तौ लौ तारा जगमगे जौ लौ डगै न सूर ॥

तौ लौ जिय जग कर्म बस जौ लो ग्यान न पूर ॥

"So long (only) shines the star as the sun does not rise,

-Sakhi 201.

So long (only) do worldly works suffice as knowledge is not full;"

literally "until that (time) shines the star until which (time) the sun does not rise."

In a precisely similar way Chand uses f, as

कहां लगि लघुता वरनवों ॥

"How long shall I describe my inferiority?”—i. 22.

The other change to which is subject, namely that into T, yields the Bengali objective.

In Gujarati works the affix of the objective is sometimes written without the anuswâra, and thus resembles one form of the genitive affix; but it will be shown hereafter that the resemblance is accidental only.

§ 57. THE INSTRUMENTAL. This case possesses a special importance in the seven languages, from the fact that in most of them, owing to the peculiar system of prayoga or construction which prevails, it takes the place of the nominative before verbs in the past tenses—a practice which makes these languages in this respect difficult to foreigners. In the cumbrous Marathi especially, the correct use of the prayoga is a sort of pons asinorum to beginners, and even in some instances to natives themselves. The forms of the instrumental are these:

Sindhi has no form for this case, but uses the simple oblique or crude form without any affix; so also do the early and middle age Hindi poets, as will be shown in the latter part of this section. Gujarati, in addition to the e, which may also be regarded as originally merely the crude form, has also certain pleonastic affixes; thus it writes देवे करीने, देवे करी “by God,” “by means of God,” also देव थी, or देवे थी, which latter is strictly an ablative, and will be considered under that case.

Bengali uses the direct prayoga or construction in the past tenses of verbs, and has no need of an instrumental to take the place of the nominative; but when it requires to indicate instrumentality, the literary language employs such words as कर्तृक, करणक, द्वारा, पूर्व्वक; while the common speech uses the participles of the verbs "to do" and "to give," after “having done," fa “having given." Both high and low alike also borrow the affix of the locative, as in Gujarati the ablative.

Oriya, like Bengali, has only the direct prayoga, and, like it, supplies the place of an instrumental by and similar words, and colloquially by "having given," and such like words; but the instrumental is very rarely used in Oriya, the locative affixusually supplying its place.

The Gipsy uses sa in the singular and ja in the plural, but as a pure instrumental only, and not as a substitute for the nominative.

In those languages in which the past tense of the transitive verb requires the instrumental construction, the verb does not under those circumstances agree with the nominative case. There seems, however, to be an exception to this rule, if my informant, a Nepalese pandit, be correct, in the Nepali language. The pandit gives the past tense thus:

In this paradigm we see that the verb changes its termination in each person, whereas in Hindi it remains fixed, thus: खाया, तू ने खाया, etc. The peculiarity of the Nepali usage is undoubtedly to be explained by the fact that this form of the instrumental has become so completely identified with the nominative as to be mistaken for it by the vulgar; and in all probability, as I shall endeavour to show, the use of the (= Hindi) is a mere modern custom, and originally the direct construction was used, and they said a i, त खाइस

Although the question more strictly belongs to syntax, yet, in order to establish the correctness of the theory as to the origin of the instrumental affix which will be brought forward in this section, it will be advisable to give a brief description of the question of prayogas as they exist in the modern languages.

The prayogas are three in number: kartari, karmani, bhâve, which may be Englished respectively, subjective, objective, and impersonal; and what they are will be understood from the following Latin phrases:

Kartâ. Rex urbem condidit.

Karma. A rege urbs condita.

Bhâva. A rege urbi conditum est.

In the first the verb agrees with the nominative case; in the second it agrees with the object, and the subject is in the instrumental; in the third the verb is impersonal and neuter, the subject in the instrumental, and the object is generally in the oblique form.

The Karta prayoga is generally employed in the present and future tenses; the other two in the past tenses. In Marathi the potential, however, takes the Bhava as well as the Kartâ; and in all the languages except Marathi the Karma and Bhava constructions are restricted to transitive verbs.

Having thus briefly stated the general system of construc

tions, we return to the instrumental case of the noun, which, it will be seen, occupies the place of the subject in two of the constructions. It is, in the first place, necessary to observe, that in Gujarati there is an additional form of construction, in which the subject is in the dative case; and this is, strictly speaking, the Karmani construction: for in native grammars the dative, as well as the accusative, goes by the name of Karman or Karma, just as we have in these pages called them both the objective. The construction with the instrumental would more accurately be called the Karane, Karana being the name for that case. Secondly, not only in so archaic a language as Gujarati is the dative used indifferently with the instrumental in the frequently occurring constructions noted above, but in Nepali the forms of the case-affixes are very similar, the dative having, the instrumental; and the same similarity exists between the of the Old-Hindi objective and the of the Modern-Hindi instrumental; and so also, while is the sign of the dative-objective in Gujarati, it is the sign of the instrumental in Marathi. From these considerations it would seem to result that the two forms are identical in origin, and have been confounded with one another by the vulgar. For, as regards Hindi and Panjabi, certainly my own experience is, that the objective and impersonal constructions are never properly understood by the unlearned, and in the rustic dialects of the Eastern-Hindi area are more usually omitted altogether, and the direct or subjective construction employed.

It would be out of place here to go into more detail on a question of syntax; but it may be noticed that the participial form af, with its variant, which is almost if not quite proved to be the origin of the case-affix, is often used with a very wide range of meanings, and with great laxity of application, as is natural from its meaning, which may, without violence, be diverted to many uses. Thus in Old-Bengali it is used in the sense of "on account of," "for," as

fa anfa geft aza grafa 11

हेरल चेतन मोर ॥ – Bidyapati in Pad.

"For what, O fair one, dost cover thy face?

It has ravished my senses."

It is, however, necessary to inform the reader, that the theory above stated is not the generally received one; or, as these languages have never yet been studied scientifically, it would be more accurate to say that it is not the theory held by the few scholars who have looked into the question. Trumpp probably means his remark upon p. 113 to be taken as a mere obiter dictum, and it seems not to have occurred to him that there were serious objections to his derivation. He and others state that the affix, with its variants, is derived from the case-ending of the Sanskrit. The instrumental in Sanskrit ends in ena in the case of a-stems; and down to a late stage of classical Prakrit, this ending is preserved, and occurs even in Chand in Gâthâ passages, and, as stated in § 48, survives in Marathi as , where the final has been weakened to anuswâra. In Gujarati, also, the e of the instrumental has been mentioned in the abovequoted section as a quasi-synthetical termination; but it will be observed that this ena loses its n, and that we cannot in any way get out of it, unless we suppose a termination to start with, which does not exist. In general, the modern languages, throwing aside the complications of the various Sanskrit inflections, adopt those of the a-stem only, and the few traces of the synthetic system that still survive are, without exception, to be referred to that stem. We should hardly be justified in looking to the terminations of any other stem for the origin of modern forms; nor in this case would it much help us if we did: for, in all but the a-stem, the instrumental termination is; and although in masc. or neuter stems ending with a vowel an is inserted, making the whole termination, yet this regarded by Bopp, i. § 158, as euphonic only, and not an

is