io SANSKRIT, PRAKRIT, AND APABHRAN^A
pulled ' ; atra khadatamodata vartate, 'eat and enjoy ' is the rule here ; jahistambo 'yam, ' he is one who says " strike the sheaves of corn"'. They record also the parenthetical use 1 of manye, ' I think ' ; the humorous apacasi, ' you're no cook ' ; and authorize such quaint forms 2 as yamaki, 'I go '. The elaborate rules regarding the accent reflect also actual speech.
ConGrmatory evidence can also be adduced from the references of Yaska, 3 Panini, and Katyayana to particular usages of the northerners and the eastern peoples ; Katyayana also recognizes as a matter of notoriety the existence of local variations, which Patanjali illustrates by reference to the practice of the Kambojas, Surastras, Pracyamadhyas, &c. Here too may be mentioned the references of Katyayana and Patanjali to changes in usage after Panini's time, as when the former 4 finds fault with Panini for not giving nama as well as naman as the vocative, for not mentioning that pronominal forms are permitted in the masculine as well as in the feminine singular of dvitiya and trtiya, and for allowing only the feminines upadhyayi, dryd, ksatriya, and matulani. Patanjali shows us that in his time participial phrases had superseded the second person perfects such as tera, usa,peca, a fact specially characteristic of a genuine living speech. 6
Further information of a precise character is incidentally given us by Patanjali. 8 He insists that grammar does not exist to create words, but to make clear what are correct uses; in ordinary life (loke) a man thinks of a thing and uses the appro- priate word without going to a grammar ; the words of Sanskrit are of ordinary life (laukika). We find a grammarian and a charioteer (sutd) engaged in a discussion conducted in Sanskrit, and the latter has decided opinions of his own on the etymology of his designation and on that of the term prajitr, driver. The norm of speech is that of the £istas, and these are people who speak correct Sanskrit without special tuition ; the purpose of grammar is to enable us to recognize who are Qistas, and thus to
1 As in Pali ; Franlce, ZDMG. xlvi. 311 f.
2 Keith, JRAS. 1915, pp. 502 ff.
3 tfirukta, ii 2 ; v; 5, Mahabhasya^ 1. 9 ; v. 8 on vii. 3. 4s.
4 Bhandarkar, JBRAS. xvi. 273. Cf. Macdonell, Vedic Grammar, p. 307, n. 2. 6 Bloch, MSL. xiv. 97; L.Renou, La valtur du parfait, p. 189.
8 vi. 3. 109; Bhandarkar, JBRAS. xvi. 334 ff. Grierson (JRAS. 1904, pp. 479 ff.) misunderstands the passage to mean lhat Cistas require to be taught Sanskrit.
