A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India v2.c12.s7: V. The Interrogative—Type क

A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India v2.c12.s7

Language: English

V. The Interrogative—Type क

v2.c12.s7.1

v2.c12.s7.2

The reader will see by casting his eyes down any one of the columns how perfectly symmetrical all the languages are; how H. has यहां, वहां, जहां, तहां, कहां, and इधर, उधर, जिधर, तिधर, किधर; Marathi एहां, जेहां, तेहां, केहां; and the same in all the other languages.

v2.c12.s7.3

The adverbs will be explained in their proper place, and all the pronouns have been commented on above. The forms in use are often numerous, especially in Sindhi; thus the demonstratives ही and ह are pronounced ई and ऊ in Lar, or the coast district of Sindh. In Gujarati the adverb of time appears as केवारे, क्यारे, कारे, successive stages of shortening; and many other trifling dialectic variations occur; but in the above tables only one, and that the central or typical form, has been recorded, except in cases where two forms appear to be used with equal frequency, in which case both are given. Much of this redundance of form is doubtless due to the absence hitherto of any settled standard of spelling in all the languages. Native scholars have unfortunately set themselves to improve their mother-tongue by the resuscitation of Sanskrit words, instead of striving to fix the orthography of the words really in use among their contemporaries; and from this misdirected energy of theirs it has too often resulted that the language presents a disjointed heterogeneous aspect, certain parts of it, as the nouns and the nominal part of compound verbs, being highly refined classical Sanskrit; while other parts, as the inflectional and connecting particles, are rude in form and unsettled in orthography. This unfortunate practice, moreover, has misled such European scholars as have taken a cursory glance at the subject into supposing that the modern languages are far more closely allied to Sanskrit than they really are; and Bengali, which, from its phonesis and organic structure, is proved to be a very poor and rustic patois, has had so many "purpurei panni" sewn on to it, that it has been regarded as the eldest daughter of Sanskrit, which has preserved, with greater fidelity than its sisters, the family type.

v2.c12.s7.4

It is in truth one of the youngest grand-daughters; and an examination of its essential features shows that it has wandered further from the original forms than any of the allied speeches.

v2.c12.s7.5

§ 77. Besides the pronouns which have been arranged in classes above, there are certain miscellaneous pronouns which it is difficult to classify exactly under any of the heads which have preceded. Such is S. सभु “all,” which is declined throughout, so is G. सरवे, while in the other languages it is indeclinable, as H. सब, P. सभ, O. सवु, B. सब. Traces remain of this pronoun having been inflected in Old-H. सबै, which seems to be a reproduction of Skr. सबै. S. has also an emphatic form सभोई “every one,” also compounds सभुको and सभुकोई. These two latter are treated as compounds in S., but their equivalents are written as two distinct words in the other languages. In S. it is necessary to regard them as compounds, because सभु being capable of inflection, if it were written as a separate word it would have to be inflected also. Unique, as far as I have been able to ascertain, is the curious S. adjectival pronoun मिड़ोई, or मिड़ोऐ m., मिड़ाई f., meaning “every,” which seems to have come from Skr. मर्त्य, originally of course meaning “mortal,” but subsequently shading off into the meaning of human beings in general, just as Latin *homo* has become French *on*, or as in German *man* has lost its distinctive meaning, and now implies merely “they,” “people in general,” and the like. मर्त्य would become मट्यो, and by further softening, aided by the fondness of Sindhi for the *i*-sound, it would successively be मट्यो and मिड़यो. The ई is merely the emphatic increment, as is shown by the fact of the inflection taking place in the syllable which precedes it as it does in सभोई also, thus:—

v2.c12.s7.6

Nom. sing. masc. ( सभोई / मिड़योई ) Nom. sing. fem. ( सभा ई. / मिड़या ई. )

v2.c12.s7.7

v2.c12.s7.8

The ablative plural shows the form of the synthetic abl. in आं, with the emphatic ई added, thus सभिनांई. Only the obl. sing. fem. seems to show some divergence. The feminine of an adjective in o generally ends in ई, and its formative or oblique in ia, as रुखो “dry” (m.), रुखी (f.), obl. fem. रखिआ. What appears to have happened is, that the type of the oblique ia has been added to the irregular feminine in आ, and the emphatic ई altogether omitted.

v2.c12.s7.9

In सभुको a double inflection occurs; thus fem. सभका, where सभ is fem. of सभु, and का fem. of को; but in the declension no further change takes place in the termination of the first number of the compound, which remains सभ throughout.

v2.c12.s7.10

Although सभ is in the languages where it occurs indeclinable, yet H. P. and G. have a declinable adjective from सर्व, which takes the form m. सारा, f. सारी, obl. सारि, and like S. सभु, means “the whole.” P. declines सभ in the oblique, as सभनां, सभनीं; the latter is an instrumental, but is used as oblique with the objective affix तांई in the first line of Bhai Mihr Singh’s “Panjâb dâ Roshan Kissâ.”¹

v2.c12.s7.11

¹ This work was written for me by the author, and is in the purest Panjabi of Gujrat, a town in the most fertile portion of the Panjab, near the banks of the Chenab. The MS. is in my possession, and has never been edited or printed.

v2.c12.s7.12

सचा साईं सभनीं तांई कुदरति जिस खिलारी ॥
“The true God who has spread out his power for all.”

v2.c12.s7.13

Similarly Panjabi makes a declinable word out of the indeclinable H. और “other,” also used as a conjunction “and.”

v2.c12.s7.14

This is in Old-H. अन, and sometimes अनु, which betrays its origin from the Skr. preposition अनु. In P. होर means “other,” and it is declined in the oblique pl. होरां “others,” and होरनां. It has also an indeclinable form होरस, which is analogous to आपस, and has the genitive case-ending irregularly tacked on to it. In such forms as सभनां and होरनां, an irregular न has been inserted between the stem and the termination. This is probably due to the tenacity with which all pronouns retain archaic forms; the nom. pl. of the old declension would have been सभनि, होरनि, and in adding the plural oblique (i.e. Prakrit gen. pl. आणां) ending, which is आं, it has been forgotten that the न of सभनि is an inflection, and a new plural base सभन has thus been formed, to which the oblique has been added. The same process has operated in H. अपनां, where the न of अपना has similarly been incorporated into the stem. In all languages of the Indo-European family such eccentricities are found in the pronoun, and had their origin at that stage of the progress of language when the old synthetical forms were breaking down and becoming confused, and before altogether disappearing, were being used in a way which would have broken the heart of Cicero to hear. Precisely similar to such forms as सभनां is the French “leurs;” the Latin genitive masc. illorum becomes “leur”=“their,” and like the modern Indian genitives, has become an adjective, and, as such, has been supplied with the plural sign s, which comes from os, the termination of the Latin accusative, so that “leurs” would be translated back into illorumos! just as सभनां contains the elements of Skr. सर्वाणि + आणां. So also Italians, forgetting that loro=illorum is already a genitive, prefix to it the genitive preposition, and say di loro=“of them,” as also da loro, “from them,” and con loro, “with them,” as if a Roman should have said de illorum, de ab illorum, cum illorum. Thus language plays sad tricks with ancient forms, whose meaning has ceased to be felt or understood. Not less eccentrically Hindi says आपस में “among themselves,” as if there had existed a Sanskrit phrase आत्मस्य मध्ये. Priscian in the one country, and Panini in the other, had, fortunately for their peace of mind, passed away before such processes were invented. Panjabi uses a genitive case-affix with आपस, and makes आपस दा, and an objective आपस नुं, also an ablative आपस ते. When a form—whether derived from a nominative or from an oblique form—in Prakrit had once established itself in the mind of the horny-handed Panjabi peasant, he, knowing nothing about direct or oblique forms, treated it as a stem, and added the usual case-endings to it. So true is it that man is not the master of language, but merely the instrument by which the processes of speech develope themselves according to natural laws. Man in fact makes nothing; nature makes, and man merely places materials in such a position that the forces of nature can work on them. Man collects the wood, applies the fire, and sets the pot on it; but the forces of nature thus brought together boil the water in the pot. So man utters sounds by means of his vocal organs, but nature controls the form which his utterances shall take; and man unconsciously works out great and deep-reaching developments of speech far beyond his cognizance or comprehension.

v2.c12.s7.15

Compound pronouns are in common use, but they present no remarkable features. The laws of their composition may be studied in the grammars of the several dialects, but do not come within the scope of a work which deals with structure only, because structurally they have nothing to be explained beyond what has already been stated when treating of them separately.

v2.c12.s7.16

Gujarati has two pronouns peculiar to itself. One is पोते, pl. “self or selves,” obl. पोता, the origin of which is by Taylor (p. 73) correctly referred to the Skr. स्वतः; the व of स्व being hardened to प and the स dropped, the visarga becomes ओ, and the ablative affix तस्, having lost its special signification, has been applied to all the cases of the pronoun. The word seems to have been formed in two halves, as it were: स्व becoming separately स्वो and पो, and the affix तस् becoming separately ते. The word when first compounded must have been used adverbially, “by themselves” or “of itself;” and then, through the common custom of forgetfulness of its origin, the compound has been treated as a nom. pl., and regularly inflected. A regular form पोत is still in use, but as a distributive, and with the full form पोता added to it; thus तेओ पोत पोताने घेर गया “they went each to his own house,” literally, “they his own, their own, house went.”

v2.c12.s7.17

The other pronoun is पेलो, a remote demonstrative “that,” which is also written पेहेलो. The origin of this word is uncertain. पेहेलो means “first,” but I think this is a different word from पेलो. After *e* the Gujaratis often insert in speaking an inorganic ह, so that the two words come to be alike. My own idea is that पेलो is shortened from पइलो, and that again from परिलो, a secondary formation from पर “distant,” just as in Panjabi we have उरला “on this side,” परला “on that side” (of a river, road, etc.), so that पेलो would literally mean “yonder,” just as in the colloquial English of rural counties we hear “yond’ man,” or “yon man,” for “that man,” German *jener* = “that.”

v2.c12.s7.18

§ 78. The language of the Gipsies in various countries of Europe, though its vocabulary is a medley of words taken from the languages of all the lands in which this strange race has sojourned, is purely Aryan in its structure; and Modern-Aryan too, being in many respects quite as far removed from the old synthetical system as any of the seven languages now under discussion. In respect of the pronouns, other than personal, it preserves the traces of its origin very clearly. Thus we have the interrogative *kon* “who?” *káya* “what?” with its oblique *kas*, also *kalés*, pl. oblique *kalén*, and the indeclinable *ka* “which.” In addition to this, they have a more definite interrogative *kavâ*,

v2.c12.s7.19

which in sound and meaning is almost identical with G. केवो. It is singular that they have also the unique (so far as the Indian languages go) G. सो, Gipsy *so*, from which comes an ablative *sostar*, which, when pronounced with the accent on the first syllable *sóstar*, means "why?" but with the accent on the last syllable *sostár*, "because," literally "from what." From this again comes a further interrogative *savo* "qualis?" parallel to *kavá*. The Kashmiri, with which the language of the Gipsies is most generally in accord, here diverges from it, and the connexion is closer with Gujarati than with any other of the languages. Kashmiri has युस and कुस for "who?" or "what?" oblique *kas* as in Gipsy, but here, as far as the meagre information accessible enlightens us, the resemblance stops, and Kashmiri runs into its usual similarity with Panjabi.

v2.c12.s7.20

The reflexive pronoun "self" is represented by forms derived from the stem आप, as masc. *po*, fem. *pi*, obl. *pe*. An older form, which Paspati (p. 71) says is rare in the present day, is *pinro* m., *pinri* f., *pinre* obl. Here we see आपण with the loss of its initial *â* and the old genitive affix *ro, ri, re*, shortened from *koro*. With this agrees the possessive of the two first personal pronouns *minro, -ri, -re*, "mine;" *tinro-, ri-, re*, "thine;" and plurals strikingly Indian *amaro, -ri, -re*, "our;" *tumaro, -ri, -re*, "your." But the language still possesses the simple genitives *mo, to*, as in H. B. O. मो, तो, though it differs from H. in treating them as possessives, and consequently as adjectives, and inflects them for gender and case *mo* m., *mi* f., *me* obl.; so also *to, ti, te*. In addition to the reflexive *po, pi, pe*, it has also *pes* = आपस "each other."

v2.c12.s7.21

Demonstratives are *aka* and *avaka* "this," *oka, ovoka*, "that," *akavka* and *okorka* "this here," "that there," which do not ally themselves very closely to the corresponding words in any of the Indian languages. Peculiar also are *kadava* m., *kadayá* f.; *kadalá* nom. pl. m., *kadale* f., "this," and *odova* "this." Perhaps we are here to suppose the operation of some influence other than Indian.

v2.c12.s7.22

The demonstratives *aka* and *oka* form sets of parallel pronominal adverbs, just as do the demonstrative types of the Indian group. Thus we have *akaté okoté* “here and there,” *akatar*, *okotar*, “hence,” “thence.” The latter of these corresponds in the manner of its formation to the Panjabi, which expresses “hence” and “thence” by adding the ablative of the old synthetic system under the form *ओi* to the words for “here” and “there” respectively, as *इत्ये* “here,” *इत्योi* “from here,” “hence,” *उत्ये* “there,” *उत्योi* “thence.” In like manner, *tar* is the sign of the Gipsy ablative. Thus too M. has *इकडे* “hither,” and the ablatival form *इकडून* “hence,” so also *तिकडे* and *तिकडून* “thither” and “thence;” and the same method runs through all the languages, for which reason the words expressive of “motion from” have not been given in the lists above exhibited, as they are merely the ablatives of the words expressive of “rest at.”

v2.c12.s7.23

The only two authorities for the Gipsy, namely Paspati and Miklosich, which are procurable here, do not give a full series of pronouns and pronominal adverbs; and it may be conjectured that, in the rude speech of this people, they are not all to be found. Those noted, however, are in striking conformity with our Indian group.

v2.c12.s7.24

§ 79. In concluding, amidst constant interruptions, this volume on the Noun and Pronoun, I have a few further remarks to make of a general character. Attention has already been directed in several parts of this volume to the varying nature of the seven languages in point of simplicity; but the geographical aspect of this question remains to be noticed. The most complicated of the seven languages are Marathi and Sindhi, and, as far as we know anything of it, Kashmiri. If Gujarati and Panjabi were as complicated as these three, then we might establish a regular gradation from east to west; for the Oriya and Bengali, the most eastern members of the group, are distinguished by

v2.c12.s7.25

extreme simplicity; while the Hindi, the central language in position, is central also in this respect, being less simple than B. and O., less complicated than M. and S. It will be remembered that in the First Volume Hindi was noted as central in respect to its phonesis, leaning neither to the peculiarities of the extreme eastern dialects, such as a fondness for long vowels and the u-sound, nor to those of the western dialects, a predilection for short vowels and the i-sound. As regards the structure of the noun, the homogeneity of the western group is disturbed by P. and G. The former, with its structure only slightly less simple than Hindi, lies between the intricate Sindhi and the no less intricate Kashmiri; while the latter also, only a little more full than Hindi, intrudes between Sindhi and Marathi.

v2.c12.s7.26

The comparatively simple structure of Panjabi, as compared with its neighbours to the north and south, is probably to be ascribed to the fact that the Panjab has been for numerous centuries the battle-ground of India, over whose plains have passed and fought Greek, Persian, Arab, Turkish, and Indian armies; from all, except perhaps the first, of whom the language has imbibed words and ideas, and has been led to reject much of its former complicated structure. Since the establishment of the Musulman on the throne of Delhi, it has been constantly ruled from the Hindi area, and so strong has been, and still is, the influence of Hindi, that the wonder is that anything should be left of a distinctly dialectic character. As it is, in the towns and more civilized portion of the country, Panjabi is fast disappearing, and will in all probability disappear entirely at no distant date.

v2.c12.s7.27

The simplicity of Gujarati has been frequently explained in these pages by a reference to the fact that it is a dialect of Hindi, separated at an early, but not precisely assignable date, from the parent language, and thus retaining a certain amount of archaism.

v2.c12.s7.28

§ 80. With regard to the two eastern languages, much remains for future research to make plain. In Orissa the traces of a large non-Aryan element in the population are patent to the most superficial observer, and the same may be said of Bengal; but unfortunately neither of these provinces has as yet been examined, either as to their language or ethnology, as thoroughly as could be desired. The Europeans resident in India are all busy men; no one of us comes here except to work, and as a rule to work very hard. The machinery of Government becomes more complex, and makes greater demands upon the time of members of the administration every year; so that those whose previous training would best qualify them for the task of investigation have as a rule the least leisure for it. It is not possible for scholars in Europe to conduct minute inquiries, because the materials they possess refer rather to ancient than modern India; and it is necessary that one should live in the country itself, and in daily communication with its people, in order fully to breathe the spirit of their customs and institutions, and so to get an insight into the nature of them, such as may indicate the most promising line of inquiry to follow. There are more materials for Orissa than for Bengal, because the former province was more isolated, more homogeneous, more bound up in itself, more a nation in short than Bengal for many centuries; and the records of the great idol-temple at Puri, together with others which are probably still to be found in various holes and corners of this most conservative of Indian provinces, will, when they can be got at and examined, probably yield a rich harvest of facts to the labourer in the departments of history and philology.