________________
250
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ DECEMBER, 1914.
with pp and with It occur already in Prakrit (See Pischel, $ 401). The meaning Hemacandra ascribes to tanai is that of sambandhin "Belonging or related to " (Siddh., iv, 422, 20), und such a meaning is quite in accordance with appa aü, which Hemacandra explains as an adeça of atmiya (Siddh., iv, 422,4). In the two examples of the use of taraü, which are evidenced by Hemacandra, viz. :
imu kulu tuha-lanau" This family [is] belonging to thee" (Siddh., iv, 361), and :
bhagga amhaha ta á "Ours are defeated " (Siddh., iv, 381, 2), it is plain that tanaü has the sense of " One's own," and, if we were to translate the two examples above into Sanskrit, we ought to render tanaü by * almanaka or åtmiya. Observe that in the latter example land is used substantively, a construction which is likewise common to Sanskrit atmiya and to its equivalents eva, svaka, etc.
The postposition tanai is largely used in poetry and in a few old texts in prose also. Ex: caritra sunya tasu-tana "His deeds have been heard of "(P. 364), deva-tani kusuma-tani vrsti" The raining of flowers of the gods” (Kal. 20), ghuya la-tanaü çiçu" The young of the owl” (Kal. 3), mai-tanai mani" In the mind of the mother" (Ratn. 109), ghcda-tania phoja“ A troup of horses "(kanh. 46), deva-tanai prasadi" In the temple of the god " (Kanh. 87), hi eha-tanaü nahi "I [am] not belonging to her" (Dac. i, 10).
(5) nai (nu) cannot be explained as a curtailment of tanaú, for medial of Apabhramça never changes to n in Old Western Rajasthani, but it is congener of the postposition nal of the dative, which has been shown above to be a curtailment of kanhal. Whether there ever existed a genitive postposition * kanhai, whereof naü would be the regular curtailment, or naü was directly formed from nai it cannot be ascertained to-day, but I am strongly inclined in favour of the latter alternative, which is supported by the considerations following:
(a) It is not very likely that, whilst kanhal survived long after nal had become of general use, *kanhaü should have died out so early as not to leave the least trace of itself in the Old Western Rajasthani materials that have been preserved to us;
(6) The absence of the genitive postposition naü in Mârwa!f, where both kanhai and nat have survived up to the present day, is perhaps a sign that the use of the former postposition is not so old as that of the two latter, and therefore nai has derived from nat;
(c) In the MS. Adi C. occasional instances occur of nal used in the sense of naü as an uninflected postposition of the genitive, as :
e bhagavanta-nal teramaü bhava "This [is] the thirteenth existence of the Venerable one." Now, it is very likely that such an employment of nal is a survival of an old practice of forming the genitive by means of a postposition of the dative (of. the use of rahal as a postposition of the genitive), and if so it is plain that naü has been formed from nal simply by making the latter capable of agreeing with the noun, on which it was depending.
In most of the Old Western Rajasthani texts I have seen, nai is by far the commonest postposition of the genitive. In poetry, however, tanaü is likewise frequent and it is freely used by the side of nai, generally undiscriminately, though in many cases it seems that tanaü still retains its original meaning of "Related or belonging to," and so naü its own meaning of " Situated near to, or proceeding from". The only prose texts, in which tarai and naü are
