139 
1872.] Hoernle — Essays on the Gaurian Languages. 
more than suggestions of their probable origin, founded partly on the fact of 
the common origin of all Gaurian languages, partly on Prakrit analogies. 
In the Marathi genitive post-positions ^T, a simple transforma- 
tion of the guttural of <rr, yft, ^ into a palatal has taken place. For 
the rest they must be derived from the Sanskrit a<T in the same manner as 
'fiT, ^1, %. There is only one other instance known to me in Marathi of such 
a change of gutturals and palatals : it is that of the Sanskrit fyr r l?C barba- 
rian into the Maharashtri which is the subject of a special rule in 
the Prakrits Prakasa (II. 33.) But the change is physiologically very easy 
(cf. Max Muller, Science of Languages Lect. Ill, page, 155 vol. 2nd), and by 
no means uncommonin the Aryan languages in general (cl. Bopp, Comp. Gram. 
§ 14 page 25).* 
The origin of the Panjabi, Sindhi and Gujarati post-positions I explain 
alike, in a manner similar to that in which I have explained the Bangali 
and Oriya post-positions y and yy ; viz. that they have originated from a 
Prakrit form of tRH by the elision of the initial consonant 3fT and contraction 
(by Sandh i) of the two adjoining vowels. 
The original of the Panjabi post-positions yr, y), y is the form yiyT or 
fyriy ; probably the latter. t Take for instance the genitive of horse. 
It may be assumed to have been originally i|l% fyryT. % Here the original 
* I had written tlie above remarks when I received a copy of the Student’s 
Manual of Marathi Grammar. In the appendix on the grammatical forms which occur 
in old Marathi poetry, a few forms are given which confirm my thooiy in a remarkable 
way. The old form of the masculine and the neuter ^ is there (page 138) stated 
to be reap. and Now represents a Prakrit form and is the 
very form which, a few pages back, I postulated as tho immediate original of tlie 
Hindi 3TT (taking yi and ^ to be interchangeable letters) and about which I expressed 
a hope that a more thorough examination of the oldest Gaurian literature might bring 
to light traces of it. I, there, derived *RT (or thus : Sanskrit fSH:, Prakrit 
= fyr% (or f%%) = either (or f^T) or *1 (or (or ^T). The 
derivation of ^T( in the same grammar page 132) from the Sanskrit genitive affix 
W is untenable. 1 stly, because even if *8 could be the original of V, it certainly 
could not bo so of tho older from fW 2 ndly. The Sanskrit * is unchangeable, 
while is capable of forming case, number, and gender. 3rdly. Against the Sans- 
krit derivative affix as well as against the inflexional affix HI all those objections 
lie which I have pointed out with reference to the derivation of the Hindi ^1 from the 
Sanskrit affix or w)v. 
t The Panjabi dictionary of tho Lodiana Mission gives a form Ty^iT, a preposition 
or genitive particle. If this can bo trusted, it would seem to indicate that the initial ^ 
of the Panjabi post-positions is a modification of the original ^ of f%yT See on this 
interchange of the guttural and dental class, Bopp’s Comparative Grammar, § 401. 
$ I must reserve the explanation of the inflected from UP? for another paper. 
18 F 
