Page:Gurujadalu English.djvu/326

 :4) Morris’ grammar of the Telugu language (Trubner’s simplified grammars edited by Rost 1890 pp.64., 75, 89, 91)
 * 5) Rev. A. Ricoaz. An abridgement of the Telugu grammar for the use of schools (1869) pp.4.6-54)
 * 6) A short grammar of the Telugu language Maddali Lakshmi Narasayya, 1870, Madras Civil Engineering College papers (pp. 30-41)
 * 7) Caldwell’s comparative grammar of the Dravidian languages. (Second edition p.396)
 * 8) Linguistic survey of India Vol.IV Drs. Grierson and Sten Konow (p.589)
 * 9) Telugu philology by the late Prof. Seshagiri Sastri, verbs p.32.

22. The present participle in tu or utu has a very respectable pedigree. It has its sisters in the oldest cultivated Dravidian languages in (1) utu and nine variants of it in old Canarese, of which Mr. Kittel considers utu as the primitive form (vide Kittel’s grammar, page 109 para 173), and (2) in Tamil ttu the suffix of the adverbial participle (strong form). A present participial particle t or its voiced form d is found in several Dravidian languages pointing to its probable existence in the parent Dravidian. It is possible that in Telugu the current particle tu and the archaic particle chu or more correctly tsu, belonged to different dialects and had independent existence. The statement often made by writers of the Old school that cuffent forms are corruptions of literary forms is unsupported. In Tamil and Malayalam the particles tt and chch live side by side in the high and lower dialects. Dr. Grierson says, “In Vulgar Tamil and in Malayalam chch almost always coffesponds to tt in high Tamil after i and ei” (Lingustic survey Vol. IV p. 289).