74 
A F. Rudolf Hoernle— Essays on the Gaurian Languages. [No. I, 
possible, F that the verbal nouns in can have changed their character so 
radically in Gaurian. 
3. It is a very peculiar usage of all Gaurian languages to employ the 
infinitive to express command or necessity. E. g., “ never go to their 
house” is in Hindi ^ ^ SfT*TT (Braj Bhasha or 5JTM), 
which would be in Sanskrit . Again “ we 
must all die” is ^ = Skr. (tffl) 
In Panjabi ^fT^«TT “you must come” = Skr. In 
Marathi ^hT“ continue to write to us.” (See Etherington H. 
Gr. §. 544, 545. Loodiana P. Gr. §. 95. Manual of Mar. Gr. §. 110, note). 
The only rational explanation of this usage is afforded by the theory of the 
identity of the Gaurian infinitive with the Sanskrit and Prakrit Part. Fut. 
Pass. It may be also noted that in modern Sanskrit, the proper imperative 
is almost as a rule substituted by the Part. Fut Pass, (in or <Tq&t). 
4. All the uses to which the Sanskrit Part. Fut. Pass, in is 
put according to this theory in Gaurian, (e. g., to express the mere act, as 
infinitive), is provided for by Panini. He has a sutra (III, 
3, 113), which is explained in the Laghu Kaumudi to mean, that the 
Kritya affixes, to which and er^T belong, are occasionally employed 
in many ways different from that enjoined by the ordinary rules (see 
Siddhanta Kaum. p. 300, 2nd Yol. and Laghu Kaum. No. 823, p. 284). 
The examples given are powder for bathing (to both) = Hindi 
cjfT ; and ^T«TtijT ♦ a brahman who is to be presented (with 
something) ; with which compare in Panjabi fT^ii ^ % = Hindi 
^>T # ; or % = Hindi ^°(or f f) 
sprft mm # (see Loodiana Grammar, §. 95). These 
irregular, bahulam uses, of the Part. Fut. Pass, were, no doubt, more 
peculiar to the vulgar Sanskrit; and, hence, it is intelligible, how they became 
the regular uses in the Gaurian. Note also the commentary to the sutra 
(Panini III, 196), where the example is given 
<3‘€fT and this is explained ^ (Siddh. Kaum. 
p. 298, 2nd Yol.), i. e., when the Part. Fut. Pass, expresses the action itself 
( = v’q'PTf), the singular and neuter is naturally employed. Accordingly 
the Bart. Fut. Pass, (in and p3j) in the sing, neuter may express the 
mere act of the verb. Both characteristics are found in the Gaurian (so 
called) infinitives. They, qua infinitives , both express the mere act of the 
verb, and also stand in the sing, neuter ; as Hindi — *rf or (*rr), Marathi 
— ip, Gujarati etc. 
5. Perhaps the most serious objection which is felt at first sight 
against the identity of the Gaurian infinitive with the Sanskrit and Prakrit 
Part. Fut. Pass, is this, that it involves a change from the Pass, and Future 
to the Active and Present. But we have an exactly analogous phenomenon 
