52 Transactions. —Miscellaneous. 
kore, in Maori and Rarotongan ; kurang, in Malay ; kourang, in Javanese; 
kolang in Tagala)—is treated as a Verb in Tahitian and preceded by the 
particles ¢ or a. 
The Adjective roa (same in Maori; loa, in Tongan and Hawaiian ; dhava, 
in Javanese ; lava, in Malagasi). ‘“ Long” is used in Tahitian for “ very” 
and placed before the Adjective ; so, also, ino, bad; and in Hawaiian and 
Marquesan, nui, great, as, ca nua, very high. On the subject of the Pre- 
positions, I will only add that the following seem to be the simplest forms 
of them in Maori :—E, i, ki, hei, no, na, mo, ma, hei, 0, a, ko, to, and that 
most of them may be recognised in the other dialects; as, in Tongan and 
Rarotongan—a, e, ki, t, 0; mo, na, no, in Mangarevan, ete. M. Buschmann 
shows that in Tahitian i is employed in many and various ways—the same 
relations being found also in Marquesan. He considers it represents the ¢ 
of the Hawaian, the Ai of the Maori and Rarotongan, and the hing of 
Javanese ; it is applied in Tahitian to all times, while ¢ and é have also 
a general similarity of sense ; on the other hand, a is restricted to times 
future, and na and i na to times past, as is the case also with ne and ine 
in Hawaiian. 
There bring to a close the few observations I have thought it worth 
while to make on certain forms occurring in different Polynesian dialects, 
and, while I am sure that they admit of almost walimited expansion, I 
venture to hope that these will be considered sufficient to determine the 
question that the leading Oceanic dialects—the Maori, Tongan, Tahitian, and 
awalian—are the remains of one original and wide-spread language. It 
now only remains that I should attempt to draw some conclusions from the 
evidence adduced in the previous pages, so far at least as this seems to 
point to the ultimate origin of the Polynesian population. Now, I think it 
will be admitted that, whenever I have found in such books as I have had the 
opportunity of examining, any apparent connexion between the Polynesian 
and other peoples, I have, in all cases, endeavoured to notice them. Thus I 
haye repeatedly called attention to siinilarities existing between the Malay 
languages and one or more of the Polynesian dialects, with this principal 
object, that I might confirm, as far as I could, the evidence brought forward 
y Mr. Thomson, in the Appendix to “Trans. N. Z%. Inst.” Vol. VI. 
ees poet to. That there is some connexion, I do not suppose any 
ne can doubt who will take the trouble of fairly considering Mr. Thomson’s 
arguments. The question is, how has this arisen ? Have we, in short, 
any further reasons to support this connexion, and is what Mr. Thomson 
has urged, sufficient to enable us to say, unhesitatingly, that the Polynesians 
are Malays? I hardly think so; for what we are sure of amounts to 
