278 REVIEWS. 



-en by our verbs "to affect," or "to concern" or "to influence," we obtain 

 this translation: 



leytjenmi tjaitja: our liking concerns them.' ih) Or the object is in 

 the predicative nominative; the transitive force of -en may be indicated 

 by words like "aim," "object": 



alaeniako nan tolfeg : our taking-object (is) : the key 



217. The relation of the object to the Nomen actionis with suffix -an is analogous 



to the construction mentioned in [216], if we assume the possibility 

 that -an is probably identical with -acn, or merely a variation of -en, in 

 this combination with JSTom. actionis. The following theory seems to 

 be more plausible: -an is the locative particle, as affixed to substantives 

 in [56-58]. The object is the place where the action named by the 

 Active Nom. act. "takes place", to which it tends; it is the end of the 

 action. We can translate: 



ayakantako nan aliwidtako our calling-end (is): the man' 



218. The relation of the object to Nomina actionis with the prefix i- appears 



to be the same as that to Nom. Act. with -en; i- performs here a similar 

 function as -en does there; i- directs the action towards the aim, the 

 object. 



(/- may be compared with our prefix be- in be-speak, befall: or it may 

 represent the preposition is, and may then be compared with invade, 

 offend, persuade, provide, and other prepositional compounds.) 



: In certain cases i- points to a person in whose behalf another acts, and 

 to the tool which a person uses in performing or executing that which 

 the Nom. act. names; 



itafongko nan soklongna my hiding aft'ects his hat. The discussion of 

 the constructions in the examples of -en, -an, i- Verbs given [216-218] 

 was attempted for the purpose of facilitating translation and re- 

 translation and with the assumption that there were in Bontoc IgOrot 

 cases of the substantive, distinctions between nominative and accusative, 

 which do, in fact, no exist: the Bontoc Igorot does not distinguish 

 between Casus rectus and obliquus. 



Later, on page 95, the author returns incidentally to the subject under the 

 heading Future Passive: 



The imperative [of the Passive] does not exist : any theoretical forms and 

 any experimentative use of them in sentences were unexceptionally denied; 

 "Because you cannot tell a man what shall be done to him" . . . (But the 

 misnamed "Three Passives" (the "Genus Relativum", my Active "Possessive 

 Verbs") were put in the Imperative without hesitation; this shows also that the 

 ■en, -an, i- verbs are conceived to be Active Nomina Agentis. )° 



To the parenthetical clause of paragraph 218 above quoted the following is 

 added as a footnote: 



However convenient for minds trained, to some extent, iu Latin, the Doctrine of 

 the Three Passives has appeared, centuries ago, to its inventor, and however 

 credulously his disciples climg to this perverse interpretation of the Active Verbal 

 Noun (Nom. actionis) in Tagalog and in the dialects of several other tribes — in 

 the Bontoc Igorot Language the Verbal Noun is certainly not passive, but active 

 in its character. 



' Here as in the paragraphs following I give only one of several examples. 

 For diacritical marks used with Bontok words, compare the original. (Rev.) 

 * "Man" is but a lapsus for "our friend" { Rev. ) 

 " Agentis ? ( Rev. ) 



