No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2011
Nothing is more important for the right understanding and analysis of the North Indian vernaculars, than a thorough comparison of their minute details with their noble mother-tongue, and the two intermediate languages, which we call Pāli and Prākrit. Many things, which have hitherto remained doubtful, will thereby receive light, and their true structure will be laid open, if we take the trouble to follow the old Präkrit down into its more modern branches. It is unquestionable that we shall never be able to decide what words in the modern vernaculars are of Sanskrit origin, and what are derived from some foreign (Tatar) source, until we have accurately defined the laws by which the system of sounds is regulated in the present (Sanskritical) vulgar tongues of India. An attempt of this kind I have made in an essay, entitled The Sindhī System of Sounds, &c., published in the “Journal of the German Oriental Society,” vol. xv. 4. It is my object in the present essay to show in what way the modern tongues of India have supplied their declensional necessities, and how far their method is in accordance with Sanskrit or Prākrit usage; from this will follow, naturally, how far they have a claim to be considered true daughters of their common mother, the Sanskrit-Prakrit. We shall also find occasion, in the course of the following investigation, to oppose some claims which hare lately been made in the name of the Drāvidian tongues of South India, and vindicate the original structure of the northern tongues, independent of any Dravidian influences. As we tread on ground which has, to our knowledge, never been investigated, many of our conclusions may prove abortive, for which we beg the reader's kind indulgence.
page 361 note 1 When speaking here of the modern tongues of India, I exclude throughout the South Indian or Drāvidian tongues, as being foreign to our object.
page 362 note 1 As to the Sindhī characters, see my Sindhī Reading Book—Preface.
page 368 note 1 Regarding this affix and its origin from the Sanskrit abstract affix 
see my Essay “On the Formation of Themes in the Modern Arian Tongues:” German Asiatic Society's Journal, vol. xvi.
page 368 Note 2 Some few nouns have the ending ō in Marāthī too, as 
masc. ‘covetousness;’ Sindhī likewise 
fem, ‘a wife.’
page 368 Note 3 The affix 
in Marāthī adjectives corresponds to the Prākrit affix 
see Varar, iv., 26, Cowell's edition.
page 369 note 1 In Hindi and Marathi also forms like 
masc. ‘father,’ 
fem. ‘mother,’ etc.
page 370 note 1 The change from final Ī to ā or ã is seldom, and occurs occasionally already in Prākrit as well as in Sindhī: e. g. 
fem. ‘sister’ Prākrit 
Sana. 
Marāthī 
Hindi 
page 374 note 1 Marāthī 
adj. ‘faithful,’ etc.
page 377 note 1 
is occasionally interpolated in the modern vernaculars to prevent a hiatus, as: Sindhī and Marathī 
and 
an ablative affix; likewise the Sindhl affix 
Marāthī 
in fonns like Sindnī 
‘a writer,’ Marāthī 
Part. fut., 
and 
= Sanskrit 
(with elision of 
). VOL. xix.
page 380 note 1 We must assume here again that 
has first been shortened into 
and then dropped altogether.
page 389 note 1 The Apabhransha has not always been the model for the modern Sindhi; for we find in Apabhransha the instrumental singular in 
and in feminine themes simply in 
(See Lassen, pp. 461 and 464.)
page 389 Note 2 Garcin de Tassy writes (p. 27) in the instrumental plural 
which is erroneous; it must be pronounced 
. Compare the Sindhi
page 390 note 1 If we do not prefer to refer this 
to the Apabhransha 
or 
which seems to us rather doubtful, as 
in Gujarātī is of different origin.
page 390 Note 2 The Marāthī uses for the plural instrumental also the affix 
which corresponds to the Prākrit plural instrumental affix 
or 
. (See Lassen, p. 310.) 
is also occasionally used with the elision of 
.
page 392 note 1 The Marāthī has also preserved the eame affix, only with a different assimilating (or rather, as regards the Marāthī, dissolving) process; for 
is absolutely the same as 
. See my System of Sindhī Sounds, $ 2, p. 399.
page 395 note 1 The same we find already in the Apabhransha (see Lassen, pp. 461 and 465).
page 395 Note 2 In Panjābī a regular ablative-case termination is also occasionally to be met with, viz.: 
as, 
‘from a house,’ etc.
page 399 note 1 About rē and rī, and arī, see Dr. Caldwell's Remarks in his Comparative Grammar, p. 440.
page 403 note 1 In the Apabhransha dialect the genitive plural is already shortened to 
as 
, etc. See Lassen, pp. 463, 12.
page 404 note 1 The Anusvāra is dropped before the instrumental plural affix 
, as unnecessary, 
‘by houses,’ but 