________________
82
Amrita
Mārkandeya who takes it as developing out of y in a conjunct. It is quite probable that in such stray cases Apabhramśa has kept a genuine popular element, the mode of pronouncing some words with an intruding r current among the illiterate people. In Marāthi we actually find village folk pronouncing the word dusta as drusta and a similar habit may be at the basis of Apabhramśa.
Finally we come to the most important problem about these forms, their relation to other forms of these words which show either the full vocalisation of r or the normal assimilation of r-groups. These latter predominate even in Mahāpurāna and are exclusively found in the majority of Apabhramśa works. They are normally so represented in the Prākrits as well. Two explanations are possible and both are put forth by scholars. The forms. with r-groups may be regarded as indicating a dialectal and regional feature as is done by Dr. Upadhye or they may be thought to represent an older phase of growth, thus suggesting the earlier and archaic form of the language as compared to the other forms current in the younger form of the same language. This is the view of Dr. Jacobi. Dr. Alsdorf has further suggested that these forms with r and r-groups also indicate a phase of growth which is even earlier than the normal forms of Prākrits and in this respect at least, the latest stage of MIA. is more archaic than the earlier dialects.
With the above evidence before us the following facts become clear and help us in deciding which of these suggestions is most acceptable. Firstly we have now forms which preserve these sounds side by side with others which assimilate the groups in the same literary work. This will certainly go to exclude the possibility of regarding them as dialectal and regional in origin. It is possible to imagine that a grammarian like Hemacandra may have formulated his role of the language by taking into consideration all available literature, in which finer dialectal differences were neglected, and thus laying down rules applicable to different dialects side by side. But it is quite inconceivable that a poet writing a literary composition remaining in one place, can make use of forms from two different dialects, without apparent reason. That the same dialect can preserve both types of forms side by side should become evident from the Girnar version of Asokan inscriptions and the literary Pāli.
The second fact about these forms to be noted is that in nearly all cases the conjuncts are of a different nature than those of Sanskrit and even of Middle Indo-Aryan, where they are preserved. This difference becomes