Page images

रोचिमो, मु,

Sanskrit passive having been worked into the stem, and the terminations of the active being added to it. The Âtmanepada and the dual are of course rejected.

Of tenses these dialects have a still more restricted range than the Jaina Prakrits. They have the present, imperative and future, with traces of the potential. The past tense is chiefly formed by the p.p.p. with auxiliary verbs. Thus from VT“shine," Present s. 1. रोचामि, 2. रोचसि, 3. रोचदि. रोचमि,

P. 1. रोचामो, मु, म, 2. रोचध, ह, 3. रोचन्ति.
रोचम, °मु,
म्हो, मह,

त्य, धं.

°इत्य. Here are observable those first indications of a confusion of forms, and uncertainty in their use, which are always characteristic of that period in languages when the synthetical structure is breaking down into the analytical. In these dialects, as in Jaina Prakrit, the practice exists of inserting as a junction vowel; thus we have such forms as कलेमि “ I do," Skr. करोमि, instead of a fa, which would be the regular result of treating कर् as a Bhu verb, गच्छेम्ह for गच्छाम, "let us go.” The presence of the x in S. 1 and P. 1 is accounted for by its being confused with that construction in which the present of Wh is used with a past participle; thus we find कदम्हि “ I was made' = Sanskrit कृतोऽस्मि, and पेसिदम्हि “ I have been sent" = Skr. प्रेषितोऽस्मि. The imperative has the following forms, S. 2. रोच 3. रोचदु.

P. 2. रोचध

3. रोचंतु. रोचाहि रोचउ. रोचह. The S. 2 has also forms रोचस्स, रोचस्सु, pointing to a Sanskrit Atmane form रोचस्व and P. 2 similarly रोचधं = Skr. रोचवं, though neither are used in a middle sense, but are equivalents as regards meaning of the Sanskrit active.



[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


The following are a few examples :

पेकबस्स "look thou!" Skr. प्रेक्षस्व.
णमस्स " bow thou!"

" bear ye."

जाध “go ye."

अबेध "go away."

ओशलध "get out of the way!" अपसरत.
कलेध “do."

ay “wake up."

जाग्टत. The future most usually exhibits the form of the Sanskrit present in ष्य = इस्स.

S. 1. रोचिस्सामि, 2. रोचिस्ससि, 3. इस्सद्.

P. 1. स्सामो, 2. एस्सध, 3. इस्संति.


' This form is used indifferently with roots of all classes as in Pali, but here also there still subsist some traces of a future formed without the intermediate T. Vararuchi (vii. 16, 17) gives the following : Skr. / श्रु " hear,"

V' fut. श्रोष्यामि. Pr. सोच्छं.
Vवच “speak,"

वक्ष्यामि. वोच्छं.
/ गम "go,"

[गत्स्यामि]. गच्छं. / रुद् “weep," Ved. रोत्स्यामि. रोच्छं.

✓ fag“know," वेत्स्यामि. वेच्छं. These forms are, however, justly regarded as exceptions; for the rule in scenic, as in other, Prakrits is to retain throughout the root-form of the present. The regular type of the future is that in issa-, and the above words have also a future formed in the regular way, सुणिस्सइ, वचिस्सह, गमिस्सह, etc. This स्स



[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

1 Some of these are Mâgadhi Prakrit, but for my present purpose it is not necessary to draw a distinction between Magadhi and Çauraseni.

[ocr errors]

is softened to , and the following vowel is weakened to T, producing as characteristic the syllables ihi. Thus,

/ हस् “laugh," S. 1. हसिहिमि. 2. हसिहिसि, 3. हमिहिए, etc.

By a forgetfulness of the origin of such forms as H1, the ordinary future terminations may be added to them too, just like dakkhissati in Pali (4), so that we find otherfâ, and सोच्छिहिति.

The various tenses which in Sanskrit indicate past time have already in Pali and the earlier Prakrits been fused down into

In scenic Prakrit a further step is taken, and the syllables ia, erroneously written ia in some MSS., are added to the root for all persons of the past tense (Var. vii. 23, 24. Lassen, Inst. Pr., 353). This is probably the neuter of the P.P.p. in Sanskrit, and its use is due to the frequency of the construction with the instrumental. Instead of saying “I I went, I heard,” the people said, " by me seen, gone, heard.” This point is one of great importance in modern Hindi and Gujarati.



$ 8. While the Maharashtri and Çauraseni dialects are considered the principal ones in the dramas, there are yet others of great importance, such as the Mâgadhi, with its sub-dialects. Among these, however, it is necessary only to notice that called Apabhrança. I do not wish here to touch upon the question whether the dialect called by this name in the dramas really represents the speech of any particular Indian province or not. I assume, for the sake of convenience, that Apabhrança is really a vulgar speech further removed from the classical idiom than Maharashtri or Çauraseni. There may have been half a dozen Apabhranças, probably there were. In this section I am merely seeking to put together examples of verbal forms in a dialect one step nearer to modern times than the principal scenic Prakrits, and having done so, shall go on to my own special subject.

[ocr errors]

P. 1. पुच्छाम,

All that we can expect in the way of tenses after what has been said in the preceding sections, is a present, an imperative, and a future. The rest of the verbal work is done by participles. V प्रछ “ask," Present s. 1. पुच्छामि, 2. असि,


•एमि इमि.
2. पुच्छह,

3. अंति.

/ “do," Imperative S. 2. करहि, P. 1. करडं, P. 2. करह.


करऊ. कर,

का. कर, In the future, although the form with the characteristic issa is found as सुमरिस्सदि= स्मरिष्यति, Skr. / स्मृ, yet more commonly

V we find the form in which has been softened to g; thus

S. 1. करिहिमि, 2. करिहिसि, 3. करिहिइ, etc. The grammarians also give a

P. 1. in हु as कासाहुं = करिष्याम. The participles resemble in most respects those in other Prakrit dialects, but that in तव्यं becomes व्वं, as करड्व्वं and करिवं= करितव्य (कर्त्तव्य). The gerund ends in प्पि, प्पिण, and a softened form fa; the ordinary Çauraseni form , which will be found in several modern languages, is here also used. To the gerund rather than to the infinitive, as the grammarians would have it, seems to belong the form in एबहुं, as लहबर्ड, the exact genesis of which is doubtful, though, as to the final हुँ, there is an analogy in the true infinitive OEUF, which very closely approaches to Chand's forms, as बरणहुं, बरणवं.

In addition to the above forms which are found in scenic Apabhrança, others and those more genuine fragments of popular speech are to be picked out from scraps that have


[ocr errors]

been preserved by bards. It is much to be wished that we had more of Hemachandra's works accessible, as in them we should doubtless find a rich mine of such words. Thus for all past tenses there is the participial form in for all three persons, as

जाणिउं= जानितं (जातं).
कहिउं= कथितं.
अप्पिङ = अर्पितं.


It has a plural in h or YT, as:


आया= आगताः

उट्टिया= उत्थिताः Sometimes also the u of the singular is rejected and a substituted, as afu=ufun. There are other forms to be found in these poems which will be referred to hereafter when the modern forms which they illustrate are under discussion.

As a general result from the preceding brief sketches it may be asserted that Sanskrit, Pali, and the Prakrits taken collectively as the languages of the earlier stage have a common structure, though in different grades. Sanskrit, with its full range of synthetical tenses, yet admits here and there analytical constructions. Pali does the same, though its synthetical tenses are fewer and simpler. The Prakrits reduce the tenses still further, and make greater use of participial constructions. The treatment of the root-syllable also shows a gradually increasing tendency to simplification, for whereas in Sanskrit it is changed in form repeatedly in the various tenses, a practice begins in Pali and grows more common as we go down the stream, of using in all parts of the verb that form of the root which is found in the Sanskrit present.

From the review of these languages given above the passive and causal have been purposely omitted, because the parts which they play in the development of the modern verb are peculiar,

« PreviousContinue »