________________
284
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[NOVEMBER, 1878.
of Malayalma poetry is in fact a mixture of Sang. kṣit, generally pure, with Sěn and Kodun Tamil.
In this verse not only the laws, but even the licenses, of Tamil metre are observed. It belongs to the Alavadi or Kaliviruttam of Tamil prosody, and its common measure is four feet, thus expressed by the usual marks (-u -- --Vu - vu), the first syllable in the first, second, and fourth lvot, and the two long syllables in the third foot, being at pleasure resolvable each into two short. This rule is strictly observed in this verse, the first syllable of the fourth foot being resolved in every line, as are the first syllable of the third foot in the second line and the first syllable of the second foot in the third and fourth lines; in translating into Tamil I have followed not only the law of this species of verse, but have been able to preserve even the quantity of the syllables, except in the third foot of the last line, where a syllable is resolved, though not so in the Malay&lma. According to the strict laws of Tamil prosody, tho fourth syllable in the third foot of the second line (bahundsatte) ought to be long, being preceded by a long syllable and followed by a double consonant; for a similar reason every syllable in the fourth foot of the last verse (vannikkunnen) ought also to be long, but in the several species of verse classed under the general term Viruttam it is an allowed license to shorten such syllables when followed by double consonants or a nasal and consonant of the same class; this license the Malayalma also assumes, and it is retained, therefore, in the same places in the translation. The rules by which the length and shortness of syllables and initial rhyme are governed are the same in both dialects.
In rendering this verse into Tamil the second term of the last line (mama) has been omitted; this term is the sixth or genitive case of the
* This profuse intermixture of the grammatical forms of the Sanskrit in the higher order of MalayAlma composition would seem to have led certain recent Italian writers into strange misconceptions. Though one of them, Paulinus St. Bartholomeo, has composed a Grammar of the Sangkrit, he does not seem quite clear that there is any radical distinction between what he calls the lingua Sanscreda. mico-malabarica, and the Samscredamica (vide 16 and following pages of the Preface to the sidharubam); and the author of the introduction to the Alphabetum Gran. donico-Malabaricum sive Samscrudonicum, by which he means the Arya character of the Malayalma, though he be sadly puzzled to discover whether the Samscrudonica lingua be the mother of the Grandonica, or vice versd. (vide p. 6, sec. VI)., expressly says (p. 10, sec. X.):-" Lingua igitur vulgaris Malabarica, es nempe quæ usurpatior a Gentibus littoria Malabarici insolis, a Promontorio Comorino que ad montem Deli prope Regnum Canara, nil nisi dialectus ent Sansorydonicee Lingum." From his invariably giving to Sanskrit words Tamil terminations, and from his distinguishing three dialecte, Grandonica, Samserudonica, and Mala. barica, it might be conceived that be applied the second epithet to the metric langaage of Malayalma, but he does away with this distinction by stating it his opinion that the Grandonica and Samscrudonica may be the same (see p. r.). I cannot, however, conclude this note without making
pronoun of the first person in Sanskrit, and cannot be used in Tamil, as declined or conjugated forms from the Sanskřit are not admissible into that language. They are not admissible, also, in Malayalma prose, but in verse they are often used with such profusion as to give it the appearance of that fanciful species of composition called in Sanskrit Mani-pravdlam, and in English 'maccaronic verse,' rather than the sober dress of grammatical language : often, indeed, the whole verse is pure Sanskrit, connected or concluded by a few words of Malayalma.' The following stanzas will exemplify these peculiarities : in the two first the grammatical forms of the Sanskrit are intermixed with terms of Sanskrit and Tamil derivation; in the last nearly all the terms are Sangkrit. A stanza from the Vyavahára Samudra : &
treatise on law. Attipôrky nfrang' oruvanôd'oruvan janmam kam
digâyẩm Drishțanmar Apu pêr und alukiya vidhi yěnnu
kôlppundu sastram Sajjâti bandhu putran narapati likhitan tatra sam
bandhi Yěnn'ittham chõllullavar Oliga kollola dh&tri
channam. "At the place where one takes from another the Janmam, or proprietary right in the soil, by the water of the Attipêru obligation,
"The prescribed law is, that, according to an excellent rule, six descriptions of persons should be present;
"People of pure caste, relations, a son, the prince, a scribe, and persons connected with the parties;
"Unless such as are here mentioned be present, a portion of land must not be purchased." an attempt to relieve one of the writers I have mentioned, Paulinus, from the consequences of a note to one of the articles of the Asiatic Researches (see "Dissertation on the Language and Literature of the Indo-Chinese Nations)." In the general intent of this note, and in the facts it states, I agree: but I much doubt whether Paulinus is to blame for the substitution of the Tamil termination " al in his Sanscrit Grammar, in the place of the regular Sanskrit affix at," or whether this be anything more than a typogra. phical error. It is shown in this note that this sobatitation, l for t, takes place in many other instances wherein Paulinas could not have been misled by the resemblance of the vernacular dialect, and I have had occasion to remark that it is universal in all works printed in the Arya character at the Propaganda press. In this character the mute l and t resemble each other so nearly that it is not at all surprising that they should be mistaken by a compositor ignorant of the language; but the fact would ra. ther appear to be that the fount was without the latter letter. The work of Paulinus to which I refer is the Sidharubam, seu grammatica Samscredamica, in which Sanskrit terms are written in the Aryam character only, not in the Latin, and in which the substitution noticed in. variably takes place; I have never seen his other work, Vyakarana, &c. referred to in the text of this dissertation, (see Note D. infra, p. 287.)
whether the same, though hem
Hec. Vhother of the
