108 REV. FR. J. HOFFMANN", S.J. 



The terms miru and kare imply that the person addressed by the speaker is a 

 relation of his and somewhat younger than himself ; at the same time they show that 

 he speaks to him with a confiding tenderness, for these terms of endearment are not 

 currently used by mere relatives, but only in confidential and affectionate conversation. 

 Since in the typical Mundari village all the male members of the community are descen- 

 dants of the same ancestors, they are all more or less closely related. Hence we may 

 conclude that the speaker addresses one of his cousins of his own village who chances 

 to be just a trifle younger than himself and whom, consequently, he may call miru or 

 kare. 



Having completed his picture the poet now proceeds to use it for the purpose he 

 has in view. 



Composed on the same principles as the first, his second stanza is intended to form 

 a shocking contrast with the first : the pleasing picture must be utterly destroyed, and 

 this is done by simply substituting for the jingles j enged' -j enged' and kere-bore, two 

 synonymous predicates denoting the felling and the downfall of trees : gur to fell and 

 rauruo' to fall down. In the first of these a melic e is inserted before the passive affix 

 jan and an o added at the end. In the second line the predicate rauruo' changes the 

 u into e and throws off the categorical a at the end. 



Burura edelo, miru ! gurejanao miru ! 

 Berara' kadalo, kare ! raurejan ! 



The (majestic) cotton tree of the mountain side is felled ! 

 The (shining) plantain in the valley fallen. 



I may here remark that the linkword or, as it is called by some, the categorical a is 

 very frequently and evidently purposely left out at the end of second lines. This 

 intensifies the impression produced. In prose this can never be done with transitive 

 or intransitive predicates ; for this a is the verbalizing factor, i.e., precisely that which 

 transforms words into verbs, i.e., transitive or intransitive predicates. This omission 

 in poetry is a remarkable grammatical violence done to such predicates. Is it perhaps 

 the result of a greater elasticity of the mind as it rises to poetic descriptions, an at- 

 tempt at breaking through the rigorous and rather narrow frame-work of the Mundari 

 proposition or sentence ? 



The third stanza begins to reveal the purpose for which the strongly contrasting 

 pictures have been used. 



The disappointed youth asks his confidant by whose words this sad change may 

 have been brought about, and thereby indicates that he did not mean to speak of the 

 felling of real trees, that these were but used as terms of comparison with another 

 beauty which had captivated his heart even as the sight of the two trees in question 

 might well captivate an appreciative eye. The greater part of the second stanza 

 remains intact. 



To the words : burura' edelo and berara' kadalo two very idiomatic Mundari ques- 

 tions are substituted, Okoe kajite : literally, by whom being speaking, i.e., by whose 

 words, and chimae bakanrate, by which one being talking, i.e., by whose talk. 



