Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 11.djvu/882

Rh 842 HINDUSTANI [LANGUAGE. 3. &quot;Words which cannot apparently be traced to any Sanskrit original, and are therefore considered by some scholars as words of non-Aryan origin ; e.g., pagrl, &quot; turban &quot; ; gor, Prk. gat-am, &quot; leg.&quot; Such words form but a small proportion ; and it is probable that further research and a better acquaintance with the laws of develop ment of the modern Aryan tongues will ultimately enable scholars to very much diminish their number. Gender. The three genders of the Prakrit and Sanskrit are, in Hindi and Hindustani, reduced to two, the neuters and masculines of the old tongues generally becoming masculines in the modern language. Instances, however, are not; a few in which they are changed to feminines. A striking feature in the modern tongues is the preponderance of masculines ending in d, with the corresponding feminines in I. Now in the Sanskrit a is a typical feminine end ing, and I is as often a masculine as a feminine termination. Many feminine words ending in d are no doubt to be found in the Hindi, fischhimd, &quot; patience, &quot; = S. kshamd ; and similarly many masculine words which in the Prakrit and Sanskrit terminate in I are also to be met with, &spd7il, &quot; water,&quot; = S. pan njam ; lidthl, &quot;elephant,&quot; = S. hastl (hastin). But d is typically a masculine and I a femi nine termination in the Hindi and Hindustani, and this is pro bably due to the number of sources from which the termination springs; thus we have (1) a = Prk. o, =S. as or ah, e.g., kaisd, &quot;like what,&quot; &quot; what manner,&quot; &quot; how,&quot; Prk. kSr iso, S. kldrisah ; (2) a = Prk. ad, =S. akas orakah, e.g., ghord, &quot; horse,&quot; Prk. ghoraS, S. ghotakah ; (3) a = Prk. a(k)am, aam, = S. am, e.g., kcld, &quot; plan tain,&quot; Prk. kera(k)am, kcraiim, S. kadaram. Again, the masculine ending aka of the old languages has a corresponding feminine in ikd ; and as the Prakrit commonly employs the pleonastic increment k to raise bases to the form aka, so it employs the same affix to form the feminine ikd of these masculines ; ikd becomes iyd, and more commonly I in the modern tongues. The form iyd is that which is generally used in feminine diminutives ; e.g., dibiyd, &quot; a tiny box&quot; ; but it is also used like I for a simple feminine ; e.g., kuttd, &quot;dog,&quot; kutiyd, &quot;bitch &quot; ; burhd, &quot;old man,&quot; burhiyd, &quot;old woman.&quot; If to the above class of feminines ending in i be added the large class which in Prakrit and Sanskrit form the feminine in I (i.e., the Prakrit masculines in o, =S. as), the preponderance of nouns ending in I seems sufficiently accounted for. It may be added that d and I are so universally regarded as masculine and feminine terminations respectively that the natives employ them freely in forming feminines from masculines and vice versa, e.g., badld, badll, from the Arabic badal. There are afew other feminine terminations which are worthy of notice, not so much on account of their origin (which presents no difficulty), as on account of the free use which is made of them ; these are (1) inl, in, an, nl, =S. int (fern, of in, I) ; (2) dni, dni, din,=S. dnl. These are not only found in words de rived from the Prakrit, but are added to Persian and even Arabic words; e.g., hdthini, hdthin, hathnl, &quot;female elephant,&quot; ( = S. hastinl) sundrin, sundran, &quot; a goldsmith s wife,&quot; (fern, of sonar, &quot; goldsmith, &quot; = S. suvarnakdra) ; shcrn i, &quot; tigress,&quot; from the Per sian sher, &quot; tiger &quot; ; naslban, a proper name, from the Arabic naslb ; panditdni, &quot; the wife of a pandit&quot; ; chaudhrdin, &quot; the wife of a chaud/iarl or head-man &quot; ; mZhtrdnl, &quot; the wife of a sweeper, a sweeper- woman,&quot; from the Persian mShtar, &quot;a, sweeper.&quot; Declension. It is here that the most striking contrast between the old and the new languages is found. The synthetical method of the Prakrit and the Sanskrit is, as a whole, rejected, only certain half-effaced traces of declension being retained. The number of cases, as in the Sanskrit, is seven, the nominative, accusative, in strumental, dative, ablative, genitive, locative, and vocative ; but the inflexions of the Prakrit have given place to case-affixes or post positions. For example, where the Sanskrit has sivdyai and sivasyai, the Hindi has siv-ko, and siv-kd. The case-affixes or postpositions are as follow : Instrumental tie, &quot;by.&quot; Diitivc-Accusiitivc- to, &quot;to,&quot; &quot;for.&quot; Ablative se, &quot; from.&quot; Genitive /.&amp;lt;; (ke, kl), &quot;of.&quot; Locative mer i, par, &quot;in,&quot; &quot;on.&quot; The genitive affix, it may be observed, varies its termination so as to agree with the governing noun. In other words, it is adjecti val, and agrees with the governing noun just as an adjective would ; e.g., sone-ki yharl, &quot; a gold watch.&quot; The case-affixes or postpositions are all, there can be no doubt, remnants of Prakrit nouns which were probably in use at the period when the modern Aryan languages began to be formed. The majority of these are fairly determined, and it seems probable that the remainder will also be fixed before long. The results of the in vestigation of scholars, as regards the postpositions noticed above (which are those commonly employed in the declension of Hindi and Hindustani nouns), we will here attempt to exhibit. The case-affix ne of the instrumental (or case of the agent) is re garded by Trumpp and others as derived from ena, the instrumental case-ending of the Sanskrit. This opinion is, however, combated by Beames (Comp. Gram., vol. ii. p. 266 ct seq.), who is of opinion that it is an affix of the dative, which was probably transferred to the instrumental as late as the time of Shah Jahan, in whose reign, as has been shown above, Urdu or Hindustani was consolidated. Beames shows that the postposition is not used in the old Hindi, and is not to be found in most of the dialects, except as a dative ; but he does not, we believe, trace it to any particular original. It is clear, however, that whether this affix is derived from the instru mental case-ending of the Sanskrit or not, it bears a striking resem blance to the latter in its use and the construction it requires ; e.g.. the Sanskrit tena uktam is marvellously like the Hindi us-na kahd, &quot; by him it was said,&quot; or freely &quot; he said.&quot; The dative postposition ko is derived by Dr Trumpp from the Prakrit kito, kid, =S. kritam. Dr Hoernle, 1 however, would seem to connect it with the Bangali kdchhe &quot; near,&quot; and the S. sa-kdsa ; and Beames (Camp. Gram., vol. ii. p. 257), accepting this as a right clue, traces the affix to the Prakrit kakkham, =S. kaksham, &quot; arm pit,&quot; &quot;side,&quot; the locative of which, kakshc, he believes to be tho source of the Bangali kdchhe. The postposition se of the ablative is traced by Beames (Comp. Gram., vol. ii. p. 274) to the Sanskrit samam, &quot; with,&quot; through an old form soil still used in the rustic dialects. The genitive case-affix kd (fern, kl, oblique ke) is derived by Trumpp and others from the Sanskrit affix ka. But Hoernle 2 shows conclusively (and his derivation is accepted by Beames) that the affix is derived from the Prakrit kari&amp;lt;j ( = S. kritas), which becomes kero, kera(k)o, and then kerao ; kero is then shortened to kard, whence the modern form kd. Of the locative case-affixes, men, &quot;in,&quot; is derived by scholars from the Sanskrit madhyc, the locative of madhya, &quot; the middle&quot;; while par (pari, orpai) is obviously traceable to the Sanskrit upari, &quot; upon.&quot; The declensions are two in number. In the one the nominative or base is inflected before the case-affixes are added ; in the other no change takes place in the nominative form. The first consists solely of masculine nouns ending in d = Prk. o = S. as (e.g., ghord, &quot;horse,&quot; = Prk. ghorao, = S. ghotakas) ; the second comprises all other nouns, whether they end in vowels or consonants. The base of the first declension is inflected by changing final d to e ; e.g., nom. ghord, inflect, base ghore, gen. ghore-kd, dat. ghorc-ko. But in the second declension we find, nom. raja, &quot;king,&quot; gen. rdjd-kd, &quot;of a king,&quot; &c. Dr Hoernle connects the e of the inflected base with the yd of the oblique form in Mariithi, and so traces it to a Prakrit geni tive in yassa = iassa = ikasya. The correctness of this derivation would seem to be established by the analogy of the oblique or in flected base of the plural of nouns, and especially by the inflected base of the pronouns, both these bases being indisputably traceable to the Prakrit genitive. Mr Beames, however, is of opinion that &quot;it is not correct to derive the oblique form from any special case of the Sanskrit ; &quot; he thinks .that &quot; it rather results from a general fusion of all the cases&quot; (Comp. Gram., vol ii. p. 210). This is the more remarkable as he accepts without demur the fact that the plural oblique base is a corruption of the Prakrit genitive plural. The terminations of the nominative plural of nouns (where a plural form is used) are clearly traceable to the Prakrit. Nouns which fall under the first of the declensions noticed above terminate in e in the nom. plur. (e.g., ghord, &quot;horse,&quot; nom. plur. ghore, &quot;horses,&quot; which is identical in form with the inflected base of the sing.). The termination e = Prk. e, =S. dh. Feminines ending in a consonant (and also fern. Arabic words ending in d, as bald), form the nom. plur. by adding en to the sing. nom. This ending, en, = Prk. neuter di, din, =S. neut. dni. The plur. termination dh of the nom. of feminines ending in i (as bctl, &quot; daughter &quot;) is also to be referred to the Prakrit din = S. dni. The oblique form of the plural of. all nouns ends in oh (e.g., ghoroh ; gen. ghoroh-kd ; rdjd- oh, dat. rdjd-oh-ko). The termination oil is derived from the Prakrit dnam ( = S. diidm), the termination of the genitive plural. Pronouns. The pronouns stand in marked contrast to the nouns in respect of the fidelity with which they have preserved the Prakrit forms. Those of the first and second persons run parallel to one another, and have four fundamental forms, namely, the nominatives and the obliques in both numbers. The genitive is a possessive pro noun, and, as in the noun, is adjectival in form. Main, &quot;I,&quot; is derived by Trumpp from the Prakrit mam, the accusative of aham ; but it seems more probable that it is, as Beames shows, the instru mental maim of the Prakrit, and =S. mayd. In the genitive me- rd, &quot;my,&quot; the affix rd added to the Prk. base me is, there can be little doubt, connected with the affix kd, used in forming the geni tive of nouns ; the form kard, by elision of k would naturally yield rd, which we may observe is the genitive affix of nouns also in the Marwari dialect of Hindi. The oblique form mujh is derived from the Prakrit mnjjha, one of the forms of the genitive. The dative- ace, mujhe of the modern Hindi is formed by adding e to mujh, this e being the usual sign of the oblique in nouns. Ham, &quot;we,&quot; = Prk. amhe by transposition of h. This is now commonly used as the oblique form of the plural (e.g., ham-ko, ham-par) ; but the oblique hamoh, = Prk. gen. plur. amhdnam, is also to be met with. 1 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1872, pt. 1, p. 174 et seq. 2 Ibid, p. 124.