Page:EB1911 - Volume 15.djvu/720

Rh question, as in chwā, is he? ti adds emphasis, as in chuti, he is indeed; and tyā asks a question with emphasis, as in chutyā, is he indeed?

Two or three suffixes may be employed together, as in kạru, was made, kạru–m, was made by me, kạru-m-akh, thou wast made by me; kạru-m-akh-ā, wast thou made by me? The two kh suffixes become h when they are followed by a pronominal suffix commencing with a vowel, as in kạru-h-as (for kạru-kh-as), I was made by them.

E. Conjugation. As in the case of the modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars, the conjugation of the verb is mainly participial. Three only of the old tenses, the present, the future and the imperative have survived, the first having become a future, and the second a past conditional. These three we may call radical tenses. The rest, viz. the Kashmiri present, imperfect, past, aorist, perfect and other past tenses are all participial.

The verb substantive, which is also used as an auxiliary verb, has two tenses, a present and a past. The former is made by adding the pronominal suffixes of the nominative to a base chu(h), and the latter by adding the same to a base ạ̄su. Thus:—

As for the finite verb, the modern future (old present), and the past conditional (old future) do not change for gender, and do not employ suffixes, but retain relics of the old personal terminations of the tenses from which they are derived. They are thus conjugated, taking the verbal root kar, as the typical verb.

For the imperative we have 2nd person singular, kar, plur. kariv; third person singular and plural karin.

Many of the above forms will be intelligible from a consideration of the closely allied Sanskrit, although they are not derived from that language; but some (e.g. those of the second person singular) can only be explained by the analogy of the Iranian and of the Piśāca languages.

The present participle is formed by adding ān to the root; thus, karān, making. It does not change for gender. From this we get a present and an imperfect, formed by adding respectively the present and past tenses of the auxiliary verb. Thus, kāran chus, I (masculine) am making, I make; karān chĕs, I (feminine) am making, I make; karān ạ̄sus, I (masculine) was making; and so on.

There are several past participles, all of which are liable to change for gender, and are utilized in conjugation. We have:—

In the strong past participle and the pluperfect participle, the final v and y (like the final h of chuh quoted above) are not parts of the original words, but are only added for the sake of euphony. The true words are karyō, karyē, karyā and karyēyē. There are three conjugations. The first includes all transitive verbs. These have both the weak and the strong past participles. The second conjugation consists of sixty-six common intransitive verbs, which also have both of these participles. The third conjugation consists of the remaining intransitive verbs. These have only the strong past participle. The weak past participle in the first two conjugations refers to something which has lately happened, and is used to form an immediate past tense. The strong past participle is more indefinite, and is employed to form a tense corresponding to the Greek aorist. The pluperfect participle refers to something which happened a long time ago, and is used to form the past tense of narration. As the third conjugation has no weak past participle, the strong past participle is employed to make the immediate past, and the pluperfect participle is employed to make the aorist past, while the new pluperfect participle is formed to make the tense of narration. Thus, from the root wuph, fly (third conjugation) we have wuphyōv, he flew just now, while karyōv (first conjugation) means “he was made at some indefinite time”; wuphyāv, he flew at some indefinite time, but karyāv, he was made a long time ago; finally, the new participle of the third conjugation, wuphiyāv, he flew a long time ago.

The corresponding tenses are formed by adding pronominal suffixes to the weak, the strong, or the pluperfect participle. In the last two the final v and y, being no longer required by euphony, are dropped. In the case of transitive verbs the participles are passive by derivation and in signification, and hence the suffix indicating the subject must be in the agent case. Thus kạru means “made.” For “I made” we must say “made by me,” kạru–m; for “thou madest,” kạru–th, made by thee, and so on. If the thing made is feminine the participle must be feminine, and similarly if it is plural it must be plural. Thus, kạru–m, I made him; kạru-m, I made her; kạri–m, I made them (masculine); and karĕ–m, I made them (feminine). Similarly from the other two participles we have karyō–m, I made him; karyēya–m, I made her; karyā–m, I made him (a long time ago). The past participles of intransitive verbs are not passive, and hence the suffix indicating the subject must be in the nominative form. Thus tsạlu, escaped (second conjugation); tsạlu–s, escaped-I, I (masculine) escaped; tsạj ü -s, I (feminine) escaped, and so on. Similarly for the third conjugation, wuphyōv, flew; wuphyō–s, I (masculine) flew; wuphyēya–s, I (feminine) flew, &c.

As explained above, these suffixes may be piled one on another. As a further example we may give kạru, made; kạru–n, made by him, he made; kạru–n-as, made by him I, he made me, or (as -s also means “for him”) he made for him; kạru–n-as-ā, did he make me? or, did he make for him? and so on.

Tenses corresponding to the English perfect and pluperfect are formed by conjugating the auxiliary verb, adding the appropriate suffixes, with the compound past participle. Thus kạrumạtu chu-n-as, made am-by-him-I, he has made me; tsạlumạtu chu-kh, escaped art thou, thou hast escaped; wuphyōmạtu chu-s, flown am-I, I have flown. Similarly for the pluperfect, kạrumạtu ạ̄su-n-as, made was-by-him-I, he had made me, and so on.

Many verbs have irregular past participles. Thus mar, die, has mūdu; di, give, has dịtu; khi, eat, has khyauv for its weak, and khĕyōv for its strong participle, while ni, take, has nyūv and niyōv, respectively. Others must be learnt from the regular grammars.

The infinitive is formed by adding -un to the root; thus kar-un, to make. It is declined like a somewhat irregular noun of the first declension, its accusative being karanas. There are three forms of the noun of agency, of which typical examples are kar-awunu, kar-an-wạ̄lu, and kar-an-grākh, a maker.

The passive is formed by conjugating the verb yi, come, with the ablative of the infinitive. Thus, karana yiwān chuh, it is coming by making, or into making, i.e. it is being made. A root is made active or causal by adding -anaw, -āw, or -arāw. Thus, kar-anāw, cause to make; kumal, be tender, kumal-āw, make tender; kal, be dumb, kạl–arāw, make dumb. Some verbs take one form and some another, and there are numerous irregularities, especially in the case of the last.

F. Indeclinables. Indeclinables (adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections) must be learnt from the dictionary. The number of interjections is very large, and they are distinguished by minute rules depending on the gender of the person addressed and the exact amount of respect due to him.

Literature.—Kashmiri possesses a somewhat extensive literature, which has been very little studied. The missionary William Carey published in 1821 a version of the New Testament (in the Śāradā character), which was the first book published in the language. In 1885 the Rev. J. Hinton Knowles published at Bombay a collection of Kashmiri proverbs and sayings, and K. F. Burkhard in 1895 published an edition of Maḥmūd Gāmī’s poem on Yūsuf and Zulaikhā. This, with the exception of later translations of the Scriptures in the Persian character and a few minor works, is all the literature that has been printed or about which anything has been written. Maḥmūd Gāmī’s poem is valuable as an example of the Kashmiri used by Mussulmans. For Hindu literature, we may quote a history of Krishna by Dīnanātha. The very popular Lallā–vākya, a poem on Śaiva philosophy by a woman named Lālladēvī, is said to be the oldest work in the language which has survived. Another esteemed work is the Śiva Pariṇaya of Kṛṣṇa Rājānaka, a living author. These and other books which have been studied by the present writer have little independent value, being imitations of Sanskrit literature. Nothing is known about the dates of most of the authors.