MELANESIAN ANNOTATIONS ON THE VOCABULARY. 63 
in which we find the stem ne, an easy variant of ni, is 6-9, 22-24. 
The two forms unoi and 26 ngoi are clearly associable, a primitive 
stem as no by devolution from nu having assumed a final i as 
in 12; the stem no has varied in 26 to ngo, but in 25 remaining 
unaltered it has attached itself to u of undetermined sense. Out of 
this complex of three dozen widely varying items we feel justified in 
extracting two varieties of primitive stem, ni which varies to ne, and 
nu which varies tono. In 15-16 we find clear proof that ni is sufficient 
to carry the sense without additions, in 22-23 that ne can do the same, 
and in 19-20 that nu is equally strong. 
69. ol pot. 
REFERENCES: Melanesische Wanderstrasse, 70: 151,139: 151. Deutsch-Neuguinea, 
214c. Ray, 405: 101, 496: 101. 
POLYNESIAN. 
kuro Viti. ‘ulo Samoa. 
kulo Tonga, Nuguria. tlo 8 = Niué. 
MELANESIAN. 
1. kuro Tangoa. 10. ol Sissano. 
2. nakalo Kilenge. 11. k6re Shortland Islands. 
3. gulo Sinaugoro, Hula, Keapara. 12. ure Dobu. 
4. kul Tami. 13. gureva  Suau. 
5. ku Pak, Jabim. 14. gurewa_ Sariba, Misima. 
6. uro Motu, Maiva, Roro, Kabadi, | 15. kar6ng  Bongu. 
Gosisi. 16. olun Misima. 
7. ulo Kelana, Galoma, Barriai. 17. urun Panaieti. 
8. nipji-uru Aneityum. 18. kudsi Kai. 
9. ur Rook. 19. buro Efaté. 
The history of this stem is largely conditioned by technical factors. 
The pot presupposes workable clay and the discovery of the fictile 
art in at least its more primitive details of molding and firing. In 
the comparatively recent vulcanism of the islands of Polynesia potter’s 
clay is but scantily found and the art of the potter is non-existent. In 
many parts of Melanesia the art and the material exist, the nearest 
approximation to the distinctly Polynesian area being in Fiji, where 
pottery has attained no inconsiderable development. It will be seen 
in this series of identifications that the name designating earthenware 
articles occurs only in Nuclear Polynesia and may very properly be 
assigned to the more ancient Proto-Samoan migration. 
Since the word is absent from the Tongafiti migration languages 
we shall consider two explanations. It may have been an ancient 
vocable in the Polynesian before its dispersal in Indonesia and the 
divarication of the two migration movements, and in the course of 
distant wanderings over tracks that did not unite until long afterward 
in central Polynesia the word was lost to memory through the loss of 
the objects thereby denoted. Or the word may have been picked up 
by migrant Polynesians as a loan word from Melanesians who were 
in possession of the art. I incline somewhat toward the latter theory, 
