________________
302
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ DECEMBER, 1917
(2) Dr. Tessitori's second reason is
That O. W. Rajasthani changes to y3 invariably and it is not admissible that having begun its existence with such a change, it should retrace its steps and go back from w to wy again.
My answer is as under :
Considering the comparatively limited number of cases of sumprusd rana, is it safe, I would ask, to state that O. W. Rajasthani reduces every HT of the Aprabhramsa to ! Assuming, however, that this process is a strong fcature of the Old Western Rajasthani, does it necessarily follow that the we cannot revert to Wa? Such reversion is not unknown in linguistic development. For instance, the double ! ( ) of Apabhra mía derived from the in Sanskrit, goes back to in O. W. Rajasthani and its offspring languages, as in ws (Sans.), gouf (Apabhr.), GITT (O. W. Raj.), org (Guj.) and words of that type. Similarly an initial single of Apabhramsa, derived from the dental n in Sanskrit, goes back to the dental in 0. W. Raj. and derived languages; e.g., f (Sanskr.), 4 (Apabhr.), afo (O. W. Râj.), 7 (Guj). Take the very case of 7; Sanskrit , Prakrit
-TT came to be crystallized into **7 in Apabhramsa. (This is the real progress, although Hemachandra has found it convenient for the purposes of his plan to call a ready-made ádeia of fru. See Siddha-Hemachandra, VIII. iv. 367). This 47 has reverted to 19 (by samprasarara) in O. W. Rajasthani, as Dr. Tessitori points out. (See also Mugdhavabodha Auktika-V. S. 1450 - which has fou in nine different places at p. 3, 4, 5, 7, against four of 59 at p. 2, 7, 8.) This has again passed through a reflux, and we find 47 in Vimala-prabandha (V. S. 1568), p. 9, st. 25, also in Vaitala-panchavisi-Poem (V. S. 1619), p. 39, side by side with 14 or y also. If this be regarded as a retention of the Apabhramsa tatsama () in the 16th and 17th century literature, the same cannot be said of the 47 found frequently in still later literature and in popular duhás as in
कवण खटकाये कमाड मढी छ राणकदेवनी. The correct explanation must be found in a process of reversion which, in this case, exhibits the anti-samprasarana process.
If more instances of reversion and greeTERT combined were wanted, I would cite caret (derived from देसावर-देश+अपर) reverting to देशावर in Gujarati (the स is changed to श by the proximity of and is not to be mistaken as a sign of tatsama for the y is absent where we have )and (from which really is the result of samprasdrara of the ring from I, a potential contraction of 3) reverting to ® Guj.); and T (from Sanskrit IT)--see Vimala-prabandha, p. 146, st. 23-reverting to it in Hindi. Of course, the in
30 I have taken both these types from Dr. Tessitori's " Notes", $ 41 and $ 23. I have taken the you type with cortain reservation; for, so far as I can ascertain, the double of Sanskrit is not seen to change into the cerebral T either in Prakrit or Apabhramba; Hemachandra does not show it. But Sanskrit doable # appears as 09 (cerebral) in later Prakrit, e. g., THT (from The ). Prdkrita Paingala (Calc. Edition), p. 356, 1. 3, p. 380, 1. 4; 409T ( Sans. #T), p. 36, 1.4; also you
), y ( 2), and the like may be constructive instances in point, * first turning into w. Only in one case I find Hemachandra giving up for a constructed T: feqoft (from ait: see Si-He, VIII, ii. 79.
However, - , 9- T (Guj.), and 79-rare-ri (Guj.), 17- it-17 (Guj.), 77-74-(Guj.), -afft (Guj.), ***T-TT-TT (said spocially of a horse's place in the stable), si-
s i (9)- a (Guj.), would be good instances of reversion.
