Indian Antiquary Vol 47

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

Page 46

42
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
(FEBRUARY, 1918
We notice here 4 changed to sf in (2) Tir and 373 changed to in (3) T; in the latter case the of 35 is so subordinate and so very predominant that, instead of the two uniting into a narrow it, the sy is lost and T+ remain as T in T.28 The following lines in Kanhadade Prabandha (V. S. 1512) will show the place of both tea and to in old Western Rajasthani : कोठे छड कोसीस घणां 29 गूखगवाख मढ मतवारणां
(Khanda III, st. 245.
III-*9
59
(Apabhramba) (O.W.R.)
(O.W.R.) 59
*49 (O.W.R.)
*T (Guj.) Here also the results, and kit, are as in Ter ( ) and write the only difference being that, while the in Te is long, that in 37 is short, and yet somehow occupies a prominence which ousts the off.
We may also contrast-चोलावत, चंशवत, etc., which contain वत as the final evolute of पत्र through पुत्त, उत्त,30 with गुहिलोत from गुहिलपत्र, गहिल उत्त: the point of contrast being that, in the latter case the 33 unites into a narrow it because of the strong 3, while in the former the strength is more than counteracted by the long stt preceding it, and hence the change into .
It may be objected : Is not this fixing of the accent an arbitrary procedure? What is the guide for fixing it? Does it not amount to begging the question when you fix the accent on the 37 or on the 3 (or 2-) according as the resulting sound is wide or narrow ? My answer to the first and last question is-No, and to the second question the answer is furnished in the reason I shall just give for this answer in the negative. We have the guide and the test in certain instances where the accent is obvious and undisputable, e. g., घईर, चित्तऊड, अवयव, अंधवार, चउब्वेई, कसवाहिआ, पण्णवल्ली, खऊड, गुहिल उत्त, भाउजाई, पाबदल, and the like ; and in the light of these we detect the location of the accent in the other cases, always with good reason for the same. In this subsequent process if the method appears to be a priori, it has a justification and is not the same as begging the question ; for the test indications have already disclosed to us the governing principle, and we trace it backwards
The is extraordinarily subordinate in this case because it is in the initial syllable, and hence unsupported by a preceding syllable, and so it becomes are. In the case of Tre the accent on gets lost when it becomes shortened, and hence the 1 of 2 gets accented.
Of course, the fact is that when people are inclined towards subordinating overmuch it becomes lost, and in the opposite case it acquires emphasis. Karmana Mantri's Slidharaña (V. S. 1626) also has to and Tour in juxtaposition : ger, Tare, ATT
T ; (Description of Ayodhy&). (This double-barrellod word must have been a conventional expression, it seems. )
Vimala prabandha (V. S. 1568) has T with a short 3. (See Khanda I, st. 55.) 30 The becomes TT by prati-va praadrana in these cases. I do not believe that becomes JM and thus 41; for in the case of great the steps are ge- (not TT, TT, 34).