REVIEWS. 277 



foi'ms as Verb oi' Koun, but that the same word, without any change of form, 

 may be in use as almost any of the parts of Speech. The use of the word, not its 

 form, eommonl}' declares its character "" 



The first among Spanish grammarians to depart from the traditional Latin 

 observance was probably P. Toribio Minguella. For the use of other than Latin- 

 bred students he publislied in 1878 a Tagalog grammar which, perhaps on account 

 of its being an attempt in a new direction, he modestly called "Ensayo de 

 gramatioa hispano-tagala." In this work he endeavors to do more justice to the 

 language itself. Besides fitting the grammar for practical use by giving exercises 

 and matter for reading and translating, he guides himself, in presenting the 

 structure of the language, more by its own forms, and introduces certain terms 

 denoting grammatical categories under discussion of their definition and their 

 applicability to Tagalog. 



As was seen in a previous quotation from Doctor Seidenadel's preface, the 

 proper arrangement of his material has been with him likewise a matter of 

 consideration. Consulting in this respect the convenience of students trained in 

 Indogermanic languages, he decided to adhere, with slight modifications, to the 

 customary order observed in those grammars, designating that order, however, 

 as one applied to his grammar only "as if the Bontoc language would distinguish 

 the same grammatical categories as the Indogermanic languages." We are, then, 

 not at liberty to look upon the order followed by the author as representing his 

 views on the proper systematic presentation of an Indonesian language such as 

 Bontoc Igorot; but we are also absolved for . the same reason, from giving 

 consideration to that hypothetical plan from this point of view. 



Still, as already indicated above, at one point of his chosen plan the author 

 makes a strong criticism of the views held by a number of Indonesian philologists 

 concerning certain classes of derivatives particularly characteristic of Philippine 

 langTiages, and since the reviewer is completely in accord with the negative part 

 of the author's contention, and believes that the time has come for a revision of 

 prevailing views involved, he extracts here some of the paragraphs in Doctor 

 Seidenadel's grammar which bear directly on the matter. 



212. If roots shall be formed into Nomina actionis, they receive (after certain 



phonetic changes [220]) one of these verbalizing particles: 

 I. the suffix -en (but no prefix) 

 II. The suffix -an (but no prefix) 

 III. the prefix i- (but no suffix) 



213. By combination with one of these particles the root is transformed into an 



Active Verbal Noun. The particles indicate that the action named by 

 the root passes from the agent to an object. They give the Active 

 Verbal Noun transitive force. 

 216. Since the Nomen Actionis possesses active force — as has become evident 

 through many various experiments with the spoken language — the 

 relations of the direct object or accusative, in our conception, to the 

 Nomen Actionis with -en is: (a) Either the object of the Nom. act. is 

 in the accusative; it is governed by the Nom. Act. which has its 

 transitive force in the suflix -en. If we represent this transitive force of 



- The jMelanesian Languages by R. H. Codrington, D. D. Oxford 1855, pp. 

 101-102. The judgment quoted may appear somewhat severe; as a remedy against 

 the belief in the universality of Latin categories, it is certainly wholesome. 



