Page:The Indian Antiquary Vol 1.pdf/127

 103

ON HINDI.

APRIL 5, 1872.] Kuralneriya näl Védam Kūpitum kānāta Parama rakasyattei Pärpat’—Ekkālam 2 Túriyin min pèl Sulandru, manam vádámal, Ariyanei tedi Adipanivat'—Ekkālam 2 Penninallár asei Pirameithanei vitt'olintu,

Kunnirundu màdi, Kalant'iruppat'—Ekkālam 2

When, ah when, Though I the Vedas four may hoarsely” shout, The secret of the heavens shall I find out?

When, ah when Shall this poor soul, within this body set Disquieted like fish within a net, Find the true Priest, and offer as is meet Perpetual homage to his sacred feet. When, ah when, Will all my carnal lusts have utter end, And I, with eyelids dropt, to heaven ascend, And with God's being my own being blend. -

ON THE NON-ARYAN ELEMENT IN HINDI SPEECH. By F. S. GROWSE, M.A., OXON, B.C.S. -

The precise character of the relationship which connects the modern Braj Bhāshā with the ancient Sanskrit of the Vedas and the medi

aval Prākrits of the classic dramatists, and how far its vocabulary has been adulterated by the introduction of a foreign element, are matters regarding which a considerable diversity of opinion still exists among the most eminent

philologists. Lassen says:—“The few words in Prākrit which appear to be of extraneous origin can, for the most part, be traced to Sanskrit, if the investigation is pursued on right principles,” an opinion which Colebrooke has stated in equal

ly emphatic terms by declaring that “nine tenths of the Hindi dialect may be traced back to the Sanskrit.” On the other hand, a third writer maintains that “the line taken by Pro

fessor Lassen of treating all Prākrit words as necessarily modifications of Sanskrit words is one which he has borrowed whole from Vara

ruchi and Hemachandra, and however excusable in those ancient commentators seems unworthy

of an age of critical research.” Dr. Muir, in the second volume of his Original Sanskrit Terts, republished within the last few months, holds, as is usual with that most impartial of critics, a middle course between the two ex

treme views. He says:—“Lassen may not un

der-rate the number of purely

indigenous words

in the Prākrits, as they are exhibited in the

dramas, polished

compositions written by Pan

ºils, men familiar with Sanskrit ; but his re

"arks are not certainly correct if applied to the from the Sanskrit, and which must have come "h to them from the vernacular Prākrits, are
 * dern vernaculars, in which words not derived
 * y numerous.” For my own part, a resident

of Braj, and writing of the Braj Bhāshā, the typical form of modern Hindi, which I hear spoken about me, I discover every day stronger arguments for agreeing to the very full both with Lassen and the

ancient commentators.

The maxim “stare super antiquas vias' is one which has often proved sound in application,

and is never rashly to be discarded. After a lapse of 1800 years the sūtras of Vararuchi, if rightly handled, seem to me as accurate an ex ponent of the variations from classic form which

characterise the modern dialect as they were of the peculiarities of the vulgar speech at the time when they were first enuntiated. No more satisfactory proof could be desired of the essen tial identity of the Indian vernacular from its Vedic birth to its present rustic degradation. Out of Sanskrit arose the Pāli, from that the

Sauraseni Prākrit, and from that again the Braj Bhāshā; each supplanting its predecessor so imperceptibly that neither contemporaries were conscious of the transition, nor can critics

at the present day determine its period. I specially omit from the above table of de scent the language of the Buddhist Gāthas, which

appears to be entirely exceptional. Used by the early teachers of Buddhism, men for the most part sprung from the lower orders of the people, it is described by Bābu Rājendralāla Mitra, who is of all men best competent to speak on the subject, as differing from the Sanskrit more in its neglect of the grammatical rules of the latter than from inherent peculiarities of its own: “it professes to be Sanskrit, and yet does not conform to its rules.” A fitting and indeed a

singularly close parallel to such a style is afforded by the barbarous Latin of some of the mediaeval


 * Literally—“Shout till I strain my throat.”