Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 375

M. A. MEHENDALE
exceptions were also covered by the phonetic change and made it automatic. The alternation between s and ţ in Sanskrit may be cited as an instance, This alternation is automatic in classical Sanskrit vis-à : vit-su, vit-patibut it is not so in Vedic Sanskrit. There it is regular in the paradigm vis-à: vit-su, but not applicable for the whole language, since we get words like -vis-pati, vis-patni (and even vis-pala it that is the correct analysis of the word). If one keeps to the formula, without any other considerations, that a non-automatic alternation reflects a later stage of the language, then it will be seen from the Sanskrit example that that is not always the case. Non-automatic Ś t is the earlier one, automatic ś~ţ is the later. A reconstruction based on the late Sanskrit automatic alternation ś ť as *Ś>ţ will only find confirmation in the instances like vis-pati found in Vedic language. The Seneca illustration given by Chafe (p. 484, § 25) of an anomalous form ?óxtne?ta? 'fern' need not necessarily be explained as a result of some recent phonetic change which is responsible for the sequence tn in it. It may as well be the case of an old survival which has until now resisted the change *tn >hn.
There is also another way of deciding the chronology of phonetic changes in terms of internal reconstruction when we get a double alternation in a given paradigm. If, among these two alternations, one concerns phonemes which are phonetically closer, then it may be said that the phonetic change which led to this alternation occurred earlier than the one which led to the alternation between phonemes not so close. Thus e. g. in
the paradigm of Sanskrit viś we have the alternation ś ţ: vis-à, vit-su and Ś d: vis-à, vid-bhih. In these two alternations phenemes s, t, and d are involved. Of these, ś and ţare phonetically closer than s and d. Therefore we conclude that the change *ś > occurred before t was affected by another change leading to the alternation ś~.
Another instance of the above type of alternation is found in s alternating with k and g in Sanskrit dis-à, dik-șu, dig-bhiḥ, and as stated above, we suspect that the change ś>k occurred before k, in certain environments, was replaced by g as a result of a subsequent change.6
As regards the relative merits of internal and comparative reconstruction Hoenigswald observes, “In principle, internal reconstruction cannot claim to yield phonetic detail any more than the comparative method does". (Lg. 36, p. 192, 1960). However one is inclined to feel that in this respect internal reconstruction stands on a somewhat different level than the comparative one. Since, in a majority of cases, internal reconstruction is likely to
6 By the way, these two alternating types ś:t:d and $:k:g will show that these are not cases of compulsory alternations in the strict sense.
Madhu Vidya/350