Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 219

A Historical Syntax of

Late Middle Indo-Ary;


Vit Bubenik

Memorial University o f Newfoundland


The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements o f American
National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence o f Paper for Printed
Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Bubenik, Vit, 1942-

A historical syntax o f late middle Indo-Aryan (apabhramsa) / Vit Bubenik
p. cm. - (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history o f linguistic science. Series IV, Current
issues in linguistic theory, ISSN 0304-0763 ; v. 165)
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
1. apabhramsa language-Syntax. 2. Apabhramsa language-Grammar, Historical. 3. Indo-Aryan lan­
guage, Middle-Grammar, Historical. I. Title. II. Series.
PK1423.B83 1998
4 9 i’3--dc2i 98-35298
ISBN 90 272 3670 4 (Hur.) / 1 55619 881 7 (US) (Hb; alk. paper) CIP

© Copyright 1998 - John Benjamins B.V.

No part o f this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means,
without written permission from the publisher.

John Benjamins Publishing Co. • P.O.Box 75577 • 1070 AN Amsterdam • The Netherlands
John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA

Preface vii

List of Illustrations xiv

Abbreviations of Languages and Dialects xvii

Abbreviations of Primary Literature xix

Abbreviations of Grammatical Terms xxi

Introduction xxiii



Chapter 1: Methodology and Theoretical Approach

1.1 Previous studies of the lateMiddle Indo-Aryan period 1
1.2 The scope and aims of the present study 3
1.3 Methodology 5
1.4 Conceptual framework 6

Chapter 2: Historical, Social, and Linguistic Background

2.1 Regional states in Northern India (6th - 12th century A. D.) 13
2.2 Sociolinguistic impact of foreign invasions and settlements on
Northern India 15
2.3 Literary languages of Medieval India (Sanskrit, Prakrits, and
Apabhramsa) 16
2.3.1 Classical Sanskrit 19
2.3.2 Prakrits 22 Prakrits used in poetry and Sanskrit plays 23 Prakrits used by Jainas 26
2.3.3 Apabhramsa 27

Chapter 3: Evidence from Medieval Indian Grammarians

3.1V araruci ’s Prakrtaprakasa 33
3.2 Descriptive technique of Hemacandra Suri (1088/89-1172/73) 34
3.3 Eastern grammarians: Kramadlsvara and Purusottama 44

Chapter 4: Late Middle Indo-Aryan Vernacular Corpus

4.1 Eastern Apabhramsa: the Dohakosas of Kanha and Saraha 50
4.2 Apabhramsa songs in Kalidasa’s VikramorvasTya 55
4.3 Joindu’s Paramatmaprakasa and Yogasdra 56
4.4 Svayambhudeva’s Paumacariu and Ritthanemicariu 56
4.5 Puspadanta’s Harivamsapurana 58
4.6 Kanakamara’s Karakandacariu 58
4.7 Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha 59
4.8 Ramasimha’s Pdhudadoha 59
4.9 Haribhadra’s Sanatkumdracarita 59
4.10 Somaprabha’s Kumdrapalapratibodha 60
4.11 Addahamana’s Samdesa Rasaka 62



Chapter 5: Restructuring of the Nominal System and the Evolution

of the Phrasal Case
5.1 Erosion of the nominal case system 65
5.2 Source 68
5.3 Appurtenance 74
5.4 Reference 78
5.5 Location 80
5.6 Accompaniment/Instrumentality 83

Chapter 6: Restructuring of the Pronominal System and the

Evolution of the Phrasal Case
6.1 Late Middle Indo-Aryan period (Apabhramsa) 88
6.1.1 Double-oblique system in Apabhramsa 90
6.1.2 Evidence of Apabhramsa literature 95
6.2 Early New Indo-Aryan period 99
6.2.1 Emergence of oblique pronominal forms to host postpositions
on par with nouns 99

Chapter 7: Evolution of Grammatical and Lexical Aspect

7.1 Grammatical aspect 104
7.1.1 Perfect (retrospective aspect) 104
7.1.2 Progressive aspect 107
7.2 Lexical aspect 111
7.2.1 Inception and completion 111
7.2.2 Version and ablation 114

Chapter 8: The Old Synthetic and the New Analytic Passive

8.1 Inherited finite (synthetic) passive in -ijja- 118
8.1.1 Used in non-modal meaning 118
8.1.2 Used in modal meaning 119 Demand and deontic modality 119 Finite passive in relative clauses 121 Abilitative and cohortative meaning 122 Passive forms in the future tense 123
8.1.3 Imperfective passive participle in -anta 123
8.2 Inherited analytic 6e-passive 124
8.3 Innovative analytic jana “go”-passive 125
8.4 Non-finite passive with the past passive particle 126
8.4.1 The argument low in animacy as an agent 126
8.4.2 True agentless passive 127
8.4.3 The agent in the marked postverbal position 128
8.4.4 The avoidance of subject switching to maintain topic continuity 129
8.4.5 The goal as the vantage point for the narration 130

Chapter 9: The Emergence and Development of the Ergative

9.1 The functional theory of the origins of ergativity 133
9.2 The possessive and agentive construction in Middle Indo-Aryan 136
9.3 The tug o f war between conservative and eliminative forces in the
history of Indo-Aryan 141
9.3.1 The appearance of the absolute case at the end of the MIA
period 142
9.3.2 The diverging development of the ergative and the passive
construction 143
9.3.3 The consequences of the cliticization of the pronominal suffixes 145
and the copula to the ta-form

9.4 Ergative interpretation of the constructions with the past passive

participle in Apabhramsa
9.4.1 Word order in clauses with the ergative construction
9.4.2 Ergative construction in the 1st and 2nd person
9.4.3 Verbs of speaking in the 3rd person
9.4.4 Conjoining the intransitive and transitive predicates

Chapter 10: The Scope of the Causative

10.1 The functional theory of causativization
10.2 Finite causatives
10.2.1 Finite active causatives
10.2.2 Finite passive causatives
10.3 Non-finite causatives
10.3.1 Ergative (active) interpretation
10.3.2 Passive interpretation
10.4 Causativization in Sanskrit and Prakrits
10.4.1 Passivization on the goal
10.4.2 Passivization on the causee
10.4.3 Semantic restrictions on the passivization of causatives
10.4.4 Summary

Chapter 11: Mood and Modality

11.1 Epistemic and deontic modality
11.2 The gerundive in statements of necessity and possibility
11.3 The gerundive in the function of inferential mode
11.4 The gerundive recategorized as future tense

Chapter 12: Absolute Constructions

12.1 Absolute constructions in Old Indo-Aryan
12.2 Absolute constructions in Apabhramsa
12.2.1 Instrumental/Locative absolute
12.2.2 Genitive absolute
12.2.3 Nominative absolute

Chapter 13: Complementation and Relativization

13.1 The gerund with modal verbs
13.2 Dative of purpose with verbs of motion
13.3 The quotative particle ema

13.4 Relative clauses in Apabhramsa 209

13.5 Subordinate clauses introduced by relative pronouns 210
13.6 Subordinate clauses introduced by relative adverbs 212
13.6.1 Adverbial clauses of place 212
13.6.2 Adverbial clauses of time 212
13.6.3 Adverbial clauses of manner 214

Chapter 14: Conclusions

14.1 Grammatical change in Indo-Aryan languages during the Medieval
period (6th - 12th century A.D.) 217
14.2 Sociolinguistic aspects of the history of Indo-Aryan languages
during the Medieval period 221
14.3 A contribution o f the present monograph to general historical
linguistics 223
14.4 Epilogue 230

Editions of Primary Literature 231

References and Select Bibliography 235

Index of Ancient and Medieval Grammarians 250

Index of Modern Authors 251

Index of Quoted Passages 253

Index of Languages and Dialects 258

Index of Subjects 261


Sociolinguistic continuum in Medieval India (11th - 13th c.) 17

Literary languages of Medieval India 19
The literary-linguistic continuum during the late MIA
period 23
Alleged diagnostic features of Svetambara vs.
Digambara Apabhramsa 29
The Eastern and Western School of Prakrit grammarians 34
Masculine a-stems and feminine a/a-stems 37
i- and w-stems in Apabhramsa 39
Oblique forms of personal/demonstrative pronouns and
neuter forms of the demonstrative pronoun “this” 41
Personal pronouns of the l sl and 2nd Pers 43
“I” and “we” in Apabhramsa 45
“you” and “ye” in Apabhramsa 46
Some pronominal forms according to Hemacandra,
Kramadisvara and Purusottama 47
The suffixes of the Nom/Acc Sg of a-stems in the
Dohakosas 51
The syncretism of the Instr/Loc Sg/Pl in Eastern
Apabhramsa 52
Pronominal forms in the Dohakosas 53
Present tense in the Dohakosas and in Western
Apabhramsa (according to Hemacandra) 53
Phonological features of Western vs. Southern vs.
Eastern Apabhramsa (according to Tagare (1948: 25-26)
and Turner (1926)) 54
Morphological features of Western vs. Southern vs.
Eastern Apabhramsa (according to Tagare (1948: 34-37)) 55
Apabhramsa and Jain Maharastrl gerundial suffixes
in Sanatkumaracarita and Kumarapalapratibodha 61
The incidence of Apabhramsa -ahi/ehi vs. Pkt -asi/esi
(2nd Sg) in late Apabhramsa works 62

The nominal system (a-stems) of Old and Middle

Indo-Aryan 66
i- and u-stems in Apabhramsa 66
Genitive and ablative in Middle Indo-Aryan 69
Pronominal ablative and genitive in Apabhramsa 70
Personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd Pers in
Apabhramsa (according to Hemacandra 8.4.368-381) 88
Double-oblique system of pronominal clitics 90
Three pronominal subsystems in Apabhramsa 91
Reassignment of semantico-syntactic functions in the
l st/2nd Pers singular pronouns in Apabhramsa 92
Forms of “I” and “you” in Old Gujarati (based on
Baumann 1975) 98
Forms of “I” and “you” in Old Gujarati (according to
Bender 1992) 98
Grammatical and lexical aspect of Apabhramsa 116
From the OIA passive imperative to the NIA active
‘polite’ imperative 121
Markedness shift (Dik 1989) 133
Markedness shift in the history of Indo-Aryan 134
Case marking and subject assignment in a language with
split ergativity (Hindi-Urdu) 135
Constructions with the ta-participle in Asoka (according
to Andersen 1986) 138
Nominative vs. accusative in nominal declension 142
Drift towards nominativity in the East 147
Word order in clauses with the ergative construction
(based on Puspadanta’s Harivamsapurana, Hv 81-83) 148
Ergative and nominative patterning of the verbs of
‘speaking’ in Apabhramsa 151
Verbs of speaking in Svayambhudeva
[Pc 1-38, Rittha 1-7] 152
Passive causative constructions in Mudraraksasa 168
Passive and active causatives in Mudraraksasa 176
Passivization on the goal 179
Passivization on the causee agent 180
Loss of perfectivity in the Apabhramsa imperative 186
The 3rd Pers imperative in Apabhramsa 187

Table 11.3 Apabhramsa modal forms 189

Table 11.4 OIA modal forms 189
Figure 11.1 Recategorization of the OIA gerundive 192
Table 13.1 Relative-correlative pairs of adverbs of place 213
Table 13.2 Relative-correlative pairs of adverbs of time 213
Table 13.3 Relative-correlative pairs of adverbs of manner 215
Figure 14.1 Sociolinguistic aspects of the history of Indo-Aryan
languages 223
Figure 14.2 The active and double-oblique alignment of
semantico-syntactic properties 224

AGr Ancient Greek

AMg Ardha-MagadhI
Ap Apabhramsa
Av Avesta
Class Skt Classical Sanskrit
DigAp Digambara Apabhramsa
EAp Eastern Apabhramsa
EH Eastern Hindi
Gu Gujarati
GuAp Gurjara Apabhramsa
H Hindi
IA Indo-Aryan
IE Indo-European
II lndo-Iranian
JMah Jain Maharastri
J$ Jain SaurasenI
Kash Kashmiri
Lat Latin
Li Lithuanian
Mah Maharastri
Mar Marathi
ME Middle English
Mg Magadhl
MIA Middle Indo-Aryan
MnGr Modem Greek
MP Middle Persian
NIA New Indo-Aryan
OAv Old Avadhi
OBraj Old Braj
OE Old English
OGu Old Gujarati
OH Old Hindi
OIA Old Indo-Aryan

OKhB Old Khan Boll

OMai Old Maithili
OMar Old Marathi
OP Old Persian
Pa Panjabi
Pai Paisac!
PIA Proto-Indo-Aryan
PIE Proto-Indo-European
Pkt(s) Prakrit(s)
R Rajasthani
S Saurasen!
SAp Southern Apabhramsa
Si Sindhi
Skt Sanskrit
SvAp Svetambara Apabhramsa
WAp Western Apabhramsa
WH Western Hindi

Av Avaiya&a-Erzahlungen
Ayar Aydrarigasutta
Bk Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha
BD Dhumatrkd (in Baumann)
BN Nemindthacatuspadika (in Baumann)
BS Salibhadda-kakka-kulam (in Baumann)
D Digha-Nikaya
Dasa Dandin’s Dasakumdracarita
Erz Erzahlungen in Maharastri
He Hcmacandra’s Siddha-Hema (Prakrit Grammar)
Hv Puspadanta’s Harivamsapurdna
JaCo The Jataka (with its Commentary)
Jc Puspadanta’s Jasaharacariu
JSC VTrakavi’s Jambusamicariu
Kal Kalyanamandirastotra (in Tessitori)
Kanha Kanha’s Dohakosa
Karp Rajasekhara’s Karpuramanjarl
Kc Kanakamara’s Karakandacariu
KI The Inscription of Kakkuka
Kp Somaprabha’s Kumdrapdlapratibodha
Kr Kramadlsvara’s Samksiptasara
Mbh Mahabhdrata
Mbhsy Patanjali’s Mahabhasya
Miyaputte Miyaputte ddrae (in B. D. Jain)
Mokkha Mokkhamagge (in B. D. Jain)
MP Puspadanta’s Mahapurana
Mrcch Sudraka’s Mrcchakatika
Mudr Visakhadatta’s Mudraraksasa
Mug Mugdhavabodhamauktika
P Panini’s AstadhyayT
Pc Svayambhudeva’s Paumacariu
Pd Ramasimha’s Pahudadoha
PE, RE Die GroBen Felsen-Edikte As okas

PSC Dhahila’s Paumasiricariu

Rittha Svayambhudeva’s Ritthanemicariu
RV Rig-Veda
S Samyutta Nikaya
Sak Kalidasa’s Abhijndna-tidkuntala
Saraha Saraha’s Dohakosa
Satta Hala’s Sattasal
SB Satapatha-Brahmana
Sc Haribhadra’s Sanatkumdracarita
Sd Devasena’s Savayadhammadohd
SR Addahamana’s Samdesa Rasaka
Vararuci Vararuci’s Prakrtaprakasa
Vetala J ambhaladatta ’s Vetalapancavimsati
Vikr Kalidasa’s Vikramorvasiya

Abl ablative
Abs absolutive case
Acc accusative
Act active
Ag agent
Aor aorist
Aux auxiliary
Ben beneficiary
Caus causative
CC complementary clause
Cop copula
Dat dative
Def definite
Dir direct
Erg ergative
Fem feminine
FG functional grammar
Foe focus
Fut future
Gen genitive
Ger gerund
Gerve gerundive
Go goal
Imp imperative
Impf imperfect
Impfve imperfective
Ind indicative
Inf infinitive
Instr instrumental
Intr intransitive
Loc locative
Masc masculine
MC main clause

Med/Pass medio-passive (middle voice)

Ms manuscript
N noun
Neg negative
Neut neuter
Nom nominative
NP noun phrase
Obj object
Obi oblique
Opt optative
Part participle
Pass passive
Pat patient
Perf perfect
Perfve perfective
Pers person
PI plural
PP past passive participle
Pres present
Pret preterit
Pro pronoun
Prt particle
Q question particle
Quot quotative particle
Rec recipient
Ref referential
Rel relative
SC subordinate clause
Sg singular
Subj subject
Top topic
Trans transitive
V verb
VO verb object
Voc vocative
VP verb phrase

My previous monograph, The Structure and Development o f Middle Indo-

Aryan Dialects (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996), was a systematic treatment of
the most likely historical processes that were responsible for the variation and
change found in phonology, morphology and syntax of Middle Indo-Aryan
dialects during the successive periods of their development. The upper limit of
that study was the middle of the 1st millennium B.C. and its lower limit the end
of the 1st millennium A.D.:

Old period: represented by Asokan inscriptions, Pali and Ardha-MagadhI

literary corpuses

Middle period: stage Prakrits (used in Sanskrit plays), Maharastri literary

corpus (lyric poetry and Jaina narratives)

Late period: represented by the Apabhramsa literary corpus.

In the sections dealing with phonology and morphology I devoted my

attention to the best documented varieties of MIA (Asokan Prakrits, Pali, Ardha-
MagadhI, Maharastri and Apabhramsa). The limits of space prevented the
legitimate inclusion o f the three types of non-Classical Sanskrit (Jain, Buddhist
and Epic Sanskrit) into the chapters dealing with phonology and morphology.
However, in the section dealing with syntax it proved necessary to draw on data
from late Classical Sanskrit for the sake of statistical accounts and comparisons
with Prakrits. Only a few topics deemed to be of fundamental importance were
examined in the section dealing with syntax: word order, cliticization of
pronominal objects, epistemic and deontic modality, evolution of aspect, passive
and the emergence of the ergative construction, and causativization. The emphasis
was placed on the transition from the OIA stage to the MIA stage, with only
casual remarks regarding the late MIA stage. The present monograph takes over
where the previous one stopped: all the above and some additional topics are
explored on the basis of the Apabhramsa literary corpus (6th - 12lh c.) in a unified
theoretical framework of Functional Grammar. The following volume will be
devoted to the early NIA period (11th - 16th c.)





1.1 Previous studies o f the late Middle Indo-Aryan period

The perusal of older representative works (in both European and Indie
languages) dealing with the historical development of Indo-Aryan languages
(Chatteiji 1926/1970, Bloch 1933/1965) reveals a neglect of the late MIA period
(Apabhramsa), when the real break with the synthetic typology of earlier MIA
begins. In morphology, both Chatterji and Bloch concentrate on the “phonetic
origins” of the MIA endings and their “alterations”. In syntax Bloch devoted
about 15 pages (Part Three, pp. 303-319) to the following topics: (i) verb “to be”
and the nominal sentence, (ii) word order, and (iii) linking of sentences (subordi­
nation). Bloch viewed the MIA period only as a transitional stage between OIA
and NIA and did not try to elaborate on MIA data synchronically. Consequently,
he did not present MIA dialects systematically but rather atomistically in terms
of the phonetic origins of their individual forms, and only rarely considered
paradigmatic relations obtaining in MIA after various sound changes had taken
place. Apabhramsa was to him “only a disfigured Sanskrit” (p. 29) undergoing
“phonetic deterioration” (p. 141).
In the subsequent decades syntactic matters of (late) MIA were typically
discussed under morphology. Bender’s bibliography o f Middle Indo-Aryan
studies (1969) lists 147 titles but only one devoted to syntax: Sukumar Sen’s
Historical Syntax o f Middle Indo-Aryan, published in Indian Linguistics (Vol. 13,
pp. 355-473) in 1953. Sen’s work is valuable for its extensive documentation
(with emphasis on the early and middle periods) but the author does not use any
particular syntactic theory in his explications. His later book, A Comparative
Grammar o f Middle Indo-Aryan (1960), is devoted to phonology and morphology,
with no section on syntax. In the West, H. Hendriksen’s Syntax o f the Infinite

Verb-Forms o f Pali (1944) is a significant contribution to the study of Pali

raorphosyntax. O. von Hinuber’s Studien zur Kasussyntax des Pali (1968)
contains well-organized material for the study of the syntax of case. In India,
S. K. Sen’s study of the Proto-New Indo-Aryan (1973) focuses on the transition
from late MIA to early NLA in the areas of phonology and morphology, but there
are only a few scattered comments on historical syntax. R. A. Singh’s Syntax o f
Apabhramsa (1980) contains a wealth of morphosyntactic data from the final
stages of MIA, but in the vein of S. Sen’s study (1953) does not offer any
syntactic framework for their evaluation. In spite of its title, Singh’s study deals
predominantly with morphology (syntax is dealt with by providing textual
examples for nominal and verbal categories under traditional classificatory labels).
In none of the above studies is there any attempt to outline morphosyntactic
trajectories into the early NIA period (1 l th/l2 th c.) when the real break with the
synthetic typology of earlier MIA begins (the reduction of the declension to two
cases, the incorporation of the periphrastic construction based on the PP (past
passive participle in -ta) into the verbal paradigm, the emergence of verbal
compounds to express grammatical and lexical aspect, etc.). The survey of the
“state of art” by von Hiniiber (1986) focuses on the earlier stages of MIA and has
no section on syntax. More recently, Breunis (1990) devoted a monograph to the
study of the nominal sentence containing the verbal adjective (the ta-form) in OIA
and MIA (Pali and Maharastri) but stopped short of examining the crucial
formative period of NIA, i.e. that of Apabhramsa. C. Masica (1991) in his Indo-
Aryan Languages devoted Chapter Seven (Historical phonology) to MIA prakritic
developments and their consequences for the NIA state o f affairs. Syntactic
matters of NIA are dealt with synchronically in Chapter Ten, with occasional
references to the earlier stages of MIA and OIA (e.g. in the sections dealing with
word order and the ergative construction, pp. 341-346).
New horizons in MIA syntactic studies have been opened by P. K. Andersen
in his articles (1980, 1982/1983, 1986) devoted to the problems of word order,
functional sentence perspective and the origin of the ergative construction in MIA,
cast in the framework of Functional Grammar. V. Bubenik in his articles (1987,
1989,1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 with C. Paranjape, 1997) explored the
issues of causativization, the nature of split ergativity, cliticization of pronominal
objects, and the evolution of the phrasal case in MIA with emphasis on the late
MIA and early NIA periods.
The early NIA period is probably better off. However, in India the study of the
early stages of NIA has been carried out by literature-oriented scholars, not
linguists. Older general studies of the historical development of Hindi and Marathi

concentrate on phonology, morphology and sociolinguistic aspects, offering very

little on syntactic change (e.g. J. Bloch 1919, U. N. Tivarf 2018 vi., N. Simha
1954, Dh. Vcrma 1954). There arc a few exceptions. D. Srivastav’s book (1970)
on historical syntax of Early Hindi prose (limited to the period of 1800-1850 but
offering some comments on the previous centuries) touches on a number of
syntactic issues in a descriptive fashion. V. Miltner’s study o f the Hindi sentence
structure in the works of Tulsidas (1967) is innovative in analyzing the data in his
own idiosyncratic theory of syntagmatics (the relationship between sentence parts
is analyzed dialectically). Indian scholars were more successful in philological
analysis of individual texts whose findings are in need of synthesis and critical
evaluation (e.g. S. K. Chatterji 1953, N. Simha 1954, S. Simha 1955, etc.).

1.2 The scope and aims o f the present study

In this monograph I am proposing to close up the lacuna in our knowledge of
the nature and pace of grammatical (morphosyntactic) change in the history of
Indo-Aryan languages during their medieval period (6th - 12th c.). The topics
investigated on the basis of the primary evidence of Apabhramsa literary works

i) Restructuring of the nominal systems and the evolution of the phrasal case.
(Chapter Five).
The rich OIA system of eight fusional cases was reduced to four during
the MIA period, and by the time of the earliest N1A texts this system was
reduced to a simple binary opposition of the direct and oblique case. 1
explored the causal nexus between the increased use of adverbial elements and
the loss of distinctive values of OIA/MIA fusional cases. These adverbial
elements ended up as postpositions cliticized to the oblique form in the NIA
ii) Restructuring of the pronominal systems. (Chapter Six).
It will be shown that the main event in the development and restructuring
of the pronominal systems of Ardha-MagadhI, Apabhramsa, and early NIA
languages was the appearance of a typologically rare double-oblique system,
known synchronically from Pashto and Kurdish, (cf. Bubenik 1989b). The
same oblique pronominal form of the l st/2nd Pers Sg encodes the subject
(agent) in ergative tenses and the object in non-ergative tenses. Thus in
Western Apabhramsa mai “me” and p a l (or tai) “you” were both Instr and
Acc. This system co-existed with another bipartite system found in the plural
forms. The latter system, in common with the nominal ergative type, was

based on the opposition absolutive-ergative: amhe (Nom/Acc) - amhehi (Instr)

“us” vs. haii (Abs) - mai (Acc/Instr) “me”. The behavior of MIA pronominal
clitics constitutes a complex problem that has not yet been studied properly.
Most generally, Prakrits show predilection for the postverbal enclisis of
pronominal objects in declarative and jussive sentences; their NIA descen­
dants lost pronominal clitics altogether.
iii) The evolution of the grammatical and lexical aspect. (Chapter Seven).
The diachronic study of the grammatical and lexical aspect in Indo-Aryan
has been long time overdue. The emergence of the verbal compounds for the
expression of the grammatical and lexical aspect in the Apabhramsa texts and
their further development in the early NIA texts will be in the focus of my
attention. It will be shown that the innovative progressive aspect had not yet
been quite systematized in Apabhramsa. In the quasinominal forms there
appeared a new imperfective passive participle, kijjunta “being made”, formed
‘paradoxically’ by attaching the active suffix -anta to the passive stem kijj-.
Expressions for the perfect (retrospective aspect) were systematized by the
end of the MIA period by combining the PP with the copula {kiu acchai “has
done” and kiu asi “had done”) or with the PP of tha “stand” (only in the
pluperfect kiu thiu “had done”).
iv) The emergence and development of the ergative construction. (Chapters Eight
and Nine).
The tug of war between conservative and eliminative forces in the history
of the IA ergative construction has been studied relatively extensively in the
past (Chatteiji 1926/1970, Hock 1980, Stump 1983, Bubenik 1989a).
However, the following two phenomena have not received sufficient attention:
the appearance of the absolute case at the end of the MIA period as a
necessary prerequisite for the development of the ergative construction and the
diverging development of the ergative and passive construction from the
ambiguous, but formally passive, structure inherited from OIA. It will be
shown that Indo-Aryan languages are of primary importance for our
assumptions about the co-existence of the ergative construction with a full
fledged system of the passive voice (cf. Bubenik 1993a). It will be demon­
strated that their syntactic differences were exploited for the purposes of
semantics (in the ergative construction the agent has to be mentioned
explicitly, whereas the passive construction is typically agentless) and
pragmatics (the choice of the passive construction may be motivated by the
postulate of the preservation of topic continuity, in the case of ‘true’ agentless

events, or in the case of ‘agents’ low on animacy scale, especially if the goal
is animate).
v) Passivization and causativization. (Chapter Ten).
It will be shown that in Prakrits as in Classical Sanskrit the causative
constructions were freely passivizable. In the stage Prakrits (Mudraraksasa)
the passivization on the causee and on the goal were equally common. In the
Apabhramsa texts passive causatives are much rarer than the active ones.
vi) Mood and modality. (Chapter Eleven).
Various interactions between mood, modality and agentivity in the
Apabhramsa texts will be analyzed (the imperative and optative sentences in
terms of the difference between commanding and requesting, on the one hand,
and intimacy and deference, on the other; attention will be paid to pragmatic
and semantic aspects of the passivization in jussive sentences with the finite
passive or the gerundive). The changing place of the gerundive in the modal
system will be examined. It will be shown that in MIA the gerundive was used
predominantly in contexts of deontic modality and to indicate deference, while
in early NIA the gerundive either disappeared (in central languages) or was
finitized and recategorized as the optative in Marathi or the future tense in
Eastern languages.
vii) Shorter sections are devoted to the study of the remaining syntactic phenom­
ena: absolute constructions (Chapter Twelve), and, complementation and
relativization (Chapter Thirteen).

1.3 Methodology
A sufficient database for subsequent linguistic analysis was created by
excerpting representative texts from the period under investigation (cf. Chapter
Four). Suitable examples (sentences containing nominal and pronominal forms;
passive, ergative and causative constructions; absolute constructions; relative
clauses etc.) were transliterated and provided with their English translation;
original sentences were parsed and analyzed for the grammatical encoding of the
agent (absolutive or instrumental), the goal (= patient), the morphological
category of the verb (finite active or passive, active or passive participle), the
derivational category of the verb (causative), etc. Comments regarding the
semantic category of the agent (pronominal, nominal), the semantic category of
the verb (saying, perception, motion, etc.), the type of agreement of the predicate
(subjective, objective, impersonal) were added. All this information was entered
into a computer database program. The following is an example of a computer
entry of all the pertinent information:

i) Source (author, text, line) Somaprabha, Kumarapdla [40.7-9] and

ii) Text in transliteration ja acchai pecchantu ditthao
Vararui tena
iii) Grammatical analysis when be+3/SG watch+PART see+PP
Vararuci he+INSTR
iv) English translation “He saw Vararuci while he was watching”
v) Comments Progressive aspect in SC, ergative construction
in MC (pronominal Ag, Obj agreement, verb of

These data were manipulated and retrieved to aid with statistical analysis of
selected morphosyntactic phenomena on the basis of individual authors/texts. I
assumed that statistical preferences of individual authors/texts tend to reflect
grammatical preferences and productivity. In the absence o f native speakers they
provided the only means of determining ‘basicness’ for a number of grammatical
statements. In addition, changing frequencies in historically successive texts may
provide a sensitive quantification of ongoing changes involving the phenomena
under scrutiny: the spread of the phrasal case and the loss of the suffixal case
(Chapter Five); the spread of the ergative type and the elimination o f the double­
oblique system in pronouns (6.2.1); the increasing use of verbal compounds to
mark aspectual categories (7.2.1-2); the incidence of the old synthetic and the new
analytic passive (8.1-2); and the incidence of the passive vs. active causative

1.4 Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework which I adopted in this monograph is essentially
that of F(unctional) G(rammar) available in numerous writings of the Prague
School (Danes 1964, Sgall et al. 1986) and the Amsterdam School of Functional
Grammar (Dik 1989, Siewierska 1991). The model of FG possesses a number of
advantages for writing context-sensitive grammars. The most valuable is its ‘tri-
stratal’ organization o f the deep structure articulated by Danes in 1964. The three
levels within the ‘syntax’ are:

i) the level o f the semantic structure

ii) the level o f the grammatical structure (called currently ‘morphosyntax’)
iii) and the level of the organization of the utterance (called alternatively
‘functional sentence perspective’, ‘discourse’ or ‘pragmatics’).

(4) “The book was given to the friend by DEVADATTA” (i.e. not by someone

It should be observed that in (4) Sanskrit may place the Agent into the focal
position in either voice (active or passive), while English has to use the passive.
The above Sanskrit data present Sanskrit as a nominative-accusative language.
The main morphosyntactic change which took place during the MIA period was
the shift to the ergative-absolutive typology whose necessary prerequisite was the
loss of the nominative-accusative distinction (OIA Nom -ah vs. Acc -am end up
as the ‘absolutive’ case in -a or -u by the late MIA times). It became necessary to
restore the special status of the Agent and the instrumental suffix (OIA -ena >
MIA -e) used in the passive construction resumed this function. Certain passive
constructions became ‘demarked’ and started to be taken as their active versions
(for details cf. Bubenik 1994b). The Apabhramsa equivalents of the Sanskrit
examples in (1) - (4) are presented in (5) - (8):

(5) Devadatte putthaya mittaho dinna

(6) Devadatte mittaho PUTTHAYA dinna
(7) Putthaya Devadatte MITTAHO dinna
(8) Putthaya mittaho DEVADATTE dinna

Their English equivalents:

(5) “Devadatta gave the book to a friend”

(6) “Devadatta gave the friend a BOOK”
(7) “The book, Devadatta gave it to a FRIEND”
(8) “The book was given to the friend by DEVADATTA”

Taken actively (= ergatively), (1) and (2) continue the former state of affairs of
assigning the semantic and pragmatic functions, with the Focus favoring the later
position in the clause. (4), however, allows for the passive interpretation, which
typically places the focal Agent in the final position. The active interpretation for
the focal Goal (PUTTHAYA mittaho Devadatte dinna) would run “It was the
BOOK Devadatta gave to a fidend”. Skipping over the late MIA state of affairs
(Chapters Eight and Nine), we may ascertain that the solution of some of the
above ambiguities (passive morphology linked with active or passive meaning)
was provided during the early NIA period as a result of the emancipation of the
passive construction (jdna-passive) and the appearance of focusing particles (such

as hi and hhi in Hindi)2. To conclude this section we may examine the Hindi
equivalents of the above Apabhramsa examples in (9) - (12):

(9) Devadatta=ne kitab dost=ko diya

(10) Devadatta=ne kitab=hl dost^ko diya
(11) Devaddatta=ne=hl kitab dost=ko diya
or Devadatta=se kitab dost=ko diya gaya (h a i).
(12) Devadatta=se kitab=hl dost=ko diya gaya (hai)

Unlike Apabhramsa which relies on word order to assign pragmatic functions, in

Hindi word order is largely immobilized and the pragmatic function of Focus is
assigned by the particle hi. The formative early NLA stage of these matters will be
studied extensively in the second volume of this monograph.


1. We possess no direct evidence (in terms o f texts provided with accent marks) regarding the
accent and prosodic patterns o f M IA. Certain conclusions, however, may be reached on the
basis o f various vocalic phenomenon, such as vocalic changes, syncopation, shortening and
lengthening, above all in Pali (cf. Geiger 1916:47 —49). Regarding middle and late M IA
dialects, see Bubenik ( 1996: 29- 33 , 61- 63).2

2. More specifically, the ‘ force’ o f hi is restrictive and that o f bhi inclusive; see M cGregor
( 1977: 27- 28 ).


2.1 Regional states in Northern India (6th - 12th century A.D.)

We may start our short survey of the main historical events during the period
of our linguistic inquiry at the end of the 5th c. A.D. The 5th c. saw the erosion of
the Gupta power and the final collapse of their empire. These events were
precipitated by the invasion of Huns, who ruled Northern India until their king
Mihirakula (+ 542) was driven out of the Gangetic Doab into Kashmir. The Hunic
military activity was accompanied by large-scale demographic movements by
which various central Asian peoples moved to Northern India. Among them were
the Gurjaras who were destined to play a major rule in the spread of Apabhramsa
and its rise to a literary status. The Hunic activity subsided by the end of the 6th c.,
when the Huns were challenged by the Turks and Persians in Bactria.
The political scene of Northern India during the 6th c. remained confused. The
country was divided into four petty kingdoms: that of the Guptas of Magadha, the
Mahakauris around Kanauj, the Pushyabhutis in Thanesar, and the Maitrakas in
Gujarat. Only the latter kingdom survived until the middle of the 8th c., when the
Maitrakas were defeated by the Arabs. The major ruler during the 7th c. was
Harsha, the king of Kanauj (606-647), whose power extended as far as Panjab,
Kashmir, Nepal and Vallabhi (in Surashtra). His advances to the South were
stopped by Pulakeshin II (ca. 620). After Harsha’s death his kingdom, a loose
feudal conglomerate, disintegrated into a number of small states; ca. 700 A.D. the
city of Kanauj was ruled by Yasovarman whose main deed, the conquest of Upper
Bengal and the slaying of its king, was immortalized by Vakpati in his Prakrit
epos Gaudavaho (cf. 2.3.2). During the subsequent centuries (8 - 10th) the
overlordship of Kanauj was disputed by three powers: the Rashtrakutas (Western
Dekkan), the Pratiharas (Rajasthan), and the Palas in Eastern India. The latter
dynasty was founded ca. 750 A.D. and much o f its military activity was directed
towards the conquest of the imperial city Kanauj. The Pratiharas are claimed to
be descended from the Gurjara people of Rajasthan. Their name (etymologically
“door-keepers”) may be taken as indicative of their ‘low-caste’ and ultimately
foreign origin. By the end of the 8th c. the Pratiharas ruled over a large part of
Rajasthan, Ujjain and the city of Kanauj.

At the beginning of the 8th c. the earli est encounter of the westernmost part of
India with ethnic Arabs took place. In 712 the lower valley of Indus (Sind),
became the easternmost extremity of the general Arab expansion through Asia.
The Arabs under Muhammad bin Qasim (from Basra) met with some resistance
from the forces of Sind’s ruler Raja Dahir (battles at Debal, Rewar and
Brahmanabad). Sind being half desert was overrun rather fast, but the Arabs’
attempts at further conquests northwards, eastwards and southwards were resisted
by the Pratiharas (King Bhoja) and Rashtrakutas. During the 9th c. Sind and
Multan (the area on the middle course of Indus) were incorporated into the
Omayyad caliphate, and under the Abbasid caliphs Sind was culturally integrated
into the Dar al-Islam, the ‘Islamic World’. In 871 the caliph al-Mu?tamid
bestowed the government of Sind on the Saffarid Ya?qub ibn Layth (861-879)
who became the virtual ruler of the eastern frontier provinces of the caliphate
from the Indus valley to Turkistan in Central Asia.
The rivalry between the Pratiharas and the Rashtrakutas lasted throughout the
9th and 10th c. (in 916 the latter attacked the city of Kanauj). At the end of the
10th c., in 997, a Turkish nobleman, Mahmud of Ghazni, moved for the first time
his army from the mountains of the Hindu Kush through the Khyber Pass to the
Panjab plains. In 1018 his armies sacked the imperial Kanauj and the Pratihara
power came to its end. In the Western Deccan the Rashtrakutas were replaced by
the (Later) Chalukyas. Until 1030 Mahmud’s army invaded Northern India on
almost annual basis.
The remaining historical events of the 12th c. are fairly well known. The
second large scale-attack by the Turks, Afghans and Persians took place under the
leadership of Muhammad Ghuri at the end of the 12th c. His invading force entered
the Indus plain through the more southerly Gomal pass, and a series of annual
campaigns followed: in 1185 Muhammad conquered Lahore, annexed Multan and
Sind, and in 1192 defeated the last Indo-Aryan king of Delhi, Prthviraja.
Muhammad was assassinated in 1206 but, unlike on the previous occasions, this
did not mean a temporary withdrawal of the invading force. His generals, Qutb-
ud-din Aibak and Muhammad Bakhtiyar, continued the work of expansion of the
Islamic kingdom in Northern India. Their armies conquered Gwalior, Kalinjar,
Gujarat, Bihar and Bengal (the latter two without any resistance) and within thirty
years the entire region between the Indus and the Brahmaputra was overrun by
Muslims. The foundation of the Muslim rule in India was now laid permanently.

2.2 Sociolinguistic impact o f foreign invasions and settlements on Northern

Let us return to Sind during the 8th c. As mentioned above, in the long run the
Arabs failed to retain their political power in the regions they overran during the
8th c. It is usually claimed that they lacked the necessary skills and knowledge for
the management of complicated matters such as taxation and registration, which
had to be entrusted to the natives. Thus the rural population of the Indus valley
was left completely alone and the Arab government had to adopt local Indian
administration. The contacts with the indigenous population were restricted to the
cities and they obviously produced a limited number of Arabic-Sindhi bilinguals.
We have also some information about the Arab soldier colonists who settled down
and intermarried with the local Sindhi women (according to the Islamic marriage
law, a Muslim may take a non-Muslim wife, who does not need to be converted).
The rapid islamization of the region was being helped by the Islamic missionaries
of various sects. We know that the first missionary of the sect of the Ismailis had
arrived in Sind in 883, and that Multan was islamized by the Qaramites during the
reign of the Fatimid caliphs (10th c.). To help the missionary activity the Quran
was translated into the local Indo-Aryan tongue, Old Sindhi, as early as 883. W7e
also know that there was a Persian version of the epos Mahabharata translated
from Arabic in 1026. The latter, in its turn, was translated from Old Sindhi (cf.
Khubchandani 1969:215). Most unfortunately, nothing of these early translations
came down to us. Summarily, the lower and middle parts of the Indus valley were
linguistically Arabo-Persianized and culturally and religiously islamized before
similar processes started taking place in Panjab and the Gangetic Doab.
In Northern India the later Islamic conquerors and settlers were predominantly
ethnic Turks from Afghanistan and Turkistan who spoke heavily arabized Persian,
the lingua franca of Eastern Islam. Unlike in the Indus valley where the Indo-
Aryan inhabitants met ethnic Arabs and were exposed to colloquial Arabic, in
Northern India the presence of Arabic was limited to religious service and high
literature, whose vehicle was the literary Classical variety. It is extremely difficult
to ascertain the exact amount and the nature of cultural, religious, social and
linguistic impact which the Persians, Turks and Afghans exercised during the 11th
and 12lh c. in Panjab and the Western Gangetic Doab. For these two centuries our
primary historical evidence is fragmentary. We know that isolated groups of
Persians, Turks and Afghans settled down in different parts of the country, but the
nature of social contacts between them and the indigenous population is not
sufficiently known. There is some information regarding the imposition of special
taxes on Turkish settlers and their building activity (within three decades of the

devastating invasions of the temple-town Somnath, the inhabitants of Gujarat

allowed the Muslims to build up a mosque at Ahmedabad in 1053 A.D.). The
upper class of the Hindu society, Brahmans, were certainly hostile to the Muslim
settlers; a piece of direct evidence is available in a contemporary historian,
Albiruni, who came to India with Mahmud of Ghazni (Sachau, 1914:10):

they forbid having any connection with them by intermarriage, or any other kind o f
relationship, or by sitting and drinking with them, because thereby, they think, they
would be polluted

On the other hand, some writers have gone to the length of reporting that some of
the lower castes, which were denied certain human rights, welcomed the message
of equality and readily became converted. In the few recorded cases of conver­
sion, people who were instrumental in them were Sufi and Ismaili saints. This
type of activity required certain linguistic skills and we have reports that Sufis
tried to learn the Indo-Aryan tongue of the Hindus.
By the end of the 12th c. as a result of the permanent settlement of the Turks
and Persians in Northern India and the spread of Islam, the upper social strata of
Medieval India ended up being divided culturally, religiously and linguistically.
This is shown in a highly simplified fashion in Figure 2.1. Classical Arabic as a
language of religious service and Islamic scholarship, and Persian as a language
o f administration and literature appeared on the top of the sociolinguistic
continuum to match Vedic and Classical Sanskrit used by Hindus in parallel
functions. (The relexification of Indo-Aryan from Persian taking place in the
subsequent centuries will be studied in the second volume of this monograph).

2.3 Literary languages o f Medieval India (Sanskrit, Prakrits and Apabhramsa)

During the late MIA period (6th - 12th c.) a number of ‘languages’ were used
for literary works: Classical Sanskrit, Prakrits (stage Prakrits in Sanskrit plays,
Maharastrf in epic and lyric poetry) and Apabhramsa. It may be said that this
co-existence of essentially three literary vehicles of artistic expression (Sanskrit -
Prakrit - Apabhramsa) represents one of the typical features of the Medieval
period. It is important to realize that we are not dealing with three different
languages in the usual sense of the word; rather we are dealing with ‘triglossia’
definable as the simultaneous use of three functional varieties o f the same
language for literary purposes. I am proposing this term as an extension of
‘diglossia’ (defined technically by C. Ferguson 1964). Diglossia, the use of two
functional varieties of the same language should not be confused with
‘bilingualism’, the ability to handle two different languages.

C I qcci/ 'o I A r o k w ' \/a/Ii/' Concl/rtf

Religious Religious
service service
(Ulemas) (Brahmans)

Administratic Scholarship,
scholarship, literature
literature (Hindus)


Figure 2 .1: Sociolinguistic continuum in Medieval India (1 l'h - 13,h c.)

This stratification o f literature in Medieval India is in general typical of that

found in Medieval societies, but India furnishes an extreme case of it. The closest
European parallel is perhaps available in Byzantium whose authors could avail
themselves of one of the three varieties for their creations: the Atticizing
Hochsprache imitating classics of the 5th/4th c., the ‘official’ Byzantine koine
continuing Hellenistic koine, or the ‘vernacular’ koine approximating the spoken
language. There are further interesting details making it worthwhile to pursue this
parallel. The beginnings of this complex situation in Byzantium go back to the 3rd
c. B.C., when the Hellenistic koine, a ‘common language’ (koine dialektos) spread
through the entire Middle East. Its regional basis was Attic, but in its new function
of the ‘world’ language of Alexander’s far-flung empire it diverged in many
respects from the language used by the Athenian writers of the 5th/4lh c. (cf.
Bubenik 1989c). By the end of the 1st c. B.C. a classicizing tendency (so-called
Atticism) set in and spread with rapidity throughout the educational system of the
upper classes in the Roman empire. By the end of the 2nd c. A.D. the situation in
the schools could be described as a rigorous linguistic purism buttressed by lists
of ‘prescriptions’ for phonology, morphosyntax and lexicon. In post-Christian
centuries this diglossic situation started correlating with the new religious division
of the Roman world. Christians who from the beginning did not belong to the

educated elite used Hellenistic koine in their sacred books; similarly before them
during the 3rd c. B.C. the Jewish community used Hellenistic koine in the
translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint). Both religions rejected Classical
Attic-Ionic, the tongue of pagan literature. An Indian parallel to this rejection of
the hitherto available prestigious literary tongue is the adoption of Pali by
Buddhists and Ardha-Magadhi by Jainas instead of Sanskrit, the tongue of Hindu
scriptures. The situation changed when the Christians undertook missionary
activity among the upper classes which had to be reached in the dignified classical
tongue of the Attic-Ionic writers. Browning (1989:107) mentions a striking
example of this change of attitude between Clement of Alexandria (c. 215) and
his disciple Origen (185-253/254). Clement wrote in classicizing Atticist Greek
for the consumption of the educated pagan elite, while Origen, engaged in
doctrinal polemics within the church, wrote in technical koine, comparable with
the language used by contemporary scientists. In the following sections, we shall
see that Buddhist and Jain monks also made use of Sanskrit in their writings. This
diglossic situation was carried on into Medieval Byzantium. The Church, imperial
historians and rhetoricians continued using the Atticizing Hochsprache, while
legal documents, ceremonial and military manuals, chronicles, etc. were written
in Byzantine koine. During the earlier period a special category was represented
by the hagiographa, edifying accounts of the lives of saints (e.g. Life of St. John
the Almsgiver of the 7th c.) written in an approximation to spoken language (to
judge by the confusion of the aorist and perfect, uncertainty in the use of the
dative, Latin borrowings, etc.). On the Indian side we may mention the lives of
Jain saints written in the ‘lowest’ code approximating spoken language,
Apabhramsa (cf. 2.3.3). By the 12th c. we witness the emergence of vernacular
Greek in poems composed in 15-syllable accentual verse, a genre outside the
classicizing influence. The late Byzantine vernacular corpus (poems, chronicles,
romances, novels, etc.) is composed in an approximation to spoken medieval
Greek. This vernacular koine became the third choice the contemporary writers
had for their creations.
But let us return to Medieval India and assess the three functional varieties for
literary production diachronically. In diachronic perspective these three
synchronically available varieties of IA are a product of the elevation to the
literary status of formerly spoken varieties: Classical Sanskrit during the early
MIA period, followed by Prakrits during the MIA period, and lastly by
Apabhramsa at the end of the MIA period. Figure 2.2 captures in a highly
simplified fashion this process. The horizontal line represents the ‘ordinary’
genetic transmission of IA through centuries, and the ascending arrows the

u ia ntu ly i^aic cany


Figure 2.2: Literary languages o f Medieval India

‘elevation’ to the literary status of formerly spoken varieties. During this process
Classical Sanskrit and Prakrits were not replaced by later varieties (i.e. Sanskrit
by Prakrit, and Prakrit by Apabhramsa) but moved up vertically into the position
of the ‘high’/ ‘prestigious’/ ‘dignified’ variety to be imitated by the ‘low’ one.
From the point of view of modem theories of the acquisition of language, the
‘high’ varieties are transmitted in a non-genetic ‘interrupted’ fashion, indicated
by the dotted line.

2.3.1 Classical Sansbit

During the late MIA period Classical Sanskrit used in contemporary artistic
literature (kavya) had long ceased to be a ‘living’ language in the sense of
‘ordinary’ genetic transmission. During the post-Christian centuries Sanskrit was
becoming increasingly a language spoken and read by the privileged ones who
could afford formal education (upper strata of Hindu, Jain and Buddhist
communities). From our modem viewpoint, it will always amaze us that some of
the best pieces of Sanskrit literature were written during the medieval centuries
when the population o f India at large spoke late Prakrits. But India is not unlike
many other oriental societies where the language of ‘high’ literature had always
been lagging behind the spoken language. Like Latin in Medieval Europe,
Classical Sanskrit became the appropriate linguistic medium for artistic and
scientific literature during the Medieval period.
There is no need to discuss the scientific Sanskrit corpus; only the valuable
grammatical literature will be considered in Chapter Three. But a few comments
on Sanskrit kavya literature are in order in view of its influence on Prakrit and

Apabhramsa creations. The Sanskrit term kavya “poetry” in broader sense

includes not only metrical poetry (padya) but also prose (gadya). Metrical poetry
may be written in the major form (sargabandha “consisting of cantos”) or in the
minor form (simple and multiple-stanza poetry). Prose ‘poems’ are o f two types:
fiction/'romance (kathd) and true story (dkhydyikd). The third type is a mixture of
these two: mixed prose and verse (campu).
Major poetry (mahakavya) in Sanskrit and Prakrit flourished until the 18th c.
Prakrit and Apabhramsa creations will be mentioned in the context of the
discussion of their linguistic medium (2.3.2-3 and 4.1-11). Sanskrit mahakavya
after Kalidasa was cultivated by Hindu poets, but for the purposes of this
monograph we do not have to dwell on their creations (cf. Lienhard
1984:196-211). At the end of the period under examination, mention must be
made of Jayadeva’s Gitagovinda, “The song of Krsna” (12th c.), one of the last
great masterpieces of Sanskrit poetry. Jayadeva was a great innovator and it is
maintained that his predilection for rhyme is explainable by a strong influence
from rhymed Apabhramsa and popular poetry.
From about the 3rd c. A.D. rich literature developed in Jain circles. Its poets
were learned monks who could write their works in any of the three available
varieties: Sanskrit, Maharastri (2.3.2) and Apabhramsa (2.3.3 and 4.1-10). A great
portion of their creations display epic features and close resemblance to narrative
writings, more specifically to Hindu mythological scriptures called puranas (a
propos their relation to other branches of Sanskrit literature, esp. epics and the
sastras cf. Rocher 1986:80-95). In this context we have to mention one Jain work,
called a carita “biography” rather than purana. Vimalasuri’s Paumacariya, “Life
of Padma” (= Rama), calls itself apurana [1.32 and 118.111]. Its ‘creativity’ vis-
a-vis Valmlki’s Ramayana has been answered either way, the Jain position being
that it took its origin within the Jain tradition. We will return to this work in our
discussion of its linguistic medium, Jain Maharastri (2.3.2).
To conclude our short outline of Sanskrit mahakavya we may mention
historical narratives in prose and verse written by both Hindus (in Sanskrit) and
Jainas (in Sanskrit and Apabhramsa). These works “resulting from the growing
feeling of regional loyalty . . . assumed a new importance” (Thapar 1966:255).
Bilhana, a court poet of the Calukya ruler of Kalyana, Vikramaditya VI
Tribhuvanamalla, composed (before 1088) the biography of his patron,
Vikramdhkadevacarita “The Deeds of His Majesty Vikramarika”, in eighteen
cantos. In 1148, the Kashmiri poet Kalhana completed his opus entitled
Rdjatarahgini “The Stream of Kings”, a chronicle of the kings of Kashmir.
Hemacandra’s Kumarapdlacarita “Experiencess of Kumarapala” is a notorious

example of a scientific work that is also poetry (sastrakavya). The first twenty
cantos of this opus are in Sanskrit and the latter eight in Prakrit; the Sanskrit
cantos illustrate the rules of the Sanskrit portion of Hemacandra’s grammar
(Books 1-7), and the Prakrit cantos exemplify the rules of the Prakrit portion,
Book 8 (cf. 3.2). This work extols the deeds of the king Kumarapala (of Anhilvad
in Gujarat) whom Hemacandra had converted to Jainism in 1152.
A much earlier biography of the king Harsha of Kanauj (606-647) by Bana,
entitled Harsacarita, may be classified as an dkhydyikd “true story”. Harsha was
the most potent king in post-Hunic Northern India (cf. 2.1) who managed to write
three plays. Bana’s contemporaries, Dandin and Subandhu, composed historical
fictions (kathd “story, romance”) which came down to us: Dasakumdracarita
“The Experiences of Ten Princes” and Vdsavadattakathd “The Story of
Vasavadatta”, respectively.
During the medieval period one may find the same subject matter treated in
Sanskrit and Prakrit by different authors, or the same author using Sanskrit and
(several) Prakrit(s) in the same work. For instance, one of the most popular
biographic stories, Rdmacarita “Rama’s life”, came down to us as Padmapurana
in Sanskrit (by Ravisena in 678 A.D.), in Jain Maharastri (Vimalasuri’s
Paumacariya ca. 300 A.D.), and in Apabhramsa (Svayambhudeva’s Paumacariu,
ca. 8th. c. A.D.). The legendary biography of Krsna is available in Sanskrit in
Bhagavatapurana (attempting “the sanskritization of the popular Krsna legend”,
cf. Rocher 1986:146) or in Apabhramsa (Svayambhudeva’s Ritthanemicariu and
Puspadanta’s Mahdpurdna, ca. 10th c.); cf. more under 2.3.3 and 4.4-5.
Especially at the end of the period under consideration we find authors making
use of all the available literary vehicles in one work. One of them was
Somaprabha who composed his Kumarapdlapratibodha (ca. 1195) to illustrate the
rules of Hemacandra’s grammar. There are at least 58 kathas “stories/tales” in his
opus written mostly in Jain Maharastri, alternating between prose and verse, with
an admixture of Sanskrit, Prakrit and Apabhramsa strophas borrowed from other
works. Five stories consist completely of Sanskrit verses, and five pieces are
composed in Apabhramsa (Jiva-manah-karana-samldpa-kathd, Sthulabhadra-
katha, description of 12 Bhavanas, a hymn on Pdrsva, and four descriptions of the
seasons of the year). What was the reason for this ‘macaronic’ character of
Somaprabha’s work? One of them was certainly to prove that he excelled equally
in all the three literary media of the 12th c. in addition to his ‘native’ Old Gujarati.
It is o f importance to realize that the Apabhramsa sections were not taken from
some older works, but represent genuine creations of Somaprabha and can thus

be taken for authentic representations of the 12th c. Apabhramsa which would be

very close to Old Gujarati (cf. Alsdorf 1929:7).
Hemacandra’s and Somaprabha’s creations are instructive in providing us with
an insight into how someone could perform in several linguistic media. Among
other things, the availability of ‘transfer’ grammars, such as that by Hemacandra
(cf. 3.2) equipped the authors with versatility in converting one variety into
another. As in Medieval European literature, the wholesale borrowing of various
materials (attributes, themes, phrases) was normal. We have to remind ourselves
that the question of whether a poem was original or not “would not have struck
an Indian reader as an important one” (Lienhard 1984:43). 1 will not pursue this
issue in the present monograph. For my purposes it will be more important to
search for ‘glimpses’ of our poets’ ‘native’ vernaculars and regionalisms
indicative of the place and time of the composition.
Summarily, at the end of the MIA period, members of the ‘educated elite’
ended up with two or even three linguistic media at their command. The highest
prestige was attached to Classical Sanskrit w'hich functioned as a ‘frame of
reference’ for any literary activity. Between Classical Sanskrit and the regional
dialects (= emerging NIA vernacular languages) we find a fluid continuum of
Prakrits and Apabhramsa. Their use of early Prakrits during the late MIA period
may be viewed as showy ‘antiquarianism’ (cf. 2.3.2). Apabhramsa, a literary
variety based on late Prakrits, became the literary ‘koine’ of Northern India during
the last centuries (10th - 12th) under consideration (cf. 2.3.3). Apabhramsa’s
intermediate position in the linguistic continuum is manifested by influences from
‘above’ and ‘below’: from the classical literary models (Sanskritisms and
Prakritisms) and from the spoken language (in individual works one may
distinguish Gujaratisms, Rajasthanisms, Marathicisms. and Magadhisms). Figure
2.3 captures these matters in a highly simplified fashion.

2.3.2 Prakrits
A number of Prakrits were used during the MIA period for various literary
genres. Excluding Pali (which is outside the time limits set up for this mono­
graph), the following Prakrits were used in poetry, Sanskrit plays and various Jain

Maharastrl - in poetry
Maharastn, SaurasenI, MagadhI - in Sanskrit plays
Ardha-MagadhI - in the Jain Canon

frame o f reference’ (model, standard)


terary ‘koine’ (influenced from written and spoken language)

living’ language

Figure 2.3: The literary-linguistic continuum during the late MIA period

Jain-Maharastri and Jain-SaurasenI - in post-canonic writings

PaisacI - is known to us only through statements by grammarians. Prakrits used in poetry and Sanskrit plays

Maharastri, according to the grammarians, was the Prakrit par excellence, the
‘standard’ Prakrit. While the grammarians describe its features, in the case of
other Prakrits they mention only how they deviate from the ‘standard’ Prakrit.
According to Dandin (7th c.) Maharastri was the most ‘excellent’ Prakrit. It was
based on the living tongue of the northwestern part of the Deccan (along the river
Godavari) and became a ‘lingua franca’ of Southern India in post-Christian
centuries. Its prestige is connected with the fact that it was spoken in the
dominions of the powerful dynasty of Satavahanas (the Andhra dynasty). About
230 B.C. Satavahanas replaced the house of Maurya in Deccan, became
paramount sovereigns of Trans-Vindhy an India during the 1st c. B.C, and restored
their power during the 1st c. A.D., when they ruled over Maharashtra, Kathiawar,
Central India, Berar and Malwa.
The earliest and the most celebrated work in Maharastri is the anthology of
short poems (laghukavya) called Sattasal (Skt Saptasati) “The Volume of
Sevenhundred Poems” written by various poets. The most illustrious among them
was Hala, the seventeenth successor to the throne of the Satavahana dynasty (2nd
c. A.D.), who authored forty' of them. The existing version contains later revisions
and was in the making between 200 and 450 A.D. (cf. Lienhard 1984:81).
Two other works in the mahakavya tradition are worth mentioning:
Pravarasena’s Setubandha “The Building of the Bridge” and Vakpati’s
Gaudavaho “The Slaying of the Gauda” . Pravarasena is probably identical with
the Kashmiri king Pravarasena II (6th c.) and his Setubandha is alternatively

known as the Ravanavaha “The Killing of Ravana”. It narrates in fifteen cantos

the Rama legend in a difficult style full of repetition of sounds and long
compounds. Vakpati in his Gaudavaho extols the military exploits of his princely
patron, the king Yasovarman of Kanauj (first half of the 8th c.), who defeated the
king of the Gauda country (Upper Bengal). Vakpatrs epos was the last major
work in the older tradition of Prakrit literature.
As far as its linguistic relationship to OIA is concerned, Maharastri is the most
advanced Prakrit. Three of its salient features are:

i) The three sibilants of OIA merged here into one dental sibilant.
ii) All intervocalic voiceless stops were voiced and fricated, and subsequently all
voiced fricatives were reduced to zero (contrast OIA prakrta “Prakrit”, Mah
paua). Similarly, all murmured voiced stops were fricated, lost their
consonantal component but kept the murmur as a segment (OIA mukham
“face”, Mah muhd; OIA dadhi “curds”, Mah dahi).
iii) Final -ah of OIA became -o.

Saurasenl is deemed to be the Prakrit of the Madhyadesa (Surasena was the

name of the country around Mathura). Unlike for Maharastri and MagadhI, we
have no inscriptional evidence for this Prakrit. In Sanskrit plays it is spoken by
women and the Vidusaka “clown, jester”. Apart from these passages there are no
independent literary works in Saurasenl. The following are its three main features:

i) As in Maharastri the three sibilants of OIA merged into one dental sibilant.
ii) Intervocalic stops are reduced to zero with the exception of the voiced dental
stop (plain or murmured) whether the original or arising from the voiceless
one (OIA gata “gone”, Mah gaa but £ gada\ OIA jlvatha “you live”, Mah
jlvaha but S jlvadha).
iii) Final -ah of OIA became -o (as in Mah).

MagadhI, on the other hand, possesses some inscriptional evidence going back
to the 3rd c. B.C. (Magadhisms in Asokan inscriptions). MagadhI used in Sanskrit
plays may be viewed as a stylized literary variety based on the dialects of the East.
In Sanskrit plays it is used to stereotype people of a low social status.

i) Unlike in Maharastri and Saurasenl, the three sibilants of OIA merged here
into one palatal sibilant (OIA suska “dry”, Mg suska).

ii) Intervocalic stops in Magadhi are reduced to zero as in Sauraseni (OIA

bhavisyati “will be”, S bhavissai, Mg bhavissadi, vs. Mah havisai). However,
the environment for their fricativization also includes the voiced palatal
affricate (OIA adya “today”, Mg ayya vs. Mah ajja).
iii) Final -ah of OIA became -e (unlike in Mah and &).

A propos the Magadhi ‘shibboleths’, s and l (Mg merged OIA r and l in favor
of the latter), it is possible to specify their focus and diffusion in Asokan
inscriptions (cf. Bubenik 1996:11). It was pointed out that only one site (the
Jogimara cave) among the Eastern inscriptional sites showed i, and that less than
a half of the places displayed merger of OIA liquids in favor of /. One could thus
conclude that the ‘strict’ Magadhi dialect (with s, /, and -e for OIA -ah) was
confined to a rather small area; the greater part of the Eastern regions showed only
two of the three features; and the periphery of the region possessed none of these
Magadhi characteristics. Pataliputra, the capital of Mauryan empire, is usually
considered to be the region where the ‘strict’ Magadhi must have been spoken.
Elsewhere in Magadha there was less ‘strict’ Magadhi spoken. This dialect, called
traditionally Ardha-Magadhi, did not merge OIA sibilants i and s, and liquids /
and r. This variety was used by Jainas for the composition of the earliest sutras of
their Canon.
It is generally assumed that stage Prakrits do not represent the actual speech
of the people they are supposed to typify. Nevertheless, they are based upon it and
remain for us pieces of valuable evidence regarding phonology, morphology and
syntax of regional and social Middle Indo-Aryan dialects. This value diminishes
with time. The later plays, written by writers who learnt their Prakrits from
grammars, present us with Prakrits following strictly the rules of Prakrit
grammarians. For instance, the tyrannic use of the passive causative in Sanskrit
and Prakrit sections of Visakhadattas’s Mudraraksasa (ca. 800 A.D.) belongs to
the realm of artificial linguistic usage (cf. 10.4). As late as ca. 900 A.D.,
Rajasekhara, a court poet at Kanauj, composed his play Karpuramanjan “The
Cluster of Camphor” entirely in Prakrit (prosaic passages in Sauraseni and poetic
passages in Maharastri). Rajasekhara was an erudite poet who wrote also in
Sanskrit (no Apabhramsa works of his are known to us); his Prakrit shows a
strong influence not only from the ‘high’ variety (Sanskrit) but also from the
spoken language of Maharashtra, the region of his origin.

Ardha-MagahadI and Maharastri were cultivated above all by the religious
sects of Jainas who made them a linguistic medium for their literary works,
rejecting Classical Sanskrit linked with Hindu scriptures. The earliest Jain sutras
(2nd c. A.D.) were composed in Ardha-MagadhI. Its salient features are the

i) Nom Sg of masculine a-stems in -e

ii) Loc Sg of a-stems in -msi
iii) -ittha as the singular suffix of the preterit in all persons, and -imsu as its
counterpart in plural.

These sutras form the Canon (arranged by Devaddhi Ganin in the 5th c. in 45
agamas) of the Svetambara sect. The exegetical texts of the Svetambaras (so
called niryuktis and bhasyas) were written in a form of Maharastri, called Jain
Maharastri. The Jainas had been using this variety for literary purposes since ca.
300 A.D. until it was replaced in this function by Apabhramsa during the 8th/9th
c. Jain Maharastri used by the Jain authors in their secular writings was for all
purposes identical with ‘general’ Maharastri. One of the few differences, noticed
by Jacobi (1886:XXII), was the use of the palatal glide to avoid the hiatus in the
environment after vowels before a; e.g. Mah gaa vs. JMah gaya “gone”, Mah hiaa
vs. JMah hiyaya “heart”. The Canon o f the Digambara sect was written in a
dialect which in some respects resembles SaurasenI and has therefore been termed
Jain SaurasenI.
A standard description of Jain Maharastri is found in Jacobi (1886) and
Pischel (1900). Its salient features vis-a-vis the earlier Pali and Ardha-MagahadI,
and later Prakrits were analyzed recently by Bubenik (1996).
At the beginning of the secular literature in Jain Maharastri we find a vast epic
in more than 9000 verses, the celebrated Paumacariya “The Life of Padma” by
Vimalasuri. Vimalasuri (ca. 300 A.D.) stands at the beginning of a new literary
tradition, part epic and part poetic, but corresponding more closely to the kavya
style. He picked up a well known subject, the story of Rama, called Padma in Jain
mythology. It underwent various changes to suit Jainism; for instance, Ravana is
killed by Laksmana, and the gold deer incident is omitted. Vimalasuri’s Jain
Maharastri shows a number of Apabhramsa features. The salient ones are the
gerund in -evi, the pronoun kavana “who” (cf. H kaun, Gu kon vs. Skt kah), and
the negative particle navi (< na api) “not” (cf. R navi). In addition, many desT

“local, provincial” words are used to make the epic more understandable to the
common people.
Another early Jain Maharastri poet was Padalipta whose romance
TararigavaTkaha has not come down to us. Only a short epitome of it by
Nemicandra of unknown date survived. Chronologically next is the great prose
work Vasudevahindi “Transmigratory Wanderings” (< Pkt hind- “wander, roam”)
in hundred lambakas “sections”. The purpose of this work (by two authors
Samghadasa and Dharmasenaganin) is to narrate the life of Vasudeva and Krsna
on the model of the famous Brhatkatha by Gunadhya. This work, composed in
archaic Jain Maharastri (cf. Alsdorf 1974:56-70), is allocated to the 7th c. A.D.
We may conclude our survey by mentioning two romances belonging to the
8th c.: Haribhadra’s Samarddityakathd (on the model of Sanskrit mahdkdvyas) and
Uddyotanasuri’s Kuvalayamalakatha (written in 779 during the reign of Vatsaraja
of the Pratihara dynasty). The latter work in addition to Jain Maharastri makes use
of PaisacI and Apabhramsa.

2.3.3 Apabhramsa
The term Apabhramsa will be used as the name of a literary dialect in which
Jain authors composed their poetic works between the 5th to 12th c. A.D. (virtually
no prose works in Apabhramsa have come down to us). The name Apabhramsa
was used by the authors themselves and by the contemporary grammarians (cf.
Chapter Three). A few words are in order a propos the origin and the development
of meaning of this term, and its regional and ethnic sources. Among ancient
Indian grammarians and rhetoricians the term Apabhramsa was used contemptu­
ously to denote all deviations from Paninian Sanskrit, descended from the divine
language o f the Vedic texts. For instance, Patanjali (2nd c. B.C.) in his
Mahdbhdsya [1.1.1] labels all the dialectal forms of Sanskrit go “cow” (gdvl, gonl,
gold, gopotalika) as apabhramsah “aberrant, off standard”. The famous treatise
of dramaturgy, Bharatiya Natyasastra, whose present text available in the 2nd c.
A.D. is a compilation from previous works going back to the 1st c. B.C., describes
Apabhramsa as vibhrasta “fallen down”, as a dialect abounding in -u and as the
dialect of the Abhlras. The Abhlras were a West Indian nomadic tribe whose
roaming grounds stretched from Mathura to the Western sea. There is some
evidence that Abhlradesa must have been a part of Sindhudesa extending from the
Indus delta to the Ran of Kutch, and that Abhlra Apabhramsa could have been
identical with Vracada Apabhramsa, known only through later grammarians
(Kramadlsvara). Most unfortunately, the Abhlras’ political history is virtually
unknown. Ptolemy mentioned them under the name of Abiria and at the beginning

of our era there were Abhira rulers as far east as Nepal. Samudra Gupta (4th c.
A.D.) recorded their name as one of the conquered nations on the stone pillar at
Allahabad. At the time of Islamic invasions they held Khandesh and Nimar
(between contemporary Surat and Nagpur). Nowadays, their name A h iri survives
in several ethnolinguistic terms, namely:

i) Malvi spoken by non-Rajputs in Malwa;

ii) a tribal Bhili dialect of Kutch (viewed by Grierson as a Gujarati dialect with
a Bhili substrate)1;
iii) Ahirani, a usual name for Khandeshi in Maharashtra;
iv) and Ahirwati, a dialect of Mewati, spoken in West Gurgaon and Haryana,
Southwest of Delhi.

Given the fact that some Apabhramsa words appear in Vimalasuri’s

Paumacariya, composed otherwise in Jain Maharastri in the 3rd c., we may assume
with Tagare (1948:1) that Apabhramsa was “a linguistic stage at least as early as
300 A.D”. As of the 6th c. A.D. there is indirect evidence that Apabhramsa
achieved the status of a literary dialect furnished by statements of Bhamaha and
Dandin; to these may be added the inscription of the Valabhl king Dharasena II
referring to his father Guhasena (559-569) as one proficient in composing works
in three languages: Sanskrit, Prakrit and Apabhramsa. The only direct piece of
evidence for this early period of Apabhramsa are Kalidasa’s Apabhramsa songs
in Vikramon’aslya, assuming their genuineness. To the 8th c. belong presumably
the epics of Svayambhudeva. The 10lh c. was the heyday of Apabhramsa poetry,
when Rajasekhara (in KavyamTmamsa) recognized Apabhramsa as a literary-
dialect equal in status to Sanskrit and Paisacl. During the centuries of Islamic
invasions, when NIA languages stated emerging, Apabhramsa became another
classical language of India in addition to Sanskrit and Prakrit. It should also be
mentioned that the rise of Apabhramsa from the regional dialect of Jain epic
poetry culminated in the normative work of the greatest Prakrit grammarian,
Hemacandra Suri (1088/1089-1172/1173).
A propos the early regional differences in North India, we may start by
observing that they did not escape the medieval Prakrit grammarians. Among
them, Kramdlsvara (Eastern grammarian) was the first to mention three varieties
of Apabhramsa [Prakrtadhyaya v.66-67]: Vracata, Nagara and Upanagara.
Several scholars (e.g. Jacobi and Bhayani) identified Vracata with Abhira as the
main variety of Apabhramsa. Late Eastern grammarians (Markandeya and
Ramatarkavagisa of the 17th c.) locate Vracada in the valley of Indus [Markandeya

XVIII. 18.1 sindhudesodbhavo vracado’p abhramsah “the origin of Vracada

Apabhramsa [lies] in the country of Sindhu”]. Its salient phonological feature was
the preservation o f r in consonant clusters (cf. Sindhi tre “three”, vs. H tin < Pkt
tint < OIA trlni). Kramadlsvara mentions two other features: the suffix -eppi (and
eppinu) used in the gerund (tva), and the pair of correlative pronouns jrum - drum
“which/what” - “that” (Skt yat - tat). Nagara, according to Bhayani (1947:306),
is to be understood as a cover term for all sorts of regional Apabhramsas which
had developed in northern and western India “in opposition to Vracata”. Since no
literary works in Vracata Apabhramsa have come down to us, we may speculate
that this variety lost its prestige which was acquired by the more central Nagara
variety. In any case it appears that Apabhramsa from its beginnings was located
in Gujarat, Rajputana and Malwa (contemporary Gujarat, Rajasthan and western
Madhya Prades) and thence it spread through the whole of North India and
became North India’s literary koine. Given the amount of Apabhramsa works
which originated in Gujarat, we may be justified in postulating a regional variety
called Gurjara Apabhramsa even though there are no extant works in this variety
earlier than the 12th c. (with a possible exception of Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha).
From the point of view of later developments seen in early NIA languages, it
was proposed by Alsdorf that there were two varieties within Apabhramsa. The
‘classical’ Apabhramsa variety which bore certain affinities with Old Gujarati and
Marwari was labelled Svetambara Apabhramsa, and another, closer allegedly to
Old Braj and Western Hindi, was labelled Digambara Apabhramsa. However, we

Table 2 .1. Alleged diagnostic features o f Svetambara vs. Digambara Apabhramsa


may agree with Bhayani that this dichotomy is rather untenable for a simple
reason of the eclectic character of Apabhramsa literature borrowing freely from
earlier Prakrits and Sanskrit.
Glancing at the paradigm of the present tense in Digambara Apabhramsa,
Svetambara Apabhramsa and Old Gujarati (in Table 2.1), it might appear that
OGu is somewhat closer to SvAp, but the 2nd Pers Sg -si (in SvAp) and the 3rd
Pers PI -nti (DigAp) can/should be evaluated as Prakritisms. This, of course,
lowers considerably the diagnostic value of our morphological criteria. Other
salient features of SvAp are claimed to be ‘harmonized’ genitival suffixes -aha,
-ihi, -uhu (vs. -aho, -ihe, -uho of DigAp); Instr Sg -e/ina (and later on -i) in SvAp
(vs. -e/ina, -e/T in DigAp); the absence of va-sruti and non-elision of v and m
before u in SvAp (vs. the occurrence of these two phenomena in DigAp). All these
features are surveyed in Table 2.1.
At this point we have to consider the salient innovative features of
Apabhramsa vis-a-vis its earlier Prakrit stage (sometimes called Second MIA
stage). I want to make only broadest statements about phonology, morphology
and morphosyntax (for details the reader is referred to Bubenik 1996).


i) Apabhramsa preserved the Prakrit phonological system virtually intact. The

only addition to the phonemic inventory was v resulting from m in intervocalic
position (in our texts this v is spelled with MV or only M or V). A potential
minimal pair may be seen in /kuvara/ “prince” (< /kumara/) vs. /kuvara/ “cry”
(< kupdra < pukdra)}
ii) Salient sound change was fricative weakening, s> h, which did not result in
changing the phonemic inventory (cf. Bubenik, 1996:104-110 for its
occurrence in various morphological classes in Prakrits and Apabhramsa).
iii) As mentioned above, the Vracada variety preserved r in consonantal clusters
(whence Sindhi tre ~ te “three” vs. H tin, Sindhi trio ~ tiyo “third” vs. H
iv) The long vowel in the ultima of Apabhramsa words (i.e. not Prakrit words) is

On the other hand, morphology and morphosyntax underwent far-reaching

changes which altered fundamentally the synthetic morphology of earlier Prakrits
in the direction of the analytic typology of NIA.


i) The nominal system underwent erosion of case contrasts and Apabhramsa

ended up with only one form for each Nom vs. Acc, Instr vs. Loc, and Abl vs.
ii) Certain dissyllabic suffixes containing -n- (Instr Sg -ena and Neut PI -dni)
became monosyllabic as a consequence of the loss of the segmental status of
-n- {-ena > ena > -en > e and -dni > dni > -ai).
iii) i- and w-stems underwent thematization, i.e., they started being declined more
and more as a-stems.
iv) The pronominal system adopted some nominal suffixes.


i) The emerging phrasal (= postpositional) cases started compensating for the

loss of morphological cases.
ii) The aspectual system was completely rebuilt as a consequence of the loss of
earlier synthetic forms expressing the past tense (such as the Pali preterit akasi
“made” < OIA aorist akarsat, AMg preterit in -ittha). The past passive
participle (the OIA ta-form) became the only means for this function. New
analytic formations combine the PP and the Pres Part with grammatical
auxiliaries {acchai “is”, thakkai “stands”, acchiu be+PP “been”, thiu
stand +PP “stood”) to express the retrospective and progressive aspect (cf. 7.1)
iii) In addition to (ii) we witness the evolution of the system of the lexical aspect
(Aktionsart) anticipating the state of affairs familiar in NIA languages. Certain
verbs, such as lag(g)- “be attached”, ja- “go”, de- “give”, le- “take”, were
increasingly used in collocation with infinitival/gerundial forms of other
verbs; their lexical content became ‘bleached’ and they started functioning as
Aktionsart auxiliaries.
iv) The ergative construction became established during the Apabhramsa period.


1. A propos the tribal ethnonym Bhilia —* Bhili, it is not impossible that it is an old ‘ corruption’
o f the word Abhlra, cf. Grierson, LSI, IX, II, 50.

2. The ancestors o f European Romani dialects (essentially balkanized Prakrit(s), cf. Bubenik
1995) must have come through the stage with nasalized v; e.g. phuv “ earth” may be traced
back to OIA as follows: bhumi [bhumi] (OIA) > bhuwi > bhuwi > bhuvi (M IA Prakrit) >
bhuv >phuv Romani (cf. Old Gujarati pahuv).


3.1 Vararuci’s Prakrtaprakasa

The oldest pieces of Prakrit grammar are the famous fragments preserved in
Chapter XVII of the Bharatvya-Natyasastra. Its present text existed in the 2nd c.
A.D. but it appears to be a compilation from previous works going back to a
period as early as the 1st c. B.C. It considers Prakrit to be ‘disfigured’ in
comparison with Sanskrit and lacking in the proper grammatical processes and
qualities. In Chapter XVII (XVIII).47, seven bhasas “major dialects” are
enumerated (Magadhi, AvantI, Pracya, SaurasenI, Ardha-MagadhI, Bahlika and
Daksinatya), and the rules for their use on the stage are given.
Apart from these fragments which do not offer any grammatical analyses, the
first treatise on Prakrit grammar is the Prakrta-prakasa attributed to Vararuci
(another title is Prdkrta-laksana-sutra) whose dates remain unknown. The eight
books of his treatise (of ca. 420 sutras) deal with Maharastri: I—III with phonol­
ogy, IV with morphophonemics, V with nominal declension, VI with pronominal
declension, and VII-VIII with conjugation. According to one of the experts on
grammatical literature, Scharfe (1977:192), Vararuci’s rules were probably
abstracted from a collection of popular songs with regional dialectal differences
such as the famous collection Sattasal (ascribed to King Hala of the 2nd c. A.D.).
Sometime in the 7th c. A.D. the rhetorician Bhamaha commented on the
Prakrtaprakasa but the text in his possession included two additional books: one
on the Paisaci and another on the Magadhi dialect. Sometime after Bhamaha
another book on the Saurasem dialect was added, and book V was split in two.
Thus in Cowbell’s 1868 edition, book IX deals with particles, X with Paisaci, XI
with Magadhi, and XII with SaurasenI, making the total of twelve books.
Vararuci’s Prakrit grammar presupposes knowledge of Panini’s Sanskrit
grammar. Its descriptive technique consists of transfer rules that convert the
Sanskrit ‘underlying’ forms into their ‘surface’ Maharastri forms. Vararuci gives
often a number of variants for the same grammatical function. For instance, the
genitive singular of the 1st Pers pronoun is specified in (1).

(1) me mama maha majjha nasi [Vararuci VI. 50]

“(The pronoun asmad [from Sutra 40] has the substituents) me, mama, maha,
majjha in the genitive singular”

The post-Vararuci grammatical tradition is dichotomized into the Eastern and

Western School of Prakrit grammarians (cf. Baneijee 1977; Scharfe, 1977:
192-194); their protagonists are given in Figure 3.1.
In the context of this monograph I only want to look at the earliest grammar­
ians, i.e. those who are relatively close to the Apabhramsa stage. In the East,
Kramadlsvara and Pursottama (12th c.), and in the West, Hemacandra (1 1th - 12th
c.) and Trivikramadeva (13th c.). Markandeya (17th c.) and Ramasarman (17th c.)
will be excluded from the following expose. Their evidence is sometimes at
variance with that of the preserved Apabhramsa literature, and one is faced with
a serious problem of “how far we should go in correcting Prakrit literature to
conform with the rules of the grammarians” (Scharfe 1977:193). The most
influential among them was Jain Hemacandra Suri (1089-1172), whose
descriptive technique we are going to examine in the next section.

3.2 Descriptive technique o f Hemacandra Suri (1088/1089-1172/1173)

The title of Hemacandra’s grammatical opus is Siddha-hema-sabddnusdsana
“Hema(candra)’s doctrine of words”. Its first part reflects the name of his
illustrious patron, the Calukya king Jayasimha-Siddharaja of Gujarat. The story
(cf. Vyas 1982:10-11) goes that Siddharaja procured various grammatical works
from Kashmir and other kingdoms (in addition to Bhojavyakarana acquired by the
conquest of Malva) for Hemacandra. Hemacandra composed his opus in eight


W estern School Eastern School

Hemacandra Kramadlsvara
Trivikramadeva Purusottama

Figure 3 .1: The Eastern and Western School o f Prakrit grammarians


books (of four chapters each) consisting of ca. 4500 sutras. Its first seven books
are devoted to the grammar of Sanskrit and the eighth book deals with the Prakrit
dialects (Maharastri. MagadhI, PaisacI and SaurasenI), which are derived from
Sanskrit by means of transfer rules. Hemacandra taught Apabhramsa (contained
in sutras 329-446 of the fourth chapter of the last book)1in the same manner as
the above Prakrits by means of transfer rules. His dependence on Vararuci is
obvious. As an example we may quote He [8.4.379] deriving the Apabhramsa
forms of the Gen Sg of the 1st Pers pronoun from Sanskrit asmad; compare (2)
with (1):

(2) m ahu m ajjhu n asi-n asb h yam [He 8 .4 .37 9 ]

Apabhram se asm ado nasina n asa ca saha p ratyekam m ahu m ajjh u lty ad esau
bh avatah
“ In A pabhram sa the pronoun asm ad in the ab lative sin gu lar and the gen itive
sin g u lar has each tw o substituents, m ahu and m ajjhu ”

One of the major problems for the grammarians was the co-existence of older
sanskritic and prakritic forms with those of contemporary Apabhramsa. For
instance, the Instr Sg of <2 -stems could be either -e (< en < ena) or sanskritic -ena\
deve or devena “by/with the god”. This state of affairs was described without any
comments regarding their distribution in the following fashion by Hemacandra:

(3 ) etti (= et ta-[p ratyaye]) [He 8 .4 .3 3 3 ]

A p ab h ram se ak arasy a tayam ekaro bh avati
“ In A p ab h ram sa the ending -a b e co m es -e in the Instr S g ”

A doha “couple” containing the Instr form dale “by the lover” (daie according
to manuscripts A and B) and its Sanskrit translation dayitena is added.

(4) atto n an usvarau [H e 8 .4 .34 2 ]

(= a[-ant]at ta-[p ra ty ay a sy a] nah an u svarah [ca adesau])
A p ab h ram se ak aratp arasya ta-v acan a sy a n an u svarav-ad esau b h avatah
“ In A p ab h ram sa the Instr S g s u ffix o f nouns ending in -a is -na and the
anusvara ” (e.g. devena)

For the purposes of this monograph, I will organize the nominal declensions
of Apabhramsa contained in Hemacandra’s grammar in the usual paradigmatic
display. These forms arc contained in sutras 330-354, and may be grouped into

four categories: Masc a-stems [He 8.4.331-9, 342, 346, 347], Fem a/a-stems
[346-352], Neut a-stems (Nom PIphalai/aT) [353—354]2 and i- and w-stems [340,
341,343, 346, 347]3.
The forms which are found in Apabhramsa literature but are not listed in
Hemacandra’s grammar may be discussed under several headings:

i) Archaisms (i.e. Sanskritisms and Prakritisms). For instance, Hemacandra lists

the prakritic Gen Sg devassu (cf. Pali devassa) but not its earlier form devassa
and its plural counterparts devana (and devana)-, in the Loc Sg the prakritic
form with the pronominal suffix -ammi is found (He gives only -i ~ -e); and
in the Loc PI one finds the sanskritic form -esu (He gives only -ahi). However,
one might argue that the occurrence of sanskritic forms is covered by the last
sutra sesam samskrtavat siddham “in all remaining respects [Prakrit] is like
ii) Certain forms could have been excluded because of Hemacandra’s conserva-
tism/prescriptivism. The syncretic expression of the notions of appurtenance
(Gen) and spatial removal (Abl) are the issue. According to Hemacandra the
difference between the Abl and Gen Sg could be as minimal as devahu and
devaho, respectively (but for the Nom both devu and devo are given).
Apabhramsa literature furnishes examples of either devahu or devaho in both
Abl and Gen. Similarly, in the plural, according to Hemacandra, the suffix -hu
is to be used in the Abl and -ha in the Gen; however, -ha is also documented
for the Abl. Regarding the Instr and the Loc see under (v).
iii) The occurrence of alternative spellings involving high and mid vowels could
be w'ider than that sanctioned by Hemacandra: u ~ o and i ~ e\ thus he allows
for devu ~ devo (Nom Sg) and deve ~ devi (Loc Sg). Apabhramsa literature
furnishes also deve ~ devi (Instr Sg), narena ~ narina (Instr Sg in Sc), devahu
~ devaho (Abl Sg and Gen Sg), devehi ~ devihi (Instr PI). As argued in
Bubenik (1996:31-33) these spellings may actually be interpreted as evidence
for a new phonological system with four degrees of aperture (i, e, e, a).
iv) On the basis of Table 3.1 one may observe that nasalization implemented the
opposition between the Sg vs. PI en block (all the plural forms display
nasalized suffixes). Nasalization in the Sg is limited to the Instr (with plain
counterparts: deve ~ deve, devi ~ devi, devena ~ devena) and the Loc (devai
~ devai, deve, devi). Only rarely one finds nasalization in other forms, e.g.
Gen Sg, as in (5).

Copyrighted image

Table 3 .1 : Masculine 2l-s terns and feminine aA-stems


(5) kam m aham jeh a u [R ittha 3 .2 .4 ]

K am a+G EN sim ilar
“ S im ila r to K a m a ”

Vice versa, only rarely one encounters plain suffixes in the plural, e.g. Instr PI
(.devihi ~ devihi).

v) Certain ‘agglutinative’ forms are not listed by Hemacandra:

Hemacandra Apabhramsa literature

Instr Sg dev-e devae ~ devai
Loc Sg dev-e devae
-i devai ~ devai
devammi (< Pkt)

These ‘agglutinative’ forms add the suffixes -e~ -i (Instr) and -e ~ -i (Loc) to
the stem deva-, whereas Hemacandra’s forms deve (Instr) and deve/i (Loc)
represent phonologically expected outcomes from OIA to MIA {devena > deven
~ deve; deve > deve > devi respectively):

(6 ) riu naraem tadiu [R itth a 3 . 1 0 ]4

en em y a r r o w + IN S T R hit+P P
“ H e hit the en em y w ith an arro w ”

The following observations are in order a propos feminine a/a-stems:

i) There are only three distinct feminine suffixes:

Sg Nom/Acc -a vs. Masc -u(o) - a

Instr -ai(ae) -e ~ ena
PI Nom/Acc -au(ao) -a a

ii) The singular Abl/Gen/Loc -ahe is identical with the masculine Abl -ahe.
iii) The plural Instr/Loc -ahi is identical with the masculine Instr/Loc -ahi. One
notices the alternative form of the Masc Instr PI -ehi (< -ebhih)\ i.e., the
contrast Masc vs. Fern was possible in the Instr PI {-ehi vs. -ahi), but it could

be ‘prescriptive’ (-ehi is the original masculine form, -ahi < -dbhis is the
original feminine form).
iv) There was as a single form -ahu in the Abl/Gen PI (vs. Masc Abl -ahu and
Gen -aha), but the contrast based on -ahu vs. -ahu would not be particularly
viable. In any case, masculine suffixes such as those in Gen PI malaha and
Gen Sg malaho are documented.
v) Hemacandra specifies only -de as the suffix of the Fern Sg Instr, but -ai is also
documented, e.g. in Svayambhudeva’s Ritthanemicariu:

(7) p ath iya-p an aya-sad d u suu kannae/kannaim [M s B ]

tra v e lle r-?-v o ic e h ear+ P P g ir l+ IN S T

au au na(m ) ko k k ai sannae/sannaim
[Rittha 3.2.1]
com e, com e a s - if c a ll+ 3 / S G a p p e lla tio n + IN S T R
“ T h e girl heard the ? v o ic e o f the traveller, as i f callin g ‘ com e! c o m e !’ ”

Apabhramsa i- and w-stems are presented in Table 3.2.

This nominal subsystem did not prove to be stable and it adopted a number of
a-stern suffixes. The following observations bear this out:

i) The sanskritic Instr Sg forms, girina and guruna display the athematic suffix
-na (< -nd), but the a-stem suffix -e (< -en < -ena) is also used: girie, gurue.

Table 3.2: i- andu-stems in Apabhramsa


ii) The Loc Sg forms are given without nasalization [He 8.4.341] but the
nasalized forms, girihi and guruhi, are common in Apabhramsa literature
(even Ms B of [He 8.4.341.3] gives kalihi). Most likely, we are dealing with
the pronominal suffix -hi (< *asmin, cf. older Prakrits girimmi, both from
pronominal < *asmin). It could be that the pronominal suffix ‘invaded’
a-stems after it had been adopted in z- and a-stems where it replaced the
opaque suffix of the Loc Sg -au (Skt girau, gurau).
iii) The Abl Sg suffix -he (and Gen Sg) is also used with a-stems.
iv) In the plural subparadigms several suffixes appear also with a-stems: -hi Instr,
-hu Abl and -ha Gen.
v) The situation in the locative is o f considerable interest. According to
Hemacandra the suffix -hi is used in the plural [8.4.347] but Apabhramsa
literature uses this suffix also in the singular with i- and a-stems, while in the
plural the original Loc PI suffix -hu (< -su) is used.

a-stems z'/a-stems
Hemacandra Apabhramsa literature
Loc Sg -e/i -i/u-hi -i/u-hi
PI -ahl -i/u-hi -i/u-hu

The source of -ahi with a-stems is somewhat uncertain. Older Prakrits display
devasu or devesu. It may be derived from the pronominal Loc Sg -asmin (> ahmin
> amhin > ahi > ahi) or -hi might have been borrowed from the Instr -ahi/-ehi\
however, nasalization in the Instr does not seem to be original (in older Prakrits
both non-nasalized devehi and nasalized devehi occurred; the non-nasalized form,
from *devebhis > devefihih > devehi, is the expected form). On the other hand,
nasalization in the Loc PI of z'/a-stems, -i/u-hu, is explainable if one assumes that
^-weakening was accompanied by the nasalization of the following vowel (the
preceding vowel in Iranian, cf. manasa > manaijhd (Instr) “mind”):

older Prakrits Apabhramsa

girisu girihu
gurusu guruhu5

The resulting picture is

a-stems z'/a-stems
Loc Sg deve/i (original suffix) girihi (pronominal suffix)

Loc PI devahi (pronominal suffix?) girihu (original suffix)

vi) In the Gen PI the suffix -ha is in common with a-stems; -hu appears to be the
Abl suffix, also in common with a-stems.

Sutras 355-381 present pronominal forms. Their breakdown is as follows:

Oblique forms of demonstrative, relative and interrogative pronouns [He 8.4.
355-359]; singular neuter forms of demonstrative and correlative pronouns, plural
forms of demonstrative pronouns, oblique forms of imu (= idani) “this”, the
substitutes for sarva “all” and kim “why?” [He 8.4.360-367]; and the forms of the
personal pronouns in the 1st and 2nd Pers [He 8.4.368-381].
In Table 3.3 only the oblique forms of personal/demonstrative pronouns (their
relative counterparts replace t by j, and their interrogative counterparts replace /
by k), and their neuter forms of the demonstrative pronouns imu “this” are

The following observations are in order:

i) all the other pronominal forms (Sg Nom, Ace, Instr and all the plural forms)
are in common with their nominal counterparts. Compared with older Prakrits,
there are some interesting phenomena such as the loss of gender in sa “he/she”
(but also so/su Masc) vs. Pali so “he” vs. sa “she”; ta (Ace) “him/her” is
already documented in Pali (cf. more in 6.1.1).
ii) Hemacandra appears to be prescriptive in differentiating the ablative form
taha (< tasmat) from the genitive tasu (< tasya). In literary documents the

Table 3.3: Oblique forms ofpersonal/demonstrative pronouns and neuter forms o f

the demonstrative pronoun "this "

feminine form take (< tasyah) may be used with masculine head-nouns. On
the other hand, the masculine locative form tahi may be used with feminine
head-nouns (one would expect the feminine form to be take (< tasyarn), cf.
Pali tassa ~ tissa).
iii) Hcmacandra might be prescriptive in giving only the 5-forms of the masculine
Gen Sg (tasuja.su, kasu) vs. their feminine counterparts with h: (tahejahe,
kahe). On the other hand, with masculine nouns Hemacandra gives both
devas(s)u and devaho. Also the Gen Sg form of the neuter counterpart imu
(= idam) “it” is given as ayaho in his illustration to sutra 365:

(8) a y ah o d ad d h a-kalevarah o . . . [Illu stration to H e 8 .4 .36 5 ]

a sy a d a g d h a -k alev ara sy a . . .
“ o f this w retch ed b o d y ”

iv) As mentioned in (i) the Sg Instr forms correspond to their nominal counter­

devena - tena kannae- tae

deve - te kannai/I - tai

The feminine forms may also show i as a ‘thematic’ vowel: tie, jie 6 (Skt taya,
jaya). The suffix -Te is documented only with pronouns (there are no examples of
nominal forms such as *kannle).
The 1st and 2nd Pers forms of the personal pronouns are given in Table 3.4.
Apabhramsa, as described by Hemacandra, appears to make four formal
distinctions in the 1st and 2nd Pers pronouns: Nom vs. Acc/Instr vs. Abl/Gen vs.
Loc (in Sg), Nom/Acc vs. Instr vs. Abl/Gen vs. Loc (in PI). In semantic terms,
both subsystems differentiate between the Agent/Subject and Patient; the notions
of spatial removal and appurtenance are syncretized (Abl/Gen); and there is a
general locative case.
That this was a somewhat idealized state of affairs may be proven by careful
perusal of Apabhramsa poetry which abounds in forms not listed by Hemacandra,
or, vice versa, his peculiar form tudhra, the Abl/Gen form of “you” (in addition
to tau and tujjha), does not appear in the extant Apabhramsa works. The whole
matter in its diatopic and diachronic ramifications will be examined in consider­
able detail in 6.1; at this point we may glance at one of the earliest Apabhramsa
poets, Svayambhudeva (cf. 4.4), and pinpoint some pronominal forms which are
not found in Hemacandra. Svayambhudeva uses occasionally Prakrit clitic forms.

Table 3.4: Personal pronouns o f the 1st and 2nd Pers

But as we saw in Tables 3.3 and 3.4, Hemacandra does not mention any
pronominal clitics:

(9) homtu me tanam [Rittha2.9

be+PART I+GEN/DAT protection
“I will be protected”

Svayambhudeva uses the archaic form tumd (< tvam) instead of Ap tuhuf

(10 ) tum am d ev a d ev o [R ittha 2 .9

“ Y o u are the suprem e g o d ”

There are a number of genitive forms not found in Hemacandra; in the 1st Pers Sg
there is mahu with nasalized u (instead of mahu):

(11) mahum kahiya bhadara [Pc]

“Bhattaraka told me”

In the 2nd Pers Sg Hemacandra lists sanskritic tau (< lava), prakritic tujjha (or a
peculiar form tudhra which is not found in Apabhramsa literature) but not tuhaf

(12 ) tuha sasanu [Pc 3 .8 .10 ]

“ y o u r instruction

In the 1st Pers PI there is amhahu (in addition to Hemacandra’s amhaha):

(13 ) am hahum sa sanu [P c 4 .4 .2]

“ our instruction”

In the 2nd Pers PI there is the shorter form tumha (in addition to Hemacandra’s

(14 ) tum ha da su [P c 4 .14 .2 ]

“ y o u r serv an t

And, finally, Svayambhiideva uses the locative form tumammi instead of

semantically overloaded pai ~ tai (Acc/Instr/Loc). One can only guess that here
we might be dealing with either an apparent effort to decrease the ambiguity of
pai/tai or that the longer form was used metri causa or, perhaps, because of
agreement with the PP in the locative absolute construction:

(15 ) tum am m i pasannam m i hom tu me tanam [R itth a 2.9 .8]

you+LO C p le a se d + L O C be+PA R T I+ G E N p rotection
“ W ith y o u satisfied /p leased I w ill be protected”

3.3 Eastern grammarians: Kramadisvara and Purusottama

Kramadisvara’s relative chronology vis-a-vis Hemacandra is uncertain (cf.
Scharfe 1977:193); Indian scholarship places him after Hemacandra, and
according to Banerjee (1977:38) he lived before Purusottama, who probably lived
in Bengal in the 12th c.
The Prakrit grammar of Kramadisvara, attached to his Sanskrit grammar, is
know'n under the title Samksiptasara. Its significance lies in the fact that
Kramadisvara was the first grammarian to discuss a number of Prakrit dialects and
subdialects. A propos Apabhramsa, he gives three varieties/subdialects of it (in

i) Vracada, described as a “variety of Apabhramsa”

( Vracadadir apabhramsabhedah)
ii) Nagara

iii) Upanagara, a variety of Nagara.

Vracada (v.66) is characterized by its optional retention of r in consonant clusters,

the forms jru-dru for the correlative set yat-tat (Ap ja-ta), and the gerundial
suffixes -eppi and -eppinu. Nagara (v.67) is said to abound in 5 and k (sese ndgare
vd skadan).
There are some interesting differences between Hemacandra’s and
Kramadisvara’s account of the characteristics of Apabhramsa. The space permits
us to focus only on the most salient ones, most notably, the pronominal system
[He 8.4.355-381, Kr v.37-47]. The forms of the 1st Pers are presented in Table
3.5, those of the 2nd Pers in Table 3.6.
The most salient difference is the existence of two distinct forms in syntactic
cases according to Kramadisvara: amhe = Norn vs. amhaha = Acc. Hemacandra,
on the other hand, gives amhe or amhai which can be used indiscriminately for
either subject or object as shown in (16).

Table 3.5: “I ” and “w e” in Apabhramsa


Table 3.6: "you” and "ye” in Apabhramsa

(16 ) H em acan dra K ram ad isva ra

“ Y e ask ” tum he p ucch ahu tumhe p ucch ah a
“ I ask y o u ” (PI) tum he p ucch au tum haha pucch au
“ W e ask ” am he pucch ahu am he p u cch am o
“ Y e a sk u s” am he pucchahu am haha pucchaho

Amhaha (and tumhaha) given by Kramadisvara as the accusative form appears as

the ablative/genitive in Hemacandra’s system. Kramadisvara’s 2nd Pers Sg tuha
is closer to the original form tvam (> tuvam > tuha with -h- by analogy with the
1st Pers Sg hamu) than Hemacandra’s tuhu. The latter form is listed as the
ablative/genitive by Kramadisvara, while tuha is given as both the nominative and
ablative/genitive. The difference between the accusative form taT and the
instrumental tahi according to Kramadisvara might be prescriptive; in any case,
Hemacandra gives p a l ~ taT for both Acc and Instr. Its Is1 Pers counterpart at
(Acc/lnstr/Loc), corresponding to Hemacandra’s mat, is puzzling.
Purusottama of Bengal is the best-known representative of the Eastern School
of Prakrit grammarians. His grammar, Prakrtanusasana, is preserved in a single
manuscript (edited by L. Nitti-Dolci in 1938). This manuscript is dated to the year
385 of the Nepal era which corresponds to 1265 A.D. But, as argued by Banerjee

(1977:43), Prakrtdnusasana must have been in existence already in the 12lh c. and
Purusottama was most likely a contemporary of Hemacandra (1088/1089-
1172/1173). There are also good reasons for placing Purusottama after
Kramadlsvara; for instance, as pointed out by Banerjee (1977:45), Kramadlsvara
only mentions the names of some dialects and subdialects of Prakrit, while
Purusottama discusses them in detail. Thus in XVIII. 14-23 Purusottama mentions
a number of minor ‘dialects’ belonging to Apabhramsa, such as Upandgara,
Pancala, VaidarbhJ, LatT, Latti, Kaikeyi, Gaudi, and the languages of the Dhakka,
Vakkara (?), Kuntala, Pandya and Sim(g)hala. Some of the above are briefly
characterized, e.g., Vaidarbh! is labelled ullaprdya “characterized by the usage of
the suffix -ulla".
As far as the pronominal forms discussed above are concerned9, Purusottoma
agrees with Hemacandra rather than with Kramadlsvara. This is obvious from
Table 3.7.

Table 3.7: Some pronominal forms according to Hemacandra, Kramadlsvara, and



1. Hemacandra’s Prakrit Grammar is available in several editions: Pischel (1877/1880), Vaidya

(19 58 /19 8 0 ) and V yas (1982). V aidya’ s is a revised edition o f S. P. Pandit (1900); in his
critical notes he also used Pischel’ s (1877/1880) edition and two manuscripts from the 16 ,h
c. (A 15 5 6 and B 15 14 ) ; V y a s’ edition contains materials from three additional paper
manuscripts from the 1 5 lh/ 1 6 lhc. (A 1492, B 1493, C 15 18 ). There are no significant
differences between these two editions (but see Endnotes 1 and 2 to Chapter Five).

2. According to sutra 354, neuters replace the suffix -ka by -u in the Nom/Acc Sg; e.g.
bhagnaka “ broken” —<► bhaggau, etc. Other neuter nouns display the suffix -a!d\

Masc -a/a -a/a
Neut -a/a -ai/ai

3. Sutras 344 and 255 specify that the suffixes o f the Nom Sg, Acc Sg, Nom PI, A cc PI and the
Gen may be dropped.

4. -a. in nam e is covered by He [8.4.330]: a ~ a.

5. It should be observed, however, that in older Prakrits both non-nasalized and nasalized girisu
and girisu, gurusu and gurusu are found. The nasalization is the other way round with the
Gen PI girlna and girlna, guruna and guruna where one would have expected the nasalized
forms (from girinam, gurundm). The only way out o f this dilemma is to assume that
nasalization was used to mark the plural forms:

older Prakrits expected forms

Instr girihi ~ Ihi girihi (< giribhis)
Gen girlna ~ Ina girlna (< girinam)
Loc girisu ~ Isu girisu (< girisu)

Deriving Apabhramsa forms from the expected forms one should end up with a non-nasalized
instrumental girihi and nasalized locative girihu; the nasality in the instrumental would be by
analogy with the Gen and Loc.

6. These forms are presumably covered by sutra 4 33: “ In Apabhramsa in feminine nouns the
[penultimate] a before the suffix -a changes to i.” In terms o f historical phonology the form
tde may be derived by the rule o f height dissimilation, the form tie by that o f height
assimilation: *taya > tad > taa (metathesis o f length) > tde; *taya > tiya > tia > iia > tie.

7. It could be that Apabhramsa ‘ experimented’ with the three-way honorific contrast familiar
from Hindi:

Apabhramsa Hindi
thou” tuhu tu
•ye” tumhaT turn
Th ou” tuma ap

8. Tuha could be traced back to tujjha (< tubhyam ) or its h could be o f analogical origin
imitating the distribution o f h and jjh in the Is1 Pers: majjhu ~ mahu = tujjha ~ x (cf. Bubenik
& Paranjape 19 9 6 :122). Tujjha (not tuha ) is the ancestral form o f Hindi tujh(e).

9. Purusottama [X V II.64]: jas-sas-os tumhaim

Purusottama [X V II.66]: am-ta-ni-su mai


4.1 Eastern Apabhramsa: the Dohakosas o f Kanha and Saraha

We have to start where we stopped in 2.3.3 and re-examine the issue of the
regional varieties of Apabhramsa from the point of view of so-called Eastern
Apabhramsa. Eastern Apabhramsa displays undoubtedly the most divergent
features, measured against the Western ‘standard’ as codified by Hemacandra, to
warrant a re-examination of pertinent evidence.
This variety is known to us on the basis of the Dohakosas of Kanha and
Saraha, composed in Eastern India. Kanha’s Dohakosa consists o f 32 dohas
(distichs and occasional tetrastichs) which describe the mystical experience of
Kanha (Krsnacarya), known as Kaniph Nath (Kanupa). According to their editor,
Shahidullah (1928:25-29), Kanha was bom in Samatata (Eastern Bengal) and his
mentor was Jalandhar Nath, a contemporary of Matsyendra Nath who was in
Nepal in 657 A.D. Together with other pieces of evidence assembled by
Shahidullah it would appear that Kanha should be located to the 7th c. (rather than
the 12th c. as claimed by S. K. Chatteiji). Tagare (1948:20) adopted a compromise
solution of the period between 700 - 1200 A.D. for Kanha.
Saraha’s Dohakosa consists of 114 dohas composed in a dialect similar to that
of Kanha. On linguistic grounds (such as higher incidence of the Eastern
Nom/Acc Sg ~(a)e, cf. Shahidullah 1928:40-41) one may maintain that Saraha
was later than Kanha; according to Tagare (1948:20) Saraha flourished around
1000 A.D.
In phonology the following three phenomena are claimed to serve as the
diagnostic features of Eastern Apabhramsa (Tagare 1948:24-26):

i) The OIA cluster ks became unexceptionally kh in Eastern Apabhramsa

(through the process of fricative weakening). In the West, from the beginning
of the 7th c. A.D., k was fronted in the anticipation of the retroflex sibilant and
assumed the place of the more front palatal affricate: k > c / — s. Hence the
contrasting forms such as Eastern Apabhramsa khetta “field” (< ksetra),
akkhara “syllable” (< aksara) and Western Apabhramsa acchi “eye” (< aksi),
vaccha “tree” (< vrksa).

ii) OIA v became unexceptionally b in Eastern Apabhramsa but it remained

unchanged (with some sporadic b 's) in Western and Southern Apabhramsa.
iii) OIA sibilants merged in favor of i in the East, but in favor of s in the West
and South.

In morphology the following observations can be made:

i) In the Nom/Acc Sg of the a-stems the Dohakosas display normally the suffix
-a. However, both the Western Apabhramsa -u and the Eastern (MagadhI) -e
make also their appearance. In addition there are also peculiar forms in
-hat-ho (-ha appears also in the Acc), which look like the genitive. Their
statistical distribution according to Shahidullah (1928) is presented in Table

An example of the latter nominative form is provided in (1):

(1) jai tasu ghora andharem mana dibaho

if that+GEN terrible darkness+LOC mind lamp+NOM/SG

kijjai [Kanha 22.2]

“If in this terrible darkness one makes of the mind a lamp”
lit. if the mind is made a lamp

An example of the MagadhI nominative is provided in (2):

(2) kusumiau arabindae [Kanha 6.1]

flourish+PP lotus+NOM
“The lotus has flourished”

Table 4 .1: The suffixes o f the Nom/Acc Sg o f a-sterns in the Dohakosas


ii) The Instr and Loc of both numbers use the suffixes -ahi or -ehi of pronominal
origin (from the locative form (t)asmin “on/in that” through the processes of
fricative weakening and nasalization: asmin > cihmin > ahi ). The prakritic
suffix -e (-e) is encountered only in the singular. Western Apabhramsa, as
known to us from Hemacandra and Jain literature, preserved a more archaic
state of affairs; here the syncretism of the Instr and Loc did not apparently run
its full course. Witness the sanskritic suffix -ena limited to the Instr Sg and the
dissyllabic suffixes of the Instr and Loc PI vs. their singular counterparts.
These matters are surveyed in Table 4.2.
In the Dohakosas the Instr suffix -enal-ena is only found with the
pronouns of the 3rd Pers (tend) which also contrast the Instr and Loc forms
(Instr te, tena vs. Loc tahi, tahi, tatthu, tattha).
iii) In the genitive the sanskritic/prakritic ‘sigmatic’ suffix -asu is only found with
pronouns (tasu) while the nominal forms display h (in both numbers); e.g.
naraha “man’s”. Western Apabhramsa also uses the archaic suffixes -asu and
-assu (in the singular).
iv) And finally, as in Western Apabhramsa, there appeared a distinct form of the
Voc PI in -ahu, different from the Nom PI in -a (cf. WAp -aho vs. the Nom
PI in -a):

(3) pandia-loahu khamahu mahu [Saraha 95]

pandit-people+VOC excuse+2/PL/IMP I+GEN/DAT
“Pandits, excuse me!”

v) Our knowledge of the make-up of the pronominal system gleaned from the
Dohakosas is insufficient. The absence of the accusative forms makes it
impossible to determine whether the double oblique system, typical of

Table 4.2: The syncretism o f the Instr/Loc Sg/Pl in Eastern Apabhramsa


Western Apabhramsa (cf. 6.1.1), existed also in the East. The documented
forms are displayed in Table 4.3.
Evidence from Kramadisvara [v. 37—47] is somewhat ambivalent in what
regards the existence of the double-oblique system in the 1st and 2nd Pers Sg.
For the 1st Pers, both Acc and Instr, he gives the puzzling form ai (correspond­
ing to WAp mat) but for the 2nd Pers two slightly different forms, tai for the
Acc and tahi for the Instr, are given. A remarkable form is the hapax tahara,
an adjectivalized genitive form tahu (by the suffix -ra), used typically in the
1st and 2nd Pers:

(4) tahara nama na janami [Saraha 92]

he+GEN+ADJ name not know+l/SG
“I don’t know his name”

The forms of the present tense in the Dohakosas and their counterparts in Western
Apabhramsa, according to Iiemacandra [8.4.382-388], are in Table 4.4.

Table 4.3: Pronominal forms in the Dohakosas

Copyrighted image

Table 4.4: Present tense in the Dohakosas and in Western Apabhramsa

(according to Hemacandra)

The Jain literary works in Western Apabhramsa display also the prakritic
(Maharashi) forms such as karemi [in Sc, Kp], karasi [in Sc, Kp], karanti [in Sc,
Kp]. The archaic form of the 2nd Pers Sg -asi in the Dohdkosas may be evaluated
as one of the salient features of Eastern Apabhramsa. For the sake of comparison,
Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakahd (Gujarat, 10th c.?), a typical Western work, displays
the weakened suffix -ahi to the virtual exclusion of -asi (47 vs. 2 instances, cf.
Jacobi 1918).1From the retrospective of NIA languages, it may be observed that
Bengali, Maithili, Assamese and Eastern Hindi show -as in the 2nd Pers Sg
present; on the other hand, Western Hindi and Gujarati -e, Rajasthani -ai\ Panjabi,
Lahnda and Sindhi -e go back to -ahi w-hich is found in Old Khan Boll.
Similarly, the archaic form of the 3rd Pers PI -anti appears also in Old Bengali
(continued by New Bengali -eri)\ Middle Assamese -anta and Maithili -athi go
also back to -anti. On the other hand, the suffixes in Western languages, Hindi -e,
Rajasthani, Marathi and Old Gujarati -ai (New Gujarati -e) continue the Western
Apabhramsa suffix -ahi.
After this global survey of the features of Apabhramsa, we may try to tackle
the problem of diagnostic features of Western vs. Southern Apabhramsa. In
phonology, to summarize Tagare (1948:25-6), there is not enough to allow us to

Table 4.5: Phonological features o f Western vs. Southern vs. Eastern Apabhramsa
(according to Tagare (1948:25-26) and Turner (1926))

Table 4.6: Morphological features o f Western vs. Southern vs. Eastern Apahhramsa
(according to Tagare (1948:34-37))

discern without any doubt Western from Southern Apahhramsa, as shown in

Table 4.5.

OIA dv, sm, j , and -m- lost their distinguishing power (cf. Bubenik
The matters seem to be more promising in morphology as the survey of salient
features based on Tagare (1948:34-37) in Table 4.6 shows.
The 1st Pers Sg -ami and 3rd Pers PI -anti in Southern and Eastern Apahhramsa
(vs. -au and -ahi in Western Apahhramsa) are actually the older prakritic forms
and it is difficult to attribute any diagnostic value to them given the fairly well
established practice of the Apahhramsa authors to archaize their writings. Thus
one is left with the gerundival suffix -ev(v)a(ya) in Southern Apabhramsa vs.
-avvu in Western Apabhramsa; and the infinitival suffix -hit in Southern
Apabhramsa, the ancestor of the New Marathi infinitival suffix -u (via OMar -it),
e.g. SAp ghe-hu > Mar ghe-u “take”.

4.2 Apabhramsa songs in Kalidasa’s Vikramorvaslya

The celebrated Apabhramsa songs in the Fourth Act o f Kalidasa’s
Vikramorvaslya (the love story of king Pururavas and nymph UrvasI) are probably
the earliest extant pieces of Apabhramsa (5th c. A.D.). As is well known, most of

the Fourth Act is a soliloquy of the king who roams around in the jungle asking
various animals and objects about his beloved UrvasI; as an uttamapatra “highest
person” of the drama he performs in Sanskrit but ‘switches’ to Apabhramsa when
uttering verses. Their genuineness was a matter of considerable dispute, settled
positively by Ghosal (1972). Karmarkar in his edition of Vikramorvasiya (1932)
argued also in favor of their genuineness admitting, however, that the Fourth Act
is not free from interpolations.
As indicated in Table 4.6, the salient Western Apabhramsa suffix of the 1st
Pers Sg -au is absent in Kalidasa’s Apabhramsa songs:

(5) haum pucchimi [Vikr4.45] vs. later haum pucchaum

I ask+l/SG
“I am asking”

Its origin is sought in “the influence of 1 p. Nom. Sg. pronominal ending -au <
OIA -akam” (Tagare 1948:34); in more up-to-date terminology, Tagare proposes
non-proportional analogy with the independent pronoun hau, in contexts such as
(5), as the source of this innovation.

4.3 Joindu’s Paramatmaprakasa and Yogasara

These two works on the nature of the soul and its transmigrations are available
in the edition by Upadhye (1973) provided with a brief introduction regarding
linguistic matters. Both works were written as kavyas “poems” consisting of
dohas, but certain portions of Paramatmaprakasa are written in conversational
form between Bhattaprabhakara and Joindu. Upadhye allocated Joindu
(=Yogindradeva) to ca. 600 A.D. while H. L. Jain assigned him to a much later
period of ca. 1000 A.D.

4.4 Svayambhudeva’s Paumacariu and Ritthanemicariu

Svayambhudeva, a southerner and non-Jaina (Brahman from Maharastra or
Karnataka), is the most celebrated Apabhramsa poet (kaviraja). According to his
translator into Hindi, Devendra Kumar Jain (1985:18), he lived in the 8th c. We
know by name some of his predecessors, most notably Caturmukha, a Brahman,
whose stanzas are found as citations in Svayambhudeva’s work on Prakrit
prosody. According to Bhayani (1958a), Caturmukha pioneered the sandhi form
for composing epics and his works served as models for Svayambhudeva. It
appears that Caturmukha composed the story of Rama in Apabhramsa but it has
not come down to us. Other illustrious predecessors of Svayambhudeva in

reworking Ramacarita were Vimalasuri, whose Paumacariu in Jain Maharastri

is the earliest available Jain version of it (cf. 2.3.3); and Ravisena whose
Padmapurana (678 A.D.) was composed in Sanskrit. Svayambhudeva composed
his two celebrated epics Paumacariu and Ritthanemicariu in Apabhramsa.
Paumacariu (Skt Padmacarita or Ramayanapurana) narrates, in accordance
with the Jain puranic tradition, the well known story of Rama in 90 sandhis
“divisions”. Each sandhi contains 12 to 20 kadavakas “stanzas” consisting of 7
verses, and is concluded by ghatta “double-verse”.
Ritthanemicariu (Skt Aristanemicarita or Harivamsapurana) describes the life
of Krsna in 112 sandhis containing 1937 kadavakas (ca. 15.000 verses).
We may dwell for a while on the fact that Svayambhudeva does not refer to
his language as Apabhramsa, the term used by the grammarians and rhetoricians,
but by the term desibhasa “regional languge”. He does so in a highly poetic
manner worth of reproducing here:

(6) vaddhamana-muha-kuhara-viniggaya
ramakaha-nai eha kamagaya . . .
desTbhasa-ubhaya-tadujj ala
ka vi dukkara-dhana-sadda-silayala [Pc 1.2.1-4]
“This story of Rama resembles a flowing river,
which originated in the cave of Vardhamana’s (Mahavlra) mouth.
It is tortuous by the flood of long compounds,
it is marked by Sanskrit and Prakrit banks.
Its both sides are brilliant with regional speech
and in some places there are cliffs of difficult and opaque words”

Given the importance and size of Svayambhudeva’s opus I want to take a closer
look at his literary ‘idiolect’ which allegedly possesses several southern features,
most notably:

i) 1st Pers Sg Pres in -mi (also -vz)3; WAp -au is absent (with a single exception
of visahaum “I endure” [Pc 18.6.2]).
ii) 3rd Pers PI Pres in -anti (never WAp -ahi).
iii) The SAp infinitival suffix -ehu (e.g. niehum “to watch” [Pc 10.2.4.]). The
other form used by Svayambhudeva, -anaham, is considered both Western
and Southern Apabhramsa (cf. Table 4.4); but there is at least one instance of
WAp -anahi: ruanahim “to weep” in [Pc 36.11.8].

In other respects, however, his language may be classified as Western

Apabhramsa (e.g. his pronominal system contains the double-oblique subsystem
in the l sl/2nd Pers Sg typical of WAp hau “I” vs. mat “me” Acc/Instr, cf. 6.1.1; and
he uses the WAp genitival postposition tanau (but also the SAp (?) kerau, cf. 5.3).

4.5 Puspadanta’s Ilarivamsapurana

One of the greatest Apabhramsa poets was Puspadanta (= Pupphayamta in
Apabhramsa) who flourished in Manyakheta (modem Malkhed in the former
Nizam State) during the 10thc. We know the name of his patron, a certain Bharata,
the minister of the king Subhatunga of Manyakheta, at whose behest Puspadanta
composed his monumental Apabhramsa epic Tisatthimahapurisagunalamkara
depicting the lives of 63 mahdpurusas in 102 sandhis “chapters” (completed in
965). The whole opus was critically edited under the title Mahapurana by P. L.
Vaidya (1937-1941). In my study I used another edition by L. Alsdorf, entitled
Harivamsa Purana (1936), which contains only 11 chapters (81-92) of
Mahapurana (in Vaidya’s Vol. III). Alsdorf s edition, equipped with a glossary
and dialect analysis, deals with the twenty-second Tirthamkara, Nemi, and the
ninth (last) triad of heroes: Vasudeva Krsna, Baladeva Balarama and
Prativasudeva Jarasandha.
The other two works by Puspadanta are biographic tales of the king
Yasodhara, Jasaharacariu (edited by P. L. Vaidya in 1931) and Nayakumaracariu
(edited by H. L. Jain in 1933).
Puspadanta’s Southern Apabhramsa will be dealt with in the next section in
conjunction with another southerner, Muni Kanakamara.

4.6 Kanakamara’s Karakandacariu

The biographic tale of Karakanda in ten cantos was edited by H. L. Jain in
1934. We learn from Muni Kanakamara himself that he composed his tale at
Asaiya (identical with modem Assaye in the former Nizam State). The author
flourished between 975-1025. Kanakamara and Puspadanta are claimed to
represent Southern Apabhramsa by Tagare (1948:18-19).
We saw in 4.1 that there is not much to go by in allocating an Apabhramsa
work to southern India (the Deccan) on purely linguistic grounds. Both
Puspadanta and Kanakamara use the Is1Pers Sg -ami and 3rd Pers PI -anti (to the
exclusion of Western Apabhramsa -au and -ahi) but the diagnostic value of these
features is diminished by the Prakrit influence (cf. also 4.4 for Svayambhudeva).
All the three southerners use the Southern Apabhramsa infinitive in -ahu
(ancestral to Marathi -u): bhanium “to tell” [Jc 1.12.15], nieum “to take”

[Jc 1.18.7], thunahum “to worship” [MP 2.2.14]. But there are also unmistakable
Western Apabhrarnsa features (the ‘double-oblique’ pronominal system, and the
Western Apabhrarnsa genitival postpositon tanau; cf. also 4.4 for
Svayambhudeva). Tagare (1948:18), however, reminds us that all the southern
manuscripts were taken to Gujarat to be copied there and consequently “some
westernization of these texts is not improbable”. Puspadanta’s lexis displays some
Dravidian loan words (cf. Shriyan 1965), e.g. akka “mother”, adda “mirror”, kira
“parrot”, chana “cow-dung”, pulli “tiger”, etc. But the western (Arabo-Persian)
words are also present; e.g. pilu <filu “elephant”, tivila < tabla “drum”.

4.7 Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha

Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha (Skt Dhanapala’s Bhavisyadattakatha) was the
earliest Apabhrarnsa text known in the West thanks to the excellent edition by
Jacobi (1918). In this work Dhanavala narrates in 22 sandhis the romantic
biography of Bhavisatta. Jacobi’s edition contains an excellent introductory essay
on Apabhrarnsa. Dhanavala’s dialect was considered ‘northern’ Apabhrarnsa and
was used as an echelon by Alsdorf in his discussion of the linguistic features of
the works written allegedly in Gurjara Apabhrarnsa by Haribhadra (4.9) and
Somaprabha (4.10).

4.8 Ramasimha’s Pahudadoha

Pahudadoha of Muni Ramasimha is a work on Jain mysticism similar in both
content and form to the Buddhist Carydpadas (of Krishna, Dombi, Vina, Saraha
and Gundari) and the Dohakosas of KanJha and Saraha. The work has also many
verses in common with the Paramdtmaprakasa and Yogasara of Joindu (cf. 4.4).
Ramasimha, in his turn, quotes verses from Devasena’s Savayadhammadoha
(composed in 933 in Dhara in Malwa), and Ramasimha’s verses are quoted by the
grammarian Hemacandra. Therefore, according to H. L. Jain who edited
Pahudadoha (1933) in Hindi with a brief analysis of Ramasimha’s dialect,
translation and glossary, Ramasimha’s work belongs to the 10th c. (Rajputana).

4.9 Haribhadra’s Sanatkumaracarita

Jacobi’s 1921 edition of Haribhadra’s Sanatkumaracarita was another of the
early Apabhrarnsa publications. The text was re-edited with the Gujarati
translation by H. C. Bhayani and M. C. Modi in 1974. We know exactly where
and when Haribhadra composed his Neminahacariu, in which the story of the
cakravartin (“sovereign of the world”) Sanatkumara is incorporated. Haribhadra
himself tells us that he finished his Neminahacariu in the residence city of the

Caulukyas, Anahila Pataka (contemporary Anhilvad Pattan), in 1216 (= 1159

A.D.). Around this time the king Kumarapala (1143-1172) was converted to
Jainism by Hemacandra and the Gutjara kingdom became a Jainist state.
Haribhadra was patronized by Prthivipala at whose behest he composed his
Apabhramsa opus. Haribhadra’s Apabhramsa dialect is for all purposes identical
with that of Somaprabha and will be dealt with in the following section.

4.10 Somaprabha’s Kumarapalapratibodha

The story of the conversion of the king Kumarapala of Gujarat to Jainism by
Hemacandra was a topic of another famous work, Hemacandra’s
Kumdrapalacarita, composed mainly to illustrate the rules of Hemacandra’s
grammar. Somaprabha’s work is not really a historical account of Kumarapala’s
conversion. The historical passages provide only a framework for an extensive
collection of stories, narrated by Hemacandra, whose purpose is to instruct the
king in Jainism. There are at least 58 kathas “stories/tales” incorporated into the
historical framework; the majority of them were written in Jain Maharastri mixing
prose and verse, with an admixture of Sanskrit, Prakrit and Apabhramsa strophas
borrowed from other works. Only six pieces were composed almost entirely in
Apabhramsa, among them Sthulabhadrakathd [Kp 443-461], edited and
commented on by Alsdorf in 1928. The story of the prince Sthulabhadra and
hetaera Kosa was known to Somaprabha through several earlier Prakrit and
Sanskrit versions which he paraphrased in Apabhramsa. What is important, as
stressed by Alsdorf (1928:7), is the fact that the Apabhramsa passages of
Kumarapala are not taken from older Apabhramsa sources but represent
Somaprabha’s ‘original’ work; thus we may take them as direct evidence for
Apabhramsa of the 12th c. (Kumarapalapratibodha has been dated to 1195 A.D.).
Somaprabha’s dialect was characterized by Alsdorf (1928:65) as Gurjara
Apabhramsa, in contrast with ‘northern’ and ‘classical’ Apabhramsa (as known
on the basis of Dhanavala’s Bhavisattakaha). The salient features of Guijara
Apabhramsa, according to Alsdorf (1928:65), are the following:

i) the ‘harmonized’ genitival forms in -aha -ihi and -uhu (vs. He -aho, -ihu/a,
ii) the Instr Sg form of a-stems in -inal-ena vs. -T/e;
iii) the absence of va-srutv,
iv) unlike in Bk, v remains in intervocalic position;
v) the Taw’ governing the coda (Auslaut) of monosyllabic and polysyllabic
words. The former group, in agreement with Pkt (but not in Sc), prefers the

long vowel (so 30 x vs. su 2x; jo 17x vs.ju 7x; te lOx vs. ti 2x); the latter
group prefers the short vowel (cf. Alsdorf 1928:54).

Both Somaprabha and Haribhadra archaize their Apabhramsa by a number of

Prakrit forms (esp. Somaprabha w'ho composed the Apabhramsa portions of
Kumarapala in strongly prakritized Apabhramsa). Salient differences in their
adaptation of prakritic elements were discussed by Alsdorf (1928:66); e.g.
Somaprabha uses the Prakrit genitival suffixes -assa and -issa (vs. a single
occurrence of -issa in Haribhadra’s Sc); another one is their preference for various
suffixes of the gerund, where Haribhadra uses six of the eight recognized suffixes
by Hemacandra [8.4.439]: -i, -iu, -ivi, -avi, -eppi, -eppinu, -evi, -evinu (only -i and
-eppi are not found in Sc). Somaprabha, on the other hand, uses only two of them:
-i and -avi\ and, in addition, -iya (lx), which is not given by Hemacandra. All the
numerous gemndial suffixes of JMah are found in Haribhadra’s Sc but only two
of them (-iiina and -tuna) occur in Somaprabha’s Kp (cf. Jacobi 1921:18 and
Alsdorf 1928:66-67). Table 4.7 summarizes these matters.
Another salient difference between these two late Apabhramsa works is the
incidence of the Apabhramsa 2nd Pers Sg suffix -ahi which is recorded only once
in Sc. The statistics are ambivalent for Kp (-asit-esi 12x vs. -ahil-ehi 6x, cf.
Alsdorf 1928:67). Measured against the ‘classical’, ‘northern’ Guijara
Apabhramsa as represented by Dhanavala’s Bk, we perceive immediately a
thorough Prakritization of Sc by Haribhadra. In Bk the matters are the other way
round with 48 instances of Apabhramsa -ahi vs. 2 of Prakrit -asi (cf. Jacobi 1918,
§33). Table 4.8 summarizes this.

Table 4.7: Apabhramsa and Jain Maharastrigerundial suffixes in Sanatkumaracarita

and Kumarapalapratibodha

Table 4.8: The incidence o f Apabhramsa -ahi/-ehi vs. Pkt-asi/-esi (2nd Pers Sg) in
late Apabhramsa works

Summarily, both Haribhadra and Somaprabha in their Apabhramsa writings

did not hesitate to use older Prakrit forms, on the one hand, and elements from
contemporary spoken Gujarati, on the other hand.

4.11 Addahamana’s Samdes'a Rasaka

Addahamana’s (Abdul Rahman) Samdesa Rasaka was published in 1945 by
Muni Jinavijaya with a linguistic study by H. C. Bhayani. It is a sole specimen of
the late secular Apabhramsa poetry belonging to the category of dutakavyas
“messenger poems”, initiated by Kalidasa’s Meghaduta. It was written during the
12th/!3 th c. by a Muslim, Abdul Rahman. Its content is rather very simple: a belle
of Vijayanagara narrates to a traveller (= messenger) the qualms of her passion for
her absent husband. Her lyrical story takes the traveller through the seasons of
summer, rains, autumn, winter, cool season, and spring. At the end she sees her
husband returning from the South.
Its language has been labelled “late, vernacular-colored Apabhramsa”
(Bhayani 1945:1). Besides the features of the ‘classical’ Western Apabhramsa, as
known to us through Hemacandra’s grammar, there are several features which
Bhayani claims to be peculiar to Svetambara or Gurajara Apabhramsa (1945:47).
They include:

i) the bare stem in the Nom Sg of masculine u-stems;

ii) Instr Sg forms in -i and -hi of masculine u-stems;
iii) assimilated -h- of the genitive suffix;
iv) pronominal instrumental forms jini, tini, in f
v) 3rd Pers PI forms in -ai.

Another of its salient features, according to Bhayani (1945b), was the ‘endingless
genitive’, whose status was disputed by Alsdorf (1937:56). It appears that in some
instances we have to do with the nominative absolute (i.e. not the genitive

absolute), as in (7), or, with the genitive absolute with ‘deflected’ agreement, as
in (8):

(7) tuya sumaranta samahi-mohu

you+GEN remembering+NOM samadhi-swooning

visam’utthiyau [SR 86a]

“While cherishing your memory I became overwhelmingly subject to samadhi
in the form of swooning” (Bhayani 1945:104)

(8) jasu pavasanta, na pavasia [SR 70a]

who+GEN leaving+NOM not leave+PP
“On whose going abroad, [I also] did not leave [with him]”

On the whole, more than any other extant Apabhramsa literary work, Samdesa
Rasaka shows a “greater degree of admixture of the popular dialects” (Bhayani
1945:46) i.e. those of the Midland (Early Braj and Hindi).


1. If, however, one examines the situation in the archaizing late Western Apabhramsa works (of
the 1 2 lh c.), such as Haribhadra’s Sc (Gujarat 115 9 ) and Somaprabha's Kp (Gujarat 119 5 ),
one will notice quite a few archaic forms: -asil-esi (13 x ) vs. -ahii-ehi (7x) in K p (cf. A lsdorf
19 2 8 :6 1); in Sc there is only one example o f Apabhramsa -ahi [Sc 752.2] vs. numerous
instances o f Prakrit -asi.

2. The future in -iba (< gerundive -eva) belongs already to Old Bengali (e.g. kariba “ I will do” ),
cf. Shahidullah( 1928:44).

3. -mi appears also as - v f (e.g. in pariharevi [Pc 18.8.9b]); presumably through the change
(referred to in 2.3.3) whereby the intervocalic m was replaced by nasalized v: -emi > -emi >
-ewi > -evi, which was ultimately denasalized; cf. European Romani ker-av (< *ker-am, OLA
kar-omi) “ I make” .





5.1 Erosion o f the nominal case system

The nominal system of late MIA underwent a considerable erosion of case
contrasts and Apabhramsa ended up with only one form for earlier Nom vs. Acc,
Instr vs. Loc, and Gen vs. Abl. Table 5.1 puts these matters into diachronic
perspective of Old and Middle IA (Old and Middle Prakrits represented by Pali
and Ardha-Magadhi). Globally speaking, Old and Middle Prakrits created a new-
type of the opposition of the direct (Nom, Acc) to the oblique cases (Instr, Gen,
Abl, Loc) in both numbers: a monosyllabic ending in the direct case vs. a
disyllabic ending in the oblique case (trisyllabic in the Abl in AMg). In
Apabhramsa, in addition, a new opposition of the singular to the plural in oblique
cases based on the presence of the nasalized vowel started emerging: plain vs.
nasalized ultima of the ending signalized the opposition between the singular vs.
plural oblique case (here we are reaching a NLA state of affairs). In morphological
terminology, the cumulative exponence of grammatical significates of 01A and
earlier stages of MIA gave way gradually to new types of semi-agglutinative
exponence in MIA. At the end, the nasalization of the ultima became more or less
consistent in the plural cases in Apabhramsa, whereas it was only optional during
the previous stages (as shown by AMg).
As shown in Table 5.2, i- and n-stems underwent thematization, i.e. they
started being declined more and more as a-stems. The following observations may
be made:

i) In the Instr Sg the a-stem suffix -e (< en < end) replaces the original /'-/w-stem
suffixes -ina/~una.

Table 5.1: The nominal system (a-stems) o f Old and Middle Indo-Aryan

Copyrighted image

Table 5.2: i- a n d u-ste m s in A p a b h ra m sa


ii) The Abl/Gen Sg suffix -he is used also with a-stems.

iii) In the plural subparadigm several suffixes are transferred from a-stems: Instr
- h i, Abl -hu, and Gen -ha (see 3.2 for more details).

Given the drastic reduction from the seven fusional cases of OIA to four by
the end of the MIA period, the postpositions grew steadily in importance in
denoting relational aspects of their head nouns. Examples in (1) and (2) are
provided to contrast the grammaticalization of the notion of ‘source’ in Sanskrit
and Apabhramsa:

(1) hrdayad yadi nihsarasi

heart+ABL if out-go+2/SG (case)
“if you go out of [my] heart”

hiaya-tthiu jai nisarahi [He 8.4.439]

heart=ABL if out-go+2/SG (postposition)
“if you got out of [my] heart”

(2) kukavitvat
bad-poetry+ABL (case)
“because of being poetaster”

kukavitvena hetuna (case and postposition)

bad-poetry+INSTR cause+INSTR
“because of being poetaster”

kukavitta-resi [SR 21 a]
bad-poetry=REF (postposition)
“because of being poetaster”

In (1) the ablative suffix in its concrete spatial sense was replaced by the
postposition thiu whose source is the past participle sthita “stood”; in (2) the
causal relation ‘due to/because ofron account o f is grammaticalized in several
ways: in Sanskrit by the ablative suffix or by the postposition hetuna which
actually is the instrumental form of hetu “cause” (also its head-noun is in the
instrumental); in Apabhramsa there is one of the referential postpositions, such as
Similar instances of the reanalysis of syntactic structures involving participles
are known in diachronic linguistics as grammaticalization (or depletion or
dematerialization o f lexical content), cf. Traugott and Heine (1991). In several

European languages this process supplied some prepositions, adverbials and

conjunctions. For instance, the English adverbial ago goes back to the OE
participle dgan “gone, passed away” (via ME agoon); the Spanish conjunction
segun “as” (in segun dicen “as they say”) goes back to the Latin participial form
secundum “following”; the French preposition vers “against” developed from the
Latin participial form versus “turned against”. Less commonly, even the finite
verb forms may supply adverbials as seen in Italian un anno fa “before one year”
(lit. it makes one year). In all these instances what began as the reanalysis of
syntactic structures involving participles may have resulted in their recategori­
zation as conjunctions or prepositions (many more examples have been assembled
recently by Kortman (1992:429-453)).
In what follows I want to study the sources of Middle (and ultimately New)
Indo-Aryan postpositions on the basis of Apabhramsa data. Broadly speaking, I
want to examine the nature of the causal nexus between the increased use of
adverbial/adj ectival (= participial) elements as postpositions and the decreased use
of the synthetic cases inherited from Old and early MIA observable in
Apabhramsa. I want to examine the following semantic functions which were
previously expressed by synthetic cases but came down to be expressed
analytically by postpositions in Apabhramsa: source (grammaticalized in Sanskrit
by the ablative), appurtenance or ownership (grammaticalized by the genitive)
and reference (grammaticalized by the dative). As Table 5.1 shows, Apabhramsa
ended up with a single form -aho for the Dat/Gen and another similar form -ahu
for the Gen/Abl. The other notions I want to explore are location (grammati­
calized by the locative) and accompaniment/instrumentality (grammaticalized by
the instrumental which already in OIA was reinforced with the postposition saha

5.2 Source
As a consequence of phonological changes the synthetic morphology of the
ablative became insufficient. This happened already in Early MIA, where the old
ablative devat lost the final -t and became thus homophonous with the Nom PI.
Pali helped the situation by adopting the pronominal ablative suffix -asmd (cf.
OIA tasmat) ~ amha, or the adverbial suffix -to (<tas). The latter suffix is
continued in Middle Prakrits in the form -do. In Maharastri, in addition to the
ablative suffixes -a (< at) and -do (< -at + tas), there was a peculiar suffix -ahi,
which is well documented in Hala’s Sattasai.

(3) tia muhahi tuha muham [Satta 179]

she+OBL mouth+ABL you+GEN mouth
“from her mouth (in)to her mouth”

It was shown by Insler (1993) that this suffix derives from the postposition adhi
which as far back as Vedic Sanskrit could be attached to the ablative form of the
noun in the meaning “down from, out o f ’. In later development the ablative and
genitive, in both nominal and pronominal declensions, gradually merged. This is
shown in Table 5.3.
In Apabhramsa the ablative suffix -he is probably adopted from the feminine
paradigm where it may express both the ablative and genitive (vice versa, the
masculine genitive suffix -ho has been adopted from the masculine into the
feminine paradigm).
The etymology of -he is uncertain; it could be traced back to the feminine
pronominal suffix of the Dat Sg -asyai (cf. tasyai “to her” > Ap tahe “from her”).
Thus in Late MIA there arose a need to differentiate between the function of
source (ablative) and appurtenance (genitive) by analytic means. In Apabhramsa
there were two postpositions, honta(u) and thiu, used for this purpose. Both are
participial forms: honta(u) is the present participle of the verb ho “be” (< OIA
bhu) and thiu is the past participle of the verb thd “remain, stay” (< OIA sthd).
They are not recognized explicitly as ablative postpositions by Hemacandra but
appear in his illustrations to the sutras in which he specifies the pronominal forms
of the ablative and genitive.

Table 5.3: G en itive a n d a b la tiv e in M id d le In d o -A ry a n


Sutra 8.4.355 specifies the adverbial ablative suffix -ham added to the
pronominal roots in -a:

(4) sarvademaserham [He 8.4.355]

Apabhramse sarvader-akarantat-parasya naserham ity adeso-bhavati
“In Apabhramsa pronouns ending in a have ham as the singular ablative


jaham hontau agado “Whence he has come”

taham hontau agado “Thence he has come”
kaham hontau agado “Whence has he come?”

Hemacandra’s illustrations with the postposition hontau, lit. being, demon­

strate that it was probably insufficient to say only

taham agado “Thence he has come”

If we glance at the pronominal subsystem of the ablative and genitive in Table 5.4
we may see why.
The Gen PI form taham “of these” is practically identical with the adverbial
taham “thence”: also taham given by N. Kumar in his Anabhramsa dictionary

Gen PI taham “of these”

Adverbial taham (also taham) “thence” [He 8.4.355]

Table 5.4: P ro n o m in a l a b la tiv e a n d g e n itiv e in A p a b h ra m sa


The suffix -ham, given by Hemacandra, (cf. Old Western Rajasthani tasmat >
tamhd > taham, Tessitori 1914:185) continues the earlier -sam (cf. Skt tesam,
tdsdm)\ but it may represent the prescriptive form since the Gen PI taham
obviously continues the Gen PI Fem form tasam.
It may be observed that the OIA adverbial tatah became tau in Apabhramsa,
converging thus with tau from tava “your” (Gen Sg of tvam “you”). This
‘unpleasant’ homophony rendered the form tau dysfunctional and it became
necessary to introduce a new form “thence” formed by the suffix -ham.
Hemacandra [8.4.380] gives the form of the Abl and Gen of the 1st Pers PI
pronoun {amhaham, Skt asmad) but the two illustrations indicate that the
postpositions, hontau and tanau, respectively, were used to ‘reinforce’ the
meaning of the synthetic forms; they are given in (5).

(5) amhaham hontau agado [Illustration to He 8.4.380]

we+GEN ABL come+PP
“He has come from us”

aha bhagga amhaham tana [He 8.4.380 and37

however flee+PP we+GEN GEN/PL
“[If], however, the fleeing [soldiers are] ours”

Actually, given the identity of the ablative and genitive it was necessary to use the
postpositions to distinguish between the meanings of spatial removal and
appurtenance. A more conservative style could, of course, achieve this by using
the ‘archaic’ form of the genitive, amhana, vs. the ablative amhaham. The overall
situation is surveyed in (6).

(6) Pronominal Ablative in Apabhramsa

Sanskrit Apabhramsa Apabhramsa
Abl asmat amhaham amhaham hontau
Gen asmakam amhana amhaham tanau (~ amhaham)

Hemacandra (8.4.373) provides the form of the ablative and genitive of the 2nd
Pers PI pronoun (tumhaham, Skt yusmat) but his two illustrations indicate that the
postpositions, hontau and kera(a), respectively, were used to ‘reinforce’ the
meaning of the synthetic form; this is shown in (7):

(7) tumhaham hontau agado [He 8.4.373]

ye+GEN ABL come+PP
“He has come from you (PI)”

tumhaham keraum dhanu [He 8.4.373]

“the wealth of yours”

As above, given the identity of the ablative and genitive, it was necessary to
use postpositions to distinguish between the meanings of spatial removal and
appurtenance. It is of interest to observe that earlier Ardha-MagadhI disambigu­
ated between the instrumental and ablative (present in Pali) by enlarging the latter
case with -to (< tas). This is shown in (8):

(8) Instrumental vs. Ablative in Ardha-MagadhI

Sanskrit Pali Ardha-MagadhI

Instr asmabhih amhehi amhehim
Abl asmat amhehi amhehinto

This complex ablative plural suffix -ehinto is also found with nouns where it
spread even to the singular subparadigm, witness occasional ablative singular
forms in -ahimto in Maharastri (e.g. in Hala 451 hiaahimto “from the heart” =
hrdayat). Tagare (1948:192-193) surveyed Apabhramsa literature and ascertained
a complete absence of similar Ardha-MagadhI-like instances in the Apabhramsa
documents of the 10th - 12th century. Therefore, he concluded that the use of
hontau was of late Western Apabhramsa origin, which was current in the speech
of Gujarat, Rajputana and other adjacent districts ca. 1150 A.D.
Another ablative postposition was thiu which comes from the past participle
sthita. It was not recognized as an ablative postposition by Hemacandra, but it
appears in one of his illustrations to sutra 8.4.439 (this sutra enumerates four
substitutes, i, iu, ivi, avi, of the absolutive participle).

(9) hiaya-ttthiu jai nlsarahi janaum munja sarosu

hrdaya-sthitah yadi nihsarasi [tatah] janami munja [tvam] sarosah
[Illustration (3) to He 8.4.439]
“If you, [however], get out of [my] heart, [then only dear] Munja I will know
that you are angry”

There is, however, a shortage of similar examples in Apabhramsa literature.

Tagare (1948:193-195) checked all the instances of thia in Apabhramsa literary
works and concluded that this postposition might have been used in the 12th c., but
that “Apabhramsa literature up to 1100 A.D. shows little trace of it.”
From the earlier Apabhramsa works an instance which comes closest to the
ablative is found in Devasena’s Savayadhammadoha [132]:

(10) ahava timiru na thaharai surahu gayani thiena [Sd 132]

Tagare (1948:194) translates:
“Or darkness does not stand by the sun’s being in the sky”, i.e.
“because of the sun in the sky”

It should be observed that Devasena did not use the instrumental absolute
construction, surena gayani thiena “because of the sun being in the sky”, which
would indicate usage of thia in its literal sense of the past participle “stood,
Other literary works, e.g. Puspadanta’s Harivamsapurana (10th c.), use the
locative pronominal forms in contexts where one would expect the adverbial form
taham, sanctioned by Hemacandra in the 12th c., or the postposition thiu.

(11) tahim niggau [Hv 88.21.2]

that-LOC go-out+PP
“He went out from that”

tahim tahim nisarai [Hv91.

that+LOC that+LOCgo-out+3/SG
“He goes out from that”

taham hontau agado [He 8.4.355]

that+GEN ABL come-out+PP
“Thence he has come”

I am inclined to assume that Hemacandra behaved as a conservative

grammarian in not recognizing the ablative postpositions hontau and thiu on a par
with other case suffixes. On the other hand, without his illustrations we would not
know about their existence because they do not appear in Jain narrative literature
of the 10tl1- 12th c.

5.3 Appurtenance
No particular sutra is devoted to the discussion of the semantic function of
appurtenance (or ownership) or to the discussion of the formal properties of the
genitival postpositions tana and kera. Again, we learn about them through
Hemacandra’s illustrations to the sutras in which he specifies the pronominal
forms of the genitive and ablative: 359, 373, 379, 380 (or some other forms: 361,
Sutra 8.4.359 specifies that the pronominal genitival suffix -he is to be used
in the feminine gender.

(12) striyam dahe [He 8.4.359]

apabhramse strilinge vartamanebhyo yat-tat-kimbhyah parasya naso dahe ity
adeso va bhavati
“In Apabhramsa, the pronouns yad, tad and kirn take optionally the suffix
-ahe in the Gen Sg of the feminine gender”


jahe kerau cf. Skt yasyah

“whose (Fern)”

tahe kerau cf. Skt tasyah

“of that (Fem)”

kahe kerau cf. Skt kasyah

“whose (Fem)?”

Illustrations to other sutras are given in (13):

(13) imu kulu tuha tanaum [He 8.4.361]

this family you+GEN GEN+NEUT
“This family is yours”

aha bhagga amhaham tana

however flee+PP we+GEN GEN/PL
“[If], however, the fleeing [soldiers][are] ours”

Both instances show the genitival pronominal forms followed by the genitival
postpositions in the equational prediction. One might speculate that the genitival
postpositions could have started to be used in this particular context, i.e., in the
slot of the complement which receives sentential stress. During the older stages
of IA, when the pronominal clitics were still a part of the system, the contrast
between the adjectival/attributive vs. complementary meaning could be
implemented by clitic vs. non-clitic pronominal forms, e.g., Sanskrit te kulam
“your family” vs. kulam tava (asti) “the family is YOURS.”

(14) Sanskrit Apabhramsa

attributive te kulam tuha kulu
“your family” ~ tava kulam —kulu tuha
tuha tanaum kulu

complementary (later)
“The family is YOURS” kulam tava kulu tuha tanaum

The situation in their plural counterparts could be similar:

(15) tumhaham keraum dhanu [lie 8.4.373]

you+GEN GEN+N wealth+N
“the wealth of YOURS”

One could speculate that the longer constructions (with the postposition) could be
used in environments where the possessor was focused on (vs. the focal

(16) tumhaham dhanu “your WEALTH”

tumhaham keraum dhanu “the wealth of YOURS” [He.8.4.373]

tumhaham tanaum dhanu “the wealth of YOURS”

dhanu tumhaham tanaum “The wealth is YOURS”

The following illustration is of particular importance because it shows that in

Apabhramsa the genitival postposition had to agree with its head-noun in case:17

(17) kesari. .. jasu keraem1 humkaradaem2

who+GEN GEN+INSTR roarmg+INSTR mouth+GEN/PL

muhahum padanti trnaim [He 8.4.422.15]

lion fall+3/PL grass
“The lion by whose roar [mouthfuls of] grass fell from [your] mouths
[through fear]”

kesari jasu keraem1 humkaradaem2

lion who+GEN GEN+INSTR roaring+INSTR
genitival agreement with
postposition the head-noun
“The lion by whose roar . . . ”

In Old and Middle IA, agreement with the possessed object could not be
shown on the pronoun referring to the possessor (= genitive case):

(18) Sanskrit Prakrits

tasya bhrata tao bhau “his brother”
tasya duhita tao dhuya “his daughter”
tasya bhrata tahe bhau “her brother”
tasya duhita tahe dhuya “her daughter”

This state o f affairs changed fundamentally when Apabhramsa introduced the

two genitival postpositions, kera and tana, in that these two display full adjectival
agreement with the possessed object. At that point Apabhramsa reached the NIA
state of affairs. In Hindi, as is well known, the genitival postposition displays
adjectival agreement with the possessed object (the pronominal possessor,
however, is not marked for gender):

(19) Apabhramsa Hindi

tao kerau bhau is=ka bhal “his brother”
tao keri dhuya is=kl betl “his daughter”
tahe kerau bhau is=ka bhal “her brother”
tahe keri dhuya is—ki bet! “her daughter”

In historical perspective, Hindi possessive (genitival) pronominal forms preserved

adjectival characteristics and the Apabhramsa stage shows nicely what happened;
the adjectival form kera (etymologically, the gerundive karya “to be done, made”)
was cliticized to the pronoun and underwent some phonological erosion.
We do not possess enough information regarding what happens in
Apabhramsa when the possessive construction is declined. In Hindi the genitival

postposition takes on the form of the oblique case (the difference is observable
only in the Masc Sg ke)\

(20) is=ke bhal=ke sath

he+OBL=GEN+OBL brother=GEN+OBL with
“with his/her brother”

In Apabhramsa one would expect the adjectival postpositions kera and tana to
copy the case of their head-noun; thus I would translate (20) into Apabhramsa as
shown in (21):

(21) tao ker(a)em bhauna saha

he+GEN GEN+INSTR brother+INSTR with

tao tanena bhauna saha

he+GEN GEN+INSTR brother+INSTR with
“with his brother”

These constructions, to the best of my knowledge, are not found in the available
Apabhramsa literature. Instead, we find sanskritic constructions tao bhauna saha
“with his brother” (Skt tasya bhratra saha), tae bhauna saha “with her brother”
(Skt tasya bhratra saha). The earliest instances of the type Ae+GEN GEN+INSTR
brother*-INSTR with, i.e. of the genitival postposition recycled as an adjective,
and showing consistent agreement with the possessed object ‘declined’ by
postpositions, come from Old Gujarati.
Undocumented Apabhramsa constructions could be reconstructed as given in
( 22):

(22) tao tanena bhauna saha

his GEN+INSTR brother+INSTR with
“with his brother”

tahe tanena bhauna saha

her GEN+INSTR brother+INSTR with
“with her brother”

The issue of the recycling of the pronominal possessor as an adjective should be

further researched on the basis of other languages. For instance, there are some
indications that it was taking place in Latin as the following construction from
Virgil’s Eclogues [3.1] may demonstrate, as shown in (23):

(23) Cuium pecus. . .? (Latin)

Whose+NEUT cattle+NEUT
“Whose cattle (is it)?”

In this passage instead of expected cuius pecus with the bare genderless genitive
cuius “whose” we have the form with the neuter suffix -um which agrees in
gender and number with its head-noun. In Old Latin of the earlier literature of the
republic (Plautus, Terence) one could say cuia mulier “whose wife” as in Indo-
Aryan and certain Slavic languages; cf. Hindi kis=ka beta “whose son” vs. kis=ki
betl“whose daughter”, and Serbian ciji brat “w'hose brother” vs. cija mati “w’hose

5.4 Reference
The only semantic function Hemacandra specifies for any of the cases is that
of tadarthya “reference”. The entity referred to, or tadarthya, lit. being meant for
that, is grammaticalized by the dative in Classical Sanskrit. Patanjali in his bhasya
on Panini [11.3.13] captured this relationship in the following w'ords:

(24) caturthl-vidhane tadarthya upasamkhyanam yupaya daru

[Mbhsy onP 11.3.13]
“When the dative is prescribed, the mention is [made] of reference [for
instance]: ‘the wood for the sacrificial post’”

In Apabhramsa, which syncretized the dative with the genitive, the sense of
reference came to be expressed by one of the postpositions attached to the genitive
form or the stem of the noun. Hemacandra [8.4.425] mentions five postpositions
without specifying their semantic difference or the range of their usage:

(25) tadarthye kehim-tehim-resi-resim-tanenah [He 8.4.425]

apabhramse tadarthye dyotye kehim tehim resi resim tanena ity ete pamca
nipatah prayoktavyah
“In Apabhramsa when the sense of reference is to be indicated the five
nipatas (here, postpositions) are to be used: kehim, tehim, resi, resim, [and]

The postposition kehim (~ kihim) corresponds to Hindi lie “for (the sake of)”.
Formally, it is the Masc Instr PI form o f ka “who” (similarly, tehim is the Masc
Instr PI form of ta- “that”). One might be tempted to trace kehim back to Sanskrit

krte “for (the sake of)” but its descendant should be kie (or kae) according to the
phonological rules.
Resim, following Schwarzschild (1959:85-86), can be traced back to the
genitival postposition kera (< the gerundive karya “to be done”), via the longer
form keresim. The latter is to be taken as the genitive plural (cf. other pronominal
genitive plural forms: tesim, kesim, annesim, savvesim in AMg, JMah and JS;
according to Hemacandra [111.61], they could be used for both the feminine and
masculine plural). This postposition is found only in a limited number of late
Apabhramsa texts over a short period of time, and it has not survived into the
modem languages. An example from Somaprabha’s Kumarapalapratibodha is
given in (26):

(26) ta valivi pucchiu samanu

then tum-back+CAUS+GER ask+PP monk

sauna-parikkhanana-resi [Kp 49.9]

“They made the monk turn back and questioned him in order to test the bird”

Tanena is the instrumental form of the genitival postposition tana discussed

in (5.3). According to Vyas (1982:130) tanena resulted by ellipsis from the phrase
tanena karanena “by that reason” > “because of that” (cf. Gujarati tethl avya nahi
“he did not come because of that [reason]”).
Examples of both kehim and rest are found in the illustration to Hemacandra

(27) dholla eha parihasadl ai bhana kavanahim desi [He 8.4.425.1]

haum jhijjaum tau kehim pia tuhum punu annahi resi

he nayaka, esa paribhasa ayi bhana kasmin dese

aham ksiye tava arthe, tvam punah anyasyah arthe
“O dear, tell me in what place is this practice in vogue
(that) I am pining for you, while you are pining away for someone else?”

In (26) resi is attached to the stem form of the noun (parikkhana-resi) whereas
in (27) it follows the pronoun in the genitival form {annahi resi another+GEN/F
“for someone else”).
An example of tanena is found in the illustration to Hemacandra [8.4.366]:

(28) sahu vi lou tadapphadai vaddattanaho tanena [He 8.4.366.1]

vaddappanu pari paviai hatthem mokkaladena

sarvah api lokah praspandate mahattvasya arthe

mahattvam param prapyate hastena muktena
“All the people struggle for greatness;
greatness, however, is achieved [only] by the generous”

5.5 Location
In this section the following postpositions expressing the notions of inessive
“in” (cf. ghar-m e “in the house”), locative “on” (cf. H ghar=par “on the house”),
and adessive “at” (cf. H ghar=ke=pas) will be studied.
In OIA it was enough to say grh+e “in the house” with the locative suffix -e\
in MIA it became necessary to use the adverb majjhe/i “inside” as an adposition
(< OIA madhy+e “in the middle”) with the noun in the genitive: majjhe gharaho
~ gharaho majjhe “in the house”. In Apabhramsa both constructions (with the
head majjhe before or after its modifier) are available:

(29) majjhi hiyayaha [Sc 707.5]

middle+LOC heart+GEN
“in the heart”
lit. in the middle of the heart

In NIA the case of the noun has been lost and the adverb majjhe was reduced to
the postposition me which is cliticized to the noun: ghar-m e. At this point the
fusional case of OIA has been replaced by the phrasal (postpositional) case.
The locative postposition par “on” in Hindi goes back to the OIA
adverb/adposition upari which could be used with the noun in various cases:
N+Acc “above, over”; N+Loc “upon, at the head o f’; N+Abl “with regard to,
after”, and, of course, also with the genitive. In Apabhramsa literature all sorts of
examples are available ranging from (a) upari/uvari detached from its
(pro)nominal modifier to (b) the immediately following one (N+Gen upari) to (c)
the ‘compound’ N-upari. Representative examples are provided in (30):30

(30) a. iyarassu kassu vi uvari [Sc 693.2]

another+GEN who+GEN PRT on
“on whoever else”

b. acchai kailasaho upari sahu [Pc 13.2.6]

is Kailasa+GEN on saint
“The saint is on the Kailasa”

c. iyar’uvari [Sc 694.8]

another on
“on another (one)”

The last example approximates the NIA usage of par as the postposition. There
are also instances where initial u of the postposition is contracted with final a of
the stem into o as in (31):

(31) ditthaim naharaim thanasiharo’vari [Pc 14.7.9]

see+PP nailmarks breast-peak=on
“The nailmarks are seen on the breast-peaks

The notion of proximity is realized by one of the adessive postpositions, most

commonly pas-i “in the proximity/neamess o f ’. Its concrete meaning used to be
“side, region of the ribs” (in OIA parsva, cf. its derivative parsva-ka “rib”, and
compounds such asparsva-cara “attendant”, parsva-stha “standing beside”). This
concrete meaning still lurks in the following Apabhramsa example, where pas-i
(with the locative suffix -i) is the head o f the compound pai-pasi (< pati-pdrsve)
“at husband’s side” —►“close to/at the husband”:

(32) kahi vi paipasi paritthiyau [Rittha 1.7.7]

who+GEN PRT husband-side+LOC seat+PP
“[Someone] seated at the side of the husband”

This concrete meaning is not present if the compound N-pasi is used with verbs
of motion:

(33) gayau guru-pasi [Kp 101.1]

go+PP teacher-side+LOC
“He went to the teacher”

Here, arguably, the meaning is not “he went to the side of the teacher” but rather
“he went to the proximity of the teacher”, i.e. “he went to the teacher” with the
concrete meaning of pasi dematerialized through the process of grammati-

The absolute form pasu may also be the head of the noun phrase with the
nominal modifier in the genitive:

(34) vasudevaho pasu gau [Rittha 4.7.8]

Vasudeva+GEN proximity go+PP
“He went to Vasudeva”

The pronominal modifier (the genitive form of the pronoun) may or may not be

(35) na pasu jami [Pc4.4

not nearness go+l/SG
“1 don’t go close [to him]”
cf. Hindi mai na uske pas jata hu

anaho pasu mahu [Pc 27.3.9]

bring+IMP nearness I+GEN
“Bring to me”

In either case the locative form pasi or pasahi may also be used:

(36) pasahim cau mahihara cau sariu [Rittha 7.12.6]

proximity+LOC four mountains four river
“In [its] proximity there were four mountains [and] four rivers”

The effects of grammaticalization, i.e. the dematerialization of the lexical content

“side”, its reduction to the abstract notion of “proximity” and ultimately to the
function word (postposition) “at/to” are especially clear if the construction 'N-pasi
(or the construction-N+Gen pasi) is collocated with the verbs of speaking, such
as in (37):

(37) thulabhaddina bhaniu guru-pasi [Kp72.1]

Sthulabhadra+INSTR say+PP teacher-side+LOC
“Sthulabhadra said to [his] teacher”

Here the meaning is clearly “S. addressed [his] teacher” not “S. was spreading
comments in the vicinity of [his] teacher”.
It should be observed that already in 01 A, with its rich system of
morphological cases, there were a number of postpositions expressing various
nuances of the notion of proximity (e.g. antikam “vicinity, presence” —►“near, up

to”, antike (Loc) “near, close to”; samipam “vicinity, proximity” —►“to”, sanilpe
(Loc) “close at hand, near, beside”). In Apabhramsa the two following may be
mentioned: saviha (< OIA savidha “vicinity, proximity”) used in the locative
savihi; and sammuhu (< OIA sammukha “confronting, facing”, sammukham “face
to face” —i►“towards”):

(38) tie sunandaha kaminihi savihi vaitthu

this+GEN Sunanda+GEN beloved+GEN proximity+LOC sit+PP

kumaru [Sc 637.8-9]

“The prince sat altogether) with [his] beloved Sunanda”

to kosa-sammuhu bhanai [Kp 66.2]

then Kosa-towards say+PP
“Then he said to Kosa”
lit. . . . face-to-face with Kosa

We may conclude this section with a few' comments on the OIA proximative
postposition prati “against, towards, to” used with nouns in the accusative, e.g.
devan prati “towards gods”. By the late MIA period the meaning of pai (< prati)
was reduced to that of the adverb (degree w'ord) “only” and the emphatic particle
(corresponding to Hindi bhT); in addition, the form pai was homophonous with pai
“husband” (< pati) and pai “you” (< OIA tvaya). It is therefore no surprise that
this postposition had to be recreated from OIApratipam “towards” (lit. prati-ap-
“against the water/stream”) > Apabhramsa padiva:

(39) suraha padlvau [Ritlha 7.2]

god+GEN/PL towards
“towards gods”

5.6 Accompaniment/Instrumentality
The most common adpositions expressing these two notions are samau (also
samanu) and sahu (also sahu/sau/sai/sai, cf. Old Hindi se). They may precede or
follow the noun in the instrumental:40*

(40) samaranganu samau dasananena [Pc 12.2.6]

war with ten-faced+INSTR
“the war with Ravana”

samarahganae kena samau paharahi [Pc 52.2.1]

battlefield what+INSTR with strike+2/SG
“With what do you strike in the battlefield?”

te tumhahim samanu main jujjhiu

[Pc 46.9.9]
that+INSTR ye+INSTR with I+ACC/INSTR fight+PP
“Therefore I fought with you”

sahu kannae kiu paniggahanu [Pc 9.2.8]

with girl+INSTR make+PP marriage
“He married the girl”
lit. he made the marriage with the girl

In later documents, such as Samdesa Rasaka, the postposition sau may be

attached as a clitic to the noun in the absolute form (i.e. here we reach the early
NIA state of affairs):

(41) pahiya na sijjhai kiri balu maha

traveller not succeed+3/SG PRT strength I+GEN

kamdappasau [SR 99]

“O traveller, my strength cannot compete with Cupid/proves of no avail
against Cupid”

The ancestor of the Hindi postposition =ke sath “with” is Apabhramsa satthihi
from OLA sa artha lit. having [its] object attained —►“successful, wealthy” (cf. its
OIA derivatives such as sarthaka “profitable, significant”, sarthika “travelling
with a caravan, travelling merchant”). It appears in late Apabhramsa texts, such
as Samdesa Rasaka, and its -hi seems to be identical with the marker of the
oblique case. It is attached to the nouns in the absolute form and it may be spelled
separately or together with its noun (the latter option undoubtedly indicates its
status of a postpositional clitic as in NIA):42

(42) viviha-viakkhana satthihi jai pavasii niru [SR 43]

various-clever=with if enter+3/SG continuously
“If in the company of clever persons one takes a stroll in the city”

(43) sohahi sijja taruni janasatthihi [SR 175]

beautiful+OBL bed young-lady people=with
“The beds [were graced] with [the presence of] beautiful young ladies”

Another Apabhramsa postposition was the instrumental form sage/-ena

(< OIA sahga “attachment to, contact with”) whose modifying noun is in the

(44) sattaha suyaha samgena dinna.. .

[PSC 2.183]
merchant+GEN son+GEN contact+INSTR give+PP/F girl
“He married the daughter with the son of a merchant”

And finally, as in OIA, one could express the notion of accompaniment in a

‘poetic’ fashion by attaching the adjective sahiya “accompanied by/associated
with” (< OIA sahita “standing near; joined” < *sam-hita “placed together”) to a
modifying noun in the instrumental:

(45) dehadevali jo vasai sattihim

body-temple+LOC who live+3/SG Sakti+INSTR

sahiyau deu [Pd 53]

accompanied-by god
“The god who lives in the temple of the body along with Sakti”

Unlike in the case of the above mentioned adpositions, samau and sahu, the
notion of instrumentality does not arise in sahiya. The adjective sahiya could
presumably also function as the head of the compound such as mahddevT-sahiya
X “X accompanied by the queen” vs. the noun phrase mahadevie sahio X “X
along with the queen”:

(46) mahadevie sahio rajjam kunai [Kp J. 3(1-2)]

queen+INSTR with rule+ACC do+3/SG
“He rules along with the queen”

Nevertheless, one could maintain that the lexical meaning “accompanied by” still
lurks in (46) because of the adjectival morphology of sahiya. Combined with the
adposition sahu, sahu mahadevie or mahadevie sahu, the meaning of (46) would
only be “(along) with the queen”.

The antonym of “with”, vinu “without” (< 01A vino), is used with the noun
in the instrumental (in OTA it could also be used with the accusative): pai vinu
“without you”, vinu hiae “without a heart”, etc. An interesting way of saying
“without you” consists of combining vinu with samge (INSTR) “contact with”:

(47) ettiu kalu gamiu vinu samgem [Bk 201.7]

so-much time go+CAUS+PP without contact+INSTR
“1 spent so much time without you”

And finally, there is also an antonym to sahiya “accompanied by”, namely rahiya
(< 01A rahita “devoid o f ’ —►“without”). It is added as a postposition to nouns in
the instrumental or in the absolute form:

(48) dosahim rahiu [Sd 5]

fault+INSTR/PL without
“without faults”

(49) raya rosa rahiyau [JSC 11.9.8]

love anger devoid-of
“without love or anger”

The latter may be understood as the compound rdya-rosa-rahiyau “devoid of love

or anger” (cf. above regarding sahiya).


The two editions o f Hemacandra (Vaidya 1958/1980 and Vyas 1982) list several variants

Vaidya (1958/198 0 : 619): kerae (B kerae)

V yas (198 2: 36): keraern (A CD keraim, P kerem, V kerae)

Vaidya (19 58 /19 8 0 :6 19 ): humkaradaem

(A humkaradaim, B humkaraue)
V yas (198 2:36): humkaradem (BC humkaradai)

‘Rhym ing’ agreement, keraem humkaradaem appears in V ya s’ edition (vs. V aid ya’s kerae


6.1 Late Middle Indo-Aryan Period (Apabhramsa)

We may start by re-displaying the forms of the personal pronouns of the 1st
and 2nd Pers according to Hemacandra, shown in Table 6.1 (cf. Tables 3.4-3.6).
Apabhramsa, as described by Hemacandra in the 11th/12th c., appears to make
four formal distinctions in the 1st and 2nd Pers pronouns: Nom vs. Acc/Instr vs.
Loc (in Sg), and Nom/Acc vs. Instr vs. Abl/Gen vs. Loc (in PI). In semantic terms,
both subsystems differentiate between the agent/subject and patient; the notions
of spatial removal and appurtenance are syncretized (Abl/Gen); and there was the
general locative case. A salient feature of this Western Apabhramsa system was
the existence of the morphological syncretism of the Acc Sg and Instr Sg: mai(m)
and pai(m)/tai(m). In Bubenik & Paranjape (1996:111), I introduced the term
‘double-oblique’ for this phenomenon. The same phenomenon is observable in

Table 6 .1: Personal pronouns o f the Is' and 2nd Pers in Apabhramsa (according to
Hemacandra 8.4.368-381)

some Iranian languages such as Pashto (cf. Bubenik 1989b), Kurdish (cf. Bynon
1979) and Pamir languages (cf. Payne 1980). For instance in Pashto the same
oblique pronominal form of the 1st or the 2nd Pers Sg encodes the AgSubj in the
past tense and the GoObj in the present tense; examples are given in (1):

ma to vulid “I saw you” (Pashto)

I+OBL you see+PP

to ma vine “You see me”

you I+OBL see+2/SG

ta zo vulidom “You saw me”

you+OBL I see+PP+l/SG

zo ta vmom “I see you”

I you+OBL see+l/SG

The double oblique system did not exist in OIA; as far as I can tell it made its
first appearance in the Ardha-Magadhi texts of the 4th - 3rd c. B.C. Diachronically
speaking its appearance in AMg was only an extension of the situation which had
already existed in the plural subparadigm of pronominal clitics in OIA. The
conservative Prakrit dialects, such as Pali, preserved the OIA accusative forms ma
and ta in the singular subparadigm but AMg started using the universal clitic
forms me and te instead. Analogy with the plural subsystem could have been
operative here. These data are shown in Table 6.2.
As a result of this extension the same oblique clitic forms could express
notions as different as the AgSubj in the ergative construction and the GoObj in
the non-ergative construction. Pertinent AMg data are shown in (2).

(2) AgSubj [+erg] GoObj [-erg]

1st Pers Sg na me dittha naraga suneha me
not=I+OBL see+PP hells hear+Pl=I+OBL
“I have not seen the hells” “Hear me!”
[Miyaputte 20] [Mokkha 4.6]

2ndPers PI se dittham ca ne ma ne cayahi

he/it see+PP+N and=we+OBL not=we+OBL abandon
“And we have seen it” “Don’t abandon us!”
[Ayar] [Ayar]

Table 6.2: Double-oblique system o f pronominal clitics

6.1.1 Double-oblique system in Apabhramsa

The earliest pieces of evidence for the existence of the double-oblique system
with non-clitic pronominal forms in Apabhramsa are found in Kalidasa’s
VikramorvasTya (assuming that the Apabhramsa songs in the Fourth Act are
genuine). Here the same pronominal formpai may encode both the Agent in the
passive (or ergative) construction, on the one side, and the Goal, on the other side.
Both instances are found in stropha 45, and they are shown in (3):

(3) GoObj [-erg]

hau pat pucchimi.. .
I you+OBL ask+l/SG

AgSubj [+erg]
ditthl pia pat samuha jantl [Vikr4.45]
seen+FEM beloved+FEM you+OBL in front passing
“I ask you .. . have you seen [my] beloved, while passing in front [of you]?”1

The double-oblique system with hill pronouns is amply documented in the

Jain texts composed in Western and Southern Apabhramsa during the 10th - 12th
c. and it was described by Hemacandra [8.4.355-381]. Sutra 370 observes that the
forms of the 2nd Pers Sg taim and paim may be used in both the Instr and Acc Sg,
and sutra 377 observes that the form maim in the 1st Pers Sg may be used in both
the Instr and Acc Sg. Both sutras are given in (4):

(4) tanyama paim taim [He 8.4.370]

apabhramse yusmadah ta hi am ity etaih saha paim taim ity adesau bhavatah
“In Apabhramsa the pronoun yusmad has the substitutes taim, paim in the
Instr Sg, Loc Sg and Acc Sg”

Table 6.4: Reassignment o f semantico-syntactic functions in the JSI/2nd Pers singular

pronouns in Apabhramsa

Sg pronoun behaved also like that, while the masculine form clung to the old
tripartite morphology typical of 01 A. These data are surveyed in Table 6.3.
The morphological difference between the singular vs. plural forms in the 1st
and 2nd Pers is obvious from Table 6.3: in the plural the absolutive case (= old
accusative) marks the [-erg] GoObj, whereas in the singular it is the oblique case
(= old instrumental) which does it. The functional difference between the
Apabhramsa and OIA system is captured in Table 6.4 which shows the reassign­
ment of semantico-syntactic functions in Apabhramsa in terms of Functional
The double-oblique subsystem functioned in exactly the same fashion as e.g.
in contemporary Pashto, i.e. by Subject-Object inversion by tense: the oblique
form grammaticalizes both the Agent in ergative tenses and the Goal (= patient)
in non-ergative tenses, cf. (1). I constructed the data in (6) on the basis of textual
evidence presented in (7).

(6) Subject-Object inversion by tense in the l st/2nd Pers Sg in Apabhramsa.

tuhu mat pucchiyau “I asked you”

you I+OBL ask+PP
Obj Subj
tuhu mai pucchahi “You ask me”
you I+OBL ask+2/SG
Subj Obj

hau pal pucchiyau “You asked me:

I you+OBL ask+PP
Obj Subj
hau pal pucchau/imi “I ask you”
I you+OBL ask+l/SG
Subj Obj

(7) Textual evidence for (6):

1—>2 tuhu mai dhariyau [Hv 86.10.8] “I held you”

2—>1 jiha pecchaha mai [Sc 740.4.5] “that you may see me”
2—>l hau p a l. . . nijjiu [Hv 83.23.7] “You have defeated me”
1~*2 hau pal pucchimi [Vikr 4.45] “I ask you”2

The bipartite subsystem in the plural works exactly in the same fashion as the
nouns do, hence the label nominal (ergative) type. In this subsystem there is the
absolutive form which does not encode morphologically the contrast between
Subj and Obj, and the instrumental plural suffix -hi is used with both nouns and
pronouns; with feminine /-stems -hi may also indicate singular, and the same
suffix is used with the feminine pronoun in the 3rd Pers singular. Pertinent data
would look as shown in (8):

(8) nari/ahi kanna dittha “The men saw the girl”

amhehl kanna dittha “We saw the girl”
sahihi kanna dittha “The friends/fricnd (Fern) saw the girl”
tahi kanna dittha “She saw the girl”
tlhl kanna dittha “They (Fern) saw the girl”

It is of some importance to realize that in non-ergative tenses it was necessary

to fix word order to prevent ambiguity between “we ask you” (PI) and “ye ask us”,
since the difference between pucchahii “we ask” and pucchahu “ye ask” was
clearly insufficient. In the ergative tenses the agent was marked morphologically
and its position was free. This is shown by means of plural counterparts to (6)
given in (9) which show that the plural subsystem does not work by Subj-Obj
inversion by tense:

(9) Pronominal plural subsystem in Apabhramsa

11—>22 tumhe amhehT pucchiya “We asked you” (PI)

you (PI) we+INSTR
Obj Subj
22—*11 tumhe amhe pucchahu “Ye ask us”
ye we
Subj Obj
22—>11 amhe tumhehl pucchiya “Ye asked us”
we ye+INSTR
Obj Subj
11—>22 amhe tumhe pucchahu “we ask You” (PI)
v/e you (PI)
Subj Obj

Another source of ambiguity, at least in the minds of editors of Apabhramsa

texts, are the alternative forms amhai and tumhai with the suffix of neuter plural.
They look deceptively like instrumental forms in that they rhyme with their
singular instrumental counterparts mai and pai/taT). For instance, Alsdorf, the
editor of Puspadanta’s Harivamsapurana, translated erroneously [81.6.12]:

(10) amhai pai dittha [Hv 81.6.12]

we you+INSTR see+PP
“You saw us”
“We saw you” (Alsdorf, 1936:331)3

During the following centuries both the singular and the plural bipartite
subsystems were abandoned as a result of the introduction of a distinct Dat/Acc
postposition used also with nouns. The earliest documents of NIA vernacular
languages show a return to the conservative tripartite subsystem realized
increasingly analytically by means of postpositions. The same is true of Eastern
Apabhramsa (cf. 3.3) to judge by the Eastern school of Prakrit grammarians which
distinguished between the subject vs. object plural forms in the 1st and 2nd Pers.
Thus, while Hemacandra would use one form amhe for both “we ask” and “ye ask
us”, Kramadisvara would use amhe for “we” and amhaha for “us” (the latter form
is the Abl/Gen PI according to Hemacandra):

(11) Hemacandra (WAp) Kramadisvara (EAp)

“We ask” amhe pucchahu amhe pucchamo
“Ye ask us” amhe pucchahu amhaha pucchaho

mahu (vs. He mahu), presumably by analogy with all the other forms in the
paradigm (hau, maT).
Kanakamara in his Karakandacariu (975-1025) apparently overuses the
Acc/Instr form of the 2nd Pers pronoun pai. This form appears in the context where
one would expect Nom tuhu and Gen/Dat tu(jj)ha, as shown in (16):

(16) paimjeha [Kc 3.10.6]

“like you”

so paim deva na vi navai [Kc 3.11.9]

“He will not bow to you my lord”

More importantly, there is an instance of the Gen/Dat form of the 1st Pers pronoun
majjhu used where one expects the Acc/Instr form maT according to the double­
oblique system of Hemacandra:

(17) leu hatthi majjhu vahi [Kc 1.13.6]

“Let the elephant take me away”

We may assume that in some dialects the double-oblique system did not exist and
that they syncretized the Gen/Dat with the Acc. This is the situation in
Addahamana’s Samdesa Rdsaka (12th/l 3th c.) as shown in (18):

(18) piu majjha samtosihai [SR 197a]

priyatamo ma santosayisyati
“The beloved will satisfy me”

so vi mahu milhihai [SR 197b]

yanma ujjhasyati
“He too will leave me”

The form tua which is used in both the Gen/Dat and Acc of the 2nd Pers pronoun
may be derived from either the OIA accusative form tvam or the genitive tava or,
perhaps, from the Ap form tuha:19

(19) tua chaddivi hiyaatthiyaha [SR 75b]

tvam hrdayasthitam muktva
“Having abandoned you, who [always] stands in [my] heart”

tuya samaramta [SR 86a]

“thinking of you”

The double-oblique system survived Hemacandra by at least one century to

judge by the Jain poems in Old Gujarati published by Baumann (in 1975). They
were written in 1301/1302 A.D. but their language according to the editor
represents the older transitional phase when Old Gujarati was strongly influenced
by Apabhramsa.4 The forms of the 1st and 2nd Pers pronoun in the singular are
presented in Table 6.5. It should be observed that in spite of what Baumann
(1975:48) says there is no positive evidence for the double-oblique system in the
2nd Pers. Examples for the 1st Pers are given in (20).

(20) mai as [+erg] AgSubj

tasu mai appa appiyau [BS 51; Baumann 1975]
“I entrusted him my soul”

Table 6.5: Forms o f “I" and “y o u ” in Old Gujarati (based on Baumann 1975)

Copyrighted image

Table 6.6: Forms o f "I" and “you" in Old Gujarati (according to Bender 1992)


1. In the Sanskrit passages the king uses the non-finite passive as in drsta sarvahgasundan tvaya
in 4 .5 1, or the activated passive participle, as in api drstavan=asi mamapriyam vane in 4.60.
These two Sanskrit renditions, the passive and the active one, show nicely the ambiguity
o f the ‘proto-ergative’ construction ditthi pia par, depending on the context (i.e. paying
attention to pragmatics), we may opt either for ergative: “ Have you seen [my] beloved?” or
passive interpretation: “ Was [my] beloved seen by you?” .

2. The pronominal agent in the 2nd Pers Sg (pat, tai) may be omitted in the interrogative (cf. Hv
83.7.3) but not in the 1 st Pers Sg:

ha, hittau kim maim para-kalattu [Hv 8 1.16 .3 ]

alas rob+PP why I+IN ST R other-wife
“ Alas, why have I robbed a wife o f another man?”

Without mat this sentence would mean: “ Why have you robbed a wife o f another man?” The
pronominal Subj in the past does not have to be realized by the Acc/Instr form mat since the
strategy o f compounding may be used instead. For instance, Puspadanta [in Hv 8 1.16 .5 ] says
hau kaya-kukajja “ I am the one who has done a bad deed” (the type aham krta-kukdryd with
Fern subject) instead o f mai kukajja kaya “ I have done a bad deed” (= an ordinary ergative

3. For “ we saw you” one would expect

amhehl tuhu ditthau

w e+IN ST R you see+PP

with the absolutive form tuhu “ you” and the singular agreement marker on the PP ditthau ;

aya tuhum ditthau, purisa-slha [Hv 8 1.11 .6 ]

come+PP/PL you see+PP man-lion
“ We came and saw you, oh man-lion”

4. “ Dieser Text stellt also eine Mischsprache dar, aber es ware wohl nicht verfehlt za sagen, daB
er im Gesamtbild dem friihen Alt-Gujarat! zugerechnet werden m uB,. . . ” (Baumann, 1975:3).

5. Baumann (19 75:48 ) lists tau (4x) and tii ( lx ) as accusative forms; however, the three
instances o f tau (in BN 36, BD 29 and 37) and the single instance of tu (in BN 18) are clearly
nominatives. Only in BN 9

ma-na apanapau tau khaya nesi [BN 9]

not-not yourself you destroy
“ D on’t destroy yourself!”

tau can be analyzed as Nom rather than Acc.

Dave quotes Sthulibhadra-rasa (p. 104, 1.18 ) olaggi mamti-hara-ddsi “ He used to oblige
minister’ s servant” where hara comes closest to the OGu usage in the sense o f the genitive.


7.1 Grammatical aspect

Further evolution of the perfect and progressive aspect is typical of MIA. For
the sake of historical continuity I will be using the traditional term ‘perfect’
which, as argued in Hewson & Bubenik (1997:13), should be replaced by the term
‘retrospective aspect’ to eliminate the confusions that arise between ‘perfect’ and

7.1.1 Perfect (retrospective aspect)

Synthetic perfect forms (as known in OIA) were replaced by analytic non-
fmite constructions in MIA. There are only a handful of relics of the OIA perfect
in Pali (most notably, aha “he has said”, vidu “they know/have known”). The
other way of expressing the perfect was by means of the passive participle +
copula. It should be observed that the 3rd Pers Sg atthi “is” (< OIA asti) is
regularly ommitted; and hoti (< OIA bhavati) is often omitted. With intransitive
verbs the meaning of the periphrastic perfect is active:

(1) agato ‘mhi

come+PP/M be+l/SG
“I have come (Masc)”

The PP participle has to agree with its subject in gender and number:

(2) agata ‘mhi

come+PP/F be+l/SG
“I have come (Fern)”

With transitive verbs the meaning of the periphrastic perfect is passive:

(3) mutta ‘mhi

liberate+PP/F be+l/SG
“I am/have been liberated (Fern)”

nimantita ‘mha
invite+PP/PL be+l/PL
“We are/have been invited”

With certain transitive verbs, however, the periphrastic perfect has both the
active and the passive meaning; Q.g. patto (< OLA. prapto) means both “obtained”
(Pass) and “having reached” (Act):

(4) patto si nibbana

reach+PP/M be+2/SG nirvana
“You have reached the nirvana”

This polysemy could be removed by the activization of the PP by the suffix -vant:

prapta “obtained” (Pass) ~ “having reached” (Act)

—►prapta-vant “having reached”

But similar formations are rare in early MIA (Pali) and they tend to be lexicalized:

bhutta “eaten” ~ “having eaten”

bhutta-vant “one who has eaten”

An innovation of Pali is the activizing suffix -avin:

(5) vijita “conquered” —►vijitavin “victorious”

kata “done” —* katavin “one who has done”

In this fashion it was possible to form even the periphrastic pluperfect and the
future perfect:

(6) patto abhavissam

reach+PP/M be+PRET+l/SG
“I had reached”

(7) gato bhavissati

go+PP/M be+FUT+3/SG
“He will have gone”

The notion of inception (cf. 7.2.1) could be realized by combining the gerund
of the main verb with the verb titthati “stands” and viharati “dwells”:

(8) ekasmim gumbe laggitva atthasi [SIV.60.15]

one+LOC bush+LOC stick+GER stay+PRET+3/SG
“It remained stuck on a bush”

(9) pathamajjhanam upasampajja viharati [D 1.37.3]

first-trans+ACC put-himself+GER dwell+3/SG
“He put himself into the first stadium of trans”

The same nuance of lexical aspect could be achieved by combining the participial
form of the main verb with the verb “stand” in the preterit:

(10) atha kho ayasma anando. . . rodamano atthasi [D 11.143]

then PRT venerable Ananda weeping stand+PRET+3/SG
“then the venerable Ananda burst into tears”

Here the meaning is not “Ananda stood weeping” but “became weeping” = “burst
into tears”, anticipating NIA (Hindi) ro uthd weep stand+PP.
The past perfect (pluperfect) was formed during the whole MIA period as in
Pali by combining the PP with the copula in the preterit. As in the present perfect,
the meaning of the past perfect is active with intransitive verbs (11) and passive
with transitive verbs (12):

(11) tumam mae saha.. . gada asi [Mrcch 28.14]

you I+INSTR with go+PP/F be+PRET+2/SG
“You had come with me”

(12) tassa judialassa. . . nasika bhagga asi [Mrcch 36.18]

this+GEN player+GEN nose break+PP/F be+PRET+3/SG
“The nose of this player was broken”

With the verba dicendi et sentiendi the expressions of past events necessitate use
of the passive construction with the PP in the neuter singular (anticipating the late
MIA/early NIA ergative construction, cf. 9.4.3). An example from JMah:

(13) paccha ranna cintiyam [Av 32.19]

later king+INSTR think+PP/N/SG
“The king thought later”

In Apabhramsa we encounter examples of the PP with the copula asi (preterit)

which may be interpreted ergatively:

(14) janasi jam jittl asi kanna

[Hv 81.10.10]
know+2/SG how conquer+PP/F be+PRET+3/SG girl
“Do you know how you have defeated the girl?”1

In Apabhramsa at the end of the MIA period the expressions of the perfect
(retrospective aspect) were systematized in the following fashion:

Present perfect = PP + copula acch- in the present

Past perfect = PP + copula acch- in the preterit (asi)
PP + PP thiu (of tha- “stand”)

Pertinent examples are in (15) and (16):

(15) acchai asanapatti nisannau [Bk 74.2]

is seat-slab+LOC sit+PP
“He is seated on the seat”

(16) gayau asi [Pc 36.4.6]

go+PP was
“He had gone”

7.1.2 Progressive aspect

The progressive aspect could be expressed in Pali by combining the present
participle of the main verb with the verb tisthati “stand” or vicarati “walk”. These
are rather rare constructions:

(17) te anham-annam patva sarirani lehenta

they other-other reach+GER bodies lick+PART

atthasu [JaCo 11.31.18]

“They were licking each other”

(18) bodhisatto ekam upamam upadharento

bodhisattva one+ACC simile+ACC invent+PART

vicarati [JaCo III.102.16]

“Bodhisattva is inventing a simile”

The progressive meaning in the future may be expressed by combining the

gerundive or the PP with the copula in the future tense. The following is an
example from Warder (1984:236):

(19) attha gune samadiyitva tapo caritabbo

eight virtues undertake+GER penance practice+GERVE

“I will be doing penance practicing the eight virtues”

Habituality may be expressed by combing the absolutive of the main verb with the
verb vattati “become”:

(20) gotamo ime dhamme anavasesam samadaya

Gotama these rules restlessly undertake+GER

vattati [D 1.164.5]
“Gotama follows restlessly these rules”

These rare formations employed to express progressive and habitual aspects were
continued and further developed during the MIA period. At its end they were
systematized in the following manner in Apabhramsa:

Present progressive = Participle - I-

copula acch- in the present
Gerund + copula acch- in the present
Present habitual = Participle + thakkai “stands”
Gerund + thakkai “stands”
Past progressive = Participle + acchiu (PP of the copula)
Participle + thiu (PP of tha “stand”)
Gerund + thiu (PP of tha “stand”)

All the above options are exemplified in (21) - (27).


Present progressive:

(21) acchai duri bhamantu [Pd 4.17.2]

be+3/SG far wonder+PART
“He is wondering far away”

(22) vollau savvu haseppinu acchami [Pc 38.19.2]

say+PP all laugh+GER be+l/SG
“I am laughing at all [that has been] said”

Present habitual:

(23) khane khane dukkhanti na thakkai

[Pc 39.4.9]
moment+LOC moment+LOC hurt+PART not stand+3/SG
“It does not continue giving pain each moment”

(24) thiru hovinu thakkai [Bk26

steady be+GER stand+3/SG
“He remains steady”

Past progressive:

(25) bhavakaddami haum hindantu acchiu [Jc 4.17.2]

world-mud+LOC I wonder+PART be+PP
“I was wondering in the mud of the world”

(26) vane vijjau arahanta thiu [Pc9.8

forest+LOC vidya. worship+PART stand+PP
“He was worshipping vidya in the forest”

(27) janeri siri karapallava dharivi thiya [Bk 164.9]

mother head+LOC hand hold+GER stand+PP
“The mother kept the hand on the head”
lit. stood holding

Summing up, at the end of the MIA period we encounter a rich system of
periphrastic constructions which could adequately express aspectual contrasts of
retrospectivity (perfect) and progressivity. The following auxiliary verbs were
used for these purposes:

acchai “is” (present of the copula)

acchiu “been” (PP of the copula)
asi “was” (preterit of the copula)
thakkai “stands' (present of tha. “stand”)
thiu “stand” (PP of tha “stand”)

It should be observed, however, that the full-fledged analytic system of NIA has
not yet been reached in Apabhramsa. Most notably, the auxiliaries could appear
both before and after the main verb (contrast (21) and (25)) and even be separated
from it by other words, e.g. adverb in (21).
The progressive aspect could also be expressed by the present participle in its
adjectival function, as in the following example:

(28) to mantina talaudu khaddhu

then minister+INSTR talaputa eat+PP

nandarayaha namantina [Kp 48.2-3]

N.-king+GEN honoring+INSTR
“Then the minister ate the poison talaputa while he was honoring the king

This present participle may also function as the adjective in the construction
of the genitive absolute:

(29) so pecchantaha tli tasu khittu khali

he looking+GEN she+INSTR he+GEN throw+PP cloakaTLOC

apasatthi [Kp 95.8-9]

“While he was watching she threw it (= the scarf) into a dirty cloaka”

A remarkable formation of Apabhramsa is the impcrfective passive participle

formed by the suffix -anta (Pres Part) from the passive stem in -ijj: e.g. k-ijj-anta
“being made” (replacing 01A kr-iya-mana):

(30) kahiu tena kijjanta-auhu [Kp 45.3]

narrate+PP he+INSTR make+PASS+P ART-weapon
“He narrated about the weapons which were (being) made”

(31) kula majj'ha dosi hammantu raina [Kp 46.4-5 J

family I+GEN sin+LOC kill+PASS+PART king+INSTR
“The fam ily which is (being) killed by the king because of my sin”

In (31) the form hammantu “being killed” (< han-y-anta) is an opaque form, a
blend of archaic hamm (< han-y-, cf. Pali hannati “is killed”) and.innovative
-antu. In this case the contrast between “killing” and “being killed” was rather
very ‘delicate’: han-antu vs. hamm-antu.

7.2 Lexical aspect

7.2.1 Inception and completion

Apabhramsa data contain examples of verbal compounds expressing several
Aktionsart categories. As in NIA languages these are composites of main verbs
with one of a small number of the auxiliary verbs. The lexical meaning of the
auxiliary is not present fully in the compound (the well known phenomenon of
grammaticalization) or it is present only ‘figuratively’; the auxiliary simply
modifies or makes more specific the basic meaning of the main verb. Contrasted
with NIA, w'hich compounds either the oblique infinitival forms (of the type bol-
ne lag-na speak+INF/OBL be-attached+INF “begin to speak”) or the bare verb
roots with the auxiliaries (of the type ro uth-na cry rise+INF “burst into tears” in
Hindi), we find an older state of affairs in Aprabhramsa. Here the main verb may
be realized by one of the quasinominal forms: either by the gerund (-W, -vinu,
-eppi, -eppinu) or the infinitive (-anaha, -anahl or -ahu) or the gerundive
Our Aprabhramsa data allow us to identify exponents of the notions of
inception and completion, expressed by the Aktionsart auxiliaries lag(g)- “begin”
and ja - “go” (and perhaps also a- “come”). There is also some evidence for
another pair, that of version and ablation (to use Chatterjee’s 1988 terms),
expressed by the auxiliaries le- “take” (also rii- “take”) and de- “give”. According
to Singh (1980:164—167) there were other Aktionsart nuances, such as ‘intensive’
and ‘continuative’, expressed by the auxiliaries a-tni- and rah- “remain”,
respectively. In my analysis a- is rather completive and ni- versive; a propos the
latter notion, continuative, none of Singh’s examples is satisfactory.3
We may start with the most common pair of the Aprabhramsa Aktionsart
auxiliaries, namely lag(g)- and ja- expressing the notions of inception and
complction/rcsult. The inceptive auxiliary, lag(g)- (cf. II lag-na “be attached”),
may combine with any of the quasinominal forms of the main verb, i.e. gerund,

infinitive or gerundive. This type of construction is very common in NIA

languages; e.g. Hindi combines the main verb in the oblique form of the infinitive
with lag-na:

(32) vah bol-ne lag-a

he speak+INF/OBL be-attached+PP
“He began to speak”

Apabhramsa examples of all the available combinations (from Svayambhudeva’s

Paumacariu) are provided in (33) - (35):

(33) daddura radevi lagga [Pc 28.3.2]

frog cry+GER be-attached+PP
“The frog began to weep”

All the three infinitive suffixes appear in Paumacariu-. SAp ~(a)hu and -anaha;
and WAp -anahi (rarely; no statistics for the whole opus are available):4

(34) pucchiya . .. kahahum lagga [Pc 46.2.4]

ask+PP say+INF be-attached+PP
“Being asked she said”

mahi kampanaham lagga [Pc 10.1.8]

earth tremble+INE be-attached+PP
“The earth began to tremble”

punu dhahahim ruanahim lagga khane

[Pc 36.11.8]
again lament+INF weep+INF begin+PP moment+LOC
“Soon she began to lament and weep”

An example of the main verb in the gerundive is provided in (35):

(35) punu laggu cavevae [Pc 39.3.6]

again begin+PP speak+GERVE
“Again he began to speak”

For the main verb to be in the PP is unusual. The following is an isolated

example of this option:

(36) sahanu bhaggau laggu umaggehim [Pc 21.7.8]

army run+PP begin+PP bad-road+INSTR/PL
“The army began to run on bad roads”

The main verb may also appear in the finite form, such as the passive disai “is
seen”. The collocation of disai with the PP laggau may be translated as “began to
be seen/became visible”:

(37) disai laggau vasarattau [MP 14.10.3]

see+PASS be-attached+PP rain-season
“The rainy season announced itself’
lit. began to be seen

By contrast, the non-inceptive passive “was seen” would be expressed by

collocating the PP of ja-na“go”, ga-u (the go-passive, cf. 8.3) as in (38):

(38) so kalamehu vane ditthu gau [Pc 19.17.5]

that Kalameha forest+LOC see+PP go+PP
“That Kalameha was seen in the forest”

That is, Kalameha was seen in the forest on various occasions, whereas “he was
spotted for the first time” would be disai laggau.5
The notion of completion/result is expressed by combining the main verb
either in the PP or in one of the quasinominal forms (infinitive or gerund) with the
auxiliary ja- “go” (< 01A yd-). As in Hindi, the auxiliary ja- “stresses the fact that
an action is completed or carried through as a process” (McGregor 1977:99).
While Hindi ja- is suppletive in forming the PP gaya (< OIA ga-ta belonging to
another root, gam-), the Aprabhramsa PP ja-u continues the OIA PP ya-ta. Thus
a typical completive event such as “he (has) died”, vah mar gaya in Hindi, would
be realized as ja-u mu-u in Aprabhramsa:

(39) so jau jji muu [Pc 36.5.9]

he go+PP PRT die+PP
“He (has) died”

One may observe that Hindi uses gaya as both the exponent of the completive
Aktionsart and the passive voice (in the latter case the main verb also has to be in
the PP):

(40) vah mar gaya

he die go+PP
“He (has) died”

vah dekha gaya

he see+PP go+PP
“He was seen”

Aprabhramsa, on the other hand, may use the form jd-u (but also ga-u) for the
completive event, and the form ga-u as the marker of the passive voice; the main
verb has to be in the PP in either case, cf. (39) and (38).
The PP ga-u is common with intransitive verbs but there are also instances of
the collocations with transitive verbs such as le- “take”:

(41) pawaja levi gau surarau [Pc 12.2.5]

ascetic-vows take+PP go+PP Suryaraj
“Suryaraj took ascetic vowrs”
Suryaraj ne pravrajya grahan kar IT(Devendra Kumar)
i.e. not “Suryaraj having taken ascetic vows went”

1 have not come across any convincing examples of a- “come” functioning as

an Aktionsart auxiliary. Singh (1980:164) gives the following example involving
the transitive verb ghe- “take”:

(42) panghivavi au sahum rahavarena [Pc 1.2.7J

take+GER go+IMP with chariot-best+INSTR
“Take [them] away on the chariot” or
“Having taken [them] go away [with them] by the chariot”

Devendra Kumar’s Hindi translation, is dustd ko . . . bahut dur rath se chor do,
indicates that we might really be dealing with the Aktionsart auxiliary (as in le do

7.2.2 Version and ablation

There is some evidence in our Apabhramsa data that the notions of version
and ablation could be expressed by the auxiliaries le- “take” (and also m - “take”)
and de- “give”. The auxiliary le- “take”, heralding the NIA state of affairs, has a
general reflexive sense, i.e. the action is of particular interest to the agent.
Functionally, it may be described as being equivalent to the medio-passive
morphology of OIA which was lost in MIA. Consequently, this loss had to be

compensated for by lexical means. Examples for the notion of version are
provided in (43):

(43) kaddhevi lesai janai-jasa-muttahalaim [Pc 58.3.9]

pull-out+GER take+FUT+3/SG JanakT-glory-pearls
“He will pull out Slta, splendid as pearls”

vijjulangu niu alingeppinu [Pc 25.4.9]

Vidyudaiiga take-HPP embrace+GER
“(The king) embraced Vidyudanga”

Its counterpart, the notion of ablation expresses the fact that the given action
concerns some other person than the agent. Its exponent is the auxiliary de-

(44) nimmala-gunaham bharevinu dehu [Bk21.9]

pure-quality+GEN/PL fill+GER give+IMP
“Fill with good qualities!”

These (rare) examples have to be distinguished from numerous instances of

the compound verbs consisting of de- as the fully meaningful lexical verb “give”
combined with nouns such as desa “command”, jujjhu “fight”, etc., which yield
verbal meanings “to command”, “to fight”, etc. Some of them have the nominal
derivational suffix -an, i.e., they look like the later infinitive in -na:

(45) alimganu dei [Pc 49.10.8]

embrace give+3/SG
“She will embrace [you]”

The most numerous, however, are the compound verbs consisting of kar-
“make” and nouns. There are quite a few doublets, such as aesu kar- ~ aesu de-,
without any clear difference in meaning. Some of them are presented in (46):

(46) “fight” jujjhu kar- [Bk 234.7] ~ jujjhu de- [Pc 18.11.8]
“serve” pesanu kar- [Pc 22.8.9] ~ pesanu de- [MP 2.17.8]
“protect” rakkhanukar- [Pc 5.10.7] ~ rakkhanude- [MP 7.14.7]

We may sum up our discussion by presenting the whole system of the

grammatical and lexical aspect of Apabhramsa in Table 7.1.

Table 7 .1: Grammatical and lexical aspect of Apabhramsa



1. It is questionable whether the full-fledged tense/aspect system as known from Hindi existed
in Apabhramsa. In Hindi the contrast “ you saw” vs. “ you have seen” vs. “ you had seen” is
realized by using the bare PP vs. combining it with hai vs. with tha (tu ne larkidekhT/dekhi
haiidekhi thX). In Apabhramsa one could presumably say kanna ditthi atthi “ you have seen
the girl” vs. kanna ditthi asi “ you had seen the girl” but I have not found any evidence in our

2. Morphologically, the WAp infinitive form -anaha is the Gen PI o f the nominal stem V-ana;
this is the older form o f the Hindi infinitival suffix -na. The other infinitival suffix, -(a)hu,
typical o f SAp, survives in New Marathi -u. The gerundival suffix -ev(v)ae is
morphologically the Loc Sg form.

3. Singh’ s examples are o f the type

vinni vi samarasi hul rahiya [Pd 49]

both PRT equanimous be+PP/F rem ain-PP
“ Both (= wind and god) remain in the same state”

For rahiya to be the Aktionsart auxiliary, one would expect the verbum existentiae to be in
one o f the quasinominal forms, such as the gerund hoevi(nu). Thus the translation is rather
“ both remain to be equanimous” lit. both being-equanimous remain.

4. Bhayani (19 5 3-19 6 0 :7 0 ) only mentions SAp infinitives -anaha and -ehu for Svayambhudeva.

5. The finite passive in combination with the PP o f lagga- seems to express the progressive
aspect in the passive in tullijjai laggau lift+P A SS+3/SG lag+PP “ he is being lifted” [Pc
7 7 .5 .10 ].


8.1 Inherited finite (synthetic) passive in -ijja-

The MIA passive in -ijja- continues the OIA passive in -ya-, e.g. kri-ya-te “is
made” > Apabhramsa k-ijja-i.
It may be used non-modally (8.1.1) or modally (8.1.2). In the latter case we
may distinguish its use to express demand and deontic modality (, and
abilitative and cohortative meaning (
On the other hand, one also witnesses the use of the analytic &e-passive
(inherited from OIA); however, certain of these constructions also allow for the
ergative interpretation (8.2). The innovative go-passive was used in Apabhramsa
only sporadically (8.3). And finally, we will study several reasons for the passive
interpretation of the construction with the PP (8.4).

8.1.1 Used in non~modal meaning

Unlike in OIA (kri-ya-te Present vs. a-kri-ya-ta Imperfect), only the present
tense forms are available in Aprabhramsa. The future tense forms of the type
k-ijji-hi-i are isolated and their OIA ancestry is doubtful. Given the fact that
colloquial language avoids the passive in the dialogue, one would expect instances
of the 1st and 2nd Pers to be rare. And, indeed, they are isolated in our literary
documents. Examples from Svayambhudeva are presented in (1):

thiya haum nara-vesem jiha na

stand+PP I man-garment+LOC so that not

munijjami janena asesem [Pc 26.18.6]

recognize+PASS+l/SG people+INSTR all+INSTR
“I am dressed in man’s clothes in order that I am not recognized by anybody”

dive dive vandina-vindehim thuwahi

day+LOC day+LOC servants+INSTR praise+PASS+2/SG

ajju kaim thuwantu na suwahi [Pc 23.3.4]

today why praise+PASS+PART not hear+PASS+2/SG
“You were daily praised by [your] servants; why are you not heard being
praised today?”

Examples of the 3rd Pers are numerous:

‘hanu hanu [hanu] ’ bhananti hammanti ahananti

[Pc 25.6.1]
kill kill kill say+3/PL kill+PASS+3/PL hit+3/PL
“Saying ‘kill, kill, kill!’, they are killed [and] they kill”

In (2) Svayambhudeva ‘plays’ with the inherited passive hammanti (< hanyante)
“they are killed” and its active counterpart hananti “they kill”.
Instances of the finite passive in the context of an embedded active gerund,
such as in (3), are peculiar:

(3) tarn nisunevi vuccai ganaharena [Pc1.1

it hear+GERsay+PASS+3/SG Ganadhara+INSTR
“Having heard it Ganadhara said”

The form vuccai (< OIA passive uc-ya-te) has to be interpreted actively; vuccai
here equals the construction with vuttu (< uktam) “said” presented in (4):

(4) tena hi vihasevinu ema vuttu [Pc1.1

he+INSTR PRT laugh+GER Q say+PP
“Having laughed he said”

The-passive or impersonal interpretation is to he used in agentless contexts:

(5) jahim labbhai acalu anantu sokkhu [Pc4.1

where take+3/SG unmovable endless happiness
“Where one obtains unmovable and endless happiness”

8.1.2 Used in modal meaning

8. 1.2.1 Demand and deontic modality
Various interactions among mood, modality and agentivity in Sanskrit modal
sentences were studied preliminarily in Bubenik (1987a). Three aspects of the
passivization in modal sentences were considered: pragmatic, semantic and
honorific. Modal contexts presuppose dialogue and its participants are always

‘given’ (or ‘topical’); what is typically focal is the goal or the beneficiary of the
action or the action itself. The passivization can thus be seen as an option left to
the interlocutor in the dialogue of not grammaticalizing the non-focal addressee
as the subject of the sentence; or, positively, as the option of grammaticalizing the
focal goal of the action as the subject:

(6) jinavara-tapam kuru [Sanskrit rendering of (7)]

Jina-noble-penitence do+IMP-r2/SG

(7) jinavaru-tau kijjai [PIv 82.17.10]

Jina-noble-penitence do+PASS+3/SG
“Exercise the penitence of noble Jina!”

In both (6) and (7) the goal of the action is in the focus. However, only the active
imperative grammaticalizes the addressee of the command (by the suffix -u of the
2nd Pers imperative accompanied by ablaut in the root). Its passive counterpart in
(7) may be classified as a demand which differs crucially from the command in
that it is not necessarily addressed to those upon whom the obligation of
fulfilment is imposed; here the potential performer of the demand may be the
interlocutor (2nd Pers) or another person (3rd Pers). In the latter case, if the
potential performer of the demand is taken genetically, we enter the domain of
deontic modality. The chief exponent of deontic modality in OIA was the
gerundive (cf. 11.2) but with the recategorization of the gerundive as the infinitive
in late MIA (cf. 7.2.1 regarding -ev(v)ae) it was possible to use the finite passive
in its stead:

(8) eu karijjahu annabhavamtare [Rittha 5.3.4]

this make+PASS+IMP/3/SG another-life-within+LOC
“This deed should be accomplished within another birth”

The form karijjahu corresponds to the OIA passive imperative kri-ya-tam (or
rather *kri-ya-tu with the suffix of the active imperative). Another spelling of the
same passage, karijjuha, may indicate that the form was rather opaque and not a
part of the system. The above deontic statement could be grammaticalized in two
ways in Classical Sanskrit: either by the gerundive (idam kartavyam) or by the 3rd
Pers imperative (idam kriyatam). Because of the recategorization of the gerundive
in late MIA, (7) out of its context is ambiguous between a deontic statement and
a demand. Only the latter interpretation is available in the context of issuing a

Table 8 .1: From the OIA passive imperative to the NIA active ‘p o lite’ imperative.

command to one’s interlocutor grammaticalized by the personal pronoun, as

shown in (9):

(9) dijjai mathura mahu [Rittha 4.3.5]

give+PASS+3/SG Mathura I+GEN/DAT
“Give me Mathura!”

Another spelling of the same passage, dijjau, goes back to *di-ya-tu with the
suffix of the active imperative (vs. OIA dT-ya-tdm).
The finite passive form in -ijja- may be provided with the 2nd Pers imperative
suffix -hi (cf. OIA de-hi “give!”):

(10) paharijjahi naha [Rittha 6.1.7]

hit+PAS S+IMP/2/SG lord
“Lord, hit [him]!”

This form provides the crucial link between the OIA passive imperative and the
NIA active ‘polite’ imperative (Hindi type kijie “please, make!”). See Table 8.1. Finite passive in relative clauses

The finite passive in the consecutive clause possesses modal meaning, if
correlated with the clause containing one of the modal forms (imperative,
subjunctive, modal passive):

(11) paim Ji nitti tlha jfvahi jiha

you+INSTR and behaviour thus live so

paribhammai kitti [Pc 7.12.1]

spread+PASS+3/SG fame
“Live in such a manner so that your fame spreads”

The form gammau derives from the 3rd Pers passive imperative *gam-ya-tu (cf.
01A gam-ya-tdm). In Sanskrit it was possible to express the subject by the
instrumental: gamyatam asmdbhih “let us go!”. Passive forms in the future tense

There are rare instances of the finite passive in the future tense:

(16) piu-vaha-pavi na lippihisi [Kp 47.8]

father-murder-sin+LOC not besmear+PASS+FUT+2/SG
“You will not be tainted with the sin of [your] father’s murder”

The form lippihisi is to be analyzed *lip-yi-hi-si with the future tense marker s
weakened to h (cf. Bubenik 1996:104—108).
The passive causative in the future tense found in Sanatkumaracarita is
certainly a Sanskritism:

(17) padijjihii [Sc 661.8]

“He will be made (caused) to descend”

This form is to be analyzed: pad-ijji-hi-i

*pat yi syi ti
Its OIA active counterpart: pat ayi sya ti

8.1.3 Imperfective passive participle in -anta

The OIA imperfective passive participle kri-ya-mana “(being) made” was
rebuilt by means of the active suffix -anta (cf. OIA kurv-ant-) in the same fashion
as the finite forms.

OIA Apabhramsa
Indicative Active karo-ti
Indicative Passive kri-ya-te ki-jja-i
Imperative Active karo-tu
Imperative Passive kri-ya-tam ki-jja~u
Participle Active kurv-ant-
Participle Passive kri-ya-mana ki-jj-anta

The passive interpretation is more likely than the ergative interpretation “the four
arrows w'ounded the four horses”.

(26) baddhu tehim vi naga-pasehim [Sc 581.1-2]

bind+PP these+INSTR PRT snake-fetters+TNSTR

saw a’angu kumaru-vara

whole-body prince-best
“The best prince was bound on his whole body with these snake fetters”
(rather than “The snake-fetters bound the prince . . .”)

The other logical option: “The snake bound the prince with [his] fetters . . . ” is not
warranted by the original.

(27) jo marevau vairi sa-hatthem so parivaddhu

who hit-GERVE enemy own-hand+IN STR that bind+PP

pau parahatthem [Pc 25.19.3]

grab+PP another-hand+INSTR
“In the fashion in which an enemy was hit by [his] own hand, he was grabbed
by someone else’s hand”

The case of abstractions (e.g. “deception”, “niggardliness”, “fate”, etc.)

performing the function of agent is somew'hat controversial. But one might say
that they are not animate instigators of an action in the same fashion as proto­
typical animate agents:

(28) samsare na ko mohena jiu?

existcnce+LOC not who deception+INSTR conquer+PP
[Hv 82.8.14]

“Who has not been conquered by the deception in this existence?” (rather than
“Who(m) has the deception not conquered . . .?”)

8.4.2 True agentless passive

There are numerous instances of agentless constructions which are used, as in
modem languages, when the agent is unknown, too general, on the one hand; or,
too well known from the (extra)linguistic context to be worthy of mentioning, on
the other hand. Some of the most convincing examples for the first option involve

verbs expressing the notion of coming into the state of being, such as ditthu “was
seen/could be seen” —►“became visible, appeared”:

(29) ditthaim chatta-ddhaya-cindhaim [Pc 6.1.7]

see+PP/PL umbrella-banner-sign+PL
“Umbrellas and banners could be seen” —►“became visible, appeared”

The second option may be exemplified by (30):

(30) cangau jam sihoyaru dhariyau [Pc 25.19.2]

nice that Simhodara hold+PP
“It is nice that Simhodara was apprehended”

8.4.3 The agent in the marked postverbal position

We may be tempted to evaluate these instances passively because of the well-
known tendency to place the passive agent in the marked sentence-final position.
In functional terms, I understand the passivization as one of the means of
assigning the function of focus to the agent. It is needless to say that there are
other means which do not involve permutations of word order, such as the accent
and particles used in NIA languages (cf. 1.4). If we take the above principle
seriously, then out of the six possible permutations of the ‘unmarked’ sequence
Ag Go PP, assuming that Apabhramsa tended towards the SOV typology of most
NIA languages, two allow for the passive interpretation:

Ag Go PP
Ag PP Go
Go Ag PP
Go PP Ag passive interpretation
PP Ag Go
PP Go Ag passive interpretation

In 9.4.1 it will be shown that Go PP Ag and PP Go Ag are statistically the least

common options in our data.
An example of Go PP Ag:

(31) narayanu cattu nisayarehim [Rittha 4.13.6]

Narayana abandon+PP demons+INSTR
“Narayana was abandoned by the demons”

introduces another AgSubj which by not being coreferential with the AgSubj of
the subordinate clause disrupts the topic continuity; schematically:

When [Vasudeva] boasted, [he] was given a chariot (passive)

AgSubj 1 Subj 1 coreferential
Topi Topi topic is maintained
When [Vasudeva] boasted, [his father-in-law'] gave [him] a chariot (ergative)
AgSubj 1 AgSubj 2 not coreferential
Topi Top2 topic is not maintained

Similar examples could be multiplied:

(34) aha . . . ja kim-ci sa muddha samullavai

further when something she charming speak+3/SG

tava . . . dittha tina khayara purisina [Sc 629.1-5]

then see+PP this+INSTR air-going man+fNSTR

“Further .. . while the charming [one] spoke/was uttering several words, she
was seen by that Vidyadhara” (rather than “ . . ., that Vidyadhara saw her”)

8.4.5 The goal as the vantage point fo r the narration

Finally, in longer stretches of narrative discourse the passive interpretation of
the main clause is preferable if its goal was assigned the function o f subject in
preceding clauses:

(35) galiya-pariyanu caiya-suhi-sayanu . .. ‘vinhussiri! tuhum

left-retinue abandoned-friend-relative Visnusri you

kahim gaiya caiu mamam?’ ti

where go-PP abandon+GER I+ACC QUOT

bhanantu ditthau vinhussiri-juina nivaina kaha-vi

speaking see+PP V.-joined+INSTR king+INSTR somehow

bhamantu [Sc 672.1-9]

“With the retinue gone, abandoned by the friends and the relatives, and
exclaiming ‘Visnusri, where did you go having abandoned me?’ he was seen
by the king, who was accompanied by Visnusri, roaming with toil”


1. D. Kum ar in his Hindi translation favors this interpretation: . . . Hari-Haladhar ko buldya

gaya lit. it was called on Hari and Balarama. However, our linguistic context allows also for
the interpretation “ Hari and Balarama, [who are] invincible in battle, came [upon being]
summoned” i f one takes the form gaya go+PP for the main verb.



9.1 The functional theory o f the origins o f ergativity

The classical theory of the origins of ergativity in IA languages (Pray 1976,
Anderson 1977, Dik 1980, 1989:242-246) is based on the assumption of
markedness shift. The position of Functional Grammar is that ergative systems
can arise through markedness shift operating on the active-passive opposition of
a nominative language (cf. Dik 1980:113-126). Markedness shift (as formulated
by Dik 1978:111, 1989:239) is a historical process in which certain expression
type which is marked at an earlier stage in the development of a language may
become unmarked at a later stage, as shown in Figure 9.1.
At Stage 1 there is an opposition between an unmarked form E] and a marked
form E2. At Stage 2 the marked form has become unmarked, and has ousted Ej
from being used. In Stage 3 a newly created marked form E3 has been introduced,
so that the original opposition is restored. Figure 9.2 shows markedness shift in
the expressions for the past perfective events during the history of IA.
01A could form passives from transitive verbs; the unmarked expression for
the past perfective events was the active aorist akarsat\ the marked expression was
the non-finite passive construction (based on the verbal adjective) tena krtam. At
a certain point in time markedness shift started operating on the passive
construction of OIA. The originally marked passive became less and less marked
and eventually ended up as the unmarked construction which pushed the active
construction out of usage altogether (one has to remember that the sigmatic aorist

Obsolete Unmarked Marked

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Figure 9 .1: Markedness shift (Dik 1989)


Obsolete Unmarked Marked

OIA akarsat (Act A or) tena krtam (Pass)

M IA akasi tena kata (Pass/Erg)

NTA us-ne kiya (Erg) us-se kiya gaya (Pass)-*

~ us-ke dvara kiya gaya

Figure 9.2. Markedness shift in the history o f Indo-Aryan

akasi was used only during the early MIA period). In later MIA, although there
was no active construction for the expression of past perfective events, the
construction with ta-form nevertheless followed the rules applying to the non-
finite passives of OIA: if there is agreement on the verb, it will be triggered by the
GoSubj (goal subject); the agentive phrase need not be present, and in general all
rules involving subjects will operate on the goal rather than on the agentive
phrase. On the other hand, the main reason for speaking of a ‘passive construc­
tion’, namely the existence of an opposition with a corresponding active one,
disappeared (i.e. by late MIA times the nominalized deverbal form in -ta was fully
incorporated into the inflectional paradigm). Furthermore, the unmarked passive
transitive construction is in conflict with the normal markedness relations and we
may expect strong pressure to reinterpret the agent of the unmarked passive
construction as subject and the goal as object.
It is debatable whether MIA passed through the stage of an ergative language
without a passive construction since the new analytic passive constructions with
the auxiliary jana “go” (and other auxiliaries) appeared quite early in MIA period
(however, no precise data for the upper time limit are available, cf. Schokker
1969-1970). In terms of FG, this simply means that MIA again extended subject
assignment to goal constituents. The full-fledged passive construction was
established in the NTA period when different postpositions for the marking of the
agentive phrase in the passive construction from those used in the ergative
construction appeared (one may contrast Hindi us-ne kiya “he made (it)” with us-
ke dvara kiya gaya “(it) was made by him”). In terms of FG it may be claimed that
a language with split ergativity and a full-fledged passive construction is in all
respects identical to a nominative language, except for the case marking o f its
NPs. It may be farther noticed that this case marking correlates neither with the
semantic nor with the syntactic functions of the arguments, as shown in Table 9.1.
In particular, the absolutive case is used to express both agents and goals, and
both subjects and objects. If one supposes that the basic function of case marking

Table 9 .1: Case marking and subject assignment in a language with split ergativity

is to express either the semantic or the syntactic functions of arguments, then one
may expect a restructuring of case marking in such a way that all subjects are
marked by one and all objects by another case. Within a VP we may expect a
restructuring of verb agreement in such a way that both intransitive and transitive
verbs display the same type of subject agreement in person and number. Examples
such as us-ne cala “he went” (ergative postposition used even with intransitive
verbs), mai-ne marta hu “I am striking” (ergative postposition used even in the
present of transitive verbs), o mara “he struck” (no ergative postposition in the
perfective past of transitive verbs) are known from various regional dialects of
Hindi-Urdu. These dialects thus close the circle and bring us back to a nominative
syntax but leave us with ergative morphology (cf. the case of Nepali).
Thus, on the whole, the functional theory makes a number of interesting
predictions about how ergative systems may arise and disappear in the develop­
ment of a language/language family. Some general advantages are the following:
the development is explained in terms of well-established principles, such as
subject and object assignment, markedness shift and case marking; the postulated
development is not unidirectional; and the theory accounts in a natural way for the
phenomena which seem to relate the ergative construction to the passive
construction.1 In what follows, however, we shall see that the evidence o f MIA
data may cast some doubt on the trajectory from a nominative language with
unmarked passive to an ergative language with passive, claimed to be an ergative
language without passive (Dik 1980:116).
The claim that the original marker of the agent phrase in the passive is
reinterpreted as ‘ergative’ is not necessarily true in the case of all IA languages.
Thus the source of Braj nai is not the OIA instrumental suffix -ena (which gives

the Marathi instrumental suffix -e), or the OIA phrase karanena “by the agency”
(Chatterji 1926:968), but the postposition of the oblique or general ‘referential’
(Hoemle 1880/1975:220) case. Its cognate forms are used in other languages in
the meaning of the dative/accusative postposition (Merwari nai, Gujarati ne,
Nepali lot). The source of nai is, according to Beames (1872-1879:265) the
participial form lagi “stick, adhere”. The functional theory is not specific enough
to settle the more subtle issues of the finite vs. non-fmite passive and the modal
forms (= gerundive) in IA languages, cf. the criticism by Hock (1985:16). And
finally it is not clear how the possessive constructions (i.e. those with the agent
in the Gen/Dat) would be evaluated as a source of the ergative construction. I
want to turn my attention to the possessive construction of IA in the following
section (9.2).

9.2 The possessive and agentive construction in Middle Indo-Aryan

The crucial form in all discussions of ergativity in IA languages is the tat-form
of OIA. It is usually assumed that this form is ergative (Hock 1986, Klaiman
1978, 1987) rather than passive (Anderson 1977, Pray 1976) for various reasons
summarized by Hock (1986). This form is an archaism from PIE times when it
was also ergative. In pre-PIE times the fonn was presumably a verbal noun which
only later on became a verbal adjective with stative force. In OIA times the ta-
form had a stative force with intransitive verbs (gatah “gone”) and a passive-like
quality (= P-orientation) with the transitive verbs (pltah “drunk”, hhuktah
“eaten”). However, some transitive participles might have A-orientation (pitah
“having drunk”, bhuktah “having eaten”).2
An attempt to capture the Janus-like nature of the tar-form by one label, i.e.
ergative, may therefore seem futile. Using the same logic we might argue that
Latin -tus (witness locutus “having spoken”, locutus “spoken” and profectus
“gone”) or English -ee (cf. payee and escapee) possess ergative force. For
typological purposes we have to examine the state of the whole language, not just
one isolated form. A better representative of a form with ergative force is the
gerundive (OIA -tavya) which is obligatorily P-oriented with transitive verbs.
Looking elsewhere, however, the systemic potential of OIA was definitely of
nominative-accusative typology in both nominal and pronominal declensions. The
increase in ergativity came only with the phonological attrition of nominal
suffixes at the end of the MIA period when the contrast Nom vs. Acc with nouns
was destroyed and the absolutive case appeared (cf. 9.3). On the other hand, the
IA languages never gave up the inherited accusativity with pronouns; as is well
known, the heteroclisis of the type aham vs. mam, “I” vs. “me”, is found in all

MIA languages; and NIA languages mark the definite object by the Acc/Dat
postposition (e.g. =ko in Hindi). The closest we can get to the ergative alignment
of pronominal elements is in the Northwestern peripheral languages (Lahnda,
Sindhi) where the distinction between the direct/agentive vs. oblique case is
blurred (e.g., in Sindhi a , mu, ma “I” = Dir or Obi, but ail is only Dir; cf. Grierson
(1919, VIII.1:35) or in Lahnda ma “I” = Dir/Ag vs. ma = Obi; cf. Grierson (1919,
VIII. 1:259).
In OIA the finite passive and the ta-participle could be accompanied by the
agentive phrase in the instrumental, but only the latter one (and also the
gerundive) by the agentive phrase in the genitive; the selection of the shape of the
agentive phrase was determined on semantic grounds. Roughly speaking, the
active verbs selected instrumental, whereas those of perception, consumption and
enjoyment (‘digestive’ verbs) favored genitive (cf. Jamison 1979:322)3. The first
construction needs no example and the second one is shown in (1):

(1) tad va rsinam anusrutam asa [SB]

that PRT seers+GEN heard was
“That was heard by the seers”

In OIA, by the time of Vedic prose, there was a convergence in case marking
of the finite passive, non-finite passive (ta-form) and the gerundive (cf. Hock
1986:20). The gerundive lost its dative agent marking and in the new productive
use of the ta-participle and the gerundive as main verbs (i.e., as the equivalent of
lost finite categories of the aorist and perfect) instrumental agents started to
In late Vedic Sanskrit genitival agents are exceedingly rare. According to
Panini (2.3.67) the ta-form, if used in the sense of the present tense, selects the
agent in the genitive (e.g., rdjndm pujitah “honored by kings”, aham eva mato
mahipateh “I alone am regarded by the king”). Cardona (1970:5) gives several
examples from the Mahabharata:

(2) Ipsito varanarmam [Mbh 3.50.4]

“desired by choicest women”

sarvam hi viditam tava [Mbh 1.2.14]

“All [this] is known by you”

Table 9.2: Constructions with the ta-participle in Asoka (according to

Andersen 1986)

In MIA the agentive phrase in the non-finite passive construction may be

expressed by either the instrumental or the genitive. Statistics for Asokan Prakrits
were elaborated by Andersen (1986); these are shown in Table 9.2.
The above figures may be interpreted in the sense that active verbs favor the
instrumental agent in the passive construction whereas the ingestive verbs prefer
the genitival agents. An example for the nominal instrumental agent with an active
verb is given in (3):

(3) iyam dhammalipi devanampiyena

this dhamma-inscription+NOM devanapiya+INSTR

piyadasina lajina likhapita [RE I A]

piyadasina+INSTR king+INSTR write+CAUS+PASS+PART
“This dhamma-inscription was caused to be written by king Devanapiya

An example for the nominal genitival agent with an ingestive verb is given in

athi pi cu ekatiya samaja sadhumata devanampiyasa

is=also=and certain meetings good-considered D.+GEN

piyadasine lajine [RE IE]

P.+GEN king+GEN
“But there are also certain festival meetings (which are) considered merito­
rious by king Devanapiya Piyadasin”

akkhay am [Ayar ]

“I heard, long-lived one, that the Lord has spoken thus”

Here the argument for the interpretation of me as an experiencer (Gen/Dat) is not

particularly strong because the construction with the orthotonic Instr mae would
result in syntactic doubling (. . . mae . . . tena . . .).
In the later development, there was a convergence in case marking of active
and ingestive verbs, whereby the possessive construction with the active verbs
was given up in favor of the instrumental. It is worth mentioning that some MIA
dialects even went some way towards creating pronominal clitics on the basis of
instrumental morphology (AMg plural clitic =bhe “you” from orthotonic
instrumental tubbhe).5

9.3 The tug o f war between conservative and eliminative forces in the history
o f Indo-Aryan
The tug of war between conservative and eliminative forces in the history of
the IA ergative construction was studied by Stump (1983). He listed three
conservative characteristics: almost universal elimination of the impersonal
construction with intransitive verbs (of the OIA type tena gatam corresponding
to NIA us=ne cala “he went”); reinforcement by the secondary use o f ergatively-
pattemed personal endings in Lahnda and Sindhi; and object agreement in the
transitive impersonal construction in Gujarati and a few dialects of Rajasthani and
Pahari (of the type us-ne kitab-ko likhT). The list of nine eliminative characteris­
tics included, above all, the universal introduction of the transitive impersonal
construction (of the type mai ne kitab-ko likha)\ the uniform use of the oblique
case for direct objects and the nominative case for subjects in the Eastern
Magadhan languages (Bengali, Assamese, Oriya and Maithili); and the use of
personal endings on the verb to mark subject agreement (Eastern Magadhan and
Nepali). Stump (1983:161) concluded that “the remarkable predominance of
eliminative (as opposed to conservative) tendencies affecting case-marking and
verbal agreement patterns .. . constitute a Modem Indie drift” towards nomina-
I want to discuss above all the phenomena which have not received sufficient
attention in previous studies of this problem.

imam bhavanam [KI22]

this+NOM temple+NOM

Passive interpretation:
“This temple has been (caused to be) built by this illustrious Kakkuka”

this+ERG lllustrious-K.+ERG make+CAUS+PASS+PART

this+ABS temple+ABS
Ergative interpretation:
“This illustrious Kakkuka has caused this temple to be built”

It could be pointed out that the seeds of this state of affairs were already
present in the OIA stage in the case of neuters which do not distinguish formally
between Norn and Acc. Thus an OIA sentence such as:

(15) maya mitram hatam

I+INSTR friend+NEUT killed+NEUT

can be given either interpretation. Under the passive interpretation of (15) maya
mitram hatam the NP mitram would be considered to be a grammatical subject
and the sentence would be translated “the friend was killed by me”. Under the
ergative interpretation the NP mitram could be taken for the absolutive case which
grammaticalizes the patient, and the sentence would be translated “I killed the
friend”. However, in OIA there were not too many animate neuters (kalatram
“wife, female” is another one) whereas in late MIA this morpho-syntactic
ambiguity spread to all nouns. That is the same suffix -u would be used with the
intransitive subject, the subject of the passive sentence and the object of the active
sentence. For this reason, late MIA mae naru mariyau could be given an ergative
interpretation. On the other hand, we may still favor the passive interpretation
because of the shape of the agentive phrase, in our case the pronoun /, which is
in the instrumental case, as in early MIA (or OIA). To capture these facts, we may
want to introduce labels such as ‘semi-ergative’ (because of the absolute case) or
‘semi-passive’ (because of the shape of the agentive phrase). Other proposals will
be entertained in 14.3.

9.3.2 The diverging development o f the ergative and the passive construction
The state of affairs described in 9.3.1 certainly was not an ideal situation and
it could conceivably be ‘remedied’ by enhancing the contrast between the ergative
construction and the passive construction in terms of case marking on NPs and the

morphology of VP. During the NIA period, most Western languages adopted a
new ergative postposition which replaced the old suffixal instrumental case. This
new ergative postposition is different from the agentive postposition used in the
passive construction, e.g. in Hindi -ne (ergative) vs. -se or -ke dvara (passive). As
far as the shape of the VP is concerned, MIA developed several types of the
analytic passive construction (cf. Schokker 1969-1970:1-23):

i) the construction with the auxiliary jana “go” (this one was ultimately adopted
across the whole spectrum of IA)
ii) and the construction with the copula as an auxiliary (found in some dialects).

Here are some Apabhramsa examples for the latter construction:

(16) kekkayahe saccu jam dinmi

Kaikeyl+GEN/DAT promise REL give+PP

asi [Pc 22.12.3]

“The promise which was given to Kaikeyl”

pesiya ve vi asi desantarau [Pc 2.15.1]

send+PP two PRT be+PRET country-another
“We two were sent to another country”

The advantages of the former solution are obvious: the auxiliary jana “go”
indicates that the ia-form has its original passive meaning, while the copula can
now be used as the marker of perfectivity in the ergative construction:

(17) kitab us=se parhi gal (Hindi)

book he=INSTR read=PP/F go+PP/F
“The book was read by him”

us=ne kitab parhi hai

he=ERG book read+PP/F is
“He has read a book”

A more archaic state of affairs is found in Lakhlmpuri dialect of Awadhi

whose passive construction is formed by the copula:

(18) mai mAra hau “I was/have been struck” (Lakhimpuri)

vs. mai mara gaya hu (Western Hindi)

On the other hand, Lakhimpuri active construction in (19):

(19) m aim Are hau I struck” (Lakhimpuri)

is unmarked for gender and the strange form tmre continues the passive participle
of Eastern Apabhramsa marite “struck”, whose passive morphology was
reinterpreted as the perfective aspect (cf. Niya kadamhi “I have made”). Thus this
dialect uses Western Apabhramsa marita in its original passive meaning, but the
Eastern Apabhramsa form marite was reinterpreted as an active form in the
perfective aspect. An ‘unpleasant’ consequence of using the copula for both
purposes (i.e., the marker of the passive voice and the perfective aspect) is the
ambiguity of the plural active and passive forms: m,\re hxn means both “we
struck” and “we were/have been struck” (but with the feminine plural form mxrl
the meaning can only be passive), cf. Saksena (1971:247-252) for details.

9.3.3 The consequences o f the cliticization o f the pronominal suffixes and the
copula to the ta-form
As far as the cliticization of the pronominal suffixes and the copula to the
original ta-form is concerned, there are several options:

i) The copula is cliticized to the intransitive verb and the possessive suffixes to
the transitive verb. This is the case of some Iranian (such as Tati dialects) and
the Northwest Indo-Aryan languages (Lahnda and Sindhi). The differential
treatment of transitive vs. intransitive verbs is a well-known feature of
ergative systems.6
ii) The copula is used with intransitive verbs (and the transitive verbs in the
imperfective aspect). In the perfective aspect of the transitive verb only the
bare ta-form is used. This is the case of Western Indo-Aryan languages with
ergative construction.
iii) The copula is cliticized to both intransitive and transitive verbs. This is the
case of Eastern (Magadhan) IA languages which completely eliminated
ergativity from their verbal (and nominal) systems.

More generally, the identical treatment of intransitive and transitive verbs in

(iii) leads to nominativity whereas their differential treatment in (i) and (ii) leads
to ergativity.
The uniform treatment of the intransitive and transitive verbs in terms of their
derivation and finitization has its roots in the MIA period. As is well known, in
Classical Sanskrit and in Pali7 it was possible to recycle the inherited passive
participle in -ta as an active one by means of the possessive suffix -vant:

(20) krta-vant “the one (Masc) who has made” (Classical Sanskrit)
krta-vati “the one (Fern) who has made”

In conjunction with the copula this construction would express the present perfect:
krtavan asmi “I have made”. In the Northwest dialects of later Niya (or KharosthI)
documents from the 2nd - 3rd c. A.D. the past passive participle could appear
without any activizing suffix with the copula cliticized to it (data from Bloch

(21) kadamhi “I have made” (Niya, 2nd- 3rd c.)

pesidamhi “I have sent”

Here the passive morphology was reinterpreted as the perfective (or retrospective)
aspect and the original passive participle was thus recycled as the active one
without the means of any activizing suffix.
These trends foreshadow the development in the Eastern (Magadhan) Prakrits
(summarized in Table 9.4). While the Western Prakrits continued using the bare
ta-participle in transitive perfective constructions without any activizing suffix (or
without fmitizing it by the copula), the Eastern Prakrits made use of the suffix
-ilia to enlarge the inherited passive participle in -ta; e.g. MIA mdrita “struck,
killed” Mila ends up as marHe in Bengali or maria in Marathi. The function of
-ilia was similar to Sanskrit -vant i.e., it could activize the old passive participle
in -ta. Thus *mar-it-illa would mean “the one (Masc) who has struck”. The
passive value still lurks in Marathi maria since it has to agree with the direct
object as its Hindi counterpart mara (< OIA mar-ita). The way to the complete
activization of these forms was through their finitization. During the early history
of Eastern NIA languages pronominal elements were cliticized to the /-participles
and subject agreement of transitive verbs with their agent was established. In other
words, agreement in gender and number with the object was replaced by
agreement in person and number with the subject. It must have been a long drawn

Table 9.4: Drift towards nominativity in the East

process since the cliticization of pronominal elements to the /-participles was not
fully accomplished in Bengali even in the 15th c. Thus in the present day state of
affairs we have, on the one side, fully fmitized Bengali /-forms such as marilum
“I struck” vs. marilam “we struck” but Marathi semi-finite participial forms
showing the three-way gender agreement with the object, on the other side.
A unique solution of the problem of the differential treatment of intransitive
and transitive verbs was adopted by the Northwestern group of IA languages.
Sindhi and Lahnda fmitized the /a-form of intransitive verbs by the copula but the
passive participle of transitive verbs (in the perfective aspect) by the possessive
suffixes (and also by the copula). A full treatment of these matters is available in
Bubenik (1989a).

9.4 Ergative interpretation o f the constructions with the past passive participle
in Apabhramsa

9.4.1 Word order in clauses with the ergative construction

Word order in clauses containing the PP is highly variable (poetic texts!) but
the trend for the agent to be placed initially and the verb finally is quite strong
(anticipating the NTA state of affairs). Limited statistics (for the declarative mode)
based on the three cantos of Harivamsapurana by Puspadanta (81-83) are
presented in Table 9.5.
Taking these statistics at their face value, one might conclude that in late MIA

i) the subject tended to be placed initially (97:53)

ii) and the past passive participle finally (83:67).

One would expect the form mai instead of hau; however, the former one is
ambiguous (Acc/Instr) and it would be used to render “Then I brought Ketumati
home” td keumai mai gharaho niya. This dilemma was solved in NIA where
different postpositions (=ne vs. =ko in Hindi) keep the agent distinct from the goal
even in the 1st and 2nd Pers. Thus Hindi would render (23) Ketumati-ne mujhe
ghar-m e liya which would correspond to Apabhramsa Keumaie mai gharaho
The same reasoning applies a fortiori to the constructions with the causative
PP (cf. 10.3).
An example for the 2nd Pers Sg object is in (24):

(24) maim miliu tuhum [Sc 515.4-5]

I+INSTR meet+PP you
“I met you”

It is needless to say that in our poetic documents there are less common
instances of the 1st Pers agent placed in postverbal position (cf. 9.4.1 for

(25) suyanu! laddha tuhum maim.. . imammi vanammi

[Sc 628.5-7]
beautiful find+PP you I+INSTR this+LOC forest+LOC
“Oh beautiful one, I have found you in this forest”

All this being said there still remain cases of a genuine indeterminacy of the
interpretation between the active and the passive, as in the following instance:

(26) aham-iha, bhadda! tumhehim nitthariu bhav’uyahihi [Sc 755.1-5]

I=PRT fellows ye+INSTR save+PP being-water+LOC

devi niya do vi hatthau

give+GER own two PRT hands
“Dear fellows, you saved me from the ocean of samsara by giving [me]
[your] two hands” (narrated from the point of view of the addressee)
~ “Dear fellows, I was saved by you . . . ” (narrated from the point of view of
the speaker)

The pronominal agent in the 2nd Pers Sg may be omitted in the interrogative

absolutive or the ‘oblique’ case (Gen/Dat). The verbs which express their
addressee by the absolutive are vuttu, pucchiu and pabhaniu; those which express
their addressee by the Gen/Dat are volliu, kahiu, and pajampiu. The verbs which
pattern both ergatively and nominatively express their addressee by the absolutive
case only when the speaker is realized by the instrumental; if there is no addressee
they may resort to the absolutive marking for the speaker. Verbs which may
express their addressee by the Gen/Dat are free to realize their speaker by either
the instrumental or the absolutive case. Table 9.6 captures this dichotomy.
Further complication is introduced by the fact that certain verbs of speaking
appear also in the finite passive form (limited, however, to the 3rd Pers Sg): vuccai
(< OIA ucyate) “it is said”, vollijjai (innovative in MIA) “it is said”, kahijjai (<
OIA kathyate) “it is said”. In spite of their present tense they pattern ergatively as
their non-fmite counterparts: ten a vuccai or ten a vuttu “he said”. We may assume
that the ergative pattern in the finite passive (in the present tense!) continues the
earlier passive construction tena ucyate “[it] is said by him”, and that it was
reinforced during the late MIA period by syntactic analogy with the construction
involving the PP tena vuttu (< OIA tena uktam “[it] was said by him”).
At this point we may examine these matters statistically in the ‘idiolect’ of
Evaluating the data in Table 9.7, we may start by observing that volliu “said”
and kahiu “told” (but not pucchiu “asked”) anticipate the Hindi construction with
the addressee marked by the postposition se.

Table 9.6: Ergative and nominative patterning o f the verbs o f 'speaking' in


Pucchiu “asked” patterns ergatively and expresses the addressee by the absolutive

(32) pucchiu punu vi nahu naranahem [Pc 35.3.9]

ask+PP again PRT lord king+INSTR
“The king asked the lord again”

In Hindi the addressee with puchna has to be realized by the postposition se

(:us-seyah savalpuchie “ask him this question”). Pajampiu “said” patterns both
ergatively and nominatively, and expresses its addressee by the ‘oblique’ case

(33) vaidehi pajampiya harivalaho [Pc 27.12.2]

VaidehT say+PP Visnu-lover/beloved+GEN/DAT
“Vaidehi (= Slta) said to Visnu-belovcd (= Rama)”

Vuttu “said” and pahhaniu “addressed” pattern both ergatively and nominatively,
and express their addressee by the absolutive case. As the above figures show, the
ergative construction is much more common and allows for the addressee to be
put into the absolutive case (no examples of the absolutive case expressing both
the speaker and the addressee were found).
As mentioned above, vuttu “said”, volliu “said, spoke” and kahiu “told”
appear also in the finite passive form vuccai, volijjai and kahijjai with the speaker
in the instrumental (to judge by our statistics, this construction was actually more
common than its non-finite counterpart). Their addressee is realized by the
absolutive case (with vuccai) or the ‘oblique’ case (with kahijjai):

(34) vuccai tena rau [Pc 31.8.2]

say+PASS+3/SG he+INSTR king
“He said to the king”

tama kahijjai kenavi kamsaho [Rittha 5.1.6]

then narrate+PASS+3/SG someone+INSTR Kamsa+GEN/DAT
“Then someone told Kamsa”

There was a single example of the speaker expressed by the absolutive case:
varu vuccai “the hero said” [Pc 31.7.7]. This may be taken as indicative of the fact
that vuccai was not understood as the finite passive anymore. One may argue for

studied in a number of contemporary ergative languages (by Comrie, Dixon, et

al.). Put succinctly, the subject of the intransitive predicate is in the absolutive, but
the agent of the transitive predicate (either ergative or passive) is in the instrumen­
tal ivel sim.) case. If these two are coreferential and their clauses are co-ordinated
or subordinated in one sentence, which marking will prevail? In IA languages the
subordination may be accomplished by reducing one of the predicates to its non-
finite participial form, the conjunctive participle (labelled absolutive or preferably
gerund in European grammars of Sanskrit). In diachronic perspective the above
dilemma arose as a consequence of the shift from the nominative to the ergative
typology. In the OIA period, before the demise of the active forms of the aorist
and the perfect, this problem did not exist. For instance, the active forms of the
aorist of both intransitive and transitive predicates could be co-ordinated as shown
in the following fictive example:

(38) Ramah tatra agat naram ahan ca

R.+NOM there go+AOR+3/SG man+ACC kill+AOR+3/SG and
“Rama went there and killed the man”

Or, the finite form of the intransitive predicate could be reduced to the conjunctive
participle as shown in (39):

(39) Ramah tatra gatva naram ahan

R.+NOM there go+GER man+ACC kill+AOR+3/SG
“Having gone there Rama killed the man”

As a consequence of the change to the ergative typology during the MIA period,
(39) would be expressed as shown in (40):

(40) Ramena tatra gatva narah hatah

R.+INSTR there go+GER man+NOM kill+PP+NOM/PL

In Classical Sanskrit used in the MIA period, we may imagine its derivation in the
usual fashion by embedding the clause with the intransitive predicate and the
deletion of its subject:

(41) Ramena (Ramah tatra agacchat) narah hatah

Ramena (0 tatra gatva) narah hatah

The late MIA version of (41) would be Ramena (tatthi gantu) naru mariu. In our
Apabhramsa documents various permutations of word order are found with the
agent in any position:

(42) Ramena (tatthi gantu) naru mariu

(Tatthi gantu) Ramena naru mariu
(Tatthi gantu) naru Ramena mariu
(Tatthi gantu) naru mariu Ramena

The postverbal sentence-final position of the agent is the least common option (cf.
our statistics in 9.4.1). Pragmatically speaking, this is the marked version which
assigns the function of focus to the agent: “It was RAMA who went there and
killed the man”. Unfortunately, due to the nature of our texts, pragmatic
considerations are secondary to the considerations of metri causa. This is the case
in the following passage from Haribhadras’s Sanatkumaracarita:

(43) utthiuna, mottu . . . pariyanu, majjhi gantu . . .

rise+GER dismiss+PP retinue middle+LOC go+GER

nisiyai kumaru [Sc 566.4-8]

sit+3/SG prince
“The prince got up, dismissed the retinue, went inside and sat down”

When the intransitive predicate is co-ordinated with the transitive predicate

without the conjunction (asyndeton), the subject of the intransitive verb will also
function as the agent of the transitive verb:

(44) tarn vayanu sunevi padiharu gau vinattu

that word hear+GER doorkeeper go+PP know+CAUS+PP

narahiu [Pc 30.5.1

“Having heard this word the doorkeeper went and announced to the king”

In Hindi one would use the anaphoric pronoun with the agentive postposition in
the transitive clause: Yah vacan sunkar pratihar gay a aur us~ne raja nivedan kiyd
More serious problems arise with the formation of the conjunctive participle
from transitive predicates. During the 01A period the conjunctive participle would
be derived from the active construction, whereas in the MIA period it has to be
derived from the ergative/passive construction. With the deletion of the agent in

(48) mantrina punar aham ahuya abhyadhayisi

[Dasa, 125.5-6]
minister+INSTR again I call+GER tell+AOR+PASS+l/SG
“Having been called again by the minister, I was told”

Finally, we may look at some less usual cases of conjoining the predicates. If
the intransitive predicate is combined with the ‘instrumental subject’ (bhave
prayoga), then it may co-function as the agent of the transitive predicate:

(49) Ramena (Ramena narah hatah) tatra gatam

Ramena (0 naram hatva) tatra gatam
“Rama having killed the man went there”

Similarly, if the finite passive and the ergative construction are conjoined, the
agent may co-function as the agent in the passive and the AgSubj in the ergative

(50) sottiehim som’ambu rasijjai,. . . uppari risihim

brahmans+INSTR soma-drink savour+PASS+3/SG on seers+LOC

mhittaim haddaim [Hv 83.16.11-12]

throw+PP bones
lit. the soma-drink is savoured by the brahmans [and they] threw the bones at
the monks
“The brahmans savoured the soma-drink [and] threw the bones at the monks”

When the goal of a transitive predicate co-functions as the agent o f another

transitive predicate we are dealing with the construction apo koinou:

(51) raem. . . pesiya kimkara pure ghare avaloiu

king+INSTR send+PP servant city+LOC house+LOC search+PP

uvavane [Hv 83.6.6-7]

“'Hie king sent the servants [and they] searched in the city in every house and
in the park”


Several aspects of the process of causativization in late MIA will be

considered: causativization of finite predicates (both active and passive);
causativization of non-fmite predicates with the problem of ergative vs. passive
interpretation; and the problem of subject assignment in passive causatives
(passivized on the goal or on the causee agent) in the context of increased ergative
typology of late MIA. Given the fact that Sanskrit syntax was extremely
influential in providing examples of causatives, it will be necessary to include
some medieval Sanskrit data into our discussion.

10.1 The functional theory o f causativization

The process of causativization (= causative predicate formation) may be
understood as an extension of the valency of the input predicate-frame by an extra
causer argument. If the causative construction is to be passivized, this extra
argument supplies the speaker with an additional candidate (to the causee) for the
assignment of subject function.
Using terminology of Functional Grammar (Dik 1989), we may account for
the syntactic and semantic properties of causative constructions in MIA (both
Classical Sanskrit and Prakrits) by assuming the following special rules regarding
subject and object assignment to apply:

(Rl) The causee agent may be assigned Obj function (morphological

accusative in Sanskrit or absolutive in Apabhramsa) for
‘contactive’ causation, or it may be realized by the form of the
agentive phrase (instrumental) for ‘non-contactive’ causation.

(R2) The causer agent is assigned Subj function (in the sense of
controlling the agreement with the PP) in the active causative

(R3) The causee agent or the goal of the action is assigned Subj
function in the passive causative construction.

(R4) If the goal is assigned Subj function both the causer and the causee
may be expressed by the agentive phrase (instrumental).

(R5) If the causee agent is assigned Subj function the causer agent may
be expressed by the agentive phrase and the third argument (goal,
recipient) remains in the original case.

The semantic parameter of the degree of control retained by the causee in the
causative construction interrelates closely with the formal expression of the
It is intuitively satisfactory to assume that in the case of an inanimate causee
this causee has no potential for exercizing any control over the situation. Where,
however, the causee is animate, as in our examples (1) and (2), there is the
potential for a continuum of degree of control retained by that causee:

(1) dasam bharam harayati

servant+ACC burden+ACC carry+CAUS+3/SG
“He has a servant carry the burden”

(2) dasena bharam harayati

servant+INSTR burden+ACC carry+CAUS+3/SG
“He has the burden carried by a servant”

Example (1) with the causee in the accusative implies low retention of a control
on the side of the servant (it would be appropriate for a situation, where the
grudging servant was compelled or forced physically to carry the burden).
Example (2) with the causee in the instrumental leaves a greater control in the
hands of the causee, where the action of his carrying the burden was not preceded
by any physical or psychological coercion. Here the servant is simply performing
his duty by serving his master without being directly affected. Even clearer
examples were discussed by Patanjali in Bhasya 13 (on P [1.4.52]): vahayati
bharam Devadattena “he has D. carry a load” (with an instrumental causee) vs.
vahayanti balivardan yavdn “they have bullocks carry the barley” (with an
accusative causee). The non-human animate causee in the latter example has very
little potential for exercizing any control over the situation, whereas the human
instrumental causee is left with a greater control over the situation (i.e. the
bullocks cannot but Devadatta can refuse to act). Examples in Bhasya 14 are
similar: bhaksayati pindim Devadattena “he has D. eat a sweetmeat” (with a
human indirectly affected causee grammaticalized by the instrumental) vs.

likely as a consequence of the overall increase in ergative typology during the late
MIA period. The earliest signs of it might be the use of the causative PP in the 1st
and 2nd Pers where one can legitimately maintain that the spontaneous use of
language in conversation does not favor the passive (and a fortiori the passivized
causative). Other reasons, as in the case of the ergative interpretation of non­
causative PPs, were pragmatic (postulates of Functional Sentence Perspective)
and syntactic (problems with conjoining intransitive and transitive predicates).
We may start by examining examples of the passivized causatives in the 1st
and 2nd Pers (participants in discourse), where the spontaneous use of language
does not favor the passive interpretation. Examples are shown in (9) and (10):

(9) avuhu padarisiu appanau [Pc 1.3.12]

ignorance see+CAUS+PP own
“I manifested my ignorance”

padiu haum calanehim deva [Pc 30.11.7]

fall+CAUS+PP I feet+LOC lord
“Lord, you made me fall at [your] feet”
lit. I was caused to fall

(10) tumam dhanno, jena manam thaviyam magge

[Kp 100.2]
you blessed who+INSTR mind stand+CAUS+PP path+LOC
“You are blessed, because you have set up [your] mind on the [right] path”

The active interpretation is also more likely in the interrogative mode (in any

(11) bhanu kena karaviu ihu layanu [Kc 5.1.1]

tell who+INSTR make+CAUS+PP this cave
“Tell [me], who built this cave?”
lit. who made this cave to be built

indiyalu kim va kina-vi darisiu [Sc 604.3]

illusion PRT or someone+INSTR see+CAUS+PP
“Or did someone show me an illusion?”
lit. was I shown an illusion by someone

(One would like to know whether it was possible to say darisiu asi (hau) “I was

In both narrative passages and dialogues it is quite common to leave the

causee agent unexpressed. This is statistically the most common option (14 among
the 37 instances of the passivization on the goal). In most cases the identity of the
causee agent is not relevant to the discourse; in some cases the causee agent is not
realized to avoid syntactic doubling. In the following instance with the instrumen­
tal of manner the realization of the causee agent would result in syntactic

(24) canakyahatakena vicitravadhena vyapaditah

[Mudr 2.15.66-67]
C.-wretched+INSTR variegated-death+INSTR perish+CAUS+PP
“That wretched Chanakya ordered him to be killed in a fearful way”

In other words, this sentence conveys the information about the manner of its
caused action but not about its intermediary.
It is of interest to notice that the other option, i.e., that of realizing the causee
agent but not the causer agent, is found only in dialogues (jussive or interrogative
sentences) where the causer agent is always obvious from the extralinguistic

(25) itarau tu hastibalakamukau hastina

other-two then elephant-force-wishing+NOM elephant+INSTR

eva ghatyetam [Mudr 6.21.14]

indeed kill+CAUS+PASS+IMP
“The other two who wish to have elephants should be killed by means of an

In the passive jussive sentence it is clearly redundant for the interlocutor receiving
the command to be realized by the agentive phrase tvayd “by you”. Here the
causer agent coincides with the interlocutor receiving the command.
Most typical instances of passivized jussive causative sentences involve the
verb vedaya- “inform, tell to” (causative of vid- “know”). With this verb the
causee agent appears in the guise of the recipient (indirect object) grammati-
calized by the dative:

(26) Bhadramukhe, nivedyatam .. . canakyaya [Mudr 7.4.5-6]

“Friend, tell the wicked Chanakya”

pesido [Mudr 5.9.55-56]

scnd+CAU S+PP
“The minister Raksasa . . . sent me to Chandragupta”

The goal of the action with the participle presitah “caused to send out/caused to
be sent out” may also be grammaticalized by the dative:

(34) kumarenai ’tan mahyam anupresitam [Mudr 5.13.38]

prince+INSTR this+NOM M A T send+CAUS+PP
“This was sent to me by you”

The goal of the action is typically realized by direct speech after the passive
causative participle djndpitah/vijnapitah “ordered” (lit. caused to know):

(35) dava aham amaccena annatto jaha karabhaa

then I minister+INSTR know+CAUS+PP thus Karabhaka

kusumapuram gaccha [Mudr 4.8.11-12]

Kusumapura+ACC go
“I was ordered by your Excellency thus: ‘Karabhaka, go to Kusumapura . . . ”’

In jussive contexts, either the goal or the causer agent may remain unex­
pressed. The order “let him come in” or “bring him in” may be grammaticalized
by either the active or passive causative of the verb pravis- “enter”:

(36) pravesaya [Mudr 5.5.11]

you enter+CAUS+IMP
“Let him come in”

(37) sa tvaya pravesayitavyah [Mudr 5.3.6]

he you+INSTR enter+CAUS+GERVE
“Bring him in!”

The active causative imperative grammaticalizes the causer agent but not the
causee (which is obvious from the extralinguistic context). On the other hand, the
causative gerundive (used here in the meaning of the passive causative impera­
tive) grammaticalizes the causee and (optionally) the causer agent. However,
neither of the above constructions grammaticalizes the recipient which coincides
with the addresser of the command (“to me”).

Following are the examples of the passive causative constructions used in

jussive contexts without grammaticalizing the causer agent (but expressing the
goal of the action):

(38) yo ‘yam aparah . .. sulam aropyatam [Mudr 1.20.35-37]

who that other stake+ACC ascend+CAUS+PASS+IMP
“and that other man . . . should also be impaled”

Quite rarely, the causative gerundive may be found in jussive contexts

(without grammaticalizing the causer agent):

(39) ghatakah . . . samjnam grahayitavyas [Mudr 1.20.22-23]

executioners .. . sign+ACC take+CAUS+GERVE
“Make the executioners understand the sign!”

To express the causer by the agentive phrase (tvaya “by you”) is clearly
redundant in the jussive context, since the causer coincides with the addressee of
the command.
Finally, there were isolated instances when neither the causer agent nor the
goal were expressed. The following instance of the passive causative imperative
is typical:

(40) samarpyatam raksasagrhajanah [Mudr 1.22.12]

move+CAUS+PASS+IMP Raksasa-family
“Surrender the family of Raksasa”

10.4.3 Semantic restrictions on the passivization o f causatives

In semantic terms the verbs whose causatives may be passivized fall neatly
into two groups. Those verbs which allow the passivization on the causee agent
include the following three subcategories:

i) “to order someone”: d/vijhdp (causative of jna “know”)

ii) transitive verbs such as grah “take”, sru “hear”, pd “drink”, likh “write”, dp
“obtain”, vis “enter”, etc.
iii) verbs of motion (which keep their spatial satellites grammaticalized by
various cases) is “set in motion”, hhrams “fall dow7n”, vah “carry”, r “move”,
ruh “ascend”, pad “fall”, etc.

Those verbs which allow the passivization on the goal include the following
two subcategories:

i) verbs of “killing”: ghataya “make Y kill Z” (causative of han “kill”),

vydpddaya “make Z perish” (vydpad “perish”)
ii) verbs with the causee in the dative: nivedaya “tell” (causative of vid “know”),
darsaya “show” (drs “see”)

The only verb whose passivized causative was found to occur in both types
of constructions (i.e. those involving the passivization on the goal and on the
causee agent) was likh “write”. That means that the passive causative participle
lekhitah is two-way ambiguous:

i) “someone who is caused to write”

ii) “something which is caused to be written”

Both instances are found in Mudraraksasa:

(41) sakatadaso ’pi tapasvi tarn tadrsam

Sakatadasa+NOM also poor+NOM that+ACC such-t-ACC

kapatalekham . . . maya lekhitah [Mudr 7.8.6-7]

forged-letter+ACC .. . I+INSTRwrite+CAUS+PP
“Poor Sakatadasa, also, was made by me to write that forged letter”

(42) aryacanakyena . . . lekhito . .. lekhas

[Mudr 5.1.3-4]
minister-Chanakya+INSTR . .. write+CAUS-PP . .. letter
“The letter . . . which was caused to be written by his Honor Chanakya”

This certainly was not an ideal situation. We saw above that the passive causative
participle yyapdditah was used in Mudraraksasa only in the meaning of “caused
to be killed”, but, theoretically, at least, it could also be understood as “caused to
kill (someone else)”. However, Sanskrit could avoid this ‘unpleasant’ ambiguity
by the activization of the causative passive participle by the suffix -vant, as seen
in (43):

(43) esa raksasaprayuktaya visakanyaya parvatesvaram

he Raksasa-employed+INSTR poison-girl-INSTR Parvatesvara+ACC

vyapaditavan [Mudr 2.18.10 J

“He (= the Jain mendicant Jivasiddhi) killed Parvatesvara through the agency
of the poison-girl employed by you (= minister Raksasa)”

In this case there are actually two causee agents: the first causee is the Jain
mendicant Jivasiddhi who entrusted the second causee, the poison-girl, to kill
Parvatesvara. Both Jivasiddhi and the poison-girl were employed by minister
Raksasa (who is the ultimate causer agent).
As we saw above, the majority of our examples of the passive causative
involve the PP (the past passive participle in -ta) used typically in the narration
of past events. About 25% of the passive causatives were found in jussive
contexts (imperative and gerundive). The passive causative is used rarely in the
present indicative, where the active causative is preferred. The statistical
breakdown for Mudraraksasa is given in Table 10.2.
Further observations on the use of the passive causative are in order. Finite
forms are almost always in the 3rd Pers (of both imperative and indicative). An
isolated example of the passive causative in the 2nd Pers involves the verb (pra)vis

(44) ma gummahiariehim. . . raakulam

lest troop-officers+INSTR . . . king-tent+ACC

paveslasi [Mudr 5.2.31-32]

enter+CAUS+PAS S+2/SG
“lest you might be taken to the king’s tent by the officers of the company”

Here, the passive causative form paveslasi (Skt pravesyase) could easily be
replaced by the active form (with the causee realized by the accusative).

T a b le 10.2: Passive and active causatives in Mudraraksasa


causer and the causee grammaticalized by the instrumental). These valency

changes in a nontransitive verb can be summarized in Figure 10.1.
The passivization on the causee agent (R5) results in a construction with an
agentive phrase expressing the causer agent; the goal of the action remains in the
original case (accusative, dative, locative). These valency changes can be
summarized in Figure 10.2.
In MIA, as in NIA languages, it was possible to form double causatives from
certain verbs. While the act of causation in a ‘single’ causative is carried out
through one intermediary (causee), the act of causation in a double causative is
carried out through two intermediaries. The first causee functions as the causer for
the second causee who performs the goal. Theoretically, double-causativization
should result in syntactic doubling or even triplication. Let us exemplify these
complicated matters in (50) - (52).

(50) Agent Goal kill

visakanya parvatesvaram hanti
“The poison-girl kills Parvatesvara”

(51) Causer Causee Goal kill+CAUS

raksasa visakanyam/aya parvatesvaram ghatayati
“Raksasa makes the poison-girl kill Parvatesvara”

(52) Causer Causee 1 Causee 2 Goal

raksasa jlvasiddhim/ina visakanyam parvatesvaram

“Raksasa entrusts to Jivasiddhi to make the poison-girl kill Parvatesvara”

Active Passive

C ausative C ausative

SU BK SU BJ (Causer)------------- ------------- Agentive phrase SU BJ

D O ------- — DO (G o a l)-------------------

^D O (Causee) Agentive phrase

F ig u re 10.1 Passivization on the goal


commanded to do so by him directly or through an intermediary (in the case of a

double causative). The conclusion is rather that the ‘agreement’ (1 causee - single
causative, 2 causees - double causative) was far from being of categoric nature in
‘colloquial’ language.


1. Svayambhudeva uses four different causative forms o f “ to show” :

davai (< OIA dars-aya-ti)

darisavai (<*darsa-paya-ti)
dakkhalai (cf. Hindi dikh-l-and “ show” )

There are also r-causatives (cf. Gujarati):

vaisariu “ seated” (<*pra-vis-ar-) in [Pc 5 .14 .3 ; 26 .1.2],

2. The form devavia is actually a double causative. Contrast:

*da-vi-u (<O IA da-pi-ta) “ who was caused to be given Y by X ”

*de-va-vi-u (<*de-pa-pi-ta) “ who was caused to be given Z by X through Y ”
(cf. Hindi causatives dildna vs. dilvana).

3. I owe this interpretation to Dr. A. M. Ghatage o f the Bhandarkar Institute (Pune).

4. Risi “ seer” in (19) is the recipient to which Subj function has been assigned. We may observe
that in Sanskrit Subj assignment to the recipient is quite restricted (cf. Dik 1989:227). It may
be noticed that this clause comes after the passive causative construction, where the causee
(Subj/Ag o f “ obtain” ) was assigned Subj function, i.e. we are dealing with syntactic analogy:

padilahiu r is i. . ., aharu dinnu

lit. the seer was caused to obtain alms, and was given food
“ The seer was given alms and food”

One would expect either risi rae aharu ddviu (as in Skt rsir rdjhd dharam dapitah ) or:

risihi aharu dinnu

seer+GEN /DAT food+N give+PP+N

O f course, in the apo koinou construction the absolute form risi suffices.


11.1 Epistemic and deontic modality

The notions of epistemic and deontic modality (internal and external
obligation) are grammaticalized in a variety of ways in world languages.
Typo logically, there are several options:

i) modal verbs in personal constructions, e.g. English you must go\

ii) modal verbs in impersonal constructions with the non-fmite main verb, e.g.
Latin te ire oportet “you must go”;
iii) modal verbs in impersonal constructions with the finite verb in a subordinate
clause, e.g. Latin oportet ut eas;
iv) synthetic morphology of various finite modal categories (imperative,
injunctive, subjunctive, optative);
v) synthetic morphology of non-finite modal categories, especially the gerun­

In OIA the three modal categories, the indicative, subjunctive and optative,
represent a classical triad of factivity, non-factivity and contra-factivity (cf. Lyons
1977:816). From the point of view of epistemic modality, the indicative was the
mood of factivity and categorial assertion; the subjunctive was the mood of non-
factivity and less remote possibility; and the optative was the mood of contra-
The optative (and the imperative) in the 2nd and 3rd Pers are used in utterances
w'hich impose, or propose, some course of action and indicate that it should be
carried out. These utterances are governed by the general addressee based
condition that the speaker must believe that the addressee is able to comply with
the directive (i.e. one does not command, request, advise or exhort someone to
perform an action which one knows he is incapable of performing).
The difference between imperative and optative sentences was primarily the
difference between commanding and requesting, and secondarily that between
intimacy and deference. The following minimal pair of Sanskrit sentences (1) and
(2) may be used to establish this distinction:

(1) katam kuru

mat+ACC make+IMP+2/SG
“Make the mat!”

(2) katam kuryah

mat+ACC make+OPT+2/SG
“Make the mat, please”

Leaving the semantic difference between commanding and requesting aside, it

would seem that the crucial difference between (1) and (2) is that in the optative
sentence the speaker leaves the addressee the option of refusal to comply with the
request, whereas the command does not. In MIA after the disappearance of the
OIA subjunctive, the chief mood of the epistemic modality became the optative,
which could be used in both contra-factive and non-factive utterances. In Classical
Sanskrit the most obvious example of the former type are declarations of
impossible wishes introduced by api nama “if only” as in (3):

Avi nama aham pururava bhaveam [Vikr 3.9.7-8]

Api nam’ aham pururava bhaveyam (Sanskrit translation)
If only I Pururava be+OPT+l/SG
“If only I (a woman) could become Pururava (lit. female Pururavas)”

This wish is, obviously, contra-factive since the female speaker (Citralekha)
knows that the proposition “I can become Pururavas (a man)” is false.
Non-factive, on the other hand, are the utterances such as those in (4) and (5):

(4) atha va mayi gate nrsamso hanyad

the PRT I+LOC go+PP+LOC monster kill+OPT+3/SG

“But no, with me gone the monster may kill her”

(5) kadacjt nagaram gata syat

perhaps city+ACC go+PP be+OPT+3/SG
“Perhaps she went to the city”

Similar utterances contain optative forms or the modal adverb kadacit “perhaps”
accompanied by the optative. In these utterances the speaker subjectively qualifies
his commitment to the truth of the propositions expressed by the sentences he

T ab le 11.2: The 3rd Pers imperative in Apabhramsa

feasible (cf. OIA bhava/edhi vs. bhaveh/syah). In the 3rd Pers Sg either another
optative form of “to be” hojja “let him be/may he be” (from the aorist optative
bhu-ya-t) or the ‘imperative’ form ho (< *bhavatu) functions as the modal form
expressing contra-factive utterances (wishes):

(6) piya-bhattaru hojja mahu lakkhanu [Pc 29.5.3]

dear-husband be+OPT+3/SG I+GEN/DAT Laksmana
“May Laksmana be my dear husband”

manoraha homtu tau [Rittha7.1

wish be+IMP+3/PL you+GEN
“May your wishes be fulfilled”

It may be observed that the Apabhramsa imperative forms of “to be” are the
source of the subjunctive in Hindi:

2nd Pers Sg bhava > ho

3rd Pers Sg bhavatu > ho
2nd Pers PI bhavata > ho(o)
3rd Pers PI bhavan tu > hotu

In Sanskrit the 3rd Pers imperative is used typically to issue ‘polite’ de-
mands/requests/wishes, and their human addressee is grammaticalized by bhavan
and bhavati (corresponding roughly to English “sir” and “madam”):

(8) mantram ekam mahyam dadatu bhavan [Vetala 92.17]

charm one I+DAT give+3/SG/IMP sir
“Sir, please give me a charm!”

On the other hand, the 2nd Pers imperative dehi “give!” would be used as an
‘intimate’ command by a superior or a friend:

Table 1 1 .3 : Apabhramsa modal forms

Copyrighted image

Table 11.4 : 01A modal forms

optative. Both were formed by the suffix -jj- (< OIA -y-) and it was virtually
impossible to form the optative mood in the passive voice. The whole
Apabhramsa system with its gaps is presented in Table 11.3.
Given the phenomenon of raising of short mid vowels in MIA (cf. Bubenik
1996:31-33), the 2nd Pers PI optative form such as pucchejjahu [pucchijjahu]
“may you ask” could not be distinguished from the passive imperative (3rd Pers
Sg) pucchijjahu “he should be asked”. (The latter form would also be
homophonous with the 2nd Pers PI “you should be asked”). This gap
(= impossibility to form the passive optative) was inherited from OIA which could
form the subjunctive in the medio-passive and passive, but the optative only in the
medio-passive; this is shown in Table 11.4.

11.2 The gerundive in statements o f necessity and possibility

In Vedic Sanskrit certain adjectival derivatives have acquired the meaning of
“X has to/ought to” undergo an action expressed by the verbal root from which
they are derived. In Paninian grammar they are treated as a part of the general
verbal system and are called krtya (lit. to be done). In Greco-Roman linguistic
tradition they are called future passive participles or gerundives. In OIA the three


OIA -s- [inferential] [deontic]

MIA -s- G E R U N D IV E ^ G E R U N D IV E


Apabhramsa -h-



Figure 1 1 . 1 : Recategorization o f the OIA gerundive

11.3 The gerundive in the function o f inferential mode

There are no examples of the inferential use of the gerundive in Rigvedic and
Brahmana Sanskrit. This meaning developed later on during the MIA period with
the demise of the perfect which could fulfil this function in OIA (bhutakale
parokse). In later Pali and Classical Sanskrit texts the gerundive of the verb “to
be” in the neuter gender (constructed with the agentive phrase in the instrumental)
is used quite commonly as the inferential mode:

(18) Asmin . . . latamandape . . . sakuntalaya bhavitavyam [Sak3.6.1-2]

this+LOC bower+LOC S.+INSTR be+GERVE
“Sakuntala must be in this bower of creepers”

Etad api nama srotavyam [Mudr7.5.12]

it also hear+GERVE
“[Raksasa] must have heard also this”

In Apabhramsa the gerundive was not used as the inferential mode, but there
is evidence for its recategorization as the future tense. This might be linked with
the ‘weakening’ of the future tense morphology by phonological attrition (5 > h)
in that the gerundive supplied new more distinctive morphology for it. These
matters are surveyed in Figure 11.1.

11.4 The gerundive recategorized as future tense

In many instances the construction with the gerundive and the agentive phrase
in the instrumental is not to be taken as an expression for one of the modal
meanings discussed in 11.1 and 11.2, but rather as the future tense:

(19) amhehim punu jujjhevau samarem [Pc]

we+INSTR again fight-GERVE battlc+LOC
“We will fight again in the battle”

The context indicates that the narrator reports that the interlocutors intend to fight
in the future rather than making a pronouncement about the necessity to undertake
such an action on their part.
This shift from the statement of deontic modality (necessity) to the future
tense accompanied the shift from the passive to the ergative construction, since
the gerundive is a ‘modal’ PP (= passive participle of necessity):

(20) maya kartam (PP) mai kada

“[It was] done by me” “I did [it]”
maya kartavyam (Gerundive) mai karewau
“[It is] to be done by me” “I have to do it” —►“I will do it”

This construction supplied Apabhramsa with the future tense in addition to (and
later instead of) the former sigmatic future whose distinct marker -sy- was
weakened to h: OIA kar-isy-ami > Ap kar-ih-imi. Both the gerundive-based future
and the sigmatic future have survived in NIA. Eastern IA languages such as
Bengali finitized the gerundive-based future by regular personal suffixes: Ap mai
karewau —►Bengali ami kariba “I will make”, tumhehi (PI) karewau —* tumi
karibi “you will make”, etc. The sigmatic future is found in Western IA languages
such as Lahnda and Gujarati (Gu calls “I will go”, calse “you will go”, etc.), and
its weakened counterpart with h in certain Eastern Hindi dialects (e.g. Bundeli
calahau “I will go” < OIA carisyami, calahai “you will go” < OIA carisyasi,
Returning to Apabhramsa, it is no surprise to find instances where even within
the (extra)linguistic context we cannot be quite sure whether we are dealing with
the modal category or the future tense. These are the cases involving the 1st Pers
where one hesitates between the volitional “I want to V” and the future “I will V”

(21) jinu mellevi annu na namevau [Pc 26.3.2]

Jina abandon+GHR another not worship+GERVE
“With the exception of Jina I don’t want to/will not worship another [deity]”

Depending on the context we may translate the gerundive-based future as the

future perfect:3

(22) tau chattaim tau vaisanau rajju

you+GEN umbrellas you+GEN throne kingdom

sahevau maim appanau kajju [Pc 22.10.2]

carry-out+GERVE I+INSTR own work
“The umbrellas, the throne and the kingdom [will be] yours, after I will have
accomplished my work”

As in the case of the PP (9.4) we are faced with the problem of the ergative vs.
passive interpretation. For instance, how do we want to interpret the following
passage about Padmavatl in Karakandacariu:

(23) pomavai taho bhamini gaena nevevi

P. he+GEN wife elephant+INSTR carry-away+GERVE

dutthem harivi tena [Kc 2.5.3]

vicious+INSTR take+GER he+INSTR

Presumably, Kanakamara narrated this passage with Padmavatl being the topical
argument and we may opt for the passive interpretation:

“His wife Padmavatl will be carried away by a vicious elephant”

Similarly, we may opt either for the active or the passive interpretation in the
following passage from Paumacariu:

(24) navara ekku vau maim palevau jinu mellevi

only one vow I+INSTR observe+GERVE Jina abandon+GER

annu na namevau [Pc 26.3.2]

another not w'orship+GERVE
“I want to observe only one vow that with the exception of Jina I will not
worship another [deity]”


1. It is o f interest to observe that earlier Prakrits possessed abbreviated optative forms which
could function in any person in the singular (cf. Bubenik 19 9 6 :117 ):

Pali Ardha-Magadhi

Sg 1 passeyyami “see” passe pasejjami pasejja

2 asi passe asi/hi pasejja
3 a passe a pasejja

(Maharastri forms are identical with those o f A M g but their thematic vow el is short:
pasejjami etc.). Pali passe (and Ap -e in kare) is actually an archaic form continuing the OIA
optative in -eh (OIA pasy-eh ).

2. A propos the gap in the system, the passive optative forms (of the type *k-ijj-ejja) are found
occasionally in JM ah (cf. Bubenik 19 9 6 :117 -12 0 ) ; the following example is from Avasyaka-
Erzahlungen [43.22]:

ahara-virahio sayam eva vivajjejja [Av 43.22]

food-deprived self PR T fall+ C A U S+P A SS+O PT
“ He w ill be made to succumb o f his own because o f the lack o f the food”

The form vivajjejja was analyzed by Pischel (19 0 0 :327) as vi-pad-y-e-ta , i.e. as the middle
voice optative (-e-ya) formed from the passive stem vi-pad-y-. I proposed to analyze it as the
optative o f the passive causative (vi-pad-y- > vi-vajj- plus the innovative optative suffix

3. We may remind ourselves that in Hindi the future perfect patterns ergatively (mai=ne us=ko
kiya hoga “ I will have done it” ) whereas the simple future does not (mai us=ko karuga “ I will
do it” ). For the sake o f comparison, in Pashto the perfective future does not pattern ergatively
(cf. Bubenik 1989b).


12.1 Absolute constructions in Old Indo-Aryan

All ancient IE languages possessed absolute constructions involving the noun
and its participial attribute in one of the ‘peripheral’ cases (to use Jakobson’s
term). In Latin it was the ablative, in Ancient Greek the genitive (and also the
dative in Hellenistic Greek), in Old Church Slavic the dative. In OIA this function
was performed by the locative and less commonly by the genitive. These absolute
constructions are used only when the subjects of two clauses are not coreferential.
The head noun and its participle form a special type of a subordinate clause which
could express an event contemporary with or anterior to that in the main clause.
The contemporaneity was typically expressed by the present active participle
(Part), and the anteriority by the past passive participle (PP), as shown in (1):

(1) Contemporaneity
Rame vanam gacchati sarve jana
Rama+LOC forest+ACC go+PART+LOC all+PL people

duhkhita abhavan
unhappy+PL become+IMPF+3/PL
“When Rama was going to the forest, all the people were unhappy”

Anteriority (PP of the intransitive verb)

Rame vanam gate. . .
Rama+LOC forest go+PP+LOC
“When/after Rama had gone to the forest,. ..”

Anteriority (PP of the transitive verb)

tasmin hate raksase sarve jana
that+LOC kill+PP+LOC raksasa+LOC all+PL people

bhayamukta abhavan
fear-free+PL become+IMPF+3/PL
“When/after that raksasa had been killed, all the people became free from

The Agent Subject of the active participle is in the locative case, while it is the
Goal Subject (= patient) of the passive participle, either imperfective hanayamana
“being killed” or perfective hata “killed”, which appears in this case. The agent
is realized rather rarely, but if it is, it has to be expressed by the instrumental case:

AgSubj Active Participle

Ag GoSubj Passive Participle

(2) Contemporaneity
Rame vanam gacchati. ..
Rama+LOC forest+ACC go+PART+LOC
“When Rama was going to the forest,. .

Ramena hanyamanesu raksasesu. . .

“When the raksasas were being killed by Rama,..

Ramena hate raksase. . .
Rama+INSTR kill+PP+LOC raksasa+LOC
“After the raksasa had been killed by Rama, . .

Anterior actions in the active voice are expressed by the gerund (= conjunctive
participle), whose agent is typically coreferential with the subject or the agent of
the main clause (cf. 9.4.4): ramo/ena raksasam hatva .. . “Rama having killed the
raksasa . . Thus in the above OIA absolute constructions the aspectual contrast
of perfectivity is interpreted as that of relative tense (or anteriority):

(3) Contemporaneity and anteriority in the absolute constructions

Contemporaneity Present imperfective active participle

Present imperfective medio-passive participle
Anteriority Present perfective active participle (Gerund)
Past perfective passive participle

The imperfective participles, active or (medio)-passive, express the event/action

which is contemporary with that in the main clause. The perfective participles, the
gerund or PP, express the event which is anterior to that in the main clause.

As the label indicates, the imperfective medio-passive participle may express

concurrent actions in the middle voice or concurrent events in the passive voice:
Rdme bhdsamdne . . . “While Rama was speaking . . or Ramena hanyamanesu
raksasesu . . . “While the raksasas were being killed by Rama . . The latter
option is only available in languages which possess the imperfective passive
participle (such as Old Church Slavic and Ancient Greek but not Latin; for
example, cf. AGr ekhthron phoneuomenon “while the enemies were being
killed” vs. ekhthrdn phoneuthentdn “after the enemies had been killed” while in
Latin only inimicTs occlsis “after the enemies had been killed” is available). But
even the languages which do possess the imperfective passive participle use it
rather rarely in their absolute constructions (I am unaware of any statistical
accounts in this respect).
Use of the genitive in the absolute construction parallels exactly that of the
locative in that both the head noun and its participle are in the same case. In OIA
this construction was less common than its locative counterpart but with time
during the MIA period it became as common as the construction involving the
syncretic instrumental/locative case (12.2.1). It is claimed that there was an
additional semantic nuance distinguishing these two constructions in OIA. The
genitive construction is “occasionally restricted” (Goldman & Sutherland
1980:253) to cases in which the action takes place in spite of the action expressed
by the verb in the main clause. This action was described as being in some way
disrespectful or contemptuous by Panini [ii.3.38], hence the term ‘genitive of
disrespect’ (sasthi anadare) of Ancient Indian grammarians:

(4) rajno bhasamanasya kaikeyi ahasat

kmg+GEN speak+MED/PASS PART+GEN Kaikeyi laugh+lMPF+3/SG
“Kaikeyi laughed despite the fact that the king was speaking”

12.2 Absolute constructions in Apabhramsa

As we saw in 5.1, the OIA rich system of seven (eight with the vocative) cases
was reduced to four during the late MIA period. In a-stems, omitting the sanskritic
suffixes of the instrumental (-ena and -ehi), we end up with three cases which
could be used in the absolute construction: two ‘oblique’ cases (Instr/Loc and
Gen), and the ‘absolutive’ case (Nom/Acc). For all practical purposes there was
no phonological contrast between the instrumental and the locative singular as a
result of raising of mid vowels (for details of the Instr vs. Loc morphology in
WAp refer to 4.1; a propos their treatment by Hemacandra to 3.2). Thus we will
encounter the following cases in Apabhramsa absolute constructions:

(5) a-stems Sg PI
Nom/Acc dev-u -a
Instr/Loc -e/-i -ahi/-ahl
Gen -aho -aha

i- and w-stems, and feminine a-stems distinguish the instrumental from the
locative in the singular (cf. 3.2 for their treatment by Hemacandra) but not in the
plural. Omitting the sanskritic suffixes we find girie (Instr) vs. girihi (Loc), gurue
(Instr) vs. guruhi (Loc), malae (Instr) vs. malahi (Loc). However, in the plural
girihi, guruhi, mdlahllahi are both Instr/Loc.
Given the phonological identity of the Instr and Loc in Apabhramsa, the OIA
absolute constructions involving the passive participles with the Goal Subject in
the locative and the agentive phrase in the instrumental, exemplified in (2),
stopped being viable. To use two fictive Apabhramsa examples, the sanskritic
narena marie sue man+INSTR kill+INSTR/LOC son+INSTR/LOC meant
unambiguously “when the man (had) killed the son”; however, if the agent is
marked with the non-sanskritic Instr/Loc as shown in (6) the sentence becomes
ambiguous assuming relatively free word order in Apabhramsa:

(6) nare marie sue

“when the man (had) killed the son”
or “when the son (had) killed the man”

It is needless to say that (6) would be disambiguated in the context. Nevertheless,

in functional terms, the loss of the morphological contrast between the Instr and
Loc rendered the OIA construction of the locative absolute ‘dysfunctional’. As we
know from the vantage position of NIA, with the progressive demise of the
morphological case the ultimate solution was to drop the absolute construction
altogether. A short term solution in late MIA was to adopt another unambiguous
case for its absolute constructions. And here the OIA genitive absolute could fulfil
this role. Thus if we use the Gen instead of the Instr/Loc in (6), nare mdriaho
suaho, its reading is unambiguously “when the man (had) killed the son”. One
would like to speculate that one of the reasons for adopting the genitive as the
main case for the absolute construction was to free the Instr/Loc to perform the
duty of the ergative case (in addition to its other traditional functions). Perhaps
surprisingly, however, I have not come across this type of construction (i.e. the
Agent expressed by the Instr/Loc and the GoSubj expressed by the Gen) in my
perusal of Apabhramsa literature. In more general terms, we are dealing with a

convincing example of syntactic change conditioned by morphology. The loss of

the morphological contrast between the two ‘peripheral’ cases (Instr and Loc)
revamped the system of absolute constructions in Apabhramsa with the genitive
absolute becoming the main exponent of the unmarked temporal function.

12.2.1 Instrumental/Locative absolute

Given the fact that the main function of the instrumental case in late MIA was
agentive (ergative), frequent MIA examples of absolute constructions involving
the instrumental may be viewed as Sanskritisms. Many of them involve some use
of sanskritic morphology of the instrumental. For the sake of convenience the
WAp subparadigm of the Instr and Loc with its sanskritic suffixes (cf. 4.4) is
reproduced in (7):

(7) Instr -e -ahi/I

-ena/a (< Skt) -ehi/i (< Skt -ebhih)
Loc -i -a h !

Examples (8) and (9) display the unambiguous sanskritic morphology of the
instrumental case:

(8) harisiu vajjayannu ditthena lakkhanena [Pc 25.10.1]

rejoice+PP Vajrakama see+PP+INSTR Laksmana+INSTR
“Having seen Laksmana Vajrakarna rejoiced”

(In ‘correct’ Classical Sanskrit one would not form the absolute construction in
the case when the subject of the subordinate and the main clause are coreferential;
instead, the gerund Laksmanam drstya would be used).

(9) ma tumhehim humtehim harau rajju

[Rittha 6.5.3]
not you+INSTR/PL be+PART+INSTR/PL take+PP kingdom
“While you were/with you around the kingdom [would] not be taken away”

(The negative particle md indicates the modal meaning of the PP in the main
In ^-sterns there are no unambiguous examples of the locative morphology;
in the case of i- and u-stems the distinction was possible (cf. 3.2) but I have not
come across any unambiguous examples of the locative morphology. Thus the

matter of how to say in Apabhramsa “while the teacher is speaking” (01A gurau
bhasyamane) has to be reserved for a further search in primary sources
(guruna/gurue/guruhi bhanante ?)
Shortened pronominal forms as in (10) are difficult to parse:

(10) tumhi homti hoi rajju [Kc 1.13.4]

you+INSTR be+PART+LOC be+FUT+3/SG kingdom
“With you around the kingdom will survive”

I take tumhi for the instrumental tumhehi (vs. locative tumha.su !). The form hoi
seems to be shortened hohii < bhavisyati “will be”.
Most Apabhramsa examples of absolute constructions have to be parsed
Instr/Loc as shown in (11):

(11) lajjiyahim “hamae” bhanantihim [Pc 23.4.2]

shameful+INSTR/LOC/PL oh mother saying+INSTR/LOC/PL
“While the shameful [ones] were saying ‘oh mother”’

maim jiyante taya tuhum callahi

[Pc 21.6.4]
I+INSTR/LOC live+PART+INSTR/LOC father you walk+2/SG
“While I am alive, father, you are safe”

One of the striking Sanskritisms is the use of the passive imperfective

participle. As explained in 8.1.3, its morphology is peculiar in combining the
inherited passive marker -ya- > -ja- and the suffix of the active participle -anta,
which replaced the OIA medio-passive suffix -mdna: 01A di-ya-mana > Ap di-jj-
anta “being given”. All the examples I came across in Svayambhudeva and the
late sanskritizing poet Haribhadra (12th c.) were of the type shown in (12):

(12) glyahim gijjantaehim [Pc 21.14.7]

“While the songs were being sung”

While glyahim is both Instr and Loc PI, its participle gijjantaehim is only Instr PI.
Haribhadra in his Sanatkumaracarita made extensive use of them:

(13) bhattehim dijjantehim [Sc 743.9]

“While the portions of food were (being) given”

kijjantihim mangalihim [Sc 741.4]

“While the mangalas were being made”

(Other examples are available in 741.6-7, 743.4-5, 743.6-7, 744.6-7). In

[468.3-4] the poet added even the agentive phrase but erred in agreement of the
participle with its head noun which appears in the genitive (sic!):

(14) vandihim kijjantihim


mangala+GEN/PL [Sc 468.3^1]
“While the mangalas were (being) made by bards”

In the same passage there is a ‘monstrosity’ involving the suffix of the Sanskrit
medio-passive participle -mana attached to the Apabhramsa passive stem di-jja-
in combination with the Prakrit locative form of the head-noun dan-ammi (the
pronominal locative suffix -ami < -ahmin < -asmin):

(15) dijjamana danammi [Sc 468.3]

“While the gifts were (being) given”

12.2.2 Genitive absolute

In my Apabhramsa data I have not found any instances of the ‘genitive of
disrespect’ (12.1). For instance, “while he was ruling” may be expressed
indiscriminately be either the instrumental/locative absolute or the genitive
absolute in identical contexts:

(16) X+INSTR/LOC rajju karamte [Rittha 1.4.1]

X+GEN rajju karamtaho [Rittha 6.13.6]
“While X was ruling”

It may be concluded that in Apabhramsa the genitive absolute became the main
‘unmarked’ absolute construction:

(17) pekkhatamham sayalaham naravaraham [Rittha 6.13.6]

looking+PART+GEN/PL all+GEN/PL man-best+GEN/PL
“While the best men were looking”

magahamamdalu paripalamtaho [Rittha 1.4.5]

Magadha-district protect+PART+GEN
“While he was protecting the district of Magadha”

As in OIA the aspectual contrast of perfectivity was interpreted as that of

anteriority. The present participle indicated an event/action contemporary with
that in the main clause and the past passive participle indicated the event/action
which was anterior. Apabhramsa examples are given in (18):

(18) Contemporaneity: Present participle in the genitive

rajju karantaho taho maharakkhaho devarakkhu
rule do+PART+GEN he+GEN Maharaksasa+GEN Devaraksasa

uppannau nandanu [Pc 5.14.5-6]

be-bom+PP son
“While that Maharaksasa ruled, the son of the name Devaraksasa was bom”

Anteriority: Past participle in the genitive

jammem jammem mua-muahe sa-lakkhanu
birth+LOC birth+LOC die+PP-die+PP+GEN/F with-marks

piya-bhattaru hojja mahu lakkhanu [Pc 29.5.3]

dear-husband be+OPT+3/SG I+GEN Laksmana
“In each rebirth after I have died with auspicious marks (or with Laksmana),
let Laksmana become my dear husband”

The absolute construction with the PP in the genitive mua-muahe (Skt rta-
mrtayah) expresses the series of events which will be anterior to the desired
events in the future expressed by the main clause.
With two pronominal forms in the Gen/Dat the construction could be
theoretically ambiguous. The form closer to the participle is usually its subject:

(19) ganga jai dei dinara pecchantayaha

Ganges if give+3/SG money watch+PART+GEN

maha imassa [Kp 40.1-3]

“If Ganges gives him money while I will be watching”
(not *“If Ganges gives me money while he will be watching”)

12.2.3 Nominative absolute

And finally the subordinate clause may be realized by the absolute construc­
tion with the participle and its head noun in the nominative (or rather ‘absolutive’
Nom/Acc). Its existence may be taken as symptomatic of the continuing demise
of the morphology of the synthetic case and its replacement by analytic
formations (described in Chapter Five). Representative examples involving
anteriority are given in (20):

(20) vavvara-savara-varuhini bhaggi janayaho jaya

Barbara-Sabara-army-HF break+PP/F Janaka+GEN become+PP

pihivi avaggl [Pc 21.8.1]

earth subject
“When the army of barbarian Shabaras was destroyed, the earth became
subject to [the authority of] Janaka”

jarasamdhabamdhu parinattha rane asamka jaya

Jarasamdha-brother destroy+PP battle+LOC doubt arise+PP

jayavaham mane [Rittha 7.9.1]

Yadava+GEN/PL mmd+LOC
“When Jarasamdha’s brother was killed in the battle, a doubt arose in the
mind of Yadavas”


Sections 13.1-3 deal with complementation, and 13.4-6 are devoted to

relativization in Apabhramsa. These topics will be taken up on the basis of data
from Old Hindi, Gujarati and Marathi in the second vol ume of this monograph.

13.1 The gerund with modal verbs

The main verb complementing the modal verb sakkai “can” (or the adjective
samathu “capable”) is expressed by the gerund in Apabhramsa.

(1) ko sakkai raya ganevi taim [Pc 37.5.8]

who can+3/SG king count+GER those
“King, who can count them?”

haum jiyapauma laevi samatthu [Pc 31.10.2]

I Jitapadma take+GER capable
“I am capable to take Jitapadma”

The modal verb sakkai “can” may be realized by the PP (ergative construction):

(2) kena ganeppinu sakkiya rana [Pc 30.2.12]

who+INSTR count+GER can+PP king+PL
“Who can count [all those] kings?”

parabalu jinivi na sakkiyau [Rittha 7.3]

enemy-army conquer+GER not can+PP
“[The prince] could not conquer the enemy army”

13.2 Dative ofpurpose with verbs o f motion

After the verbs of motion the complement (= verbal noun) appears in the

(3) vandanahattie so vi gau [Pc]

praise-worship+DAT he PRT go+PP
“and he went to praise and worship”

Or it may be realized by the gerund (as in 13.1):

(4) damodara-halayara jayava vi gaya namdaho

Krsna-Balabhadra Yadava and go+PP Nanda+GEN

goula pekkhanevi [Rittha 6.4.1]

cattle-pen see+GER
“Krsna, Balabhadra and Yadava went to see Nanda’s cattle-pen”

In (4) one would expect the gerundial form pekkhevi. It could be that -n- in
pekkhanevi is from the verbal noun pekkhana, i.e. Svayambhudeva probably
contaminated the gerund pekkhevi and the verbal noun pekkhana into pekkhanevi.
There are also examples of complementation by means of the sanskritic
infinitive in -u (< -turn):

naha so esa kalo maham nandano thau

lord this that time I+GEN son stand+CAUS+INF

rajjanupalo [Pc]
“Lord, this is the time to appoint my son a king (- kingdom-protector)”

The form than goes back to the OIA infinitive sthapitum (causative o f stha-

13.3 The quotativeparticle ema

In Apabhramsa complementary clauses after the verba dicendi et sentiendi
(saying, telling, hearing, thinking, knowing) are introduced by the quotative
particle ema (from the OIA adverb evam “thus”). It functions in approximately the
same fashion as its OIA counterpart iti, but it differs from it in being placed
usually before while iti in Sanskrit is placed after the complementary clause:

(6) panaveppinu tena vi vuttu ema

how-with-respcct+GER he+INSTR PRT say+PP QUOT

gaya diyaha jowanu lhasiu deva [Pc 22.2.1]

go+PP days youth whither+PP lord
“Having bowed with respect he said: ‘Lord, [my] days are gone [and my]
youth has whithered’”

The Classical Sanskrit equivalent of (6) would be structured MC (CC iti):

. . . tena uktam gatani dinani. . . iti. It is of interest to note that the 01A pattern
with the quotative particle after the complementary clause survived until NIA (in
Gujarati, Marathi and Sindhi) if the complementary clause is preposed to the main
clause (cf. Masica 1991:402-403). The following example is from Gujarati:

(7) (teno bhal pas thayo em) te bolyo

[Gujarati, Lambert 1971:205]
his brother passed was QUOT he say+PP
“He said that his brother had passed [the examination]”

Gujarati em continues the Apabhramsa particle ema. The particle in both

Apabhramsa and Gujarati may also be embedded in the main clause:

(8) amara vi akampiya ema pajampiya kaho uppari

gods PRT tremble+PP QUOT say+PP who+GEN on

arutthu kharu [Pc 37.7.9]

enraged Khara
“Gods trembled and said [among themselves]: ‘Who is Khara angry with?”’

Example (9) shows the particle em in Gujarati placed internally in the main

(9) tene sm bolyo (ke tsno nano bhai

he+INSTR QUOT say+PP QUOT his younger brother

pas thayo) [Gujarati, Lambert 1971:205]

passed was
“He said that his younger brother had passed [the examination]”

In this case, however, the complementary clause is introduced by the quotative

particle ke (also in Hindi (ki) and Panjabi (ki)) which is ultimately of Persian
origin (ke).

(10) malik ne naukar se kaha (ki turn ghar jao)

[Hindi, Masica 1991:403]
master=ERG servant=ABL ask+PP QUOT you home go+PP
“The master asked the servant (to go home)”

13.4 Relative clauses in Apabhramsa

Relative clauses in Apabhramsa are very much like OIA and NIA relative
clauses in presenting the characteristic relative - correlative construction of the
type “(Which girl we saw), she came from the village” (yd kanya asmabhir drsta:)
sa gramdd dgata (Sanskrit). The relative clause is introduced by a member of the
‘J’-set of relative pronouns (adverbs and conjunctions), and is represented by its
correlative counterpart in the main clause. In NIA languages the relative clause
may occur in one of the three positions: to the left of the main clause, immediately
after its head noun (center-embedded) or to the right of the main clause after its
final verb (cf. Masica 1991:411). In NIA languages these three ‘options’ are
constrained by the distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses: a
non-restrictive clause is placed after the head-noun (or to the right of the main
clause) and requires no correlative, while the restrictive clause is preposed to the
main clause. Both types in Hindi are exemplified in (11):

(11) mujh ko to yah khabar najim ne pahucal thl

(jo aj kal mahal ke pahre par mukarrar hai) [Hindi, Masica 1991:411]
“But Nazim, (who these days has been appointed to the palace watch), gave
me this information”

(Jo koi ae), use yah khabar dijie. [Hindi, McGregor, 1977:83]
“Please tell this to whoever comes”

As mentioned by Masica (1991:413) the latter construction is anomalous in

that it displays a preposed relative pronoun, while the whole relative clause is
preposed to the main clause (Rel SC) Correl MC. The anomalous preposed
subordinators are frequently deleted in Gujarati, Marathi and Dakkhini Hindi (but
not in Gangetic Hindi):

(12) (ap kharlde) so ghar mere ku pasand hai

[Dakkhini Hindi, Masica 1991:413]
you buy+PP that house I+GEN=DAT/ACC pleasing is
“I like the house (you bought)”

Here one can maintain that the correlative pronoun has been reanalyzed as a
clause-final subordinator; contrast Hindi (jo dp khande) so ghar . . . with
Dakkhini Hindi (dp kharide so) ghar . . .
The development of relativization in Dakkhini Hindi will be studied in detail
in the following volume. As far as Apabhramsa is concerned, semantic correlates
of preposing and postposing the relative clause are extremely difficult to study.
All the texts at our disposal are poetic compositions and any statistical accounts
would have to be evaluated with an additional proviso of poetic licence. In their
stead I will concentrate on certain issues comiected with the passive-to-ergative
shift, and etymologies of the relative-correlative pairs of pronouns, conjunctions
and adverbs.

13.5 Subordinate clauses introduced by relative pronouns

Subordinate clauses introduced by relative pronouns function as a modifier of
the head noun or pronoun in the main clause. The latter construction is shown in

jam dinnu saccu taem ti-vara tarn mai

which give+PP truth father+INSTR three-times that I+INSTR

mi dinnu tumha saya-vara [Pc 24.10.5]

PRT give+PP you+GEN hundred-times
“Which truth [my] father gave [you] three times, that [truth] I gave you
hundred times”

As in many other languages, in Apabhramsa it was possible to relativize on

both the subject and the object with the result that the relative and correlative
pronouns might be in a different case as in the Sanskrit construction of the type
yam apasyama sa mama sakhi, lit. whom we saw she is my friend. This is shown
in (14):

(14) so na johu. . . jam vasueu-sarehim na

he not warrior who+ACC Vasudeva-arrow+INSTR/PL not

vimdhau [Rittha 3.6]

pierce +PP

The meaning of (14) is approximately “There was no such a warrior who(m)

Vasudeva did not pierce with [his] arrows”. One can immediately object that in

the ergative interpretation of (14) one could expect the coreferential pronoun to
be in the nominative case (jo), and the agent to be marked with the instrumental
case (yasuee). For the latter reason the passive interpretation might be preferable
“who was not pierced by Vasudeva’s arrows” (taking vasueu-sarehim for a
compound); but the former objection remains, i.e. one would expect the relative
pronoun to be in the nominative. As it stands the sentence is a blend of the
ergative and passive morphology, indicative, one might add, of the overall shift
towards ergative typology at the end of the MIA period.1
The adjectival compounds of the type Tdrsa - tddrsa (OIA) “of what
appearance” - “anysoever” are documented only in sanskritized Apabhramsa texts
(such as Sanatkumdracarita of the 12th c.): erisa -tarisa. Another sanskritic pair
is ettiya - tettiya (< iyant - tavat) “so great, much, little”. In these the relative
member does not begin with j- (but there is also jarisa < yddrsa “of what
appearance, what kind”).
The relative pronoun ja, appearing in the correlative pair ja - ta (from
accusative forms yam - tam “whom” - “that”) was reduced through the grammati-
calization process to the temporal conjunction “when”, as shown in (15):

(15) jam padivakkhu sayalu niddaliu lakkhanenam

when wing whole crush+PP Laksmana+INSTR

gayavarem pattavandhane cadiu

elephant-best+LOC Pattabamdhana climb+PP

takkhanenam [Pc 25.16.1]

“When Laksmana crushed the whole wing [of the enemies’ army], he climbed
on the back of the elephant Pattabandhana”

Special problems arise in the interpretation of those correlative clauses whose

agent occurs in the subordinate clause whose correlative pronoun is the subject of
the intransitive predicate:

(16) tam(=manu) ajja vijjaviu, tuha. . . jam laddhu damsanu

it (mind) today extinguish+PP your which obtain+PP view
“Today it (= the mind) was extinguished which enjoyed your view”
or rather “.. . when it enjoyed your view”

Here one would expect the instrumental jena in the subordinate clause since, if
constructed as the main clause, the ergative construction would have to be used:
mamma (Instr) laddhu tuha damsanu “the mind enjoyed your view” One may
speculate, however, that the correlative pair jam - tarn could also fulfil the
function of the adverbial pair yavat - tavat (Skt) “when” - “then”; cf. 13.6.2.

13.6 Subordinate clauses introduced by relative adverbs

Adverbial clauses of place, time and manner are realized as relative clauses
introduced by a number of adverbs. As in the case of relative pronouns (13.5),
these adverbs begin with j- (< OIA y-), and their main clauses arc usually
introduced by a corresponding correlative adverb beginning with t- (< OIA t-).
Some of the commonest relative-correlative pairs of Apabhramsa, together with
their ancestral Prakrit and Sanskrit forms, are given in Tables 13.1-13.3.

13.6.1 Adverbial clauses o f place

Relative-correlative pairs of adverbs of place are displayed in Table 13.1.
In Apabhramsa texts a number of Prakrit relative-correlative adverbs are
encountered: jattha/jattu/jetthu - tattha/tattu/tetthu (also taththi in Avahattha (N.
Kumar’s dictionary (1987:507)). In NIA languages the correlative form begins
with v- (contrast Ap jaha - taha with H jaha - vahd). In Apabhramsa texts the
relative-correlative pairs do not always ‘rhyme’, as shown in (17):

(17) jetthu atthi tahim atthi bhanevau [Pc 35.7.2]

where is there is say+GERVE
“One has to say that he is there, where he is”

Another later form of OIA yatra is ittha (in SR, Jc and Prakrta paingala). The
two-fold outcome of yatra {jattha or ittha) may be compared with the twofold
outcome of the adverb of manner: yatha > jaha or jiha (cf. 13.6.3).

13.6.2 Adverbial clauses o f time

Relative-correlative pairs of adverbs of time are given in Table 13.2.
The first pair may also express the contrast, which in English is typically
realized by the adversative conjunctions “while” or “whereas”:

(18) ja pahanu na pavai mukkau, ta karina

when stone not hit+3/SG throw+PP then elephant+INSTR

T a b le 13.3: The relative-correlative pairs o f adverbs o f manner

(23) kuvvara-nahena kiu mancarohanu javehim

Nalakubara-lord+INSTR make+PP stage-ascent in which manner

suru va candena lakkhijjai lakkhanu

sun+PRT like moon+INSTR see+PASS+3/SG Laksmana

tavehim [Pc 26.7.9j

in that manner
“In which manner the lord Nalakubara climbed on the platform, in that
manner the moon looks at the sun”5

The later forms in SR (13th c),jima - tima “as, like” - “so” (cf. Gu jem - tern),
cannot be traced back directly to OIA yathd - tatha; they appear to be contami­
nated with their temporal counterparts jama - tama (and/or the particle emateva)
whose -m- is justifiable phonologically (cf. Endnote 3 to Chapter 4 ).


1. Devendra Kumar in his edition o f Ritthanemicariu (1985:29) interprets (1 4) as the passive

relative clause:

(1 4) vaha aisa ek bhi yoddha . . . nahl tha . . . . . . .

(jo vasudev ke tiro se chinn-bhinn na hua ho)

2. The pair jata - tata “ as many/much as” - “ so many/'much” (corresponding to Hindi jitna -
utna) is documented in Prakrta paingala.345

3. In Shahidullah’s translation: “ En attendant que 1’epouse plonge dans la maison, peut-on jouir
des cinq couleurs (objets des sens)?”

4. The accusative form devaim “ D evaki” is puzzling.

5. Devendra K um ar’ s Hindi translation is too free:

Jaise hi kubaranathne mamcpar arohan kiya, vaise hi usne laksmanko usl prakar deklia,
jis prakar candramake dvara surya dekha jata hai (Devendra Kumar)
“ Nalakubara having climbed on the platform looked at Laksmana in the same fashion
as the moon looks at the sun”


14.1 Grammatical change in Indo-Aryan languages during the Medieval period

(6th - 12th century A.D.)
The purpose of this monograph was to close the lacuna in our knowledge of
the nature and pace of grammatical change in the history of Indo-Aryan languages
during their Medieval period (so called Late Middle Indo-Aryan, ca. 6th - 12th c.)
Generally speaking, the history of Late MIA in the pre-Islamic centuries is
essentially that of a slow erosion of OIA morphology and remodelling of OIA
syntax. These changes fundamentally altered the synthetic typology of the earlier
OIA and MIA morphosyntax in the direction of the NLA analytic type.
In Chapter Five, we saw that Apabhramsa reduced the earlier system of eight
fusional cases in OIA to four and ended up with only one form for the earlier Nom
vs. Acc, Instr vs. Loc, and Abl vs. Gen. Apabhramsa compensated for this loss by
the formation of new analytic postpositional cases.
Starting from the Sanskrit synthetic locative grh+e “in the house” we reach
Apabhramsa which forms the inessive case by combining “house” in the genitive
with the adverb majjhe, i.e. ghar+aho majjh+e. The latter form goes back to the
Sanskrit synthetic locative madhy+e “in the middle”. At the end of this process,
in Hindi ghar-m e, this adverb was reduced to the postposition me.
The other postpositional cases of Hindi have a similar history. The adessive
and allative started as compounds, such as pati-parsv+e “at the side of the
husband”, and ended up as pai-pasi, with parsv+e reduced to the postposition
pas. Its nominal origin is still perceivable in the Hindi genitival construction,
ghar=ke=pas lit. at the side of the house —►(later) “at the house”.
In Chapter Six, I argued that the main event in the development and
restructuring of the pronominal systems of Ardha-MagadhI, Apabhramsa, and
early NIA languages was the appearance of a typologically rare double-oblique
system (known synchronically from Pashto and Kurdish, cf. Bubenik 1989b): the
same oblique pronominal form of the 1st and 2nd Pers Sg encodes the subject
(agent) in ergative tenses and the object in non-ergative tenses. Thus, in Western
Apabhramsa, mai “me” and p a i (or taT) “you” were both Instr and Acc. This
system co-existed with another bipartite system found in the plural forms. The

latter system, in common with the nominal ergative type, was based on the
opposition absolutive-ergative: amhe (Nom/Acc) - amhehi (Instr) “us” vs. hau
(Abs) - mai (Acc/Instr) “me”.
The first indications of the disintegration of the double-oblique system came
from the Deccan texts (Kanakamara’s Karakandacariu of the 10th/ 11th c.). The
state of affairs in Addahamana’s Samdesa Rasaka (12th/l 3th c.) made me believe
that the double-oblique system very likely did not exist in some dialects (or
idiolects). In Old Gujarati the double oblique system survived Hemacandra by at
least one century to judge by certain Jain poems written in 1301/1302. In the same
geographical area of Western India the earliest pieces of evidence for the break
with this system are found in Mugdhdvabodhamauktika (1394) and certain 14th c.
texts in Old Western Rajasthani. In the geographical area of Western Hindi these
matters, as recoverable from the Prithviraj raso, are in the state o f flux. The
double oblique system was lost in the 1st and 2nd Pers Sg as there are new
accusative forms, but it appeared, surprisingly, in the 3rd Pers (the form tihi).
These matters will be taken up in great detail in the second volume of this
As we saw in Chapter Seven, the aspectual system of Apabhramsa was
completely rebuilt as a consequence of the loss of the MIA forms expressing the
past tense (such as the Pali and Ardha-MagadhI preterit, which resulted from the
merger of the OIA aorist and perfect). The progressive aspect made its appear­
ance, which, very much like its English namesake, allows for the contrast such as
bhammai “he roams (habitually)” vs. bhammantu acchai “he is roaming
(presently)”. Its past tense counterpart could be formed by adding the PP of “to
be”, acchiu, or the PP of “to stand”, thiu, to the present participle of the main
verb. (The former strategy anticipates Bengali chi and the latter Hindi tha).
In the quasinominal forms there appeared a new imperfective passive
participle, kijjanta “being made”, formed ‘paradoxically’ by attaching the active
suffix -anta to the passive stem kijj-. Expressions for the perfect (retrospective
aspect) were systematized by the end of the MIA period by combining the PP with
the copula {kiu acchai “has done” and kiu asi “had done”) or with the PP of tha
“stand” (only the pluperfect kiu thiu “had done” is documented).
We also witnessed the evolution of the system of lexical aspect (Aktionsart)
as familiar from the NLA languages. Certain verbs, such as lag(g)- “be attached”,
ja - “go”, de- “give”, le- “take”, were increasingly used in collocation with
infhutival/gerundial forms o f other verbs; their lexical context was ‘bleached’ and
they started functioning as Aktionsart auxiliaries. Thus the notion o f inception is
realized by combining the infinitive or gerund(ive) with lag(g)-, e.g. Ap kah-ahu

0 indicates 'ordinary’ genetic transmission o f a spoken language

ii) indicates ‘ elevation’ to the literary status o f a spoken variety

m) indicates learnt transmission o f the spoken/written language

it indicates mutual influence (‘ high’ —► ‘ low’ , ‘ low’ —> ‘ high’)

v) t indicates use o f regionalisms (spoken language influencing written language)

Early wMiddle Late


Verb: loss o f the old finite tenses -» passive-to-ergative shift

Noun: erosion o f the old declensional system —¥ postpositional case

F ig u re 14.1: Sociolinguistic aspects o f the history o f Indo-Atyan languages

finally the vertical arrow in (v) indicates the use of regionalisms (i.e. the influence
from spoken into written language).

14.3 A contribution o f the present monograph to general historical linguistics

The morphological realization of semantico-syntactic functions (in FG
terminology) or the ‘alignment’ of case marking with syntactic characteristics (cf.
most recently Harris & Campbell 1995:240) is currently one of the ‘hot’ issues in

historical syntax. My findings should be of considerable interest to historical

syntacticians for two reasons: (i) the existence of the typoiogically rare double­
oblique system in Apabhramsa pronouns, and (ii) an opportunity to study the
passive-to-ergative reanalysis in progress.

i) The three ‘classical’ alignment types (ergative, active-inactive and

nominative-accusative) were recognized as far back as 1917 by Sapir. The less
common active-inactive type (in Caucasian languages, e.g. Laz) is defined as
an alignment in which the agent (A) is identical with the subject (S) of an
active intransitive, and the subject of an inactive intransitive with the direct
object (O). Even less common is the double-oblique type, found in certain
Pamir languages (Payne 1980), Kashmiri and Pashto (Bubenik 1989b). It was
shown in Chapter Six (6.1) that this type made its appearance during the
Middle Indo-Aryan period (in Ardha-MagadhI, Apabhramsa and Old Gujarati)
in the pronominal subsystem of the 1st and 2nd Pers Sg. The double-oblique
type aligns ‘counterintuitively’ the agent and the object (in non-ergative
tenses), on the one hand, and the subject and the object (in ergative tenses), on
the other hand. Unlike in the accusative and ergative types, one has to make
provision for the double treatment of the subject in the active type, and the
double treatment of the object in the double-oblique type. This is shown
graphically in Figure 14.2.
We saw in 6.1 that both Iranian and Indie languages passed through the
stage with the bottom portion of the double-oblique alignment, i.e. the same
pronominal form functioning as both the A and [-ergative] O, called ‘anti-
absolutive’. For instance, in Ardha-MagadhI the 1st Pers Sg pronominal clitic
me “me” functioned as the subject of the transitive predicate in the past
suya=me “I heard [it]” and the object in the present (= non-ergative object)
suneha-m e “hear me”.

Active type Double-oblique type

(Kartvelian) (Roshani, Pashto, Kashmiri)-

Figure 14.2: The active and double-oblique alignment o f semantico-syntactic properties


The Apabhramsa examples (from Kalidasa’s VikramorvasTya 4.45) are here

repeated in (1).

(1) hau pal pucchimi . . . ditthl pia pai samuha jantl (cf. 6.1.1, Example 3)
“I ask you . .. have you seen [my] beloved, while passing in front [of you]?”

Only in Middle Persian there is some evidence for the ‘superabsolutive’

patterning (i.e. the same pronominal form expressing the subject and the
object in the ergative tenses) anticipating the double-oblique system of Pashto.
For instance, in Arda Wiraz Namag the 1st Pers Sg form ham “I am” may
encode the object in the past (cf. Bubenik 1989b:207):

(2) ud nek bud ham u-t nektar kard ham

(Middle Persian)
and good be+PP be+l/SG and=you better make+PP be+l/SG
“and I was good and you made me better”

It will be observed that ham in the first clause expresses the (non-ergative)
subject, but ham in the second clause realizes the ergative object. The ergative
subject in the second clause is encoded by the pronominal clitic =t “you”
which is attached to the conjunction u “and” in accordance with
Wackemagel’s Law (cf. Bubenik 1994a). The category of the
‘superabsolutive’ in its initial Middle Persian stage shows nicely that the
ergative construction is actually an activated passive construction, i.e. u-t
nektar kard ham meant originally “and I have been made better by you” and
only later on “and you made me better”. Similarly, in Pashto the ergative
object expressed by the direct form was originally the subject in the posses­
sive construction; furthermore, the present-day agreement marker with the
ergative object is a recategorized clitic form of the copula, as shown in (3).

(3) Z9 ye vulid-am cf. za yam “I am” (Pashto)

I=his seen=am
“He saw me”

A propos the actuation problem, a number of scenarios for the passive-to-

ergative reanalysis were proposed. Their common denominator is the
typological ‘straddling’ over millennia in that the synchronic state of affairs
in NIA languages is ‘explained’ from the earliest recorded stage

(Vedic/Classical Sanskrit). The three main theories/hypotheses regarding the

origin of the ergative construction in NIA languages are the following:

i. passive-to-ergative reanalysis (Anderson 1977, Comrie 1978, Dik 1980);

ii. the ergative hypothesis, i.e. that the ‘passive’ construction of OIA was
already ergative (Klaiman 1978, Wallace 1982);
iii. a compromise stance in that neither of the preceding is fully adequate
(Hock 1986).

All the above pay due attention to typological matters and historical evidence of
OIA as a starting point but they tend to skip over the cmcial Middle IA period (4th
c. B.C. - 12th c. A.D.). In this intermediate period between OIA (of nominative-
accusative typology) and NIA (of ergative-absolutive typology) one would expect
to see the matters in statu nascendi. And, indeed, we saw in Chapters Eight and
Nine that the MIA texts offer a unique opportunity for the study of the actuation
problem of the passive-to-ergative reanalysis. I argued that the MIA ergative
construction could be distinguished from its passive counterpart on pragmatico-
syntactic grounds but not morphologically (only at the end of the evolution, in
NIA languages, is this distinction fully anchored in the morphology). It was
shown that the constructions containing the PP forms could be interpreted either
passively (in true agentless passive constructions; in instances when an inanimate
NP could not function as the ergative case; when the agent appeared in the marked
postverbal position; and when the authors wanted to avoid subject switching vis-
a-vis the gerundial clause) or ergatively (in other contexts).
In addition, several syntactic problems regarding the conjoining o f non-fmite
(gerundial) and finite predicates, and that of intransitive and transitive predicates
in MIA were elucidated: in the non-finite past tense involving the PP the agent of
the relative transitive clause may be marked with the absolutive case if the main
intransitive clause is introduced by the correlative pronoun; the agent marked with
the instrumental case typically co-indexes the coreferential subject of the
intransitive predicate, but also, less commonly, the subject marked with the
absolutive may co-index the coreferential agent of the transitive predicate. In
Chapter Ten the peculiar problems involving the ergative vs. passive interpreta­
tion of the PP form of causative predicates were dealt with. It appeared that the
subject function could be assigned either to the agent or the patient as in Classical
Sanskrit, which was of nominative-accusative typology.
Most theory-driven approaches to the study of ergativity will have difficulty
with an inherently ‘untidy’ state of affairs as presented by the primary evidence

of MIA literary documents. We saw in Chapter Two (summarized in 14.2) that

MIA authors were commonly ‘diglossic’ or even ‘triglossic’, and could move
‘freely’ between the vertical extremes of the nominative-accusative Sanskrit and
the ergative-absolutive Apabhramsa (with several mixed alignments in pronomi­
nal morphology, cf. 6.1.1).
More specifically, against the prediction of Functional Grammar that the
linguistic stage between the unmarked passive and the ergative should be a
language without passive (Dik 1980, 1989), Apabhramsa shows an increase in
passive morphology vis-a-vis the older stages of MIA (the passive infinitive in
-ijj-iu, the passive participle in -ijj-anta competing with the older -ijj-amdna).
There is more than a theoretical controversy whether the passive constructions
containing the past participle (ta- or na- forms) are appropriately categorized as
passive or whether we are dealing with an emerging ergative construction (passive
and ergative are alike in that both involve assignment of some subject properties
to the patient, but differ in greater integration of the agent phrase into the syntax
of the clause in the case of the ergative construction, cf. Comrie 1988). An
increase in ergativity came as a consequence of the appearance of the absolutive
case, since henceforward the same nominal/pronominal form could be used as
both an intransitive subject and transitive object. However, before the systemati­
zation of the analytic passive morphology and the appearance of a distinct ergative
postposition the construction with the past participle could be evaluated as either
passive or ergative in accordance with principles of Functional Sentence
Perspective. Extra complications arise with the pronominal agents which may be
realized by the Instr or by the uniform clitic form (Instr/Gen/Acc).
Another problem for Functional Grammar in the Indo-Iranian family of
languages is its ‘perspectival’ approach to syntactic functions (in 1.4,1 adopted
Dik’s 1989 approach to subject and object, in that the subject is taken to represent
the ‘primary’ and the object the ‘secondary perspective’ for the interpretation of
the predication). This may be shown on a limited set of data from Modem Indo-
Iranian languages such as Hindi, Nepali and Pashto. The latter language displays
agreement in person with the pronominal patients (goals) in the ergative
construction in exactly the same fashion as in the passive construction. Consider
the passive and ergative constructions in Pashto with the patient in the 1st Pers:

(4) za wuwahal(ay) ked+sm Vpass (X2)TopGoSubj (Pashto)

I hit became DIR
“I was hit”

14.4 Epilogue
The second volume of this monograph, entitled A Historical Syntax o f Early
New Indo-Aryan Languages, will be organized in a parallel fashion. It will contain
chapters on nominal and pronominal systems, grammatical and lexical aspect,
passivization, ergativity, causativization, mood and modality, complementation
and subordination.
It will be based on a linguistic analysis of the literary works in emerging New
Indo-Aryan languages spanning the period of the 11th - 16th centuries: Old Braj
(Gorakhnath, Chand Bardal), Old Gujarati, and Rajasthani poetry, Old Khan Boll
(Amir Khusrau), Old Dakkhini prose and poetry, Old Avadhi (Maulana Daud),
Old Baisvari (Tulsidas), Old Maithili (Vidyapati) and Old Marathi (Jnanesvari and

Cowell, E. B. 1868. The Prakrita-Prakasa: or The Prakrit Grammar ofVararuchi

with the Commentary (Manorama) o f Bhamaha. London: Trtibner.
Emeneau, Murray B. 1934/1967. Jambhaladatta’s Version o f the
Vetalapancavimsati. New York: Kraus.
Fausboll, V. 1877-1896. The Jataka together with its Commentary. London:
Feer, Leon. 1960. Samyutta Nikaya. London: Pali Text Society.
Ghosha, Chandra Mohana. 1900. Prdkrita-Paingalam. Calcutta: Asiatic Society.
Jacobi, Hermann. 1880. “Kalakacarya-caritam”. Zeitschrift der deutschen
morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 34.247-318.
___ 1882. The Ayaramga Sutta o f the Svetdmbara Jains. London: Pali Text
___ 1886/1967. Ausgewahlte Erzahlungen in Mahdrastri. Leipzig: Hirzel. (1967
ed., Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.)
___ 1918. Bhavisatta Kaha von Dhanavala. Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der
----- 1921. Sanatkumaracaritam ein Abschnitt aus Haribhadras
Neminathacaritam. Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
___ 1962. Acarya Vimalasuri’s Paumacariyam. (= Prakrit Text Society Series,
6.) Varanasi: Prakrit Text Society. (2nd ed. revised by Muni Punyavijayaji;
translated into Hindi by Shantilal M. Vora.)
Jain, Banarsi Das. 1923. Ardha Magadhi Reader. Lahore: Panjab University
Oriental Publications.
Jain, Devendra Kumar. 1958. Paumchriu o f Kavirdja Svayambhudeva. Kashi:
Bharatiya Jnanapltha.
___ 1985. Kavirdja Svayambhudeva’s Ritthanemi-cariu (Arishtanemi-charita).
Kashi: Bharatiya Jnanapltha.
Jain, HIralal. L. 1932. Savayadhammadohd o f Devasena. Karanja, Berar: Jaina
Publication Society.
___ 1933. Muni Ramasimha viracita Pahudadohd. Karanja, Berar: Jaina
Publication Society.
___ 1934. Kanakdmara’s Karakandacariu. Karanja, Berar: Jaina Publication
Jain, Vimal Prakash. 1968. Jambusami Cariu o f Virakavi. Kashi: Bharatiya
Sri Jina, Vijaya Muni. 1945. The Samdesa Rasaka o f Abdul Rahman. Bombay:
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
Kale, M. R. 1911/1976. Mudrarakshasa. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Bender, Ernest. 1969. “Middle Indo-Aryan”. Current Trends in Linguistics ed. by

Thomas E. Sebeok, vol. 5, 46-54. The Hague: Mouton.
Berger, Hermann, ed. 1974. Miindliche Uberlieferungen in Siidasien. Fiinf
Beitrage. Wiesbaden: Steiner.
Bhandarkar, R. G. 1929. Collected Works ed. by Narayan B. Utgikar. Poona;
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Bhatt, Bansidhar. 1978/1991. The Canonical Niksepa. Studies in Jaina Dialectics.
Delhi: Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan.
Bhayani, Harivallabh C. 1943. “Apabhramsa Gleanings”. Bharatiya Vidya
___ 1945a. “Two Apabhramsa Citations”. Bharatiya Vidya 6:1.13-15.
___ 1945b. “Endingless Genitive in Apabhramsa”. Bharatiya Vidya 6:5.103-104.
___ 1947. “Language of Gujarat from Earliest Times to c. 1300 A.D.”. Bharatiya
Vidya 8.289-318. (New Series.)
___ 1951. “Some Interesting Features of the Prakrit of the Nanapancamlkaha”.
Bharatiya Vidya 12.153-162.
___ 1957. “Apabhramsa and Old Gujarati Studies”. Bharatiya Vidya
___ 1958a. “Chaturmukha, one of the Earliest Apabhramsa Epic Poets”. Journal
o f the Oriental Institute, Baroda 7:3.214-224.
___ 1958b. “Apabhramsa and Old Gujarati Studies” Bharatiya Vidya
___ 1959. “Analogical Replacement in MIA Past Passive Participle Bases:
Replacive -gga-, -dha- and a Few Others”. Bharatiya Vidya 19:1-4.111-115.
___ 1962. “Studies in Hemachandra’s Deslnamamala”. Bharatiya Vidya
___ 1963. “Apabhramsa Uvittha- ‘lost taste’, ‘become insipid” ’. Journal o f the
Oriental Institute, Baroda 13:1.17-20.
___ 1965. “The Narrative of Rama in the Jain Tradition”. Bharatiya Vidya
___ 1971. “Jambusami-cariya of Vlra”. Journal o f the Oriental Institute, Baroda
___ 1988. Studies in desya Prakrit. Ahmedabad: Kalikala nidhi.
----- 1989. Apabhramsa Language and Literature. Delhi: B. L. Institute of
Bloch, Jules. 1919. La formation de la langue marathe. Paris: Champion.
___ 1933. L ’indo-aryen du veda au temps moderne. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve.
(English translation by A. Master, Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1965.)

Bhamaha, 33 Panini, 78, 137,162, 189, 199

Dandin, 23, 28. 57 Pantaniali. 27. 78. 162
Hemacandra, 21, 22, 28, *34-47, 52, Purusottama, 34^ *44—47
53, 60. 70-79. 88. 90. 91. 94. 95. Ramasarman, 34
91 J& J 3 SL2 1 & Ramatarkavaglsa, 28
Kramadlsvara, 27, 28, 29, 34, *44-^47, Trivikramadeva, 34
53,94,96 Vararuci, *33-34. 35
Markandeya, 28, 29, M

Alsdorf, 22* 27*29, 58, 60* 61*. 64* 34* Ghatage, 183. 191
96* 186 Ghosal, 66
Andersen, 2* 138. 140, 159 Givon, 129
Anderson, 133, 136,226 Goldman, 199
Grierson, 22* 99, 137
Banerjee, 34, 44. 46, 47
Baumann, 98* 99* 100, 102 Harris, 223
Beames, 136 Heine, 62
Bender, 1. 98. 99 Hendriksen, 1
Bhayani, 28* 23* 30, 56. 59*62*63* 117, Hewson, 104, 186
186 Hiniiber, 2
Bloch, L 2* 146 Hock, 4* 126, 137.219. 226
Breunis, 2 Hoemle, 126
Browning, 18
Bubenik, 2* 2* 4, 10, 12, 17,26* 26,26, Insler, 69
22* 26* 49* 65* 22* S3* 113*
122* 147, 148, 186,189, 196, 217, Jacobi, 26,28, 54. 59, 61, 101, 186
219,222, 224, 225 Jain, Devendra Kumar, 66, 114, 132,
Bynon, 89 216
Jain, Hlralal, 66* 62* 59
Campbell, 222 Jakobson, 197
Cardona, 127 Jamison, 122
Chatterji, 1,3,4, 50, 136,219 Jinavijaya, 62
Comrie, 155, 226, 227
Cowell, 22 Karmarkar, 56
Khubchandani, 15
Danes, 6 Klaiman, 136, 226
Dave, 160* 162 Kortman, 68
Kumar, 70, 212

Dixon, 155 Lambert, 208

Lienhard, 20,22, 23
Ferguson, 16 Lyons, 184

Geiger, 12 Masica,2* 208, 209


McGregor, 10, 12^ 113. 209 Simha, £, 3

Miltner, 3 Singh, 2, 111, 114, 117
Modi, 52 Srivastav, 3
Stump, 4, 141, 219
Nitti-Dolci, 46 Sutherland, 199

Paranjape, 2, 49*. 88 Tagare, 28* 50* 54* 55* 56* 58* 59* 72,
Payne, 82,224 73,95, 186
Pischel, 26*48* 140, 196 Tessitori, 71, 99, 100, 101
Pray, 133, 136 Thapar, 20
Tikkanen, 157
Rocher, 20 Tivari, 3
Traugott, 67
Sachau, 16 Turner, 54
Saksena, 145
Sapir, 224 Upadhye, 56
Scharfe, 22*24* 44, 95
Schmalstieg, 159 Vaidya, 35* 48* 58* 87
Schokker, 134, 144 Verma, 3
Schwarzschild, 79 Vyas. 34, 48,79. 87.91
Sen, 1,2, 140
Sgall, 6, 7 Wallace, 226
Shahidullah, 511 51,64.216 Warder, 108* 139
Shriyan, 59
Siewierska, 6 Yar-Shater, 160
Simha, N, 3

A vasyaka-Erzahlungen He [8.4.355], 70, 73

Av[IX], 181 He [8.4.359], 74
Av [32.19], 106 He [8.4.361], 74
Av [43.22], 159 He [8.4.365], 42
He [8.4.366.1], 50
Ayarangasutta He [8.4.370], 00
Ayar [I.l.l.l], 141 He [8.4.370.4], 11
Ayar [], 59 He [8.4.373], 72, 75
Ayar [], 89 He [8.4.377], 91
He [8.4.379], 25
Bhavisattakaha He [8.4.380 and 379.2], 71
Bk [21.9], 115 He [8.4.422.15], 76
Bk [74.2], 107 He [8.4.425], 78
Bk [164.9], lUfi He [8.4.425.1], IQ
Bk [201.7], 56 He [8.4.439], 67, 72
Bk [269.9], 109
H arivam sapurana
N em inathacatuspadika Hv [81.5.11], 164
BN [9], 98 Hv [81.6.12], 94
BN [17], 99, 100 Hv [81.7.9], 122
Hv [81.10.10], 107
Salibhadda-kakka-kulam Hv [81.11.6], 94
BS [511, 98 Hv [81.16.31, 93, 150
Hv [81.16.5], 150
D Igha-Nikaya Hv [82.8.14], 127
D [I. 164.5], 108 Hv [82.10.13], 167
D [11.143], 126 Hv [82.12.1], 167
D [ Hv [82.12.5], 163
Hv [82.17.10], 120
D asakum aracarita Hv [82.17.10], 188
Dasa [125.5-6], 158 Hv [83.6.6-7], 158
Hv [83.7.3], 150
Hemacandra Hv [83.11.7], 213
He [8.4.333], 25 Hv [83.16.11-12], 155
He [8.4.342], 25 Hv [83.23.7], 93

H v [86.10.81, -S3 Kp [46.4-51, ITT

Hv [88.21.2], 73 Kp [47.81, 123
Hv [91.18.5], 73 Kp [48.2-3], 110
Kp [49.9], 79
Jataka Kp [66.2], 83
JaCo ril. 31.18], 107 Kp [72.1], 82
JaCo [III. 102.16], iQS Kp '95.8-91, 110
Kp [100.1], 56
Jasaharacariu Kp '100.21,165
Jc [4.17.2], 105 Kp '101.1], 81

Jambusamicariu Mahabharata
JSC [11.9.8], £6 Mbh [1.2.14], 137
Mbh [3.50.4], 137
Kal [7], JLQD Mahdbhasya
Mbhsy [1.1.11 21
Kapha’s Dohakosa Mbhsy [11.3.131, IS
Kanha [6.1], 51
Kanha [22,2], 51 Miyaputte darae
Kanha [28], 213 Miyaputtc [201, £5

Karpuramanjari Mokkhamagge
Karp [3.22], 124 Mokkha [4.6], £5

Karakandacariu Mahapurana
Kc [1.13.4], 202 MP [14.10.31,113
Kc [1.13.61,52
Kc [2.5.3], 154 Mrcchakatika
Kc [3.10.6],57 Mrcch [5.11.1-2], 178
Kc [3.11.9], 57 Mrcch [28.141, 106
Kc [5.1.1], 165 Mrcch [36.181,166
Kc [5.11.3], 195
Kc [6.12.1], 148 Mudraraksasa
Mudr [1.13.3-41, 177
The Inscription of Kakkuka Mudr [1.14.4-51, 168
KI [22], 143, 181 Mudr [1.15.16-18], 172
Mudr [1.20.22-23],174
Kumarapalapratibodha Mudr [1.20.35-37], 154
Kp J. [3 (1-2)], £5 Mudr [1.22.12], 154
Kp [40.1-31, 204 Mudr [1,22.24-251, 178
Kp [45.31, HQ Mudr [2.15.66-67], 150

Mudr [2.18.7], 169 Pc [6.1.7], 128

Mudr [2.18.10], 176 Pc [6.7.1], 166_
Mudr [3.24.40-42], 177 Pc [7.12.1], 121
Mudr [4.8.11-12], 173 Pc [7.12.6], 122
Mudr [4.8.20-21], 172 Pc [8.2.8], 16L
Mudr [4.10.7-8], 178 Pc [9.2.8], 84_
Mudr [5.1.3-4], 115 Pc [9.8.9], 1119-
Mudr [5.2.31-32], 177 Pc [10.1.8], 112
Mudr [5.3.6], 175 Pc IT2.2.5], LL4_
Mudr [5.5.11], 173 Pc [12.2.6], 83
Mudr [5.5.41—42], 169 Pc [13.2.6], 81
Mudr [5.9.53], 171 Pc [14.7.9], 81
Mudr [5.9.55-56], 173- Pc [19.17.5], 113, 125
Mudr [5.9.63-64], 172 Pc [21.6.4],202
Mudr [5.13.38], 173 Pc [21.7.81. U3
Mudr [6.3.30-31], L69_ Pc [21.8.1]. 205
Mudr [6.17.21], 171 Pc [21.14.71,202
Mudr [6.21.14], 170- Pc [
Mudr [7.3.65-66], 111 Pc [22.10.2], 194
Mudr [7.4.5-6], 170- Pc [22.12.3], 144-
Mudr [7.5.12], 193- Pc [23.3.41. 119
Mudr [7.8.6-7], L25_ Pc [
Pc [24.10,5], 240
Mugdhavabodhamauktika Pc [25.4,9], UL5_
Mug, 99, 100 P c-[2-5t6-]7152
P c [25.6.1], 119
Paumacariu Pc [25.9,8], 154
Pc, 43, 164,19X202 Pc [25.10.11,201
Pc [1.2.1-4], 52_ Pc [25.16.1], 244-
Pc [1.2.7], ULX Pc [25.19.3], 127
Pc [1.3.12], L65_ Pc [25.19.2], 128
Pc [1.11.1], 119 Pc [26.3.2]. 1-94—
Pc [1.16.1], 119 Pc [26.3.41. 166-
Pc [2.13.9], 124 Pe-f-2^T-7^]7-2-T5
Pc [2.15.1], 144
Pc [3.8.10], 44L Pc [-2-773t9]782
Pc [4.4.2], 44L Pct-2-77-E2r-2-]r B 3-
Pc [4.4.3], 82 T*t [-28t3t-2]7 H 7-
Pc [4.12.4], 119 Pc [28.10.1 ]7E6^
Pc [4.14.2], 44- -Perf29r5T3]7-P8-77-204
Pc [5.14.5-6], 204 Pc-[30:27l3]7206
Pc [5.16.4], 25_ P c-[-30t5tF]7E56-

Pc [30.11.7], 165 Ritthanem icariu

Pc [31.7.6 -7],. 154 Rittha [1.4.1], 203
Pc [31.8.2]. 153 Rittha [1.4.5], 204
£c_PUJL21, 206 Rittha [1.7.7], 81
Pc [32.2.7]. 152 Rittha [1.9], 164
Pc [35.3.9], 153 Rittha [2.9.7], 43
Pc [35.7.2], 212 Rittha [2.9.8], 43,44
Pc [35.12.2], 125 Rittha [3.1], 163
Pc [36A6-], 102 Rittha [3.1.1], 163
2c4MSJQ, 113 Rittha [3.2.1], 39
Pc [36.11.8], 112 Rittha [3.2.4], 38
Pc 13X5-81, 206 Rittha [3.4.5], 129
£c-[3X6J4, 152 Rittha [3.6], 210
Pc 137-1-91, 208 Rittha [3.7.4], 126
■RC4-3&-1-9X1, 109 Rittha [3.10], 38
U2 Rittha [4.3.5], 121
Pc [39.4.9], 109 Rittha [4.7.8], 82
Pc [46.2.4], 112 Rittha [4.8], 122
Pc [46A-9], 84 Rittha [4.13.1], 122
jPe4494^j-, 115 Rittha [4.13.6], 128
Pc [52.2.1], 84 Rittha [5.1.6], 153
Pc [58.3.9], 115 Rittha [5.3.4], 120
Rittha [5.8], 129
Pahudadoha Rittha [5.11.1], 166
Pd [417.2], 109 Rittha [6.1.7], 121
Ed-1421, LU Rittha [6.4.1], 207
Pd [531S5 Rittha [6.5.3], 201
Rittha [6.5.6], 126
Asoka’s edicts Rittha [6.12.4-5], 214
PE [VI E], 139 Rittha [6.13.6], 203
PE [11 F], 139 Rittha [6.13.7], 214
Rittha [6.14], 124
Pautnasiricariu Rittha [7.11.6], 182
PSC [2.183], 85 Rittha [7.12.6], 82
Rittha [7.2], 83
Asoka’s edicts Rittha [7.3], 206
RE [I A], 138 Rittha [7.9.1], 205
RE [XIII A], 139
RE [I E], 138 Rig- Veda
RE [III B], 139 R V [i.7 5 .4 ], 19 0

RV [i. 113.11], 191 Sc [707.5]. SO

RV fvii.22.71, 190 Sc [724.4]. 124
Sc [740.4.5], 93
Samyutta Nikdya Sc [741.4], 203
S [IV.60.15],106 Sc [743.9]. 202
Sc [755.1-5], 149
Sak [3.6.1-2], 152 Savayadhammadohd
Sak r 14.121, 140 Sd [5], S6
Sd [132], 73
Saraha’s Dohakosa
Saraha [41], 214 Samdesa Rasaka
Saraha [921,12 SR [21a], 62
Saraha [951, 52 SR [431, S4
SR [70a], 63
Sattasai SR [75b], 57
Satta T1791, 69 SR [86a], 63, 98
SR [99], S4
Satapatha-Brdhmana SR [1751, S5
$B, 137 SR [197a], 52
SR [197b], 52
Sc [468.3], 203 Vararuci
Sc [468.3-4], 203 Vararuci [VI. 501,24
Sc [509.2], 122
Sc [515.4-5], 149 Vetalapancavimsati
Sc [566.4-8], 156 Vetala [92.17], 1S2
Sc [581.1-2], 127
Sc [604.3], 165 VikramorvasTya
Sc [628.5-7], 149 Vikr [3.9.7-8], 185
Sc [629.1-5], 130 Vikr [4.45], 56, 90,53
Sc [631.8], 126
Sc [635.2-7], 191 New Indo-Aryan Languages
Sc [637.8-9], 83
Sc [661.4], 148 Dakkhini Hindi [Masica 1991:413], 209
Sc [661.8], 122
Sc [672.1-9], 130 Gujarati [Lambert 1971:205], 208
Sc [672.6-7], 55
Sc [693.2], SO Hindi [Masica 1991:403], 209
Sc [694.8], 81 [Masica 1991:411], 209
Sc [707.1], 56 [McGregor, 1977:83], 209

Abhlra, 28 Digambara Apabhramsa, *29-30

Ahlrani, 28 Dravidian, 29
Ahlrwati, 28 Eastern Apabhramsa, 5, *50-55, 94.
Ancient Greek, 22* 96, 137, 159, 197. 145.220, 221 ‘
199, 221, 222 Eastern Hindi, 22* 24* 193* 214
Apabhramsa, 2-4, 13*. 16, 18-19. 20. Eastern Magadhan, 141
Eastern Prakrits, 146, 147
43, 62, 69, 83, 92, 96, 97, 150, 189, English, 8, 9, 10, 28* 136, 177, 184,
190, 193,202,212,218 187,212,218
Arabic, 15, 59 Eshtehardi, 160
Ardha-MagadhT, 3, 18. 22. 25. *26. 31. European Romani, 22* 64
22* 65, 66* 72, 29* £9* 90* 96, 140,
141, 142, 189* 191,217,218,224 French, 68
Assamese, 54* 144
Attic, 17 Gangetic Hindi, 209
Attic-Ionic, 18 Gaud!, 42
Avahattha, 212 Greek, 18,92* 137, 190.192* 199, 221,
AvantI, 22 222
Awadhi, 144 Gujarati, 26, 28, 54, 79, 136, 141, 163,
193, 206, 208, 209,212* 220, 221
Bahlika, 22 Gurjara Apabhramsa, 29* *59-62, 100
Bengali, 54* 141, 146^221
Bhili, 28* 22 Hellenistic Greek, 197, 221
B.ra^29_ 63, 135, 221 Hellenistic koine, 1 2 18
Bundeli, 193 Hindi, 2, 3, 9, U* 26* 29* 30* 43* 44,24*
Byzantine koine, 17, 18 56, 59* 61* 76, 78, 80, 82, 83, 84,
106, 107, 111-114, 121, 122, 125,
Classical Arabic, 1C, 12 126, 134, 137, 144, 146* 149,
Classical Sanskrit, 5, 16, UL *19-22, 150-153, 156, 163, 164, 166, 187,
26,28,78, 120, 146, 147, 155, 157, 190, 191* 194, 206, 208, 209,210*
161 164. 171 178, 184. 185. 192, 212, 214, 217-221,227 229
201,208,220, 222,226 Hindi-Urdu, 135
Hybrid Sanskrit, 221
Dakkhim Hindi, 209, 214
Daksinatya, 22 Indo-Aryan, 3, 7, 16, 75, 133-136,

141-147, 155* 190, 123* 213, 214, Middle Indo-Aryan, 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 13-
217,219, *221-223,224* 225 15. 16-19, 22*23*25* 30* 32*50*
Indo-European, 7, 159, 186, 197 54, 65, 66* 67-69, 76, 20, 83, 22*
Indo-Iranian, 224* 222* 222 104-109, 144* 118, 120, 121, 125,
Iranian, 40* 89* 137, 145, 159, 224* 227* 134-139, 141-144, 146542* 151,
222 154-157, 161, 165, 178-180, 185,
Italian, 6 8 126* 189-192, 199-201, 211, 242*
218, 220-222,224, 225,226,221

60,61, 79, 106, 142, 180, 189, 222 Nagara,22* 29, 44, 45
Jain SaurasenI, 22* 52.6* 22 Nepali, 135, 136, 141,227,229
New Indo-Aryan, 1^4, 5, 9, 10, 11,22*
Kaikeyi, 42 28-31, 54* 65, 76, SO* 81, 84, 94,
Kartvelian, 224 99, 106* HO, ill* 144* 121, 125,
Kashmiri, 224 128, 134, 137, 141, 144, 146, 147,
Khandeshi, 2& 149, 179, 103* 200, 208, 209, 212,
Khan Boll, 54. 221 217,218, 220, 225- 229
Kurdish, 3,22*212 Niya, 146

Lahnda, 54J47* 141,145*160, 193 Old Avadhi, 230

Lakhlmpuri, 144,145 Old Baisvari, 230
Latl, 42 Old Bengali, 54* 64
Latin, 18,19*52*77,22* 136, 137, 159, Old Braj, 29, 230
124, 190, 197,122 Old Church Slavic, 197, 199
LattI, 42 Old Dakkhini, 230
Laz, 224 Old English, 6S
Lithuanian, 137, 159 Old Gujarati, 2JU22* 29,30* 54* 77, 98,
99, 102, 103, 206, 218, 222*224,
Magadhi, 3, 18, 22* *24-25. 26* 33* 35* 230
51* 65, 72, 22* 20* 142, 178, 189* Old Hindi, 83, 94, 171, 202, 206
191,217,218,222, 224 Old Indo-Aryan, 1-4, 10,24*25*29,35*
Maharastrl, 2, HI 22, 22, 522*24*25* 50, 54* 54, 55* 56, 52, 65, 66* 62,
26* 22* 23* 35* 54* 52* 60* 51*52* 6S* 69, 71, S0=S6* S2* 92, 96, 97,
69,72, 106* 137, 142, 189. 221,222 99, 104, 105, 110, 113, L14*
Maithili, 54* 141 118-124, 133-137, 140-143, 146,
Malvl, 22 142* 150, 151, 154-157, 164, 178,
Marathi, 2,5,54*55*52*145*117, 136, 180, 181, 1&UL9Q, 192,1 9 \ 195,
146* 147. 206, 208, 209, 220 197-199, 200, 202, 204, 207, 208,
Medieval Greek, 221 209, 211-215, 212*1218* 219, 220,
Mewati, 22 226
Merwari, 136 Old Khan Boll, 54, 221,230
Middle English, 62 Old Marathi, 55, 206, 230

Old Marwari, 29 Roshani, 224

Old Maithili, 230 Sanskrit, 5, *8-10, 16, *18-22,2 4 26,
Old Persian, 137,145.159, 160 29* 56* 55.55* 40*42, 4 4 56* 52*
Old Sindhi, 15 59. 60. 66-69. 71-78. 90. 99. 119,
Old Western Rajasthani, 71, 99* 218* 120, 123-125, 137, H6, 147, 155,
230 157, 164 163, 164, 167, 168,
Oriya, 141 175-178, 184-187, 189, 191, 192,
201, 203, 204, 207, 209, 210,
Pahari, 141 212-215, 211* 220, 222, 226, 227
Paisa cl, 23* 27* 28* 33*. 35 SaurasenI, 22* *24, 25, 33*35* 140, 221,
Pali, 2, 9, 18*22* 26.5456*4442* 65, 222
66* 68* 69, 72, 89* 90* 104-107, Serbian, 78
111,. 139, 142, 146,189, 190, 192, Sindhi, 15*26* 29* 30* 47* 54, 105, 123,
218. 221 124, 137, 141,145* 147, 208, 220
Pamir, 89. 224 Slavic, 78
Pancala, 47 Southern Apabhramsa, 51, *54-55, 57,
Panjabi, 54* 208, 220 58. 90. 96. 111. 112. 190
Pashto, 3, S3* 22* 212, 224 225* 221* Spanish, 68
228 Svetambara Apabhramsa, *29-30. 62
Persian, 15,16,5 4 145,208, 220,225
Pracya, 33 Tati, 145 160
Proto-Indo-Aryan, 29* 90* 225
Prakrit(s), 4, 5, 13* 16, 18. 19-21, Upanagara, 28* 45,47

4 4 43* 4 4 42, 5 4 48* 6042, 65, Vaidarbhl, 47

66* 65. 76, S9* 94* 95* 100, 124, Vedic Sanskrit, 16* 17, 69
138, 146* 148, 164 164, 168, 4Z4 Vracada (Vracata), *28-30, 44, 45
177, 178, 186, 189, 190, 203,
212=214-22042214222 Western Apabhramsa, 3, *51-55,
56=59,62, 72, 88,9 4 U 4 112,145
Rajasthani, 26* 5 4 71,99, 141,218 186* 190, 199, 201,213,214,217
Romani, 32 Western Hindi, 29* 5 4 145,218* 221

ab ilitative, * 1 2 2 , 12 6 ag en tivity, 5, 1 1 9 , 2 2 0 , 2 2 9
ablation (see also le x ic a l aspect), 1 1 1 , agen tless
*114-116 even ts, 12 4 , 12 6 , 1 9 5 , 2 1 2
ab lative (see source and spatial p assiv e , *127-128, 16 4 . 2 1 9 . 22 6
rem o va l) agreem ent, 7 7 , 1 3 4, 1 39. 1 82, 2 0 3 , 2 2 x
absolute con struction s, 5, * 1 9 7 - 2 0 5 , 2 2 7 -2 2 9
220 d eflected, 63
gen itive, 62* 62* 1 1 0 , 19 9 , 20 0 , w ith object, 1 4 1 , 1 4 6
*203-204 w ith subject, 1 4 1 , 1 4 6
instrum ental, *201-203 A k tion sart (see le x ic a l aspect)
lo cativ e, 44* 1 5 7 , 2 0 0 , *201-203 align m en t o f case m ark in g (see also
n om in ative, 62* *205 typ o lo gy), *223-224
accom pan im ent, 6 &* *83-86 active-in active , 2 2 4
A (ctive)-o rien tatio n , 1 3 6 ergative, 2 2 4 . 2 2 6 . 2 2 7
activizatio n , 10 5 , 14 6 , 1 7 5 m ixed , 2 2 7
a c tiv iz in g su ffix , 10 5 , 14 6 , 17 5 n o m in ative-a ccu sa tive, 2 2 4 . 22 6 .
a c tiv e -p a ssiv e opposition, 1 3 3 227
actuation p roblem , 2 2 5 2 2 6 am b igu ity, 1 4 3 , 14 9 , 1 5 4 , 157, 16 4 ,
addressee, 1 5 0 - 1 5 4 , 1 7 1 - 1 7 4 , 18 5 , 18 6 , 1 7 5 . 200. 20 4 . 228
18 8 A m sterdam S ch o o l, 6 , 7
ad verbs an a lo g y, 56, 2 2 1
relative, 20 9 , 2212=215 n on-proportional, 15 4
agent, 4, 5, *8-10, 42* £&* SSL 9£L .92* syntactic, 1 5 1 . 1 5 4
1 2 6 - 1 2 9 , 1 3 3 - 1 3 5 , 14 9 , 1 5 5 , 15 6 , an aphoric pronoun, 15 6
15 £ * 16 4 , 19 8 , 2 0 0 , 2 0 3 , 2 1 1 , 2 2 4 , an im acy, 5, 1 2 6 - 1 2 7 , 1 4 3 , 1 6 2 , 16 4 ,
2 2 6 -2 2 9 1 67 . 1 7 7 , 2 1 9 , 2 2 6
g e n itival, 1 3 7 - 1 4 0 anteriority, * 1 9 7 - 1 9 9 . 2 0 4 - 2 0 5
instrum ental, 1 3 7 - 1 4 0 an tiabso lu tive, 2 2 4
p ron om in al, 1 3 9 - 1 4 1 , 2 1 2 * 2 2 0 ao rist, 1 3 3 , 1 3 7 , 1 5 5 , 1 8 6 , 18 7 , 2 2 4 ,
agen tive 218. 219
construction, *136-141 apo koinou (construction ), 15 8
phrase, 13 4 , 13 7 , 13 8 , 14 3 , appurtenance, 26* 42* 58* 59* 69, 7 2 ,
1 6 1 - 1 6 3 . 1 7 1 . 17 2 , 1 7 4 , 1 7 9 , *74-78, 88
1 9 0 , 1 9 2 , 1 93, 2 0 1 , 2 0 3 aspect, 6 , *104—117, 2 18
p ostp osition , 1 2 5 , 14 4 , 15 6 con tin aative, 1 1 1

gram m atical, 4, 1 1 5 , 2 3 0 causation,

habitual, 10 8 . 10 9 , 1 1 6 contactive, 161. 163, 166, 180
im p erfectiv e, 4, 1 4 5 , 1 8 6 non-contactive, 161, 166
in ten sive, 1 1 1 causativity, 177
le x ic a l, 4, 3 1 , *1 causativization, 2, 5, 7, *161-182, 230
p erfective, 1 3 3 - 1 3 5 , 1 4 4 - 1 4 7 . 18 6 , causer agent, *161-163. 167, 172-174,
198,204 176,178-179
retrospective, 4 , 31*. *104—107, 10 9 , causee agent, 5, *161-163. 166, 167,
L14.218 172-174. 176. 178-180. 220
progressive, 2JL *1Q7-111,_LL6^2.L8 clause(s)
assertion, complementary, *206-209, 220
categ o rial, 1 8 6 consecutive, 121
asyn deton (co-ord in ation w ithout non-restrictive, 209
con jun ction ), 15 6 relative, 121, 122, *209-215,226
restrictive, 209
b e n e ficia ry , 7, 12 0 , 19 0 subordinate, *206-215
b ilin g u a lism , 15 0 L 2 cliticization,
of postpositions, 3,
case, *65-87 of pronominal objects, 2, 84, 220
absolutive, 4,5JU-21L 142-143, 148, of the copula, 220
15X 153=154^JL61» 166, 1S2, cohortative, 122
226. 227 command, 120,121, 170-174. 184, 220
direct, 3, 65, 137 complementation, 206-209, 230
fusional, 3, 67, 80, 217 completion (see also lexical aspect),
indirect, 177 *111-114, 116,219
oblique, 3, 65,84,21,39, 137, 150, compounding, 150, 169
151, 153. 163, 177, 199 conjoining predicates, *154-158, 165,
phrasal, 6, 31^ *65-87, 99, 205 226
syntactic, 45 conjunctions,
peripheral, 197, 201 adversative, 212
postpositional, 217,222, 223 relative, 209
causative, 5, *161-182, 226 subordinating, 209
double, *L7-9-182 temporal, 211,213
double passive, 181 conjunctive participle (see gerund)
finite active, *163-164, m , 178 contemporaneity, *197-199, 204
finite passive, *164 contra-factivity, 184-187
lexicalized, 163, 178 co-ordination, 154
morphological, 177 copula, 145, .1-8.6.^225.
passive causative, 123, 142, 16-1, coreferentiality, 154, 157, 197, 198,
162,165, *168-182, 220 201,211,226, 229
passive participles, 149, 164, 167
syntax, 168 dative (see reference)

dative of purpose, *206-207 focus, *8-10, 120, 128, 129,156, 177

declensions (see nominal system) contrastive, 140
deference, 184. 220 Functional Grammar, 2, *6-7,22* 161,
demand, *119-121, 187 223.227
diglossia, 16* 17, 227 functional sentence perspective, 2, 6,
directive, 184 1 6 5 . 2 27
double oblique (system), 3, 6, 52-53. functional theory, 133, 135, 161, 167.
58* 52* 88* *90-94. 98, 148, 217. 200
224-285 future perfect, 105, 194
doubling, future tense, 5, 108, 118. 123, 191, 192,
syntactic, 141, 163, 169, 172, 178, *193-195. 220
179 sigmatic, 126, 193
passive participle {see also gerun­
embedding, 155, 157, 208 dive), L82
case, 167. 200.201,226 genitival construction, 217
construction, 2, 4, 5, 3JL* 2(1* 21* genitive {see appurtenance)
106* 125, *133-158, 212* 212* genitive of disrespect, 199, 203
226-229 gerund,55*61, 108, 111, 112, 113, 116,
interpretation, 118, 124, 127, 129, 155* 157,155* 180, 198, 201, 206,
142, 143, 161**164-167, 194. 207, 218, 226
211, 226,227 gerundive, 5, 55, 76,22* 108. Ill, 112,
morphology, 135 116. 136, 137, 139, 171* 184. 188.
postposition, 143, 150, 227
subject, 26 causative, H U 123* 174. 176. 177.
tenses, 3, 92, 93, 217, 224, 225 178
typology, 3, 7, 21* 21* 125, 155* goal, 4, 5, *9-10, 42* 88-90. 22* 120,
161* 165, 178 125, 126, *130, 134-136, 143. 158.
ergativity, 226,222,21Q 161-163, 166—172. 177, 178-181,
conservation of, *141-147, 219 190, 198, 200,220, 227-229
elimination of, *141-147, 150, 219 grammatical change, *217-221
origins of, *133-136, 226 grammaticalization, 62* 81, 82,22* i l l
shift towards, 155. 191, 123* 210,
211,217,219,222,227 heteroclisis, 136
split, 2, 134, 135,228 honorific, 119
experiencer, 141 human, 162,152
cumulative, 65 illocutionary force, 186
semi-agglutinative, 65 imperative, 5, 120, 121, 123, 178, 184,
expression rules, 8 2186=189, 220
passive, 121, 123, 188-189
factivity, 184 polite, 121

impersonal construction, 141, 171, 184 metri causa, 156, 164, 167
impossibility, 184 middle voice, 199
inception (see also lexical aspect), 106, modal adverb, 185
5111=114, 116^218. verb, 177, 184. 206
inferential mode, *192 modality, 5, 161, *184-195, 220, 230
infinitive, 55, 52, 58, 111, 112, 11 deontic, 119-121. *184-189, 220
115, 116, 120, 207,218,219, 227 epistemic, 518,4=189
causative, 177 mood, 5, 119, *184—195. 220, 230
ingestive verbs, 137-141 morphological case (see also fusional
injunctive, 184 case), 82
instrument. 8, 126 morphosyntactic changes, 222
instrumental, 10, 68, 122, 126, 135,
137-139, 141, 144, 150, 151. 152. narrative, 130-131
155, 158, 161, 162, 166, 167, 169, necessity, 177,5184=191,193.
170, 179, 180, 190,193, 198,199, nominal system, *35-41. *51-52. 60,
200, 201-203,211,226 62, 2 3 0
instrumentality, 68* *83-86 nominative,
interrogative mode, 150, 165, 170, 186 language, 133, 134
intimacy, 184, 220 syntax, 135
intransitive predicates, 129, 154-158, nominativity,
165. 211.226 drift towards, 141, 147, 154
non-ergative tenses, 92,92-2LZ, 224
jussive, 5, Hty 121,173, 174, 176, 177, non-factivity, 5184=18.6
220 non-human, 163

koine, IT, 18, 221 object, *8, 45* 93* 94, 99* 100,
koineization, 221 134-13.5. 210. 217, 224, *227-229
definite object, 137
literary-linguistic continuum, 18, 19 direct object, 141, 142, 143
location, *80-83 function, .L6_L=L63_, 178
adessive, 80, 217 obligation,
allative, 217 internal (see epistemic modality)
inessive, 80* 217 external (see deontic modality)
locative, 42* 68, *80-83. 177, 199, old information, 140
201-203,217 optative, 5 ,5184=189, 220
proximity, 81-83 orthotonic form, 140, 141
ownership (see appurtenance)
relations, 134 Paninian grammar, 137, 162, 189, 199
shift, *133-135 participles, 6 2 68, 69
mediopassive (see also middle voice), causative passive, 172, 173. 175

conjunctive (see also gerund), 155, on the goal, *168-172, 115, 178,
158 179, 180, 181, 220
future passive (see also gerundive), past tense, 124, 125, 133-134, 178. 218.
189 219,224
imperfective passive, 4, 110, 123, patient (see goal)
177, 198-199, 202,218, 227 perfect (see also retrospective aspect),
passive causative (see causative 125, 137, 146, 155, 192. 218. 219
passive) perspective,
passive of necessity (see also primary, 221. 228
gerundive), 191 secondary, 227
past (passive), 21* 69, 104-107, phonological attrition, 192, 193
114. 116, 118, 123, *126-131, erosion, 221, 222. 223
133-136, 145-148. 197, 198, host, 140
201,204, 220, 226, 227, 228 pluperfect, *105-107, 218, 219
present (active), 55* 69, 107-110. politeness, 186, 188
123, 197. 202.218 possessive construction, *136-141, 225
particles, possessive suffix(es), 145, 147, 220
focusing, 10 possibility, 184, 51.89-19.0
inclusive, 9 postpositions, 62, 68, 5.68=86, 94, 99,
quotative, *207-209, 220 125, 134-136, 149, 151,228,229
restrictive, 9 postverbal position, 126, 217
passive agent in, *128-129, 131, 148, 149,
analytic be, 6, U8, *124-125,219, 156, 164, 226
777 pragmatic functions, *8-11, 119, 129,
analytic jana “go”, 10, 113, 114, 156. 165.228
118, *125—126, 134, 144,219 pragmatics, 4, 6, 7, 219, 220
construction, 4, 5, 10, 11. 90. 91, Prague School, 6, 9
106,1118=131, 133-136, 138, Prakritism(s), 29-31, 15, 16, 42, 41,
139, 143-145, 151. 156. 219. 52-55. 61. 62
225,226,; present tense, 51, 55, 52, 58, 61, 62,
finite, 5, 136, 137, 118, 135. 151,224
151, 151^220 preterit (see past tense)
interpretation, 10, 124, 127, 129, pronominal
130, 136, 142, 143, 148, 149, clitics, 4, 41,89, 90, 96, 140, 141,
157, 161,164, 166, 5167=168, 145,225,228
194L2JUL226 forms (declensions), 5, 6, 31.
non-fmite, *126-131,136, 137, 138 542=42, 552=53-, 62, 95=99,
P(assive)-orientation, 136 774
synthetic, 6, 120, 219 system, 45-^17, *88-103,219
passivization, 5,7, 119, 128, 220, 23.Q proposition,
on the causee, 168, *172-174, 179, truth of, 185

quasi-object (see semi-object) object inversion, *92-93

quasi-subject (see semi-subject) switching, 126, *129-130, 164. 226
quasinominal(s), 4, 111. 112, 218. 229 subjunctive, 122, 184. 185.189
subordinate clause, 1, 130, 184, 187,
reanalysis, 191, 201, 205, *210-215
of syntactic structures, 62+ 62 subordination, 1, 230
passive-to-ergative, *224-226 suffixal case (see also fusional case), 6,
recategorization, 21
of the inferential mode, 191-192 superabsolutive, 225
recipient, *8, 100, 162, 163, 170, 171, syntactic,
173.178 change, 201
reference, 68* *78-80, 100, 136 functions, *8, 92, 134, 135, 223
reflexive sense, 114 synthetic case (see fusional case)
reflexivity, 222
relative-correlative construction, 209, tail, 9
*210-212,221 theme, 9
relative pronouns, 209, *210-212, 226 topic, *9, 131, 228
relativization, *209-215, 221 continuity, 4, 126, *129-130, 194
relexification, 16 transfer rules, 34, 35
request, 184, 187, 188, 220 transitive predicates, 129, 154-158,
165,224, 226
Sanskxitism(s), 25* 36, 29, 42* 52, 77, triglossia, 16
123, 124, 199, 201,202,211 triplication,
semantic functions, *8-10, 92, 119, syntactic, 170, 179, 180
134, 135,223 typology,
semi-ergative, 143 analytic, 217
semi-object, 229 ergative-absolutive (see also
semi-passive, 143 alignment), 3, 10, 218, 226
semi-subject, 229 nominative-accusative (see also
sociolinguistic alignment), 10, 136, 226
aspects, *221-223 SOV, 128, 148
continuum, 17 SVO, 148
source, 62+ *68-74 synthetic, 1, 2, 217
spatial removal, 36,42,72, 88
speaker, *150-154, 171, 184 valency, 161, 166, 179
subject, 88* 89, 93*. 94, 96, 123, 130, verba dicendi (et sentiendi), 106, 129,
134-136, 141, 142, 143, 147, 148, *150-154, 207
150, 157, 190, 210, 211+ 217. verbs of motion, 206-207
*224-229 verbs of speaking (see verba dicendi)
deletion, 155 version (see also lexical aspect), 111.
function, *8, 45, 161-163, 168, *1-1-4=11.6
172, 178, 198, 200, 201 volitional, 192

volitionality, 22f± wish, 184-188

word order, 1, 2, 11, 93, *147-148
Wackemagel’s Law, 225 permutations of, 156