and case. The forms, which depart very much in some cases from the type of the oblique, are here given. Gujarati मारो Sindhi मुंहं जो, etc. असां जो, etc. तुंडं जो, etc. तहां जो, चहां जो, etc. Sindhi in this group merely uses the ordinary oblique with the genitive suffixes, and Marathi does the same in its plurals, simply dropping the ह of अम्ह and तुम्ह, while in its singular it makes a compound form मज + चा = माझा, and तुज + चा = तुझा. Leaving these two languages aside, the rest exhibit, under different forms as respects quantity and attendant vowels, uniformly a type in, which we have no difficulty in connecting with the older genitive of the noun formed by the affixes केरा and करा. It has been customary, however, to give a different origin to these forms. Those who have done so have unfortunately taken two extremities of a long chain and compared them together, totally omitting the intermediate forms, with which they were probably unacquainted. Bopp, whose knowledge of Hindustani was necessarily very limited, derives H. मेरा, तेरा, from Skr. मदीय “ meus," त्वदीय " tuus;" and in the same way हमारा would be for अम्हारा (as it is) from अस्मदीय and तुम्हारा from युष्मदीय. The process is said to be effected by the change of into and then to, just as in the numerals Skr. एकादश becomes Pr. एआरह, H. दूगारह. But we may look in vain in Prakrit for the intermediate forms with, and the termination of Skr. does not produce masc. â, fem. 1, in the moderns. The pronouns use the same affixes for signs of all other cases as the nouns do—,,,, and the rest; it is therefore fair to assume that they use the same signs in the genitive. Chand uses and as genitives as well as other oblique cases; but he knows already Я and ¤, using, however, the former rather as a pure genitive, the two latter where possession requires to be clearly indicated. Thus and the genitives in TT are contemporary forms, but perhaps with a slightly different meaning, the former being a pure genitive and oblique, the latter possessive adjectives. In O. and B. forms the genitive by adding ; without this it is merely the crude form of the oblique cases. from was shown under the noun; so also in the pronoun, this is That this is shortened and as in the Oriya noun, found in full in the pl. Old Bengali has a geni अम्हंकर, as well as shortened अम्हर tive, in which, as in the genitive of the noun, we have the shortened form from, with dropping of the T. I see no reason, therefore, to assume any other origin for the genitives of the first two persons in than that assigned to the similar form in the noun; for even if we were to admit Ħetu and its cognate forms to be the origin of the possessive pronoun, we can find no parallel forms for the similar genitive in of the noun. This genitive is an obscure and rustic but undoubtedly ancient form, which has only recently been brought to light, first by myself and subsequently by Hoernle. It was not known to Bopp or Lassen; had they known it, they would probably have abandoned the ¬ theory. The only point in support of that theory is the curious Panjabi genitive pl. ST asâḍâ; but the Panjabi plurals of the 1st and 2nd personal pronouns are formed upon a different system to those in the other languages, and an argument derived from it would not be fairly applicable to them. Popular Prakrit has such forms as मह केरो, from which मेरा would naturally flow; and the rustic form of the same, namely मारो, would equally be derived from मह करो. So also in the plural, where Marwari म्हारो is अम्ह + करो, and थारो for तुहारो, through a well-known Old-H. तिहारो from तुम्ह + करो, where the has been dropped. Documentary evidence is certainly wanting for earlier forms, but this is because the modern forms were already in use at the dawn of mediæval literature. § 67. For the pronoun of the third person, a direct descendant of the third person of Sanskrit is not always to be found, its place being generally supplied by the near and far demonstrative pronouns, which are reduced to their simplest elements and इ respectively. It is first necessary to pick out the few traces remaining of the genuine old third person, which in Skr. starts from a stema, making, however, its nominative case : m., f., n. Bopp shows (§ 341) that there is not in Sanskrit a pronoun of the third person with a purely substantive signification, but adduces the stem as having originally occupied that place, and given rise to the Pr.. It is not our province to go beyond what we find in Skr., and it is sufficient to remark on the traces of the stem which still exist. In Hindi we have "he," but often used as a correlative pronoun, answering to the relative ☎. Another form has now become an enclitic particle, but in Old-Hindi we find तौन and the oblique form तौने का, को. This answers to interrogative, and relative, and all three forms arise from compounding with the pronominal stem the adverb पुन:, Pr. उण, so that तौन is तो उण. Although पुनः means strictly "again," yet in the moderns it has changed its meaning; and when used as an enclitic, means merely "indeed," or nothing at all beyond a little additional emphasis, like the Greek μev, ye, de, etc. is used as a correlative in most of the languages, as in Hindi जो पीता सो मरता "Whoso drinks (it), he dies." जो जो बैरी संचरे सो सो गिरे मार "Whatsoever enemy attacks thee, he falls dead." -Elliot, Races N. W. P., vol. i. p. 65. In Panjabi it is used in precisely the same way. So also in Sindhi, where it occasionally stands alone, as सो हीउ सो हुअ सो अजलु सो अल्लड | सो प्रीं सो पसाहु सो वेरी सो वाहरु ॥ "He is this, he is that, he is death, he is Allah, Trumpp (quoting Sh. Kal. i. 19), p. 205. " but its real In Marathi is sometimes used to mean "he,' meaning is "that," the far demonstrative; it is not the third personal pronoun, but an adjective varying in gender according to the substantive with which it is connected-a m., đìƒ.,ần. It may therefore be postponed till we come to the correlative. Gujarati, however, uses à, pl. àì, as a substantive pronoun ="he." Bengali and Oriya have "he," not unfrequently, however, used as an adjective "that." These forms show a softening of the o of Pr. ; Nepali ☎. The oblique singular is H. fan; P. fau, fag; S. ǎfĕ; G.â; M. त्या ., ति./; 0. B. ताहा, ता; Nepali तस. All these forms come from the Sanskrit genitive तस्य, Pr तस्स. Chand uses and, in the latter of which the long vowel is compensatory for rejection of one of the two consonants. He also uses afe and shortened fafe, forms resting on the Apabhransa Pr. तह, ताह and तहि (Lassen, p. 482). जाके देह नहोई ॥ ताहि कैसें के महिये ॥ Thus— "(He) of whom there is no body, Him how can one seize?"-i. 161. बज्रङ्गबाहु अरिदलमलन ॥ "(Him) whose arms are thunderbolts, who crushes the hosts of foes, Of him the glory Chand speaks."-i. 46. Here the u in tâsu is a mere metrical tag. Even in Chand's time, however, this word was used as an adjective, and instances will be given under the section treating of the demonstrative pronouns. Bengali has in this third person, as in the other two persons, seen fit to have a finer term than the simple ordinary , and for this purpose it takes fafa, which is really the oblique plural corresponding to the oblique plurals of the other languages-H. fan, P. fani and fargi, S. afa, M. at; all of त्यां; which come from the Pr. genitive with the long â shortened into a and still further into i. Bengali having made fafa into a nominative singular, has struck out a new form af for the oblique, differing only from the ordinary oblique ɩ by the insertion of anunâsika in the first syllable. Oriya, on the contrary, has for the nom. plural no organic form, but adds to the singular its modern plural sign , making ; for the oblique it uses either an organic form ताहंकर, तांकर or सेमानंकर, a genitive of the modern fashion. § 68. The demonstrative pronoun falls into two divisions,that which indicates a person or thing either present or near at hand, and that which indicates a person or thing absent or at a |