A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India v2.c12.s2: II. Far Demonstrative—"that"

A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India v2.c12.s2

Language: English

II. Far Demonstrative—"that"

v2.c12.s2.1

v2.c12.s2.2

Marathi deest.

v2.c12.s2.3

Oriya deest.

v2.c12.s2.4

Bengali ओ | | उहा | ओ | उहां |

v2.c12.s2.5

Marathi and Oriya use the correlative, which is also the pronoun of the third person, M. तो, O. सै, instead of the far demonstrative.

v2.c12.s2.6

In Sanskrit, the primitive type इ is overlaid by accretions, which render it somewhat difficult to identify (Bopp, § 360). The form which this pronoun has assumed in classical Sanskrit is अयं m., इयं f., इदं n.; and in Vedic Sanskrit there is a form इत neuter, which, however, is used merely as an emphatic particle. Scenic Prakrit has nom. अयं m., इयं f., इणं n., and an oblique base इम, also इण (Lassen, p. 326; Weber's Hala, p. 55). The ordinary Apabhrańśa of the plays has इम, and in the songs in the fourth act of the Vikramorvaśî are found loc. pl. इमेसुं (Skr. एषु); से "of her" (Skr. अस्या); दुराळ्ढो अ से प्पएओ "and excessive is her affection;" एत्य, abl. sing. "than it" (Skr. अस्मात्), and other similar forms. But it is perhaps useless to seek for the origin of the modern forms in any written works. They have their origin in all probability in a much lower stratum of popular speech than ever found its way into writing before the time of Chand, whose forms may therefore in this, as in so many other instances, be taken as the furthest point to which researches can at present be pushed back.

v2.c12.s2.7

The types of the demonstrative in the Prithirâj Rasau are the following :—

v2.c12.s2.8

| N. Sing. | इह | उह. |
| Obl. | याहि | वाहि. |
| Emphatic | इहै | उहै. |
| N. Pl. | ये, इहे | वे. |
| Obl. | इनि, इन | उनि, उन. |

v2.c12.s2.9

besides variations caused by the metrical necessities of the poem, and having no value as organic forms.

v2.c12.s2.10

मोहि इह आगम बुझै ॥
“To me this scripture is clear.”—iii. 28, 2.

v2.c12.s2.11

Both the nom. pl. of the far and the emphatic singular of the near demonstrative are shown in the lines—

v2.c12.s2.12

वे वाहै तरवारि ॥ इहै मुष पक्वरि सु कटै ॥
“They ply their swords, he catching them in his mouth bites them.”
—i. 254, 5.

v2.c12.s2.13

किहि काज तुम इह धम्म लीन ॥
“For what cause have you taken up this religion?”—i. 172, 6.

v2.c12.s2.14

यांहि सम्पूरन को थिर काजं ॥
“To complete this is a work firmly resolved on.”—i. 87, 6.

v2.c12.s2.15

Shortened to इहि and oblique in sense:

v2.c12.s2.16

इहि विधि आनल बत उचारिय ॥
“In this fashion Anal uttered (his) speech.”—i. 155.

v2.c12.s2.17

The ordinary modern form of the oblique, as in H. इस, like the oblique of all these pronouns, appears to lead back clearly to the Skr. gen. अस्य, Pr. अस्स; and the forms इह, इहा, etc., with the older forms in हि, as मोहि, तोहि, ताहि, याहि, वाहि, show the ordinary oblique of the noun, produced by a general fusion of all the oblique cases of the old inflectional system; while the plural oblique in न arises from the Skr. genitive आनां, Pr. आणं. Sindhi, however, has its singular oblique in न, and thus differs from all the other languages. This seems to derive its origin from the Apabhrańśa forms of the singular oblique इण and इणं mentioned above.

v2.c12.s2.18

In practice, no distinction is observed between these two forms of the demonstrative and that of the third person, the demonstratives having to a great extent usurped the place of the latter, and being freely used to signify “he.”

v2.c12.s2.19

To trace the steps by which the various languages have arrived at each of the slight modifications of the general type by which they are distinguished, is a task impossible in the present stage of the inquiry. Much might, doubtless, be accounted for by the phonetic tendencies of each language, but this would not be sufficient to explain the whole. In the absence of a continuous chain of literary monuments which could be trusted to reflect faithfully the actually current speech of their respective periods, it is beyond the power of any scholar, however laborious, to work out all the steps of the problem. Experience has taught us that in India literature is never a faithful reflector of popular speech; and all that can now be done is to point out that one uniform type underlies the whole range of forms in the whole seven languages, and that this type can be traced back to the earliest stage of Aryan speech; while, at the same time, nothing more than the general type, the two leading ideas of i for the near, a and u for the far, demonstrative, can be with certainty identified.

v2.c12.s2.20

§ 69. The relative pronoun meaning “he or she who,” “that which,” and requiring a correlative or answering word in the second clause of the sentence, is indicated in Sanskrit

v2.c12.s2.21

by the type य, which in Prakrit, followed by the modern languages, becomes ज. The scheme in the seven languages is this:—

v2.c12.s2.22

v2.c12.s2.23

Hindi has also कौन, Pr. जो उण, which is, like तौन, produced by the incorporation of पुन:. From this source, also, springs O. जेउं, in Old-Oriya sometimes written जेड़ु, where the guttural nasal ङ is the first step in the weakening of ण to anunâsika. The relative portion of this compound word takes in O., as it does also when uncompounded in O. B. and G., the Magadhi nom. sing. form जे, which makes it identical in form with the nom. pl. The oblique forms in all the languages are from the genitive sing. Skr. यस्य, Pr. जस्स, with weakening of the vowel, and Skr. gen. pl. यानां (instead of the classical Skr. येषां, which has not been preserved), Pr. जाणां. Old-Hindi has its oblique singular जिहि, which is more modern in type than the Modern-H. जिस; this latter, however, was probably in use contemporaneously with जिहि, as we have in Chand forms जस and जास. The plural in Chand takes an emphatic addition, and is जिनै; but this seems to be restricted to the instrumental. Bengali takes this plural in the shape of जिन, and makes it into an honorific singular nominative.

v2.c12.s2.24

§ 70. The correlative is based on the Skr. सः and is the same as the pronoun of the third person mentioned in § 67. Many of the forms were given in that section, and all the others may be made on the model of जो by substituting त for ज. Nothing further need be said about it, as it is precisely homogeneous to the relative.

v2.c12.s2.25

§ 71. The interrogative pronoun is just as uniform as all the others: the only difference is, that forms which, though they exist in the other pronouns, are in them kept rather in the background, here come to the fore, and displace in common speech the forms which correspond to those more frequently used in the others. Thus, in the relative and correlative, जो and सो are in Hindi the commoner, कौन and तौन the rarer forms; but in the interrogative, कौन is the ordinary form in modern use, while कति is archaic, poetic and dialectic. The neuter, also, has a form of its own, whose origin ascends to a different Sanskrit word from कति. The type of the interrogative is everywhere क, just as ज is of the relative. The table of forms is given, because, although exactly corresponding to that of the relative, yet the exhibition of the whole set helps the eye to make the comparison, and brings out more clearly the symmetry of the pronominal forms, which is a striking and beautiful feature of this group of languages.

v2.c12.s2.26

Occasionally an emphatic form of these two pronouns is used formed in H. by adding ही or हि, as सोही, जोही, but in Sindhi only ई is added. It will be observed that, of all the languages, S. and M. alone treat these two pronouns as pure adjectives, and give them the distinctions of gender. S. सो m., सा f., but in pl. only से for both genders. M., with its customary redundance of forms, has all three genders for the nominatives of both numbers, but in the oblique singular only m. and f., and in the oblique plural only one form for all three genders.

v2.c12.s2.27

v2.c12.s2.28

Sindhi has कोड़ only in the neuter; its plural nom. is not used; and in commoner use both in Sindhi and Panjabi is the form S. केरु m., केर f., P. केहडा m., ˚ई f., obl. केहडे, which is from Skr. कोदृश, Pr. केरिसओ and later केरिहो, which in S. merely drops the ह; while in P. the र + ह have been moulded into ढ, and then again split into ह + ड. Old-Hindi preserves the symmetry by using nom. को, obl. किहि, as—

v2.c12.s2.29

को किहि वंसहि ऊपज्यों ॥

v2.c12.s2.30

“Who (am I), from what race sprung?”—i. 147.

v2.c12.s2.31

Here, again, comes in the Skr. gen. कस्य, Pr. कस्स, as in the relative. Gujarati has singularly introduced a hiatus, writing कओ instead of को; this seems to have arisen from a form कहो, which will be explained hereafter. The forms with पुनः added are here more widely used than in the other pronouns, perhaps because of the somewhat greater emphasis involved in asking a question. In all languages “who?” more often stands alone, almost like an interjection, than any other pronoun, and thus the Pr. उण, which has sunk into an enclitic, would be more frequently used with the interrogative.

v2.c12.s2.32

The neuter stands alone in all but a few exceptional instances, and is as follows:

v2.c12.s2.33

Old-H. कहा, oblique काहे. Modern-H. क्या, obl. काहे and किस; and the same in the plural.

v2.c12.s2.34

P. की, किआ, obl. कास, काह.

v2.c12.s2.35

S. कोऊ.

v2.c12.s2.36

M. काय, obl. कशा, कसा, pl. the same, but obl. कशां, with the usual anunâsika of plurals.

v2.c12.s2.37

O. कण, कि. In Balasore किस (kisŏ).

v2.c12.s2.38

B. कि, किसे.

v2.c12.s2.39

The origin of all these forms is to be sought for in the Skr. किं, an old neuter. B. किसे, H. किस, P. कास, refer back to the genitive, which in Pr. is कस्स, sometimes also कोस. H. कहा is apparently a conflation of the oblique forms g. कह, abl. कह, loc. कहिं, and क्या the ordinary modern form, from supplying the hiatus of a form कआ by य instead of ह, as in Gujarati. Prakrit has also an oblique काओ, whence Sindhi केहो by softening of â to e; from its retaining the â in the first syllable the Hindi oblique काहे exhibits a form which postulates a Prakrit काहहि.

v2.c12.s2.40

Gujarati has an unique interrogative शों m., शी f., शुं n., the only approach to which in the rest of the group is S. क्त, used only as a neuter. Vans Taylor (p. 73) refers us back to the acknowledged alliance between श and क in the leading Aryan languages, as in Skr. श्वन्, Greek κύων. But it is important to observe that these greater phonetic laws work only in the sphere of the larger groups of the Indo-European family: within the limits of any one particular group, their working, if it exists at all, is very feeble and restricted. It is beyond a doubt that Sanskrit exhibits words containing श which are weaker forms of an older word with क, the stronger form of which has been preserved by the cognate languages. But when once the parent language of the Indian group has preserved and stereotyped a form in क, it is not found that its descendants modify this क into श; an initial क stands firm for the most part, at least a change from it into श would be of too radical and wide a nature for the modern Indian languages, which do not deal in those vast organic changes which were at work in the infancy of the world. We must rather look for the origin of this form by the light of changes of such a nature as are prevalent within the restricted limits of our group, instead of hunting up all possible modifications in every country and age to which the Aryan speech has penetrated. If we can with difficulty find a single dubious instance of the change from क to च, so frequent in Sanskrit, among its descendants, we should hardly be justified in going further back still to search for a change, which is in point of time prior to Sanskrit itself.

v2.c12.s2.41

The origin of शु is to be found in the earlier form कशुं, a neuter signifying “what,” from which have been constructed a masculine and feminine कशो and कशी, which are also used as an indefinite pronoun, and, as will be seen presently, the only form in use for the oblique plural of the indefinite is कशा. This form would lead us back to Pr. कारिसो, Skr. कीदृश, from which, as we have seen above, Sindhi and Panjabi draw their interrogative. कारिसो becomes in H. कैसा, and in Old-Hindi the forms are कइसा and कसा, the latter produced by elision of the short i. With this last-named form our Old-Gujarati कशुं is identical, for श is not in this language necessarily the palatal sibilant, but rather the distinction between it and स having been obliterated, and only one sibilant sound remaining, the letter used to express that sound is sometimes स, and sometimes श, according to the habit or caprice of the scribe; so that we might here also compare the oblique in M. कसा or कशा, instead of treating it as from Skr. gen. कस्य, Pr. कस्स, which would not account for the final long á. Sindhi का is probably also of like origin, क being often interchanged with स in all the modern languages; or कसा might also have lost the a of its first syllable, and become सा, whence the transition to का is in accordance with the usual law, It is more probable, however, that both in S. and G. there has been loss of initial क, as it is not in harmony with the general phonetic laws of this group to suppose the creation of ख from क+स at so late a date as we must assume, to bring it posterior in point of time to the tenth-century कसा.

v2.c12.s2.42

It may here also be noticed in passing that the derivation of the forms कौन, जौन, etc., from को जन, जो जन, suggested by Taylor, is erroneous. These forms are written in the earlier stages of Hindi कवन and कउन, where the labial vowel and semivowel are indicative of the उ of पुन:. The compound phrase को उण is not a conjecture, but is constantly found in Prakrit (Lassen, § 32).

v2.c12.s2.43

§ 72. The indefinite pronoun deviates from the homogeneous type of the other pronouns, and this deviation is explained by its origin. The forms may be given first, and analyzed afterwards. The typical letter is क, as in the interrogative; and the neuter, as in that pronoun, stands apart from the masculine and feminine. The word now given means "any one."

v2.c12.s2.44

| | NOM. SING. | OBL. SING. | NOM. PL. | OBL. PL. |
| Hindi | कोई | किसी | कोई, कई | किन्हीं. |
| Panjabi | कोई | किसे, किसी | केई | किन्हां. |
| Sindhi | {को m., का f., कोई m., काई f.} | कँहिं | के | कंनि, |
| Gujarati | कोइ | कोइ | कंइ | कशा. |
| Marathi | कोणी, कोएही | कोणा, कोएहा | कोणी | कोएहां. |
| Oriya | {केउणसि, कौणसि, केहि} | काहारि | — | — |
| Bengali | केह | काहा | — | — |

v2.c12.s2.45

These forms arise from the compound Skr. कोऽपि (को अपि); the enclitic particle अपि in Prakrit slides into composition with the pronoun, and is written in one word कोवि, from which, by elision of the व, come the H. P. S. and G. forms. S. often, however, rejects the final ई, which is lengthened in the other languages to preserve it, and because it is emphatic. M. has merely added the emphatic particle हि, with इ lengthened to ई and the ह frequently dropped, to the modern form of the interrogative, so that we have a compound of three parts, को + उण + हि. In Oriya, the final syllable सि appears to be shortened from the demonstrative से; so that here, also, there is a triple compound के + उण + से, literally “who forsooth is he?” O. केहि and B. केह are allied, and simply add हि, which may either be the emphatic particle of Skr., or more probably ह was inserted to prevent hiatus after dropping the व of केबि (for कोबि).

v2.c12.s2.46

Old-Hindi has कोऊ and oblique काहू, where the व or ब of कोबि has softened to the labial vowel, and the final short i has been dropped, as is usual in Hindi. The oblique forms किसि or किसी show the oblique of the interrogative with the ई, whose origin has been forgotten, so that it is regarded as a mere emphatic particle. Marathi कोएहा arises apparently from the fact that â is regarded as the general type of the oblique, and has been added without reflection. In ordinary current speech it is customary to add एक “one” to this pronoun, so that they say कोएहा एकाचा “of some one;” and the same practice prevails in the nom. pl. of H.; thus कइ एक or कैएक some “aliqui, aliquæ.” The Oriya काहारि is a curious instance of how these forms arise: काहार is the genitive of the interrogative, and by adding the emphatic इ or हि to it we get काहारहि or काहारि, which should be used as a genitive only, so that the oblique would be काहाइ; but the genitive form has been extended to all the cases, and they now say काहारि कु “to some one,” काहारि ठारु “from some one,” and so on.

v2.c12.s2.47

The plurals of this pronoun are seldom used in most of the languages, and in B. and O. there are no plurals at all, the singular doing duty for them.

v2.c12.s2.48

The neuter form "something" is expressed as follows: Old-H. ककू, Modern-H. कुछ; oblique, Old-H. काहू, Mod.-H. किसू, but the oblique form is rarely used colloquially.

v2.c12.s2.49

P. कुछ, rarely if ever inflected. S. की, not inflected at all. G. कंइ M. कांहीं O. किछि B. किछु } do.

v2.c12.s2.50

H. P. O. and B. have a common origin from the Skr. किंचित्, the final त of which is dropped in Prakrit किंचि. The archaic and poetical H. ककू seems to point back to a form in which the enclitic चित् had been affixed to a neuter कत, instead of किं, thus making कचित्; from ककू, the u has leapt backward into the first syllable, making the modern कुछ. The change from च to छ is hardly to be accounted for by absorption of the anuswâra, and must remain unexplained. The three western languages, S. G. and M., do not seem to have any connexion with किंचित्; but the last two use oblique forms of the masculine indefinite, and the first merely a lengthened form of किं with loss of the anuswâra.

v2.c12.s2.51

§ 73. The reciprocal or reflexive pronoun "self" is in most of the languages a derivative of the Skr. आत्मा "soul, self." As a substantive it means "self," and as an adjective "own." The former is

v2.c12.s2.52

H. आप, P. आप, S. पाण, G. आप, M. आपण, O. आपे, आपण, B. आपनि.

v2.c12.s2.53

The principle of phonetic change which lies at the root of these modern forms was indicated in Vol. I. p. 330. The process began in Prakrit, as we have अप्पा, आपा, side by side with आप्प, etc. This latter form has not been adopted by the moderns.

v2.c12.s2.54

Hindi, followed by P. and G., uses the simple nominative, rejecting one of the two consonants, and lengthening the preceding vowel in accordance with the regular practice in the treatment of the nexus. B., as in इनि, उनि, जिनि, etc., has made for itself a nom. singular out of a plural form. The other languages retain a final ण or न, which rests on the Pr. form अप्पाण (Var. v. 45), which by his next following sûtra Vararuchi extends to all other Sanskrit nouns in न, as युवन = जुबाण, etc. Sindhi adheres most closely to the Prakrit, merely rejecting the first syllable; but the other languages, while they retain the initial अ, lengthen it to आ, and shorten the second syllable. I am disposed to think that this alteration of quantity is only apparent, and that the forms आप, etc., are really derived from the oblique cases of the Pr. singular, as instrumental अप्पणा, gen. अप्पणो. It is observable in the modern Romance languages that where the type of the oblique differs from that of the nom., the modern language adopts the former for all cases; thus we see in Italian monte, where the Latin nom. is mons, and the t occurs only in the oblique cases. The latter being used five times to the one of the nominative, naturally acquires the predominance in the vulgar usage.

v2.c12.s2.55

आप is declined with the usual case-affixes का, की, etc., in Hindi, when used as an honorific substitute for the pronoun of the second person, so also in P. and the other languages; but it has a special genitive used adjectively and with a possessive sense, meaning "my, thy, his own," according to the person in which it is used. This therefore becomes almost a separate pronoun, and has the following forms:

v2.c12.s2.56

H. अपना m., अपनी f., अपने obl. sing., अपनों obl. pl. (raro आपना, etc.). P. आपणा, ०णी, ०णे, ०णीआं. S. पांहूँ जो, जी, etc.

v2.c12.s2.57

G. आपणो, ०णी, ०णुं, etc.

v2.c12.s2.58

M. आपला, ०ली, ०लें, etc.

v2.c12.s2.59

O. आपणार (rare, निजर is usual).

v2.c12.s2.60

B. आपन्.

v2.c12.s2.61

These forms are derived from the Prakrit genitive, which is आपणो, and the endings for gender and case seem to have been necessitated by the use of the word as an adjective. Hindi goes a step further, and uses the oblique form, just as though it were the regular oblique of an adjective using अपने को, or more frequently अपने तईं = seipsum; अपने में and अपने पर may also be heard in conversation, as in the phrases अपने में यों सोचा “he thought thus in himself,” अपने पर काम लिया “he took the business on himself,” अपनों से परामर्ष करो “take counsel with your own (friends).” These forms, though common in the eastern Hindi area, might perhaps be set down as ungrammatical by authorities on the language, these gentry being apt to be capricious and fastidious, and prone to brand as wrong any phrases which they do not use themselves.

v2.c12.s2.62

There is also a curious word आपस allied to this stem, and used in H. P. and O. always with the affix of the locative, as H. आपस में, O. आपसरे “among our-, your-, them-selves,” as आपस में बांटो “divide it among yourselves.” No origin for this form can be found in any of the Prakrits, nor can the form itself be considered as a locative apart from the case-affix. It is the case-affix which contains the locative idea, and when we remember that में is from मध्ये “in the midst,” we shall see that the complement of the idea involved in the whole phrase is a genitive “in the midst of selves.” I therefore hazard the conjecture that this form is like इस, उस, जिस, and the rest, a genitive irregularly formed from a vulgar Prakrit आपस, which would postulate a Skr. आत्मस्य. Now though no such form exists, or ever did exist, yet we have seen in the case of the noun, that the varied inflections of the numerous Sanskrit nominal bases have all been rejected, and the declension of the *a*-stem taken by the moderns as the type of all nouns; it would not therefore be at all out of keeping with analogy, but rather much in keeping with it, for the modern languages to have in this instance also taken no heed of the peculiar forms of the declension of आत्मन्, but to have treated it like an ordinary noun of the *a*-stem, and made a genitive in स, as in all the parallel cases. In my own mind there is not the shadow of a doubt that this is really what has happened, and this form may be set down as one more illustration of the admitted fact that a type in common use is often extended to all classes, superseding entirely the minor types, and securing simplicity and uniformity in the place of a multitude of divergent forms.

v2.c12.s2.63

§ 74. Although the pronouns, other than personal, above enumerated, are all, to a certain extent, adjectival, yet in several of the languages they have lost those variations for gender which mark the true adjective; H. जो, for instance, is used both with masc. and fem. nouns, only in M. and S. are they treated as adjectives with separate gender forms. There are, however, certain pronouns which are adjectival in all the languages, and exhibit in their initial letters the types of all the above classes. They express quantity and quality, considered demonstratively, interrogatively, relatively, and so on. As a type of them, the interrogative is here given, the whole series being exhibited in full in a future section.

v2.c12.s2.64

v2.c12.s2.65

Marathi कितका, ॰को, ॰कें कसा, ॰सी, ॰सें. Marwari कितरो, ॰रो किस्यो, ॰स्यो.

v2.c12.s2.66

O. and B. having lost all gender, do not inflect the adjective; they use the following: O. केते “how much,” B. कत. The former series, that indicating quantity, is based upon Skr. कियन्त् (m.), कियती (f.), कियत् (n.), which in Pr. becomes केत्तिअ (Var. iv. 25), also केइह. The older Hindi form is केता, which is an immediate descendant of the Pr. form. Thus Chand—

v2.c12.s2.67

केते नर रिष राई ॥ भए सुर दानव अग्गै ॥

v2.c12.s2.68

“How many men and Rajârshis have there been, (and) gods and demons of you?”—i. 162.

v2.c12.s2.69

The addition of the affix ना in Bengali indicates affirmation, and the affix seems to have been at first distinct; thus in Old-Bengali ना regularly follows कत (kötö), as in Bidyâpati:

v2.c12.s2.70

कत ना जतने कत अद्भुत बिहि बहि तोरि देल ॥

v2.c12.s2.71

“With how much labour, how many wonders has fate brought to thee!” —Pad. 1352.

v2.c12.s2.72

कत ना जतने कत ना गोपसि हिमे गिरि ना लुकाय ॥

v2.c12.s2.73

“With how much labour, how much soever thou coverest it, the snowy mountain will not be hidden.”—Pad. ib.

v2.c12.s2.74

In fact, in the eastern area and in Orissa न and ना are not negatives only, but affirmatives also, the sense depending on the sentence or on the tone of the voice; thus in Oriya:

v2.c12.s2.75

मो घरकु जिबु ना जिबि

v2.c12.s2.76

“Will you go to my house? Yes, I will go.”

v2.c12.s2.77

ना is probably in H. a diminutive (§ 24), and with this agrees the S. and the Marwari कितरो, where रो is also a diminutive ending, as is also the लो of G. केटलो, and so perhaps is का of the Marathi. This क is a common addition to the pronouns of this series; thus we often hear in eastern H. कितेक, and in M. कितोक; it is, I think, erroneous to connect this क, as some grammarians do, with एक, supposing एक to be used as *unos, unas*, in Spanish, in the sense of "some." The ण appears to be the sign of the nom. pl., and does not belong to the affix, which latter consists simply of क, a longer form of which is कें, and a longer still करि, from which कै or कइ is made by omitting the र. Both forms occur with the pronoun कैसा in one passage of Chand—

v2.c12.s2.78

जाकै देह न होय । ताहि कैसे कें गहियै ॥

v2.c12.s2.79

"Of whom there is no body, him *how* can one seize?"—i. 161.

v2.c12.s2.80

And

v2.c12.s2.81

जिहां दिष्ट न भिदै । ताहां कैसे करि सुझै ॥

v2.c12.s2.82

"Where sight does not pierce, there *how* can one see?"—*ib.*

v2.c12.s2.83

कैसे कें and कैसे करि literally mean "what kind (of work) having done," and thus, too, कितेक would mean किते करि "how many (works) having done." In the form कैएक "some," however, the latter element may be admitted to be एक, and it is often written as two words, especially in modern Urdu کى ایک.

v2.c12.s2.84

The group कैसा, etc., comes from Pr. केरिसा, Skr. कीदृश, as has been already stated. P. and S., *more suo*, change स into ह, making केह and shortened किह, to which S. adds the diminutive ending डो. G. केवो appears to arise from the substitution of *v* for *h*, which is characteristic of the Rajput dialects of Hindi, from which G. sprung.¹

v2.c12.s2.85

¹ Dr. Bühler's welcome announcement of his discovery at Jesalmer of the *Vikramárka-charitam*, or Chronicle of the Châlukyas, leads us to hope that we shall now have some trustworthy data as to this interesting race, valuable for the early history of Gujarati.

v2.c12.s2.86

There is another series meaning "how great" in some of the languages, which arises from a composition of the Pr. बडो (Skr. वृद्ध) or बढो "great." This is S. केडो; P. केडा, केड; G. केवडो; M. केवढा; O. केडे (indeclinable). Thus Dînakrishna—

v2.c12.s2.87

काम मदे तु होइ मत्त भोळा ॥
कर मज्झ ठारे या एडे हेळा ॥
कि तु जानु नाऊं ए जेडे सरु ॥
कुच जुगल तोर जेडे गुरु ॥

v2.c12.s2.88

"Thou, drunk with the wine of love, forgetting Art, thy waist how slight (it is). What, knowest thou not how small it (is), Thy twin breasts how heavy?"—Rasakallol. iii. 43.

v2.c12.s2.89

Hindi does not possess this form, saying instead कितना बडा and the like. Sindhi here, also, uses a diminutive केडि़ड़ो meaning "how small?" a form which is not in use in the other languages. The whole of these series will be seen in their correspondence with the adverbs, the generic types running through the whole with admirable regularity.

v2.c12.s2.90

§ 75. Sindhi allies itself to Persian and Pushtu by a practice foreign to its sister tongues of suffixing pronominal signs to nouns, pronouns, and verbs, a complicated and difficult system, from which the other languages are fortunately free. These suffixes are, according to Trumpp (p. 225)—

v2.c12.s2.91

| | SING. | PL. |
| 1. | मि | ऊं or हूं. |
| 2. | इ | व. |
| 3. | सि | नि or न. |

v2.c12.s2.92

Into the intricate changes rendered necessary by the addition of these suffixes in the terminating vowels of nouns, etc., it is not necessary here to enter. मि is undoubtedly the Pr. gen. मे, and is still sounded me in Pushtu, but m in Persian; इ from Pr. ते by elision of त, so also the third person सि from से. In the plural, ॐ or हं, which appears to be used only with pronouns, is by Trumpp referred to the Pr. form अम्हे (rather अम्हे), which, however, hardly accounts for the anunâsika: a more probable origin would be from अम्हाणं, reduced to अंहां, and thus to हीं and हं; the second person व recalls Pr. वो, and the third person नि from इणाणं, a Pr. gen. pl. of the base इन, which we have already seen is substituted for that of the near demonstrative used as a third person.

v2.c12.s2.93

The general rule for the method of adding these suffixes appears to be that the noun undergoes merely euphonic changes of its final vowel, but not constructive changes, and the discussion of them pertains rather to the study of the individual language than to that of comparative grammar. The Old-Hindi and Bengali, and to a certain extent also modern colloquial Oriya, exhibit the beginnings of a tendency to this system, which, happily for those who had to speak the languages, did not get beyond the first stage, namely, using the crude form of the personal pronouns, as in Chand's मो पित “my father,” तो पाई “thy feet,” and in Mod.-Oriya मो घर “my house.” It wanted but the shortening of the vowel and the change of position to load us with forms like घरमु, पिततु, and the rest.

v2.c12.s2.94

§ 76. Not only do the substantive and adjective pronouns run in perfectly analogous series, each distinguished by the typical initial consonant or vowel, but a long string of adverbs also follows this analogy. At the risk of a little repetition, it will probably be as well to group together, so that the eye can take them all in at a glance, the whole of these concurrent forms, in a series of tables.