Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
In the discussion lately held as to how far Sanskrit was a spoken language, I drew attention to the points of resemblance which existed between the so-called ‘Dard’ languages and the language employed by Aśōka in the Shāhbāzgaṛhī inscription. During the past few months I have been examining all these languages with considerable minuteness, and hope to publish the results of my studies after a reasonable period. In the meantime I have been pressed to give further details regarding the connection between ‘Dard’ and Shāhbāzgaṛhī. I therefore submit the following list of phonetic parallels. I have taken the Shb. examples entirely from M. Senart's analysis of the Kapur di Giri inscription in the Indian Antiquary, vol. xxi (1892), pp. 8 ff. As for the ‘Dard’ examples, I intend them to be taken as preliminary to my more extended account which I hope to publish at a future date. I must therefore ask leave to make a few explanatory statements in anticipation. Miklosich and Pischel have shown reasons for assuming that these ‘Dard’ languages are modern representatives of the old Paiśācī Prākrit described by Hēma-candra. My researches have amply corroborated this suggestion, and I now call these languages, not ‘Dard’ (which is an unsuitable name), but ‘Modern Paiśācī.’ It will be noticed that I sometimes refer derivations to the Avesta, and sometimes to Sanskrit.
page 725 note 1 See Miklosich, , Ueber die Mundarten und die Wanderungen der Zigeuner Europa's, ix, 4Google Scholar, 28: Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Zigeunermundarten, i, ii, 15 ff., iv, 51 ; Pischel, Grammatik der Prākrit-Sprachen, 28.
page 726 note 1 E.g. Vedic Skr. k kavāku, K. kakawak, a fowl.