346 
BEPORT— 1847. 
beating his own son (vidi patrem caodere ijisius fUiura). As in every Bei^ 
phrase the participle in ite can be understood in this manner, I think itvi* 
missible to ascrii>e this origin to it, and instead of taking it for a nominatiw 
of a Vi’rhal adjective, to consider it as a locative of a verlwl noun. 
That all of the verbs in these languages are naturally destitute of a pw- 
sive voice, is true only so far as that they have given up the simple aid 
ancient formation of the passive, formed in Sanscrit by affixing ya to die 
l>aae oi the verb. But it is highly interesting to see bow modern laD- 
guagea, after abandoning the ancient forraatioiu, have often had recount a 
the same means, by which iheso ancient forms were eflected. Thus ik 
Bengali, giving up the Sanscrit p^isaive form in yn, created a new peripi^ 
tical paa-sivc voice by means of the same auxiliary verb yd, to gOi 
for inatance, jdwd ydy it goes to be known, instead of the Sanscrit 
it becomes known. 
It IS iliiiicult however to say whether it is the passive participle or™ 
verbal noun, which, joined ro the verb ydite, serves iu Bengali torepresoti 
jiaasive verb, ex. nndi dekfui ydUcche, the river is seen. Sir Graves Hsoghw 
has the merit of having first discovered the analogy existing betwren ib 
compound Bengali passive and other passive formations in Sanscrit, 
where the nuxiliary verb yd (to go) is already more or less changed aatlt^ 
literaied. He believes that the d is the termination of the verbal 
his o|uiiiun has been adapted by Prof. Bopp, who has confirmed it bf"’ 
ducing analogical forms from the Latin and Sanscrit languages, l’**^?* 
difiicuity of this theory is, to give a passive power to a contpoaidott’ j’*® 
the elements of whicli Imvo .‘in nciive signification, for the verbal noun in t 
-signification, for the verbal noun 
HI well as the verb ydite is tilwava active. To remove this difBcult), 
Graves says, “ that when this form is used, it implies the object obtains ik 
result of the action that the noun implies, which is just the equivaieni 
what the other forms express; for, when we say, he is killed by^thei^i 
Wi* infc-r tliat hu is gone to the state of death by means of the man.” 
this theory we have hut one observation to make, tliat is, that i® 
nwlrite means to strike, to kill, and that by this reason mdrd ya'W*®* 
always mean, to go to the state of striking, of killing, and not to the 
dcsih. Ihc other example also, quoted by Sir Graves, h^dla nMnda 
kathdr dodrd jdnd ydy^ can be well tninblated, good and bad quslitki 
go to discovery by words, but discovery would always retain an 
and would mean, to go to the state of discovering, which is nonsew* 
lore liammohun Roy, possessing doubtless the most intimate and 
■nowlcdge of (be spoken Bengali, does not follow this opinion, but sitf^ 
these passivo compounds by taking tlu; former part for the passive paW 
(not mentioned in other Bengali grammars), and the latter for the 
with the sense of to become. Ex. fdid deoyd gela, money has beco 
(money went or became given out); sc mdrd «<kve*,he will be beaten, 
speaks mostly m fivour of this opinion is, that there are in Bengw* 
phrases where ydite is really joined to tlie active verbal noun, wb>f^ 
always its active or ^'ntranKiiiv** n»wAr. R.,f m rhk «*Bse vdile Jiss 
Jflnn yflji lueraily, to know me never happens, i. ft * 
H* *|own ; tomdhe dMd geia, you coulil be seen, or yon have , 
ydite can be combined with intransitive verbs also, t*' 
W, walking goes, i. e, we can go out. ^ 
Other Bengali formations which serve to 
f ut these too are, although not found in Sanscrit, yet entirely 
