40 Transactions.— Miscellaneous. 
The two (i.e., one and the other)—raua, Maori, Rarotongan, Tahitian ; 
laua, Hawaiian ; guinauua, Tongan. 
In the Plural— 
We (inclusive)—Maori, tatou ; Rarotongan, Tahitian, and Marquesan, 
tatoou ; Hawaiian, kakoou; Tongan, guitautolu. 
’e (exclusive)—Maori, matow; Rarotongan, Tahitian, Marquesan, 
matoou; Hawaiian, makoou ; Tongan, guimautolu. 
You—Maori, koutou ; Rarotongan, kotou ; Tahitian, Marquesan, outou 
Hawaiian, oukou; Tongan, guimotolu. 
They (masculine and feminine)—Maori, ratou ; Rarotongan, Tahitian, 
ratoou ; Hawaiian, eakoou ; Tongan, guinautolu. 
M. Buschmann points out certain peculiarities in the above Tongan 
words, as, for instance, the use of gui, the preposition of the Dative, and 
mo. The Tongan also uses the pure form for three, namely tolu (Maori, 
Rarotongan, and Tahitian, toru; Hawaiian, kolu). The Rarotongan, 
Tahitian, and Hawaiian drop the consonant of the numeral, and the Maori 
makes a further contraction of the vowels, In Tahitian, aow of the 
Pronoun of the First Person Singular is abridged into ou, after the preposi- 
tions a, 0, na, no, ta, to, ia (Buschmann, p. 181), the elision being denoted 
by an apostrophe ; and the pronoun ta, both in Tahitian and Marquesan, 
generally combines with the o of the Nominative and Accusative, making 
ova ; and, also, after the above preposition, takes the form na, preceded by 
an apostrophe, as, to ia becomes to’na, of him, his ; ia’na, to him, etc., for 
ia ia.* But the most remarkable thing in the Polynesian personal pronoun 
is the existence of two distinct forms in the Dual and the Plural, distin- 
guishing those persons who are really subordinate to the speaker from those 
who are not. Thus Maua, we two, means, I and my associate, not you. 
Taua, we, that is, 1 and you. So Matou, we (not you); tatou, we (with you). 
Mr. Logan points out (‘ Journ. Ind. Arch.,”’ Vol. V., p. 231) that this remark- 
able idiom is found, also, in the Malay and Philippine languages. The 
speaker is-considered as the centre of being and action, and, in agreement 
with this, the present and future tenses are, as a rule, indicated in the 
Polynesian dialects by the definite article. Mr. Logan also thinks, that, to 
the idea of personality, which has a great influence in crude national 
minds and languages, is due, also, the double form of the possessive ; viz 
bes 
* It is a pity that more care has not been taken in the printing different Polynesian 
he American missionaries, on the other hand, he adds, distinguish in Hawaiian thus ; 
writing a’ou, na’ou for of me, mine, and aou, naou, of thee, thine 
