Indian Antiquary Vol 46

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 315

DECEMBER, 1917]
THE WIDE SOUND OF E ANDO
301
Glancing through the selected specimens from 0. W. Rajasthani texts given as an Appendix to Dr. Tessitori's Notes on the Grammar of the O. W. Rajasthani (pp. 100-106). I find and written throughout as x and and not as 2 and ; e.g., 747 (at three places), 273, ATTAT, w ar, TSE, IT, fe, TÁT, 73, all this in contrast to groft (at five places at p. 103, and at one place at p. 105), only in one place we see TETTE (p. 104), STOK (p. 100), stras (p. 103), T (p. 104), where evilently the represents itself and not (The in niat at p. 101, line 7, is of a different kind; it stands for 7 in 1975, passive form, Prakrits , Sanskrit fiya; and is therefore not to be counted in this connection.)
This much about the 0. W. Rajasthani MSS. As regards old Måravåại, the specimen given by Dr. Tessitori from the "Song of Jasavanta Sonigaro" has MET where that would have surely been expected.
I need not multiply instances. But the above instances will be enough to show that, instead of possessing a tendency to write - for (-3, the works disclose a well-established practice of writing and 3, and only in particular cases and conditions did they write a and for and these conditions being nothing but the fact of actual phonetio change into and . The very fact that only in certain words such as TC, patrí and the like the is emphasized would show that the anti-samprasarana process had already commenced in their case, and if बइठउ is seen side by side with बयठत, पइठट, it is only because the process was in a stage of beginning and not quite settled down; for changes in a language cannot proceed on regular lines of uniform march; some forms will linger, some progress, go backwards and forwards, till a final settled state is reached. Whatever may be the case, the isolated instances of a cannot be set down as the result of a tendency to write
for p in the face of so many instances of words with written in them. In his “ Notes," $4, (5) Dr. Tessitori refers to the writing of 2 for , in a particular MS. (F. 722), and infers that it is a mere writing peculiarity of the MS. The instances contain **, ZH and the like. These are exactly the representatives of the pronunciation in Gujarati at present (alternatively with an, etc.). If so, why could it not have been the case of actual change then ?
9 VaitAla-panchavisi (V. S. 1629) gives a luxuriant crop of and rarely, very rarely, (as only in Cases like 8 (p. 136), L (p. 100), T TT (p. 104), TT (p. 104), r a (p. 88); which are all explained above). It has also 3 (p. 174) and 5 (p. 173), which fact is also explained above. Only in two cases we find abnormal य:-जायस for जाहारी (p. 132) and जायछा for जााछा (p. 111). These two isolated instances in the midst of an extremely large number of instances of cannot prove a tendency to write for . We have to remember that we are to detect & general current out of a Lewildering variety of manifestations resulting partly from (a) the habit of scribes tampering with genuine forms, and partly from (b) the fact that word: Assume different changes even during the same period. An instance of the former condition is seen in Bhålapa's Kadambari where, instead of the expected (which is written only in mare exceptions) we find the TS and of type almost invari. ably. We need not wonder at it when we remember that the oldest oopy belongs to the last quarter of the 17th century of the Vikrama era, wherein this type was prominent and extensively used, although it began earlier. Take only one instance :
केशवाली चित्रवी दीसिछि प्रमाण
(P. 56, 1. 16.) Here Afefe gives a great metrical deficiency, whereas fters would fill the metrical measuro properly.
er at p. 6.1.19, is a rare exception, but it betrays the seribe who evidently forgot to turn it into it .