Amrita Collected Papers by A M Ghatage

SR No.: 006968
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Ahmedabad
Total Pages: 530
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 10 MB

Page 303

294
Amrita
-ěs, -os) o and e (of original diphthongal nature) all written as long but pronounced short before a..
Oldenberg has advanced very cogent arguments to reject this suggestion of Bloomfield. He points out that besides the improbability of preserving the original short values of -ě and -o in such circumstances, the theory make too great a use of graphic confusion at this early period of language to make it probable. After a close examination of the facts of the case, he himself has arrived at a different conclusion. He starts with the undoubted supposition that the metrical value of the final -e and -o in all such cases, is short, and proceeds to point out that in case of original long ē, 7 the sandhi was a-y, a-v before vowels other than a., and as in the case of the long diphthongs, the hiatus was left after the loss of the final y, v. Nothing is more natural than to suppose that the same sandhi was originally observed even before a- thus giving rise to -a a- and -a a- and later on for -(from -as) a- to -as a -as well. This will explain the short value of the final syllable in all cases where both syllables are kept apart. Now remains the question of explaining the use of 7 and 7 in place of -ay, -av and -as, when they are followed by a- but not when other vowels follow. Here Oldenberg's argument gets a little confused, but he appears to suggest that the abhinihita sandhi, which is found in a few cases in the RV. itself, must have influenced these cases also. The crasis of -e+a- etc. over -ay+a- etc. is proportionately as frequent as the other of -e+i- or -0+u- over -ay-ti and -as+u-, and the presence of y and v may have coloured the quality of the preceding vowel resulting into -e- and -o- with a double crasis. This usage in turn, must have affected the other group where both the vowels are kept. Why the redactors preserved the two syllables here and did not do so in many other cases like ata or i+a, cannot be made out. It is thus clear that Oldenberg regards that the phonetic value of the finals in the cases showing absence of the abhinihita sandhi was only -a, which was originally followed by a sound corresponding to the spiritus lenis in cases of -ay and -av and some kind of glottal stop in case of -as, which prevented further crasis.
Wackernagel has virtually accepted the phonetic value -a a- assigned to them by Oldenberg, but he differs from him in two minor points. Against Oldenberg, he explains the writing of e and o for the regular a by supposing that the form before the consonants was used before a as well, and it soondeveloped into the classical sandhi, which later influenced the writing of the Veda. He points out that the reduced coefficients y, v of the original diphthongs ē, 7 could not give the timbre of e and o to the original a, as this