337 
1895.] G. A. Grierson — Suffixes in the Kagmirl Language . 
These suffixes have existed in Aryan languages from the most 
ancient times, and still exist. We find them for instance in modern 
Italian as in date-mi, ‘ give me/ in mediaeval Irish, as fri-m, ‘against 
me,’ and ancient Greek as in the enclitic pe, ‘me.’ Going furthest 
back we find Zend, the parent of Pashtu and Baloci, with the enclitic 
forms md (acc.) me and moi (gen. and dat.) for the first person, thwd 
(acc.) te and toi (gen. and dat.) for the second, and he, hoi (gen. and 
dat.) for the third, the direct progenitors of the Pashtu mi (1st. person), 
di (2nd. person), and ya (3rd. person), and of the Baloci i (3rd. person). 
Similarly the modern Persian forms are derived from the Old Persian 
of the Achemenides, through the Pehlevi of the Sassanides. Thus 
Prs. am (1st. person) is derived from the Phi. am, 0. Prs. maiy (enclitic 
dat.). So Prs. at (2nd pers.), Phi. at, 0. Prs. taiy ; Prs. ash (3rd pers.), 
Phi. ash, 0. Prs. shaiy. 
In the same way, if we take Sanskrit as the nearest representative 
of the ancient Indian Vernacular from which the modern Vernaculars 
are descended, we find that it also like Zend and Old Persian had 
enclitic pronouns, viz .— 
1st. Prs.; Sg., Acc. md, Dat., Gen., me; PL, Acc., Dat., Gen., nas. 
2nd. Prs.; Sg., Acc ted, Dat., Gen., te; PL, Acc., Dat., Gen., vas. 
3rd. Prs.; Sg., Acc. enam (masc.), enat (neut.), encim (fem.) ; 
Pl., Acc. email (masc.), enani (neut.), ends (fem.). 
This last is also regularly declined in certain other cases, and in 
the dual. 
It will be seen from what follows, that a series of pronominal 
suffixes, more or less complete, exists in several modern Indo-Aryan 
Vernaculars, which too is derived from Old Indian pronouns, including 
all the above enclitic forms which have been preserved to us by 
Sanskrit. 
Ever since I have had opportunities of studying the Ka^miri 
language, I have been struck with its evident close relationship to 
SindliL This relationship was not easily explained, for, till a few 
weeks ago the territories in which these two languages were spoken 
were believed to be separated by many hundred miles of country inhabited 
by a population speaking a totally different language, — Panjabi. There 
was no historical or territorial connexion between these two widely 
separated but closely connected languages. The annexed map will 
show roughly the hitherto accepted geographical limits of Sindhi, 
Panjabi and Ka^miri. 
