§ 36. Type of the Active Verb in Sindhi and Marathi § 51. The Future Participle Passive § 52. Tenses formed from it in Sindhi, Gujarati, and Marathi § 53. The Future in Oriya, Bengali, and Eastern Hindi § 76. Sindhi Verbs with Pronominal Suffixes § 77. Conjugation of Stems ending in Vowels in Hindi, Panjabi, ERRATA. 3, 19, for this much read such. 10, 9, for मञ्जीत read मञ्जुति. 14, 28, for different read difficult. 19, 21, for पुरयति read पूरयति. 21, 26, for निषोतितव्यं read निषी- 34, 3 from below, for Pali read Prakrit 124, 1, dele comma after hearing. 131, 6, for छोडेलो read छोडेली. 135, 29, after dielala insert f.; for dielať, etc., read délať', etc. 140, 31, for सिडणा read सिउणा. 149, 24, for asmah read asmaḥ. 154, 29, for जाक्या read जावया. 162, 7, for भारूंलो read मारूंलो. 61, 25, for hladid read hlatu. 70, 12, for phrase read phase. 73, 16, for नारी read मारी. 83, 24, for माडाइज read साडाइज CHAPTER I. STRUCTURE OF VERBAL STEMS. CONTENTS.-§ 1. STRUCTURE OF THE SANSKRIT VERB.-§ 2. BEGINNINGS OF THE ANALYTICAL SYSTEM IN SANSKRIT.-§ 3. CONJUGATIONS OF THE PALI VERB.-§ 4. TENSES OF THE PALI VERB.-§§ 5, 6. THE VERB IN JAINA PRAKRIT.-7. SCENIC PRAKRIT VERB.-§ 8. APABHRANÇA VERBAL FORMS. -§ 9. THE MODERN VERBAL STEM.—§ 10. PHASES OF THE VErb.—§ 11. SINGLE AND DOUBLE STEMS.-§ 12. SINGLE NEUTER STEMS FROM SANSKRIT BHÚ ROOTS.—§ 13. THE SAME FROM OTHER CLASSES OF SANSKRIT ROOTS.— § 14. MODERN NEUTER STEMS FROM SANSKRIT PASSIVE PAST PARTICIPLES. -§ 15. SINGLE ACTIVE STEMS.-§ 16. TREATMENT OF SANSKRIT ROOTS ENDING IN A VOWEL.-§ 17. THE STEM DEKH.-§ 18. Double Verbs.— § 19. SINDHI DOUBLE STEMS DIFFERING IN THE FINAL CONSONANT.—§ 20. DOUBLE STEMS DIFFERING IN VOWEL AND FINAL CONSONANT.-§ 21. DOUBLE STEMS DIFFERING ONLY IN THE Vowel.-§ 22. EXAMPLES AND ILLUSTRA- TIONS.-23. LAWS OF THE FORMATION OF MODERN STEMS.-§ 24. THE PASSIVE INTRANSITIVE.- 25. THE PASSIVE.-§ 26. THE CAUSAL.-§ 27. THE PASSIVE CAUSAL.-28. THE CAUSAL IN A NEUTER SENSE.-§ 29. SECONDARY STEMS.-§ 30. REDUPLICATED AND IMITATIVE STEMS.—§ 31. simplification. Indeed, we may be permitted to hold that some, at least, of the forms laid down in the works of Sanskrit grammarians, were never actually in use in the spoken language, and with all due deference to the opinions of scholars, it may be urged that much of this elaborate development arose in an age when the speech of the people had wandered very far from the classical type. Even if it were not so, even if there ever were a time when the Aryan peasant used polysyllabic desideratives, and was familiar with multiform aorists, it is clear that he began to satisfy himself with a simpler system at a very distant epoch, for the range of forms in Pali and the other Prakrits is far narrower than in classical Sanskrit. away Simplification is in fact the rule in all branches of the IndoEuropean family of languages, and in those we are now discussing, the verb follows this general law. To make this clear, it may be well to give here, as a preliminary matter, a slight sketch of the structure of the verb as it stands in the Sanskrit and Prakrit stages of development. In that stage of the Sanskrit language which is usually accepted as the classical one, the verb is synthetical throughout, except in one or two tenses where, as will be hereafter shown, the analytical method has already begun to show itself. By separating the inflectional additions, and unravelling the euphonic changes necessitated by them, we may arrive at a residuum or grammarian's abstraction called the root. These roots, which have no real existence in spoken language, serve as useful and indispensable pegs on which to hang the long chain of forms which would otherwise defy all attempts at reducing them to order. Some writers have lately thought fit to sneer at the philologist and his roots, and have made themselves merry over imaginary pictures of a time when the human race talked to each other in roots only. These gentlemen set up a bugbear of their own creation for the purpose of |