Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages c3: List of Books and Papers

A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages c3

Language
English

Contents

List of Books and Papers

c3.1

*Kittel.*—Notes concerning the Numerals of the Ancient Dravidians. By the Rev. F. KITTEL. Indian Antiquary for January 1873.

c3.2

*Kittel.*—Keśirâja’s Jewel Mirror of Grammar (*Śabda mani darpaṇa*), a Grammar of Ancient Canarese. By the Rev. F. KITTEL. Mangalore, 1872.

c3.3

*Kittel.*—Article on Old Canarese Literature, by the Rev. F. KITTEL, in Indian Antiquary for January 1875.

c3.4

*Koelle.*—Grammar of the Bornu or Kanuri Language. By the Rev. S. W. KOELLE, London.

c3.5

*Marshall.*—A Phrenologist among the Tudas. By Lieut.-Col. MARSHALL. Trübners, London, 1873. Longmans

c3.6

*Metz.*—The Tribes inhabiting the Neilgherry Hills. By the Rev. F. METZ. Second edition. Mangalore, 1864.

c3.7

*Muir.*—Original Sanskrit Texts. By J. MUIR, Esq., D.C.L., LL.D., late B.C.S. Second edition, five vols. Trübners, London, 1868.

c3.8

*Mueller.*—Reise der Fregatte Novara, Linguistischer Theil. By Professor FRIEDRICH MUELLER. Vienna, 1868.

c3.9

*Mueller.*—Lectures on the Science of Language. By Professor MAX MUELLER. Two vols. London, 1864.

c3.10

*Murdoch.*—Classified Catalogue of Tamil-printed Books, with introductory notices. By J. MURDOCH, Esq., LL.D. Madras, 1865.

c3.11

*Nelson.*—The Madura Country. A Manual compiled by order of the Madras Government. By J. H. NELSON, Esq., M.A., M.C.S. Madras, 1868.

c3.12

*Phillips.*—Tumuli in the Salem District. By the Rev. MAURICE PHILLIPS. Indian Antiquary, 1873.

c3.13

*Pope.*—A Larger Grammar of the Tamil Language in both dialects, with the Nannûl and other native authorities. By the Rev. G. U. POPE, D.D. Second edition. Madras, 1859.

c3.14

*Pope.*—Tamil Handbook. By the Rev. G. U. POPE, D.D. Second edition. Madras, 1859.

c3.15

*Pope.*—One Alphabet for all India. By the Rev. G. U. POPE, D.D. Madras, 1859.

c3.16

*Pope.*—The Sermon on the Mount, in English, Tamil, Malayâlam, Canarese, and Telugu, in the Roman character. By the Rev. G. U. POPE, D.D. Madras, 1860.

c3.17

*Pope.*—Outlines of the Grammar of the Tuda Language. By the Rev. G. U. POPE, D.D., included in Colonel Marshall’s “Phrenologist among the Tudas.” Trübners, London, 1873.

c3.18

*Priaulx.*—India and Rome. Indian Travels of Apollonius of Tyana, and the Indian Embassies to Rome. By P. de B. PRIAULX, Esq., Quarrich. London, 1873.

c3.19

*Prinsep.*—Essays on Indian Antiquities. By the late J. T. PRINSEP, Esq., B.C.S. Edited with Notes by EDWARD THOMAS, Esq., F.R.S., late B.C.S. Two vols. London, 1858.

c3.20

*Sanderson.*—Canarese Dictionary, by the Rev. W. REEVES. Revised and enlarged by the Rev. D. SANDERSON. Bangalore, 1858.

c3.21

*Sayce.*—Principles of Comparative Philology. By A. H. SAYCE. London, Trübner & Co., 1874.

c3.22

*Quatrefages.*—Etude sur les Todas. Par M. DE QUATREFAGES DE BRÉAU. Journal des Savants, December 1873—January 1874. Paris.

c3.23

*Târanâtha’s* History of the Propagation of Buddhism in India; Tibetan and German. St Petersburg, 1870.

c3.24

*Tennent.*—Ceylon. By Sir EMERSON TENNENT. Two vols. London, 1860.

c3.25

*Tickell.*—Brief Grammar and Vocabulary of the Ho, a Kolarian Language. By Colonel TICKELL. Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society, vol. xxxv.

c3.26

*Travancore.*—Inscriptions in Tinnevelly and South Travancore. By His Highness RÂMA VARMÂ, First Prince of Travancore. Indian Antiquary for December 1873.

c3.27

*Trumpp.*—Grammar of the Sindhi Language. By Dr ERNEST TRUMPP. Trübners, London, 1872.

c3.28

*Yule.*—Marco Polo, newly translated and edited with Notes, by Lieut.-Col. H. YULE, C.B. Two vols. London, 1871.

c3.29

*Yule.*—Cathay and the Way Thither. By Lieut.-Col. H. YULE, C.B. Hakluyt Society, London, 1866.

c3.30

*Yule.*—Map of Ancient India, with accompanying Memoir, in Dr WM. SMITH'S Atlas of Ancient Classical Geography. London, 1875.

c3.31

*Weber.*—Indian Pronunciation of Greek, and Greek Pronunciation of Hindû Words. By Dr A. WEBER. Translated by E. REHATSEK, Esq. Indian Antiquary for May 1873.

c3.32

*Williams.*—Application of the Roman Alphabet to the Languages of India. By Professor MONIER WILLIAMS. London, 1859.

c3.33

*Winslow.*—Tamil Dictionary. Completed and edited by the Rev. M. WINSLOW, D.D. Madras, 1862.

c3.34

*Origin of the term ‘Coromandel,’* . . . . . . 25, 26

c3.35

Fra Paulino’s supposition; use of ‘Choramandala’ by the first Portuguese; equivalent of Ma’bar, 25. Derivation from name of village of Coromandel inadmissible; Colonel Yule’s communication, 26.

c3.36

*Origin of the term ‘Malabar,’* . . . . . . 27, 28

c3.37

Use of first part of the name amongst Greeks and Arabians; use of the affix *bâr* amongst Arabians and early Europeans; origin of *bâr*, 27. Suggestion of Dr Gundert; Colonel Yule’s communication; Maldives; Persian *bâr*; origin of *wâr* of Kattywar, &c.; Dr Trumpp, 28.

c3.38

III. TELUGU, . . . . . . . . . 29-32

c3.39

Where spoken, 29. Eastern ‘Klings;’ Sanskrit Ândhra; Andhras in the Vedas and the Greek writers, 30. Derivation of the name Telugu; native derivation regarded by Mr C. P. Brown as inaccurate, 31. Traces of Trilingam; traces of Trikalinga; meaning of Vadugu, 32.

c3.40

IV. CANARESE, . . . . . . . . . 33, 34

c3.41

Where spoken, 33. Derivation of the name Karṇâṭaka; different applications of the name, 34.

c3.42

V. TUḶU, . . . . . . . . . . 35

c3.43

Where spoken; Tuḷu a highly-developed language; to which Dravidian language most nearly allied? 35.

c3.44

VI. KUḌAGU or COORG, . . . . . . . . 36

c3.45

Where spoken; which Dravidian language it resembles most; doubtful whether it should be placed amongst the cultivated class, 36.

c3.46

VII. TUDA, . . . . . . . . . . 36

c3.47

Where spoken; Tudas the smallest of Dravidian tribes; books about the Tudas and their language, 36.

c3.48

VIII. KÔTA, . . . . . . . . . . 37

c3.49

Where spoken; characteristics of the language, 37.

c3.50

IX. GÔṆḌ, . . . . . . . . . . 38

c3.51

Gôṇḍwana; numbers of the Gôṇḍs; different tribes; Kôṭôrs, 38.

c3.52

X. KHOND or KU, . . . . . . . . . 38

c3.53

Where spoken; human sacrifices; origin of name, 38.

c3.54

XI. MÂLER or RÂJMAHÂL, . . . . . . . 39

c3.55

Where spoken; language different from that of the Santâls, 39.

c3.56

XII. ORÂON, . . . . . . . . . . 39-43

c3.57

Relationships of this tribe and their language, 39. Amount of the Dravidian element in the Mâler and Orâon not clearly ascertained, 40. Census of peoples and tribes speaking Dravidian languages, 41. Tribes not enumerated; Kolarian tribes, 42. Tribes of the North-Eastern frontier; Brahuî contains a Dravidian element; Dravidians seem to have entered India from the North-West, 43.

c3.58

*The Dravidian idioms not merely provincial dialects of the same language,* . . 42 People not mutually understood; Tamil and Telugu furthest apart, 42.

c3.59

*The Dravidian Languages independent of Sanskrit,* . . . . 43-55 Supposition of the northern pandits that the South-Indian vernaculars were derived from Sanskrit erroneous, 43. List of sixty words in Sanskrit and Tamil, 48. Ancient dialect of Tamil contains little Sanskrit, 49. Relation of English to Latin, and of Tamil to Sanskrit, illustrated by a comparison of Ten Commandments in English and Tamil, 49. Archbishop Trench's expressions, 50. Tamil less studied than other dialects by Brâhmans, 51. Thirteen particulars in which the Dravidian languages differ essentially from Sanskrit, 52-54. Are there traces of Scythian influences in Sanskrit itself? Mr Edkins's "China's Place in Philology," 54; *Note.*—Structure of Japanese, 55.

c3.60

*Is there a Dravidian element in the Vernacular Languages of Northern India?* . . . . . . . . . . . 56-64 Hypothesis that the corruption of Sanskrit out of which the Northern vernaculars have arisen was due to the Dravidian languages considered; general conclusion that the modifying influences, though probably Scythian or non-Aryan, do not appear to have been distinctively Dravidian, 56-64.

c3.61

*To what group of Languages are the Dravidian idioms to be affiliated?* . 64-80 Professor Rask's opinion, 64. Meaning of the term 'Scythian;' Professor Max Müller, 65. Intercomparison of the Scythian languages themselves should be carried further, 66. Some of the resemblances incapable of being accounted for by accident, 67. The original unity of languages probable, 68. Confirmation of the Scythian theory by the Behistun Tablets, 68. Principal points of resemblance between the language of the Tablets and the Dravidian languages, 69, 70. The existence of any analogy between the Dravidian languages and the Finno-Ugrian tends to confirm the argument for the original oneness of the human race, 71. *Note.*—Professor Hunfalvy, 71. Indo-European languages not so prolific of differences as Scythian, 72. Relationship of Dravidian languages to Scythian not universally admitted; Dr Pope's remarks, 73. Mr Gover's "Folk-Songs;" Indo-European analogies discoverable in the Dravidian languages, 74. Dr Bleek's remarks; possibility of developments *ab intra*, 75. List of primitive Indo-Europeanisms discoverable in the Dravidian languages, 76. Position between Indo-European and Scythian languages occupied by Dravidian; existence of a few Semitic analogies, 77. Australian affinities, 78, 79. Resemblances discoverable in an African language, 80.

c3.62

*Which language or dialect best represents the primitive condition of the Dravidian tongues?* . . . . . . . . . . 80 No one dialect implicitly to be followed; a comparison of all existing dialects our safest guide.

c3.63

1. *Literary, classical dialects of the Dravidian languages: to what extent may they be regarded as representing the primitive condition of those languages?* . . . . . . . . . . 81-83

c3.64

As soon as the Indian languages begin to be cultivated, the literary style has a tendency to become a literary language, 81. Illustrations from Northern India; the same tendency in the Dravidian languages, 82. High Tamil, 83.

c3.65

2. *High antiquity of the literary cultivation of Tamil,* . . . 84-89

c3.66

Six reasons for inferring its relatively high antiquity, 84, 85. The Sanskrit words contained in Tamil belong to three different periods; Note—Carnatic temples, 86. Remarkable corruptions of certain Sanskrit words, 87. Tamil inscriptions, 88. Characters in which those inscriptions are written; character of Jewish and Christian tablets; Note—Historical information contained in those inscriptions; language of those inscriptions Tamil; inferences from this; Note—Meaning of the phrase opposite a year, 89.

c3.67

EARLIEST EXTANT WRITTEN RELICS OF THE DRAVIDIAN LANGUAGES, . 91-106

c3.68

Dravidian words in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, 91, 92. Earliest Dravidian word in Greek, Ctesias's name for cinnamon, 93. Largest stock of Dravidian words found in names of places mentioned by Ptolemy and the other Greek geographers, 94. List of these words, 94-104. Condition of the Dravidian languages scarcely at all changed since the time of the Greeks, 104. Note.—Roman coins; dates of Greek geographers, 105. Words of the Turks of the Altaï preserved by the Chinese; period when the Dravidian speech divided into dialects, 106.

c3.69

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL RELATION OF THE PRIMITIVE DRAVIDIANS TO THE ARYAN AND PRE-ARYAN INHABITANTS OF NORTHERN INDIA, . 107-110

c3.70

Were the Dravidians identical with the aborigines whom the Aryans found in India? 107. Relations of the Dravidians to the Aryans seem to have been always peaceable, 108. Dravidians may have been preceded by another Scythian race, 109. Mr Curzon's opinion; immigrations from India to Ceylon and back again; Note.—Sanskrit and Dravidian names for the points of the compass, 110.

c3.71

ORIGINAL USE AND PROGRESSIVE EXTENSION OF THE TERM ‘SÛDRA,’ . 111-116

c3.72

Ethnological value of Manu's classification, 111. Were the Sûdras of the same race as the Aryans, or of a different race? Lassen's supposition, 112. Sanskrit authorities quoted, 113. Aryanisation of the Dravidians the result, not of conquest, but of colonisation; Note—Sagara's distinguishing marks; long hair of the Dravidians, 114. Connection of the Pândyas with the Pândavas; Note—Professor Max Müller's remarks, 115. Dravidians called Sûdras by the Brâhmans; Sûdra has a higher meaning in the South than in the North, 116.

c3.73

PRE-ARYAN CIVILISATION OF THE DRAVIDIANS, . . . 117, 118

c3.74

Testimony of the Dravidian vocabulary, when freed from its Sanskrit, 117, 118.

c3.75

*Probable date of Aryan civilisation of the Dravidians,* . . 119-122

c3.76

First city and state of the Dravidians probably Kolkei on the Tâmraparnî; Agastya, the traditional leader of the first Brâhman colony, 119.

c3.77

Agastya's age; references to Draviḍas, &c., in Manu and the Mahâ-bhârata; *Note*—name of Agastya's mountain, 120. References to early Dravidians in Mahâ-wanso, 121. Inference from Kumârila-bhaṭṭa's reference to the Dravidians; names of places recorded by the Greeks Brahmanical; suppositions respecting earliest Dravidian characters, 122.

c3.78

*Relative Antiquity of Dravidian Literature,* . . . . 123-153

c3.79

*Age of Telugu Literature.*

c3.80

A few works composed towards the end of the twelfth century, nearly all the rest in the fourteenth and subsequent centuries; Vemana's poems, 123.

c3.81

*Age of Canarese Literature.*

c3.82

New light thrown on age of Canarese literature by Mr Kittel's publication of Kêśava's Grammar of Ancient Canarese; age of Kêśava; probably he lived about the end of the twelfth century, 124.

c3.83

*Age of Malayâḷam Literature.*

c3.84

Dr Gundert's statements; earliest phase of the language exhibited in the Râma Charita, 125.

c3.85

*Age of Tamil Literature.*

c3.86

Position of Agastya in Tamil literature; works ascribed to Agastya not genuine, 126. Stanza attributed to him; grammar of Tolkâppiyan; Age of most Hindû writings unknown; Tamil literature may be arranged in cycles, 127.

c3.87

*(1.) The Jaina Cycle.*

c3.88

Reasons for not styling this the cycle of the Madura College, 128. Oldest Tamil works extant appear to have been written by Jainas; duration of Jaina period; *Note*—Dr Burnell's remarks, 129. The Kural; reasons for assigning it to the tenth century, 130. Relation of Kural to Madura College, 131. Nâlaḍiyâr and Chintâmani; classical dictionaries, 132.

c3.89

*(2.) The Tamil Râmâyaṇa Cycle.*

c3.90

Differences between the Tamil version and the Sanskrit original, 133. Many poets lived at this period; date prefixed to the poem too early, 134. Relation of this poem to the reigns of Râjêndra Chôḷa and Kulôtunga Chôḷa; Rajendra's date, 135. Date of Râmânuja, 136. Auveiyar's date; the turkey; Mr Scott's rendering, 137.

c3.91

*(3.) The Śaiva Revival Cycle.*

c3.92

Two large collections of poems belong to this cycle, 138. This cycle identical with the reign of Sundara Pâṇḍya; was this prince identical with Marco Polo's Sender-bandi? his date beset with difficulties, 139. Reasons for placing him later than the eleventh century, 140. Statements of Muhammedan historians respecting two Sundaras, 141. Madura inscription; Muhammedan influences, 142.

c3.93

*(4.) The Vaiṣṇava Cycle.*

c3.94

Poetical compositions of the disciples of Râmânuja; their date uncertain, 143. No reference in Śaiva poems to the Vaishnava ones, and vice versâ, 143.

c3.95

(5.) *The Cycle of the Literary Revival,* . . . . . 144, 145

c3.96

The head of this new period one of the Pândya princes; characteristics of the poems of this period, 144. Ati-Vîra-Râma Pândya’s date discovered in an inscription, 145. Relation of the Pândya princes of that period to the Nâyaks of Madura, 145.

c3.97

(6.) *The Anti-Brahmanical Cycle,* . . . . . 146–148

c3.98

Compositions of the so-called Sittar school; characteristics of these compositions, 146. The writers of this school acquainted with Christianity, 147. Quotations from Śiva-vâkyar, 148.

c3.99

(7.) *The Modern Writers,* . . . . . 149–153

c3.100

Their works numerous, but not generally valuable; Beschi’s great poem, 149. Introduction of good colloquial prose, 150. Comparison between the number of books printed in Bengali and in Tamil; characteristics of Dravidian poetry; alliteration and rhyme, 151. Mental physiology of Indo-Europeans and Dravidians illustrated by their language; reason why literature could not flourish, 152. New stimulus now given to the native mind, 153.

c3.101

COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR.

c3.102

*Note on Transliteration,* . . . . . 3, 4

c3.103

Reasons for using Roman characters. How vowels are to be represented and pronounced. How cerebral consonants and nasals are to be represented. How some consonants are to be represented when single, and how when doubled. Tendency to pronounce *e* like *ye*, and *o* like *wo*. This usage not ancient, and not observed in this work. *Note.*—Anecdote illustrating this usage.

c3.104

PART I.

c3.105

SOUNDS, . . . . . . . . . 4–87

c3.106

DRAVIDIAN ALPHABETS, . . . . . . . 5–15

c3.107

Three Alphabets in use, 5. Their origin, 6. Mr Ellis’s theory, 7. Mr E. Thomas’s theory; alphabet of the Malabar Inscriptions, 8. Dr Burnell’s theory considered, 9. Characters of Chera Inscriptions; further research needed, 10. Differences amongst the existing Alphabets, 11. Peculiarities of Tamil Alphabet, 12. Comparative View of Devanâgarî and Tamil Alphabets, 13. *Note.*—Dr Burnell on early printing in India, 14.

c3.108

DRAVIDIAN SYSTEM OF SOUNDS—

c3.109

I. Vowels, . . . . . . . . . 15–20

c3.110

Weakening of *a* and *â*, 15. Origin of the diphthong *ei*; Kumârila-bhaṭṭa; Mr Beames, 16. Enunciative *u*, 17, 18. Short *e* and *o*; Mr Beames, 19. Attraction of certain vowels, 20.

c3.111

II. Consonants, . . . . . . . . 21–48

c3.112

Convertibility of surds and sonants, 21, 22. Hebrew dagesh; Finnish law, 23. Gutturals and palatals, 24. Telugu pronunciation of palatals, 25. Cerebrals and dentals; conjunction of nasals and sonants, 26. Labials and semi-vowels; Tamil rule, 27. Vocalic *ṛ*, 28. Cerebral *ḷ*; rough *r*, 29. Pronunciation of Tamil *nr*; which is radical? Note—Dr Gundert’s opinion, 30. Sibilants and aspirates, 31.

c3.113

ORIGIN OF THE CEREBRAL SOUNDS—*Excursus*, . . . 32–47

c3.114

Reasons which lead me to suppose these sounds borrowed by Sanskrit from the Dravidian languages, 32. Mr Norris’s opinion; Vedic Sanskrit *ḷ*, 33. Professor Benfey’s views; Professor Bühler’s paper on the opposite side, 34. His theory of the development of the lingual sounds, 35. Lingual sounds in English; Professor Wilson, 36. Lingual sounds essential in Tamil, not merely euphonic, 37. Appearance of these sounds in Sanskrit, 38. Is the borrowing of sounds possible? Influence of Norman-French on English, 39. Normans themselves borrowed; Hottentot “click;” Dr Bleek; Bishop Callaway, 40. Descent accounts for much; imitativeness for more, 41. Mr Beames’s discussion of the question, 42–44. Oldest Aryan usage, 45. Is his theory perfectly tenable? 46. Influence of non-Aryans on Aryan pronunciation; Dr Trumpp’s views, 47.

c3.115

Dialectic Interchange of Consonants, . . . . . 48–62

c3.116

Interchange of Gutturals, 48. Palatals, 49. Linguals, 50. Dentals, 51. *r* into *l*; *t* or *d* into *l* or *ś*, 52. Labials, 53, 54. Semi-vowels, 55–60. Sibilants, 61.

c3.117

Euphonic Permutation of Consonants, . . . . . 62–64

c3.118

Some permutations imitate Sanskrit, 62. Others independent; initial surds, when softened? 63. Assimilation of concurrent consonants, 64.

c3.119

Euphonic Nunnation or Nasalisation, . . . . . 65–70

c3.120

Insertion of a nasal before formative suffixes, 65. This accounts for shape of certain Tamil adverbs of place, 66. Suffixes with *ṭ* and *ḍ* nasalised, 67. Origin of demonstrative adjectives; Dr Gundert’s view, 68. Insertion of a nasal before the *d* of the preterite in Tamil, 69. Use of nunnation in other languages, 70.

c3.121

Prevention of Hiatus, . . . . . . . 71–77

c3.122

Hiatus, how prevented in Indo-European Languages? how in Dravidian? 71. Use of *v*, *y*, and *n*, 72. Use of *m*, 73. Use of *n* in Tamil also, 74. Origin of the *n* in certain numerals, 75. Usage of Tuḷu, 76. Euphonic insertion of *r* and *d*, 76.

c3.123

groups which radiate from the base syllables *aḍ* and *aṇ*, 105. List of specialising particles ending in a consonant, 106. Another set of groups of roots; Max Müller, Aryan instances, 107.

c3.124

Root-vowel generally unalterable, 108.

c3.125

*Exceptions—Internal Changes in Roots*, . . . . 109-114

c3.126

1. Euphonic changes. 2. Changes pertaining to grammatical expression; root-vowels of pronouns, 109. 3. Strengthening of root-vowel of verb to form verbal noun; examples; this usage not likely to have been derived from Sanskrit, 110. Class of nouns so formed used adjectivally; root-vowels of numerals; shorter form older, 111. Origin of *peim*, Tam. green, 112. 4. Shortening of root-vowel in the preterite tense of certain verbs; Tamil verbs *vâ* and *tâ*; Dr Pope’s opinion, 113. Exceptions to the stability of root-vowels found also in the Scythian languages, 114.

c3.127

PART III.

c3.128

THE NOUN, . . . . . . . . . 115-215

c3.129

SECTION I.—GENDER AND NUMBER, . . . . . 115-147

c3.130

1. GENDER.

c3.131

Dravidian laws of gender accord more closely with Scythian than with Indo-European tongues, 115. Indo-European laws of gender how different from Scythian, 116. Dravidian nouns divided into two classes, denoting rational beings and things without reason. *Note.*—Mind and body, 117. Primitive laws of gender faithfully retained by Malayâlam; Telugu and Gôṇḍ destitute of feminine singular, 118. Canarese and Malayâlam agree in this particular with Tamil.

c3.132

2. NUMBER.

c3.133

Only two numbers, singular and plural, 119.

c3.134

(1.) Masculine Singular, . . . . . . . 120-123

c3.135

Masculine singular suffixes in Tamil; formation of appellatives, 120. Subdivisions of appellatives, 121. Canarese and Telugu suffixes, 122. Ultimate identity of these with Tamil, 123.

c3.136

(2.) Feminine Singular, . . . . . . . 124, 125

c3.137

No suffix of the feminine singular in Telugu and Gôṇḍ; a formative sometimes used resembling the suffix of Tamil-Canarese, and probably of the same origin, 124. Telugu mode of forming feminine singular appellatives; *Note*—Connection between Telugu *âl-u*, a woman, and Tamil *âḷ*, a person; another feminine suffix possibly Sanskritic, 125.

c3.138

(3.) Neuter Singular, . . . . . . . 126-128

c3.139

Dravidian nouns naturally neuter, 126. Neuter suffixes rarely required; suffix of neuter singular of demonstrative pronouns and appellative nouns, 127. Affinities of neuter singular suffix in *d* possibly Indo-European, 128.

c3.140

*The Plural : Principles of Pluralisation,* . . . . . . 128–135

c3.141

In Indo-European tongues number is denoted by the terminations; in the Scythian number is generally left indefinite, 128. Neuters pluralised in Telugu, but rarely in Tamil, 129. Progress of pluralisation, 130. Sign of plurality distinct from case-sign; added directly to the crude base, 131. Paradigm of a noun in Hungarian and Tamil, 132. Pluralisation of masculine and feminine nouns; no distinction of sex in plural; analogies to other languages; *Note*—Origin of Persian *án*, 133. Double plurals in Telugu, 134. Double plurals in Tamil, 135.

c3.142

*(1.) Epicene Pluralising Particle,* . . . . . . 136–139

c3.143

Origin of epicene plural suffix *ar*, &c., 136. Origin of *mâr* in Tam.-Mal.; formative in *var*, 137. Dr Gundert’s explanation; origin of verbal terminations in *mar*, &c., 138. Relationship to pluralising particles in other families of languages, 139. Resemblance in use more important than resemblance in sound.

c3.144

*(2.) Pluralising Particle of the Neuter,* . . . . . . 140–147

c3.145

1. The neuter plural suffix GAL, with its varieties, 140. *gal* appears as *lu* in Telugu, 141. Gôṇḍ particle; particles used in High Asian languages, 142. Origin of *gal*; *Note*—Derivation of Dravidian word for ‘all,’ 143. 2. Neuter plural suffix *a*. Illustrations of use, 144. Neuter plural of verb; of possessive adjectives; of Malayâḷam demonstratives, 145. Lapse of *a* into *ei*. Telugu and Gôṇḍ peculiarities, 146. Relationship of neuter plural suffix *a*; Indo-European affinities; grammatical gender more fully developed in the Dravidian than in any other family of languages, 147.

c3.146

SECTION II.—FORMATION OF CASES, . . . . . . 148–203

c3.147

*Principles of Case-formation,* . . . . . . 148, 149

c3.148

In this particular the Indo-European and Scythian families originally in agreement, 148. Case-signs in both originally postpositional words; case-terminations of the plural different from those of the singular in the Indo-European; identical in the Scythian group, 149. Dravidian languages follow the Scythian plan.

c3.149

*Number of Declensions,* . . . . . . 150

c3.150

Only one declension, properly speaking, in Dravidian languages; no difference in signs of case, 150. Number of Dravidian cases.

c3.151

*The Nominative—Absence of Nominative Case-terminations,* . . . 151–154

c3.152

Dravidian nominative the noun itself. Apparent exceptions exist, 151. (1.) Neuter termination *am* might be supposed to be a nominative case-sign, but is not; origin of this *am*, 152. Probably *am* was an ancient form of the demonstrative pronoun; alternates with *an*, 153. (2.) Final *n* of personal pronoun does not make it a nominative. (3.) Lengthening of vowel of personal pronoun in the nominative looks like a case in point; but probably vowel lengthened for sake of emphasis, 154.

c3.153

*Inflexion or Inflexional Base of the Oblique Cases,* . . . . 155

c3.154

In many instances the noun itself used as the inflexional base. Generally the base receives some augmentation. Signs of case added to this inflected form, 155.

c3.155

(1.) *The inflexional increment* IN, *with its dialectic varieties,* . . . 156, 157 Illustrations, 156. In Telugu *ni*, 157. *in* originally a locative.

c3.156

(2.) *The inflexional increments* AD *and* AR, . . . . . 158, 159 These are most used in Canarese; are they identical in origin? 158. Tamil sometimes uses neuter demonstrative *adu* in a similar manner, 159.

c3.157

(3.) *The inflexional increment* TI, . . . . . . . 160 This the most common increment of neuter nouns in Telugu; probably *ti*, not *ti*; connection of this with neuter demonstrative, 160.

c3.158

(4.) *The inflexional increment* ATTU *or* ATTRU, . . . . 160-162 Tamil nouns in *am* take this increment, 160. *attu* used by the singular alone; *attru* used instead of *attu* by a few neuter plural pronominals; *attu* and *attru* virtually identical, 161. Origin of the *r* of *attru*, 162. Dr Gundert's views respecting its origin.

c3.159

(5.) *The formation of the inflexion by means of doubling and hardening the final consonant,* . . . . . . . . 163 Explanation of this doubling; Dr Gundert's view, 163. In Telugu, final consonant hardened, but not doubled.

c3.160

(6.) *The inflexional increment* I. *Origin. Euphonic links of connection between the base and the inflexion,* . . . . . 164 In Tamil, euphonic *u*, 165. Use of *v* and *y*.

c3.161

*The Accusative or Second Case,* . . . . . . . 166 In Indo-European languages, accusative a sign of passivity; in Dravidian, accusative case-sign originally a formative of neuter abstracts; nominative much used instead, 166. The same in Telugu as to things without life.

c3.162

(1.) *Accusative Case-signs* EI, E, *and* A, . . . . . . 167 In Tamil *ei*; in Malayâḷam *e* or *a*, 167. With what case-signs in other languages this may be compared.

c3.163

(2.) *Accusative Case-signs* AM, ANNU, ANNA, NU, &c., . . . 168-170 *am* the Old Canarese sign, *annu* the modern; change of *m* into *n*, 168. Tuḷu case-sign *nu* or *n'*; in Telugu *nu* or *ni*, 169. Comparison with case-signs in other languages; Indo-European *m* or *n*; origin of Dravidian case-sign; identical with *am*, the formative of neuter nouns, 170. Change of *am* into *a*.

c3.164

*The Instrumental or Third Case, properly so called,* . . . 171-173 Different particles used in the different dialects. Telugu instrumental; Canarese, origin of this, 171. Tamil and Malayâḷam *âl*, *ân*; origin of this; Dr Gundert's explanation, 172. No affinities to other languages; periphrastic modes of forming instrumental case, 173.

c3.165

*The Conjunctive or Social Case,* . . . . . . 174

c3.166

Ought to have a place in the list of Dravidian cases; difference from instrumental Tam.-Mal. case-signs, 174. Telugu case-sign; is this allied to the Tam.-Mal.? Tuḷu communicative case.

c3.167

*The Dative or Fourth Case,* . . . . . . 175-178

c3.168

In North Indian languages dative postpositions substantially the same as accusative, 175. Dravidian dative; resemblance between Dravidian case-sign and North Indian how to be accounted for; Dr Trumpp’s explanation of Hindû *kô*; Mr Beames’s explanation, 176. Antiquity of Dravidian *ku*; Scythian dative case-signs bear some resemblance to Dravidian, 177. Behistun-Scythian case-signs; Malayâlam seems to have two case-signs; Dr Gundert’s view of origin of *nnu*, 178. Can a Dravidian origin be discovered for *ku*?

c3.169

*The Ablative of Motion or Fifth Case,* . . . . . 179-181

c3.170

This case included in the list out of deference to Sanskrit grammarians; not really different from locative, 179. Change of place expressed by addition of verb of motion; Tamil suffixes *il* and *in*; Old Canarese *im*, 180. Were *il* and *in* originally identical? Compound ablative suffixes in Canarese, 181. Explanation of Telugu ablative; Tuḷu.

c3.171

*The Genitive or Sixth Case.*

c3.172

(1.) *The abbreviated Pronominal Genitive,* . . . . . 182

c3.173

This may be explained as a pronominal adjective, 182. Similar abbreviation in the case of some of the numerals.

c3.174

(2.) *The Neuter Inflexional Genitive,* . . . . . . 183, 184

c3.175

Neuter suffixes used for the genitive originally signs of the locative; Dr Trumpp’s view; adjectival use of these suffixes arose from their use as genitives, 183. Connection between locative, genitive, and adjective; Max Müller’s view, 184. Inflexional suffixes used as signs of genitive in Telugu; not so in Canarese.

c3.176

(3.) *The Neuter Demonstrative Genitives,* . . . . . 185

c3.177

*adu* and *âdu* in Tamil how used, 185. Followed by the singular alone; Telugu use, 186. This suffix appended to the inflexion.

c3.178

(4.) *The Possessive Suffix IN, and its Varieties,* . . . . 187-191

c3.179

Tamil *in* and Telugu *ni* originally locative suffixes; in the most common of all possessive suffixes in Tamil; Max Müller, 187. Other case-suffixes generally appended to this *in*, 188. Adjectival force of *in*; use of *am* resembles that of *in*, 189. Indo-European analogies to the use of *in* as a genitive, 190. Scythian analogies, 191.

c3.180

(5.) *The Genitival Suffix A,* . . . . . . . 192-194

c3.181

Probably identical with the *a* which forms the relative participle; *a* the only genitive case-sign in Canarese, 192. So also in Telugu and Tuḷu; adjectival *a* of some Telugu nouns identical with possessive *a*; a little used now in Tamil, though first in the list, 193. Its use generally confined to poetical plurals, 194. Indo-European affinities of this *a*, especially in the later dialects.

c3.182

(6.) The *Malayâlam* Genitive Suffix RE or DE, . . . 195, 196 This takes the shape of *indre* or *inde*, 195. Some resemblances to this illusory; Dr Stevenson; Hindûstânî and Persian *rá*, &c., 196. Identical with Tamil *adu*.

c3.183

(7.) Auxiliary Suffixes of the Genitive in Telugu and Tamil, . . 197 (i.) Telugu *yoka*; origin of this word, 197. (ii.) Tamil *udeiya* means literally that which is the property of; Mal. *ude*.

c3.184

*Locative or Seventh Case,* . . . . . . 198-200 *il* the most common sign of this case in Tamil; any word signifying ‘place’ may be used, 198. Canarese suffixes *ôl* and *alli*; Telugu *andu* and *lô*; *Note*—Resemblances between Tamil *il* and Latin *in*, 199. Telugu *na*; use of the inflexion as a sign of the locative; fusion of the meaning of genitives and locatives; *Note*—Radical element in *il* is *i*; Max Müller, 200.

c3.185

*The Vocative or Eighth Case,* . . . . . . 201 No case-sign of the vocative in Dravidian languages; modes in which the vocative is formed, 201.

c3.186

*Compound Case-signs,* . . . . . . . 202 Two or more case-signs occasionally compounded into one, 202.

c3.187

*Possessive Compounds,* . . . . . . . 202 The absence of this class of compounds in the Dravidian languages remarkable.

c3.188

SECTION III.—ADJECTIVES, OR NOUNS USED ADJECTIVELY, . . 203-213 Adjectives in grammatical agreement with substantives in the Indo-European tongues; in the Scythian tongues independent nouns of quality, 203. 1. Dravidian adjectives also nouns of quality, 204. 2. How Sanskrit derivatives become Dravidian adjectives; 3. How nouns ending in hard consonants double those consonants when used as adjectives, 205. Soft finals how changed; 4. Each of the inflexional increments used for converting substantives into adjectives, 206. 5. Relative participles of verbs largely used as adjectives; 6. Past verbal participle used as an adjective in Telugu, 207. 7. Many Dravidian adjectives formed by the addition to nouns of the suffixes by which relative participles are formed; (1.) Addition of the suffix *iya*; origin of this, 208. Addition of the suffix *a*; *Note*—Explanation of *nalla*, Tam. good, 209. Explanation of origin of certain adjectives; (3.) Addition of the suffix of the future relative participle, 210. 8. Nouns may become adjectives by the addition of the relative participle of the verb to become. Certain words erroneously styled adjectives.

c3.189

*Comparison of Adjectives,* . . . . . . 211, 212 Mode of comparison different from that used in Indo-European languages; resembles Semitic and Scythian mode, 211. Addition of conjunctive particle *um*, &c., as an intransitive, 212. Formation of superlative; attempt of Robert de Nobilibus.

c3.190

*Postpositions,* . . . . . . . . 213 All postpositions nouns, in the locative case understood, 213.

c3.191

PART IV.

c3.192

THE NUMERALS, . 216-253

c3.193

Each cardinal number has two shapes, that of a neuter noun of number and that of a numeral adjective; in the colloquial dialects the former sometimes used instead of the latter, 216. Primitive form that of the numeral adjective.

c3.194

One.—Two forms in existence, *oka* in Telugu, *oru* in all other dialects. 1. Basis of *oru* is *or*, 217. *ondu* or *onn’* at first sight resembles Indo-European ‘one,’ 218. Origin of *ondu* from *oru*; similar changes in other words, 219. Dr Gundert’s opinion; Mr Kittel’s, 220-22. Origin of Telugu word for one, *oka*, 221. Scythian analogies to *oka*; are *oka* and *or* related? 222. Dravidian indefinite article. The numeral adjective for ‘one’ used as a sort of indefinite article.

c3.195

Two.—Neuter nouns differ slightly in the various dialects; numeral adjective, *ir*; the same in all, 223. Canarese form of neuter; Tamil form nasalised, 224. Radical form without a nasal; origin of *ir*; Dr Gundert’s opinion; Mr Kittel’s, 225. No analogies in any Indo-European language. Brahui word. No Scythian analogies.

c3.196

Three.—Neuter noun; numeral adjective, 226. *mû* or *mu*? Brahui word, 227. Origin of word for three. Dr Gundert; Mr Kittel.

c3.197

Four.—Neuter noun; numeral adjective, 228. Origin of *nal*, 229. No Indo-European analogy; Ugro-Finnish analogies remarkably close.

c3.198

Five.—Neuter noun; numeral adjective, in all the dialects *ei*, 230. Resemblance between Sans. *pañchau* and Tam.-Mal. *añju*, 231. How this resemblance has arisen, 232. Dr Gundert’s opinion, 233. Radical meaning of *ei*; Mr Kittel’s explanation, 234.

c3.199

Six.—Neuter noun and numeral adjective nearly alike; root-meaning of *aru*, 235. No analogy with other languages discoverable.

c3.200

Seven.—Neuter noun and numeral adjective nearly alike, 236. No resemblance to word for seven in other languages.

First 200 of 761 passages. Read on

Cites (28)