( 416 )
NUMERALS.
CARDINAL NUMBERS.
308. I. In the designation of the number one great dif- ference prevails among the Indo-European languages, which springs from this, that this number is expressed by pronouns of the 3d person, whose original abundance affords satisfactory explanation regarding the multiplicity of expressions for one. The Sanskrit êka, whose comparative we have recognised in the Greek ékárepos, is, in my opinion, the combination of the demonstrative base ê, of which hereafter, with the interrogative base ka, which also, in combination with api, “also” (nom. mase. kô’pi), signifies "whoever"; and even without this api, if an in- terrogative expression precedes, as Bhagavad-Gîtâ, II. 21, DEVANAGARI kathaṅ sa purushaḣ Pârtha kan ghâtayati hanti kam, “How can this person, O Pârtha, cause one to be slain, (or) slay one?” The Zend AVE [G. Ed. p. 429.] aêva, is connected with the Sanskrit pronominal adverbs êva, “also,” “only,” &c., and êvam, “so,” of which the latter is an accusative, and the former, perhaps, an instrumental, according to the principle of the Zend language (§. 158.). The Gothic ain’-s, theme AINA, our einer, is based on the Sanskrit defective pronoun êna (§. 72.) whence, among others, comes the accusative masculine êna-m, “this.” To this pronominal base belongs, perhaps, also the Old Latin oinos, which occurs in the Scipionian epitaphs, from which the more modern ûnus may be deduced, through the usual transition of the old ŏ into u, which latter is lengthened to make up for the i suppressed. Still ûnus shews, also, a surprising resemblance to the Sanskrit ûna-s, which properly means “less,” and is prefixed to the higher numerals in order to express diminution by one; as, ûnaviṅshati, “undeviginti,” ûnatriṅshat, “undetriginta.” This ûnas could
