Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/615

SANSKRIT LANGUAGE. 54» SANSKRIT LITERATURE. mi, 'set' (Gk. Tidriiu) are Skt. pud- and da- dhami. With this single exception Sanskrit re- flects the prehistoric system of vocalism most per- fectly. The preservation of the Indo-Germanic lingual vowel.s, r and /. as Skt. r, as Indo-Germ. e-drk-mn, 'I have seen,' Skt. a-dri-tim. or "idqDs, 'wolf.' Skt. rrkii-x, led to the recognition of the fact that lingual and nasal vowels belonged to the original stock of the whole family of lan- guages, and was followed by far-reaching and permanent results concerning the entire system of vocalism. The Indo-Germanic indeterminate vowel or sh'w'a. (j), appears in Sanskrit as i, and its wide preservation in Sanskrit led to the important theory of dissyllabic roots or stems. The preservation in many te.xts of the Veda of the old system of accentuation made it possible for Verner to discover his famous law (see Verner's Law) which explained the ap- parent exceptions to Grimm's law (q.v.). In its consonant-system Sanskrit has preserved the original five series of mutes : labials, dentals, palatals, gutturals, and labiovelars (see Phi- lology), and has in addition developed an im- portant sixth series, the Unguals or cerebrals, mutes produced by the influence of the r and I sounds. Thus Indo-Germanic *dcndrom, 'tree, staff' (Gk. S4v5pov), Ijecomes Skt. dunda, 'staff;' or the Vedic root n-art, 'dance,' becomes naf in Sanskrit. Most important is the undisturbed preservation in Sanskrit of the Indo-Germanic sonant aspirates, bh, dh. (/h. which underwent radical changes in all other Indo-Germanie lan- guages, as Indo-Genn. *6/ic(i6, 'T carry,' Skt. bhara- mi, hut Gk. (p4pu, Lat. fero, Gothic buira, etc. The Indo-tiermanic surd aspirates are also preserved most clearly in Sanskrit, as tli in Skt. vet-fha, 'thou knowest,' Gk. 'yrolo--9a, Gothic iiais-t ; or fc/i in Skt. iankha, 'conch-shell,' Gk. k67xos. Sanskrit has preserved all the Indo-Germanic cases, having independent forms for the instru- mental and locative in addition to the more fa- miliar cases of the remaining languages. In verb- formation it has retained and developed the dis- tinction between the so-called thematic (o-verbs) and non-thematie (»u-verbs), which has prac- tically passed out of the remaining languages of the family with the exception of the Greek. Sanskrit abounds in varieties of present-systems and aorist-systems, offering in the last men- tioned respect strikingly close parallels to Greek. The modal forms, such as the subjunctive, the in- junctive, and the optative, are present, but have never developed into the delicate syntactical categories of either Greek or Latin. On the other hand, the so-called secondary systems of conjugation, intensive, desiderative. and causa- tive, have become indefinitely productive, so that theoretically every verb is entitled to any of these formations, as Skt. sidati, 'he sits,' and s/idai/nfi, 'he sets;' nasyati, 'he perishes,' and nfis(uint, 'he destroys.' Bibliography. Benfey, Practical Grammar of the Sanskrit Language ('2d ed., London, 1808) ; Miiller, l<aiiskrit Grammar (ib., 1870) ; Kellner, Elemeiitarbuch der Satuskrit-ffprache (.3d ed., Leipzig, 1885) ; Edgren, Comprndinus SanfiJcrit Grammar (London, 188.5) : Williams, Practical Grammar of the Sanskrit Langiiaric (4th ed.. O.x- ford. 1887) : Geiger, Elcmcntarbuch der Sanskrit- Sprachc (JIunieh, 1888) ; Kielhorn, Grammar of the Sanskrit Language (4th ed.. Bombay. 1800) ; Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar (3d ed., Leipzig, I'.tUl) ; id.. Itoots. Verb-forms, and Primary De- riralircs of the Sanskrit Language (ib., 1885) ; Wackernagcl, Altlndische Gratnmatik (Giittingen, 1890); Macdonell, Sanskrit Grammar (London, lllOl); rick, Sanskril-Spraehe (N'ienna, no date) ; Perry, Sanskrit Primer (3d ed., Boston, 1001) ; Speijer, Sanskrit Sgntaj; (Leyden, 188()) ; id., 'edische und Sanskril-Si/ntax (Strassburg, 18'J(i) ; Dclbriick, Attindiselie Si/nlax (Halle, 1888) ; Weber, Ueber die iletrik der indcr (Berlin, 1803) ; Kuhnau, Die Trishlubh-Jagati I-'amilie (Giittingen, 1880) ; BJihtlingk and Roth, Sanskrit -Worterbuch (Saint Petersburg, 1855- 75) ; Bohtlingk, Sanxkrit-Wiirterbuch in kiirzerer Fassung (ib.. 1879-89) ; Apte, Practical Sanskrit- English Dictionar/i ( Poona, 1890) ; id.. Students' English-Sanxkrit Diclionarg (ib., 1893); Capel- ler, Sanskrit-h:nglish Dictiontirg (Boston. 1891); ilacdonell, Sanskrit-English Dictiunari/ (London, 1893) ; Williams, Sanskril-l-^nglish Dictionary (new ed., Oxford, 1899) ; Uhlenbeck, liurzge- fassles etijmologisches Wiirterbueh der altin- dischen Sprachc (Amsterdam, 1898-99) ; id.. Manual of Sanskrit Phonetics (London, 1898). SANSKRIT LITERATURE. The literature in Sanskrit (see Sa.n.skrit Language), like the language, may be divided into two periods, the Vedic and the Sanskrit. Notwithstanding the continuity of the Hindu writings, the spirit of Sanskrit literature differs greatly from the Vedic. The chief distinction between the two periods is that the Veda ((|.v.) is essentialh" a religious col- lection, whereas Sanskrit literature is. with rare exceptions, profane. In the Veda the lyric and legendary forms are in the service of prayer, or exposition of the ritual ; in Sanskrit epic, didac- tic, lyric, and dramatic forms have been devel- oped far beyond their earlier forms for the pur- jiose of literary delectation and a>sthetic or moral instruction. In Sanskrit literature, moreover, with the exception of the MaluibhOrata (q.v.) and the Puranas (q.v.), the authors are gener- ally definite |)ersons, more or less well known, whereas the Vedic writings go back to families of poets, or schools of religious learning, the indi- vidual authors being almost entirely unknown. The form and style of Sanskrit literature differs generally from that of the Vedas (q.v.). Vedic prose was developed in the Yajtir-Vedas, Brahmanas (q.v.), and Upanisads (q.v.) to a tolerably high pitch ; in Sanskrit, aside from the strained scientific language (sfilra) of philosophy and grammar, prose is found in genuine litera- ture only in fiibles, fairy talcs, romances, and partially in the drama. Nor has this prose im- proved in literary and stylistic quality, as com- ])ared with the earlier variety. On the contrary, it has become more and more clumsy and hob- bling, full of long awkward compounds and other artificialities. As regards the poetic medium of classical Sanskrit, it also differs from the Veda. The bulk of Sanskrit poetry, especially the epic, is composed in the sldka metre, a development of the Vedic anustubh stanza of four octosyllabic lines of essentially iambic cadence. But numer- ous other metres, usually built up on Vedic pro- totypes, have become more and more elaborate and strict than their old originals, and in the main they have also become more artistic and beautiful. Sanskrit literature may be divided into epic, lyric, didactic, dramatic, and narrative. Epic