-SMI^L I? ID- V* ' \ ' 10 JP' ^^ . D . ' 0. I FIJI ELIDES , ^C^ I S . '':'<'. I J no, ' ''--. 20 (j J70 J 80 Ciarendffn, Press, OaforcL. THE MELANESIA^ LANGUAGES BY vv^ E. H^CODEINGTON, D.D. OF THE MELANESIAN MISSION FELLOW OF WADHAM COLLEGE, OXFOED SEE^4 BY PRESERVATION SERVICES AT THE CLARENDON PRESS M DCCC LXXXV [All rights reserved'] PL C1 -i PREFACE, I HAVE endeavoured in the following 1 pages to carry on the work of Bishop Patteson. He brought to the philological study of the Melanesian languages an extraordinary linguistic faculty,*which enabled him to use very many of them with ease, but he left little behind him in print or in manu- script. In the year 1864 he printed privately some outline grammars or grammatical notes, and in 1866 phrase-books, and Vocabularies of Mahaga, Bauro, and Sesake, which have furnished material for the Melanesischen Sprachen of Von der Gabelentz. In the latter year also phrase-books were printed in some of the languages of the Banks' Islands. I have not taken these as tne foundation for my own work. I never had the advantage of studying them with Bishop Patteson, and I know that he considered them im- perfect and tentative. It seemed better to work indepen- dently on materials obtained directly from natives of Mela- nesia, and afterwards to compare my conclusions with those of the Bishop where the subjects were the same. Bishop Patteson, therefore, is not answerable for the general views concerning the Melanesian languages here put forward, nor for the structure and arrangement of the Grammars ; but I can never forget that I owe any knowledge of these languages that I may possess to the impulse towards the study of them and to the direction which I received from him in the first instance; and I desire to make all that I have been able to do a memorial of gratitude and affection to him. We have in our Mission school in Norfolk Island from time to time boys and young men from many of the Melanesian vi Preface. Islands, who all come to know and use, more or less, the Mota language. From these natives of the various islands, and by the medium generally of the Mota language, I have ob- tained what I now offer ; with the exception of what concerns the Duke of York, Rotuma, Sesake, and Fate languages. There is an evident advantage in a method that is throughout more or less comparative ; and in some cases my interpreters have been able to speak more languages than their own and Mota. In this way I received the greatest assistance from my friend and pupil the late Edward Wogale, a native Deacon, who used with much intelligence his knowledge of the languages of the Banks' Islands, Torres Islands, Florida and Fiji. Great, however, as are the advantages of Norfolk Island for gaining knowledge of the Melanesian languages, the want of books and of communication with scholars is much felt in so remote and isolated a place ; and I hope in consideration of such difficulties that some indulgence will be allowed to the many defects of which I am sensible. Since my return to England I owe much to the kindness and learning of my friend the Rev. A. L. Mayhew, of Wadham College, who has saved me from many errors and helped me in many difficulties. In conclusion, I venture to say that I put forth my con- tribution to the knowledge of these languages with a certain desire to show that in my long absence from Oxford I have not been altogether idle or unmindful of my connexion with the University and College to which I owe so much. WADHAM COLLEGE, Aug. i, 1885. CONTENTS. I. INTBODTJCTION. I. The Groups of Melanesian Islands. 2. The Melanesian languages here in view. 3. Polynesian settlements in Melanesia ; their language not in view. 4. The Melanesian languages homogeneous, and of a common stock with the Ocean languages, those of the Indian Archipelago and Polynesia. 5. Great and conspicuous differences between the various Melanesian languages tend to disappear on closer view. The most ex- ceptional among them not Australian. 6. Proof of kinship to be found in Vocabulary ^Grammar, and Phonology, whether between the Melanesian languages themselves or between these and the Ocean languages gene- rally. Examples of the use of Vocabulary. 7. Common Numerals and systems of Numeration. 8. Examples of proof from Grammar ; suffixed Pronouns, and Verbs. 9. Great differences among Melanesian languages to be accounted for by the probable history of the population of the islands. Note. Theory of the connexion of the Melanesians with the Ocean races pp. 3-35 II. VOCABULABIES. Mr. Wallace's Vocabularies in his ' Malay Archipelago.' Examination of his nine words in fifty-nine languages. Seventy words in forty Melanesian Notes on the Vocabularies .... pp. 36-100 III. SHOBT COMPABATIVE GBAMMAB OF MELANESIAN LANGUAGES. Comparison of Melanesian languages with Malay, Malagasy, and the Maori of New Zealand. Absence of Inflexion and formal Parts of Speech. I. Demonstrative Particles. 2. Articles. 3. Personal Articles. 4. Pro- nouns. 5. Personal Pronouns. 6. Suffixed Pronouns. 7. Possessives. 8. Interrogative Pronouns. 9. Demonstrative Pronouns. 10. Nouns. ii. Independent forms of Nouns. 12. Classes of Nouns. 13. Construct Nouns. 14. Prefixes to Nouns. 15. Collective Nouns. 16. Redu- plication of Nouns. 17. Plural of Nouns. 18. Prepositions. 19. Ad- verbs. 20. Adjectives. 21. Verbs. 22. Verbal Particles. 23. Verbal Suffixes. 24. Prefixes to Verbs. 25. Reduplication of Verbs. 26. Pas- sive Verbs pp. 101-192 IV. PHONOLOGY. I. Alphabet. II. Phonetic Changes: i. Gutturals; 2. Dentals; 3. La- bials ; 4. Compound Consonant ; 5. Nasals ; 6. Liquids ; 7. Sibilants ; 8. Aspirates; 9. Metathesis; 10. Vowels; n. Phonetic Character pp. 193-219 viii Contents. V. NTTMEBATION AND NUMEBALS. i. Systems of Numeration. 2. Grammar of Numeration. 3. Peculiar Methods and Terms. 4. Numerals pp. 220-251 VI. GBAMMABS. I. Banks' Islands PAGE 1. Sugarloaf Island, Mota 253 2. Saddle Island, Motlav 310 3. Volow 322 4. Vanua Lava, Pak . . . . . . . . 332 5. Leon and Sasar ...... 337 6. Vuras 345 7. Mosin 350 8. AloTeqel . .355 9. Star Island, Merlav 357 10. Sta. Maria, Gog 367 11. Lakon 377 12. Bligh Island, Norbarbar 384 II. Torres Islands 14. Lo 391 III. North of Fijir 15. Botuma . 401 IV. New Hebrides 16. Aurora Island, Maewo 408 17. Lepers' Island, Oba 420 18. Pentecost Island, Arag 431 19. Espiritu Santo, Marina 441 20. Ambrym 449 21. Three Hills Island, Sesake . 459 Tasiko, Lemaroro, Tonoa. 22. Sandwich Island, Fate 471 Nuna, Anaiteum. V. Loyalty Islands 23. Britannia Island, Nengone 478 VI. Santa Cruz 24. Sta. Cruz, Deni 486 25. Nifilole "... 493 VII. Solomon Islands 26. San Cristoval, Fagani 499 27. Wawo 505 28. Contraries Island, Ulawa 5^ 29. Malanta, Saa 5*6 30. Florida, ffela 522 31. Guadalcanar, Vaturawa 539 32. Ysabel Island, Bugotu 54" 33. #ao 555 34. Savo 559 35. Duke of York Island 5 6 5 3o MELANESIAN LANGUAGES. GUIDE TO THE PRONUNCIATION OF MELANESIAN WORDS. Vowels have the Italian sound. Consonants : 1 . In the languages Grammars of which are given b, generally mb. d, generally nd. g, a guttural with a trill, peculiar sound. 5 r =ngg, i. e. ng in ' finger.' j, as in English, but ch in Santa Cruz, Torres Islands, Ure- parapara. m, nasal, nng in 'singer.' gn, same as n, as in Italian. q, compound of kpw. 2. In Fiji words b=mb. d=nd. g=ng in 'singer.' q=ng in 'finger.' c=th in 'that.' 3. In Fate and Anaiteum g as in Fiji; 4. In Nengone words g, hard ; ng as in ' singer.' c=ch. 'm, nasal m=m. x, the peculiar g above described. N. B. The Malagasy o is u. / The italics n, m, g, are used when the words are in Roman type : when native words, as in the following pages, are distinguished by being printed in italics, the Roman n stands for ng, g for ngg, m for the nasal m. Thus in Roman type sin, in italic stn, sounds ' sing.' INTRODUCTION. 1. 'MELANESIA comprises that long- belt of island groups which, beginning in the Indian Archipelago at the east limits of the region there occupied by the Malay race, and as it were a prolongation of that great island region, runs south-east for a distance of some 3500 English miles ; i. e. from New Guinea at the Equator in 130 E. longitude, to New Caledonia just within the Tropic in 167 E. longitude, and eastwards to Fiji in 180. This chain of groups has a certain geographical as well as ethnical unity. Its curve follows roughly the outline of the Australian coast, and large islands occur, with a number of small ones, along the whole length, with mountains of considerable height coin- ciding pretty closely with the line of volcanic action. Mela- nesia is usually held to begin with New Guinea, this great island being then viewed as the headquarters of that dark Papuan race which, widely and variously modified in all the other groups, occupies the whole region, as the name Melanesia implies 1 .' To the east of New Guinea lie the two great islands of New Britain and New Ireland, with Duke of York Island between them. Next come the So- lomon Islands, seven large islands running N.W. and S.E. for 600 miles. The curve is continued by the Santa Cruz group ; and further on by the Banks' Islands, with the Torres Islands to the north of them, which, with the New Hebrides, stretch for more than 500 miles. South-west from the New Hebrides and zoo miles away lies New Caledonia, an island 240 miles long, with the Loyalty group 70 miles 1 Encyclopaedia Britannica. B 2 Melanesian Languages. 5 to the east. Fiji lies detached to the eastwards, and ap- proaches very nearly the limit which divides Melanesia from Polynesia. Although Polynesia is often made to include the Melanesian islands as far as New Guinea, yet if Melanesia is to be the name of the region defined above, as undoubtedly the languages and the people are separated by a clear line of division from their eastern neighbours, it is desirable to use the term Polynesia strictly to indicate the region of the East Pacific, to the west of which Melanesia begins with the Fijian group. To the north of Melanesia lies the region of small and scattered islands which are comprised in the name of Micronesia. The attempt here made to give an account of the languages of Melanesia does not include, except in the way of occasional reference, the languages of New Guinea. Whether the in- habitants of Melanesia can be all called Papuans or not, it is clearly desirable to avoid the use of the name Papuan when the languages of Melanesia and not of New Guinea are in view. That some of the languages of New Guinea, e.g. Motu, are Melanesian is clear, the vocabulary of a very distant part, such as Mafoor, contains a large proportion of words common in Melanesia, and by no means all of these Malayan or Polynesian ; but the languages of New Guinea have not been available for consideration and examination together with those of Melanesia in the narrower acceptation of the word. Of these languages, those of the great curve stretching from New Guinea, beginning with New Britain and New Ireland and ending in the Loyalty Islands, it may perhaps be said that a general representation is here given. The lan- guage of Duke of York Island, which has been kindly communi- cated by the Rev. George Brown, may be taken to represent those of the great islands between which it lies. The likeness of this language to those of the Solomon Islands and of the New Hebrides, and its wholly Melanesian character, together with the Melanesian character of such a New Guinea lan- guage as that of Motu, warrant the assumption that the space between New Britain and Ysabel is occupied by not Introduction. 5 dissimilar languages. The personal knowledge and enquiries of the writer begin with Ysabel to the north, and extend, with serious deficiencies here and there, to the Loyalty Islands. The Fiji language is within easy reach in Hazlewood's Gram- mar and the translation of the Scriptures 1 . A Grammar and Dictionary of the Anaiteum language has been put forth by the Rev. John Inglis 2 . The two treatises on the Melanesian Speech of the elder von der Gabelentz deal with many of the languages included within the limits above specified 3 . The materials were supplied to him to some extent by Bishop Patteson, and the same materials have been employed here ; but in whatever case the same language has been dealt with, what is put forth here is either, as in the case of Nengone, the result of independent enquiry from natives of the place, or, as in the case of Wawo in San Cristoval, the representation of a dialect not the same as that which has been given by von der Gabelentz. It may be confidently hoped that a view of languages taken from within, that is, by means of a native language in which Melanesians give an account of their own speech, has certain advantages over a view taken, with greater intelligence and more knowledge of language generally, from without, that is, from printed books. A Nengone man, for example, who can speak Mota will probably be able to ex- plain some things to an European who can speak Mota, which may be misunderstood even by an European who can speak Nengone himself. The Melanesian languages, like all kindred languages, explain one another, and appear in the light when they are viewed one with another. At the least, all the groups of Melanesia are represented here, at the furthest point west- wards by the Duke of York Island, at the furthest southern ex- tremity by Nengone ; and if the regions towards the extremities are comparatively unexplored, there is a tolerably complete 1 I am bound to take the earliest opportunity of expressing my sense of what I owe to the assistance of the Rev. Lorimer Fison, late Missionary in Fiji, in the discussion of the various problems that arise in the comparison of the Fijian with other Melanesian languages. Williams and Norgate. London, 1882. 3 Die Melanesischen Sprachen. Leipzig, 1873. Melanesian Languages. 2. New Hebrides. 3. Banks Islands. investigation of the central part in the languages of the Northern New Hebrides, the Banks' Islands, Santa Cruz, and the Southern Solomon Islands. 2. It will be convenient to give a list here of the languages of Melanesia which are brought into comparison in the intro- ductory treatises of this book, and of which Grammars, or outlines of Grammars, are subjoined. Beginning at the ex- tremity furthest from New Guinea : 1. Loyalty Islands. 1. Nengone or Mare. 2. Fate, Sandwich I. 1 3. Sesake, Three Hills. 4. Ambrym. 5. Espiritu Santo. 6. Araga, Whitsuntide or Pentecost. 7. Oba, Lepers' I. 8. Maewo, Aurora. 9. Merlav, Star I. 10. Santa Maria, Gaua, or Gog. 11. Lakon. 12. Vanua Lava, Pak. 13. Sasar. 14. Vureas. 15. Mosina. 16. alo Teqel. 17. Mota, Sugarloaf I. 18. Saddle I., Motlav. 19. Volow. 20. Ureparapara, Bligh I. 21. Lo. 22. Rotuma. 23. Deni, Santa Cruz. 24. Nifilole. 25. Ulawa, Contrarie'te I. 26. Malanta, Saa. 27. San Cristoval, Warco. 28. Fagani. 1 The sketch of this Grammar is drawn from the translation of a Gospel. 4. Tones Islands. 5. N. of Fiji. 6. Santa Cruz. 7. Solomon Islands. Introduction. 7 Solomon Islands 29. Guadalcanar, Vaturawa. (continued). 30. Florida. 31. Savo. 32. Ysabel, Bugotu. 33. GQ.O. 34. Duke of York. Some of these are but dialects differing not much from one another, as those of Vanua Lava here given ; but there is much instruction in the comparison even of dialects philo- logically and geographically very close. Vanua Lava, an island fifteen miles long, had, before its depopulation by the labour trade, fifteen dialects recognised as distinct by its in- habitants : it was worth while to preserve as much as possible of so characteristic a specimen of Melanesia. Other lan- guages, though very near together in one island, as those of Gog and Lakon on Santa Maria, are not less valuable or less characteristic because they differ so widely one from the other. The absence of the Fijian language from the above list leaves, no doubt, a great incompleteness in that general view of the Melanesian languages which might otherwise be thought to be given. But the language of Fiji, so much the most important of all, is so well known as not to need what it would be a presumption on the part of one not practically acquainted with it to offer. Much, no doubt, remains to be learnt about it by the study of dialects and by the com- parison of other Melanesian languages, for which materials may be here supplied. 3. From the limits of the Melanesian languages as defined above, the language of the Polynesian settlements in Me- lanesia has to be withdrawn. The distinction between this and the Melanesian is everywhere plain, and there is very little distinction apparently to be made of dialect in the speech of one settlement and another. These Polynesian out- liers are to be found in Uea, one of the Loyalty Islands ; in Futuna, a small island of the New Hebrides ; in Fate, Sand- wich Island ; in some of the islets of the Sheppard group, and 8 Melanesian Languages. notably in the settlement of Mae in Three Hills ; in Tikopia, north of the Banks' Islands, and in several of the Swallow group near Santa Cruz ; in Rennell and Bellona, south of the Solomon Islands, and in Ontong Java, near Ysabel. The language of these is said, on good authority, to be substantially that of Tonga, and the same throughout ; speakers of the Maori of New Zealand can understand it and make themselves understood ; it has nothing directly to do with the Melanesian languages *. The existence of these Polynesian settlements, however, in the midst of Melanesia cannot fail to suggest ques- tions of interest and importance which it is impossible to dis- miss without consideration. As to their origin, it is not difficult to conjecture what it has been. Canoes accidentally drifting or blown away, or expeditions purposely directed to known islands, have landed small parties of Polynesian people either on uninhabited places or on islands occupied by Melanesians. Some at least of such settlements may be supposed compara- tively modern. If such islands as Rennell, Bellona, or Tikopia have been reached, remote from any large Melanesian island, the colonists naturally remain purely Polynesian in language, habits, and physical characteristics, for there is no admixture. If a single canoe, or a small male party, has found its way to an inhabited Melanesian island, the Polynesian element has been absorbed, leaving perhaps only some fairer and more straight-haired children as an evidence of mixed blood 2 . In the case of such a settlement as Mae the case is different. The middle part of that island, one only about six miles long, is occupied by people whose speech is that common to all these Polynesian settlers, but who physically are not dis- tinguishable from their neighbours who are Melanesian both 1 Some few years ago a whaler picked up in the Solomon Islands and brought down to Norfolk Island some natives of Mae and of Fate, survivors of a crew massacred in Ongtong Java. They belonged to the Polynesian settlements, and they told me that they, the Mae and Fate men, spoke the same language, and also understood that of the Ongtong Java people. 2 I have seen myself in Ureparapara a man and woman with a son, drifted thither from some Polynesian island ; and I have noticed straight-haired chil- dren in Saddle Island who were known to be descendants of Polynesian cast- aways. Introduction. 9 in language and physical character. The same is the case in the Swallow Islands : the inhabitants of islands close together speak either a language like that of Santa Cruz' or the Poly- nesian ; but they are all alike Melanesians in appearance. The Tikopians, an isolated Polynesian settlement, are wholly unlike Melanesians, tall, heavy, light-coloured men, with straight hair. The reason why the Polynesian-speaking people of Mae, for example, are Melanesian in appearance clearly is that the Melanesian blood in them has overborne the Polynesian element ; that is to say, the Polynesian settlers have, generation after generation, taken Melanesian wives into their villages in which the speech was Polynesian. The speech, the descent of chiefs, certain religious practices, have remained Polynesian, the physical aspect has gradually lost its original character. Under such circumstances the speech which will be permanent is the speech of the settlement ; the physical character that will prevail will be that of the blood. Hence the Tikopian is physically and in language purely Polynesian, the Fileni man of the Swallow group is in speech Polynesian but physically Melanesian. The phenomena of the case are thus explained 1 . It remains to state another remarkable fact. In Three Hills Island, Mae, the Polynesian settlement above men- tioned is about two miles distant from Sesake, at one end of the island, occupied by those who may be called the aborigines. The Mae language is Polynesian, if not purely at least de- cidedly so ; the Sesake language is Melanesian decidedly, and at any rate has nothing that makes it appear more influenced by its Polynesian neighbour than if Sesake and Mae were in 1 Some fifty years ago the Banks' Islands were visited in two successive years by -double canoes. The people in these canoes said they came from Tonga. They settled the first year for a time on the Islet of Qakea, close to Vanua Lava, quarrelled after a time with their neighbours, and went off. When they returned next year they were attacked by the natives and driven off. There were women with them. If they had settled on Qakea there would be there now a Polynesian-speaking people, but Melanesian wives from Vanua Lava would be continually bringing in Melanesian physical characteristics. If Qakea had been an isolated place like Tikopia, there would have been then a small purely Polynesian colony. io Melanesia*, Languages. different and distant islands. This cannot be too positively stated, and the importance of the fact is very great. It is an exemplifi cation, in a very narrow field, of what is found also to be the case with regard to Fiji. The Fijian group is only some 200 miles west of the Friendly Islands, which are de- cidedly part of Polynesia. There has been a considerable intercourse between the two groups, and no doubt a great infusion of Tongan, Friendly Islands, blood among the higher classes of Fijians. There has been also, according to native le- gends, a considerable intercourse between Fiji and the purely Polynesian Samoa 1 . Yet the Fiji language is most decidedly Melanesian ; it has no doubt something directly derived from Tonga, but it is no more Polynesian than the languages of the Banks' Islands, which lie far away to the west, out of reach of any but the most casual and insignificant intercourse with Tongans or other Polynesians. Intercourse therefore and close neighbourhood with Polynesians do not as a matter of fact materially affect the language of Melanesians. 4. The view of the Melanesian languages here proposed is, in the first place, that they are homogeneous ; and secondly, that they belong to a common stock with the Ocean tongues generally those of the Indian Archipelago and of Polynesia. The view which is opposed is one which would make the Melanesian stock of languages originally distinct from that to which Malayan and Polynesian languages belong, and would pronounce all that is found in Melanesian languages common with Malay and Polynesian to be borrowed from these tongues, or due to influence received from them. In opposition to this latter view, it is by no means denied that the Melanesian languages have borrowed from those of the Indian or Malay Archipelago on the one side, and from those of the Eastern Pacific on the other, or that they have been influenced in various ways ; allowing this, what is maintained is, that whatever has been introduced has been brought from 1 Turner's Samoa, Macmillan, 1884, pp. 41, 123, 225, 228, 230, 256. In these stories the Fijians are by no means represented as inferior to the Samoans. See Vocabulary Notes under the word ' Bow.' Introduction. 1 1 languages of a kindred, not a distinct stock. By way of illustration, not of exact comparison, the English language has borrowed largely, directly and indirectly, from Latin and Greek, but still what has been borrowed has been taken from kindred languages. It is not as when Arabic is found in Spanish. There was an archaic flow of Aryan language over Europe, and over a great part of the region so covered more recent waves of the same have passed. There is differ- ence enough between Celtic, Slavonic, Italic, and Teutonic, but they are members of one family. Let as much difference be allowed between the various Ocean families, and let not one be said to borrow from the other without good reason. The Melanesian languages, which are very little known, come geographically between the Malay and Polynesian languages, which are well known. Any observer of the Melanesian languages who approaches from the West and sees in them much that is the same with the Malay, calls that a Malay element, and calls that which he does not recognise the native Melanesian or Papuan element. One who approaches the Melanesian languages from the East finds much that is common with the Polynesian, and he calls that the Polynesian element, and again what he does not recognise the Melanesian or Papuan. But suppose an ob- server to begin with the Melanesian languages, and, being familiar with them, to advance on the one side to the Polynesian regions and on the other to the Malayan. He will find in the islands of the Eastern Pacific people of a brown colour, using a language very much of which is familiar to him, but one poorer in sounds, poorer in grammatical forms. He will say that they speak a kind of Melanesian dialect. If, as is conceivable, it had so happened that an English occupation of Australia had made the Fijian language familiar to Australian merchants, officials, and scholars, before English- men had advanced far enough to the East by India to have come in contact with Malay; then as Australian commerce advanced westwards from Fiji, and the native languages were found more or less to resemble Fijian, it would certainly 12 Melanesian Languages. have happened that the Melanesian, the Indian Archipelago languages, Malay, Malagasy itself, would have all been found marked by Fijian character, would even by Australian scholars have been said to belong to the Fijian family. It is a matter of chance or circumstance after what member of a family a family of languages is called, just as it is by what name foreigners call another country. The first that comes perhaps is the one that gains the place, and it is very likely that it is quite inappropriate. At any rate, there is a certain fallacy in the natural conclusion that the language after which a family of languages is named is the standard, the characteristic, and to the unlearned the original, language of them all. If an- other supposition may be ventured on ; suppose America to have discovered Europe and not Europe America, and the American discoverers to be in a superior state of civilisation to the discovered Europeans, so that they should extend their acquaintance with them and observe their languages: they would discover England first it may be supposed, find the Dutch language a form of English, recognise in French an English element in that which was found in common ; when their learned men knew more they would distinguish the languages of Northern Europe from the Southern, but the Northern languages would take their name from English ; German would be classed as Anglic, and not English as Teutonic. It is possible, by the correction of a similar mis- take, that, instead of speaking of Malay or Polynesian elements in Melanesian languages, it would be right to class Malay and Polynesian languages as Melanesian. The Melanesian people have the misfortune to be black, to be much darker, at least, than either Malays or Polynesians ; and because they are black it is presumed that their original language cannot be of the same family with that spoken by their brown neighbours ; that where their language has a general resemblance to that of their neighbours they must have cast off their own and taken another in the lump, and that where the resemblance is not conspicuously apparent they must have borrowed words and expressions in com- Introduction. 1 3 mercial or other intercourse. With regard to colour it is enough to say, if the matter is to be considered at all in a question of language, that between the black of Melanesians and the brown of Polynesians the difference is not so very great, and that the colour of the inhabitants of the Indian or Malay Archipelago is much the same as that of the Melanesians. There is a great variety of shades of colour in Polynesians, Melanesians, and others ; with quite enough of general distinctive character to throw them into classes, but yet such that among Polynesians are to be seen very dark individuals, as among Malays those who might be taken for Chinese. Given an original dark and frizzly-haired stock, it is not difficult to conceive such a cross with straight-haired and light-coloured men as would produce a brown and wavy- haired progeny, and beyond that such a series and confusion of inter-crossings as would give a great variety of inter- mediate shades of colour, straightness or curliness of hair, and other physical characteristics. There is no doubt a certain reluctance on the brown side to acknowledge the kindred of the black. The Melanesians are the poor relations, at the best, of their more civilised and stronger neighbours ; but a question of language must be discussed on its own merits, and degrees of complexion or cultivation may be put on one side. Any one who approaches the Melanesian languages with some knowledge of a Polynesian or Malayan language cannot fail to find a certain resemblance ; he will find words, perhaps very many words, the same; he may find the Melanesian language so much like the one he has been before acquainted with that he will hazard the assertion that it is a corrupt Samoan for instance, or will conclude that commercial inter- course with Malays has had a great effect upon the native language. Whether, except in the Polynesian colonies above mentioned, he will ever find a language that he can think taken over by Melanesians as a whole to supersede their original tongue is very doubtful. That such a language has been taken over from Polynesians one may say is certainly not 14 Melanesian Languages. the case. In a Melanesian language many words will be the same as the Polynesian, many grammatical forms will be the same ; but undoubtedly, as a rule, the phonetic character of the Melanesian will be fuller than that of the Polynesian word, and the Melanesian grammar will fail in some feature con- spicuous in the Polynesian, the Passive for instance, and will have in vigorous life some power which is at work, but com- paratively little at work, among the Polynesians ; for ex- ample, the definite transitive power of certain forms of verbs. If the inhabitants of any Melanesian island have cast off their old tongue and taken to a new one, which is not here ! denied, at any rate it has not been one of the Polynesian languages of the East Pacific that they have taken. If the people, for example, of the Banks' Islands have, either in their present seats or in some place from which they came in a distant time, given up their old speech and taken to another, we should not expect to find what they had given up, but we should have every reason to expect to find the source whence they have obtained their present language. Cer- tainly this is not Polynesian, and certainly not Malayan ; looking round for a language resembling the Banks' Islands languages we may fix on Fiji as being very similar on the whole. But in Fiji the same process has to be gone through. If the Fijians, Melanesians, have thrown off their old speech and taken another, whence did they get their modern lan- guage? Most certainly not from their Polynesian neigh- bours. The most remarkable characteristic of the Fiji language, that very efficient suffix of a transitive termination to a verb, which flourishes in this even more than in any other Melanesian language, is absolutely unknown to their Tongan neighbours, and to the Malays also, if in consideration of the immense space which divides them it is necessary to mention the Malays. But the fact that Melanesians, pre- sumed to have cast off their original language and taken another, have not taken a Malayan or Polynesian one instead, is no proof that they have not taken any other. It may be that the languages here treated of, those of which a list has Introduction. 1 5 been given above, and here called Melanesian, because the islands in which they are spoken are Melanesian, are not the original languages of the race that now speaks them. It may be that a third term should be used for the languages which, not Malay, not Polynesian, are now spoken in the Indian Archipelago and in the Melanesian islands. Those now in use are the languages here called Melanesian ; and if the ancient language once possibly belonging to the people now inhabiting Melanesia could be found, there would be a great difficulty about nomenclature ; a difficulty which only does not arise because the languages here called Melanesian are the only languages, with the exception always understood of what is spoken in the Polynesian settlements, now found to be spoken in the Melanesian islands. This last assertion, resting on no authority, requires some explanation ; the truth of it can only be assented to, or dissented from, after the study of the languages themselves. 5. The first view of the Melanesian languages no doubt shows great differences between some languages and others ; the learner who has acquired one approaches another as if it were quite a foreign language, with some words only in common with that which he knows. But languages which are mutually unintelligible to natives of parts of the small islands on which they are spoken are often perceived without much trouble to be really not far apart, when once acquaintance has been made with them ; for, without any substantial differ- ence in vocabulary and with little difference in grammar, two languages as closely allied as Dutch and English may have so far diverged in pronunciation and in the use of the vocabulary as to be very different to the ear. As acquaintance with the languages increases, the likeness of one to another becomes more apparent ; a sort of ideal standard is established to which they conform, the specific differences become subordinated to the general character, the difficulty presented by the multi- plicity of forms diminishes more and more. But there will remain some among the Melanesian languages which seem exceptional and hard, not fitting into the neighbouring 1 6 Melanesian Languages. groups, and having forms which cannot well be matched with parallel examples. Supposing-, for example, that the languages of the Northern New Hebrides are to be learnt by one who has an acquaintance with Mota : it is not long before he sees that the languages of Aurora, Pentecost, Lepers' Island, and Espiritu Santo belong to a type with which he is acquainted, though a knowledge of Mota does not enable him to understand what he hears. But when he reaches Ambry m he finds that the language is much more hard ; there are words indeed that he knows, but he seems a stranger. Beyond Ambrym, in such a language as Sesake, he is comparatively again at home. The same is the case in the Solomon Islands, where round Florida, in Guadalcanal Malanta and Ysabel, the languages which are heard are not very far apart ; but at Savo, which lies in the midst of them, the language seems altogether puzzling: many words indeed are the same and the people identical in customs and appearance, and yet to make out the speech is very difficult. Far beyond Savo, the language of Duke of York Island is again familiar, with hardly anything in it which has not an easily-perceived analogy with the Solomon Islands, Banks' Islands, Fiji, and New Hebrides tongues. If difficult ex- ceptional languages are to be named in the list of thirty-four Melanesian languages given above, they would be Nengone, Ambrym, Santa Cruz, Savo. The very important question then arises whether these differ so fundamentally from the other languages that they cannot group with them as mem- bers of the same family. The lesser question, whether they agree together in difference from other Melanesian languages, is easily answered in the negative : they sometimes agree, but generally do not ; each has its own peculiarities. On the main question the judgment of the writer has been already given when the Melanesian languages have been pronounced to be homogeneous. As with the Melanesian languages generally, very much as their differences are conspicuous at the first view, greater acquaintance with them makes them appear more and more alike, so with these exceptional Ian- Introduction. i 7 guages, the difficulties of them do not disappear, they do not range themselves by the side of the others in orderly groups, but the more they are known the more their features show the family likeness. It cannot be said of these that they are the remains of the old Melanesian speech, now in many islands thrown off to make room for a foreign language to take its place. More archaic they well may be, belonging to an earlier movement of population, carried forwards by an earlier wave of speech passing onwards among the islands, but having somewhere a common origin with those which have since and successively passed among them. It is equally clear that these languages, which are rather exceptional among those of Melanesia, do not, in the points in which the exceptions appear, agree with the neighbouring language of Australia. It would seem natural, on the sup- position that there was a language in the Melanesian islands originally which has since been exchanged for another and that some traces of the original still remain here and there, that we should look to Australia with the expectation of finding in the native people and languages the kindred of the original Melanesian. But in regard to language it must be said that any one familiar with the Melanesian tongues finds nothing but what is strange to him in Australian grammar and vocabulary. Illustrations of this will be offered hereafter, but the statement is necessary here that, with regard to words at least, whereas a strange word appearing in a Melanesian language is very often to be found in some distant Ocean vocabulary, no correspondence whatever seems to occur between Melanesian and Australian vocabularies. If then two distinct families of language do not appear in Melanesia at the present time, not including New Guinea in the consideration, and the Melanesian languages are homo- geneous, it further has to be established that they belong to the same family with the Ocean languages generally, that is to say, with the Polynesian, the Malay, the Malagasy, and those of the Indian Archipelago generally. This can only be -done here, so far as a very limited acquaintance with those c 1 8 Melanesian Languages. languages can enable it to be done at all, by a comparison of Vocabularies and Grammar. 6. The proof of the kinship of languages must be made in consideration of Vocabulary, Grammar, and Phonology. Some material is here offered towards this end. Seventy words in forty languages of Melanesia are given, which can be com- pared among themselves, to see what proof they give of the substantial unity of the Melanesian languages ; they can be compared further with the same list of words given in thirty- three languages of the Malay Archipelago by Mr. Wallace in his book on that subject ; and they can be compared also with the corresponding Malagasy and Polynesian words, which will make comparison with the Ocean languages tolerably complete. A comparative sketch of the Grammar of the Melanesian languages is given, with reference also to the Ocean languages as exemplified in Malay, Malagasy, and Maori, and in the Marshall group in Micronesia. There is also added something on the phonology of the Melanesian languages, the vocabularies and grammar of which are the subjects of consideration. With regard to Vocabulary it may be observed that the use of it requires always careful con- sideration when proof of the kinship of languages is sought in it. There is always a certain element of chance corre- spondence to be expected, such as may be seen in the words tarn, as, si, if, the same in Latin and Mota, or sike in Mota, the same in sense with the English seek. There is also to be calculated on the presence of borrowed words. It proves nothing as to the kinship of two languages that many words are found common to both. On the other hand, the pre- sence of very many common words must be allowed to prove something in favour of relationship, and disagreement to a very great extent in vocabulary does nothing to disprove relationship. No one could refuse the evidence of vocabulary in proving the kinship of English and German, and no one is shaken in the belief of such relationship by complete disagreement in the ordinary words for the commonest things, horse, dog, or pig, woman, boy, or girl. If there- Introduction. 19 fore in comparing- Melanesian vocabularies among themselves we find a great deal of agreement, that is not without its value in proving them homogeneous ; if we find differ- ences where we might look for agreement, that does not prove any fundamental distinction. The same is the case in comparing Melanesian vocabularies with those of the other Ocean languages. For example, if we find iga the common Melanesian word for a fish, it argues something for the re- lationship of the languages which have it ; and if we find the same word common in the Polynesian and Malay Archipelago vocabularies, as it is in the Melanesian, it argues something for the relationship of all these Ocean languages together. But if we find two neighbouring Melanesian languages like Merlav of the Banks' Islands and Aurora of the New Hebrides, one having the word for fish ig and the other mast, there is no proof whatever of radical difference between the two 1 . There is no reason why a language should not have taken into its use a word for fish which is unknown elsewhere. When, how- ever, in Borneo a fish is masik, as it is masi in Aurora, and many common words are found in Borneo and in Aurora be- sides, although this particular coincidence may be accidental, it is impossible not to admit the fact as going some way to prove that a common stock of words is found in the Malay Archipelago and in Melanesia. Exceptional words have thus their value, as have those which are so commonly the same. It is certain, however, that the presence of words the same in form and in meaning, in two or many languages, does not do anything like so much to prove a common stock as the presence of words either the same in form but differing in signification, or the same in signification but with a change of form. With regard, in the first place, to words which are substantially the same in form in different languages but different in signification, this may be rather apparent than real, it may be only a difference of application 2 . Words also 1 The words for fish in the nearly related languages of Latin and Greek are radically distinct. 2 ' Would not a man, not well versed in the Teutonic languages, infer from C 2 2O Melanesian Languages. are often present in two languages, or more, but when a vocabulary is being compiled they will appear in one and not in another, because they lie in different levels of the language 1 . What is the general term in one language is specific in another, what is the common word in one is an out-of-the- way word in another. If English and German vocabularies are compared in the few words mentioned above, Horse and Pferd, Dog and Hund, Pig and Schwein, Woman and Weib, Boy and Knabe, Girl and Madchen, are wholly different words, and the effect of them set side by side is to make the two languages seem distinct. But there are in the English language prad 2 , hound, swine, wife, knave, maiden, on other levels in the language, some of them only different in application, some with a specific instead of a general signi- fication. Vocabularies such as are gathered by travellers are made up of words taken from the surface of language, and are therefore apt to deceive. Very often a word is in a language but in another meaning, very often it is there but is not ordinarily used : a common stock of words is held by various languages, but in the lapse of time and changes of use they get sorted and re-sorted into various applications and employ- ments, though they may lose very little of their original form. A few examples may be useful, taken from Melanesian and Ocean tongues. The word rangi in Maori is the sky, as in other forms it is in all the Polynesian languages ; the same rani in San Cristoval is rain ; the same in Mota, Ian, is wind ; the same in Fiji, cagi (dhangi) is wind and, more generally, the atmosphere. If the % Maori ua, rain, is put against the San Cristoval rani, or the Maori hau, wind, against the Mota Ian, there is nothing to show a likeness in vocabulary. But usa for but, maar, sondern, and to, naar, zu, that English, Dutch, and German are no kindred languages ? Such words seem different, because they are very liable to different applications.' Outlines of Malagasy Grammar, H. N. van der Tuuk. 1 Mr. Fison has used the expression that ' words are not in the same focus, microscopically speaking,' using the illustration of infusoria in a drop of water, one of which may be invisible until a turn of the screw brings it into focus. 2 The word palfrey, I am informed, contains the same root ; and wife is in fact contained in the word woman, wife-man. Introduction. 2 1 rain is used in the next island to San Cristoval, and saw in Mota is the blowing of the wind ; the words are there, though in the latter case not in the same application. The common word for blood in Melanesia, as in the Malay Archipelago and in Malagasy, is ra, dara, nara ; the common Polynesian word is toto. But toto appears in the Solomon Islands in the name of a disease, and as congealed blood, and no doubt is the same with the totoa, toto, of the Banks' Islands, where it signifies the sap or juice of trees. The word tasi, tahi, tai, is common in Melanesia, Polynesia, and the Malay Archipelago for salt, salt-water, the sea, and a lake. In the Banks' Islands, though tas has gone out of use as meaning salt, or salt-water, the verb tasig is used for seasoning food with salt-water ; tas is no longer the sea or sea- water, but the names of places on the lee or weather side of islands retain it in that sense : Tasmate, where the sea-water, the surf, is dead or still; Tasmaur, where it is alive or breaking. The lake in Santa Maria is the Tas l . Again, the Maori wketu, Samoan fetu, is no doubt the Mota vitu, a star, which, with the termination commonly suffixed, is in the Banks' Islands also vitwgi. In Celebes bitui is clearly the same and the meaning the same; but in Dayak of Borneo betuch is 'eye ;' as in the compound betuch anuh, the eye of day, the sun. The word is the same, and the expression is paralleled in the Malagasy maso andro, eye of day, the sun, masoe being a star also in the Banks' Islands, and maso, eye, in Malagasy. To add one more, the word for mouth in Maori, waka, in Batak baba, Malagasy vava, in Lepers' Island wawa, does not appear in Mota as a mouth, but in a verbal form is wawan, to open the mouth. Another Maori word for mouth, mangai, is ma&a, mouth, in Florida, which is also a word or speech ; and in Mota again is formed into the verb manasag, to make a word or speech about a thing, to make known 2 . 1 In Madagascar one of the large lakes is Itasy, and on the weather S. E. coast is Tasimoro. These names Tasmate and Tasmaur, in varying forms, are applied to places on weather and lee sides of islands in the New Hebrides and Solomon group. 2 See further these words in the Vocabulary Notes. 22 Melanesian Languages. To observe words which are evidently the same under changes of form is equally interesting-, and more effective as a proof of kinship between languages. The word for star, mentioned above, whetu, vitu, betuch, bitiii, is no doubt the Malay bintang, the Malagasy vintana, n having been intro- duced to strengthen t. It is plain that the Malay bintang cannot have been introduced in the form vitu, vitugi ; the word has not been borrowed by the Melanesians from Malay. Has it then been borrowed from the Polynesians ? There is one objection to the supposition, in the fact that in Fiji, which is nearest to the Polynesians in Tonga, kalokalo is the word for star, not vitu ; but, as has been observed, there is no greater nearness in speech coinciding with geographical near- ness to the Polynesians. It is in the likeness of the Dayak form to the Melanesian that the argument for the common property of the Ocean tongues in this word mainly lies. The Dayak nouns have this termination ch where the Banks' Islands languages have gi or g ; buruch, feathers = wulugi ; turoch, egg = tolegi ; jipuch, tootk = liwoffi J ; as the non-Hova Malagasy has a similar ending in ch. There cannot well be conceived an importation from the Dayak into the Banks' Islands, there must have been a common source for both ; and the Polynesian wlietu^fetu without the termination can- not have got into Borneo as betuch, and into the Banks' Islands as vitugi. A good word perhaps to show changes of form stretching over a vast extent of Ocean with identity of signification is what in Malay is rumah, house. This in Javanese is uma, in Amboyna lima,, in Bouru huma, in Gilolo um. In Mela- nesia there is ruma in Duke of York, San Cristoval, and in Motu of New Guinea. ; uma in the New Hebrides and Banks' Islands ; luma, nima in the Solomon Islands ; sumo, in Fate ; ima in Banks' Islands and New Hebrides ; 'ma, ma, in Nengone and Santa Cruz ; and ^m, em, and en in the Banks' Islands. 1 See Vocabulary, No. 64. Out of the seventy words selected for these Vocabularies twenty-seven in the Sarawak Dayak are known to me as Mela- nesian. Introduction. 23 The changes and variations are regular, no one can doubt the identity of the word ; and it is impossible to suppose that the words were imported into Melanesia from the places in which they have the corresponding- form ruma into San Cristoval from Malay, uma into Lakona from Java, suma into Fate from Bouro, lima into Malanta from Tidore or Amboyna. It is evident that the word belongs to some common ancient stock, that it has been modified into various forms in use, and that it has travelled hither and thither in a way that it is now impossible to trace. But this word is not in use in Polynesia ; it runs from the Malay regions down the Indian Archipelago, through New Guinea, and through the Mela- nesian islands to their extremity, not continuously, but here and there ; and it should be observed that it is present in such places as Nengone and Santa Cruz in such a form as does not look like a recent importation. The distribution of words in these regions cannot be traced ; but as the question arises whether we can find in Melanesia some original stock of language upon which the languages now spoken have been superinduced, it is important to attempt to find regions to which particular words are confined. In the word for house that which is characteristically Melanesian is also Malay. It happens, as before remarked, that certain lan- guages in Melanesia strike the enquirer as different from others, such as those of the Southern New Hebrides, Am- brym, Loyalty Islands, Santa Cruz, Savo, and it is in these that the supposed original stock of language would be sought. This word ruma is found among them, as it is found in the Mafoor of New Guinea, which, it seems, has been observed as an example of a language very different from those of Melanesia generally 1 . Such points of agreement are common in that language ; for example, the word which the Voca- bulary No. 10 shows to be very common in Melanesia for ' bone ' is in Mafoor ; but it is not in those languages of Melanesia in which exceptions are often noticed, and it is not in Polynesian or in Malay. The divisions into which the 1 Georg von der Gabelentz and Meyer. 24 Melamsian Languages. Vocabularies appear to arrange themselves cross and perplex one another. There are disconnected lines of passage along which words, like ruma, can be traced from one end of the Ocean region to another, and often a word quite unknown in Melanesia, except in some isolated spot, is found to be well known very far away * ; but, whether sporadic or fre- quent, common words appear in all the Ocean languages, and bear their share of witness to the common kinship of them all. 7. The presence in the Ocean languages of Numerals which have a general resemblance does not in itself go far to prove a common origin, for languages may very likely borrow nu^ merals from others more advanced than themselves. At the same time, there is something which cannot be passed over as without signification when numerals radically identical but very various in form are found in regions widely separated from one another, and in languages which are otherwise shown to be akin. There is much more, however, when comparison shows not only numeral words but numeral systems to be related ; and when in languages the most advanced in the art of numeration the traces of the same methods are to be found which are in use in the most archaic or least deve- loped members of the family. It is not only that there is a general consent in the Ocean languages with regard to the first five numerals at least, but it may be seen that the grammatical form of the numerals is common, that what can be made out of the meaning of Melanesian terms explains others, and that the methods used for expressing numbers, such as those above ten or twenty, are in fact the same. It is also important to observe that the numerals common in Melanesia have certainly not been borrowed from the Malay, because four out of ten of them are different, and that the Melanesian forms are phonetically fuller than the Polyne- 1 For example, the word for head in Vaturama, lova, Malagasy loha ; the Santa Cruz loju (j=tch), Sula Island lotu, canoe; blood in Araga, New Hebrides, daga, in Philippines dagga, Formosa tagga. The common word butterfly in Melanesia and in Polynesia is pepe, but Savo in the Solomon Islands has bebeula, and Morella in Amboyna has pepeul. Introduction. 2 5 sian as they now appear. In the Island languages, at any rate, numeration advances with ease and accuracy up to a considerable height; there is no difficulty in counting thousands in the languages which are here examined. And the difference in this between the Melanesian languages and the Australian is very remarkable. It is not only that the numerals, so far as the latter go, are different ; it is that the Australian, who calls three two-one and four two-two, appears to be in matters of numeration altogether in a different mental region from that in which the Melanesian reckons. An account therefore of the Numerals and Numeration of the Melanesian languages is given, not only because of the inte- rest of the subject in itself, but on account of the bearing which it has on the argument for the radical connection of all the Ocean languages. 8. The proof of kindred afforded by the Grammar of languages is no doubt more effective than that given by Vocabulary. Grammatical forms may no doubt be borrowed, but not so freely as words, and in themselves they are more characteristic. It is necessary, however, to use caution in comparing grammars as well as vocabularies. In the first place, it cannot be assumed that the presence of a common grammatical form is any proof of kindred at all when two or more languages have the same, apart from the consideration whether one has borrowed from the other. In languages which have no inflexions, and therefore little grammar, it is particularly likely that the same method of putting words together should occur when there is no family connection of one language with another. For example, the practice of suffixing pronouns to nouns and verbs is one which may well have arisen in quite distinct families of language ; it is only when vocabulary comes to the assistance of the grammar in such a case, as it does when the Melanesian languages are compared with the other Ocean tongues, that the proof of relationship is complete. In the second place, since in making comparison some sort of standard must be set up, it is very important that the language taken as the standard should 26 Melanesia^ Languages. not be a late, simplified, or decayed member of the family the members, or presumed members, of which are being com- pared. Such a standard is naturally to some extent fixed by the language from which the start is made, and it is neces- sary to guard against this natural bias of judgment. Any one who from the Indian side approaches the languages of the Indian Archipelago and starts with Malay, has Malay as his natural standard ; it is a Malayan element that he sees where there is agreement, and a divergence from Malay where there is disagreement. But Malay is undoubtedly, as com- pared with the languages of Madagascar and the Philippine Islands, a simplified form of the common language, just as English is as compared with German. It would be absurd to judge of the relationship of a claimant to the position of a Teutonic language by its correspondence to the grammar of modern English. In the same way, one who approaches the languages of the Western Pacific from the Polynesian side, starts with the standard of Maori or Tongan or Samoan naturally in his mind. If he finds correspondences to Samoan it is to Samoan intercourse that he ascribes it ; if he begins with Tongan, it is the Tongan influence that he observes. But it is quite certain that, as compared with Fijian, the languages of Tonga and Samoa are late, simplified, and decayed 1 . It would be absurd to put down some Greek grammatical forms as belonging to a distinct, perhaps more ancient, element in the language because they are not found in Italian ; and there is a danger lest something of the same kind of mistake should be made in the case of the Ocean languages. If it be asked what language should be taken as a standard, conformity to which may be assumed to be a proof of membership of the Ocean family of languages, the only answer can be that no such standard is likely to be agreed upon. Let the whole range of languages be examined, and it will not be difficult, in some particulars at least, to 1 This statement will be shocking to some who are impressed with the excellences of the Polynesian tongues ; but a comparison of grammars will uphold its truth. Introduction. 2 7 determine where the most archaic forms are to be found. To recommend caution lest a false standard be set up, is not the same thing as to point to a true one. As an example of grammatical forms which being com- pared together show the common kinship of the Melanesian languages, and of these again with the Ocean languages generally, the suffixed Personal Pronoun just referred to will be useful. There is a form of the Personal Pronoun in the three persons singular the characteristic consonants of which are k, m, n ; in Malay, ist person ku, 2nd mu, 3rd tia ; in Malagasy, 1st ko, 2nd nao, yd. ny ; in Maori, ist ku, 2nd u, 3rd na ; in Melanesian languages, ist, ku, gu (qu), k, g, ffw,ffo, ng, n, n ; 2nd, mu, ma, m, na, m, m, n ; 3rd, na, na (gna), ne, n, de. These Pronouns, in all these languages alike, are suffixed to Nouns, giving, in a general way, a possessive sense, as Malay rumahku, my house, Malagasy volako, my money. But although, as was inevitable on any extended and intelli- gent observation, these suffixes have been recognised as in fact personal Pronouns, their limited employment in the Poly- nesian languages has caused them, together with the stem to which they are suffixed, to be considered only as Possessive Pronouns. It has not been apparently recognised that what is called a Possessive Pronoun in Polynesian languages is in fact a Noun with a Personal Pronoun suffixed, that ku in the Maori toku, my, is exactly the same grammatically with ku in the Malay rumahku, my house. The suffixed Personal Pro- nouns then, being common to all, or almost all, these Ocean languages as far as may be known, and substantially identical, are used in three ways. In Malay they can be suffixed in- discriminately to all common Nouns ; they are not usually as a matter of fact so suffixed, but there is no distinction : in the Melanesian languages they are suffixed, according to a definite rule of practice, to certain Nouns only: in the Polynesian languages they are used only in the suffixes of what are called Possessive Pronouns. Thus the Malay says rumahku, my house, suffixing ku to that noun as to any other ; the Fijian says valeqii ; the Solomon Islander says valegu, because vale is one 28 Melanesian Languages. of the nouns which take the pronoun suffixed ; the Maori says toku wTiare, because he cannot suffix ku to any common noun, only to the o or a which appears in what is called the Possessive Pronoun. The Melanesians have a strict rule dividing common Nouns into two classes, those that take the suffixed Pronoun and those that do not. Those that do not are in the condition of all Polynesian Nouns; there is a Possessive, with the appropriate Pronoun suffixed, which goes with the Noun and qualifies as a Possessive Adjective would do. Melanesians, generally at least, would not have their word for money in the class of Nouns which takes the suffixed Pronoun ; they cannot, like the Malagasy, say volako, but noqu lavo in Fiji, nok som in Mota, nigua na rono in Florida ; and these Possessives exactly correspond to the Polynesian toku, inasmuch as they consist of a nominal stem no or ni, signifying a thing belonging, and the Pronoun suffixed. We see then a general agreement in the practice of suffixing a Pronoun to make a Possessive, and a general agreement in the Pronoun suffixed ; but we see a difference in the use, in that the Melanesians suffix to a certain fixed class of common Nouns, Malays to common Nouns indiscriminately, and Poly- nesians to no common Nouns at all. If then the Melanesians have borrowed these suffixed Pronouns, whence have they borrowed them ? and how is it that they use them according to strict rule unknown to Malays or Polynesians ? It appears that it is no case of borrowing, but that these Pronouns which are suffixed and the practice of suffixing them are common property, which the Melanesians use in a more elaborate way. In fact, it is very instructive to observe that one of the first effects on a Melanesian language of inter- course with foreigners is a relaxation of this rule of theirs ; they come down to the Polynesian level ; they use the possessive noqu, nok, or whatever it may be, with all common Nouns alike, to make their language more easy to strangers because less idiomatic. It is no longer tamak, tamaqu, my father, but noqu tama, nok mama, like toku matua, like the Pigeon English ' father belong-a-me.' It is impossible surely Introduction. 29 to doubt that the Melanesians have the ancient idiomatic use 1 . If further examples are needed, they are easily supplied by the Verbs. It is characteristic of the Ocean languages gene- rally that the Verbs are preceded by certain particles which mark them as being Verbs, and to a certain extent fix tense and mood. But these particles are not used in Malay, though they are present and mark tense in Madagascar and the Philippine Islands. Here then is a grammatical feature which connects the Ocean languages together. Another characteristic of Melanesian Verbs is the termination which turns a neuter Verb into a transitive one, or gives a definite direction to one already active, the taka, caka, raka of Fiji, tag, sag, rag of Mota, the ni, M, li, ti of Florida, and n, s, I, t of Mota. These terminations in some form, like the Verbal Particles, appear in all Melanesian languages ; they are not in Malay or Malagasy, though they are in Javanese to some extent, and they are not in the Polynesian languages except in Samoan 2 , and in that not very conspicuous. The presence of the termination in Javanese and in Samoan shows this grammatical form not to be purely Melanesian, but it is very characteristically so. In Fijian, for example, it is the most conspicuous feature in the language, and it is certainly a very effective mode of speech. If then the Melanesians have borrowed this form, whence have they borrowed it? It is indeed, a little of it, in the Polynesian language, but the ample and elaborate forms of Melanesia cannot have been borrowed from that little ; that little in Samoa shows rather that they have retained there something of a common property. Fiji is very near Tonga and has this feature in 1 The Polynesian languages have only two roots, o and a, which are the foundation of their Possessives. Melanesian languages generally have more than two of these possessive nouns ; at least one meaning a nearer, and another a more distant, relation, at most five or six applied to things owned, produced, eaten, drinkable, &c. 2 The reciprocal Samoan verb, with the terminations fcfi, scfi, ta'i, &c. j the termination -alee in Javanese. 30 Melanesian Languages. great force ; Tongan has none of it. If Fiji borrowed verbal particles from Polynesia, whence did it get its definite transi- tive terminations ? If these transitive terminations belong to an original Papuan stock, and therefore are characterist- ically Melanesian, how have they come into Javanese and Samoan ? It is easy to account for their absence in some regions while present in others if they are supposed to belong to a common stock of which all, with various peculiarities, partake : but to account for their conspicuous development in Melanesia, on the supposition that the Melanesians have bor- rowed from Polynesians or Malays, would be certainly very difficult. The mere fact of a comparison being possible between the grammars of the Melanesian languages and those of the Malayan and Polynesian branches of the Ocean family, such as is here attempted, goes some way to show relationship between them all. That they have a great deal in common is unmistakeable ; the question is whether what the Me- lanesians have in common with the others is really their own or borrowed, and, if borrowed, whether there can be found anything of the original languages upon which what has been borrowed from Malayans or Polynesians has been super- induced ? The examination of vocabularies does not seem to disclose any such ancient stratum of words, nor does the com- parison of grammars show any greater difference than may well be consistent with a community of origin. There is perhaps only the one language of Savo among those the grammar of which is here examined which shows a form not to be reconciled with the rest ; but this only in one particular, and with very little known about the language. It is con- ceivable, on the supposition that the languages now spoken by Melanesians are not originally their own, that the original stock is not now represented anywhere, either in vocabulary or grammar, that languages derived from without have en- tirely taken the place of some earlier speech, but it is difficult to allow it to be more than possible. The circumstances that have brought about such a state of things elsewhere do not Introduction. 3 1 seem to have occurred in Melanesia ; and there is the great difficulty that the present Melanesian languages certainly have not been introduced by intruders speaking the present Malay or Polynesian languages. The analogues of the Me- lanesian languages are found in Madagascar, the Philippine Islands, not in Malay ; the Melanesian languages spoken nearest to the Polynesian settlements, such as Sesake near Mae, or in regions, like Fiji, most visited by Polynesians, are distinctly not more Polynesian in character than those that are exposed to no such influence. This is most important in view of the theory that Malay commerce or Polynesian coloni- sation has made Melanesian languages what they are. 9. It has been said, with regard to Melanesian Vocabulary, that it does not appear to coincide at all with any Australian list of words, and the same may be said, though with less confidence, of the Grammar. There is included in the vocabu- laries given hereafter one of Murray Island, situated on the edge of the great reef that fringes Australia, opposite the Gulf of Papua. This is given to show that, although as an island tongue it might be supposed Melanesian, it is quite distinct, so far as this list of words goes, from the Melanesian languages here considered. It is the same with the grammar. The translation of a Gospel in the Murray Island language is quite strange to one accustomed to Melanesian languages ; it is very likely that close study would show many resemblances, but the aspect of the language is strange. It would be too much to assert that it is Australian, but the construction which corresponds to the use of prepositions with nouns by way of making up for the loss of case is also Australian l . Have we then in this an example of the supposed original Melanesian language ? and are there among the New Guinea languages some which agree with this, and are distinct from those which are upon the face of them, like Motu, similar to the ordinary Melanesian tongues ? It would be very natural that in New Guinea the aboriginal population should be the same with 1 ' Nouns form their dative and ablative in im and lam ; plantation gedub, to plantation gedubim, from plantation gedublam? Eev. S. M c Farlane. 32 Melanesian Languages. that of Australia. If it should be so, and upon these should have come the same people who have occupied the Melanesian islands, it would certainly result that one acquainted with the Ocean languages would find himself in a foreign region of speech when he was enquiring into these languages of Aus- tralian affinity 1 . But it would go no way to prove that there are, or ever were, people or languages of the same stock in the Melanesian islands, other than New Guinea. In these latter islands it may be safely asserted that the vocabularies and grammars here given do not show more than one family of language to exist. The languages are very numerous and various, their differences are such as to make them mutually unintelligible, there are some among them that seem to depart considerably from the common type ; but, on the whole, they have a vocabulary and grammar which is found in them all, and in the other Ocean lan- guages in common with them. It is plain that there has been no one unbroken flow of population and of language into and among these islands. There may have been an ancient movement of the primitive inhabitants of the Indian Archipelago of which Melanesia is but a prolongation, which by successive advances has arrived at the very furthest islands. Upon this, age after age, may have succeeded immigrations from one quarter or the other of the Oceanic region, from Micronesia, from Polynesia, from Indonesia again, and these somewhat mixed on their wanderings, possibly with Austra- lian, certainly with Asiatic blood. But the family of popu- 1 Mr. M c Farlane, of the London Mission Society, has been kind enough to send me short vocabularies of the languages of Erub, Tauan, the Fly River, Port Moresby, Kerepuna, South Cape, East Cape, Teste and Heath's Islands, all belonging to the coast of New Guinea, from Torres Straits eastwards. The first three of these, close to Cape York in Australia, contain no words that I know ; all the others have words with which I am familiar as belonging to Solomon Islands, Banks' Islands, and New Hebrides. The suffixed pronouns are shown in tinana, his mother, tinalcu, my mother, and the verbal particle, i, is prefixed, as in Melanesia, to adjectives and to verbs. The pronouns of the first three languages are quite different from the Melanesian, those of the six latter substantially the same. In the numerals the same difference appears, and not merely in words, but in capacity and system. Introduction. 33 lation and of language is apparently one, languages and dialects of one family intermixed, migrations from one stock crossing and intercrossing. We may conceive of the peopling of Melanesia and the settlement of its languages as of the filling with the rising tide of one of the island reefs. It is not a single simultaneous advance of the flowing tide upon an open beach, but it comes in gradually and circuitously by sinuous channels and unseen passages among the coral, rilling up one pool while another neighbouring one is dry, appa- rently running out and ebbing here and there while generally rising, often catching the unwary by an unobserved approach, sometimes deceiving by the appearance of a fresh-water stream on its way into the sea, crossing, intermixing, running con- trary ways, but flowing all the while and all one tide till the reef is covered and the lagoon is full. NOTE. Although the connection of the Melanesian Lan- guages is here considered entirely on the side of language, and ethnological difficulties do not properly belong to the subject, yet such a theory of the ethnological connection of the Me- lanesian people with those of the Ocean races generally, as may be consistent with the varying physical characteristics of the inhabitants of the Indian and Pacific Archipelagos, may perhaps be propounded without presumption. It has been stated above, p. 8, that the Polynesian settlements in Three Hills Island in the New Hebrides, and the Reef Islands near Santa Cruz, show us people physically indistinguishable from Melanesians but speaking a Polynesian language ; whereas isolated Polynesian settlements at Tikopia, Rennell Island, and Bellona, with no Melanesian neighbours, are physically Polynesian. The children speak the language of the village if their mothers are foreigners, still more would they speak the language of the village if their fathers were foreign visitors. Suppose, then, in the islands adjacent to the Asiatic continent a population of dark-coloured and curly- haired physical character with their own language. Suppose 34 Melanesia* Languages. the islands to be settled with this population, originally of one stock, and the gradual settlement of the islands further away to the south-east to be going on by the people of this one stock, their languages diverging as time and distance increase. Suppose Asiatic people, lighter in complexion and straight-haired, to have intercourse with the island people nearest to the continent, going over to trade with them, residing on the island coasts, giving rise to a certain number of half-castes. These half-castes then, in regard to language, would be island people, they would not follow their foreign fathers' speech, but their mothers' and their fellow-villagers' ; but in regard to physical appearance they would be mixed, lighter than their mothers in complexion, with natter features (if their mothers were like Papuans and their fathers like Chinese), and their hair would be straighter. This mixed breed would begin on the coast, and increase ; it would mix in its turn both with the inland people and with the foreign visitors, relatives on the fathers' side. The result, after a time, would be that in the interior of the island the aboriginal inhabitants would remain physically and in speech what they were, but on the coast and towards the coast there would be a great mixture of various degrees of crossings, some very like the Asiatic visitors, some very little unlike the inland people ; but all speaking the island language. Suppose this to be the case in all the islands, most in those nearest the continent, but as time went on and migrations took place extending far beyond, we should find great diversities of appearance, ranging between the light and straight-haired and dark and curly-haired ; yet the languages, various as by distance and isolation they might well become, would show that they belonged to the same stock. This would account for the Malay and Chinese being, if dressed alike, very much alike to look at, and for the Malay and Banks' Islander being a good deal unlike to look at, and it would account for the Malay and Banks' Islander speaking languages of the same stock, and quite distinct from Chinese. It would do more ; it would account for Asiatic words, if there be such, being found Introduction. 35 in Melanesian languages, for some words would come in from the continent, though the language of the islands would not be superseded ; and it would account for the fuller less- decayed grammar of the darker less-mixed people of the further islands. Let a branch of the mixed population, of a certain degree of mixture, go off by themselves where they could mix no more, they would carry a branch of the old stock of language with them which would vary into dialects in time, and they would not change their physical character- istics except as circumstances might modify them ; yet there would naturally be visible among them, as there are among the Maoris of New Zealand, individuals or strains darker and less straight-haired than the rest: the dark ancestry would show. This would account for the Polynesians having a language allied both to the Malay and to the Melanesian. To the Polynesian, who is shocked at being claimed as a relation by a much blacker man than himself, it is answered that he speaks a language very like the Melanesian, but not so complete and full, and that he has a good deal of black blood and shows it. To the Malay, who will equally disclaim his poor relation, it is replied that his speech is that of the dark man, but much decayed and simplified ; and though he has a good deal of Sanskrit and very likely some continental Asiatic words in common use, yet that there is no doubt but that his tongue and that of the Banks' Islanders belong to a common stock. Nor would the truth of this theory be upset if in New Guinea were to be found languages which could not be re- conciled with the island Melanesian tongues. The Austra- lian languages are evidently distinct from these, and the part of New Guinea on the other side of the Torres Straits from Australia has people whose language is not like Melanesian. There may be New Guinea men, Papuans, not Australians nor Melanesians of the Islands ; but if there be, what is here considered is the stock to which the Melanesian islanders and their languages belong. II. VOCABULARIES. MR. WALLACE, in his valuable book on the Malay Archi- pelago, has given Vocabularies of one hundred and seventeen words in thirty-three languages of that Archipelago. He also gives nine words in fifty-nine languages of the Archi- pelago. He divides the Archipelago into two portions, by a line which he conceives to separate the Malayan and all the Asiatic races from the Papuan and all that inhabit the Pacific. This line is not the same as that which divides the animal productions of the same countries ; but since it divides, as is conceived, the races, it must be taken to divide the languages, according to Mr. Wallace's view of the radical distinction between the Malay and Papuan races. This line then would be the boundary of Melanesian and Malayan languages ; and it is of great importance, to the under- standing of the relation of the one set of languages to the other, to ascertain if the distinction thus made holds good according to the Vocabularies. For this purpose the nine words in fifty-nine languages supply convenient matter for investigation. Do these nine words divide themselves into two sets, the one on the one side and the other on the other side of the dividing line ? If they do, we have the boundary of the Papuan and Melanesian Vocabularies ; if they do not, there is no boundary, at least where such an observer as Mr. Wallace marks the difference of physical characteristics. Of the fifty-nine languages twenty- seven are Malayan, according to Mr. Wallace's division, and Vocabularies* 37 thirty-two are Papuan. Examination of the nine words shows them distributed as follows : 1. Slack. Out of fifty-nine words thirty-six are forms to which the Malay itam belongs. Of these thirty-six, ten are on the Malayan side, and twenty-six on the Papuan. More than two-thirds of the Papuan languages have the word which is also Malay; and the proportion is greater on the Papuan side than on the Malayan. 2. Fire. Excluding doubtful words, there are about equal numbers on either side agreeing with the Malay word api ; fifteen out of the twenty-seven Malayan, fourteen out of the thirty- two Papuan. If words rather doubtful, i.e. farther from the form api, are taken, there are many more on the Papuan side. 3. Large. There is no word common by which comparison can be made. Words are very various on both sides. 4. Nose. Here there is the same word in nineteen lan- guages, fourteen on the Malay side, five on the Papuan. The word therefore, in Malay idong, may be claimed as Malayan rather than Papuan. 5. Small. There is no word by which to make a division. 6. Tongue. There is an approach to a division of words corresponding to the supposed division of races. The Malay lidah has seventeen on its side, against one Papuan ; the other word, ma, has twelve Papuan to two Malayan. 7. Tooth. This most common word occurs eighteen times, and in nearly equal proportions on either side ; eight on the Malayan, ten on the Papuan. Malay itself is an ex- ception. 8. Water. Taking ayer to be the same as wai, thirty-four of the fifty-nine are the same. Of these, twenty-five are on the Papuan side, nine only on the Malayan ; but Malay itself has the Papuan word. 9. White. The Malay word putih is very common on both sides, thirty-five out of fifty-nine. But about half the Ma- layan languages have it, and two-thirds of the Papuan. It is rather then Papuan than Malayan. 38 Melanesia* Languages. On the whole, it is from this Vocabulary quite impossible to draw a line between the languages. In only one case out of nine do words arrange themselves on the two sides of the line in accordance with the proposed division of the races. So much being ascertained, we can compare with more satisfaction Melanesian Vocabularies with those of the Malay Archipelago ; and Mr. Wallace's Vocabularies supply an ex- cellent basis for comparison. It is evident that those voca- bularies can be taken as a whole, and that there is no danger, while concerned with them, of travelling beyond reasonable and legitimate limits of comparison. To go further beyond, and search for likeness between Melanesian words and those belonging to the continent of Asia, would be to go altogether beyond the inquiry which is undertaken here. What is pro- posed is to compare Melanesian vocabularies together, so as to ascertain what evidence they show as to the possession of a common stock of words ; and further to compare the Me- lanesian words with those of other Ocean languages which may add their testimony to that of the Malay Archipelago lists and make the comparison tolerably general and com- plete. Vocabularies are here given of seventy words in forty Melanesian languages, the words being chosen from those of Mr. Wallace's list. Many of his words are inapplicable in islands where metals are unknown ; and there were good reasons for leaving out others. With the Melanesian words are added, for comparison, the corresponding ones in Malay, Malagasy, and the New Zealand Maori. Words from Murray Island, an island between Australia and New Guinea, are given among the Melanesian for the sake of the example it affords of a vocabulary very unlike the others, where a Me- lanesian language would perhaps be expected. Only one is given of New Guinea, from a part where the language is clearly very near to those of the Solomon Islands. Vocabularies. 39 SEVENTY WORDS IN FOKTY MEtANESIAN LANGUAGES. I. Ashes. i. Sad. 3. Banana. 4. Belly. 5. Bird. I. Nengone cekole nia hnamaco ore ia 2. Anaiteum ohpa has nos etga man 3. Eromanga owanta sat tini minok 4. Fate tano ou sa at kweli manu 5. Sesake tano au sa adi bele manu 6. Api poparua pirai, adi sine manu 7. Ambrym hagavi vi bwehel 8. Espiritu Santo avuavu oso vetali tia nanu 9. Whitsuntide taniavu hantai ihi siqeni manu 10. Lepers' Island qie esi votali taqanigi manu ii. Aurora digevu seseta udi taqa?iii manu 12. Meralava vurua sasat vetal teqei man 13. Santa Maria, Gog tarowo tes vatal toqan man 14. Lakon tawehav sa vetal toqan inah 15. Vanua Lava, Pak uwus se ve'el eqei men 1 6. Sasar uwus se ve'el eqegi men 17. Vureas wowo tisi vetel toqai man 1 8. Mosina tuwus tisi vetel toqegi man 19. alo Teqel UWU8 see ve'el oqegi mon 20. Mota tarowo tatas vetal toqai manu 21. Saddle Island, Motlav wowo het vtel tqege men 22. Volow ao heat vetel teqegi men 23. TJreparapara powo, puio set vetel toqegi man 24. Torres Islands, Lo. wowa hia vetel toqa mon 2.> Fiji dravu ca vudi kete manumanu 26. Eotuma roh raksa pori ef inanman 27. Santa Cruz bu jia bepi bole kio 28. Nifilole nublese ea nou noweso deguluo 29. Ulawa ora tataala liuti iia manu 30. San Cristoval, Wano dohu taa hugi ahu manu Fagani ravu tai fuki oba manu 31. Malanta, Saa pwasa ora eaiala huti lie manu Bululaha ora tataala huti opa manu Alite ora taa bau oga malu 32. Vaturana ravu taulaka vudi toba manu 33. Florida ravu dika vudi kutu manu 34. Savo lavu isarowo sou pika kosu 35. Ysabel, Bugotu pidaravu dika vudi kutu manu 36. ao parafu di'a jau tia waji 37. New Georgia eba jena batia tia oloko 38. Duke of York kabu akakai un bala pika rowo 39. Murray Island adud . kaba adua 40. New Guinea, Motu kaliu tika / boka manu Malay habu jahat pisang prut burung Malagasy lavenona ratfti ontsy kibo vorona Maori pungarehu kino kopu manu Melanesian Languages. 6. Black. 7. Blood. 8. Boat. 9. Body. 10. Bone. I. Nengone nashene dra koe hnengome dure 2. Anaiteum apig injairan elcau ohu eduo 3. Eromanga de lo okilis oiran 4. Fate gota ta rarua kwatoko vatu 5. Sesake maeto da rarua saranaliokakana vatu 6. Api mokoliko wa^a, rarua puriu 7. Atnbrym bulbul 8. Espiritu Santo naeto tsae ovo oson sui 9. Whitsuntide meto daga wa.g'a repehi hui 10. Lepers' Island maeto dai &g& turegi huigi 1 1 . Aurora osooso dai aka turii surii 1 2. Meralava silsilig dar ak turi suri 13. Santa Maria, Gog wirwiriga dar ak turgi suri 14. Lakon wiwirig dara ak tigri suri 1 5. Vanua Lava, Pak malegleg tar ok arpegi sirigi 16. Sasar melegleg tar ak arpegi sirigi 1 7. Vureas korkor dar ak turgi sir! 1 8. Mosina meliglig nar ak turgi surgi 19. alo Teqel melegleg tar ok arpegi sirigi 20. Mota silsiliga nara aka turiai suriu 21. Saddle Island, Motlav mlegleg dar ok trige hir 22. Volow sisilig dar g tarbegi hir 23. Ureparapara melilia dar ak tarepegi hirin 24. Torres Islands, Lo. meligaliga dara eka tarapi hur 25- Fiji loaloa dra waqa yago sui 26. Rotuma lahlah tot ak for sui 27. Santa Cruz bo newia loju neke ^lu 28. Nifilole weo dela loasiu namele ve 29. Ulawa rodohono apu haka sape suisuli 30. San Cristoval, Wawo buruburu'a abu haka abe suri Fagani buruburuga kara faka ape suri 31. Malanta, Saa rotohono apu baka sape suisuli Bululaha pulpulu'a apu haka sape suli ,, Alite golu abu va^a rape rabegu 32. Vaturaa bora habu vaka kokora suli 33. Florida bili gabu vaka huli huli 34. Savo boraga gabu vaka mejila tovolo 35. Ysabel, Bugotu jowo gaugabu vaka tono huli 36. (?ao dodofu dadara vaka tono huli 37. New Georgia kiki juka vaka susuri 38. Duke of York marut A'.ap aa pani uri 39. Murray Island qoleqole mam nar lid 40. New Guinea, Motu koremakorema rara lakatoi tau Malay itam darah prau badan tulang Malagasy mainty ra lakana tena taolana Maori mangu toto whaka tinana iwi Vocabularies. II. Bow. 12. Butterfly. 13. Child. 14. Cocoa- 15. Cold. nut. I. Nengone pehna wabiengo tene, tei nu leulebue 2. Anaiteum tana teijig halav aig idoido 3. Eromanga nitni 4. Fate asu pepe karikik niu milate 5. Sesake asu gari niu maladi 6. Api (Pama, hisu) viu lepepe susua niu manini 7. Ambrym yu terera ol mala 8. Espiritu Santo vus paule matui narir 9. Whitsuntide ihu pepe nitui niu masisi 10. Lepers' Island vuhu bebe natugi matui madidi II. Aurora usu bebe natui matua madidiw 12. Meralava VU8 beb nati matua mamarir 13. Santa Maria, Gog vus beb iiatu motu mamerir 14. ., Lakon vus pep natun matu misiw 15. Vanua Lava, Pak vus pep nenigi me'ig mamgit 1 6. Sasar vus pep ni'igi mi'ig manwit 1 7. Vureas vus rom notui moto mamegin 18. Mosina vus rup natugi moto mamegin 19. alo Teqel vus pep niigi mi'ig mamgit 20. Mota us rupe natui matig mamarir 21. Saddle Island, Motlav ih beb nten mtig momrir 22. Volow ih beb netei metig mamrir 23. Ureparapara wuh peb juin meji mamedin 24. Torres Islands, Lo. u pip magola matu melehih 25- Fiji dakai, vucu bebe gone niu liliwa 26. Botuma fan pep lelea, riri uiu matitf 27. Santa Cruz netevu bo ito nalu abao 28. Nifilole jeepoa mumulo dowolili nu balelo 29. Ulawa pasi pepe kale niu wawai 30. San Cristoval, Wao ba'e bebe gare niu wanusi Fagani aepage pepe kare niu magauga 31. Malanta, Saa pasi pepe kale niu wawai Bululaha pasi pepe kale mela niu wowai Alite basi iigra gale liu guaguari 32. Vaturawa periga bebe baka niu bisi 33. Florida bage uleulebe dale, <7ari niu bihi 34. Savo bage bebeula niuba gazu gaule 35. Ysabel, Bugotu bage aloalo dathe, ^ari niu gaula 36. Gao ba'esu kokou tuna koilo luuna 37. New Georgia bakala koburu Mosara gamu 38. Duke of York toto nat lama madarig 39. Murray Island sareg kap uerem bunari gebgeb 40. New Guinea, Motu peva kaubebi miro niu kerukeru Malay panah kupukupu anak klapa dingin Malagasy renifa lolo zanak nihu malaina Maori kopere pepepe tamaiti makariri Melanesian Languages. 1 6. Door. 17. E a r. 18. Egg. 19. Face. 20. Father- I. Nengone pa ma wabaiwa wa tei paegogo caca a. Anaiteum eucse neom tikga hakli soga nimta etma 3. Eromanga buketampiat teligo akli ipmi temi 4. Fate meta taliga toli rai tema 5. Sesake mata ki kopu dalina tolu nako tama 6. Api dalina kokolu mara ara 7. Ambrym rii 8. Espiritu Santo natan na ima saliga gotolina nago tetai 9. Whitsuntide mat gatava qero toll lol mata tama 10. Lepers' Island matai vale qerogi toligi nagogi mama II. Aurora gatame vale qoroi tolii nagoi tata 12. Meralava meteim qoroi utoli nagoi mam 13. Santa Maria, Gog mate govur qoron tolin nago mama 14. Lakon mate uma telwan wii nawon mam 15. Vanua Lava, Pak me'e e telwegi olgi nogogi mam 1 6. Sasar me'e qeqek telwegi olgi nogogi mam 1 7. Vureas mate govur qoroi wowese nogoi mam 1 8. Mosina meteim qorogi weswesegi nugugi mam 19. alo Teqel me'e qeqek telwegi olgi nogogi mam 20. Mota mateima qoroi toliu nagoi tama 21. Saddle Island, Motlav mteem delmege tlen ngoge mam 22. Volow meteem delnegi tili negegi mam 23. Ureparapara mete e delwegi juluin weregi mam 24. Torres Islands, Lo. mete ima daliwa tul nago ma 25- Fiji katuba daliwa yaloka mata tama 26. Rotuma nusura faliaw kaleuf maf o' fa 27. Santa Cruz neva dole li maku nuwe 28. Nifilole ba a foa gdko nuolie nuoeinibe tumai 29. Ulawa ma na nima alma saulu maa ama 30. San Cristoval, W&no ma nai ruma karma poupou ma ama Fagani ma rima kariwa oru ma wama 31. Malanta, Saa ma na nume alme maopu ma ama Bululaha ma na nima ali/za maomaopu ma ama Alite ma luma alma rau li main lao mae mama 32. Vaturawa samani kuli duva mata tama 33. Florida mataula kuli tolu mata tama 34. Savo ^ola ta^alu sii nito mao 35. Ysabel, Bugotu hagetha i vale kuli kidoru mata tama 36. G&o tana kuli keredi matata ma 37. New Georgia tolagra talerae vovo to mata mama 38. Duke of York bona na naka taliga kiau mata tama 39. Murray Island girip babi 40. New Guinea, Motu ituala taia vaira tama Malay pintu telinga tulor muka bapa Malagasy varavarana sofina tody tarehy ray Maori tatau taringa hua mata matua tane Vocabularies. 43 21. Finger. 22. Fire. 23. Fish. 24. Flesh. 25. Fly. I. Nengone tubenine iei wa ie iaile nengo 2. Anaiteum upsikma cap numu emihta lag 3. Eromanga dugerugo om nomu elat 4. Fate kini kapu ika pakas lago 5. Sesake kini kapu ika visiko 6. Api sulima kapi ika 7. Ambrym av ika, malo 8. Espiritu Santo pisu gapu natj visigo latto 9. Whitsuntide pihu gapi ige vigoho larao 10. Lepers' Island bisugi avi ige vihigogi lareo 11. Aurora bisui avi masi visigoi lawo 12. Meralava bisi av ig visgoi law 13. Santa Maria, Gog bisu av eg moswivin la wo 14. Lakon pisin av mah pihvi ItlH. 15. Vanua Lava, Pak pusugi ev ig vosogi Ian 1 6. Sasar pusugi ev inanat vosgegi Ian 1 7. Vureas busui ev mes vusgoi Ian 1 8. ,, Mosina pusugi ev e g visugi Ian 19. alo Teqel pusugi ev eg vosgegi Ian 20. Mota pisui avi iga visogoi lawo 21. Saddle Island, Motlav bhuge ev eg vhog len 22. Volow bihigi ev eg vohog Ian 23. Ureparapara pusugi ev ie viho Ian 24. Torres Islands, Lo. pub. ev iga vog lew 25- Fiji gagalo ni liga buka waqa ika lewe lago 26. Rotuma kak'e rahe i'a tiko Ian 27. Santa Cruz tokiamu gnie no vode mo 28. Nifilole ( gogago nime ( (nails, bisi nime) nie si nuwe nula 29. Ulawa kiki tuwa ia hasio lawo 30. San Cristoval, Wao kakau eu i'a hasio lawo Fagani kakau giu iga visogo rawo 31. Malanta, Saa riirii tuwa iie hasio laMo Bululaha uu tuna i'a hinasu lawo Alite ^rau duwa ia vilisi lawo 32. Vaturawa ririki lake cheche venesi lano 33. Florida giffiri lake iga vinahi lano 34. Savo karakara bizi keda mii melomelo kurigidi 35. Ysabel, Bugotu kaukau joto fei vinahi thawo 36. #ao 0e#esu kaagi sasa nnahi (flanu 37. New Georgia kakarisi ikusu ihana borabora dodo 38. Duke of York kalkali na lima ugan ian pani lag 39. Murray Island ur lar gem nager 40. New Guinea, Motu dodori laki lao Malay jari api ikan daging langau Malagasy rantsan tanana afo (fiana) nofo lalitra Maori matehao ahi ika kikokiko ngaro 44 Melanesian Languages. 26. Fowl. 27. Fruit. 28. Good. 29. Hair. 30. Hand. I. Nengone titewe wawene roi ie hawo wa nine a. Anaiteum jaa howa upene umri ikma 3. Eromanga tuwo buwa ariiui ov limpu nokobe 4. Fate to ua wia lulu ru 5. Sesake toa wa qia ululu ru 6. Api to po ilu lima 7. Ambrym to wi bua ili, wolu vera 8. Espiritu Santo toa va pei vul gave 9. Whitsuntide toa wai tavuha ilu lima 10. Lepers' Island toa wai rea vulugi limegi ii. Aurora kur oi wia ului lima 12. Meralava ov we wia uli lima 1 3. Santa Maria, Gog toa we wi vulu lima 14. Lakon to wehi we vul lima 15. Vanua Lava, Pak to wewegi we viligi pinigi 1 6. Sasar to wowegi we viligi pinigi 1 7. Vureas to wie we vului peni 1 8. ,, Mosina to weegi we vulugi penigi 19. alo Teqel to wowegi we viligi pinigi 20. Mota toa woai wia ului panei 21. Saddle Island, Motlav to we we ilige bnege 22. Volow kav wenen we iligi benegi 23. Ureparapara to wo wie wulugi pinigi 24. Torres Islands, Lo. to win wia ul pan 25- Fiji toa vua vinaka vulu liga 26. Rotuma moa hue lelei leva si'u 27. Santa Cruz kio va mela nini na ve mu 28. Nifilole kio nua fako lu nime 29. Ulawa kua hua tiana waraehu nimanima 30. San Cristoval, Wawo kua hua goro warehu rinianma Fagani kua fua koro waraefu ruma 31. Malanta, Saa kua hua tiana warehu ninime Bululaha kua hua tiana uuhu kikii Alite vuavua oka ivu limalima 32. Vaturawa kokoroko vuvua vasea ivu kima 33. Florida kokoroko vuavua uto ulu lima 34. Savo kokoroko igu dai luta kakau 35. Ysabel, Bugotu kokorako sagaro toke sesehu lima 36.