Collado's treatment of the morphology contains one quite obvious difference from those of his predecessors: he isolates the particles of the language as separate elements of the structure. While his effort is more or less carelessly maintained by the type setter, his attempt to establish a division between the semantemes (_shi_) and the morphemes (_ji_) of Japanese by establishing formal distance between his _verba_ and _particula_, reflects his consciousness that the morphological elements in Japanese are of a different order than those in Latin. At times, such as when he describes the preterit subjunctive as _agueta raba_, his divisions fly in the face of derivational history. But he can claim a reasonable justification for his decision by citing Rodriguez' rule for the formation of this form; "add _raba_ to the preterit of the verb" (_Arte_, 18v). Perhaps it is a prejudice founded upon familiarity with {9} contemporary romanizations, but I cannot help but consider this attempt to give greater independence to the particles as an improvement in the representation of the morphological system. In all other significant facets of the morphology Collado follows the principles established by Rodriguez with the one exception that in the over-all systematization of the verbal formation and conjugation he follows the classifications established in Lebrija's _Introductiones_ rather than those which Rodriguez inherited from the _Institutiones_ of Alverez. The most significant difference between the two systems is the use by Lebrija of the term subjunctive in his description of the moods where Rodriguez gives independent status to the conjunctive, conditional, concessive, and potential. As we shall see, after presenting the conjugational system of the verb within the framework of Lebrija, Collado breaks the expected sequence of his description of the verb to interject a section on conditional constructions and another on those of the potential. In the treatment of the tenses Collado breaks with Rodriguez in not attempting to establish an imperfect for Japanese, but he does follow him in the overall classification of the conjugations. Thus:[9] 1st Conjugation verbs ending in _e_, _gi_, and e.g., _ague, uru_ _ji_ (_xi_ and _maraxi_) 2nd Conjugation verbs ending in _i_ e.g., _iomi, u_ 3rd Conjugation verbs ending in _ai_, _oi_, and e.g., _narai, ó_ _ui_ To the description of this general system Collado adds the treatment of the substantive verbs. This section in many respects is the weakest in his grammar with a portion of his description lost in composing the final text. Since Collado does not, as Rodriguez, present the conjugations in paradigmatic form, I have extracted from his presentation the most representative forms of the verb _ague, uru_ for each of the categories of the system, and presented them in Chart 2 for reference. CHART 2