or इषू s

that is, to the tense-stem of an s-aorist or of

an is-aorist (but without augment).

The root is strengthened according to the rules that apply in forming the middle-stem of the s and of the isaorists respectively: in general, namely, a final vowel is gunated in both formations; but a medial vowel, only before is.

Other minor rules it is unnecessary to repeat here.

In the older language, as has been pointed out in detail above, precative optative forms of the middle voice are oftenest made from the s-aorist (895) and the is-aorist (907); but also from the root-aorist (838), the aaorist (850), the reduplicated aorist (870), and the sis-aorist (914); and even from the perfect (812b).

924. As example of inflection, we may take the root bhū, 'be', which is said (no middle aorist or precative is made from it in the older language) to form its middle on the is-stem. Thus:

2 भूयास् bhūyás

bhaviṣiváhi

भूयास्तम् भूयास्त भविषीष्ठा भविषीयास्थाम् भविषीम्

bhūyastam bhūyásta bhaviṣīṣṭhās bhaviṣīyásthām bhaviṣīḍhvám 3 भूयात् भूयास्ताम् भूयासम् भविषीष्ट भविषीयास्ताम् भविष bhūyat bhuyástam bhuyasus bhaviṣistá bhavisiyástām bhaviṣirán

According to the grammarians, the dental or lingual character of the initial of the middle ending dhvam depends upon how the aorist tense-sign is preceded: in the 8-form, it is dhvam if the si is preceded by any other vowel than a or a; in the is-form, it may be optionally dhvam if the is is preceded by y, r, l, v, or h. This seems wholly irrational: the true question is, whether the precative s is to be regarded as really present in 2d pl. mid., as in all other 2d persons of both voices: if so which is altogether probable, but in the absence of quotable forms from the older language cannot be pronounced certain the ending is necessarily and always dhvam.

925. The precative is a form of rare occurrence in the classical language. In each of the texts already more than once referred to (Manu, Nala, Bhagavad-Gitā, Çakuntala, Hitopadeça)

it occurs once and no more. Its value, as already stated (573), is purely optative: thus, sarvarastreṣv idam vaco bruyāsta (Nala), [I beg that you] speak these words in all kingdoms'.

Uses of the Aorist.

926. The uses of the aorist mode-forms (as has been already pointed out: 582) appear to accord in general with those of the mode-forms of the present-system. The predilection of the earlier language, continued sparingly in the later, for the augmentless forms in prohibitive expression after má was sufficiently stated and illustrated above (579).

The tense-value of the aorist indicative has also been more than once referred to, and calls only for somewhat more of detail and for illustration here.

927. The aorist of the later language is simply a preterit, equivalent to the imperfect and perfect, and frequently coördinated with them.

Thus, tataḥ sa gardabhaṁ laguḍena tāḍayāmāsa; tenā 'sāu pañcatvam agamat (H.), 'thereupon he beat the donkey with a stick; and hereof the latter died'; tataḥ sā vidarbhān agamat punaḥ; tāṁ tu bandhujanaḥ samapūjayat (MBh.), 'thereupon she went back to Vidarbha; and her kindred paid her reverence'; prītimān abhūt: uvuca cai 'nam (MBh.), 'he was filled with affection, and said to him'.

928. The aorist of the older language has the value of a proper "perfect": that is, it signifies something past which is viewed as completed with reference to the present; and it requires accordingly to be rendered by our tense made with the auxiliary have. In general, it indicates what has just taken place; and oftenest something which the speaker has experienced.

Examples from the Veda are: púri 'mé gám aneṣata púry agním ahṛṣata, devéṣv akrata çrávaḥ kú imán á dadharṣati (RV.), 'these here have led about a cow, they have carried around the fire, they have done honor to the gods who shall venture anything against them?' yám āíchāma mánasā sò ‘yám á 'gūt (RV.), 'he whom we (formerly, impf.) sought with our mind has (now, aor.) come'; yéné ́ndro havíṣā kṛtvy ábhavad dyumny ùttamáḥ, idám tád akri devā asapatnáḥ kílā 'bhuvam (RV.), 'that libation by which Indra, making it, became (impf.) of highest glory, I have now made, ye gods; I have become free from enemies'.

Examples from the Brāhmaṇa language are: sá hū 'smin jyóg uvāsa... túto ha gandharváḥ súm ūdire: jyóg vá igúm urváçī manuṣyèṣv avātsīt (ÇB.), 'she lived with him a long time. Then the Gandharvas said to one another, "this Urvaçi, forsooth, hath dwelt a long time among mortals"; tasya ha dantāḥ pedire: tam ho 'vāca: apatsata vā asya dantāḥ (AB.), 'his teeth fell

out. He said to him: "his teeth truly have fallen out"'; indrasya vṛtrám jaghnúṣa indriyáṁ vīryàm pṛthivím ánu vy àrchat tád 6shadhayo vīrúdho 'bhavan sá prajapatim úpā 'dhāvad vṛtrúm me jaghnúṣa indriyáṁ vīryùm pṛthivím únu vy àrat tád óshadhayo virúdho 'bhūvann fti (TS.), 'of Indra, when he had slain Vritra, the force and might went away into the earth, and became the herbs and plants: he ran to Prajapati, saying: "my force and might, after slaying Vritra, have gone away into the earth, and have become the herbs and plants"; svayúm enam abhyudétya brūyād vrátya kvà 'vātsīḥ (AV., in prose passage), 'going up to him in person, let him say: "Vratya, where hast thou abode"?' yád idánīṁ dvāú vivúdamānāv eyátām ahám adarçam ahám açrāuṣam íti ya evá brūyád ahám adarçam íti tásmā evá çráddadhyāma (CB.), 'if now two should come disputing with one another, [the one] saying "I have seen", [the other] "I have heard", we should believe the one who said "I have seen".

929. This distinction of the aorist from the imperfect and perfect as tenses of narration is very common in the Brahmanas, and is closely observed: neglect of it is very rare, and is to be regarded as either due to corruption of text or indicative of a late origin.

In the Vedic hymns, the same distinction is prevalent, but is both less clear and less strictly maintained: many passages would admit an interpretation implying either sense; and evident aorist-forms (especially of the simple aorist: Delbrück) are sometimes used narratively, while imperfectforms are also occasionally employed in the aorist sense.

930. The boundary between that which has just been and that which now is is occasionally overstepped, and the aorist becomes nearly the equivalent of a present. Not very rarely, in the Veda, it is convenient to render the former as if it were the latter; and in the Brahmana the same is true especially of the aorist akar.

CHAPTER XII.

THE FUTURE-SYSTEMS.

931. THE verb has two futures, of very different age and character. The one has for tense-sign a sibilant followed by ya, and is an inheritance from the time of IndoEuropean unity. The other is a periphrastic formation, made by appending an auxiliary verb to a derivative noun of

agency, and it is a recent addition to the verb-system; its beginnings only are met with in the earliest language. The former may be called the s-future (or the old future, or simply the future; the latter may be distinguished as the periphrastic future.

I. The s-future.

932. The tense-sign of this future is the syllable syá, added to the root either directly or by an auxiliary vowel in the latter case becoming isya). The root

has the guna-strengthening. Thus, from y dū is formed the future tense-stem ¿ dāsyȧ; from Vi, the stem esyá; from √3 duh, the stem u dhokṣyá; from v¥ bhū, the stem भविष्य bhavisyà; from yऋध्?dh, the stem श्रर्धिष्य ardhiṣyá; and so on.

But from Viv the stem is viṣyá, from Vuks it is ukṣiṣyá, and so on (240).

933. This tense-stem is, then inflected precisely like a present-stem ending in a (second general conjugation). We may take as models of inflection the future of y¿ dā, 'give', and that of V kr, 'make'. Thus:

1

dasyáti dasyatas dāsyánti dāsyáte dasyéte

dāsyánte

करिष्यामि करिष्यावस् करिष्यामस् करिष्ये करिष्यावहे करिष्यामहे karişyámi kariṣyávas kariṣyamas kariṣyé kariṣyávahe kariṣyámahe

934. With regard to the use or non-use of the auxiliary vowel before the sibilant, there is a degree of general accordance between this tense and the other future and the desidera

tive; but it is by no means absolute, nor are any definite rules to be laid down with regard to it (and so much the less, because of the infrequency of the two latter formations in actual use): between this and the aorist (s-aorist on the one side, or is-aorist on the other), any correspondence is still less traceable. Practically, it is necessary to learn, as a matter of usage, how any given root makes these various parts of its conjugational system.

935. Below is added a statement of the usage, as regards the auxiliary vowel, of the roots observed to form the s-future in the older language (more than a hundred and fifty: the collection is believed to be tolerably complete) for the most part, in the form of a specification of the roots which add the tense-sign directly to the root; in brackets are further mentioned the other roots which according to the grammarians also refuse the auxiliary vowel.

a. Of roots ending in vowels, the great majority (excepting those in ?) take no i. Thus, all in a (numerous, and unnecessary to specify); all in i i, ksi, ci, ji except cri [and çvi]; all in i- kri, ni, bhi, mi, vlī

cyu, dru, plu, cru,

dru

except çi [and di]; all in u except su 'press', and stu, which follow either method, as stoṣyāmi and staviṣyāmi [and except kṣu, kṣṇu, nu, yu, ru, snu]. But all in (numerous, and unnecessary to specify) take i [and those in changeable, or so-called 7-roots (242) are said to take either i or i; no i-forms, however, are found in the older language]; and likewise those in ū namely bhu, dhu.

b. Of roots ending in mutes, two thirds add sya directly. Thus, of roots in k, çak; in c (all but yac: namely), muc, ric, vac, vraçe, sic [and pac, vic]; - in ch, prach (only case); inj (all but vraj: namely), bhaj, majj (mañkṣya), mṛj (mārkṣya), yaj, yuj, vṛj, sṛj [also tyaj, bhrajj, bhañj, rañj, sañj, svañj, nij, vij, ruj, bhuj]; in t, kṛt and vṛt [kṛt, cṛt, nṛt optionally]; in d, ad, pad, çad, sad, skand, syand, chid, bhid, vid 'find', nud [also had, khid, svid, kṣud, tud, and chrd and tṛd optionally]: only observed exceptions, vad, and vid 'know'; in dh, bandh, rādh, budh, yudh, rudh [also vyadh, sādh, sidh, krudh, kṣudh, çudh, vṛdh]: only observed exceptions, ṛdh and gṛdh; in n, tan and man (but man forms sometimes manisya); in p, tap, vap, ap, gup, dṛp, srp, klp [also çap, kṣip, lip, lup]: svap forms both svapsya and svapisya; in bh, yabh and labh [also rabh] no exceptions observed; in m, nam, yam, ram: kram follows

either method.

c. Of roots ending in semivowels, all (they are very few) take the auxiliary i The roots va or vi ("ve") 'weave' and hvā or hū ("hve") 'call' take the forms vay and hvay, as before the a of their present-stem: thus, vayisya, hvayiṣya.

d. Of roots ending in spirants, the minority (about a third) are without the auxiliary vowel. They are: roots in f, viç, dṛç (drakṣya), mṛç (mrakṣya) [also danç, diç, riç, liç, kruç, ruç, spṛç]; in ș, çiş, kṛṣ (krakṣya) [also tvis, dvis, pis, vis, clis, tus, duș, puș,

çus];

in s, vas 'dwell' (vatsya: