192 
G. A. Grierson— Notes on the Rangpur Dialect. [No. 3, 
Samples of Declension. 
Nom. 
1 • •so_ 
Ob]. ??T^r.. 
Inst, ^TfTT?T 
Abl. VTK mif, or itix 
Gen. 
Loc. ^TrT 
I or 
me 
by me ^rtUK ^T«TT?T 
from me or ^tt 
of me ^“HTTC 
in me ^T*tT<T 
Similarly are declined you, <TT that, who, &c. 
this, is declined as follows : 
t, t*lK ^TrTT?T, &C. 
The plurals of all these words follow the analogy of substantives. 
The two most interesting forms amongst the above, to my mind, are 
^Tfi? and ^t^t. The first is the missing link between the Bengali ^EfTfa 
and the Hindi Tfl, both of which are plural honorific forms. ^TTliPCr is inter¬ 
esting as showing the process by which in almost every language, plural 
honorific forms supersede the usual singular. ^rr^TT is the plural of ^TfVr, 
which is itself a plural form. however, by constant use has acquired a 
purely singular sense, and thereby ceases to be honorific, and a fresh plural 
of a plural has to be coined to supply the deficiency. I may mention that 
is also used in a similar singular sense for “you” in the north-west of 
the District. 
Another point worth noting amongst these pronouns, is the characteristic 
ending in or ^t?r, which are all local variations of the same sound. 
This is the characteristic ending of most of the sarva-namdm , mistranslated 
“pronouns.” Thus we have not meaning “all.” 
It is worth enquiring into, how numerals in so many languages came to 
have not only original Aryan pronominal inflexions, but pronominal termina¬ 
tions showing the most manifest signs of, and being the result of modern 
phonetic decay. Such an enquiry, however, would necessitate discussing 
the whole theory of pronominal declension, a task which I willingly leave 
to more competent hands. What I have set myself to do is to record 
facts, and to leave others to draw inferences from them. 
I here give specimens I have collected of the commonest pronominal 
forms, in the form of a “ Philological Harp.” 
