________________
APRIL, 1874.]
PROSODICAL PECULIARITIES OF CHAND..
105
हाड कृपाल हस्तिनी।।
Or again, ibidem, Bhujangi 5, 24:
does not keep pace with pronunciation, and that तिन की उचिष्टी कुविचंदु भयी।।
while the pronunciation of a word is modified,
it still continues to be written exactly as it So again, Revátaţa Kavitta 3, 7:
used to be written when it was pronounced
differently; as, e. g., we write in English love -Uv-UUUU If this line were scanned thus, hör kripali
but pronounce lov (German liebe); we write hāstini ll, we should have an amphibrach in the
night but say nite (German nacht). We shall see, second foot, which the metre does not admit. 2,
further on, that this principle affords us a solvent there would be 12 instants altogether, while the
also of some other peculiarities of Chand. metre has only 1l instants in the odd hemistichs.
For fete in the first-cited example Chand pro3, the final would be a long syllable, instead of, as
bably read it, a slight modification of the the metre demands, a short one. On the other
Prakrit afts; from the modern Hindi this hand, as I shall presently show, two short sylla
Prakritic form has disappeared, and is replaced bles at the end are often contracted by Chand
by the Sanskrit T uchchlishta Il. into one long one; that is, हस्तिनी stands for हस्ति
I now proceed to notice a few anomalies peनिय (Prak. हस्थिणिआ, for हस्तिनिका); and the syl
culiar to the stanza called kavitta. This stanza lable hast is evidently treated as a short one;
is a combination of two different verses, viz. the and thus, if we read hõi krīpala hustinãt, the line kávya and the ullal. The verse called kávya is quite regular as regards number of instants, consists of two distichs, with 24 instants in each kind of feet, and quantity of termination.
line, and with a panse after the 11th instant, Again, take Revátaţa Kantha-sobhA 32, 15:- which divides each line into two hemistichs,
with 11 and 13 instants respectively. The मुष्क डिन पद अस्सु वुली ॥
whole line consists of five feet of 6, 4, 4, 4, 6 The kantha-sobhâ measure consists of an initial
instants respectively. It follows that the last iambus and three following anapæsts in each line.
syllable of the odd hemistichs must be always The initial iambus may be obtained by sup
a short syllable, and the third foot of the whole pressing the final vowel är of musli, and
line must be either an amphibrach ( - ) or assuming that + does not produce posi.
an anapæst (U--> or a proceleusmatic (vvu); tional length. It appears to me that this verse
generally it is an amphibrach. On the other possibly affords us a clue to the explanation of hand, the second and fourth foot of the whole this strange phenomenon that and in com- line may not be an amphibrach. The verse position with another consonant do not make called ullal consists of one distich of 28 inpositional length. The modern word for To is stants in each line, and win a pause after the fit müh; probably Chand already spoke , 15th instant, which divides each line into two though he continued to write . Now, as has hemistichs of 15 and 13 instants respectively. been already observed, , like the other semi- The whole line consists of 7 feet of 4, 4, 4, 3, 6, vowels, has not necessarily the effect of making 4, 3 instants respectively. The first, the third, positional length. Similarly we may suppose and the sixth foot may not be an amphibrach, that also in the other case, where a sibilant in the second foot may not be a dactyl, but is alcomposition with a consonant apparently does most universally an amphibrach; and the fourth not make positional length, Chand pronounced and the seventh foot may not be a trochee. It really not a sibilant, but an aspirate, which did follows, then, that the kavitta stanza consists not constitute a double or compound consonant of three distichs of 6 lines or 12 hemistichs, in prosody. Thus, for oftair Chand probably | of which latter all even ones have 13 instants, read fat, or, what is more natural and while of the old ones the first four have 11 consonant to phonetic rules, ferait, though he instants, and the two last 15 instants. These continued to write fair. Now let it be remem- are the ordinary rules of the Kavitta, to which bered that the modern Hindi is teröit, and the Chand, in the majority of cases, conforms. Prakrit perat; and we shall probably be correct Not unfrequently, however, he adds 3 instants in concluding that the principle which under- to one or several of the first four odd hemistichs, lies these phenomena is simply that which is which should have only 11 instants, and thas also observed in other languages, that writing makes anomalous, redundant hemistichs of
