________________
338
Amrita
10
ē or e o oro
au
10
If we state the changes in a phonemic form we get:
OLA
/ai/ Māu/ /ai/
MIA /e/ 70/ /e/ /0/
/au/
What has happened is clear. The phonetic pattern of the OIA has been shifted to the earlier stage much nearer to the I-I of the traditional view. Naturally there is a greater gap between it and the system of the MIA. This is so because the phonemic analysis tries to reveal the system or the structure of a language which is sometimes better represented by an earlier or a later stage in its actual history. It thus implies some amount of shift in the stage in the course of history of the language which is likely to make the understanding of the gradual change difficult.
A similar result follows a comparison of the two vowel systems of the OIA and MIA if we trace the development of each vowel separately. In phonemic terms: OIA
ΜΙΑ -/i/
-/u/
/u/— lū
-/a/
//
-
/a/ lā/ /ai/y /āi/ /au/
//
lo/
lus
Here three types of changes are involved : long vowels have become short; short diphthongs have become monophthongs and long diphthongs have also become monophthongs phonemically of the same type.
