TRACING VEDIC DIALECTS - People.fas.harvard.edu
TRACING VEDIC DIALECTS - People.fas.harvard.edu
TRACING VEDIC DIALECTS - People.fas.harvard.edu
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
grammar, and in classical Sanskrit, it results in -o '- viz. -e '-, This looks<br />
like an "elision" of the initial a-, and is usually described thus in Western<br />
grammars. Most Vedic texts, however, often write -o/-e a- next to -e/ '-. This<br />
has not been a real pronunciation, however, and is nothing but a second-hand<br />
attempt by the readctors to restore the intellegibility of the text viz. the metre.<br />
Something like *-ai a- is to be expected as Ṛgvedic pronunciation. 233<br />
In pre-Ṛgvedic pronunciation, the realisation of the later Vedic and Class.<br />
-e '- still was *-ai a-, as the monophtongisation *ai > e had not yet taken<br />
place; thus *rathai atra > rathai atra. The case of later -o a- is different: To<br />
be expected is *-az a-, in analogy to other cases of -s before vowels (V) and<br />
voiced consonants (vC), like -iz a- > -ir a- ; -ur vC-. (Note that this is very<br />
old: -is > iz > ir, not > -iṣ, or older IIr. iš, in these cases).<br />
To suppose a development -az a- > -ai a- for this early period would lead to<br />
nom. sg. like rathe, deve, putre, name, etc. only in Abhinihita Sandhi. This<br />
would be in competition with the normal forms in -o before voiced cons., like<br />
aśvaz vahati > aśvo vahati. Such forms in -e are unknown from Skt., except<br />
for a single case in RV where an older gen.sg. *sūras duhitā > sūraz duhitā ><br />
sūra i dūhitā > sūre duhitā. The development here is one that otherwise is<br />
found in internal Sandhi, e.g. *sasdai > sazdai > sa i dai > sede. (A similar<br />
development, also one that took place in the post-IIr. period, namely -az +<br />
voiced retroflex cons. > o is found in internal Sandhi: vajh-tā > vazdhā ><br />
voḍhā).<br />
A nominative sg.in -e (*deve, *putre), however, occurs in Eastern Middle<br />
Indian, in Mg., AMg., the chancellary language of Aśoka, (see O.v. Hinüber,<br />
Überblick, §296: putte, etc.); these forms could be remnants of an older<br />
developnent as described above. One would, however, expect more cases of -e<br />
in RV that were not understood by the redactors and left in the text of the RV<br />
if the form was more frequent. Apparently it was not.<br />
Forms like devo 'sti, namo'stu have to be explained differently:<br />
If we compare the development of -as vC > -az vC, eg. *aśvaz vahati > azvau<br />
vahati > aśvo vahati, as supposed by Allen, Sandhi, p. 39,62,71 sqq., this can<br />
be compared to the parallel earlier or dialect development *sūraz duhitā ><br />
sūrai d° > sūre d°. The same is found in early Vedic internal Sandhi: *sazdai<br />
> sede, while Avestan still has perf. hazd- < *sazd-. Infact such changes are<br />
not unheard of. Allen, p.105 sq., compares, among other cases, the example of<br />
233 Differently, Oldenberg, Prolegomena: short -e/o a- p.447 sqq. Note, that this kind of<br />
restitution takes place even in MSS of the Middle Ages in the corrupt Kashmir MS of PS<br />
written in 1419 AD., see author, ZDMG VI. Suppl.Bd.<br />
81