|
INTRODUCTION
Sk. Ṛishyasṛiṅgiya->Isis[iṁ]g[iya] B 53[1].
(III) Change Sk. ṛi>u:
Sk. naptri->natu- A 50.
Sk. mātāpitṛi->māt[a]pitu-a A 108.[2]
§ 2. Treatment of Sk. ayi and ava :- As is to be expected they become e and a respectively.
(I) Change ayi>e :
Sk. * krayitvā> ketā B 32. (But it is also possible to explain the form as coming
from krītvā>*kittā>kettā. Such a change, however, is not frequent in
Bhārhut inscriptions.)
(II) Change ava>o:
Sk. Śravaṇā->Sonā- A 123. (Perhaps this personal name may also he
derived from Suvarṇā¬─.)
Sk. vyavakrānta- B 18. (Is it not possible to derive vakata- from
Sk. avakrānta-? The initial v-may be a phonetic tendency to pronounce v before o.)
Sk. āmravat(a)->Aboda- B 69.
Sk. avakrānti->ūkraṁti- (i.e. akraṁti) B 19. This is according to Hultzsch
who considers the form as a mistake for akraṁti─. Lüders, however,
would like to derive it from Sk. upakrānti-. In view of the fact that we
do not get any long ū vowel before a cluster, it is better to regard ū as a mistake for o, the usual left horizontal stroke being put to the
right by mistake. If, however, the reading ū is the correct one, then we
better read the following letter as k and not kr. This k then will not
stand for kk as the preceding vowel is lengthened ; cf. Mahīdasena-A 13.
§ 3. Treatment of Sk. diphthongs ai and au :─ As usual they become e and o, except
that au is supposed to have been preserved only in a solitary instance (see however below).
(I) Change ai>e ;
Sk. Vaijayanta->Vejayaṁta- B 22.
Sk. Vaidiśa-> Vedisa- A 30, A 33, A 34.
Sk. śaiksha->seccha- B 45.
Sk. –naikāyika->-nekāyika- A 57.
Once Sk. Chaitya->chātiya- B 69. This is obviously a mistake, the top
horizontal mark being put to the right by mistake instead of to the left.
See above the probable mistake in ūkraṁti- for akraṁti-.
(II) Change an>o :
Sk. Gauptiputra->Gotiputa- A 1.
Sk. kauśala->kosala- B 39.
(III) au is supposed to have been preserved in :
Sk. pautra->pauta- A 1. But this is highly improbable. The change au>o is found in the very same inscription in the instance Gotiputa-. It is
______________________
The change ṛi>i in śṛiṅga>siṁga is explained by H. Berger p. 30 to be due to
the existence of
the old palatal ś.
[2] For the change of ṛi>u in words of relationship as result of the influence of the gen. sg. forms like pituḥ, mātuḥ etc. see Ch. Bartholomae, Ausgleichserscheinungen bei den ɀahlwörtern 2, 3 und 4 in
Mittelindischen. Mit einem Anhang Anhang: über pitunnaṁ, Sitzungsber. Heidelberger Akademie 1916, V,
and H. Berger p. 60 ff.
|
