In 1786, Sir William Jones announced in Calcutta earth-breaking news in the linguistic field. He stated that Sanskrit and the European languages "have sprung from some common source which, perhaps, no longer exists." These words set a trend in the linguistic study of Sanskrit and the use of the term "Aryan," to describe not only the Indian languages, but those of Europe, first came into effect. However, the factuality of Jones' announcement will be brought into question in this work. While the Vedic speech, or Chandas, as Panini calls it, is an inflectional one resembling, in many ways, the ancient Avestan, the argument here will be that Classical Sankrit, or Bhasa, is a native Dravidian one with heavy Austric and Indo-European influence. The same argument will be made concerning the modern vernaculars. The term, "Indo-European" in this context will refer to the European, Iranian, Kurdish, Hittite, Afghan and Chandas, but not to the other Indic languages generally classified as such. Chandas, itself, shows heavy Dravidian and Austric influences already by the time of the Vedas. Bhasa, also, has been very significantly altered by Chandas, but the two are not dialects, or branches of the same family. The theme of this work will be that Bhasa was a highly artificial language designed by the native speakers as a literary language. Probably it was never a spoken language before its conception as a literary one. The thesis here is that indigenous people attempted to create something close to Chandas, the first scriptural language (excepting possible Harappan texts), but with a form that more readily conformed to their own spoken language. As already stated, there had been already much borrowing between the Indo-European and the Dravidian, so by the incorporation of some features of the scriptural language of the Vedic peoples, the indigenous peoples may have sought to create a new sacred speech. To a certain extent they failed, as many of the features they tried to absorb into Bhasa fell into disuse when the Dravidian speakers were unable to use these effectively or with confidence. The root languages in this theory would be the ancient Prakrits. Prakrit itself means "original" or "natural". Even Chandas possesses "prakritisms" and Panini describes Prakrits as the forms use in everday speech. Prakrit comes from the same root that forms "prakriti," the primordial substance from which other things were created. T. Burrow of Oxford, in his treatise on the Sanskrit language, asserted that while Dravidian and other languages had influenced Classical Sanskrit in terms of vocabulary, the structure of Chandas and Bhasa were essentially the same. However, S. K. Chatterji was indeed much closer to the truth when he noted that Bhasa and the post-Vedic Aryan languages seemed altered due to a non-Aryan people trying to speak the Vedic language. He noted in his works that in terms of syntax and phonology, Classical Sanskrit and the other post-Vedic Indian languages had more in common with Dravidian than with Indo-European. Perhaps, Dr. Chatterji was too shy to assert, against the bulwark of Western opinion, that the post-Vedic languages were wrongly classified. Either way, he certainly made many of notes of the peculiar and numerous instances when these languages showed much closer relationship to the Dravidian. Indeed, the ancient literature itself, seems to classify Chandas and Bhasa as different languages rather than Bhasa as a development of Chandas. It may be that the Vedic people knew of an indigenous Austric-Dravidian people they associated with the Devas, in the same way they associated other native peoples further east, with the Asuras. Thus, just as many modern scholars conjecture a language and culture of the Asuras, the "Deva Bhasa" may have been the language of the Devas, i.e. the native allies of the Vedic peoples. The alliance of the Indo-Iranian Vedics with the native Deva people resulted in a fusion of language, but with the written scriptures of the Vedics initially being the accepted ones. Later on, the Dravidians, in our hypothesis, asserted their own Deva Bhasa, into the sacred literature attempting to conform it even further to the language of the Vedas. We will use an argument here that asserts the importance of morphology and phonology, and particularly morphology, over the current emphasis on lexicon used by the genetic, Nostratic and other schools. Our contention is that morphology and phonology are much more difficult to borrow than lexicon, even more so than word lists like the Swadesh list. An in-depth investigation into this matter is beyond the scope of this work, but we will make mention of the stability and durability of both morphology and phonology, and the comparative ease in borrowing lexicon. While we will not disregard the evidence of the roots, we believe that morphology and phonology are even more important in the proper classification of Classical Sanskrit and the other post-Vedic Indic languages. Our belief is that the word "aryan" has been misappropriated by the West, much like swastika symbol, as its roots are acutally Austric, and probably Austronesian. To start our discussion, we can offer first a lexical comparison of the word "bhasa" itself, showing that rather than being an Indo-European root it actually has Austric origins: bahasa "language," Indon., Malay.; basa "to read," Phil., also basahin "to read;" basa "language," Kawi; vosa "to speak, say , word, language," Fiji; waha "mouth, voice," Maori; waha "saying, word, mouth, voice, language," common Polynesian; vasa "to speak," Sesake, vasana "speech," visiena "speech," Api; bosa "to speak," Florida, Ysabel; bacah "language," Proto-Philippine, phaasaa "language," Thai; -bisi "to say," Visina, Mapremo, Nikaura, basa "to speak," Efate. The idea with this example is to demostrate that a great deal of the proposed IE lexical correspondences between the Indic and European languages actually have other explantions rather than genetic relationship. We will use what the term "Oceanic line," to describe the limits of Hindu influence east of India, and this barrier will help us establish that many roots often considered IE actually come from the Austric substratum in India. Bhasa as Agglutinative While there are certainly elements of inflection in Bhasa, and some words that have a rather complete inflection borrowed from Chandas, most words in Bhasa and the vernaculars follow agglutination as the principle form of conjugation. In such cases, the root of the verb is not inflected although the suffix or affix may be inflected as it is in the Dravidian. Only under the strictest classification of agglutinative languages, in which no inflection at all occurs regarding the verb, can Bhasa not be considered agglutinative. Indeed, using such criteria, most widely-accepted agglutinative languages would not fit into this category. But recognizing that some borrowing of inflected roots occurred between Bhasa and Chandas, there is no other alternative but to classify Bhasa as agglutinative. In many cases, modern Sanskrit grammars written in the West confuse the case by not adequately separating the form of Bhasa from Chandas in their works. It seems clear, though, that Bhasa was the main subject of Panini's work, and that Chandas was included possibly to help illustrate the likeness of Bhasa with the older sacred language. According to our theory, the likeness was in some cases due to borrowing of traits, while in others it was due to the artificial implementation by Panini and others in order to create a native religious language. Panini made no grand declaration of any such intentions, but this is not exceptional as we can see the same type of subtle introduction of indigenous beliefs in the Atharva Veda, Upanishads, Epics, Puranas and Tantras. In most cases, the agents responsible for such introduction attempt to give a Vedic, or even divine source for the new systems in order to give them legitimacy. A great deal of this work is even classified as sruti by its followers, the Sakta Upanishads, for example. Just as the Puranic and Tantric deities and rituals eventually superseded the Vedic Indra and Varuna and the homa offering, the indigenous Bhasa also supplanted the Chandas of the IE speakers. Again, due to the confusion wrought over the mechanics of Chandas and Bhasa, it would seem that Classical Sanskrit bore great resemblance to other inflectional languages in its morphology. Actually, this is not true due to the fact that Chandas itself is already a language deeply altered morphologically from other IE languages. The effect is due undoubtedly to the influence of agglutinative languages, and it resembles the same process that was found in the transformation of Latin to Italian, and ancient Persian to the modern Farsi language. However, these latter examples were not nearly as altered in terms of lexicon and, especially, phonology. Chandas, on the other hand, was very powerfully influenced in all these, and also in idiom. However, if Chandas had other examples of IE languages which followed similar, but less extreme, paths, Bhasa in practical usage followed a different road altogether. For although Bhasa could utilize all of the same verb morphologies available to Chandas, according to PaniniÝs system, it reality the usage was closer to that of the Prakrits and the modern vernaculars. Like the Dravidian languages, the participle was used mostly in passive and/or past constructions as the primary form. Of particular interest is the Hindi active participle construction using the suffix, -ta. The suffix in different inflected forms is generally agglutinated to the end of the uninflected verb root. In the IE languages, the verb base, which, unlike the Bhasa-based languages and Dravidian, mostly uses the infinitive, has sounds inflected right into the root. Although this is only one of the many morphological differeces we shall discuss, it should not be minimized. Here are the suffixes for the present tense conjugation of the Hindi verb: M. F. 1st -ta hum -ti hum 2nd -ta hai -ti hai Pl. 1st -te-haim -ti-haim 2nd -te-ho -ti-o 3rd -te-aim -ti-aim The Dravidian and Munda languages also appear to have conjugation suffixes which are similar to the -ta of Hindi. For example, the present conjugation of the finite verb in Khaia and the present of the Kannada: Kannada Kharia -te-ne -ti-ng -ti -ta-m -ta-ne -ta -ta-de -ta-nang -te-ve -ta-bar -ti-ri -ta-kiar -ta-re -ta-le -ta-re -ta-ning -ta-ve -ta-pe -ta-ki Bhasa has in its primary conjugation (Bhu class) a number of suffixes which resemble the -ta suffix: -ti -thas -tas -tha -an-ti The full conjugation looks like this: Sing. Dual Plural 1st bhava-mi bhava-vas bhava-mas 2nd bhava-si bhava-thas bhava-tha 3rd bhava-ti bhava-tas bhava-(a)nti Five of the nine suffixes in this most common of verb conjugations shows relation to the -ta suffix. The general preservation of the root by means of "gluing"on suffixes is a characteristic that can only be considered as agglutinative. It has been noted that modern Iranian and Italian show evidence of morphological change similar to that found in Chandas and Bhasa. However, scholars like Chatterji have rightly noted that such changes can be traced to the influence of agglutinative "Turanian" speakers who were known to have invaded the concerned linguistic regions for many centuries. We need not go into the historicity of Ural-Altaic invaders in either Italy or Iran, or the presence of pre-inflectional agglutinative languages like Etruscan and Elamite being present in these countries. In practical usage, Bhasa also made very liberal usage of the -ta suffix in past participle constructions in manner similar to common grammatical usage in Dravidian In Bhasa, sentences are often constructed without active verbs; something usually avoided in IE language. The use of long compound chains and mixed compounds is also clearly an agglutinative trait. For example, here is a line from the Mahabharata: "yogaisvarat-krnsat-saksat-kathyatah" "from the yoga-master, from Krsna speaking directly" Such long chains used as sentences are practically not found in IE languages, but are part and parcel of a great many agglutinative ones. In the formation of chains and compounds many rules found in the grammar of IE languages are gravely violated. Verb Suffixes Bhasa shares with the Dravidian and Munda languages a trait of inserting additional suffixes in a chain before the normal suffix. For example, in the Ya- class of verbs, the suffix -ya- is inserted ahead of the regular suffix, i.e., div-ya-ti. Indeed, in both Dravidian and Munda, the elements of the suffix chain are nearly always placed before the regular suffix just as in the Classical Sanskrit. Such suffixes in Bhasa include -aya-, -sya-, -ant-, -tavya- ,-aniya- and -ya-. Kharia offers a good example of how these suffixes are placed in front of the regular conjugation suffix: Kharia Finite Verb Future Past Present -ing -o-ing -t-ing -m -o-m -t-am -e -o -ta -jar -o-jar -ta-jar -nang -o-nang -ta-nang -bar -o-bar -ta-bar -kiar -o-kiar -ta-kiar -le -o-le -ta-le -ning -o-ning -ta-ning -pe -o-pe -ta-pe -ki -o-ki -ta-ki Suffix or prefix chains used in verb conjugation in IE are rare, if found at all. The author is not aware of any examples other than Chandas, where it is likely due to indigenous Indic influence. Of course, it is in the root-aorist that we have the true inflectional category of verbs, and this class is practically extinct in Bhasa. Note here the conjugation of the root-aorist and compare the inflection of the root with the agglutination of the Bhu class above; Root-aorist Single Dual Plural 1. Asravam, agam, ahema akaram akarma, adama 2. Agas, asres, akar agatam, kartam akarta, agata, ahetana 3. Asrot, asthat, akar akartam, adhatam, akran, aksan agman The fact that this obviously heavily-inflected category was nearly absent from Bhasa, and that the agglutinative conjugation displayed previously was the predominant form goes far in giving a true picture of the morphological character of Classical Sanskrit. In reference to the passive verb, we may return to the -ta suffix addressed previously. The use of the passive participle -ta and the future passive participle -tavya eventually came to dominate Sanskrit literature. The suffix -tavya in particular occurs first only in the Atharva Veda and is mainly found in the classical languages. Some have commented that the change in use to the pasive constructions from the multiple verbal forms was brought about by evolutionary processes, but it is much more likely that this change testifie to the true morphology of the Classical Sanskrit and the other Bhasa or Prakrit derived languages. This can be understood if we consider that the syncretism so common in Indian religion and culture also extended to language. Instead of placing a great barrier between the inflectional Chandas and the agglutinative Bhasa, Panini may have tried to explain them all in the same terms. He knew nothing of modern division of languages. He simply tried to bring under the scope of one work the two primary langauges in Indian literature at the time. Eventually, as Chandas became mostly a liturgical language, Sanskrit grammarians completely ignored it or included it only in appendices. The work of Panini sufficed. However, as Bhasa continued to be used in the literature, and other forms continued in spoken form, they became the focus of all post-Paninian works. Indeed, even Panini himself was mainly interested in fixing rules for the use of Bhasa. As in religion, Panini did not attempt to draw clear lines linguistically based on ethnic or racial considerations. He introduced the indigious, agglutinative elements with all the subtlety that Krisna introduced the puja offering and the bhakti mode of worship. When Sanskrit grammarians refer to desi words, they are not speaking about native indigenous words, but of those which did not belong to either of the two original religious languages, one of the inflectional IE, the other agglutinative Dravidian; both influenced by each other and also by the Austric. The other source of confusion comes from the Chandas language already heavily influenced by Dravidian and Austric by the time it arrived in India. This is made clear by the presence of cerebrals, a highly-agglutinative morphology and a large Austro-Dravidian vocabulary. In addition to accepting foreign morphological traits from Dravidian, it appears that in the area of verbal reduplication, Chandas displayed Austric influence. The fact that reduplication exists to some small extent in Greek and a very few other IE languages need not lead us to believe that it was a native feature. Indeed, there is every reason to believe that just as agglutination of suffixes in Iranian and Italian was due to foreign influence, so the minimal reduplicaton found in European tongues may also be a result of borrowing. We might add that in the East, the Thai and Japanese languages also show strong influences from foreign morphologies. Reduplicaton, by its rare occurrence in the IE languages, and by its secondary position when it does occur, is highly indicative of borrowing. The use of partial reduplication of the first syllable and of, in most cases, apophany clearly relates to the practice found in Sumerian and Austric verbs. The lack of apophany in Greek and Hittite seems to be a corruption of the original use which is better preserved in Chandas. We might note that this trait is not common in Bhasa, the Prakrits or modern vernaculars, due no doubt to its absence in the Dravidian forms of speech. The use of a single suffix -tum, to mark the infinitive places Bhasa much more close to the Dravidian and Munda than to the Chandas or other IE languages. The rich use of infinitives is very widely-attested to in the Indo-European. One of the main characteristics of the IE languages is there emphasis on specificity particularly with the verb. Numerous inflections exist; in some languages there are inflections for practically every possible facet. The other quality is the general emphasis on separating the different elements of speech. In agglutinative languages, simplicity takes priority over specificity. And there is a tendency to unite the different elements of speech. To foster the requirement for simplicity, the agglutinating elements tend to be similar or derived from similar roots. We see this in the conjugations given above for Hindi, Kannada and Kharia. Both vertically and horizontally, when looking at tables of conjugations in agglutinative languages, one tends to find correspondences in the agglutinated elements. We have already mentioned the importance of -ta as a root for certain suffixes, especially in the present active construction. After Panini's likely attempt to create a Vedicized indigenous sacred language from one of the native tongues, Bhasa began to shift from the artificial conjugations back to the use of the -ta suffix by using the passive participle constructions. Many scholars have recognized this as a way for the native writers to compose literature in a manner which resembled their actual daily speech. Thus, in opposition to the normal forms in Chandas, Bhasa expressed phrases like "he wrote the book," as "the book was written by him." It may be no coincidence that the most common suffix for the absolutive in Dravidian is -tu compared with the Sanskrit past participle active -ta; and that the common suffix for the relative participle is -a, which deals mostly with the past, and corresponds with the Hindi past participle passive -a. The latter is also used in some gerunds and in the accusative of the verbal action nouns in Classical Sanskrit. Another feature that displays the emphasis on simplicity in agglutinative languages is the common non-distinction between noun and verb.. This is not universal, but it follows the same principle as the non-inflected root. That is, to render the fors easily recognizable for memorization. This feature is also found in IE, for example, the word, "sailor," comes from the verb, "to sail," However, there is a great prevalence in IE, more than any other language family, to form completely distinct verbs and nouns. Often this is accomplished by using nouns derived from foreign or obsolete words as in "food," from the ancient IE word "to eat," rather than "eatables." In agglutinative languages as we see resistance to such tendencies, in favor of maintaining some recognition between nouns and corresponding verbs. In Bhasa, we have a great many words that follow this trend such as budh "to fathom, penetrate, understand," and buddha "wisdom, knowledge." A statistical analysis of the percentage of verbal nounds, nouns of agency, verbal adjectives, etc., in Bhasa, in comparison to statistics for inflectional and agglutinative languages in general, would be very helpful in understanding the relationship of Bhasa. Nouns In the formation of compound nouns, Bhasa again shows its agglutinative nature. While certainly the formation of compounds can be found in the inflectional languages, the process there is of an entirely different magnitude than what usually occurs in the agglutinative languages. This same divergence in magnitude and scope is mirrored in the difference in nomimal composition in Chandas and Bhasa. For, if in the verbal and other forms, the inflectional languages, due to their specific nature, may be much more varied, in the case of forming compounds, the agglutinative languages have found this an excellent tool in maintaining simplicity. In this sense, we can see the great similarity between Bhasa and the Dravidian languages. There is no similarlity between the principal types of nominal composition in Bhasa and Dravidian languages, found in the IE languages, with the minimal exception of Chandas. In the IE, compounds are established forms which are brought into speech over time. In Bhasa, compounds may be constructed as one speaks. In the IE, compounds are established forms which are brought into speech over time. In Bhasa, compounds may be constructed as one speaks. For example, one does not say "cornerstandingman," instead of "a man who stands at corners." In Bhasa, there are classes of compounds that can be constructed at will. Also there is nothing like the multiple compounds can be constructed in Bhasa in the IE languages. It may be true that certain IE languages construct long compounds as place names and as novelties, but not in regular literature or speech. It may be true that certain IE languages construct long compounds as place names and as novelties but not in regular literature or speech. Some Western Sanskrit scholars have erroneously tried to give an internal origin for the Bhasa nominal composition, but better scholars like Chatterji have at least admitted these have come from an indigenous influence. This thesis here, of course, is that Chatterji should have gone one step further and simply labeled the practice as a Dravidian one. Let us take, for exaple, the Dvandva compounds from Burrows and compare them to similar compounds recorded by Bloch. Some examples of these: pitraputrau "father and son," Sanskrit ingyoembar "father and mother," Kurukh Other examples of compounds are: madhuhastya "having honey-like hands," Sanskrit mudimelan "who has the crown," Kannada punyalaksmika "having auspicous marks," Sanskrit nirvarkannem "having eyes streaming with water," Tamil rastradipsu "injuring the kingdom," Sanskrit arraludeiyor "possessing force," Tamil sahasaivashyahanyanta "suddenly they sounded simultaneously," Sanskrit perumpunenukku "to me who has a great ornament," Kui In terms of declension and other elements of the noun, there is the same tendency toward attaching them as prefixes, suffixes, etc., as found in other agglutinative languages. The interesting occurrence found in both Dravidian and the Indic languages is the correspondence of morphemes used in one type of morphology, the declension of the noun, for instance, with another system like the case markings of the personal pronouns: Bengali Noun delension Personal Pronoun (1st) Nom. pit-ay am-i Gen. pit-ar am-ar Loc. pit-ay am-ay Tamil Nom manid-an n-an Acc. manid-anei en-nei Dat manid-anukku en-akku Gen. manid-anin en The vast use of compounds of nouns with adjectives, verbal adjectives, etc., displays the common desire in all agglutinative languages to unite certain ideas, or to give certain emphasis or power to certain words, by uniting them into a single unit. Thus, in religious or other literature, when a point need stressing, or great emphasis is to be added to a verse, the composer will often resort to long, compressed compounds. This is found repeatedly in agglutinative languages around the world. Compressing many ideas into a terse compound which can be interpreted in more than one way is a part of the ethnological make-up of the agglutinative languages. In judging the origin of many Bhasa and Chandas words, we must bring into question the words that contain cerebrals. It is fair to say that even the earliest Vedic literature was as different from the main body of IE as any other IE language in history. This is especially true in the area of phonetics were the cerebral, unknown in IE is already strongly attested to in the Vedas. The question is whether the words containing cerebrals are actually non-IE in origin. Most Western scholars explain the use of cerebrals in words athat are claimed as IE, is due to the change of pronunciation by the IE speakers themselves. Chatterji and other have made a more reasonable hypothesis of the IE speakers imposing their language on a predominantly Dravidian and Austric populace who could not correctly pronouce the IE. This makes sense as even the modern Indian Gazeteer, published by the Indian government, classifies the Dravidans and Austrics as the "bedrock" and the "basis" of the Indian population. However, the one problem with this scenario is that while there certainly can be no doubt that the indigenous folk may have massacred a foreign tongue, so to speak, there is no reason that the IE speakers themselves should have done the same. Unless, we accept the suppostiion that the literary and ruling class in Vedic India was primarily indigenous, we cannot see the IE speakers suddenly mispronouncing their own words! It may be true that if an Englishman were raised only speaking Hindu, and then were introduced to English as a second language he might make some mispronunciations of a certain order. But, the IE community in India cetainly seemed large and well-established enough to properly preserve their language. Even modern Indian do not use cerebrals when speaking English as a second language. The more plausible explanation is that the IE speakers, who had already drastically altered their language, accepted a large corpus of Austric-Dravidian words with cerebrals. That such words, or related words, am appear in other IE languages does not discount this theory. They may have been borrowed and pronounced the only way the non-Indian IE speakers knew how to pronounce them. But in India, the situation was such that the proper pronunciation would be preserved through close, continous contact with the original speakers. Certainly, there is also the possiblity that some true IE words were mistakenly categorized with cerebrals by the scribes. But any wholesale conversion of IE words by mispronunciation seems untenable. In general, the rules governing the cerebrals in India are the same found in the Dravidian. The main exceptions to this are the relatively few words with cerebrals as the first letter. This formation is not found in the Dravidian. The Austric languages may provide the answer, and this will be discussed more in the section on phonology. Pronouns There are some interesting parallels in form between the pronouns in Bhasa and those in Dravidian and Austric. These similar forms do not always correspond to usage, however. But this same characteristic is found in the Dravidian and Austric languages themselves. For example, avam is the singular masculine nominative of the demonstrative or third person pronoun in Kannada; however in the inferior group, avam signifies the plural accusative, in Tamil avan stands for the singular masculine-feminine nominative. In Bhasa, avam is found as the dual construction of the 1st person dual pronoun. In Old Kannada, the 1st person dual pronoun am, bears similiarity to the same pronoun in Bhasa, and theuse of the suffix -am in the declesion of pronouns in both Bhasa and Dravidian is to be noted. Also, in relation to the ma- based first person pronouns in Sanskrit, the common na-based first person singular pronouns in Dravidian would corresond by the interchangeability of |n| and |m|. This interchangeability can be clearly demonstrated in these 1st person plural inclusive pronouns in the Dravidian: Language Pronoun Old Tamil nam Telugu manamu/ma- Old Kannada nam- Kui ma- Kurukh nam Tulu nama Likewise in the second person oblique plural: Language Pronoun Tamil num- Telugu mi- Kannda nim- Kui mi- Gond mi- Bhil im- Kurukh nim- If we exchange the "n" with "m" we can imagine how these first singular pronouns in Dravidian and the modern vernaculars are very similar: Indic Dravidian ma - Danni na - Korava mai - Wl Hindi nan - Tamil ma - Tali na - Kannarese mu- Pahari nanu - Badagi mama- Singhalese nanu - Irola The trait which Classical Sanskrit shares with Dravidian and Altaic is its unusal declension of the pronouns. Kannda, for example, has inflection for the nominative, accusative, dative and genitive of all the pronouns, even the interrogatives have genitive, accusative and dative inflections. In this snese, the Dravidian, and also the Munda, depart from the usual simplicity of agglutinative languages. However, most inflectional languages do not use case inflection with pronouns. It might be noted that in agglutinative languages, the pronoun is generally the most specific element in speech. In Austronesian, it is the pronoun which usually is the only ellement to show person and number. Although it does not show gender or case, it does have inflection for the inclusive and exclusive similar to many of the Munda languages. Also, it can be very specific in terms of number. For example, the Melanesian has four numbers, the single, dual, trial and plural. Thus, the complex case sytem of the pronouns found so extensively among both the Dravidian and Munda languages may be a local extension of this specificity found in agglutinative languages, but here including case also. Another area in which Bhasa and Dravidian show common origin is in the similarity between the pronouns and verb terminations. For example, here are the pronouns and the verb terminations in Telugu as given by Bloch: Pronoun Verb Sg. 1 enu -n, -nu 2 ivu, nivu -vu, -vi 3 vadu, adi -du, -di Pl. 1 emu -mu 2 iru -ru 3 varu, avi -ru This same feature can be seen in the Munda languages, such as Kharia: Pronoun Verb Sg. 1 ing -ing 2 am -em 3 adi -e Dual 1 injar -jar 2 am(b)ar -bar 3 ar-kiyar -kiar Pl. 1 ele -le 2 ampe -e 3 arki -ki In Classical Sanskrit the relation looks like this: Pronoun Verb Sg. 1 aham (ma) -mi 2 tvam -si 3 sah (ta) -ti Dual 1 avam -vas 2 yuvam (tvam) -thas 3 tau -tas Pl. 1 vayam (ma, sg.) -mas 2 yuyam (tvam, sg.) -tha 3 te -an-ti While there is a definite similarity between the verb terminations and the corresponding pronouns, Classical Sanskrit does not show this feature in as pure a state as most Dravidian languages, or even as much as Kharia. Among the latter Indic languages a simplified pronoun system developed without the full inflection of case, person, etc., found in Bhasa and Chandas. Also, most lacked any relationship between the pronouns and the verb terminations. Needless to say these terminations are very different in nature than those in Bhasa, and this may be due to evolutionary changes, other foreign influences or simple variation. The use, in Chandas, of prepositions as verbal prefixes in prefix chains is most probably a borrowing from Austric/Sumerian influences. The fact that prefix chains may occur rarely in other IE languages like Greek does not refute this, since it was probably borrowed there as well. The Greek, of course, is not pure language, and has already been demonstrated to have an enormous substratum influence. Certainly many of the prepositions used in these prefix chains were of IE origin, but the constructions are foreign. When the Bhasa languages of India took over, the prefixes were permanently attached to the verbs as the Dravidian makes no use of them except in words also borrowed from Chandas. Thus, we find the indigenous inflences of Indian displacing earlier influences of probable Austric provenance that occured very early on among the Vedic peoples. Phonology Few areas support the contention of the Dravidian provenance of Classical Sanskrit and other similarly derived languages as that of phonology. Only the morphology and grammatical structure of the languages is more convincing. The theory that the cerebrals in Bhasa are due to natural evolution, and the use of the Scandinavian examples as proof, can safely be rejected. First of all, it can hardly be coincidence that the Indic possess cerebrals in abundance like their Dravidian and Austric neighbors while the Iranians and Afghans do not. Secondly, there is no real proof that the cerebralization of dentals in the Scandinavian languages is not due to borrowing from some language that has not survived. We know that there are many non-IE languages in this region and that they have been there since for quite a long time. Even today, there are non-IE speaking Lapps right in the heart of Scandinavia. Many so-called IE words in Sanskrit have only connection with the Avestan, and this evidence tends to show that this was due to late Indian influence in Iran, rather than vice a versa. While it is beyond the scope of this work, the author will only mention his belief that Avestan, like the Gypsy dialects, was an Indic language that migrated West out of India at an early date. By its use of cerebrals even Chandas differs more in its phonetics than anyother IE language does from the common stock. Classical Sanskrit makes slightly more liberal use of the cerebrals than does Chandas, but differs mainly in the use of the "l," for "r," the softening of hard consonants, the dropping of the final consonant, the use of long vowels, the use of apophony (wrongly assigined to ancient IE) and in the use of the svarita accent. The existence of cerebrals at the beginning of a word is a feature that cannot be explained by the Dravidian.. The cerebrals are, of course, formed by raising the tip of the tongue and drawing back to the top of the mouth. However, there is little similarity between the sound of the cerebral in Scandinavian with that of the modern Indian vernaculars or Bhasa, which on the contrary are very close to the sounds produced by the Dravidian and Austric retroflexes. Following is a list compiled by Chatterji (On the Development of Middle Indo-Aryan, pg. 61) that he classifies as shifts from OIA to MIA, but which the present author believes mostly describes a failure of artificial alterations to Dravidian languages. In some cases also, natural foreign influences from IE may have given way to Dravidian resurgence, particularly due to pressure from the South and East. In some cases, the phonological changes probably are not due to Dravidian at all, as in the case of initial retroflex consonants: (1) Vowel quantity subject to speech rhythm and to quantity of entire syllable. (2) Pitch accent gives was to fixed stress accent, also affecting vowel quality. (3) Assimilation of consonants in certain groups and clusters. (4) Cerebralisation of dental stops and aspirates through contigous r-sound. (5) Voicing of intervocal consonants. (6) Loss of intervocal stops and aspirates. (7) Flapped pronunciation of intervocal -d(h)-. (8) Spontaneous nasalisation. (9) Weakening of final vowels. (10) Change of intervocal sibilants to -h-. (11) Change of simple -m- to mere nasalisation. Syntax The Bhasa and Dravidian syntax have a great many things in common. Chatterji nots that the Bhasa languages are much closer to Dravidan in this regard than to any IE languages. Even Jules Bloch admitted that the Sanskrit sentence with its "successive inclusions and with unique agreement of the Dravidian," likely was based at least on what he calls a "psychological model" provided by the Dravidian. Nouns in both the modern Bhasa languages and in Dravidian have special functions which are dependent on oblique suffixes and the postposition of additional words. We have already discussed the copious use of long compounds, a trait which the Bhasa languages share with Dravidian and other agglutinative languages. When both languages studied by speakers of inflectional languages there will be equal difficulty in identifying the regular forms which are common in the inflectional. The action words will often be missing; the great differentiation of function found in the Chandas and IE languages will be mostly absent, the sentence will be simple and terse and with alternate meanings; and long compound phrases completely unlike anything in the inflectional tongues will appear repeatedly. Although the subject can be placed before the verb, it is common for it to come afterward. For example: sidanti mama gatrani "are quivering my limbs" instead of: "my limbs are quivering," or: etan nirikse ham "all these may view I" instead of "I may view all of these" Austric langauges often have this feature. For example, in the Philippines we have: bumasa ka lahat "read you all these" Tagalog mamangan siya "is eating he/she" Kapampangan In this regard, the Dravidian differs as is almost always placed at the end of the snetence after the both the subject and the object. The Sanskrit feature of placing he subject directly behind the verb may be due to Austric influence, possibly even Austornesian, which regularly uses this order. Eventually, though the written Bhasa-derived languages reverted to the spoken form in which the verb came at the end of the sentence, as it does in Dravidian and in the Munda languages. Hindi, for example, places the verb after the subject. Even in early Classical Sanskrit this feature was already found: pralinah tamasi mudha-yonisu jayate "being awash in ignorance, among animals is born." Sa gunan samatityaitan brahma-bhuyaya kalpate "he the modes of materialsim transcending all these to the status of Brahman becomes." It is, of course, rare to find the SOV word order of these verses in any IE language. We have already discussed the particular types of compounds based on apposed terms. Some more examples from the Dravidian are: mai-mansal "woman and man" bai-mui "mouth and nose and face" Both Dravidan and the modern vernaculars use a great deal of idiomatic expressions which are very similar in meaning and form. They are quite unlike anything outside of India and thus they probably originated among the indigenous speakers. Here are some examples in Gond as given by Bloch: rohci simt "having sent, sent" si simt "giving give" arsi hattul "falling he was, he falls," hanji mandakat "having gone, we shall stay" Bloch also gives the following description of the Dravidian proposition: "The sentence is variable in dimension and form. It can consist of a single word, which is not necessarily a verb; the verb 'to be' in particular can be missing." Such a description would also fit Bhasa when one considers the compound as a "single word." The only major difference is in the word order of Bhasa, which was unlike Dravidian or IE, but resembled certain Austric languages like the Austronesian. Eventually though, the Dravidian word order came to the fore in the later Bhasa languages. The Dravidian proposition contains fragments which are formed into long compound, something which mirrors the lengthy compounds of Sanskrit literature. Eventually, in the modern languages, all elements in the sentence: proposition and nouns and verbs themselves, came to have their morphological determinants placed at the end of the order just as in Dravidian, and to a lesser extent, the Munda languages. The primary exceptions were noun forms with prefixed prepositions that came in from Chandas and Sanskrit. Indeclinables of Place Indeclinables denoting place and time are formed using the ending -tra in Sankrit: here - atra there - tatra where - kutra everywhere - sarvatra in various places - bahutra at one place- ekatra wherever - yatra in another place - anyatra in heaven - paratra In Austric languages, here and there are often denoted with elements from a root like ta/te/ti/to/tu or ka/ke/ki/ko/ku and the like: Here There Sud-Est e|ke| e|ko| Budibud i|to|n |to|none Kukuya taina tanoi Tawala geka noka Garuwahi wedahosi nodahosi Sinaki nekai wakai Duau beka yoka Kurada tenina tenem Dobu gete gote Mwatebu iga nage Galeya kamele kano Conclusion The roots in Bhasa, having a great many roles to play allowed words to take on a substantial number of meanings, a process which had already begun in Chandas. This meanings, a process which had already begun in Chandas. This, however, is not a typology of IE were the tendency is toward specification. It is not unusual in Bhasa to find words, with over 20 different meanings. The compounding of words in Bhasa also showed the highly-agglutinative nature of the language, a process which seemed only to be borrowed in Chandas. The use of the absolutive or past particple in the proposition becomes firmly established in the Bhasa and related langauges, Indeed. in the use of the past tense, and the absolutive we see a tremendous correlaton between the Dravidian and Sanskrit of a nature comparable to the general non-inflection of Bhasa verb roots. Also, the prevalence of SOV word order and the frequent occurrence of the subject occurring after the verb, as in the Austronesian languages, also mark tendencies which can safely be classified as non-IE. The nature of agglutinative languages is that they provide simplicity and unity in spech at the sacrifice of specificity and independence of forms. Often the tendency toward secrecy in these languages, stemming from the general associated culture, is accomplished through multiple meanings, word formulae, etc. All these features are found in Bhasa, but are not typical of IE languages. The morphological similiarities between Bhasa and the derived languages, with the Dravidian cannot be easily put aside. The evidence shows that morphology is not as easily borrowed as modern philogists assert. Indeed many thousands of tribal languages have retained their morphological and grammatical structure despite centuries of highly-intrusive exposure to Western culture and language. Prof. Chatterji (Indo-Aryan and Hindi) states concerning the difference of the verb in MIA as compared with OIA, or really, mostly Chandas rather than Bhasa: "...the past tense of the transitive verb in this from was really in the passive voice - in the formation of the past, therefore, the verb became in its nature an adjective. In this matter, Aryan altered itself in the direction of the Dravidian habit which saw in the verb an adjective." Our question is whether this was the true nature of Bhasa and the Prakrits, and whether the inflected forms added to Bhasa were not simply done so to make it look more sacred like the liturgical Chandas. Speaking of the use of verbal and nominal post-positions, Chatterji states: "This post-positional habit, if it may be so called, brought the Indo-Aryan speech nearer to Dravidian and Austric (Kol); and in later MIA. their number was on the increase, so much so that a good number of these, mostly nouns and a few verb forms, were in use widely over the Aryan language area. In the NIA. stage there were more addtions of verbal post-positions (of the type of Gujarati thi and thaki), and this was a still greater approximation to Dravidian." Again, we have to wonder whether this feature, despite its apparent chronological development, was really a native feature of the Bhasa-derived languages rather than a borrowed one. In Sanskrit, and possibly also some of the Prakrits, there may have been a conscious effort to use the inflected forms that came through the influence of Chandas. This may have been much stronger in the written language rather than the spoken. With time, the emphasis on imitating these forms may have faded, and the written language and the spoken came to accord more and more with the NIA languages. The difference in morphology of the verb between Chandas and Bhasa was most striking. The subjunctive, inflected past forms, aorist and imperfect were not found in Classical Sanskrit. The optative and perfect were only meekly represented. The middle voice did not exist and the passive was found only with the indicative present, although in NIA the perishrastic passive takes the place of the inflected passive. The dual number, which seems to have Austric connections, was dropped from the verb and also from the noun and pronoun. The passive participle took the place of the inflected past in Bhasa, and although the inflected future was used, it gradually gave way to the future passive particple and post-positional forms in most NIA languages. Prof. Chatterji points out concering these apparent changes in Development of Middle Indo-Aryan (pg.92): "Functional simplification was brought about in MIA in the above way, and herein unquestionably a good deal of non-Aryan -- Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic and Sino-Tibetan -- influence can be legitimately surmised. The preponderant use of the particple made the spirit of the IA verbal construction change from the purely verbal to the adjectival, which is charateristic of Dravidian. The wider use of conjunctives and other gerundial forms and of verbal nouns which gradually became quite the characteristic of OIA as it is of NIA also points to the same direction." In the declension of the noun, a similar process occurred with agglutination taking place of inflection. On this Chatterji states: "This agglutinating habit came into prominence from Transitional MIA, when nouns, adverbial words, and verbal formations (participles and other forms) came to be added to the noun to indicate case." Later, these forms decayed into inflexions, but new forms were brought into play as Chatterji surmises: "...these became the genuined and distinctive case-indicating post-positions, in NIA, comparable e.g. to the post-positions in Dravidian. " Despite the availibility of numerous inflections in Bhasa, they were often hardly used at all, especially in the later period. This may have been due to the difficulty of writers being unable to incorporate forms they rarely, or never used in their regular daily speech. That conscious efforts were made to "Chandasize" speech elements occurred can be seen in the modification of Prakrit words that were introduced into Bhasa. Chatterji states on this matter: "...a whole host of Prakrit roots and verbal bases both of Aryan and non-Aryan or uncertain origin were slightly altered to look like Sanskrit and bodily adoped." Some examples of these words are vata > vrta and lanchana > laksana. In the hybrid Sanskrit that developed in latter Buddhism, we see this same process take place in its entirety. This is not to say that all the phonological and morphological IE elements in MIA were artificially introduced. Certainly some were the result of genuine natural borrowing, but there was also an artificial attempt that further complicated the situation. Eventually, the indigenous nature of the languages reasserted itself, not as a result of IE languages adopting new native elements, but of elements introduced local languages gradually fading away. We also see many addtional grammatical elements from Dravidian that were used in Bhasa such as the agglutination of different types of words in writing and speech: yathakasa-shtito "just as situated in the sky," In IE languages, compound come as pre-bounded forms of speech, although Chandas had already shown some influence in terms of compounding in the Vedas. We can give one last example to illustrate the close correlation in morphology and sntax as represented by the use of the past participle together with a related verb in both Bhasa and Dravidian: Sanskrit (Mahabharata) drstvedam manusam rupam tava sauyam janardana idanim asmi samvrttah "seeing this human form of yours, very beautiful, destroyer of enemies, now I am settled," phalam tyaktva minsinah janmabandhavinirmuktah "results giving up, great persons from birth and death are freed." Dravidian (Bloch) pavu kacci aransanu sattamu "the serpent having bitten him, the king died." kanda sukham aduda "having seen the dear one, the joy was produced." In demonstrating the correspondences between the Indo-Aryan and the Austric languages, we attempted to show that many of the lexical links between IA and IE were, to say the least, suspect. Not that every one of our examples was necessarily considered IE by all sources, e.g. bala, is listed as of Dravidian origin by some specialists. However, over all many words seen as IE cognates may not be so. On the other hand, the number of Dravidian words in IA, which has been aptly demonstrated in other works, seems much stronger although a close examination of this would have been to lengthy for this work. As many have already postulated that Dravidian, Austric and other words already made up a large portion, and among many experts such as Kittel, Kuiper, etc., even the majority of the IA lexicon, the study we have presented further erodes the basis of classifying IA with the IE family. Indeed, this basis has from the start been based mainly on lexicon, and m any scholars, including Chatterji, have noted that in terms of phonetics, morphology, syntax, idiom, etc., the IA languages, excluding Chandas, have more in common with Dravidian than with IE. Of course, most have assigned this similarity to external influence, while this work suggests that the similarities in the MIA to Chandas were due to the borrowing of both language forms from each other. That is, the Prakrits, as Dravidian languages, had borrowed from Chandas and other related forms, and these latter languages had also borrowed from the Prakrits, in some early epoch. Bhasa, or Classical Sanskrit, which looks like sort of an intermediary stage between the two, actually was, in our estimation, and attempt to make a local Dravidian language, or Prakrit, look like the ancient liturgical Chandas. We have already given examples of MIA words that were absorbed into Sanskrit and altered somewhat to give them an appearance of Chandas by altering the doubled consonant. It may be that the entire corpus of Sanskrit words, which are believed to have undergone a reverse process, such as ratra > ratta need to be re-examined. On the other hand, dharma > dhamma seems like a legimate example of a Prakrit assimilation of the second consonant. The authorÝs own investigations into Austric languages reveal that the latter form is the more natural and "primitive" one. Indeed, in the case of the Polynesian and Melanesian languages in comparison to the ones of the Malay Archipelago, we seen many examples of single or double consonants from the former groups, probably representing the earlier and purer form of Austronesian, breaking up into consonant clusters with varying consonants. Without the lexical basis, the IE classification of Bhasa and related Indic languages fails miserably. This becomes more apparant when we examine the morphological and phonological correspondences between MIA and Bhasa, or at least the late developed Bhasa, with the Dravidian. Again, we see the earlier Bhasa of Panini as more of an attempt to create a local sacred language by adopting certain phonological and morphological traits of the older religious languages, which did not exist in the local speech. Eventually this mostly failed in morphological and grammatical terms, as writers began to write Bhasa in a manner similar to the way in which the Prakrits were spoken.