Notes on the Future System in Middle Indo-Aryan

L. A. Schwarzschild

doi:10.1017/S0035869X00105878

Notes on the Future System in Middle Indo-Aryan

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011

L. A. Schwarzschild

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

The formation of the future tense is often mentioned in discussions on the classification of the modern Indo-Aryan languages. An -s- type of future occurs in Gujarati, Lahnda, and Jaipuri, an -h- type of future exists side by side with participial formations in Marwari, Hindi (Braj), and Bundeli, and in Bhojpuri and Awadhi (in the third persons only), as well as in Kashmiri, where it has assumed the meaning of a past conditional. Despite this Marwari belongs to the -s- group, forms with -h- being found in those dialects of Marwari that regularly have voiceless -h- < -s-. The explanation of the Kashmiri forms is similar (ś > h and -ṣy- > -śś- > -h- in Kashmiri). Thus -s- forms in principle are found over a large part of the North-West and West of India. Attempts have been made to trace back the modern conditions to earlier stages, and S. Sen claims that the two types of future go back to different Indo-European originals: “From early times there were dialectal forms with the base-affix -ha-, which became quite dominant in Apabhraṃśa.” (This is incorrect.) “The origin seems to have been the I.E. stem affix *-so-, OIA. -sa-, occurring in the desiderative, the aorist, and as a root-determinative.” The accepted opinion is that the two types of future have the same origin, the OIA. future suffix -i-ṣya-, and that differentiation did not take place till the Middle Indo-Aryan period. As has been shown conclusively by Turner and by Bloch, the future suffix of Sanskrit could have in MIA. a special development into -h- instead of -ss- which is phonetically regular, because it was in a weak position, being a terminational element.

Type: Articles
Information: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 85 , Issue 1-2 , January 1953 , pp. 42 - 52

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00105878 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 42 note 1} I am indebted for help to Professor Burrow and Professor Turner, and to Dr. W. S. Allen for information on Rajasthani.

^{page 42 note 2} Sen, S.. “A comparative Grammar of Middle Indo-Aryan,” Indian Linguistics, vol. xii, 1951, p. 110Google Scholar.

^{page 42 note 3} Smith, H., in J.A., ccxl, pp. 169 ff.Google Scholar, however, goes back to pre-Vedic, differentiating between a proto-Prakrit *-s-i-ti and the ordinary Indo-Aryan -syati.

^{page 42 note 4} Turner, R. L.. “The phonetic weakness of terminational elements in Indo-Aryan,” JRAS., 1927Google Scholar. “The future stem in Asoka,” BSOS., vi, 1930–1932Google Scholar.

^{page 42 note 5} Bloch, J., Les Inscriptions d'Asoka (collection E. Senart), Paris, 1950Google Scholar.

^{page 43 note 1} The dāsai of the Uttarādhyayanasūtra, XVIII, 20, of Charpentier's edition is a mistake for dīsai, present indicative passive of √dṛś.

^{page 44 note 1} Gray, L. H., “Observations on Middle Indian Morphology,” BSOS., viii (1935–1937)Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 2} Das Saptaśatakam des Hāla, Weber, A., Leipzig, 1881Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 3} Nitti-Dolci, L., Les grammairiens prakrits, Paris, 1938Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 4} Denecke, , Mitteilungen über Digambara Texte, Festgabe H. Jacobi, Bonn, 1926Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 5} Mehendale, , Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits, Poona, 1948Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 1} Laber, J., Über das Vajjālaggaṃ des Jayavallabha, Leipzig, 1919Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 2} Alsdorf, L., Apabhraṃśa Studien, Hamburg, 1937Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 3} Modi, M. C., Apabhraṃśapāṭhāvalī, Ahmadabad, 1935Google Scholar. Modi, M. C. and Bhayani, , Introduction to the Paumasirīcariu by Dhāhila, edited in Jain, Singhi Series, 1943Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 4} Upadhye, , Joinditdeva's Paramátmaprakāśa and Yogasāra, Bombay, 1937Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 5} Modi, M. C., Caturmukha Suayambhu ane Tribhuvana Suayambhu, Bhāratīya vidyā I, pt. 3, Bombay, 08, 1940Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 1} Vaidya, , Mahāpurāṇa, Bombay, 1937Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 2} Vaidya, , Jasaharacariu, Karanja, 1933Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 3} Alsdorf, , Harivaṃśapurāṇa, Hamburg, 1936Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 4} Jain, Hiralal, Karakaṇḍacariu, Karanja, 1934Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 5} Dr. Allen suggests a more cautious interpretation of the Old Rajasthani forms, on account of the soundchange -s- > -h- (voiceless) in some dialects of Marwari, the speakers of which write -s- not -h-. But since this voiceless -h- is based, as he points out, on earlier -s- and not on -h-, this interpretation would still prove the point for the popular language of the west in the Apabhraṃśa period and show the secondary nature of the modern conditions in Rajasthani.

^{page 47 note 1} Tagare, , Historical Grammar of Apabhraṃśa, Poona, 1948Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 2} Jacobi, H., Paumacariya, Bhavnagar, 1914Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 3} Alsdorf, L., “The Vasudevahiṇḍi, a specimen of archaic Jain Māhārāshṭrī,” BSOS., viii, 1935–1937Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 4} Dhūrtākhyāna of Haribhadra, ed. Upadhye, N., Singhi Jain Series, BombayGoogle Scholar.

^{page 48 note 1} Jacobi, , Bhavisattakahā, Introduction, p. 28, Munich, 1918Google Scholar.

^{page 48 note 2} Pischel, , Grammatik der Prakritspraehen, § 527, Strassburg, 1900CrossRef Google Scholar.

^{page 48 note 3} Tessitori, , Notes on the grammar of the Old Western Rajasthani, I.A., 1914–1916Google Scholar.

^{page 48 note 4} Modi, M., “The Bhāvanāsandhiprakaraṇaṃ of Jayadevamuni,” ABORI. xi, 1929Google Scholar.

^{page 49 note 1} Pischel, , Materialien zur Kenntnis des Apabhraṃśa, Berlin, 1902Google Scholar.

^{page 49 note 2} Krause, C., Nāsaketarī Kathā, an old Rajasthani tale, Leipzig, 1925Google Scholar.

^{page 49 note 3} Hertel, J., Über das Suvābahuttarī Kathā, Festschrift E. Windisch, Leipzig, 1914Google Scholar.

^{page 49 note 4} Cf. H. Smith's article (loc. cit.) for a different explanation. He postulates separate pre-Vedic origins for the -a- and -i- forms.

^{page 50 note 1} Upadhye, A. N., Līlāvaī. A romantic Kāvya in Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit of Kouhala, Singhi Jain Series, 1949Google Scholar.

^{page 51 note 1} Dhar, L., Padumāvatī. A linguistic study of the sixteenth-century Awadhi (Hindi), London, 1948Google Scholar.

^{page 51 note 2} Saksena, B., “The verb in the Rāmāyan of Tulsī Dās,” Allahabad Univ. Studies, 1926Google Scholar.

^{page 51 note 3} Chaudhuri, N., Studies in the Apabhraṃśa texts of the Ḍākārṇava, Calcutta, 1940Google Scholar. Shahidullah, Les chants mystiques de Kānha et de Saraha.

^{page 51 note 4} Chatterji, , Origin and development of the Bengali language, Calcutta, 1926Google Scholar.

^{page 51 note 5} Haldar, , “Vidyāpati the Maithili poet and his language,” J. Dep. Lett., Calc., 1930Google Scholar. Saksena, , “The language of the Kīrtilatā,” Indian Linguistics, vGoogle Scholar.

^{page 51 note 6} Grierson, , “The Pārijāta Haraṇa of Umāpati Upadhyāya” (J. Bihar and Orissa Oriental Research Society, 1917)Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 1} Lüders, , Bruchatücke indischer Dramen, Berlin, 1911Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 2} Pischel, , Grammatik der Prakritsprachen, p. 363Google Scholar.

^{page 53 note 3} Tulpule, S. G., Yādavakālīna Marāṭhī Bhāṣā,, Bombay, 1942Google Scholar.

Article contents

Notes on the Future System in Middle Indo-Aryan

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests