A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India v3.c17.54

v3.c17.54

Phonetic influences in Sanskrit change this root as regards its final consonant in the different tenses, but Pali, having got hold of the form pach in the present tense, retains it throughout the verb. It is still, however, only a tendency, and not a law, for we find instances in which Pali forms are derived directly from the corresponding tense in Sanskrit. One who should attempt to learn Pali without reference to Sanskrit would find it difficult to understand how the words karoti, kubbati, kayirâ, kâhâmi, akâsi, kattum, could all spring from the same verbal root. It is only when the corresponding Sanskrit forms karoti, kurvate, kuryât,¹ kartâsmi, akârshît, kartum, are put by their side, that the thread which connects them all becomes evident. Just so in the Romance languages, Italian *so, sa, sapete, sanno, seppi*, seem to have very little beyond the initial *s* in common, till it is perceived that they come from the Latin *sapio, sapit, sapitis, sapiunt, sapui*; thus, also, *ho* and *ebbi* can only be seen to be parts of the same verb when their origin from Latin *habeo* and *habui* is recognized. In Spanish there is the same difficulty, as will be seen by comparing *hacer, hago, hice, hare*, and *hecho*, with their Latin originals *facere, facio, feci, facere habeo*, and *factum*. In Portuguese, which seems to be the lowest and most corrupt Apabhrança of the Romance Prakrits, the changes are such as almost to defy analysis. For instance, *ter, tenho, tinha, tive, terei*, correspond to Latin *tenere, teneo, tenebam, tenui, tenere habeo*: also *hei, houve, haja*, to *habeo, habui, habeam*, and *sou, he, foi, seja*, to *sum, est, fui, sit*.¹