1867.] On the Arabic Element in Official Hindustani. 149 



To what source should they turn for words to express these ideas ? 

 The Brahmin and the Rajput stood aloof from the casteless strangers. 

 Sanskrit therefore was probably very little heard in the camps of the 

 G-hori or the Khilji, and still less in those of Tiniur or Baber. 



Words of Sanskrit origin, but more or less mutilated, were heard 

 from the lips of the lower classes, who also used a vast number of 

 Hindi words, i. e. words either of Sanskrit origin or not, but so far 

 altered from their original as to become new words.* 



Let us now go through some of the words which we may suppose 

 offered themselves to the invaders as native terms to express their 

 new ideas, and I think it will be seen that none of these words were 

 really available. 



In the first place the new religion was Islam. To express the 

 religious duties of that pugnacious creed in anything but Arabic was 

 profanation not to be thought of. Hence the introduction of masjid, 

 namdz, rozd, kitdb, id, and the words of this class were unavailable, for 

 even putting aside the profanation, words of Sanskrit origin could not 

 express, because they did not contain, the requisite ideas. If any one 

 doubts this, let him think how far the Sanskrit and Hindi words 

 written below represent the Arabic or Persian. 



Masjid Sanskrit — mandirum, dcvdlayam ; 



Hindi — dewdla, math, mandar, shiwdla, thdkurbdri. 



Namdz S. prdrthand, nivedanam ; 



H. pujd, path. 



Rozd S. upavdsa, updsanam, abhojanam, langhanam ; 



H. upas, langhan. 



Kitdb S. pustakani, grantham ; 



H. pothi, pustak. 



'Id S. parvva, utsava, ydird ; 



H. par ah, tyohdr or tehwdr. 



Now it is at once evident that the adoption of any of these words, 

 deeply tinctured with the hues of the Brahminical creed, would at 

 once have been fatal to the genius of Mahomedanism. These Sanskrit 

 words therefore retained their place in the language with reference to 



* An example will make the distinction clearer : Rdjd I should call a Sanskrit 

 word, because it retains its form unaltered ; hihnltdnd I call a Hindi word 

 because its connection with the Sanskrit avilamba is, though undoubted, yet 

 not at first sight apparent. 



