Wilson Philological Lectures on Sanskrit and the Derived Languages c10.77

c10.77

We have seen that there are two classes of verbs in M. one of which takes the augment इ in the Present before the consonantal terminations as करीस, करीत and the other takes ए or अ as धावें, धावत. The Imper. 2nd pers. sing. of the former is made up by adding इ in old or poetic Marathî and of the latter by adding ए. The former takes इ in the Future necessarily in the 1st and 3rd pers. sing. as करील, करीन and optionally in some others as करतील or करितील्, करशील or करिशील. This option is extended even to the Present करितो or करतो and the past participle अरिलें or धरिलें; while in the present participle these verbs necessarily take इ as करित आहे. The latter class takes ए in the Future 1st and 3rd pers. sing. and the option in the last is not allowed, अ being added in all, including the present part., as शिकेल, शिकतील not शिकितीळ, शिकला not शिकिला, शिकतो and शिकत आहे; so that this class must have ए in some cases and अ in the rest. The Sindhî has a similar distinction. Those roots that take इ before the termination of the Pres. as करीथो "I do" form their Imper. 2nd pers. sing. in इ and insert this in the present part. as करीन्दो; while the rest do not add this इ, as हलां 1st pers. sing., हलन्दो pres. part., and take उ in the Imper. sing., हलु Imper. 2nd pers. sing. We thus see that we have इ in the one case and opposed to it are the vowels ए, अ and उ in the other. The former is a characteristic of the transitive or the non-reflexive nature of a root while the latter of the opposite. Why should it be so? The vowels इ and उ form the distinctive marks of the Parasm. and Âtm. in Skr. and Pr. A consciousness of this and of the difference between Parasm. roots and Âtm. roots has been preserved in the modern S. and M. and hence there is an attempt to insert those vowels in all possible cases; and the base itself of the roots is made to end in them. But in the Prâkrits and to a great extent even in Skr. the base of most of the roots (भण, हस, etc.) has an imperative signification. Hence the newly constituted bases करीं and धावें also came to have an imper. sense. Now these are the forms of the Imper. not only in our languages but the old Apabhramś'a also; hence the process I mention must have been gone through even then. This is a better explanation of the Ap. forms than deriving them both from इ, especially since this is a dialect so prone to bring in इ even when it can not be had, that it is not likely to reject an already existing one. You will thus see how subtle the operation of the law of analogy is in the development of a language. Now as regards the Ap. form उ we see that we have it in Sindhî where the other languages have अ, so that it is the old inorganic उ which prevails so much in the Ap. And we have seen that इ is used in many more grammatical forms in M. than ए, whilst instead of it in other places and in the Sindhî in all but the Imper. 2nd pers. sing. we have अ; so that इ is made the distinctive mark of the Parasm. character of a root while its absence or the insertion of उ indicates the Âtm. character.