________________
150
i strani
Mk.
Rt.
(v) The é of daśa and caturdaśa ... There is no chan
when not denoting a name ge of s to h in becomes optionally h IX. 31 daśa, but this is
optional in catur
dasa II. 1.7 (w) Doubling is prohibited only ... Except in the
in the three words, kautū. word daiva there. hala, sevd and sthūla of the is no doubling in sevā group, IX. 50
all other words of the sevā group
II. 1.11 (*) V drs> peccha and V pra + ... v drs> pekkha, īkş> pekkha, IX. 112
II. 1.23 (y) v bhā> bhād, IX. 116 ... V bhā> bhāsa II.
1.30 (2) Šatrughna > sattuggha and ... Sattuha and Bhī. Bhişma> Bhippha, IX. 148 mha, II. 1.35-36.
(cf. Pu. IX. 31 ) The above examples show how the two authors differ in respect of the use of some words and roots of Mahārāştri and Sauraseni, Previously we have seen how they differ in respect of some other dialects too. In respect of Māgadhi also they have certain differa ences. Rt differentiates Māgadhi from Ardhamāgadhi only on the point of the use, aham whis is prevalent in the latter whereas it becomes hage in the former. This reminds us of one of the rules IV. 301 of Hc who enjoins the use of hage for aham as well as vayam in Māgadbi. Mk does not have such distinction but simply says that Ardhamāgadhi is the same as Māgadhi on account of not being far from Sauraseni. Again Mk makes no exception for ș and does not change j to y in Māgadhī
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
