444 SIDNEY H. RAY. 
use often exchange themselves one for the other, may be question- 
able.” But for the “philosophy of things we are not seeking.” 
As a first remark upon the verb we may say, in almost the open- 
ing sentence of the Author of the Hawaiian Grammar, “in com- 
parison with European languages the Hawaiian verb has many 
peculiarities. In every full sentence of these languages a verb is 
necessary to complete the idea intended. No so in Hawaiian ; 
some of the most common, clear, and strong affirmatives are fully 
expressed without any verb.” This feature is also characteristic 
of the Ponape verb. 
2. We will here group as far as we can all that is said ina 
preliminary way of the verb. 
(1) The grammar states: In Hawaiian a verb is not necessary 
to complete the idea. This, as stated above is true also of 
the Ponape sentence. 
(2) In Hawaiian there is no verb to express the idea of existence 
or being. This is expressed by particles, and by the pro- 
noun in the nominative or objective cases. Ponape has 
the same use. 
(3) There are no verbs in Hawaiian (and also in Ponape) to 
aflirm the quality of a substance, this being done by 
adjectives, nouns or pronouns. 
(4) The verbs ‘to possess,’ ‘to have,’ in the Hawaiian are want- 
ing, equally so in Ponape. 
(5) The verbs to express duty or obligation are wanting in 
Hawaiian and also in Ponape. 
(6) There are no variations of the Hawaiian verb to express 
number or person, neither are there any in the Ponape. 
In both languages the pronoun expresses these, and more 
distinctly than the noun. 
3. We here reach what may be called the “accidents of the 
verb,” and will now give the verb as affected by these. In the 
three numbers, singular, dual, and plural, the paradigm ee 
follows :— 
