The Sanskrit Drama in its Origin, Development, Theory & Practice c9.s3.5

c9.s3.5

The Prākrit of the *Gobam°* agrees with this Old Māgadhī in having *l* for *r* and *e* in the nominative singular, but it reduces all sibilants to *s*. It thus shows a certain similarity to the Ardha-Māgadhī of the grammarians, but that dialect often keeps *r* though it frequently alters it to *l*; for instance it has *r* for the *kaleti* of this Prākrit and the Old Māgadhī. Other points of similarity are the retention of the dental for cerebral in *vanna*; the lengthening of the vowel before the suffix *ka* (*vannikāhi*); the accusative plural neuter in *pupphā*; and the infinitive *bhumjitaye* (*bhuñjittae*). There are points of difference, but they are probably all cases of earlier forms. Thus, as in Old Māgadhī, we have no softening or loss of intervocalic consonants; *n* is not cerebralised, but even introduced in *palinata*; *ḷ* appears in lieu of *l*; the instrumental in *āhi* has no nasal; the nominative of *vat* stems appears as in *vā*, as against *vam* or *vante*; in the infinitive we find no doubling of the consonant in *taye*. The fact, however, of the regular change of *r* to *l* and the use of the form *yeva* after a long vowel as in Māgadhī and Pāli show that the Old Ardha-Māgadhī was more akin to Māgadhī than the later Ardha-Māgadhī, which came steadily under the influence of the western dialects as shown by the tendency to change *e* of the nominative to *o*.