137 
1872.] Hoernle — Essays on the Gaurian Languages. 
Bhasha are contracted in the High Hindi into the more euphonious KTT, 
&c.. The following scheme will make the similarity still more manifest to the 
eye— 
Sanskrit. Prakrit. Br. Bhasha. Hindi. 
(3rfWK:), (^f-)f«qrr: = far-)f%^T = fa-)1^rT = (^r-)w = (3T-)TT 
(TB?Tr:), (T-)f%<T : = = (T-)fW = = (T-)^T 
(mftrTi), (*TT-)fT7r:= (FT-)fc^T = (*T-)fC%T = (w-)m = (TJT-)TT 
faftlrr:), (tjf-)fjlrr: = (~T-)faT37= (wr-)TOT= (^TT-)JTT 
(®?r:), (— )f%rj: = (— )f^r= (— (— )^T = (— )3 tt 
A still more exact parrallel, than by these examples, is afforded by the 
Hindi 'sjt (feminine '«ft, plural if), the past tense of the auxiliary verb %T*TT, to 
be. For the original of «tt is Bgpr:, the Sanskrit past participle of the verb 
^TT, to stand. The initiator is dropped, as usual in Prakrit; likewise the 
medial rf ; thus we arrive at ; and this may change either to f’sjifT, which 
would he exactly parallel to the Braj Bhasha f^rnT, or to 'Ojr, which would 
he exactly parallel to the form %r. assumed by me as the immediate original 
°f (3iT). Now both and 'in occur in the Naipali, and are there the 
simultaneous equivalents of the Hindi WT ; e g., 
WT farijT I i e. 
High Hindi : wra i St. Luke i, 5. 
Again : T fafv W TWcttu i i. c. 
High Hindi : Sj ir^f frfa « vi | St. Luke i, 6. 
Again : T fwuT i i. e. 
High Hindi : il 33 3V i i St. Luke i, 7. 
In the case of v;t. therefore, we can still follow its descent, step by step, 
from the Sanskrit f^cTh through fvj<T, fees,!, f*T3T, iff, to WT ; while in the 
case of <st unfortmvately some of the links have been lost. But that %, or 
3*T, is really a direct descendant of the Sanskrit s57p, just as WT of is 
even more remarkably proved by the Naipali ; for in one ease it actually 
makes use of %r (feminine 3ft, plural 3TT) as a substitute of ®<r:. The Nai- 
pali, namely, possesses two forms of the past participle passive ; one is the 
ordinary form, which it shares with all other Gaurian languages ; the other is 
a very peculiar pleonastic form, which I believe only one other Gaurian lan- 
guage, viz., the Marathi, possesses. The difference between those two forms 
appears to be this, that the participle takes tho common form, whenever it is 
used actively to denote the past tense active, and the pleonastic form when- 
ever it is used passively as a participial adjective. The pleonastic form is 
made by superadding the past participle sSU!, contracted to ifir, to the common 
form of the past participle passive, and of the two participles, thus compound- 
ed, the latter cannot be inflected, whereas the former (i. c., ipT) takes the in- 
flexions, and agrees with the qualified noun in gender, number, and case, 
