The tenth class being identical with the first is omitted. It will be seen that the present tense is formed throughout on the model of the first conjugation, the Jain words given above being phonetic modifications of words which would be in Sanskrit respectively harati, vedati, dhâti, ârâdhati, prâpanati,

chayati, sunati, bhanjati, karati, grihnati, and jânati, if all those verbs belonged to the first or Bhû conjugation.

It is not so easy to draw out a full verbal paradigma in this dialect as in Pali, because we have as yet no grammars, and are obliged to fall back on the words that occur in a single text. The range of tenses appears to consist of a present (corresponding to the Sanskrit lat), imperative (lot), potential (lin), imperfect and aorist jumbled together as in Pali, and future (rit). The perfect (lit) seems to be altogether wanting, as it is in the modern languages.

The present runs thus:- "bow."

नम्

S. 1. नमामि 2. नमसि, 3. नमति; P. 1. नमामो, 2. नमह, 3. नमंति.

Those terminations which contain the vowel e have crept into the conjugation of all verbs from the tenth, to which that vowel, as shortened from aya, must be held strictly to belong, or to causals. Thus in Bhag. i. 60, we have phâseti, pâleti, sobheti, tireti, pûreti, kitteti, aņupâleï, ârâheï, for Sanskrit wŵufa, qaufa, Myufa, acufa, grufa, aît-fufa, अनुपालयति, आराधयति, respectively. In the last word the causal form becomes the same as the active given above. Of the imperative we have only the S. 2 and P. 2, which are in fact the only persons which an imperative can properly have. The S. 2 takes the ending fas in Pali with junction vowels & and e, the P. 2 ends in, which, as Weber points out, is from the P. 2 of the present, in Sanskrit . Thus

Skr. √ रुच् “shine,” causal रोचय, impv. रोचय, Jaina रोएहि.

The potential, of which only the S. 3 is traceable, resembles Pali in using the termination eyya with variant ejja.

Skr.

"go,"

S. 3. गच्छेत् Jaina गछेय्य, गछेज्ज.

V ग्रह “take,” गृह्णीयात् , गेण्हेज्ज.

But there exist some old simple forms derived by phonetic changes from the corresponding Sanskrit tense, as kujja: = kuryât, dajja = dadyât (Mueller, p. 60).

The future resembles that of Pali, thus

S. 1. नमिस्सामि, 2. ° इस्ससि, 3. इस्सद्; P. 1. इस्सामो, 2. ° इस्सह, 3. quifa.

It also appears with a termination ihi produced by weakening into and the following a to i, thus

Skr. गमिष्यति, Jain गछिहिति and गमिहिति .

Moreover, there is a trace of the double future like Pali dakkhissati.

Skr. √ पद् “go” with उप, उपपद् “attain” future उपपत्स्यते, Jaina Bqqfsgfefa.

Here उपपत्स्यते would phonetically become उववच्छ, and by still further softening, whence, as if from a present, is formed the future उववज्झिस्सद् and डववज्झिहिति.

§ 6. The reduction in the number of tenses necessitates a greatly extended use of participles. This is one great step in the transition from the synthetical to the analytical system. The Sanskrit present active participle takes in that language the characteristics of the ten conjugations, and is declined as a noun in three genders. It ends properly in ant, but the nasal is dropped before certain terminations, as

The nasal, however, is retained throughout in Jaina Prakrit, thus

This peculiarity is worth remembering; much depends on this retention of the nasal, as will be seen when we come to the modern Sindhi and Panjabi verbs.

Very great interest attaches to the participle of the future passive, which in Sanskrit ends in. In verbs which do not take intermediate, this ending is added directly to the root with the usual Sandhi changes; but as Prakrit prefers to insert the in order to preserve the root-form of the present, it comes to pass that the of the termination stands alone between two vowels, and in consonance with Prakrit phonetics is elided. The hiatus thus produced is in the Jaina writings filled by. If to this we add the regular mutation of into

, we get from the form. In its original meaning this participle corresponds to the Latin in ndus, as faciendus, and expresses that which is to be done, as "by thee it is to be gone," i.e. "thou must go." In this sense it occurs frequently in Bhagavati, as for instance in § 56:

Jaina ya Zaryfwen sag, fafgud, fadifaud, yfaug, etc. Skr. एवं देवानुप्रिया गन्तव्यं, स्थातव्यं, निषत्तव्यं, भोक्तव्यं, etc.

'Thus, O beloved of the gods, must ye go, must ye stand, must ye sit, must ye eat," where the last two words postulate a Sanskrit form with the inserted, such as fautfaaei, भुंजितव्यं.

It is obvious that it would require no great straining of the sense of this participle to make it into an infinitive, and seeing that as early as this Jaina dialect the use of the regular Sanskrit infinitive in has become rare, it follows that recourse should be had to some participial form to supply its place. In this way we find the past passive participle in, with the elided and

its place supplied by, employed in a construction where we should expect the infinitive. Thus Bhâg. § 54, a ugnfari, Heıfad, âgıfad, faqıfat (Weber, Bhâg. p. 274): "I wish to wander, to take the tonsure, to practise austerities, to learn," as though from Sanskrit forms प्रव्राजितं, मुण्डापितं, सेधापितं, faaf, the three last being causals formed with âp, as is frequently the case with causals in Prakrit, though of course these forms are not found in Sanskrit. In that language the formation of causals by means of is restricted to a few stems.

More will be said on this subject in a subsequent chapter, but it is necessary here to note an early instance of this process which takes a much wider development in later times, the infinitive in Gujarati and Oriya and several participial constructions and verbal nouns being derived from it.

§ 7. The scenic Prakrits represent a further step in development. Despite the admittedly artificial character of these dialects, they probably retain forms which were at one time in general use, although that time may not have been the epoch when the dramas were written, and without referring to them, the structure of the modern verb could not be clearly understood. It is expedient to avoid discussing this question, lest attention should be drawn away from the real subject of this work, namely, the modern languages. All this part of the present chapter is merely introductory and is only inserted in order to pave the way for a more intelligent appreciation of the origin and growth of Hindi and its fellows.

In the Mâhârâshtri or principal poetical dialect all conjugations are reduced to the type of the first or Bhû class, and the same holds good for the Çauraseni or chief prose dialect. Only here and there do we find faint traces of the peculiarities of other conjugations. Of the six phases only three remain, active, passive, and causal. The passive differs from the active only in the form of the root, the characteristic of the