This information has been digitized for use in the Ethnomathematics Digital

Library (EDL), a program of Pacific Resources for Education and Learning

(PREL). The EDL is sponsored by the National Science Foundation as a part
of the National STEM Digital Library (www.nsdl.org).

THE ETHNOMATHEMATICS OF MWOAKILLOA

ATOLL, MICRONESIA

by
Barbara Hicks and Takuya Nagaoka
Division of Historic Preservation, Cultural Affairs, Parks, and Tourism
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Pohnpei State Government
Federated States of Micronesia

© Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL).

Hicks, B., & Nagaoka, T. (2004). The Ethnomathematics of Mwoakilloa Atoll,

Micronesia. Honolulu, HI: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning.

This product was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as a component of the National Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Digital Library (NSDL), award number DUE0121749. Any
opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views of NSF.
THE ETHNOMATHEMATICS OF MWOAKILLOA ATOLL, MICRONESIA

Submitted to

Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL)

Submitted by

Barbara Hicks and Takuya Nagaoka

Division of Historic Preservation, Cultural Affairs, Parks, and Tourism

Department of Land and Natural Resources

Pohnpei State Government

Federated States of Micronesia

March 2004
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared by Barbara Hicks (Peace Corps Volunteer) and Takuya Nagaoka
(Ph.D. Student, Department of Anthropology, University of Auckland) for the Pacific Resources for
Education and Learning (PREL), which funded the endeavor. We would like to thank Nancy Lane,
PREL’s Director of Communications, for providing us with this opportunity to contribute to the study
of ethnomathematics. This documentation is part of a larger project of ours, to compile a book of
Mwoakillese oral traditions (Nagaoka and Hicks n.d.).
Conducting this research was impossible without many people’s help. Iris Falcom and Julie
Nimea at the Pacific Collection of the College of Micronesia (COM) Library, and Francis Hezel, S.J.
Eloisa Sanchez, and Erik Steffen at Micronesian Seminar were helpful during our archival work. The
staff of our office, Division Chief Emensio Eperiam, Mordain David, Roster Lemuel, and Jason
Lebehn also assisted the project in various ways. And of course, the project could never have been
completed without the many Mwoakillese people who provided us with their valuable knowledge.
These are: Moses Henry, Benjamin Jepety, Apiner Jim, Robert Joel, Jessie Lebehn, Boaz Poll, and
Danio Poll (italics indicate those who have deceased). As our report is partly based on the
Mwoakillese sailing canoe documentation project organized by this office in 1994 (Nagaoka n.d.), we
also thank all those who helped make that project possible: the relevant institutions in Pohnpei, the
Mwoakillese people, and all involved. Lastly, Barbara Hicks would like to thank Danio Poll’s family
and Takuya Nagaoka would like to thank Ines Helgenberger’s for having provided us with comfortable
and welcoming homes in Pohnpei. We hope that the data we present here will be useful, both to the
Mwoakillese people, as it preserves a traditional feature of their rapidly changing culture, and to
educators in the Pacific and elsewhere, as a contribution to elementary and secondary
ethnomathematics curricula. Kalahngan en kamwai ohroj!

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………................................i
Introduction……………...………………………………………………………....................................1
2. The Atoll……………………………………………………………...................................................1
3. Counting………………………………………………………………………………………………3
4. Measuring Length…………..…………………………………………………………………………8
5. Measuring Time……………………………………...........................................................…………15
References..……………………………………………………………….................................………20

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Micronesia.....................................................................................................................................1
2 Mwoakilloa Atoll...........................................................................................................................2
3 Distribution of food at a contemporary New Year’s celebration on Mwoakilloa.........................8
4 Sailing canoe.................................................................................................................................9
5 Measurement with arms..............................................................................................................10
6 Three kinds of measurement by hand, ngapen jaid.....................................................................11
7 The layout of measurements of a breadfruit tree log...................................................................12
8 The process of producing the pandanus leaf ruler.......................................................................12
9 The measurement of the slant of the keel line on breadfruit tree log..........................................13
10 Three ere designs.........................................................................................................................14
11 Triangular sail..............................................................................................................................15
12 Moon phases................................................................................................................................18

LIST OF TABLES

1 Four counting systems...................................................................................................................4

2 Higher numbers.............................................................................................................................5
3 Pohnpeian and Pingelapese months.............................................................................................16
4 Pohnpeian and Pingelapese days of the month............................................................................17
ii
1. INTRODUCTION

Before contact with Westerners in the nineteenth century, the people of Mwoakilloa Atoll
(formerly known as Mokil) in Micronesia (Figure 1) had been developing their own system of
mathematics for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. The traditional system that they developed is
based on knowledge the people accumulated through observing their environment and structuring their
island society. It developed independently from Western mathematics, but it serves the same purposes,
helping people organize their world by counting, measuring, locating, and designing.

Figure 1. Micronesia (Based on Goodenough 2002:xiv, Map 1).

In this paper, we present our findings about the specific ways Mwoakillese people “do”
mathematics, based on our interviews and archival work. We will discuss various methods of
Mwoakillese mathematics, specifically enumeration and counting, linear measurement, and
measurement of time.

2. THE ATOLL1

Mwoakilloa Atoll is a low coral atoll in the Eastern Caroline Islands. It is located at 6˚ 40’
north and 159˚ 47’ east, approximately 192 km (104 mile) east of Pohnpei (formerly Ponape),

1 See Bentzen 1949, Murphy 1950, Oles 1999, and Weckler 1949 for cultural and historical background of the atoll.

1
comprising presently an outer island of Pohnpei State in Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). The
atoll is comprised of three islets: Kahlap, Mwandohn, and Uhrek, making a total of 1.24 square meters
(0.48 square miles) of land (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Mwoakilloa Atoll.

The people speak Mwoakillese, a variant2 of Pohnpeian, one of three Pohnpeic languages with
Pingelap and Sapwuahfik (formerly Ngatik) atolls, comprising a subgroup of Nuclear Micronesian
which is distributed widely from Chuukic speaking atolls of Belau in west to the Marshall Islands and
Kiribati in east (Harrison 1976:5-9). We have to wait for future archaeological investigation to discuss
the origins of the Mwoakillese people.3 However, as linguistic (Rehg 1981:9) and clan affinities
(Weckler 1949:8) as well as recent archaeological research in the region suggest, the island was
probably settled from Pohnpei or by a closely related group of Pohnpeian around two thousands years
ago as other islands of eastern Micronesia (e.g., papers in Hunter-Anderson 1990).

2 Rehg (1981:7-12) discusses that the three Pohnpeic languages are not dialects of Pohnpeian but distinctive languages.
3 See Davidson 1967 for a reconnaissance survey on Mwoakilloa.

2
 Mwoakilloa was first sighted by the British indiaman Marquis of Wellington in 1815 and
visited by French corvette Coquille of Captain Duperrey in 1824 (Hezel 1979:38), which led early
Westerners to call the island “Wellington(’s) Island” or “Duperrey(’s) Island.” Visits of foreign ships,
especially whaling ships, dramatically increased during the mid-nineteenth century. Beachcombers,
who resided on the atoll consistently during the latter half of the century, had a great influence on
small island population, and early Western reports at the time praised the Mwoakillese as “civilized”
(Hanlon 1988:135, Moore 1858:454). The island consequently experienced a sequence of colonial
rulers, as Spain (1886-1899), Germany (1899-1914), Japan (1914-1945), and United States of America
(1945-1986) took over governance of the area, until the independence of the FSM in 1986.
Presently on Mwoakilloa, the village is situated on the lagoon side of Kahlap Islet, where the
main taro patch (pwel), as well as other contemporary communal facilities such as the municipal
office, elementary school, dispensary, and church are located. The population of the atoll is around
140. Many more Mwoakillese, approximately 5000, currently live on Pohnpei, the political and
commercial center of the state, in a more urban setting. The atoll is currently connected to Pohnpei by
weekly flights and cargo-passenger ships every two months.

3. COUNTING

Numbers4

If a Mwoakillese person is asked to count from one to ten, he or she will give the following
forms:

1 ew
2 riew
3 jiluw
4 pahw
5 limouw
6 wonow
7 ijuw
8 waluw
9 duoauw
10 eijek

4 See Harrison 1976:93-111 for a discussion of Mwoakillese quantification.

3
 Because the counting system is base ten, Mwoakillese people recycle the number words when
they count past ten. Translated literally, eleven is ‘ten one,’ twelve is ‘ten two,’ and so forth:

11 eijek ew
12 eijek riew
13 eijek jiluw
14 eijek pahw
15 eijek limouw
and so on until
20 riejek

The counting words above are for the general class of nouns. However, as in most Micronesian
counting systems, there are separate sets of number words used to count different kinds of objects. In
Mwoakillese, there are four sets of these number words.

Table 1. Four counting systems.

General Class Living Things Long Objects Portions of Things
Used to count Used to count
Used to count all Used to count canoes and all other portions of food,
objects not in the people, animals, vehicles, poles, sections of land,
following classes demons, etc. trees, pencils, and fragments of
stories and songs anything.
1 ew emen apas ekij
2 riew roahmen rahpas riakij
3 jiluw jilmen jilpas jilikij
4 pahw pahmen pahpas pahkij
5 limoaw limmen limpas limkij
6 wonow wonmen wonipas wonikij
7 ijuw ijimen ijipas ijikij
8 waluw walimen walipas walikij
9 duoaw dohmen dohpas dohkij

If we look across all the rows, we can see how the first parts of each number word are about the
same. All the words for ‘three’ begin with jil-, for example, and all for ‘seven’ begin with ij-. We will
call these initial elements the numeral prefixes. This part of the word carries the meaning of the
number—how many we are talking about.
If we examine the numbers down any single column, we see that their endings are about the
same. All the general class numbers end in –w, all the numbers used to count living things end in –

4
men, all the numbers for long objects end in –pas, and all the numbers used for portions end in –kij.
We will call this second element the classifying root. It indicates the category of objects being referred
to—what we are talking about.
This table shows the higher numbers. Notice how the beginnings of the words—the numeral
prefixes—are the same as for the numbers one through nine.

Table 2. Higher numbers.

Tens (-ijek) Hundreds (-pwki) Thousands (-kid)
1 eijek epwki kid
2 rieijek riepwki riekid
3 jilihjek jilipwki jilikid
4 pahijek pahpwki pahkid
5 limeijek limepwki limekid
6 woneijek wonopwki wonekid
7 ijihjek ijipwki ijikid
8 walihjek walipwki walkid
9 dueijek dopwki dohkid

As indicated above, Mwoakillese start from the column of greatest value down to name other
numbers. For example:

eijek riew ‘twelve’

jilihjek limoaw ‘thirty-five’
epwki waluw ‘one hundred and eight’
riepwki pahijek ew ‘two hundred and forty-one’
kid dohpwiki ijihjek jiluw ‘one thousand nine hundred and seventy-three’

The multiples of ten in the table above never take a classifying root, regardless of the category
of nouns they describe. For example:

armaj riekid ‘two thousand people’

japw jilipwki ‘three hundred land parcels’
war eijek ‘ten canoes’

Only when a number ends with one through nine do Mwoakillese use the classifying root -men,
-pas, or –kij. Compare the following numbers with the ones above:

armaj riekid limmen ‘two thousand and five people’

5
 japw jilipwki limkij ‘three hundred and five sections of land’
war eijek limpas ‘fifteen canoes’

These days, few middle-age or younger people commonly use, or even know, Mwoakillese
names for numbers higher than thousand. In fact, many in the younger generations are just as likely to
use the English number words as the Mwoakillese for even the lower numbers, though they are fluent
in both. The names for the higher numbers are:

nen ‘ten thousand’

lopw ‘hundred thousand’
rar ‘million’
dep ‘ten million’
japw ‘hundred million’
lik ‘billion’

The oldest generation of Mwoakillese people also remember a different set of names for ‘one’
to ‘nine’ which is out of common usage nowadays. The forms, similar to those in the four classes
listed in Table 1, are thus:

one oahd
two ari
three ejil
four oapoang
five alim
six ohn
seven ehij
eight awal
nine adu

The first five have survived in modern Mwoakillese words for Monday through Friday. They
combine with the Pohnpeian prefix ni- (‘at’) to form:

Nioahd ‘Monday’
Niari ‘Tuesday’
Niejil ‘Wednesday’
6
 Nioapoang ‘Thursday’
Nialim ‘Friday’

Mwoakillese started counting the days of the week this way after the advent of Christianity in
eastern Micronesian islands in the late nineteenth century.5 The words for ‘Saturday’ (rehn koaunop)
and ‘Sunday’ (rehn joarwi), for example, can be translated ‘preparing day’ and ‘holy day’,
respectively.

Division of Food at Traditional Feasts

A mathematical activity of great cultural importance in atoll society is the division of food (and
sometimes goods) at traditional feasts (kamadipw) and celebrations (kajarwi). One can see this today
at funeral feasts (mwerikirik), Easter, New Year’s celebrations, and at a series of first fruit offerings
(nohpwe) held during the breadfruit season (roak). In these gatherings, every household brings their
contribution to a central location, such as the church for a religious celebration, the municipal building
for a communal celebration, or in the case of a funeral feast, at the deceased person’s house. After all
the food and participants have gathered, the food is blessed, and some may be prepared and eaten there
at the gathering. Most, however, is redistributed among the families, based on the number of people in
each household.
In the political system existing before the eighteenth-century typhoon that reduced the
population to twenty-five to thirty people, the Nehnau, or sacred chief, was responsible for blessing the
food, and the “Lepen Kat*m,” or secular chief, redistributed it among the people (Weckler 1949).
Then, as now, equal distribution was of utmost importance in these dividings. There are recorded
instances of three chiefs being deposed and/or assassinated for their offensive habit of taking the best
foods for themselves and their children, eating before all the food had been divided (Nagaoka and
Hicks n.d., Weckler 1949:56).6
These days, a few middle-aged people who have a stake in the event will assemble to do the
distribution—church officers at a religious celebration, government workers at a public celebration,
members of the deceased family at a funeral feast. They use a method that does not rely so much upon
strict enumeration (e.g., “each person gets three fish”) as upon a very careful “eyeballing” system.

5 This system was apparently introduced from Pohnpei where the American Protestant mission was established in 1852
(e.g., Hanlon 1988). In the late nineteenth century, Pohnpeian missionaries also worked on Mwoakilloa (Nagaoka and
Hicks n.d.).
6 Equal distribution has been the norm on a minimally stratified atoll society (Cordy 1986:139, Table 2) since the
prehistoric period. However, the better species (e.g., fish, taro) and larger pieces of food are still given first to those of
higher social status (e.g., chiefs, reverends, elders).

7
Figure 3. Distribution of food (taro, drinking coconuts, and pig meat) at a contemporary New Year’s
celebration on Mwoakilloa. Photo by Erik Steffen.

In an open area near the assembly, spaces for each household’s share will be lined up. Each
category of food is distributed separately, starting with the largest and most basic items. For example,
one large swamp taro (mwehng) may first be put in each household’s space. If there are leftovers,
extra taro may be given to households with more people, or smaller cuts may be made to distribute.
Large items, such as bunches of drinking coconuts (pen) and cuts of baked pig meat may be distributed
next, followed by sacks of rice, pans of baked local food, etc. For items of variable size, such as fish,
they are distributed separately by species, the largest ones first. Each family may receive roughly ten
pounds of tuna, for example, with smaller extras then going to larger families. The entire process is
conducted very slowly and carefully, and the distributors check and double-check to make sure that
each household’s share is fair before all the shares are given out.

4. MEASURMENT OF LENGTH

There are two methods of traditional linear measurement on Mwoakilloa: the use of anatomical
parts and the “halving system,” both of which are discussed by Alkire (1970) in his detailed study of
Woleai Atoll in the western Carolines. For our examples, we will discuss measurements used in

8
Mwoakillese canoe building, which involves the most sophisticated techniques7 among their well-
known fine craftsmanship (e.g., wooden boats, houses).8

Figure 4. Sailing canoe.

Several aspects of Mwoakillese culture, such as material culture, customs (Weckler 1949:67),
fishing methods, food preparation, cultigens (Bentzen 1949:49), local medicines (1949:179-182),
songs and tales (Nagaoka and Hicks n.d.), and vocabulary (Rehg and Bender 1990), were introduced
by Marshallese people who drifted to the atoll during the prehistoric period. Likewise, the styles and
building technology9 of the Mwoakillese outrigger canoes (war, Figure 4) are of Marshallese origin.10

7 Measurements of the canoe, especially of sail, are considered to be esoteric and were kept secret strictly secret among
close relatives, due to the social value and prestige associated with this skill and the competitive nature of the atoll society.
To screen the work from outside observers, the builders used to hang mats around the canoe house (naj) while the job was
in progress.
8 The discussion of canoe measurements in this section is based on the results of a sailing canoe building documentation
project organized by the Pohnpei State Historic Preservation Office in 1994 (Nagaoka n.d.). See Bentzen 1949:77-90 for
brief descriptions on sailing canoe building. Traditional outrigger canoes have been replaced first by local made-wooden
boat and later by outboard motor boats after World War II. No sailing canoe is currently used on the atoll, but a very few
padding canoes are in use. Only elders in their eighties now hold knowledge of sailing canoe building, while a very few
people in their fifties can build paddling canoes.
9 Terms associated with this technology are predominantly Marshallese. Only limited numbers of basic canoe part terms,
for example, are Pohnpeian cognates. These are; hull (war), outrigger (dam), thwart (loa), mast (kehu), upper boom

9
Measuring Using Anatomical Parts

As other Micronesian islanders (e.g., Alkire 1970), Mwoakillese people traditionally measure
(jong) things using their body parts, such as their hands and fingers. Various scales are used for
measuring different sizes of objects. The fathom (ngap) is the largest unit of length, measuring the
distance between the outstretched arms (Figure 5.A). Smaller units of length are also taken, each
measuring from one horizontally outstretched fingertip: (B) to the bent elbow of the other side
(pwoakoan kaj11), (C) to the shoulder of the other side (lel imwin aproa [literally, ‘to end of shoulder’),
(D) to the mid-chest (oaloap in ngap [‘half of a fathom’]), and (E) to the shoulder of that side (poah
pas [‘one arm’]). There is also an arbitrary measurement, shorter than a ngap, measured from one
outstretched finger-tip to any point on either arm pointed to by the other hand. Different anatomical
measurements can be added and combined to measure longer lengths such as “ngap riew pwoakoan kaj
ew” (literally, ‘two fathoms and one pwoakoan kaj’). These units are used to for measuring long
things such as canoe and house parts.

Figure 5. Measurement with arms.

(rajakmwein), lower boom (rajakpein), and sheet (li). See Alessio 1990, 1991a, 1991b for Marshallese canoe building
techniques and Saito 1996 for Pohnpeian ones.
10 Oral traditions record two parties of Marshallese castaways. One was in the mid-eighteenth century, and one in the
1850s (cf. Weckler 1949:67-69, see also Riesenberg 1965). Bentzen (1949:78) maintains that the canoe building was
introduced by the first group. According to contemporary elders, it was a member of the latter group named Lapwaijong
(Andrew) that was the direct founder of the present tradition. In addition, canoe building techniques, especially designs of
sails, continued to be eagerly learned by Mwoakillese, who visited the Marshalls as sailors or for other purposes during the
historic period.
11 Literal meaning of this term is unknown to the contemporary elders, however, the first word was probably originated
from pwiki ‘cape (on a reef), knee’ as the length is up to bended elbow.

10
 Measuring smaller things with the fingers is called ngapen jaid (literally, ‘fathom of finger’).
There are three units in the ngapen jaid system: jepes, jedeng and jepes pwirangrang (Figure 6). The
jepes (approximately 9cm) is the width of the closed hand, from the outside of the thumb to the other
end. The jedeng (approximately 18cm) is from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the outstretched
middle finger. The jepes pwirangrang (literally, ‘outspread jepes,’ approximately 21cm) is from the
tip of the thumb to the tip of the outstretched little finger. A jedeng can be referred to as one ngapen
jaid, while a japes is one half of a ngapen jaid. In canoe building, this method is used for measuring
the lengths of various canoe parts, such as the height of the hull,12 the lower boom (rajakpein), the
three sides of the triangular sail (i, joaroak), and the curved lines of the sail (discussed below).

Figure 6. Three kinds of measurement by hand, ngapen jaid.

Measuring Using the Halving System

Another basic measuring technique, using so-called halving system, includes halving and re-
halving a certain length, to divide it into equal lengths. After preliminary shaping of the breadfruit log
for the hull, for example, the log is divided into eight equal lengths, in order to draw the keel line
(Figure 7). To do this, a string is stretched lengthwise down the center, from one end (omwun war) of
the log to the other. This line is folded in half to find the center (iohlap), and then halved again
between the iohlap and the omwun war, to find the pwakai. It is halved again between the iohlap and
the pwakai, and this shows the pejeng. Then the line on the other side of the pwakai, to the omwun

12 The height means the distance from the bottom of the hull up to the gunwale, as measured up the curve of the side.

11
war, is halved to find the jerjer. Then this process is repeated on the other side of the iohlap—this
divides the log into eight equal sections.13 This process is also used in other construction projects such
as houses.

Figure 7. The layout of measurements of a breadfruit tree log.

In addition, Mwoakillese people traditionally use a ruler made from a pandanus leaf (pis),
called a pisen war (literally, ‘pandanus leaf of canoe’) for more detailed measurements of canoe parts
(Figure 8). To make this ruler, a pandanus leaf is cut to an arbitrary length, such as one-fourth or one-
eighth of the hull. It is halved, producing the oahloakoa an kijedik. This unit is then halved to produce
the melimen. The halfway point is then found between the melimen and the mwijidipwok, or end of the
leaf, and this halfway point is called the dohjeik. The halves of each of these units are termed mahro.
They are mahro in melimen, mahro in dohjeik and mahro in mwijidipwok. The quarter of each mark is
termed mahro in mahro (literally, ‘mahro of mahro’).

Figure 8. The process of producing the pandanus leaf ruler (pisen war).14

13 Another elder states majahnij instead of pwakai and pwirej kajiluh (literally, ‘the third mark’) instead of jerjer.
14 Each builder had his own pisen war. Another elder, for example, uses dopwurpwur instead of melimen. Since there is a

12
 This ruler, the pisen war, was used for measuring different parts of canoe: (1) the slant of the
keel line, (2) the ere design, and (3) the curved lines of the triangular sail;
(1) To determine the slant of the keel line in profile, the builders start with a roughly hewn
breadfruit tree log. A line parallel to the axis of the log is first drawn on the upper side, between both
jerjer lines. The pisen war is placed above that parallel-to-the-axis line at the pwakai line, and the
desired slant of the keel line from the keel angle point at the pejeng line to the keel-cut point at the
jerjer line, is marked (Figure 9).15 The angle of the keel line’s slant, which is termed oahloakoa,
determines the canoe’s ability. A canoe with a steeply slanting keel line is suitable for sailing,
especially sailing against the wind (kol kepwongopwong), while a canoe with a gently slanting keel line
is suitable for paddling and for sailing before the wind (kol padil).

Figure 9. The measurement of the slant of the keel line on breadfruit tree log. The dohjeik design is
used as an example.

(2) There are three ere designs which are measured with the pisen war: the ere pohl, the ere
emmwan and the ere dik.16 The ere design decides the width of the platform attaching the outrigger to
the hull, and the distance between the hull and outrigger, which has a great influence on the canoe’s
performance. Generally, longer distance to the outrigger is preferred for sailing canoes, especially
racing canoes, while shorter distance is used for paddling canoes. The positions of the thwarts (loa),
the repjoahje thwart and the second thwart (loa kariew), are also determined by the ere design being
used (Figure 10).

mark on the Marshallese pandunus leaf ruler named taburubur (Alessio 1991b:5, 13, Figure 2), this knowledge seems to be
gained from a different Marshallese source probably during the historic period.
15 The dohjeik design is preferred for a sailing canoe. The contemporary builders use the tape ruler instead of using the
pisen war. For example, for the hull of a 20 foot-long sailing canoe, 3 inches (sometimes 4 inches) is usually used for this
mark. For smaller paddling canoes around 15 feet in length, 2 inches is usually used.
16 Dik means ‘small’ in Marshallese and emmaan means ‘good’ in Ralik dialect of Marshallese (Abo et al. 1976).

13
Figure 10. Three ere designs. In each design, the bold horizontal arrow and the vertical arrow
perpendicular to it are equidistant. Dotted lines indicate important points of measurement.

(3) Shorter and simpler pisen war are used for measuring the curved edges of the sail (Figure
11). Various body parts (e.g., tongue, tooth, finger, hand) are used for the length of the pisen war.17
he triangular design of a sail is laid out on the sail material, which is made of traditional pandanus leaf
mats or imported heavy cloth. Each side of the triangular sail18 is divided into eight equal length
points, using the “halving system” discussed above. To draw curved lines, the ruler is placed on those
points on the original triangular lines, and is used to determine the pwujpwuj, that is, where the edge of

17 Some builders instead use a Western-style ruler, converting their pisen war system into inches, to avoid others’ copying
their sail design. People also used to eat the pandanus leaf ruler to keep the secret after measuring.
18 During the documentation project, eleven types of sails were recorded on Mwoakilloa (Nagaoka n.d.). Most of these
originated from the Marshalls, while a few were of Mwoakillese invention. Some of the Marshallese types were originally
introduced by prehistoric Marshallese drifters, while others were learned by Mwoakillese who visited the Marshalls during
the historic period.

14
the sail will fall outside of the original triangular lines, and the peh, where the edge will fall inside
those lines.19 The marked points are connected smoothly to make curves of the sail.

Figure 11. Triangular sail (based on Bentzen 1949:84, Figure VI). The unit is foot.

Though the above systems of linear measurement are remembered among at least the oldest
generation of Mwoakillese, since World War II, measurement on Mwoakilloa has largely taken place
using the U.S. system of feet and inches, except for certain measurements, for which the people still
use traditional methods.

5. MEASUREMENT OF TIME

Mwoakillese traditionally recognize time (anjoau) by movements of sun (joau) and moon
(maram, johnpwong). The longest unit of time is the year (johnpar, pahr), which is divided into two

19 After the sail material had been stretched out, all outside helpers were dismissed and only permitted persons, usually
close relatives, were allowed to join the work from the process of sail design onward.

15
seasons, roak and anganang.20 Roak is the season of plenty, from April to August, when different
trees, such as mango (koahngid), pandanus (kipar), and most importantly breadfruit (moai), bear fruit.
The ripening of seedless breadfruit (moai joapwoahroak) is celebrated with a series of first fruit
offerings (nohpwe). Runs (mwumw pwok) of small young fish such as jeipwoas, ikoanid, soukuhk,
jakaras, and kereisik, associated with pre-Christian rituals, also occur during this season (Nagaoka and
Hicks n.d.). In contrast, anganang is the season of scarcity from September to March, when the people
relied mainly on preserved breadfruit (mar) and swamp taro (mwehng [Cyrtosperma chamissionis]).21
Fishing for flying fish using torches and long-handled nets at night, called kahlek, is held during this
period.
The year is subdivided into months in Micronesia (e.g., Goodenough 1953). Based on moon
phases, Pohnpeians traditionally named ten months (Hambruch 1936:160), and Pingelapese, twelve
(Morton, Hurd, and Little 1973:317, Table 47) (see Table 3).22 Although Mwoakillese probably had a
similar lunar calendar, Eilers (1934:382) reported that the people did not hold the knowledge of
months in 1910.

Table 3. Pohnpeian and Pingelapese months.

Pohnpei Pingelap
Epwelap (January)
Ir
Memwaleu (February)
Pohn Wahu
Isol Kahlek (March)
Daliaram
season Sounpwong in Wehla (April)
Mwakirikir
Palekewar (May)
Pen
Solodan (June)
Sokosok (July)
Ering
Idid (August)
Epeng
Rahk Meseneir (September)
Mesedew
season Kepihsukoru (October)
Daulel
Kih Pikker (November)
Ikehwa (December)
Sources – Pohnpei: Hambruch 1936:160, TTPI Department of Education 1973:59, Pingelap: Morton,
Hurd, and Little 1973:317, Table 47.

In addition, Micronesians have traditional names for the days of the month (e.g., Pohnpei,
Pingelap [see Table 4], Mortlocks [Kubary 1880:286], Lamotrek [Christian 1899:329], Woleai [Alkire

20 Anganang is borrowed from a Marshallese anonean ‘dry season’ (Abo et al. 1976:17). See Shimizu 1982 for a similar
Pohnpeian concept of seasons and Damas 1994:65-68 for the Pingelapese concept.
21 Recently, traditional staple foods have largely been replaced with imported ones (e.g., rice, flour).
22 The two systems on Pingelap and Pohnpei do not show any correspondence, which contrasts with the names of days of
the month on the two islands (Table 4). The sidereal calendar, which is related to navigation knowledge, is used in the

16
1970:39, Table 12]). Both counting nights and observing moon phases are important in traditional
time recognition, as indicated by the fact that Pohnpeian sounpwong and Mwoakillese johnpwong both
include the syllable pwong ‘night,’ and refer to both ‘month’ and ‘moon’23.

Table 4. Pohnpeian and Pingelapese days of the month.

Pohnpei Pingelap Pohnpei Pingelap
1 Dampihdo Esukoru 16 Leledi Er
2 Lingaling Eling 17 Lelada Lelidi
3 Irongeni Mesepong 18 Ariensoanok Komwalo
4 Masalim Mesepeng 19 Sapadmwur Edemen Komwalo
5 Masalem Mesawoun 20 Sapadmwo Apeleng
6 Masoun Meseis 21 Apenokmwur Sengek
7 Masewel Mesawel 22 Apenokmwo Wesengek
8 Masadu Weduadu 23 Oareusu Dahpas
9 Madol Medel 24 Sudakarahn Dahpas Meing
10 Tiriepwong Siepwong 25 Eiih Keredakehleng
11 Takainpoal Arkone 26 Oalok Areiso
12 Olepwua Sakainpe 27 Mehla Semwenpal
13 Olamwahi Wolpwu 28 Ihla
14 Mat Wolmwau 29 Esep
15 Ihr Mas 30 Epei
Sources – Pohnpei: Lawrence n.d., Pingelap: Morton, Hurd, and Little 1973:318, Table 48.

The Mwoakillese, rather than counting individual days, divide the moon cycle into nine moon
phases. This system recognizes the first quarter (sioahpwoang) and the last quarter (ahsik) between the
full moon (immas [literally, ‘ripe’]) and the new moon (meik), and further distinguishes the crescent
moon and the gibbous moon by using poalloan and kajipwen.24 In addition to these eight divisions of
the moon cycle, the phase between the full moon and waning gibbous moon is called leldi (literally,
‘descended25’). This system is possibly a product that was simplified from the original Pohnpeian
system26 and was reorganized with some loans from nearby islands.27 Mwoakillese immas and leldi,
for example, have cognates in Pohnpeian (mat and leledi) and Pingelapese (mas and lelidi). In
contrast, ahsik was borrowed from a Marshallese word adik ‘archaic, first quarter of the moon’ (Abo et

central and western Carolines (Goodenough 1953).

23 Similarly, in many Micronesian languages, reflexes of the Proto Micronesian *rama, ma-rama refer to both terms (e.g.,
Bender et al. 2003:78).
24 Poalloan refers to ‘part of, side of.’ Kajipwen is probably related to kajapw- ‘positioned’ or kajapwla ‘farther (from the
speaker)’ (e.g., kajapwlakoan aio ‘day before yesterday’ [Harrison and Albert 1977:36]), as it refers to the ‘farther side’ of
poalloan. In this context, these two words are paired on either “side” of the first quarter and the last quarter.
25 This name may have originated with the appearance of the moon as it descends into the sea at dawn.
26 The decline of the indigenous time recognition system on Mwoakilloa (i.e., months, days) is probably related to the loss
of their navigation technology.
27 Marshallese have a somewhat similar system, which names eight moon phases (Abo et al, 1976:406).

17
al. 1976:4).28 Sioahpwoang is probably borrowed from Pingelapese siepwong, which seems to have
originated from Kosraean siofon (Sarfert 1919:535), as Kosraean influence is notable on Pingelap
(Hurd 1977) but not on Mwoakilloa.
This calendar was used to predict tides, which is very important for fishing, especially net
fishing on the reef flat, and for going out through shallow reef passages to the open ocean. It was also
used in warfare called kapis jou during the pre-Christian period, in which rivaling lineages would wage
battle on each other only for the few hours of darkness during the leldi moon phase, between sunset
and moonrise (Nagaoka and Hicks n.d.).

Figure 12. Moon phases (based on http://www.afreshhorizon.com/moon_phases.htm).

The day (rehn) is divided into several times rather arbitrarily. The hours of the day were
recorded by Eilers (1934:383) in 1910:

6 AM dakida (literally, ‘[sun] rise’)

8 AM jauwaj in minjong (‘noon of morning’)

28 This Marshallese loanword was also used on Pingelap, where Marshallese influence is remarkable. Although it is not in
Morton, Hurd, and Little’s list (1973:318, Table 48), Good and Welley (1989:62) name ahsik ‘phase of the moon, from full
moon to new moon’ in their word list. The semantic changes from the original Marshallese meaning are notable in

18
 12 AM jauwaj (‘noon’)
1 PM “xabolixang uoxilang29”
3 PM jauwaj in joausik (‘noon of evening’)
6 PM joausik (‘evening’)
8 PM lopokoan pwong kajapwla joausik (‘midnight going towards evening’)
12 PM lokupoan pwong (‘midnight’)
3 AM lokupaon pwong kajapwla johrehn (‘midnight going towards dawn’)
4 AM lokupaon pwong johrehn (‘midnight-dawn’)

Today, people use the Western system of time, and recognize time of the day more simply:
dawn (johrehn), morning (minjong), noon (jauwaj), afternoon (mwurin jauwaj), evening (joausik),
night (pwong), and midnight (lokupoan pwong).

Mwoakillese and Pingelapese.

29We follow Eilers’ (1934:383) original orthography, as this term is unknown to the contemporary Mwoakillese. The first
word might be sapworijang ‘roll from.’

19
 REFERENCES

Abo, Takaji, Byron W. Bender, Alfred Capelle, and Tony Debrum, 1976. Marshallese-English
Dictionary. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Alessio, Dennis F., 1990. The Likiep taburbur: Construction and details of a traditional Marshallese
sailing outrigger canoe (tipnol). Waan Aelon Kein Project Report No. 3. Majuro, Marshall Islands:
Alele Museum.
---------- 1991a. Traditional and contemporary measuring, lashing and construction techniques of the
outrigger canoes of Ailuk Atoll. Waan Aelon Kein Project Report No. 5. Majuro, Marshall Islands:
Alele Museum.
---------- 1991b. Traditional measuring, lashing and construction techniques of the outrigger canoes
of Namdik (Namorik) Atoll. Waan Aelon Kein Project Report No. 3. Majuro, Marshall Islands:
Alele Museum.
Alkire, William H., 1970. Systems of measurement on Woleai Atoll, Caroline Islands. Anthropos,
65:1-73.
Bender, Byron W., Ward H. Goodenough, Frederick H. Jackson, Jeffery C. Marck, Kenneth L. Rehg,
Ho-min Sohn, Stephen Trussel, and Judith W. Wang, 2003. Proto-Micronesian reconstructions–I.
Oceania Linguistics, 42(1):1-110.
Bentzen, Conrad, 1949. Land and Livelihood on Mokil, An Atoll in the Eastern Carolines.
Coordinated Investigation of Micronesian Anthropology, Part 2. Final Report, no. 11, unpublished
manuscript. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.
Christian, Frederick W., 1899. The Caroline Islands: Travel in the Sea of the Little Islands. London:
Methuen.
Cordy, Ross, 1986. Relationship between the extent of social stratification and population in
Micronesian polities at European contact. American Anthropologist, 88:136-142.
Damas, David, 1994. Bountiful Island: A Study of Land Tenure on A Small Micronesian Atoll.
Toronto: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Davidson, Janet M., 1967. Preliminary Archaeological Investigations on Ponape and Other Eastern
Caroline Islands. Micronesica, 3(2):81-95.
Eilers, Anneliese, 1934. Inseln um Ponape. In Georg Thilenius (ed.), Ergebnisse der Sudsee
Expedition 1908-1910, 2, B, 8. Hamburg: Friederichsen, De Gruyter.

20
Good, Elaine M., and Weldis Welley 1989. A preminary grammer sketch, text and vocabulary of
Pingelapese. In Elaine M. Good and Weldis Welley (eds.), Papers in Kosraean and Ponapeic.
Pacific Linguistic C-112. Canberra: Australian National University, pp.1-126.
Goodenough, Ward H., 1953. Native Astronomy in the Central Carolines. University of Pennsylvania
Museum Monographs. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
---------- 2002. Under Heaven’s Brow: Pre-Christian Religious Tradition in Chuuk. Philadelphia:
American Philosophical Society.
Hambruch, Paul, 1936. Ponape, vol. 2. In Georg Thilenius (ed.), Ergebnisse der Südsee Expedition,
1908-1910, 2, B, 7. Hamburg: Friederichsen, De Gruyter.
Hanlon, David, 1988. Upon A Stone Altar: A History of the Island of Ponape to 1890. Pacific Islands
Monograph Series, No. 5. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Harrison, Sheldon P., 1976. Mokilese Reference Grammer. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Harrison, Sheldon P., and Salich Albert, 1977. Mokilese-English Dictionary. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
Hezel, Francis X., SJ., 1979. Foreign Ships in Micronesia: A Compendium of Ship Contact with the
Caroline and Marshall Island, 1521-1885. Saipan: TT Printing Office.
Hunter-Anderson, Rosalind (ed.), 1990. Recent Advance in Micronesian Archaeology. Micronesica
Supplement, 2.
Hurd, Jane N., 1977. A History and Some Traditions of Pingelap, an Atoll in the Eastern Caroline
Islands. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Hawaii.
Kubary, Jan S., 1880. Die Bewohner der Mortlock-Inseln. Mittheilungen der Geographischen
Gesellschaft in Hambrug 1878-1879, pp.224-299.
Lawrence, Retty, n.d. Eden maram en Pohnpei. Manuscript on file at the Pohnpei Historic
Preservation Office, Federated States of Micronesia.
Moore, S.G., 1858. Report of the first voyage of the missionary parcket “Morning Star.” Nautical
Magazine, 27:449-457, 529-536.
Morton, Newton E., Jane N. Hurd, and G.F. Little, 1973. Pingelap and Mokil Atolls: A problem in
population structure. In Michael H. Crawford and Peter L. Workman (eds.), Methods and Theories
of Anthropological Genetics. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1973. 315-32.
Murphy, Raymond E., 1950. Geographic Studies in the Easternmost Carolines. Coordinated
Investigation of Micronesian Anthropology Report no. 5. Washington D.C.: Pacific Science
Board, National Research Council.
Nagaoka, Takuya, n.d. Sailing Canoe Building Techniques on Mwoakilloa Atoll. Manuscript in
21
 possession of the author.
Nagaoka, Takuya, and Barbara Hicks, n.d. Oh Mehj Wa: Chants, Songs, Accounts, and Tales of
Mwoakilloa Atoll, Micronesia. Manuscript in possession of the authors.
Oles, Bryan P., 1999. Keeping Our Roots Strong: Place, Migration, and Corporate Ownership of Land
on Mokil Atoll. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Rehg, Kenneth L., 1981. Ponapean Reference Grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Rehg, Kenneth L., and Byron W. Bender, 1990. Lexical transfer from Marshallese to Mokilese: A
case of intra-Micronesian borrowing. Oceanic Linguistics, 29(1):1-26.
Riesenberg, Saul H., 1965. Table of voyages affecting Micronesian islands. Oceania, 36:155-170.
Saito, Hiroyuki, 1996. The Record of Building Warasap. Report prepared for the Pohnpei State
Historic Preservation Office, Federated States of Micronesia.
Sarfert, Ernest G., 1919. Kusaie, vol. 2. In Georg Thilenius (ed.), Ergebnisse der Südsee Expedition,
1908-1910, 2, B, 4. Hamburg: Friederichsen, De Gruyter.
Shimizu, Akitoshi, 1982. Chiefdom and the spatial classification of the life-world: Everyday life,
subsistence and the political system on Ponape. In Machiko Aoyagi (ed.), Islanders and Their
Outside World: A Report of the Cultural Anthropological Research in the Caroline Islands of
Micronesia in 1980-1981. Tokyo: St. Paul’s (Rikkyo) University, pp.153-215.
TTPI Department of Education, 1973. Pohnpei ni Mwehin Kawa (Old Ponape). Saipan: TT Printing
Office.
Weckler, Joseph E., 1949. Land and Livelihood on Mokil, An Atoll in the Eastern Carolines.
Coordinated Investigation of Micronesian Anthropology, Part 1. Final Report, no. 25, unpublished
manuscript. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.

22