________________
124
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[May, 1964
The state of affairs in Munda is quite different. Here we find the difference of nouns denoting animate beings and inanimate objects, quite a different system of classification, pervading the whole grammatical system. The plural, however, is formed by means of the same suffixes in both classes. There are no different forms used to denote the masculine and feminine genders. Couplets such as kora, boy; kusi, girl, are formed under Aryan influence.
Dravidian languages have two numbers, the singular and the plural. In Mundâ there is, in addition to those two, aiso a dual.
The cases are formed according to widely different principles in both classes. The Dravidian languages possess an accusative and a dative, as the cases of the direct and indirect object. In the Manda languages, on the other hand, there are no such cases. The direct and indirect objects are expressed by means of pronominal infixes in the verb. Mr. Hahn, it is true, states that the dative-suffix is practically the same in Mundári and Kurakh, viz., ke and ge, respectively. Now there are in fact some corrupt forms of Mundâri in which the Aryan suffix ké is used to denote the dative and the accusative. That is, however, only the case where the language has come so much under Aryan influence that it begins to abandon the most characteristic Munda features. Mr. Hahn was probably not aware of this fact. Bis study of Manda dialects has apparently been limited to Nottrott's Mundâri grammar, which is very far from giving a reliable account of the language. Even a philologist might have been mistaken under such circumstances.
Mr. Hahn further compares the ablative suffixes Kurukh ti and Mundârî te. The comparison does not, of course, prove anything whatever. The similarity is probably accidental. The Kurukh suffix has two forms ti and nti, and the latter is probably the original one. Compare Tamil indru. Kôrava inde, Canarest inda, &c.
The case suffixes are, in Dravidian languages, commonly added to a modified base, the 80-called oblique base, in the singular. The oblique base has various forms, and we can, with some right, distinguish different declensions according to the different additions used in order to form it. There is no such thing as an oblique base in the Munda languages, and all nouns are treated in exactly the same way.
Adjectives. - Mr. Hahn remarks that adjectives are of the same character in Kurukh and Mundari. True, but the same is for instance the case in Indo-Aryan and Tibeto-Burman languages. Most agglutinating languages form their adjectives in the same way, and correspondence in that respect cannot seriously be urged as a test of philological connexion.
Numerals. - There is no connexion between the numerals in both families. Mr. Hahn, it is true, compares Mundâ mit', moyat', one, with Kurukh mundid, first. Compare Tamil mudal, Telagu modaļa, first. The comparison is, however, based on insufficient knowledge of the nature of the Munda semi-consonants. It is of conrse quite possible that some word for "first," "beginning," might be common to Dravidas and Mundâs. Even in that case, however, it would be rash to infer a common origin for the languages of both. They must have had intercourse with each other from a very ancient date, and must certainly have borrowed from each other.
Higher numbers are formed in a different way in both families. The Dravidas count in tens; the Mundas in twenties.
Pronouns. - Also the pronouns differ in most points. Attention has often been drawn to the fact that both families possess a double set of the plural of the personal pronoun of the first person, one including, and one excluding the party addressed. I have already pointed out in another paper (see above, Vol. XXXII. p. 458) that the state of affairs in Dravidian languages points to the conclusion that the Dravidas may have adopted this grammatical feature from without, i. c. probably from the Mundas. Even if the double set originally belongs to both
