,one who gets (unto whom come) many presentsé. Cf. also 33. Only those indefinite sentences which in English are introduced by ,he whoé, ,who ever', ,that which, ,whaté etc. can be adequately expressed in Tibetan, by using the interrogative pronouns with the participle (seldom the naked root) of the verb, or adding ན་ (,if — v. 41, A. 4.) to the

latter. Instead of in this case is written more cor

rectly. Thus: སུ་ལ་དམ་པའི་ཆོས་མཆིས་པ་བདག་ལ་སྟོན་པར་ གྱུར་ན་ ,if anybody who possesses the good faith teach it me་; ཁྱོད་སུ་འགྲོ་བ་དག་ཀྱང་འགྲོགས་ཏེ་ ,when those of you who wish to go are assembled'; ནོར་བུ་རིན་པོ་ཆེ་འདི་ཇི་འདོད་ པ་ཐམས་ཅད་ཆར་བཞིན་དུ་འབེབས་སོ་ ,this jewel (ciutanaryi)

will make come down like rain whatever is wished for';

ཁྱོད་ཅི་ཟེར་ཁྱོད་ཇི་སྨྲས་པ་བཞིན་དུ་བྱའོ་

,whatever you way say

and ask of me according to that I will act, or I will grant

བདག་གིས་མཐུ་ཇི་ཡོད་པས་རྒྱ་

you whatever you askt. མཚོའི་ཆུ་བཅུས་ཏེ་ ,having scooped the water of the sea with what force I have'; རིན་པོ་ཆེ་ཇི་ལྟ་བུ་ཞིག་རྙེད་པ་བདག་ལ་ བསྟན་དུ་གསོལ་ ,I beg you to show me what sort of jewel you have found (got)'; རྒང་གྱི་རྗེས་གང་རིགས་པར་གསེར་གྱི་ བྱེ་མར་གྱུར་ཏོ་ ,his footprints, in what place soever they fell (v. lex. s. v. རིགས་), became gold-sandí.

But the participle is treated as if no relative was pre

ceding, thus སྔར་ཇི་སྐད་སྨྲས་པ་ལས་མ་ཟློགས་སོ་

,he did not

recede from (recall) the word he had spoken before'; vulg.,

WT, ང་གང་བསྡད་པའི་ཁང་མིག་ ,the room where I satí.

Chapter VI.

The Verb.

30. Introductory remarks. The Tibetan verb must be regarded as denoting, not an action, or suffering, or condition of any subject, but merely a coming to pass, or, in other words, they are all impersonal verbs, like taedet, miseret etc. in Latin, or it suits etc. in English. Therefore they are destitute of what is called in our own languages the active and passive voice, as well as of the discrimination of persons, and show nothing beyond a rather poor capability of expressing the most indispensable distinctions of tense and mood. From the same reason the acting subject of a transitive verb must regularly appear in the Instrumental case, as the case of the subject of a neutral verb, which, in European languages, is the Nominative —, ought to be regarded, from a Tibetan point of view, as Accusative expressing the object of an impersonal verb, just as, poenitet me' is translated by,I repent'. But it will perhaps be easier to say: The subject of a transitive verb, in Tibetan, assumes regularly the form of the instrumental, of a neutral verb that of the nominative which is the same as the accusative. Thus, is pro

ངས་ཁྱོད་རྡུང་

ང་ a beating happens, ཁྱོད་ regarding you, ངས་

perly: རྡུང་

by me

I beat you.

In common life the object has often

the form of the dative,, to facilitate the comprehension. But often, in modern talk as well as in the classical literature, the acting subject, if known as such from the context, retains its Nominative form. Especially the verba loquendi are apt to admit this slight irregularity.

31. Inflection of verbs. This is done in three different ways:

a) by changing the shape of the root. Such different shapes are, at most, four in number, which may be called, according to the tenses of our own grammar to which they correspond, the Present-, Perfect-, Future-, and Imperativeroots; e. g. of the Present-root to give the Perfect

root is 55, the Future-root 55, the Imperative root

ཐོང་; of འཚག་པ་,toilter, bolt‘ respectively: བཙགས་t8ag(8) (Ü: tsā), 454 tsag, tsog. The Present root, which implies duration, is also occasionally used for the Imperfect (in the sense of the Latin and Greek languages) and Future tenses. It is obvious, from the above mentioned instances, that the inflection of the root consists partly in alterations of the prefixed letters (so, if the Perfect likes the prefixed, the Future will have or retain the ), partly in adding a final √ (to the Perfect and Imperative), partly in changing the vowel (particularly in the Imperative). But also the consonants of the root itself are changed

sometimes: so the aspirates are often converted in the Perfet and Future into their surds, besides other more irregular changes. Only a limited number of verbs, however, are possessed of all the four roots, some cannot assume more than three, some two, and a great many have only one. To make up in some measure for this deficiency:

b) some auxiliary verbs have been made available: for the Present tense

ཡིན་, འདུག་, ལགས་ and others, all

of which mean,to be' (§ 39); for the Perfect ', 9, སོང་; for the Future འགྱུར་, འོང་, and the substantive རྒྱུ་

c) By adding various monosyllabic affixes, the Infinitive, Participles, and Gerunds are formed. These affixes as well as the auxiliary verbs are connected partly with the root, partly with the Infinitive, resp. its terminative, partly with the Participle.

Note. The spoken language, at least in WT, acknowledges even in four-rooted verbs seldom more than the Perfect root.

32. The Infinitive mood. The syllables

the final consonants

pa or, after

and vowels, wa are added

to the root, whereby it assumes all the qualities and powers of a noun. In verbs of more roots than one, each of them can, of course, in this way be converted into a substantive, or, in other words, each tense has its Infinitive, except the Imperative. From one-rooted verbs the different Infinitives may be formed by the above mentioned auxiliaries: thus, the Inf. Perf., by adding No♫ to the Infinitive of

the verb in question, or ཚར་བ་, ཟིན་པ་, སོང་བ་ to the

(terminative of the infinitive, 41.B) thus,

visurum esse, visum iri.

Note. The spoken language uses, in WT almost exclusively, a termination pronounced cas in Turig and Balti, ces, ce in Ladak, če in Lahoul etc., ja in Kunawar, se in Tsan etc., the etymology of which is doubtful, as it is not to be found in any printed book. Lamas in Ladak and Lahoul spell it ཅེས་.

33. The Participle. 1. This is in the written language

entirely like the Infinitive ཡིན་པ་ ,being་, གཏོང་བ་ ,giving་, བཏང་བ་ ,having givené. - 2. Whether the meaning is active and passive, however, can only be inferred from the context, e. g. 5555 is of course,the money given“, but 559′55′′,the man having given, or, that has given, the money'; the Tibetan participle means nothing but that the action or condition is connected in some way with a person or thing. But it is natural that in the present participle the active notion should be the more frequent one, as well as in the preterit the passive. 3. In the instance of Intensive verbs (formed with 38.1) the usage of scientific authors has strictly connected the active

sense with those formed with བྱེད་, as གཏོང་བྱེད་ toiú -.jed,

ton-že', instead of ', doing give, giving,