Cambridge University Press

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4167857 .

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language
in Society.

http://www.jstor.org

Lang. Soc. i6, 321-340.

Printed in the United States of America

Kinship and collective activity in the Ngayardalanguages

of Australia*
ALAN DENCH
Department of Anthropology
Universityof WesternAustralia
ABSTRACT

This paperdescribesthe functionsof a verbalderivationalsuffix foundin

the NgayardalanguagesPanyjima,Martuthunira,
Yinyjiparnti,and Kurrama.Thissuffix, whichappearsat firstblushto be an essentiallysyntactic
device very like the reciprocalsuffix foundin otherAustralianlanguages,
may be used to indicatethe existenceof a particularkin relationshipbetween participants
involvedin the actiondescribedby a verb. The paper
presentsfirstlythe moregeneralfunctionsof the suffix in the Ngayarda
languagesandthendiscussestheuse of the suffixto markkinrelationships.
It is arguedthatthe general"collectiveactivity"meaningof the suffixhas
generalisedto the markingof certainkinrelationships
throughthe recognitionthatcollectiveactivityis a featureof theseparticular
The
relationships.
successfulanalysisof the datathusrelieson a knowledgeof the socialuses
to which utterancesinvolvingthe suffix are put. (Anthropologicallinguistics, sociolinguistics,syntactictheory, culturalanthropology,Australianlinguistics)
REFLEXIVE AND RECIPROCAL SUFFIXES

IN AUSTRALIAN

LANGUAGES

Mostof thenonprefixing
languagesof Australiahaveverbalderivational
suffixes
whichderivean intransitiveverb with reflexiveor reciprocalmeaningfroma
transitiveverb.Forexample,Dyirbalhasseparatereflexive(I) andreciprocal(2)
derivationalsuffixes,as illustratedin the followingsentencestakenfromDixon
(I980:303,
(1)

bayi

433),1
yara

gunba-y:rri-nyu

baagu

barri-ggu.

HE-ABS man-ABS cut -REFL-PRES

IT-INST axe -INST
The manis cuttinghimselfwithan axe.
(2)

bayi
yara-rrji
gunbal-gunbal -nbarri -nyu
barri-ggu.
HE-ABS man-PLURAL-ABS cut -REDUP-RECIP-PRES axe -INST

The menarecuttingeachotherwithaxes.

Dixon notesthat "[r]eflexiveandreciprocalverbsoccuronly in intransitive

constructions- the single core NP is in S (intransitivesubject]function"
(I980:433). Generally,reciprocaland reflexiveclauses are consideredto be
derivedfrom constructionsinvolvingboth subjectand object arguments,the
C) I987 CambridgeUniversity Press 0047-4045/87 $5.oo+ .oo

321

ALAN

DENCH

resultingintransitiveclause havinga subjectwhich is at once deep transitive

subjectanddeeptransitiveobject.Theessentialfeaturesof the suffixesaretheir
functionandtheirreflexiveand/orreciprocalmeaning.
intransitivising
Morphy(1983), in a grammarof the Djapudialectof the Yolngulanguage,
suffixesaffect (exquestionsthe generalassumptionthat reflexive/reciprocal
clude)transitivity.She presentsa numberof argumentsagainsttheconventional
suffix, -mi, in Djapu.Two of the
treatmentof the unitaryreflexive/reciprocal
argumentsare relevanthere. First,inherentlyintransitiveverb stemsmay also
suffix. Further,whenattachedto intransitive
verbs
takethe reflexive/reciprocal
(denotedby a nonsingular
the suffixdescribesan activitywhichthe participants
subjectNP) engagein together,ratherthanan actionperformedby one participanton another.Thisreadingis also availablefortransitiveverbstems,andthus
Second, reflexthe meaningof the suffix is not strictlyreflexive/reciprocal.
of objectsin
ive/reciprocalverbsmay takeobjectarguments.The appearance
constructionsis moredifficultto explainbut in any case
reflexive/reciprocal
descriptionof the way in whichthe Djapusuffix
suggeststhata straightforward
altersthe argumentstructureof verbsis not possible.Morphyconcludes,"The
areengagedin
simplyindicatesthatthe participants
use of the -miconstruction
the activitytogether.The assigningof particularroles, and henceof syntactic
(Morphy
is notpartof themeaningof theconstruction"
cases,to theparticipants
can be usedto showthatthe
I983:1 9). As we shall see, equivalentarguments
verbalsuffixin the Ngayardalanguagesdoes not affectthe argucorresponding
mentstructure
of verbs,andindeedthe suffixhasa coremeaningverysimilarto
thatsuggestedfor the Djapu-mi suffix. For this reason,I label the Ngayarda
suffix "collective"ratherthan "reciprocal."
In the followingsectionsI will outlinethe rangeof functionsof thecollective
suffix. First,I will describethe moreconventionaluses of the collectivesuffix
andjustifythe use of the label "collective"ratherthan "reciprocal."ThenI
andshowhow
will introducethe role of the suffixin markingkin relationships
thisuse canbe relatedto the moregeneralcollectivemeaning.Finally,I discuss
of thecollectivesuffixin theNgayardalanguagesmust
howa unifieddescription
of its semanticsratherthanits syntax.
be approached
throughan understanding
THE MAIN

FUNCTIONS

OF THE NGAYARDA

COLLECTIVE

SUFFIX

This sectiondescribesthe main uses of the collectivesuffix in the Ngayarda

suffixdescribedaboveforDjapu,the
languages.Unlikethe reflexive/reciprocal
collectivesuffix in the Ngayardalanguagesdoes not have a reflexivefunction.
and
Reflexives are handledby a separatereflexivenominalin Martuthunira
clitic to verbsin Panyjima.
Yinyjiparnti,andby a postinflectional
AlthoughtheNgayardalanguagesfonn a subgroup,it is notclearatwhatlevel
thevariousformsof thecollectivesuffixarerelated.TableI liststheformsof the
Panyjima(Dench I98I), and Yinyjiparnti
collectivesuffixes in Martuthunira,
322

KINSHIP

AND

TABLE I.

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

Collective suffixforms
Conjugation

Y/0
Martuthunira
Panyjima
Yinyjiparnti

-yarri

n/a

n/a
-rnmarri

n/a

-marri

-yarri

-yarria

-lwarrib

-nyayi
-marri

-nmayi
-nmarri

-nmarri

.nyjarriC

aThe -yari Y-conjugationvariantin Martuthunirais restrictedto three

transitive stems which each have a final u vowel. These are kangku'carry', yungku- 'give', and nhawu- 'see'. All three verbs are derived
from the old future forms of monosyllabic verbs.
bThfe choice between the forms of the collective suffix in the L-con-

jugationareconditioned
by thelengthof theverbstem.Dimoricmonomorphemicverbstemstake the -yarrisuffix while monomorphemic
stemsof morethantwo moratakethe -lwarri suffix.
cThe-nyjarriY-conjugation
variantin Yinyjiparnti
also appearsto be
quiterestricted.Wordick(1982:90)suggeststhatit is theformchosen
for transitiveverbswitha fmali or u vowel. His dictionaryonly lists
twoverbswhichtakethissuffix:yungku-'give'andwanyjaarri'hear,
listen'.Theverbngarrku-Y
'eat'whichwouldappearto fit Wordick's
criteriafor -nyjarritakesthe moregeneral-marriform.Wordickdescribesa furthervariantof the-nyjarriformwhichappearson twansitive
verbsof theY-conjugation
havinga finala vowel.Again,he listsonly
the one examplewangka-'speak'.

(WordickI982).2 TheKurrama
dataareincompletebutappearto mostresemble
Whilethe suffixesin the differentlanguagesappearto be cognate,
Yinyjiparnti.
it is not clear that a single set of forms shouldbe reconstructed
for protoNgayarda.3
The suffixformsin all threelanguagesare subjectto some morphophonemic
alternation.First, the L-conjugation
form is shortenedto the syllable-rril-yi
following the causativederivationalsuffix -ma-L. Second, the Martuthunira
formsmergewitha followingRelativesame-subject
inflectionalsuffix-rra.For
canproducethefollowingderivational
example,thesetwo rulesin Martuthunira
sequence:
*muthumuthuma -yam
-rra
cool
-CAUS-COLL-RELss
*muthumuthu
-ma-rri-rra
*Muthumuthu-ma-rra
muthumuthumarra

cool+CAUS+RECIP+RELss

The collectivesuffix in Martuthunira

usuallyindicatesthatthe activitydeis
scribedby theverbstem performed
denotedby the
togetherby theparticipants
nonsingularsubjectNP. The followingexamplesillustratethe collectivesuffix
323

ALAN DENCH

on intransitiveverb stems (in all examples that follow, collective verbs will be
underlined).
(3)

thawura-la -rru.
puni-marri -layi tharrwa-lu
kulhampa-ngara
-LOC-NOW
-PLURAL go -COLL-FUT enter -PURPss net
fish
The fish will all swim together into the net.

(4)

ngaliwa nyina-marri -layi wangkarnu-marra.

lpl(inc) sit -COLL -FUT talk-COLL -RELss
We'll sit aroundand have a talk.

Wherethe verb is transitive, a reciprocalreadingis possible but is not obligatory.

In example (5), the informantgave a reciprocalreading in translation.By contrast, the transitive verb in (6) and (7) is given a collective interpretation.
(5)

nhartu-npa-lha-lwa ngula? marrari-wirraa ngalal nhawu-yarra

what-INCH-PAST-ID IGNOR word -PRIV just look-COLL-RELss
marrari-wirraa, kamparta-ma-rri-nguru. wantharni-ma -rri -layi?
-CAUS-COLL-FUT
word -PRIV angry-CAUS-COLL-PRES how
parrungka-marri-layiwiyaa.
shout -COLL-FUT maybe
What happened? They're just looking at each other without a word, making each other
angry. What will they do next? Maybe they'll start shouting at each other.

(6)

mungka-yarri-waa.
nganarna murla-a wantha-lwayarapawulu-ngara -a
-COLL-PURPs=o
lpl(exc) meat-ACC leave -HABIT child-PLURAL-ACCeat
We used to leave the kids some meat so they could have a feed.
wiruwanti yirla karlwa-marri-layi, ngartil waruul mungka-yarri -layi ngurnu
eat
-COLL -FUT thatACC
morning only get up-COLL -FUT again still
tharnta-a.
euro -ACC
In the morningwe'll all get up, and we'll still have anotherfeed of thateuro (hill kangaroo).

(7)

Since the transitiveobject of the verb may remainunchangedwhen the collective

suffix is added, it is clear that the suffix has no intransitivisingproperties in
Martuthunira.The suffix performs the purely semantic function of specifying
that the verb action is performedby a group.
In Panyjimaand Yinyjipamtithe usual interpretationof the collective suffix is
slightly different. While on intransitive stems the usual reading is collective
activity, on transitiveverb stems it is reciprocal. Although there are many examples in Martuthunirawhere a transitive verb marked with the suffix is given a
collective interpretation,this is very rare in Panyjima. Wordick (I982) makes a
similar assertion for Yinyjiparnti,noting that his data included no example of a
collective markedtransitiveverb interpretedotherthan as reciprocal.The following examples illustratethe functions of the Panyjimacollective suffix on intransitive (8 & 9) and transitive (io & i i) verb stems.
(8)

ngunha-kutha marlpa-kutha karri-nyayi-ku.

that -DUAL man -DUAL stand-COLL-PRES
Those two people are standing together.

(9)

ngatha wiya-rna nhupalukuru-ku panti-nyayi -jangu.

-ACC sit -COLL -REL
lsgNOM see-PAST 2pl
I saw you all sitting together.

324

KINSHIP AND COLLECTIVE ACTIVITY

(10)

ngatha

wiya-rna ngunha-kutha -ku

jilya-kutha -ku

lsgNOMsee-PASTthat -DUAL-ACCchild-DUAL-ACC

thali-nmayi-jangu.
kick -COLL -REL

I saw thosetwo kidskickingeachother.

(11)

nyiya-kutha warlipi-kutha pinyarri-ku

katama-yi-ku.

this -DUAL boy -DUAL fight -ACChit-COLL-PRES

Thesetwo boys arefighting,hittingeachother.

Panyjimamakes little use of the collective reading. Even the appearanceof the
suffix on intransitivestems, which require the collective reading, is relatively
infrequent.Nevertheless, the use of the label "collective" is justified, given the
extended uses of the suffix to be discussed in the next section.
To summarise so far, we have identified a verbal suffix in the Ngayarda
languages which lends a general collective reading to the verb to which it is
attached.We might best describe this suffix as a morphemederiving a new verb
lexeme which requiresa nonsingularsubject and has the added meaning that the
activity is performedtogether by the participantsdenoted by the subject NP.
Because the collective suffix may occur on intransitiveverb roots, and because a
transitiveobject may appearwith a verb bearingthe suffix, it cannotbe described
as an intransitivisingdevice like reflexive/reciprocalsuffixes in other Australian
languages.
This departurefrom an expected patternis due in part to the status of transitivity as a syntactic category in the Ngayardalanguages generally. Now, transitivity has been the subject of much attention in recent linguistic theoretical
discussion. In particular,an influentialpaper by Hopper and Thompson (I980)
has questioned the traditionalview that it is possible to make a clear division
between transitive and intransitiveconstructions. They argue that transitivity,
which is properly a feature of clauses, is affected by a number of different
properties of a predicate and its arguments. This results in a cline whereby
particularconstructionscan be considered more or less transitivein comparison
with other constructions. It follows, also, that transitivitycontrastswill assume
greateror lesser importancein different languages, depending on the degree to
which inherenttransitivityfactors are reinforcedand employed in the organization of syntax.
In most Australianlanguages transitivityis an extremely pervasive syntactic
category, largely due to the fact that these languages have an ergative type casemarkingpattern,in which transitivesubjects are markedin one way, intransitive
subjects and transitiveobjects in another(the same) way. However, unlike most
Australian languages, those of the Ngayarda group have evolved a nominative/accusative case-markingsystem (Dench I982b), a change which has resulted in a reductionin the importanceof transitivityin these languages. The loss
of a strong transitivity contrast has meant that the reciprocal suffix has no
importantpartto play in syntacticorganization,and this freedomhas allowed the
325

ALAN

DENCH

extension of the suffix function into an area largely unaffected by syntactic

phenomena, the markingof kinship relationships.
KINSHIP-DEFINED

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

datado
A large numberof examples appearingin the Panyjimaand Martuthunira
not conform to the general characterisationof the "collective" suffix given in
the last section. The following Panyjimaexamples show thatthe collective suffix
may appear on verbs in clauses with singular subjects and for which no clear
collective meaning is understood.
(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

nyinta wiya-nmayi-nha marrkara-ngarli -ku -rla?

2sgNOM see -COLE-PAT brother -PLURAL-ACC-FORE
Did you see your younger brothers?
nyinta jartunta -ku wangka-nyayi-rta, ngatha yana-rta ngunha -yu
-ACC
2sgNOM Bro-in-law-ACC tell
-COLL-FUT IsgNOM go -FUT that
walypala -ku.
white man-ACC
You tell thatbrother-in-lawof yours (my son-in-law) that I'm going to see the whitefellow.
-ku wantha-nmayi-nha,
marrkara -ku wantha-nmayi-nha
ngartimama-a
brother -ACC leave -COLL-PAST Mo & Fa -LOC-ACC leave -COLL-PAST
yikakula yana-rta mantu-yu watharri-ku.
alone
go -FUT meat -ACC look for -PRES
He left his youngerbrotherwith their parents, so he could go looking for meat on his own.
nyiya karipa-nyayi-ku
wiya-larta panti-jangu karnti-ka -ku.
this cimb ICOLLFPRESsee -FUT sit -REL tree -LOC-ACC
This one is climbing up to see that one sitting in the tree.

While it may be possible to read some notion of collective activity into (I2 &
13), perfonned by the subject togetherwith the object of the verb, this is clearly
not possible for (14 & I5). The following Martuthunira(I6 & 17) and Kurrama
(i8) examples illustratethe same pattem.
(16)

ngunhu -lwa ngathu kartatha-rnu, ngurnu -marta-lu -lwa

thatNOM-ID IsgEFF carve -PASSP thatACC-PROP-EFF-ID
thani-yarri -Iha ngurnu wartirra-a
ngunhu kanyara.
hit -COLL-PAST thatACC woman -ACC thatNOM man
That one was carved by me. That's the one that the man hit the woman with.
yirnala -a? kayarra-maria
wuraal yungku-marri-layi yarta-a
(17) kartu
give -COLL-FMTother-ACC thisDEF-ACCtwo
-PROP
2sgNOM well
warnu, kalika-a ngawurr -marta-a
yungku -layi kalika-a.
-FUTone -ACC
ASSERT one -ACC foam
-PROP-ACC give
Well can you give one to this other fellow here? You've got two haven't you? Well give
him one cake of soap.
(18) muntikuria -wa, yayi -warri-nha yanku-nba -wa
true enough-TOP aunty-DEC-PN
go -PAST-TOP
parntaya-nmarri-lu ngunyjaatpa
meet
-COLT-PURPthemACC
True enough, old aunty that we lost went off to meet up with those people (her brothers).

326

KINSHIP

AND

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

The collectivesuffix in the abovePanyjima,Martuthunira,

andKurrama
examples serves to indicatethe existenceof a particularkin relationshipbetween
differentparticipantsin the clause. Put simply, the appearanceof the suffix
indicates that the participants are in the same set of alternating generations.

Wordick(I982) does not mentionthis functionof the collectivesuffix in his

Yinyjiparnti
grammar.However,the factthatsuchuses occurin Kurrama
texts,
and given that the Yinyjiparntiform partof a wider culturalgroupwith the
PanyjimaandKurrama,we mightexpectthatsuch uses occurin this language
also.
this functionof the collectivesuffix it is necessary,first, to
To understand
discussthe essentialfeaturesof the PanyjimaandMartuthunira
kinshipsystems.
This will involvea descriptionof the principlesof the systemsas well as some
discussionof the roleof kinshipin organisingsocialinteractionin the Panyjima
andMartuthunira
speechcommunities.
NGAYARDA

KINSHIP

SYSTEMS

In this sectionI will describethe main featuresof the kinshipsystemsof the

Ngayardalanguagegroup,using as a startingpointthe Panyjimasystem. The
Panyjimakinshipsystem is quite differentfrom the Martuthunira
system in
important
ways, butthesedifferencesdo not affectthe analysisof the collective
suffix. A briefcomparisonof the two systemswill be madein the latterpartof
this section.
The Panyjimakinshipsystem, like those of its neighboursYinyjiparnti
and
Kurrama,can be classifiedas of the Karieratype, andincorporates
fournamed
sections(for a succinctintroduction
to Australiansystemssee Heath[1982:291).Thefoursectionsareset outin Figurei. All membersof thecommunityfall
intoone or anothersection,andthe preferredmarriagepatterns(forthe Kariera
systemego marriesa classificatorymother'sbrother'schild)can be reckonedin
termsof sectionnames.Similarly,the sectionmembershipof childrencan be
reckonedfromthe sectionmembership
of theirparents.Forexample,a Panaka
manwill marrya Karimarra
woman.FromFigureI, a Panakaman'schildren
will be in the Milangkasection. A Panakawomanwill typicallymarrya Karimarraman, andher childrenwill be in the Purungusection.
Sectionmembership
is determined
thatis throughbothfatherand
unilaterally,
mother.Whilein manyareasit is the customto ignorethe fatherin determining
the sectionmembership
of childrenof "wrongmarriages,"the Panyjimagive at
least token recognitionto the fatherin such cases. That is, where a person
marriesoutsideof the preferredsection, the couple's childrenwill have dual
sectionmembership.Forexample,the childrenof a maleMilangkaandfemale
Panakaunionwill be bothPanakaandPurungu.However,for the purposesof
reckoningmarriageability,
matrilinealties are the most important.
The foursectionscanbe groupedintotwo pairs,or couples,in threepossible
ways.First,we cansee thatall kinlinkedby patrilineal
descentwill fall intojust
327

ALAN DENCH

Panaka

Milangka
FIGURE I:

Karimaffa

==

Purungu

Panyjima sections. Horizontal lines indicate marriage;vertical lines

indicate patrilineal descent; diagonal lines indicate matrilineal
descent.

two sections. For example, the agnatic kin of a person in Panakasection will be
in either Panakasection or Milangka section. Thus the Panaka/Milangkacouple
comprises one patrimoiety, the other patrimoiety being Karimarra/Purungu.
Similarly, a Panakaperson's uterine kin will be in the Panaka/Purungucouple.
The Panaka/Purunguversus Karimarra/Milangkadivision correspondsto a division into two matrimoieties.
Finally, the four sections can be grouped into two couples on the basis of
generationmembership. From Figure i we can see that in any generationonly
two sections will be represented.For example, all membersof a Panakaperson's
generation - siblings, parallel cousins, and cross cousins - will be in either
Panakaor Karimarrasections. All membersof a Panakaperson's parents'generation will be in either Milangkaor Purungusections, and similarlyfor the Panaka
person's children's generation. However, a Panaka person's grandparentsand
grandchildrenwill be in the same generation couple: Panaka/Karimarra.This
division gives two merged alternategeneration sets, the first comprising ego's
siblings, cousins, grandparents,and grandchildren,the other comprising ego's
parentsand children as well as their siblings, cousins, grandparents,and grandchildren. We can talk of people as being in the same set of merged alternate
generations or in different sets.
To turnthis discussion on its head, we see that the four-section system results
from the interactionof the two principal divisions into patrimoietiesand matrimoieties, and yields the importantdivision of kin into two alternatinggeneration
sets. In analysing complex kinterms, kinship-sensitivepronominaluse, and also
in describing institutionalisedsocial interaction, it is found that section membershipby itself is relatively unimportant.Instead, the importantcategorisations
are moieties and the alternategenerationcouples. This will be discussed further
in the section on ethnographicexplanations.
The Martuthunirakinship system involves the same importantdivisions into
moieties and generation sets as does the Panyjima system. However, where the
328

KINSHIP AND COLLECTIVE ACTIVITY

Panaka

Karimarra

Pal. yarri

Purungu

===

FIGURE 2:

Martuthunirasections.

Panyjima, Yinyjiparnti, and Kurramasystems are classified as of the Kariera

type, on the basis of terminology and the preferredmarriagepattern, the Martuthunirasystem is of the Aranda type. The basic difference between the two
systems lies in a terminological distinction among patrilines. In particular,the
Arandasystem distinguishesthe four patrilinesinto which a person's grandparent
falls (although usually with some terminologicalmergingwithin patrilines). The
Kariera system, on the other hand, merges parallel grandparentalpatrilines.
Thus, in the Karierasystem, no distinction is made between equivalent kin in
ego's patrilineand ego's mother's mother's (brother's)patriline(Heath I982:6),
and similarly between kin in ego's mother's father's and father's mother's
(brother's) patrilines. The Aranda system makes a terminological distinction
between these patrilines. The preferredmarriagewithin the Aranda system is
between kin related as mother's mother's brother's son's children. Within the
Karierasystem these kin will be terminologicallyequivalent to mother's brother's children.
The essential difference between the Martuthuniraand Panyjimasystems thus
lies in the fact that the Martuthuniramake a terminological distinction between
kin in different patrilineswithin the one patrimoietywhile the Panyjimado not.
Unfortunately, there is little ethnographic information available for the Martuthunira,and so we are not able to investigate the possible socioculturalcorrelates of this difference.
Like the Panyjima, the Martuthunirahave a four-section system. The section
names are the same with one exception; the section named milangkain Panyjima
is called pal.yarri by the Martuthunira.The Martuthunirasystem is set out in
Figure 2.
The Yinyjiparnti and Kurrama, like the Panyjima, have a Kariera kinship
system and a four-section system. The Kurramanaming of the four sections is
equivalentto the Martuthuniranaming except that the termpal.yarri surfaces in
Kurramaas palyirri. The Yinyjipamtiterms are the same as the Kurramathough
theirdistributionis different. CompareFigure 2 with Figure 3, which sets out the
329

ALAN

Purungu

Kafimarra

DENCH

= = = =
FIGURE 3:

Panaka

Palyim

Yinyjiparntisections.

Yinyjiparntisection system. In the Yinyjiparntisystem a Panakaman marriesa

Purunguwoman and their children are Palyirri. A Panyjima, Kurrama,or Martuthuniraperson, crossing the FortescuRiver into Yinyjiparntiterritory,changes
section name. Figure 3 can be mapped onto Figures I and 2. Thus a Panyjima
man in Panakasection will be called Purunguby the Yinjiparntiand will marrya
Yinyjiparntiwoman in Panaka section. While this switching of section names
causes considerable confusion to all parties, it does not interferewith people's
perceptions of their kin relationships.
Linguistic reflections of the kinship systems
We can now return to a discussion of the kinship marking function of the
collective suffix. As noted above, the collective suffix can be used to indicate
thatparticipantsin the clause are in the same alternatinggenerationset. With this
in mind we can reinvestigatea numberof the examples listed earlier.In examples
(12), (13), and (14) the same generation set membershipof the participantsis
obvious from the use of kinterms. For example, (12) is given here as (I9).
(19)

nyinta wiya-nmayi-nha marrkara-ngarli -ku -rla?

2sgNOM see -COLL-PAST brother -PLURAL-ACC-FORE
Did you see your younger brothers?

In this example the use of the collective suffix reflects the fact that the subjectof
the sentence is in the same generation set as his younger brother.If a kinterm
such asfather or daughter were to be used instead, then the use of the collective
suffiixin this sentence would not be acceptable. For example:
(20)

(21)

* nyinta wiya-nmayi-nha mama-ngarli -ku -rla?

2sgNOM see -COLL-PAST father-PLURAL-ACC-FORE
Did you see your fathers?
* nyinta
wiya-nmayi-nha kurntal -ngarli-ku -ra?
2sgNOM see -COEI-P-AST daughter-PLURAL-ACC-FORE
Did you see your daughters?

By contrast, in sentences (i5), (i6), and (17), the collective suffix is the only
indicationthat the participantsare in the same set of alternatinggenerations.For
330

KINSHIP

TABLE 2.

AND

COLLECTIVE

Martuthunirafirst person pronouns

Singular

Samegeneration

ACTIVITY

(inclusive)
(exclusive)

ngayu

Different generation

Dual

Plural

ngali

ngaliwa

ngaliya
nganajumarta

nganarna
nganajumartangara

example,in (I5), repeatedas (22), the subjectis linkedto the participant

sitting
in
were not the same
in the tree. If it were knownthatthese two participants
generationset, thenthe sentencewouldbe inappropriate.
(22)

nyiya kq4a-nyayi

-ku

wiya-larta panti-jangu karnti-ka

-ku.

see -FUT sit -REL tree -LOC-ACC

this climib-COLL-PRES
This one is climbingup to see thatone sittingin the tree.

The linguisticcodingof the same/differentgenerationrelationshipis not restrictedto the use of the collectivesuffix in these languages.Like manyother
Australian
languages,thoseof theNgayardagrouphavea set of specialpronouns
to certaingroupsof kin. The most importantdeterminingfactorin
appropriate
the choiceof the appropriate
pronounin manyof the languagesthathavesucha
set is the same/differentgenerationrelationshipbetweenthe pronounreferents
(see, for example, Hale [I966]; Alpher[I982]). Table 2 presentsthe Martuthunirafirstpersonpronounswhichclearlyillustratethe generationsplit.
The pronounparadigmsof bothPanyjimaandYinyjiparnti
show an identical
Inaddition,secondpersonpronounsin bothYinyjipamtiandPanyorganisation.
jima havekin-determined
altemativesand, in Yinyjiparnti,
dualdemonstratives
have separatefonrs determinedby generation(for an extensiveanalysisof the
Panyjimasystemsee Dench[1982a]).
Ethnographic explanation

While it is possibleto show the importanceof alternategenerationsets in the

of the grammarsof the Ngayardalanguages,this in itself does not
organisation
explainwhy the collective suffix in these languageshas come to reflectthis
pattern.We mustexplainhow a suffix whichtypicallyencodesan actionperformedcollectivelyby a numberof participants
has spreadto the codingof a
kin relationship.As a startingpoint, we mightsuggestthatpeoplein
particular
the same generationset typicallyengage in collectiveactivity.Althoughthis
rathersimplistichypothesisturnsout to be essentiallycorrect,we mustbeginby
treatingit as an empiricalquestion.
It wasnotedin earlierdiscussionthatthefournamedsectionsallowedtheeasy
to patrimoieties,matrimoieties,and
reckoningof threecouplescorresponding
the mergedaltemategenerationsets. We must now ask whetherthe named
sectionsandthe threeclasses are at all importantin defininggroupsfor whom
certaintypesof socialinteraction
arerequiredor preferred.Whilewe wouldnot
331

ALAN

DENCH

expect these large superclassesto determineinterpersonalinteractionat the individual level, where people are organised into groups, for the performanceof
ritual for example, then we might expect institutionalisedpatternsof behaviour
reflecting group divisions.
Tonkinson (1978), in discussing the social organisation of the Mardudjara
(who have a kinship system very like the Panyjimaand with whom the Panyjima
interact), makes the following general statements.
Nowhere in the WesternDesert are matrimoietiesfound, and there are neither
corporate groups nor social entities based on this kind of dual division. At
large gatherings, the Mardudjaragroup their camps into two patrimoiety
"sides," also used in the seating arrangementsfor certain men's rituals and
seen in intergroup gift exchange. But the most importantdivision is the
merged alternate generation levels, which figure prominently in many religious activities (Tonkinson 1978:57).
As for the sections, section names are used as terms for addressand referencebut
groups comprising only members of one section are not of great importancein
any ritual activity. With regard to the Ngayarda situation I know of only one,
very restricted, context in which groups are organised on the basis of membership of the one section.4
Tonkinson's general statementswith regardto Mardudjarasocial classes also
hold for the Ngayarda groups. Matrimoieties as distinct social groups are not
found although, as mentioned above, matrilinealrelationshipsare importantin
organising marriage. Patrimoietiesare in evidence in a numberof areas: traditional camping arrangementsare determinedby patrimoietalaffiliation, and access to certain increase sites is occasionally dependent on patrimoiety membership. However, as with the Mardudjara,the merged alternategenerationsets
form the most importantdivision in the organisationof ritual interactionin the
Ngayarda language area. The clearest example of this appears in the religious
activities organised aroundmale initiation, which is still practisedby the Panyjima and Yinyjiparnti. A brief outline of the activities involved in a typical
Pilbarainitiationmeeting will serve to illustratethe relationshipbetween the two
groups.5

During the period leading up to' initiation ceremonies and throughoutthe

period during which these ceremonies are continuing, the kin of the novice
initiate organise themselves into two groups almost directly correspondingto the
merged alternategenerationsets (see Tonkinson [I978:581 for discussion of the
Mardudjarasystem). Kin of the same generationset as the initiate are called (in
Panyjima)jinyjanungu 'workers', while those of the other generation set are
called karnku'bosses'. Tonkinsonuses an alternativespelling for the Mardudjara
terms, which are identical to the Panyjima, and labels the two groups "Activists" and "Mourners" respectively.
332

KINSHIP

AND

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

The djindjanungugroup is active in the mechanics of actually organizing

and carrying out the appropriateritual tasks. Members of the large garngu
group . . . make most of the preliminaryplans and are consulted on the conduct of activities, but play no active role during the proceedings because its
members are too "sorry" for the initiate (Tonkinson 1978:58).
This division of labours is not restrictedto actual ritual tasks. The everyday
activities of camp life during an initiation meeting are similarly divided into
jinyjanungu and karnku work. For example, a typical day in the "meeting
camp" will begin with the jinyjanungu lighting the fires and cooking a meal,
feeding childrenand membersof the karnku"mob." The most importantmorning activity is the body painting of all people in the camp. The principaljinyjanungu males, after paintingeach other, will file to each family camp in turnto
collect other male workers. The group will then proceed to prepare ochres,
charcoal, and so on, before, together with their jinyjanungu sisters, painting
designs on the bodies of the karnkugroup. From this point on the jinyjanungu
will work as a group and largely keep out of the way of the karnkumob. The
karnku retire to the shade to spend the day in the comfort of talk while the
jinyjanunguattendto the tasks of carryingwater, hunting, replenishingstocks of
firewood, cooking meals, and, most importantly,caring for the well-being of the
initiates and preparingfor the ceremonies to be held throughoutthe night.
There is very clearly a strong division into two groups who try to give the
public impressionof avoiding each other. Any interactionis typically restrained
and may extend to open hostility (usually displeasureon the partof the karnkuat
the way the jinyjanungu are runningthings). Within the two groups, interaction
is very relaxed. Thejinyjanungu, in particular,spend much of the day convulsed
with laughter as a result of the continuous horseplay and joking (well out of
earshot of the karnku, of course). For the weeks, and even months, that the
community live in the meeting camp, this division of labourcontinues, although
membershipof the two groups will change as new initiates, at the center of new
kinship networks, become the focus of attention.
We see then that the division into generationsets reflected in the grammarof
the languages is an importantprinciple also reflected in much social interaction
within the speech community. During initiation business, this principle defines
two groups who interactin a restrainedmannerbut whose membersoperate as a
collective. It is the perceptionof this contrast between open collective activity
and relative restraintthat reinforces the division between the two groups, rather
than the abstractedprinciple of generationharmony. For the collective suffix to
be used to mark this contrastis thus not at all surprising. In fact, the collective
suffix with this kinship marking function is perhaps most often used during
initiation business. Certainly, most examples I have collected from observation
(ratherthan from text or elicitation) were gatheredduringinitiationbusiness and
333

DENCH

ALAN

typicallyinvolvedthe karnkugiving ordersto thejinyjanungu. The following

the extent
avoidancestyle)demonstrates
Panyjimaexample(in the Paathupathu
interpreting
in
crucial
is
context
ethnographic
of
this
to which an awareness
instancesof the collectivesuffix.
particular
(23)

kungama-yi

-ma

nyirntiji ngunhawali karri-ku

karntinmarra-la.

tree
stand-PRES

hairbelt that
-COLL-IMP
get
Get thatbelt hangingin the tree.

-LOC

man by a karnkuman. The relationship

This order was given to a jinyjynungu

betweenthem and the contextof utterancerequiredthe use of the avoidance

style. The subjectof the sentence,the implied"you," is linkedto the direct
object,thebelt, by the use of thecollectivesuffixon theverb.Althoughthebelt
cannotbe thoughtof as beingrelatedto the addresseethrougha kinshiplink, it
rolein initiationbusiness.It is theexclusivebusinessof
playsa vitallyimportant
thejinyjanunguto handleanduse humanhairbeltsin the ritualcontext,andthe
speakeris makingthis pointverystronglyby linkingthe addresseeto theobject
throughthe use of the collectivesuffix.
takesplacein the initiationcamp,andnot
Of course,notall socialinteraction
involvesthedivisionof peopleintogroupswhocanrightlybe said
all interaction
to engagein collectiveactivity.However,the alternategenerationsets can be
seen to providea guide to the sorts of relationshipsthat may hold between
membersof the opposinggroups.To cite Tonkinson'sdiscussiononce again:
[They] are useful becausethey separateinto oppositegroupssome kin
excategoriesbetweenwhose membersrestraintor avoidancerelationships
ist .. . [A] person's "own side" .

. .

has a majorityof kin with whom rela-

is possible,whereas"otherside" is composed
interaction
tivelyunrestrained
mainly of people with whom one interactsasymmetrically(Tonkinson
I978:57-58).
Manyof the examplesinvolvingthe collectivesuffixconformto the spiritof
The use of the suffix marksthe existenceof the particular
this generalisation.
but at the sametime invokesthe contrast
relationshipbetweenthe participants
of the samegenerationset andthat
betweeninteractiontypicalof membership
of differentsets.
typicalof membership
DISCUSSION

Havingexplainedthe use of the collectivesuffixto marka kinshiprelationship

betweenparticipantsin the clause, we can returnto the widersyntacticand
semanticissues raisedby the data.
As we have seen, verb stems derivedwith the collectivesuffix allow three
thatthe actionis performedby a groupactingtogether
differentinterpretations:
involvesmembersof a groupeachactingon theother
the
action
(collective),that
(reciprocal),or thatthe actioninvolvespersonsin the samegenerationset (kin
334

KINSHIP AND COLLECTIVE ACTIVITY

TABLE
Verb

3. Interpretationsof Martuthuniracollective suffiLx

Subject

Object

Interpretation
reciprocal

Transitive
Transitive
Intransitive
Transitive
Transitive

Singular
Singular
Nonsingular
Nonsingular
Nonsingular

collective

kin group

yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

no
yes
-

no
yes

yes

group).The readingof a particularinstanceof the suffix partlydependson the

verb to which it is attachedand on the syntacticcontextin which that verb
occurs. The rangeof syntacticcontextsand associatedinterpretations
of the
suffix in Martuthunira
are summarisedin Table3.
Wherethe subjectof the clauseis singular,the suffix mayonly havethe kin
This does not implythatthe subjectof the clausemustbe
groupinterpretation.
one of the participantslinked by the use of the suffix. For example, in the
following sentencethe participantslinkedby the suffix as belongingto one
generationset do not includethe subjectof the clause(the speaker):One is the
objectof the verbandthe otherpartof an adverbialNP construction.
(24)

ngayu
kangku-yarri-iha
panaka-ngurni karimarra-wuyu-u
IsgNOM take -COLL-PAST section-BEHIND section -SIDE-ACC
marrari -mulyarra, martuthunira -a
nhuura-npa-waa.
language-ALL
language name-ACC know-INCH-PURPs=o
I took the karimarra section boy along behind the panaka boy towards the language, to
learn Martuthunira.(I taught two boys who are together in the same generation set.)

Thereis no syntacticcontextwhichforcesa reciprocalreadingfor the suffix.

Althougha reciprocalreadingis availablewherea transitiveverbappearswithno
objectandthesubjectis nonsingular,a collectivereadingis alwayspossiblehere
as regiven the frequentellipsis of arguments.To some extent, interpretation
ciprocalor collectivedependson the particularverb. For example,(25) will
always give a collective reading,while (26) will usually yield a reciprocal
reading:
(25)

(26)

ngaliwa mungka-yarri -nguru.

Ipl(inc) eat
-COLL-PRES
We're eating together.
(??We're eating one another.)
ngaliwa thani-yarri -nguru.
lpl(inc) hit -COLL-PRES
We're hitting one another.
(??We're hitting together.)

This suggeststhatwe neednotestablishseparatecollectiveandreciprocalmeanings for the suffix. Rather,a single collectivemeaningwill allow a reciprocal
in certainsyntacticcontextsandwith certainverbs.
interpretation
335

ALAN DENCH

While a clause with a nonsingularsubject will allow a kin group reading as

well as a possible collective or reciprocal reading, the suffix itself does not
requirethat membersof the group be in the same generation.This is made clear
in the following example in which the nonsingularsubject is a pronounfrom the
differentgeneration set and hence only the collective (or reciprocal)reading is
possible.
(27)

ngunhaa mir.ta waruul kuliya-rnuru nganajumarta-a

thatNOM not
still
hear -PRES Idl(different) -ACC
wangkarnu-marri -nyila

-a.

talk
-COLL-REEts-ACC
He still can't hear us talking together (to one another).

Clearly, the kin group meaning of the suffix must be independentof the collective meaning and we must describe the suffix as polysemous between these two
meanings. On the one hand, the suffix indicates that the action is performed
together by members of a group. On the other hand, the suffix indicates that
participantsinvolved in the action denoted by the verb are in the same alternating
generation set.
Since very few sentences with a nonsingularsubject are like (27) in clearly
indicatingthe relationshipsamong participants,there is some potentialfor ambiguity in clauses with nonsingular subjects. Although such clauses are usually
given a collective reading, in some cases the suffix may serve to emphasise the
kin relationships of t'ie participants.While the collective interpretationis obviously dependent on a nonsingularsubject, it is not so easy to decide on the
availabilityof the kin group interpretation,and thus the possibility of ambiguity,
from formal features in the clause. First, as we have seen from examples (15)(17), overt specification of kin relationshipsin the form of pronounsor kinterms
need not occur in the utterance.Second, there are no syntacticrules determining
which of the availableparticipantsin the clause are linked by the suffix appearing
on the verb (see example (24)). Deciding which of a numberof participantsare
linked by the use of the verbal suffix, and whether the collective readingof the
kin group reading is intended in any particularinstance depends on close attention to other cues in discourse and in extralinguisticcontext.
The suffix rarely adds any information about kin relationships that is not
already known. In the social context in which the Martuthuniraand Panyjima
languages are spoken every person with whom one is ever likely to interactis
fitted into a complex and fluid kinshipnetworkwhich situatesevery individualin
relation to every other individual. Strangers,such as visiting Aboriginalpeople
from fartherafield, and of course the occasional linguist or anthropologist,must
be fitted into this system before any "real" interaction can take place. The
collective suffix rarely, if ever, functions to uniquely identify a participantin
discourse. Typically the individuals referredto are known to both speaker and
addressee, and their kin relationships to one another and to the speech act
participantsare also known. The suffix, then, adds no new information.Its use
336

KINSHIP

AND

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

servesonly to indicateto the addresseethatthe speakerrecognisesthe existence

of a particular
relationship,is focussingon theexistenceof thatrelationship,and
of thatrelationship.
so is askingtheaddresseeto thinkabouttheimplications
The
addresseewill know the relationshipsthathold amongthe participantsin the
clauseandso will be able to interpretthe use of the collectivesuffixcorrectly.
CONCLUSION

This paperhas investigatedthe functionsof a verbalderivationalsuffix in the

Ngayardalanguagesof WesternAustralia.At firstblushthe suffixappearsto be
very like the reflexiveand reciprocalsuffixes describedfor many Australian
languages.However, in the Ngayardalanguagesthe centralmeaningof the
suffix is one of collective activityratherthan reflexiveor reciprocalaction.
Further,the suffix does not affect the transitivityof the clauses in which it
occurs.
In additionto its role as a markerof collectiveactionby a group,the suffix
maybe usedby speakersto marktheirrecognitionof theexistenceof a particular
kinrelationship
in theclause:thattheparticipants
betweenparticipants
arein the
same mergedalternategenerationset. This use of the suffix was explainedin
termsof the kindof social interactionseen as typicalof this kin relationship.It
was suggestedthat people in the same generationset can be thoughtof as
interactingin a collective fashion. The perceptionthat collective activity is
typicalof samegenerationset membershiphas led to the use of the collective
suffix to markthis relationship.
Finally,the implicationsfor a unifiedaccountof the suffix in the Ngayarda
languageswas discussed.It was suggestedthatthe suffix be describedas polysemousbetweenthe meaningsof collectiveactivity,on theone hand,andmembershipof a particularkin group,on the other.Althoughinterpretation
of the
suffixdependspartlyon the structureof the clausein whichit occursandon the
verb stem to which it is attached,completecomprehension
of any particular
exampleis dependenton a clearknowledgeof the kinshipsystemandits role in
mediatingsocialintercourse,andon an understanding
of the possiblepragmatic
functionof verballyexpressingknowledgeof certainkinshiprelationships.
Thus,
the analysispresentedin this paperis yet anotherwitnessto the truthof Malinowski'sassertionthat, "languageis essentiallyrootedin the realityof the
culture,the triballife and customsof a people, and . . . cannotbe explained
withoutconstantreferenceto thesebroadercontextsof verbalutterance"(Malinowski I923:305).
As well as demonstrating
the extentto whichthe linguistmustbe sensitiveto
thewidersocialcontextin whichthelanguageunderinvestigationis spoken,this
papershowshow linguisticanalysiscanbe an invaluabletool forthe anthropologist andsociologistalike.Close attentionto linguisticdetailcanyield important
insightsinto the cultureandsocial interactionof a people.
337

ALAN

DENCH

NOTES
*
The data were collected with the assistanceof Percy Tuckerand HerbertParker(Panyjima)and
Algy Paterson(Martuthuniraand Kurrama).I also thankDell Hymes, HaroldKoch, Bob Tonkinson,
Anna Wierzbicka, and David Wilkins for their very helpful comments and suggestions. Any errors
remain solely my responsibility.
I.
The following list expands abbreviations used in sentence examples in the paper: X (first
person), 2 (second person), ABSolutive (intransitive subject and transitive object), ACCusative,
ALLative, ASSERTedly, REFLexive, PRESent, Bro(brother), CAUSative, COLLective,
DECeased, DEFinite, dl (dual), ds (different subject), EFFector(passive actor), exc (exclusive), Fa
(father), FOREgroundingclitic, FUTure, HABITual, IDentifying clitic, IGNORantly, inc (inclusive), INCHoative, INSTrumental, LOCative, Mo (mother), NOMinative, NOW (temporal
clitic), PASSP (passive perfective), pi (plural), PN (proper nominal marker), PROPrietive,
PRIVative, PURPosive, RECIProcal, REDUPlication, RELative, SIDE (establishes an opposition
with a numberof "sides"), ss (same subject), s=o (subject coreferentialwith object), TOPic clitic.
2.
The collective suffix in Yinyjiparntiis glossed as "collective/reciprocal" (Wordick 1982:82). I
reservingthe label
have previouslydescribedthe Panyjimasuffix as "reciprocal" (Dench I98I:I20),
"collective" for a more restrictedsuffix with a somewhat similar function. This second suffix is not
relevant to the present discussion.
There is a remarkabledegree of cognacy among reflexive/reciprocal forns across the Aus3.
traliancontinent. For example, notice the similarity among the Ngayardaforms -yarri, -lwarri, and
-nmarri, and the Dyirbal forms -yirri (reflexive) and -nbarri (reciprocal).
As partof thepurntut/purntulpaceremony,menof the one sectionoperateas a marauding
4.

group"capturing"their "fathers."Whilethe membersof these groupsneed not be in the one

generation,they usuallycomprisemen who call eachotherbrother.Nevertheless,the groupsare
referredto by sectionnames.
The
typicallyinvolvescircumcision.
and Kurrama
Initiationfor the Panyjima,Yinyjiparnti,
S.
Martuthuniradid not practice circumcision and, accordingto informants,did not practisethe "ann-

11913])andthe
tying" initiationritualcommonto the Ngarlumato theirnorth(Radcliffe-Brown
did initiateyoung
Mantharta
peoplesto theirsoutheast.Whileit is assertedthatthe Martuthunira
men, the detailsof the initiationprocessarenot known.
of the many
The initiationlaw practisedin the Pilbaratodayis in manyways a rationalisation

different laws originally practisedin the area;borrowing from Yinyjiparntilaw, Panyjimalaw, and

law, like theothernoncirpeopleof Jigalong.Martuthunira

fromthe desertlaw of the Mardudjara
cumcisinglaws of the coastalgroupshas effectivelydied out. However,the descendentsof the
lawof theinland
continueto resistthepressureto conformto thecircumcising
coastalcommunities
groups(Gray1978).
REFERENCES

Alpher, B. (I982). Dalabon dual-subjectprefixes, kinship categories, and generationskewing. In

Heath et al., 1982. I9-30.

Dench, A. C. (I981). Panyjima phonology and morphology. Master's thesis, AustralianNational

University.
(i982a). Kin terms and pronounsof the Panyjimalanguageof northwestWesternAustralia.
Anthropological Forum 5:105-20.
(i 982b). The developmentof an accusativecase markingpattem in the Ngayardalanguages
of Western Australia. AustralianJournal of LinguistiCs2:43-59.
Dixon, R. M. W. (I980). The languages of Australia. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Gray, D. (1978). "Identity" amongst the Camarvon Reserve Mob. Unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Western Australia.
Hale, K. L. (I966). Kinship reflections in syntax: Some Australianlanguages. Word 22:318-24.
Heath, J. (I982). Introduction.In Heath et al., 1982. i-i8.
Heath, J., Merlan, F., & Rumsey, A. (eds.) (1982). The languages of kinship in Aboriginal Australia. Oceania Linguistic Monograph24. Sydney.

338

KINSHIP

AND

COLLECTIVE

ACTIVITY

Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language
56:25 I -99.

Malinowski,B. (1923). Theproblemof meaningin primitivelanguages.In C. K. Ogden& I. A.

Richards(eds.), The meaning of meaning. ioth ed. London:Routledge& KeganPaul.296-336.
Morphy,F. (1983). Djapu,a Yolngudialect.In R. M. W. Dixon& B. Blake(eds.), Handbookof
Australian languages 3. Canberra:AustralianNational University Press. i-I88.
Radcliffe-Brown, A. (I913). Three tribes of Western Australia.Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 43:I43-94.
Tonkinson, R. (1978). The MardudjaraAborigines. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Wordick, F. J. F. (1982). The Yindjibarndilanguage. Pacific Linguistics C. 71. Canberra.

339