358 G. A. Grierson — Radical and Participial tenses [No. 4, 
tense is given. Pronominal suffixes may or may not be added to it. 
Thus, to take the root cal , to go. In Hindi (Braj) its Past Participle 
is calyau , ‘gone,’ and to this is given the function of a past tense, and 
it is also used to mean ‘ 1/ ‘ thou,’ or ‘ he went,’ without the addition 
of any suffix to show what person is referred to. On the other hand, in 
Kaynriri, the Past Participle is tsol u , ‘ gone,’ and when the function of a 
past tense is given to it, pronominal suffixes in the nominative case are 
added to it, to indicate the person who is gone ; thus, tsolu-s , ‘ I went,’ 
lit. ‘ gone-I,’ tsolu-k, ‘ thou wentest,’ lit. ‘ gone-thou.’ If the subject of 
the verb is feminine or plural, or both, then the participle, being an 
adjective, is altered to agree with the subject. Thus, the plural mas¬ 
culine of the Hindi calyau , is cale , and cale is used as a participial 
tense, to mean ‘we,’ ‘'you,’ or ‘they went’ (masculine). So the 
masculine plural of the Ka^miri tsol u is tsal\ and when the participle 
is used as a participial tense, with the subject in the masculine plural, 
this form is used, as in tsal l -va , ‘ you w~ent,’ in which va is the prono¬ 
minal suffix of the second person plural in the nominative case. 
It has hitherto been assumed that these terminations, added by some 
languages, and which I call pronominal suffixes, are merely the old 
Sanskrit-Prakrit terminations of the old Present, borrowed for the 
purpose (possibly under the influence of false analogy), and tacked on 
to these modern participles. Primd facie, the addition of an old Prakrit 
termination to a modern form — so that the two form one synthetic 
word—is not probable. In the second place, it will be seen that they 
are not the same as the terminations of the old Sanskrit-Prakrit present. 
Thirdly, we have the evidence of some languages that these termina¬ 
tions are (at least in them) agglutinative pronominal suffixes, which may 
be added or not as fancy seizes the speaker. For these reasons I believe 
that I can show that all these terminations of participial tenses are 
pure pronominal suffixes added to participles, and are not the termina¬ 
tions of the Old Present borrowed for the occasion. 
The Participles used in the formation of Participial tenses, are the 
Past, the Present, and the Future. We shall take them in order. Only 
Masculine forms, as a rule, will be given. 
The following are examples of Tenses based on the Past Participle. 
They are all simple past tenses, and mean ‘I,’ ‘then,’ ‘he,’ &c., ‘ went.’ 
