Dictionary of Prakrit for Jain Literature Vol 01 Fasc 01

Author(s): A M Ghatage
Publisher: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

Page 16

(*7)
division of the bigger family. A language grows and assumes different forms, and each one of them may further repeat the same process. Thus we can well speak of the genealogy of a language with its nearer and distant relations, provided we remember that this is, after all, a figurative way of expression.
2. Indo-Aryan Languages
The Indo-Aryan languages (so called to emphasise the fact that they are of Aryan descent and belong to India, so as to be distinguished from other languages of Non-Aryan descent of the country and from Aryan languages current outside Irdia) belong to the Indo-European (IE.) family (possibly itself forming a branch of an older family with Hittite). which includes other groups like the Hellenic, Italic, Keltic, Germanic, Slavic etc. They form an important branch of the Aryan group along with the Iranian branch with the inclusion of a possible intermediate group called Dardic. In the Indo-Iranian group itself the two main branches differ from each other more on account of innovations and rapid changes on the side of the Iranian larguages than on the part of the Indo-Aryan group which on the whole shows itself more conservative.
The changes on the Indo-Aryan side, though less radical, are of greater importance to us. They include the change of as and au to e and o (Sk. véda Av. veda, Sk roáyati Av. raocayeiti); of ai and au into as and au; the change of palatal z, zh into j, h Sk. yajute Av. yazuite, Sk hásta Av. zasta); the loss of voiced sibilants like z. ž (Sk néchstha Av. nazdišta Sk. duruklám Av dužūxtum); the creation of a new series of retroflex sounds including the nasal and the sibilant $; the creation of groups like cch and ks from various earlier groups. In morphology we have the form náma 1st per. pro Gen. sing. for mana of Avesta; the roct brito speak for the original mru and many analogical forms like the 1st per. act. thematic ending 12. The two branches also differ in the treatment cfr (Sk. sakit Av. hak rat) and in the grade of the termination of the medial present part. (weak in Av. mna: bura mna, strong in Sk. -māna, bháramāņa).
While most of these early stages are reconstructed with the help of the comparative method we are on more secure ground when we enter the history of the IA. languages. From Rgveda (RV.) onwards we have a mass of documentary evidence marking the different stages in the growth of these languages. But the evidence is of varying value. Based on broad considerations, it is customary to divide the history of these languages into three stages, which are not strictly chro
nological in view of the fact that languages of the earlier stage continued to be artificially cultivated after they bad become purely literary idioms. Thus we speak of the OIA. or Sanskrit, the MIA. or Prakrit and the NIA. or the stage of the modern languages. The OIA. includes the Vedic language (wherein we can distinguish the language of RV. and of the other Samhitas), the Classical Sanskrit (of Panini-Patanjali), the Epic language (of the Mahabharata and the Rāmāyaṇa), the Sanskrit of the Jains and Budhists and what we can infer about the spoken idioms of those days. The whole of this group derives its unity more on account of a rigid and well defined phonetic pattern to be adhered to, than common morphological structure, which on the contrary, shows a steady process of growth and simpli. fication. This is strongly brought out by the attempts of later writers at hypersanskritisation and the use of such foreign words only as are in agreement with the Sanskrit phonetic system. Even then each one of these speeches has its own features which distinguish it from the others Naturally the majority of them are grammatical as distinct from phonological.
The MIA. group includes a number of languages and ming the next stage in the growth of the Indo-Aryan. dialects, all showing a strong family likeness and forThese languages can be arranged into different groups according to the purpose for which they were used (those used for religious preaching and those for secular literature like dramas. epics ard popular tales), according to locality of the dialects on which they are based (those of the North, of the Midland, of the East and South), according to the form in which they are preserved for us (as literary, inscriptional and on other monuments like coins and idols) and chronological according to the more or less archaic or developed forms shown by them. Each one of these classifications bas its value and helps us in judging the linguistic nature of the Prakrits in the form in which we now possess them. We can see how the use of Mähäräṣṭrī for the composition of songs and lyrics and writing long epics making use of Yamakas and other tours-de-force, is partly responsible for the form in which we find it. The use of Sauraseni and Magadhi with their sub-dialects and rarely Ardha-Magadhi and Paisaci (?) in the dramas side by side with Sanskrit has led to the effacement of finer dialectical differences and some overlappings between them. The inscriptional Prakrits are influenced to some extent by the form of writing in which the gemination of the consonants (length) remains unmarked and the order of the members of consonant-groups remains uncertain, Even the treatment of these Pra