________________
190
M. A. MEHENDALE
The name of the dialect :-PISCHEL calls it Dhakki and considers that it was spoken in Dhakka country in Eastern Bengal. This view of PISCHEL is criticised and controverted by GRIERSON in JRAS. 1913, p. 882. GRIERSON thinks that the dialect was spoken in the sakka country of the Northern Punjab. But even this is difficult to accept at present in view of the fact that the languages spoken there now share none of its special characteristics. It is indeed very difficult to identify all the different varieties of Prakrit dialects mentioned by the grammarians inasmuch as sufficient literature representing them is not found. Only the three main Prakrit dialects, viz. Māhārāştri, Sauraseni and Māgadhi can be easily distinguished from one another. The subvarieties of these share some of their characteristics and thus lie in the peripheri of these main dialects. The most important characteristic of Täkki is the preservation of the distinction of two sibilants out of the original three, Sk. ś>ś and Sk. ș, s > s. This feature may be compared with European Romani s<s, s<ś and ș, and Syrian Romani s<s and
5 PISCHEL, $ 25.
6 "Täkka or Takki is the Prakrit dialect which PISCHEL (Pr. Gr. $ 25) calls Dhakki, and which he accordingly erroneously states to be the dialect of Dhakka (Dacca) in Eastern Bengal. His sources of information were RT. quoted above, the India Office MS. of Mārkandeya, and Pșthvidhara on Mrcchakatika (STENZLER, P. v, and GODABOLE, P. 493). RT. names the dialect " Takki." The I. O. MS., which is very corrupt, has "sakka" (i, 4), "Sakki" (xvi, 1), and "Paka," "Ttaka" and "Takka" in xviii, 12. Prtvidhara, as read by STENZLER and GODABOLE, has "Dhakka" but GODABOLE gives "Takka" as a variant reading. The printed edition of MK. gives "Täkki Vibhāşa" or "Takka Apabhramsa." The confusion with Dhäkki and Sakki is easily explained by the form which the letters take in Nāgari erant, teft and gret. The correctness of the form Täkki is vouched for by Mk.'s description of it as a mixture of the speech of the Takka country with the three varieties of Apabhrarśa, all of which belong to the North-West and West, while Dhakka is far away in Eastern India. The name is given, not only by the printed edition of Mk., but also by RT., and by the v. I. of Pithyidhara quoted by GODABOLE. Prthvidhara's account of it is la- (or va-) kāraprāyā Takkavibkāşā sanskrtaprāyatvē dant yatālav yasaśkātadvayayuktá ca. PISCHEL, under the impression that it was an Eastern language, explained this as meaning that, as in Māgadhi Prakrit, ra becames la, and that sa and śa remain as in Sanskrit. He adds that sa becomes sa, but, though the statement is probably correct, the fact is not mentioned by Prthvidhara. That Mk.'s Täkki is the same as Prthvidhara's Dhakka or Takka is shown by the fact that both authors state that it is the language of gamblers (and, adds Mk. xvi, 1, of merchants, etc.). Mk. considers it to be a vibhāṣā, and therefore describes it at some length in his 16th pada ; but (xvi, 2) he states that another authority, named Hariscandra, classes it as an Apabhrarnsa, and he accordingly again refers to it under that head (xviii, 12, comm.), as quoted above. Mk. nowhere describes its phonetic peculiarities, but his examples contain both sa and sa, thus agreeing with Pithvidhara. On the other hand he retains 1 and does not change it to l. Finally, as we have seen above, the Takka and Gaurjara Aphabhramas were closely connected. Gaurjara was the language of Gurjaras, who were a Western, not an Eastern people. Taking the evidence as a whole, I think that it is safe to assume that PISCHEL'S Dhakki should be "Täkki," and that it was spoken, not in the Dhakka country, but in the Takka country of the Northern Punjab."
Madhu Vidyā/217
Eastern hlavyasaskant of it
herefore describes it as of merchants, etc.) state tha
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
