1872.] Hoernl e— Essays on the Gauricm Languages. 143 
Or : % vfTj -z\€\ §ttt ^'vr u i. e. 
High Hindi : fire # s? f?re % sv ntt ii 
Kabir’s Rekhtas. 
Now these forms Tip? or <Ttl%! or ^T[f%, or snf?, oTf%, wt%> 
&c., are nothing hut phonetic corruptions of the Sanskrit genitives ?r^J, 
V<g, &c. No doubt when standing by themselves they are commonly used 
to express the dative case and even any other case (ablative, instrumental, 
locative) ; but that is owing to the fact (i) that the dative case has disap- 
peared altogether from the Prakrit and the Gaurian, and has been substituted 
by the genitive and (ii) that in poetry all case-signs (or post-positions) are 
generally omitted. But instances are not wanting where those forms are 
used even by themselves in the sense of the genitive ; e. g., 
gnf% w;t»s % l «• e. 
High Hindi : fsre ^ ^ ^ ^ $ 11 
Rajniti, page 3. 
Or : vi qqm aH*TT t 
J 
II *'• e. 
High Hindi : re ^1 sired ^ I 
xsx# 'sj« 4rV W I' 
Tulsi Das Ramayan, Sundarkand. 
2 In the High Hindi the interrogative pronoun %r*r forms its genitive 
the relative sir forms fare^T, the demonstrative forms fire^r, 
forms < 3 fl«*r. re forms rrerr. These forms fare. f®PT, fare, T*T have 
never been explained. The fact, however, is that they are by themselves al- 
ready full genitives so that fare^TT. fare &o., are in reality double ov pleo- 
nastic genitives. In Prakrit there are two forms of the base of these pronouns, 
one ending in ^f, the other in X (viz. qfr and fair, 31 and faff, 7T and far of which all 
T bases, with the solitary exception of fare what have been lost in Sanskrit). 
The bases far, fsj, fir, are in the Prakrit, as we know it now, restricted ge- 
nerally to the feminine ; but that originally it was not so, is proved by the 
fact that in the masculine the forms fafffnT, fsreT, farntr of the instrumental 
case occur as alternatives besides are, nit. Now the genitive of the 
masculine bases fair, faff, far is fW faPS(feminine far^T, fan^r, fap^T ; 
for the Sanskrit fffrej, faf^J farei ; feminine etc. by the common rule 
of the Prakrit of assimilating dissimilar compound consonants, cf. P. P. Ill, 
2.) In the modern dialects there is a general rule, that where the Sanskrit has 
two dissimilar consonants adjoining and the Prakrit turns these into two 
