37 
1874.] A. F. Rudolf Hoernle —Essays on the Q-aurian Languages. 
i 
faftR II III, 66. 
Again TfRq t^T^rT vq l 
^wr ^*rc ^ ii III, 52. 
Again €j <?TTT 3RJ* TO ^ ^ I 
n I, I. 
Or -ijTfa^r *fhfiTC ^7 II 
«N^ i 
cR II I, 18. 
Tlie two last verses contain the examples snx<rpTT?:*} (for High-Hindi 
^TT^RPCT), and q»qT<T*i (for High Hindi ^TrT, plural .)* The discussion of 
the oblique form of these masculine nouns in and ^pqr I shall defer, till 
after we have passed in review all Gaurian masculine nouns, the final of 
which is formed by inserting a semivowel before the Prakrit termination #r. 
It has been stated that the more usual way of treating the Prakrit 
masculine termination is not to insert the semivowel "5T or q, but to 
contract the words. This contraction (or sandhi) is made in a two-fold 
manner: either the vowel ^ is dropped and thus the termination 
reduced to iff, or the vowel is retained and thus contracted to ^T. 
The latter method is peculiar to the Braj Bhasha ; the former is common 
to the other Low-Hindi dialects of that class. In High-Hindi both these 
harsh vowels (or diphthongs) are modified to the more agreeable long vowel 
; e. g., gone is in Braj Bhasha JT*ff, in Low-Hindi ffiff, in High-Hindi 
3RT, for Prakrit Sanskrit ffrR: ; again Sanskrit or amplified 
said becomes in Prakrit and in the Braj Bhasha qrfff, in 
Low-Hindi qnpT, in High-Hindi qRT; or Sanskrit high becomes in 
Prakrit in Braj Bhasha #qT, in Low Hindi ^3%, in High Hindi 
This seems to me a truer and simpler explanation of the Braj Bhdtsha 
termination ^fT than that of taking it as a mere provincial broader pronun- 
* The final anuswdra in these two instances indicates, I believe, the plural; just as in 
Marathi the addition of a final anundsihd is indicative of the plural; e. g. £J7“RT of a 
house , hut q rRy of houses. If the semivowel ^ be not inserted, but sandhi made, we 
should have qfqTrT^, contracted ^fqTrff, a form which also frequently occurs in the old 
Hindi of Chand, and is still the usual form in Marwarx; and which in the modern Hindi 
is modified to qrq '?ff. The final nasal of these plural fonns is merely a deterioration of 
an original final which is still preserved in the modern Low Hindi dialects; e. g., 
fro gn <1*73 t ^ ii Rajaniti, p. 30. 
and occurs frequently in the old Hindi of Chand, beside the plural forms in qjq and qjj j 
«• g-» 
^IT I 
srt 3R it I, 7. 
i. e. “ why should poets call it a rechauffe.” 
