282 
Communications received. 
[Dec. 
received would prove equally interesting. He had no opportunity of read¬ 
ing the paper, and was not aware of the exact direction it had taken; but its 
title appeared to him misleading. It suggested to him the previous ques¬ 
tion, was there such a thing as a Hindi root distinct from Sanskrit roots ? 
Of course there were in Hindi, as in other vernaculars, a great many nomi¬ 
nal roots formed from nouns, in the same way in which in English the 
noun cane produced caning ; but he did not refer to them. By roots he 
meant radicals of verbs originally implying action, and not names of things. 
In this sense he believed there were no Hindi roots as distinct from Sans¬ 
krit roots, or in other words, the roots of the Hindi, as of all other Aryan 
dialects of India, were derived from the Sanskrit. Even as the Sanskrit 
nouns and other vocables had, under climatic and other influences, gradual¬ 
ly undergone wear and tear in different ways till they resulted in the ver¬ 
naculars, so had the roots ; and the transition was entirely governed by the 
laws of phonetic decay and dialectic regeneration. For instance the Yedic 
bliu ‘ to be,’ changed to ho in the Hindi,—the change commenced at a very 
early age and is still traceable, though rarely, in some Vedic and other 
ancient writings—so did all the other roots which were required for the 
derivative dialects. In the course of his reading Dr. Mitra had not found 
a single Hindi root which could not be shown to be a decayed or regenerat¬ 
ed Sanskrit radical, and he believed that an enquiry into Hindi roots for 
philological purposes must necessarily be the same as an enquiry into the 
decay and regeneration of the phonetic elements of a language. Whether 
this was the line of Dr Hoernle’s enquiry or not he was not aware, but he 
thoqght it well to point out the misleading character of the title. 
Dr. Hoernle explained that Dr. Mitra’s remarks were founded on a 
misapprehension of the scope of his paper, the points of view in which did 
not materially differ from those expressed by Dr. Mitra. He understood 
by roots the constant element in any series of sense-related words; thus in 
the Hindi words boli“ speech,” bolat “speaking,” bolai “he speaks,” 
bolavat or bolavd “ calling,” bol is the constant element or root. Hindi, 
like every other language, had such roots. The object of the paper was to 
collect these Hindi roots, to discuss the various ways of their derivation 
from Sanskrit or elsewhere, and to classify them accordingly. 
2. On the occurrence of the Music Deer in Tibet.—By 
E. Lydekkeu, b. a. 
This note will be published in Journal, Part II, No. 4, for 1879. 
The following communication has been received 
Coins of the Sunga or Mitra Dynasty found at Bamnagar or Ahich- 
hatra. By A. Cablleyle. Communicated by H. Eivett-Caenac, Esq., 
c. s , c. I. E. 
