512 
APPENDIX. 
some of these are also nouns. As nouns, they can be used in 
their simple state, with the article ny prefixed; and as verbs, 
by the formatives to be now specified. 
2. A participial root can be made into the imperative of a 
a verb, passively, by the change of the termination, and 
advancing the accent one syllable,'— ova, ovao; kapoka, kapohy. 
All the imperatives of the other passive forms of the verbs are 
made agreeably to the analogy of this radical imperative. 
3. A great number of these roots can be verbalized by pre¬ 
fixing the particle voa , and annexing the affix pronouns; as, 
voa ova, voa ovako. The force of the word voa seems to be 
“completion,” and, added to a verb, denotes that the thing 
spoken of “is done”—the act has passed completely, and has 
been done by some active agent, not by any internal process of 
its own—in which case voa could not be used. 
4. The root is again employed to form a class of verbs by 
prefixing the letter a, as, aova. This form has actually an 
active signification, and takes an objective case after the affix 
pronouns, aovako azy. 
5. Another form is made by giving a participial termination 
to the root, adding ena , ina, ana , or aina, and sometimes vina, 
vana , zena , zana , or some other similar adjuncts. The final 
syllable is rejected when the affix pronouns are added. The 
signification is participial. 
6. A verb is formed from the root by prefixing mi. This is 
generally neuter or intransitive, and can then admit the pro¬ 
nouns only in oblique cases, i.e. governed by prepositions. 
But when the verb in mi is of an active signification, the ac¬ 
cusative case is governed as in other verbs. When the mi is 
active, it supersedes the corresponding form in man, as, mividy. 
Nouns are formed from this class, as will appear in the Para¬ 
digm. 
8. A form is made by prefixing marnpi to the root, and this 
expresses the cause. It has much the same signification as the 
hiphel conjugation in Hebrew. It appears to flow regularly 
from the form in mi, and expresses the cause of the thing being 
in that state to which the verb in mi could be applied. It re¬ 
quires an accusative case after it. It takes the same variations 
as the verb in mi. 
9. A further form is made from the mi by changing it into 
mifampi, and this adds the idea of reciprocity to that of causa¬ 
tiveness; as in 
misotro—I drink. 
mampisotro—I cause another to drink. 
mifampisotro—they cause one another to drink. 
