3G A. F. Rudolf Hoernle— Essays on the Gaurian Languages. [No. 1, 
written by one method and others by another.* In Hindi (that is, 
modern Hindi), as I have already said, the bye-forms which insert the 
semivowel ^, appear always as ending in ^ ; as etc. But in the 
oldest Hindi of the bard Chand-Bardai, the intermediate and transitional 
form in (between and is the only one which is met with, side 
by side with the neuter form in ^rsj, of which examples have been given in 
Essay IV. Exactly as there are neuters, like in Chand, so 
has he also masculine nouns like iron (for High Hindi %PfT), 
series (for High Hindi sftR) ; as in the following verses— 
* If a short gy standing between two accented syllables, is followed by an inserted 
euphonic semivowel q then it does not become altogether quiescent, but merely becomes 
attenuated to the indistinct neutral vowel, out of which all distinct vowels are supposed to 
have arisen and which is found in all modern languages, and, e. g., in English is generally 
written u ; thus while Marathi ^yyqr^yy or ® ra j p"?y*yy " ls pronounced Rdmyd or Ramyd , the 
Ganwari ^yyqq is pronounced Ram’va or Ramvd. The observation of this rule, has led me 
to modify my opinion on the origin of the Marathi Gen. Sing, in qj and Hindi in rr ? which 
I discussed in pp. 87 to 94 of Essay IV (J. A. S. vol. XLII, Part 1,1873.). I stated there 
that the original of those endings might be either 7£;qy or -^syy ; ail d though the latter 
derivation appeared to be the more natural, I preferred the other, because it seemed to 
have more evidence in its favour. But the phonetic rule now noticed removes one of 
the chief difficulties in the way of ^^y being the original. And I would, therefore, 
now derive both the Marathi gen. in and the Hindi gen. in ^ from an original form 
in ^syy. Tims the Prakrit gen. of would be #1?^^ and in the original Gaurian 
(for in*r^JTV), P r0110unce( * s onayd, (i. e. airesis on o, thesis on final a) ; here 
according to rule the medial ^ becomes quiescent, i. e., the word is pronounced sonyd 
(W??T), which is Marathi; next yd changes to ^ and thus we obtain the Hindi form 
sone (%T«FT). Now according to the Marathi custom (as noticed in the text) the 
quiescent ^ is, in this case, invariably suppressed in writing; Mar. writes qjyjjyy . but 
just as ^yjgy is a contraction of VTfT^T, s0 is a contraction of ^Rcf^y. On the 
other hand the fact that the Marathi gen. in efy may be spelled either as ^y or as ~^y 
is also explained by the present rule. For before the semivowel cf the medial ^ becomes 
merely neutral or indistinct, and therefore some will write it, others will omit it, 
according as it is more or less indistinctly pronounced by them. I may add here, another 
piece of evidence. A learned Marathi (the Rev. Pandit Nehemiah Goreh) writes to 
me: “ If the name ^yqy (or any name) belongs to a respectable man, then it is 
pronounced, as if it had no final vowel. But if it belongs to an inferior person, such 
as a boy or a servant, etc., then it is pronounced y^yyyy or ^yjgy. In names of females, 
if the word ends in ^yy ? then in diminutive forms the -^yy is changed with ^ • as 
into *^3Vf. ” Observe that all three forms are identical, diminutives or depreciatives ; 
and derived from Prakrit bases formed with the affix which also may have that meaning; 
now these Marathi forms in ^yy and ^ correspond to the ordinary Hindi forms in ^y and 
^ • and, hence, the latter are also derived from Prakrit bases formed with the affix 
These Hindi words, no doubt, have no diminutive meaning; but so have also those 
Prakrit bases generally no diminutive meaning. 
