Proceedings of the Seminar on Prakrit Studies 1973

SR No.: 014005
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K R Chandra, Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 226
Language: English
Classification: Seminar & Articles
File Size: 13 MB

Page 134

93
1. as a neuter stem, ati-ri ati-rai (by 1.2.47 ); and 2. reduplicated forms like piprese or jiheda ( by 7.4.59 ).
3. Although govinda ( attested in the Mahabharata 1.91.11, 5.68.12-13) as “ winner of cows ” is derived out of go- and vind- by Kty (3.1.138.2), it is suspected by Bohtlingle and Roth ( PW 2.816 ) to have developed out of gopendra “ the chief herdsman” (through *go pinda ). Or is it, as V.P. Limaye suggests, 16.1 connected with govindū- of RV 9.96.19 or with vindufrom-vindur icchuḥ of P 3.2.169 ?
(b) ofau > 417
By the same rule (1.1.48 ), P sanctions this kind of “ shortening ”. So we get :
1. as neuter stems, upa-gu < upa-go or ati-nu < ati-nau ( 1.2.47 );
2. forms like dyi-gu at 2.1.23, tişthad-gu at 2.1.17, citra-gu etc. (all by 1.2.48 ); and
3. reduplicated forms like dudhauke or u-v-okha ( 7.4.59 ).
(C-1) It was pointed out by some to Ptj that the followers of the Satyamugri and Rānāyaniya schools among Samavedins uttered è and , and hence they deserved to be accepted as the short counterparts of e and o respectively; they were again more homorganic (sasthanatara) than i and u which were enjoyed by P ( 1.1.48 ), and so better satisfied P's condition for a substitute (1.1.50 ) to be the closest possible to the original linguistic Item. Now, although Ptj answers this by saying that it was merely a stylistic peculiarity on the part of the reciters and that an ě or an > was not to be expected either in the Vedic or in the secular speech, yet it appears that there was this tendency in the pronunciation of a section of speakers at the time. We know this was a peculiarity of the Prakrit phonology.18
(c-2) ai > e; au > 018.1
Keith suspects the working of this phenomenon 18.2 in the eastern placenames allowed as correct by P (1.1.75 ), such as enipacaniya, bhojalafiya and gonardiya ( supplied by the Kašika ), side by side with forms normally showing ai and au by his other rules (1.1.73, 4.2.114 ).
(d) ! > 219
1. P has noted this in reduplicated forms (7.4.66) as in cakre, vavyte etc.
2. Ptj has noted (1.259.14 ) the popular pronunciation of v krs- askas(e) ! > 120