276 REVIEWS. 



with Ligature ay (p. 130-134), Modifying Verbs (p. 134-138), Negatives 

 (p. 138-148), which are among the most interesting of the book, show 

 clearly' how profoimdly the author has penetrated the intimacy of Igorot 

 speech notwithstanding the short time allowed him for its practical study. 

 The grammar in general convinces us that the material, in the first 

 place, has been collected with great care and diligence, and afterward 

 very studiously arranged so as to present it to the student as one 

 systematic whole. 



It is in connection with tliis latter point, namely, tlie systematization given 

 by the author to his matter, that I wish here to tal<e up and extend a little the 

 remarks made at the beginning on the formation of Philippine grammars in 

 the past. 



Since it has been recogiiized that every language carries its order in itself, 

 it is a just demand that this natural metliodical disposition of its several parts 

 be made the basis upon which the structure of any language, or group of closely 

 related languages, be presented in a grammar. In the older Philippine grammars, 

 those written by Spanish friars, we find this principle generally not carried out, 

 either because it had not yet been established clearly and universally at that 

 time, or because any attempt to evolve a natural system or order was subordinated 

 to the practical purpose of instructing the younger members of those religious 

 corporations in a manner then considered most adapted to their previous schooling 

 in Latin. The fact is that Latin furnished the model for these Indonesian 

 languages. Latin grammatical categories, by more or less specious interpretation 

 of the native forms, were also found in Tagalog, Pampanga, Pangasinan, etc. 

 As far as concerns the interest of the vernaculars, and not that of the students, 

 the procedure was clearly recognized as improper, at least by some authors. 

 Thus P. Francisco Lopez, the excellent Ilocanist. says: "Aujique el idioma de estas 

 lenguas es muy diferente de el de la leiigua latina; con todo eso, en cuanto fuere 

 posible, nos conformarftnos con el metodo de el Arte de Antonio de Nebrija, por 

 ser &. por donde los mas de los Religiosos que vienen k estas Islas han estudiado 

 el latin. Y asl hallarfin mas claridad y facilidad en aprender esta lengua."' 

 But the evil produced, the obscuration of the genuine character of these languages, 

 makes itself felt till to-day, both in the Pliilippines and outside, and the condemn- 

 ation in Doctor Seidenadel's Bontok Grammar of a particular "fallacy" — of which 

 more presently — merits the more attention as he is a classicist himself. How ill 

 adapted Latin as a grammatical taskmaster for an Indonesian language really is, 

 may be gathered from an extract of what may be called a summary of the short- 

 comings of Auatronesian languages if tested upon the presence in them of 

 grammatical forms characteristic of inflectional languages, as given by Doctor 

 Codrington in his classical work on the Melanesian languages: "These languages, 

 all of them, are destitute of inflexions, and this gives them a common character. 

 There are, therefore, no Declensions or Conjugations: there are no Cases, no 

 Genders, and, excepting Pronouns, there is no Number or Person. Since, then, 

 these grammatical forms do not exist, it is unreasonable and undesirable to speak 

 of them as if existing .... Corresponding T\ith the absence of Inflexion there 

 is an absence of those variations in the form of words which may distinguish 

 the Parts of Speech. It is not that there is a complete absence of such special 



^ Grainatica ilocana, compuesta por el P. Predicador Fr. Francisco Lopez .... 

 Third edition, Malabon (1895) p. XIII. (First edition 1627.) 



