The History of the Bengali Language/Lecture 13
LECTURE XIII
Some Hints on the Right Method of Investigation.
In this lecture I propose to survey briefly the whole field traversed up to now, to offer some suggestions or practical hints as to what should be the right method of investigation. To get together the broken parts, scattered all about, and then to put them in order, to effect a reconstruction, is a hard work. It becomes harder still when some broken parts survive in fragments only, and when again, some fragments elude recognition in having been polished off and fitted into a new structure. Hard though the task has been, I have tried with my best effort to collect, examine, and classify such facts relating to the history of our vernacular, as I could lay my hands upon. I am perfectly aware that the facts I have collected and classified, cannot all be interrelated with equal success, though in the main they all point to the conclusion I have arrived at, or rather I have suggested. As facts, their value cannot be overrated, but I have to admit that they are a bit shadowy here and a little definite there, amorphous here and partly crystallized there, in broken fragments here and in their entirety there. However, I hope they will readily render themselves useful in the constructive hands of the trained scholars.
I have sketched out, though in shadowy outlines, the course of the stream of our language that stretches forth itself from the Vedic source-head to the Gauḍa-Magadha valley, by receiving numerous affluents at several points from various directions. That the main current of this very stream inundates Bengal, has only been partly demonstrated in the previous lectures; for the full demonstration of it, the next lecture which will be the last, has been reserved. By keeping up the metaphor, I may say that the limpid stream of this river running parallel to the artificial channel of Classical Sanskrit, from a dim past to the second century B. C, is distinctly noticeable. If the Jaina inscriptions unearthed at Muttra, be of the second century A. D., we may unhesitatingly say that the Māgadhi speech of the second century B. C. did not undergo a very severe change in its course of progress for full three centuries, but the chronology of the Kushana time remains still unsettled. From this time forth to the end of the 5th century A. D., we can get no definite trace of this stream. During the 6th and the 7th centuries we find the Māgadhi speech in the Jaina scriptures considerably altered and modified; we learn from the records of Huen Tsiang that at this time the speech of Magadha prevailed over all the different provinces of Bengal, namely, over Rāḍha or Karṇa Suvarṇa, over Kie-chu-ho-khilo or Berhampur cum Nadīyā, over Northern Bengal, consisting of Puṇḍrabardhan and Barinda, and over Samataṭa, consisting of a portion of 24 Parganas, of Jessore and of a considerable portion of Eastern Bengal. How this speech was subsequently modified both in Behar and Bengal till the displacement of the Pāla rule in Behar by the western invaders, can only be guessed from some literary fragments which have been noticed in the previous lecture.
I have stated in a previous lecture that when the rulers of Western and Central India conquered Magadha-cum-Gauḍa of old, the civilization of Magadha found a safe shelter in the extensive country of Bengal, while the people who were left in Behar or Gauḍa-Magadha country, had to adopt in due course of time, not only many forms of newly imported speeches, but also the food and the dress of the powerful new-comers. The people who took kindly to the habits of life which the Buddhist householders had brought into vogue, did not care either for a head-dress or for a garment which was not wholly white. The Dravidians, among whom these people came to live, had not then or have not now any head-gear, but were fond however of coloured pieces of cloth for their garment. The flowing white dress of the Bengali male people is now coming into fashion in other provinces also, but the Bengalis and Oriyas are only found to use no head-dress at all. I mention these facts with the object of showing, how deep and abiding, how intense and extensive, has been the influence of Magadha culture in Bengal. We may, I daresay, be fully justified to assert, what has been asserted before, that we in Bengal represent to-day the old Behar, more than the modern Beharis do in Behar. Our language is essentially Māgadhi; and trace it as far back as we may, it cannot be found to have been originated from the Classical Sanskrit language, to which we only owe a debt of many loan words only, to express high thoughts in the Vernacular.
The Behari speeches of to-day contain elements foreign to the old Māgadhi; we have to be consequently very careful in taking up Behari forms in elucidating the history of our Bengali forms. What light the speeches of Assam and Orissa may throw on the history of our Bengali forms, should also be duly gauged to avoid much misconception. I cannot halt to discuss fully the history relating to the origin of Assamese and of Oriya, but a few words relating to the topic need be added.
The very geographical situation of Assam clearly shows, that Aryan culture could not possibly reach that country, without passing through Magadha and Northern Bengal. Huen Tsiang records in the 7th century A. D., that the then short-statured people of Assam, who had no faith in Buddha and who were worshippers of Devas, spoke a dialect which was a little different from Māgadhi. The difference that existed in those days between the speeches of Bengal and Assam, was no doubt due to what the Chinese traveller has suggested in a short sentence: in the first place, the then short-statured people of Assam differed ethnically from the people of Bengal, and in the second place, because of non-adherence to the Buddhistic faith on the part of the people of Assam, the culture of Magadha could not flow freely into that country. That in later times religious differences disappeared, and for some time during the rule of the so-called Pāla Rajas, Assam came directly under the influence of Bengal, are too well known to be repeated here. We may notice, that in many particulars Assamese agrees with the provincial dialect of Rangpur, which retains nothing but the old Bengali forms; we shall also see from examples which will be adduced in the next lecture, that many grammatical forms of old Bengal which were once abbreviated on the soil of Bengal itself, are current, in Assamese. Another fact need be pointed out. We shall presently see that the main stream of Oriya language flowed into Orissa, through Bengal. It is a striking phenomenon that there are some linguistic peculiarities, wherein Oriya agrees with Assamese, and differs from Bengali. This phenomenon can only be explained by this, that Bengal as a progressive country has altered the early forms, while the archaic forms have been retained in Orissa and Assam. We can safely hold, that the Māgadhi language, as was once fashioned and modified on the soil of Bengal, got into Assam to take a fresh root there to develop into a new language under the influence of a language altogether foreign to the Aryan speech. That the script of modern Bengal, which can be proved to have taken its modern shape and form on the soil of Bengal at a comparatively recent time, is current in Assam, should not also be forgotten. There are instances, how many scholars by forgetting this fact have pronounced very wrongly the language of some old books to be Assamese, on the ground that the language discloses many forms which are now current in Assamese.
How after the complete disintegration of the old Kaliṅga Empire, a province bearing the name Orissa was constituted, and how a new Aryan speech, now called Oriya, came into being, cannot be detailed here. It will suffice to say, that when Huen Tsiang visited the land in the 7th century A.D., the people of Kaliṅga with their Dravidian speech were found confined within the confines of the Andhra country, and Orissa was struggling into a new life, with new ethnic elements and a new speech; the Utkala people, in the north were not aryanized at that time, and the people in the District of Puri (Kongada) were only learning Northern Indian speech and script under the influence of the successors of Raja Narendra Gupta of Karṇa Suvarṇa in Bengal. We learn also from some old works on Dramaturgy that the Oḍras and their congeners the Śabaras, used only some Aryan words in their non-Aryan speeches in the 6th century A.D., and their speeches were then called বিভাষা on that account. How because of the supremacy of the Kośala Guptas for about three centuries, a Māgadhi speech took deep root in Orissa, has been narrated briefly in the 4th lecture. The Northern boundary-line of Orissa runs from the North-East corner of the District of Balasore to the North-West corner of the Feudatory State of Gangpur, along the Southern limits of Bengali-speaking and Hindi-speaking tracts; how therefore two different varieties of the Māgadhi speech could come together to form the Oriya speech, may be easily imagined. We should be very careful therefore in referring to the archaic forms of Oriya, to trace the history of our words. The reason why Oriya abounds with archaic forms, may be stated in the words of Mr. Beams: "Oriya is the most neglected member of the group [of the Aryan languages], and retains some very archaic forms. The repulsive and difficult character in which it is written, the rugged and mountainous nature of the greater part of Orissa, and its comparative isolation from the world at large, have combined to retard its development." It is not the place where I can show that many letters of the Oriya script owe their origin distinctly and definitely to their corresponding Bengali forms—brought into use on the soil of Bengal at a comparatively recent time; ঘ, ছ, ঢ and স্থ are some of these letters; these letters only seemingly differ from the Bengali letters because they are written in a mode wholly peculiar to Orissa; that this mode of writing has made the Oriya letters unattractive to the foreigners, may be known from the following remark of Mr. Beams as appears in his Comparative Grammar of the Aryan Vernaculars: "The Bengali is the most elegant and easiest to write of all the Indian alphabets, Oriya, is of all Indian characters the ugliest, clumsiest and most cumbrous"—(Vol. I, p. 62).
We can very well assert on the strength of the facts adduced in this as well as in some other lectures, that the Eastern Māgadhi vernaculars were very much alike and did not much differ from one another, when they first came into being by being differentiated in different provinces; consequently we may refer to many archaic forms, retained alike by Oriya and Assamese, to trace the history of our words. Written vernacular literature of this very early period has not been hitherto discovered, and old songs, proverbs, adages and saws as have come down to us, have lost their old linguistic character in the course of being transmitted orally from generation to generation. 10th century A.D, is the approximate time when Oriya was fully differentiated as a provincial vernacular, but of this time we do not get even any literary fragment composed in a genuine vernacular. In the name of the Bengali language of the 10th century A.D,, a recently published volume of verses has attracted our attention; it is quite fitting that the language of this collection should be examined here. The book I have to notice in quest of the old Bengali language, is a collection of three doctrinal works recently published by the Bengal 'Sāhitya Pariṣat' under one general title—'বৌদ্ধগান ও দোঁহা'; the noted Scholar Mahamahopadhyay Haraprasad Shastri brought the doctrinal works from Nepal, and it is he who has edited them in the aforesaid collection. It has been prominently inscribed on the very title page, that the contents of the collection preserve for us the language of Bengal as was current thousand years ago. What Pandit Shastri says, commands my respectful attention, but I fear that it is difficult to support the claim of antiquity that has been preferred for the hieratic effusions in question. I have to remark here that I do not take any account of the ডাকার্ণব portion of the collection, as it is not in Bengaji, but composed in corrupt Sanskrit,—interspersed with some Prākṛta slokas.
These doctrinal works, we learn, were translated into Tibetan, but when, we do not know. The fact that some scholars of Tibet are known to have been active during some centuries in collecting various books in India, does not prove when these works were collected; it could be previous to this period of special activity, or it could be subsequent to it. Looking to the metrical system and the grammatical forms, some verses may be declared to be composed in Hindi. Generally the language of many effusions is such a jumble of various words and grammatical forms of various provinces and of various times, that we can hardly say that the writings represent any particular dialect. I do not think anybody will proceed seriously to determine the language of the following hybrid sentence, which I compose to illustrate my case, viz.:—মালাবাড়্তে (I think—Mārhātti) কোই এক শক্স্ (somebody—Hindi) মোক কহি ছিল (told me—Asamese) যে এই ঘরে (that in this house—Bengali) পূর্ব্বরে (previously—Oriya) মিয়াদ্ (one—Mundāri) বিরাম্মণন্ (Brahman, Nominative—Tāmil) গলাডু (lived—Telegu). Why this strange phenomenon occurs in this book is partly explained by the name of the language 'সন্ধ্যা ভাষা.' The male 'অবধূত's and the female 'বিয়ালি's came together very likely in a colony of theirs, and there composed the secret tenets, etc., of their cult for their disciples in such a manner, that when the songs would be sung or muttered, the uninitiated might not understand either the language or the purport of them. Though the language is mainly Hindi, the authors allowed words and forms of many dialects to flow freely into their composition. No doubt, to us now, the veil is very thin, and we can see the whole thing through and through. The collection is highly important to the philologists and the Anthropologists. We are not concerned here with the doctrine, but can say that such a sentence of the book as "রুখের তেন্তলি কুম্ভিরে খাঅ" reminds us of the Bāul song—
উঠন্ ঠন্ ঠন্, করে রে ভাই, ঘরে জলের ঢেউ;
নৈরামনির নিরঞ্জনে পায়না খুঁজে কেউ৷
I cannot pick up examples for insertion in this book, for that will be besides my purpose; I must however, say that in some songs, Bengali elements predominate. Our very late forms occur in one and the same piece along with many archaic Bengali forms as well as Oriya and Maithili forms. This can be noticed by the students by merely glancing at the texts. The very first song with which the book begins, contains 'বি' (অপি) and 'পইঠো' in the opening lines, which are presumably Hindi. I fear দুখেতেঁ and পাটের have been wrongly interpreted by disregarding the commentary. In song No. 33 along with the pure Bengali form 'হাঁড়িতে ভাত নাই,' occurs the line which is either Oriya or Hindi in form, namely 'দুহিলা দুধু কি বেণ্টেষামায়'; the word 'ষামায়' was no doubt in use in Bengali, but its use is now only confined to the district of Sambalpur; the form 'দুহিলা দুধ' (the milk that has been drawn) is either Oriya or Behari. We cannot fail to notice that the very late Bengali form 'এতকাল' is in company with Hindi অইসে, কইসে, কইসন্, জইসা, তইসে, etc., and Oriya জঁহি, তঁহি, এৎথু, এঠু, etc.; the special Oriya grammatical forms চান্দরে, বিষয়রে (in locative) and অছ, কএলা (archaic), ফিটিলি (verbs in different tenses), etc., occur side by side with modern Bengali forms আইল, করিবে, চলিল, যাইব, etc. We cannot also overlook such special Oriya words as ঘড়িএ (in a moment), চিখিল (slippery), ডুলী (cultivated plot of land) and বেনি (two) as occur in the text; of these words I notice particularly (1) বেনি as a special অপভ্রংশ form of দ্বি or দ্বে (বেবি in old Prākṛta and in old Guzrati) and (2) ঘড়িএ formed as adverb according to the rule of Oriya Grammar. We can see that it is a hopeless state of things, which the সন্ধ্যা ভাষা or the mystic language of the অবধূতs discloses.
No matter which Chaṇḍīdāsa of exactly what time is the author of the Sri Kriṣṇa-kīrtan, which has been very ably edited by Babu Basanta Ranjan Ray, but I have no hesitation to say that the book was composed during the early years of Mahomedan influence in Bengal. There are a very small number of words of Persian or Arabic origin, but we must notice at the same time, that though it is a Vaisnavite work, it has not been composed in that artificial language, and non-Bengali metres which the early Vaisnava poets, including our popularly known চণ্ডীদাস, resorted to in the composition of the Vaisnava lyrics or পদাবলীs.
The archaic grammatical forms as occur in this book, will be noticed in the subsequent lecture; I should only mention here, that we get in these forms a few connecting links between the late Māgadhi and modern Bengali forms. A few examples will only do here: (1) The pronominal forms মই, তই, etc., are intermediate between the late Māgadhi and modern Bengali; (2) The final হসন্ত 'ত' was formerly pronounced almost like 'তে' and this is still the case with the Oriyas who pronounce যাবৎ, তাবৎ, etc. as যাবতে, তাবতে, etc. Thus it was that the ablative case-ending of বৃক্ষাৎ became রুক্-কতে, or রুখঁতে, or রুক্-হন্তে in old Prākṛta; we get pure হঁতে in this book as ablative ease-ending, and this is what has become হতে in Bengali; it has no connection with the verb হইতে = 'to be'; in Hindi, we get for it the ending হুঁ and the corresponding Oriya form is উঁ; compare তবহুঁ of Hindi and ঘরুঁ (from the house) of Oriya. (3) The emphasis indicating 'হি' of Prākṛta, as in সেহি (He it is) is found as সি in this book as in সেসি; সে-সেন্ of Eastern Bengal and সে সিনা of Oriya may be compared. তেঁসি in this book is equivalent to modern তাইতে or তাইত (for that reason). (4) Many idiomatic expressions now obsolete in Bengali but current even now in Oriya are met with in this book; "হাট উখুড়িবে" (the market will disperse) is in use in Sambalpur, বাট কড়াইল (guided or showed the way) is idiomatic throughout Orissa. More examples need not be multiplied here. How one is liable to mistake one old language for another allied speech, may even be illustrated by an example of a sentence composed in a modern language. The line of our poet Rabindranath which reads, হে আদি জননী সিন্ধু, বসুন্ধরা সন্তান তোমার, can be easily pronounced as Assamese if the Bengali metre is disregarded; Aryan Vernaculars other than Assamese can also very well claim the line to be theirs, but for the grammatical form তোমার, which occurs at the end of the line. How very careful therefore we should be, to avoid reckless assumptions in determining the provincial character of a speech of a time, when the provincial speeches were being formed and differentiated, can be easily appreciated. To trace the history of our words, we have to look alike to those outside and inside influences which have been at work in the province of Bengal in the up-building of our speech. Just to throw out some hints as to the right procedure to be followed in such an investigation, I take up to discuss the character of some words, which have come to us from various sources. No doubt I have spoken of these sources before, but some illustrative examples may be of practical help to those who are new in the field of investigation.
The Dravidian sources.—I have said a good deal before how the Dravidians—best represented by the Tamil-speaking people of to-day, have influenced the Aryan tongues; I have also said how words of foreign origin may simulate the appearance of Aryan words, and how by comparing the roots and idioms of different languages we have to determine the real character of the words. Some additional examples are adduced here to make the matter convincing. কটু, কুটি, or কুটীর, কুটুম্ব, and খট্টা, are words without roots in the Sanskrit language, while they are found well-rooted in the Tamil speech and they are there in the company of many words derived from their living roots. For similar reasons we may say, that নিমই (appearing some times as ইমই) signifying eye-lid, is the progenitor of the Sanskrit word নিমিষ (twinkling of the eye), and বল (to surround) is the root for the Sanskrit word বলয়; the very form বালা, a bangle or a bracelet, which is in use in Bengali is met with in the Dravidian language. We note again the origin of নারিকেল which though unknown in Vedic, has been a fruit of great importance with the Aryans. Kel is the word for it in the Kerala country; the first portion of the Aryan form of the word does not convey any meaning, and so I suppose that when the Aryans inquired of the name of cocoanut in the Western portion of the Dravidian country, the vendors gave the name nàl (good) kel in response and hence নারিকেল became the name of the fruit. The Sanskrit word কাণ for অন্ধ does not also come out of a Sanskrit root, while we get কণ (eye) as a genuine Dravidian word; it is the defect of this কণ which has no doubt been expressed by কাণ in Sanskrit. We may notice along with it that as a synonym of the word বধির (বহের, বহেরা and বয়রা in Prākṛta and in Vernaculars), we use the word কালা which also seems to be derived from 'Kel,' to hear. It should be generally remembered that a very familiar object or idea is always expressed in all languages by one word only,[1] and an independent synonym of such a word (not a word expressive of the character or quality of the object or idea), cannot but be suspected to have come from a foreign source; for example, the synonym বা or বার for আপ, to denote streaming or flowing, can be very naturally coined, but such synonyms as নীর, তোয়, or জল, may be suspected to be of foreign origin. If the word জল has come out of গল (trickle out), the existence of it may be justified, but the two other words নীর and তোয় which cannot be connected with Sanskrit roots naturally arouse our suspicion regarding their origin. The Dravidian root রু which we get in অ-রু (tear-drop), আ-রু (river) is in the Tamil word নীর of which নীরু or নীলু is a Telegu variant; we have to notice along with it that, the word নীর does not occur in the Vedic language; we are therefore justified to hold that the word was introduced in Sanskrit from the Dravidian source. As to তোয় unknown in early times, we notice that an aboriginal tribe of Tippera use the word for water, and tui to signify water occurs in many dialects spoken in and near Manipur. T. C. Hodson shows (J. R. A. S., 1914, pp. 148-50) that this 'tui' is connected with Chinese 'sui.' The word in question may therefore be presumed to have come from the Kirāta source. The word kuri for twenty occurs in some Mongolian speeches in the Himalayan region; this word may be presumed to be identical with our কুড়ি.
We notice in this connection another phenomenon of equal importance. Some Sanskrit words naturalized by the Dravidians, in their Dravidian method, are found retaken in Sanskrit as new words, unconnected with their original forms; for instance, দম্ভ, reduced to i-ṭampau, has come again as āṭopa (cf. সাটোপম্ পরিক্রমতি) in Sanskrit, and the Dravidian চেত্ত a derivative of শব্দ, appears in Sanskrit in the form চিৎ as in চিৎকার . It is very interesting to note that some Sanskrit derivatives, in Bengali, disclose this fact that we have reduced some Sanskrit forms to Bengali, exactly in the manner in which the Dravidians do; e.g., (1) In pure Dravidian such as Tamil, a vowel must come before the initial র and ল, and according to this rule, we find that নগ্ন reduced to লঙ্গ has taken the vowel উ before it, in the formation of the word উলঙ্গ (cf. Oriya, উলগন্); (2) in Tamil 'শ' and 'চ' are not different letters and so the word শালা (house) has been reduced to চালা and in this very fashion we have formed the word চালা or চাল (roof or thatch) in Bengal. (3) কুঠার has been reduced to koḍāl and koḍāli in some Dravidian speeches, and we too, have given currency to exactly similar forms কোদাল and কোদালি independently of the Dravidians; (4) we get পেল from বল (force) in Tamil (and so also পলি from বলী, strong), and it is striking that our obsolete Bengali form পেলা পেলি (cf. বলাবল as a method in chess-playing in Mārāṭhi), which still exists in Oriya, and of which our mordern form is ঠেলাঠেলি, has been formed according to Dravidian method. I have given previously a list of Dravidian words as are in use in Bengali; I add a few more examples of those words which have been wrongly considered by some to be Sanskrit derivatives; they are; (1) Kaṭāl as a variant of খাড়ল or খাড়ি, indicates sea in Tamil, and it is this word which is used in Bengali to signify the swelling of the sea, as অমবস্যার কটাল; (2) নড় (to move) of Tamil is exactly the word which is in use in Bengali and Oriya; (3) Pala (pronounced in Tamil almost as পাল) signifies many in Tamil, and it is this word which is in use in Bengali to signify a flock or herd, as in একপাল গরু; (4) the Bengali word মাগি has no doubt come from মাউগি (wife), still in use in Behar, but the original word is Dravidian মুক্কণ or মোক্কন্ or মোগ্গন্ (Kôta dialect); the Oriya form মাইকিনা is closer to the original; I should also note that our next-door neighbours, the Oraons of Chutia Nagpur, who have given us the words খোকা and খুকি (কোক্কাই হাদু, কুক্কি হাদু), have the use of the word মুক্কা in their speech.
Foreign influence in India.—Even our village school boys learn to-day that many foreign nations of Western Asia and of Europe have been influencing us in diverse ways, at least from the 4th century B.C.; what impress our religious and social institutions have received thereby, should be studied diligently in special works. Not that these questions do not bear upon the history of our languages, but I am constrained to leave them out of consideration to avoid dealing with facts of complex nature. I touch only some points very superficially and irregularly, just to awaken the interest of the students in this subject of much moment. The use in the মহাভারত of the word সুরঙ্গ (of Greek origin) to signify a tunnel, in a chapter bearing no mark of lateness, is of greater significance than the adoption in our later time Astronomical works of the term হোরা of Greek vocabulary, or of the Zodiac system of Ptolemic Astronomy. Many words which are treated as দেশী in consideration of their uncertain origin, may one day reveal their history to show what relation one day subsisted between us and some foreigners. The words which have come to us, either because of trade or because of casual acquaintance with foreigners, may not be of much value to us, but the fact of trade relation with outside peoples, may throw much light on many dark parts of the history of our language. The use of the word ক্রমেলক for উষ্ট্র (Vedic উষ্ট্র = horse, and only later, a camel) by Kālidāsa and other poets, by adopting the Arabic name of the animal, may not signify much, and similarly our acceptance of such Potuguese words, as গির্জ্জা (egreja), চাবি (chave), পাঁউরুটি (pāo), মার্ত্তুল or মার্ত্তোল (martello) and শাবান (sabao = Fr. savon) may not be a matter of serious importance, but there are other things related therewith, which we cannot afford to ignore.[2] Regarding important facts, disclosed by the records of early trade relations, some instances may be taken from the accounts of the early European traders. We learn from some Greek accounts, that the Greek people traded with the Dravidians at least as early as the 1st century A.D.; the names of ports and towns of southern India as recorded by the Greeks, distinctly show that the land of the Dravidians came then under the influence of the Aryans, for many ports and towns are found to bear names of Sanskritic origin. It is in consequence of this trade relation, that many Indian articles still bear Indian names in disguise in Western Asia and in Europe. Here are some examples: (1) The English word 'rice' comes from Greek 'oruzo' which is the phonetic representation of the Tamil word 'arici.' (2) শর্করা in early Aryan language indicated sand or sand-like things, and then very likely, in the second century B.C., it commenced to signify sugar by distinguishing itself from সিকত শর্করা (sand), and this name of the article went to Italy through the Arabs, to become the progenitor of the word sugar. (3) The English word 'tamarind' is derived from Persian Tamar-i-Hind (the sour fruit of India). (4) It is admitted by the Romans, that they got 'Ivory' from the Kaliṅga people of India, and that the word is of Indian origin; it is then certainly to be derived from ইভ (elephant)+ রদ (tooth) + ইয় (suffix), which may take the Prākṛta form ইভরিয়; this example distinctly shows, that in the second century A.D., the Telegu people used many Sanskrit derivatives in their language. (5) Along with the above examples I may mention the recent word mango which is the Portuguese form of the Dravidian word মাঙ্গাই.
A curious example as to how a word or phrase of Aryan origin may return to India in a changed garb, after a sojourn in a foreign country, and on its return may be used in a different sense, may be illustrated by the example of our phrase ভূত-প্রেত; for information on this point I owe my debt to Dr. Brajendra Nath Seal: the worshippers of Buddha in Western India, got the name বোধ পেরেস্ত or ভোৎ-পেরেস্ৎ, the word বোধ being the changed form of Buddha and পেরেস্ৎ being the Persian word, signifying worshipper; the Mahomedans were enemies of the ভোদ্ পেরেস্ৎ people in Western Asia and they applied the term to some sections of the Indian people during the early years of their rule in India; from the sound suggestion of the phrase we have reduced it to ভূত প্রেত; I should note that from the name of the idol of Buddha the general name for an idol as বোধ (not ভূত) came into use among the Mahomedans.
I know that some Sanskritists have tried to derive the foreign words নাবালক, গরম্, কম, and বালিশ (pillow) from some Sanskrit words; of these I comment only on the first two words. One who attains majority is called বালীগ্ in Arabic, and so one who is not বালীগ্ or is in his hizānat is a ন-বালীগ্ in our correct court language; very curiously enough this term has been reduced to নাবালক in Bengali, though 'not a বালক' is the opposite meaning of the term. It is true that the Persian word গরম্ comes from an Avestic word which is but a variant of Vedic গ্রীষ্ম, but it is not correct that the form গরম is an Indian অপভ্রংশ of গ্রীষ্ম. It is therefore important to know the time and circumstances under which a word comes to be used in a country. I may note along with it that the derivation of রাস্তা as given by some from the word রাহা is equally faulty; it is to be first noted that according to Persian grammar the noun form রাস্তা cannot be formed from রাহা by the addition of ইস্ত্; in the second place, we clearly see that রথ্যা was reduced in Pāli to রচ্ছা and this form রচ্ছা was always in use in Prākṛta to become naturally the progenitor of রাস্তা. I note here two other important words of Persian (originally Avestic) origin; Vedic সহস্র is hazarra in Avestic and this word as hāzār has now become popular with us. The word বাজু (an ornament worn on the left arm) is not our own coining but has come from Persian source; certainly it is from বাহু; but this is the Avestic form of the Vedic word, বাহু; e.g., Avestic—dar e jo bāzu corresponds to দীর্ঘবাহু; the word দরাজ from dar e jō is also now in use in Bengali. I proceed next to notice those Bengali words, which in their decayed form cannot be recognised as Sanskrit derivatives, and are therefore treated by many scholars as দেশী words of uncertain origin. The words I note below are of much interest and importance; my suggestions regarding their origin, should be treated as merely tentative.
(1) কাণ্ডারি—That it is from কর্ণধার, can be detected, when the Sambalpuri Oriya form কণঢার as well as কণহার (usually a helm of the boat and at times the man at the helm) is compared with it. Prākṛta কণ্ঢার or কন্ধার (from স্কন্ধ + ধারা) to signify edge or bank, is not to be confounded with the above word.
(2) কনা (a piece of cloth) having a provincial variant টেনা (pronounced as তেনা in E. B.).—Seems to be from ছিন্ন—reduced to চিন্ন, টিন্ন or টেন্ন or টেনা. I consider another word along with it. From the fact that a sect of the Jainas was called নিগ্গন্থ, the men of- which sect did not care much for covering themselves with cloth, the word গন্থ as well as its variants গ-ণ-ঠ, and গণ্ঠি were perhaps wrongly taken for cloth by some vulgar people, as appears from a technical term of the Alekhs, viz., কনেট. The word কনাত very likely comes from it. কণেট is met with in বৌদ্ধগান ও দোঁহা perhaps to signify that piece of cloth which the women in some tracts still wear as underlinen, and as such may be called নীবী in the Vedic sense; কনাৎ is in use to signify a piece of cloth or a tent. (See লেঙ্গট below.)
(3) কানা (edge) being wrongly supposed to be derived from কর্ণ, it is spelt usually with ণ, but the word comes really from স্কন্ধ, for we see, that not only in the District of Jessore, and Eastern Bengal Districts, but also in the Districts of Nadya and Berhampore as well, the word কাঁধা is in use. No doubt the line, 'মেরেছ কল্সীর কানা' has become widely popular even within the area indicated above, but in common parlance the form is always কাঁধা and not কানা.
(4) কিরে (oath); the Hindi form as well as the form used in Sambalpuri Oriya is কিরিআ. The history of it is highly interesting. The method of taking an oath by what is called সচ্চ কিরিআ (সত্য ক্রিয়া) is certainly familiar with the Pāli scholars; it has been illustrated by a good number of examples by E. W. Burlingame in the J. R. A. S., 1917, pp. 429-67. That কিরিআ or কিরে comes from সচ্চ-কিরিআ is doubtless. In this connection, I may refer the students to the method of warding off curses and also of taking oath by touching the hair, as was once universal all over the globe and is now also in vogue among many rude tribes of India as well as of other countries of the world; it is because of this custom that the word মাইরি (Dravidian—মাইর্-hair) is still a term for assiveration; মাইকি is the form in use in Orissa and in Nepal.
(5) খাড়া—The origin of it may be easily traced on reference to Oriya ছিড়া derived from স্থিত as discussed before.
(6) গাড়ু—This word as well as ঘড়া, ঘটি, etc., must be traced to ঘট.
(7) ঘাট—That the pseudo-Sanskrit form ঘট্ট should be ignored, need not be asserted. Certainly the word ঘাটি (mountain pass) comes from গিরি-সঙ্কট, since সংঘাট, to signify the meaning, occurs in Prākṛta, but the word ঘাট is not associated, in idea with ঘাটি. (See হাট below)
(8) চাহ—In Aśoka inscriptions, we meet with 'চাগ' from which Bühler derives the word, but no Aryan root has been suggested for চাগ; it is certainly not Dravidian.
(9) চিনি—The supposition of Carey's Pandits that the word comes from the name চিন (China) is absurd. As চীর্ণ means divided, or split, I think the term চিনি for sugar is from চীর্ণিত গুড়.
(10) ছেলে—The earlier Bengali form of it is ছাওয়াল or ছাবাল. Certainly the word ছা or ছাঁ or ছানা comes from শাব or শাবক; in Eastern Bengal, the word ছাও, exactly corresponding to শাব is still in use. The Oriya word ছুআ is applied to human young ones also, in the Sambalpur tract; it is difficult, however, to form ছাওয়াল or ছাবাল by adding ল to either ছাও or ছুআ, since the ল suffix as diminutive-indicating (i.e., indicating affection) is not met with in Bengali. Very likely the word বাল (child) was added to ছা, or that the ল suffix signifying the very idea indicated above was once in use, for ছাও, ছুআ, and ছাওয়াল are very closely related. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar's supposition that the word comes from চেলা (disciple) cannot but be rejected; চেলা comes from চেট (originally চেড়, cf. চেড়ী a female attendant of the Rākṣasas); neither the idea of a disciple nor of a servant can be associated with the term for an infant darling; moreover, there is a phonetic difficulty, since the original derivative is not ছেলে but is ছাবাল. The word ছাবাল could perhaps be reduced to ছাওআলিয়া and then to ছালিয়া and again to ছেলিয়া to become ছেলে.
(11) ছোঁড়া—comes distinctly from ছোট which is a decayed form of ক্ষুদ্র = খুল্ল = খাট. The Nepalese form is ছোরো (properly ছোর; final ও is nominative-indicating); the Hindi form ছোক্রা with ক in the middle is only a variant.
(12) ঝুনা as in ঝুনা নারিকেল is generally treated as দেশী, but it suggested to me once, that it may be a derivative of জীর্ণ, as জুন্হা (old) is in use in some provinces, but as we get ঝুনী in Prākṛta as derived from ধ্বনি, it does not appear unlikely that the term ঝুনা was applied to that cocoanut, which produces a splashing sound when shaken.
(13) ঝাল—seems to be derived from ধার or ধারা (sharp cutting edge), as pungency is indicated by the term. Oriya meaning of the word is 'perspiration'; ধার or ধারা, a stream, is also closely associated with the idea; our ঝোল (Oriya ঝুল) which signifies broth, seems connected with ধার; cf. ঝরা, ঝরণা, etc. The word ঢাল, to pour, seems also to be derived from ধার.
(14) টলা—no doubt টল is in Sanskrit, but there it is a dignified প্রাকৃত word. It may be derived from চল, but very likely the original word is স্খল.
(15) টুকু or টুক—there cannot be any doubt that it is to be derived from স্তোক; from the very word স্তোক we have also got থোক, as I have shown before. One Prākṛta variant of স্তোক is থিক or থিঅ, as we meet with in the গাথা সপ্তশতী; so,we think the Oriya word টিকিএ also comes from the word স্তোক (for the origin of টি see next lecture).
(16) ঠেং (slang—a leg, Hindi টাং) is an অপভ্রংশ form of জঙ্ঘা; the word জং indicates জঙ্ঘা as well as 'bone' in Eastern Hindi or Lariā; the meaning bone, comes perhaps from Muṇḍāri জং = bone which is not connected with জঙ্ঘা. The word জাং for thigh is in use (I am told) in the District of Berhampur.
(17) ডাল (branch)—comes from Prākṛta দালু a branch, derived from দারু.
(18) তোলা to pluck is not from উত্তোলন but from ত্রুট; টলিবা or টুলিবা is the Oriya form and তোড়না is the Hindi form; to raise up is not the idea associated with it; তোড়া (a nose-gay) is also a cognate word.
(19) তোলো (a big earthen pot) comes from স্থণ্ডিল; the primary অপভ্রংশ form তন্দুল a big cooking pot, is in use in Hindi.
(20) নেওটা (affectionately attached) and নাই (indulgence) are derived from Prākṛta নেহ S. স্নেহ.
(21) নেকড়া—a torn piece of cloth; it is difficult to derive it from লেঙ্গট or লেঙ্গটি or নেংটি, which is, no doubt an apology for a piece of cloth to cover nakedness; I cannot uphold that নগ্ন is the word from which লেঙ্গট is derived. How the words লুগা (Oriya), and লুগ্ড়া (Hindi) may be connected with লুঙ্গি I do not know; but লেঙ্গট is not connected with it. I think the apology for a cloth worn by a নিগন্ঠি (নিগ্গন্থ জৈন) was called a নিগন্ঠি which may be equated with নেংটি, নেঙ্গট, লেঙ্গট, etc.
(22) পাগল (insane)—this word seems to have a curious history: পুগ্গল (a man) is a term which the Buddhists appropriated and Buddhist mendicants not caring for the world very likely won the name পাগল as derived from পুগ্গল; hence the modern meaning.
(23) পাহাড়—Hill—the term পখন for stone as derived from পাষাণ is well known; to the Buddhists পাষণ্ড was he, who did not care for the Buddhist religion, being impervious like a stone; the derivation given by বুদ্ধ ঘোষ as পাসং ডেন্তিইতি, has to be rejected. It is from পাখণ্ড that পাহাড় seems to have originated, being a heap of পাখন্ or পাহন্.
(24) পুতুল (Pseudo-Sans-form পুত্তল or পুত্তলি) must be traced to পুত্রক used to signify a doll. Cf. Kalidas' description of উমা's play by the phrase কৃত্রিম পুত্রকৈশ্চ.
(25) ফেল-ফেল as in ফেল ফেল করিয়া চাওয়া, to look vacantly and innocently. From অবলোকন we get বলোকন or rather বলোক; this বলোক in the shape of ভুলুক (to peep in) is in use in E. Bengal, and the form ভেল to look vacantly is in use in the west of Burdwan, as we may notice in the expression টুক্টুক ভেল্চে (he is looking vacantly); ফেল ফেল, most likely comes from ভেল.
(20) বেআড়া—The Persian prefix 'বে' (corresponding to Vedic বি) as in বে-আক্কেল, বে-কসুর, বে-মউকা (Beng. বেমক্কা), etc., and which is in use with many Bengali words, such as বে-গোছাল (untidy), বে-ঢপ্পা (ill-shaped), বে-দাঁড়া (irregular), etc., is wrongly supposed to be the prefix in বে-আড়া; this word is identical with বিঅড় derived from বিকট as met with in the Gauḍa Bahō. In this connection, I may mention that the word বেভুল used at times in non-urban tracts is not a hybrid formation, but is really the original form of ভুল, since the word ভুল comes from বিহ্বল.
(27) ভণ্ড—like the word পাগল this word has a curious history: the Buddhist religious men of high order were addressed by the term ভদন্ত which was, as we know, reduced to ভঅন্দ; it is the history of a satire, that ভঅন্দ in the form of ভণ্ড signifies a hypocrite.
(28) ভাসা (floating)—The word is wrongly treated by some as Sanskrit, for we can notice such a curious form as ভাসমন. The original Sanskrit word বৃষি was reduced, to ভিসী (a raft) in Pali; from the idea, that which floats, comes the word ভাসা to signify the meaning. The word ভেলা seems to be connected with the word. I need not perhaps point out that the original Prākṛta form of উড়ুপ is উলুম্প which is derived from উৎ + প্লব্.
(29) মটুক, মকুট or মুকুট—The last word is the pseudo-Sanskritic form of মকুট which was formed from the first word by a metathysis. The word মটুক signifying a headgear comes from মস্তক; cf. মট্কা the top of a thatched house.
(30) মেকুর—this name for a cat is not current either in Western Bengal or in Central Bengal, but that it was once so current, appears from a line of a nursery rhyme which runs as মেকুর মেকুর, কটা ছানা. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar gives us two অপভ্রংশ forms of মার্জ্জার in use in different parts of Western India, which are মজার and মেজুর; that from মেজুর the form মেকুর may easily come out, need not be asserted.
(31) হাঁটা—as the verb হিণ্ড occurs mostly in Jaina Sanskrit, it has become difficult to many to derive হাঁটা from হিণ্ড (to trudge).
(32) হাঁড়ি—from the genuine Sanskrit word ভাজন comes the pseudo-Sanskrit term ভাণ্ড by the process of metathysis (ভাজন = ভান্জ = ভাণ্ড; cf. মুর্দ্ধণ = মুনঢা of Prākṛta = মুণ্ড, which is pseudo-Sanskrit.) হাঁড়ি as a variant of ভাঁড় is derived from ভাণ্ড.
In concluding this lecture I make this general remark, that to identify the Bengali language with any old time obsolete language, we have no doubt primarily to look to the Grammatical structure of the obsolete speech, but the examination of phrases and vocables is also necessary, for, special idiomatic expressions and peculiar formation of words bear peculiar marks of particular provincial origin; as foreign words are naturalized according to the genius of every language, proper study of them cannot be also overlooked. Various are the sources from which we have derived material for our language, and there are languages which are allied to Bengali; how very careful we should therefore be to determine the history of our words and in fine to determine the history of our language, should be duly appreciated.
- ↑ Various tribes coming together with their tribal speeches to form one people, may give rise to many synonyms for a word, and most of these synonyms may for some time live in non-literary provincial dialects to assume literary dignity afterwards.
- ↑ We may notice that in ignorance of their origin, some have sought to derive চাবি from চাপ (pressure) and পাঁউরুটি from পা (foot) on the wrong supposition that the dough is kneaded with feet.