Kashmiri Language: Roots, Evolution and Affinity

Kashmiri is a unique language in the Indian linguistic context. It is analytic like the modern Indian languages of Sanskritic stock and synthetic like the Old Indo-Aryan itself, possessing characteristics of both and at the same time having peculiarities of its own many of which are yet to be fully explored. Linguistically, its importance can hardly be overlooked because, as Siddheshwar Verma has observed, it reveals linguistic strata of various ages-"Vedic, Buddhist Sanskrit, Pali, Kharoshthi Prakrit"1. George Buhler's view that it is of the greatest importance in the study of a comparative grammar of Indo-Aryan languages2 only stresses the obvious for preserving old word-forms and also revealing how new forms took shape from old bases, Kashmiri does seem to hold the key to understanding the processes through which these languages have passed in their development before assuming their present forms.

 Grierson too appears to endorse the same point when he says that a study of the Kashmiri language is "an essential preliminary to any inquiry" regarding the "mutual relations of the modern Aryan vernaculars of India"3.

Vedic Origin

There exists a very strong evidence to support the claim that Kashmiri has descended from the Vedic speech or, as pointed out by Buhler, from "one of the dialects of which the classifical Sanskrit was formed"4. References are replete in Rig Vedic hymns to rivers and mountains which have been identified by scholars like Zimmer with definite places in Kashmir, indicating that the region was a part of the Vedic Aryan world - at least in the geographical sense. Linguistically too this fact is strongly corroborated by the presence of a large number of lexical and phonetic elements in Kashmiri that can be directly traced to Vedic sources. These include several words most commonly used in everyday speech in Kashmiri. For example, we have the Kashmiri word yodvay meaning if, what if, yet, still, nonetheless. This appears in almost the same form in the Vedic word yaduvay 5, the corresponding word for it in Sanskrit and Hindi being yadi. Similarly, the word basti, which in Kashmiri means skin, hide, bellows, is hardly different from the Vedic basti meaning goat or bastajin meaning goatskin. The Vedic word sin occurs as syun in Kashmiri meaning "a cooked vegetable", while the Vedic san appears in Kashmiri as son meaning deep. Again, the word vay which means grains in Vedic is used in Kashmiri in the same sense. From the Vedic root taksh comes the Kashmiri word tachch (to scratch, to peel, to plane, to scrape) and its derivative chchan (carpenter, Skt Ksh invariably changing to chch in Kashmiri). Several Kashmiri words have evolved from Vedic through intermediary Pali or Prakrit forms. For instance, Ksh. atsun (to enter), Pali accheti, Vedic atyeti. Similarly Vedic prastar, from which the Hindi word patthar (stone) is derived, changes through the intermediary Prakrit form pattharo to pathar or pathur in Kashmiri retaining the original sense of "on the ground" or "floor". These are but a few of the numerous examples that show how Kashmiri has preserved phonetic, semantic and even morphological elements of the Vedic speech.

 It is perhaps on the basis of such overwhelming evidence that eminent inguists like Jules Bloch, Turner, Morgenstierne, Emeneau, Siddheshwar Verma and several other scholars have pointed to the Vedic origin of Kashmiri, arriving at their conclusions after intensive research on the actual traits of the language.

 Phonetic aspects of how Kashmiri retains some of the most archaic word forms that can be traced only to the Old Indo-Aryan speech have been analysed at some length by Siddheshwar Verma. Citing word after word, Verma provides evidence on how Kashmiri shows contact with older layers of Indo-Aryan vocabulary 6. The Kashmiri word Kral (potter) derived from the Vedic Sanskrit Kulal is one of such words which he has examined in detail, taking help of Turner's Nepali dictionary. While all other modern Indo- Aryan languages, except Nepali and Sinhalese, have for it words derived from the Sanskrit kumbhakar, Kashmiri alone preserves remnants of the relatively older kulal, he points out, which appears for the first time in the Vajasneyi Samhita of the Vedas. Kumbhakar makes its appearance after the Vedic age (c.f.Monier Williams: Sanskrit-English Dictionary) and it is from this that words like Hindi Kumhar, Gujrati-Marathi kunwar and Western Pahari kumar have originated. Tomul (uncooked rice) is another word cited by him in this context, which, he says, has retained the initial ta of Sanskrit tandulam, while other modern Indo-Aryan languages generally have cha. For example, we have chawal in Hindi and Gujrati, chaul in Bengali and Oriya, chaur in Sindhi, chamal in Nepali. Retention of the original r in Kashmiri pritsh (Skt. prichcha = to ask) and prang (Skt. paryank = bed) are other notable examples, according to him, of the tendency (in Kashmiri) to preserve original phonetical elements. Kochchwu, the Kashmiri word for tortoise, he goes on to point out, indicates that the original word must have been kashyapa and not kachchapa as in Kashmiri. Skt. ksha almost invariably changes to chcha, e.g. aechchi < Skt. akshi, maechchi < Skt.

 --------
Editor's note: 'ae' is used for Greek symbol for delta (lower case). A text editor does not provide a delta.
--------

makshika, lachch < Skt. laksha, vachch < Skt. vaksha and so on. The intermediary form derived from kashyapa, which actually occurs in the Vajsaneyi Samhita, must have been kakashapa, Verma suggests.

 Arguing along similar lines, eminent Kashmiri linguist S.K. Toshkhani goes a bit further and suggests that Kashmiri may have preserved even some pre-Vedic phonetic elements 7. Citing examples, he refers to the Kashmiri words rost and sost which correspond to Sanskrit rahit and sahit respectively. Rost and sost, he says, appear to be older than rahit and sahit, and could be pre-Vedic as the change of sa to ha is regarded a relatively later development.

Grierson's views

George A. Grierson, however, holds entirely different views on the question of affinity of Kashmiri. Disregarding the overwhelming evidence that reveals its basic Indo-Aryan character, he seeks to banish the language from the Sanskritic family, preferring instead to classify it under the Pishacha or Dardic group, which, he holds, occupies a position "intermediate between the Sanskritic language of India proper and the Eranian languages farther to their West"8. Considering Dardic languages, including the Shina- Khowar group, to have developed from the Indo-Iranian branch of Aryan, he uses the cover term Pishacha to describe them and observes that Kashmiri too shares their characteristics and so must be grouped with them. He tries to shrug off the predominance of Indo-Aryan vocabulary in Kashmiri by attributing it to a powerful influence of Indian culture and literature for over two thousand years and arguing that vocabulary alone cannot be the determining factor of the classification of a language. "Kashmiri", he concludes, "is a mixed language, having as its basis a language of the Dard group of the Pishacha family allied to Shina", explaining that by basis he means "its phonetic system, its accidence, its syntax, its prosody"9.

 Suniti Kumar Chatterji almost echoes Grierson when he observes that "the Kashmiri language is a result of very large overlaying of a Dardic base with Indo-Aryan elements''10. But neither Grierson nor Chatterji have heen able to show what this Dardic base precisely is or produce any evidence of the "over-laying". However, their conclusions have found almost uncritical acceptance by many, creating a confusion that shows no sign of abating and letting a totally erroneous view to prevail. It must be strongly asserted that Grierson's arguments and pronouncements are based on extremely flimsy evidence which has little to do with the facts of the language, and need, therefore, to be re-examined, particularly at a time when the very basis of his theory of Aryan immigration in waves is being seriously questioned. His classification of Kashmiri is overdue for rejection as seriously flawed and arbitrary.

Kashmiri and Pishachi

Grierson starts from a false premise when he equates Kashmiri with Pishachi and therefore with Dardic and Iranian, a theory that makes little linguistic sense and has even lesser basis in historical facts. His infatuation with this equation notwithstanding, there are questions which refuse to be exorcised. Were the supposed raw-flesh eating Pishacas actual speakers of Pishachi Prakrit? Were they and the inhabitants of Dardistan one and the same people historically? Both find mention in the Mahabharata and in the Rajatarangini, but in different contexts and as separate and distinct ethnic groups. Nowhere have their ethnic traits or identities overlapped or been confused with one another - something that only Grierson has attempted on the basis of far-fetched and hardly tenable evidence.

 Scholars are absolutely not sure and certainly not in agreement about the linguistic features and exact geographical area of Pishachi. Yet Grierson in his obsession to separate Kashmiri from Indo-Aryan languages extends as though with a sweep of his hand the Pishachi and hence Dardic speaking region from the Hindukush to Goa11, assuming too much and interchanging the terms Pishacha and Dard only to create a mess from which linguistic research has yet to recover. And granted for a moment they are interchangeable terms in ethnic as well as linguistic sense, is there sufficient material for one to adduce inferences about the features of Pishachi and sufficient grounds to apply these on one to one basis to Dardic larguages and equally to Kashmiri? Was Chulika Pishachi an Indo-Iranian form of speech? For answering these queries all that we have to fall back upon is what the Prakrit grammarians have to say in this regard and the stray examples they have cited in their works, for of Pishachi virtually no record exists, the great Brihatkatha of Gunadya having been completely lost.

 What we gather from Vararuchi, Hemachandra and other Prakrit grammarians boils down to but a few phonetic and morphological features with which Kashmiri has hardly anything to do. One of these is hardening of soft consonants in Pishachi as compared to Sanskrit, or the third and fourth voiced aspirated stops becoming voiceless and unaspirated. This process is nowhere in evidence in Kashmiri except in some rare cases limited to borrowings from Persian. Thus ga seldom changes to ka in Kashmiri-there being absolutely no possibility of nagar changing to nakar or gagan to gakan (examples chosen by the Prakrit grammarians to illustrate their point), nor of guru changing to kuru or gachcha to katsh. Sanskrit agni changes to agin and lagna becomes lagun (of Hindi lagna) the ga remaining strong and unchanged in initial, medial or terminal positions. Again gha is pronounced as ga but in no case does it become kha as is said to happen in Pishachi-megha > mekho is unthinkable in Kashmiri in which ghotaka > gur, ghama > gum and ghata > gati. Further, d at the end of a word does not change to t. Thus, Damodar changing to Tamotar, as shown to happen in Pishachi is absolutely impossible in Kashmiri. In fact, there are several examples of the final ta changing to da, as, for instance, in Skt. anta > Ksh and, Skt. danta > Ksh. > dand. The consonant is, however, mostly retained in Kashmiri in initial and medial positions while changing to th in the final position (rakta > rath, gati > gath, mati > math, prati > prath, shata > shath and so on.

 Also, Sanskrit ja is pronounced as za in Kashmiri and does not become cha as the rules of Pishachi phonetics would have required. Thus, jal becomes zal, jana becomes zon, jangha becomes zang, jarjar becomes zazur and ujjwal changes to wozul. In borrowings from Persian, however, ja usually remains unaltered, as in jald, janawar, jurmani, jae:hil, jang etc. Of Sanskrit ra changing to la, a frequent phenomenon occuring even before the Prakrits were evolved, there are but very few examples, the tendency to retain it as such being quite strong. For example, rajju > raz, raksha > rachh, taranam > tarun, maranam > marun, patra > vaethr, mitra > myethir, sutra > sithir, mutra > mithir and so on. Final dha is pronounced as da, loosing its aspiration, but not as tha to which it changes as in Pishachi.

 Morphologically too Kashmiri does not share any of the characteristics attributed to Pishachi. The ablative of stems ending in a is not marked by ato or atu, nor does the past- participle tva changes to tun, or thun or dun as Prakrit grammarians have laid down. Sanskrit tva invariably becomes it or ith in Kashmiri as illustrated by Kritva > karitva > karith, nutva > namayitva > naemith, mritva > marith, dhritva > darith and so on.

 As against this none of the actual linguistic traits of Kashmiri, phonetical or morphological, can be traced in Pishachi, of which examples provided by the Prakrit grammarians are the only record available. One, therefore, sees little logic in forcibly imposing on Kashmiri features of a virtually non-existent language. All that Grierson has done is to gather far-fetched examples, mostly from Dardic and Kafir languages, and attribute these to Kashmiri, claiming that rare exceptions form the rule and pronunciation of a few words (Persian borrowings) represents phonetical tendencies of the whole language. A much laboured exercise, surely, but also gross misrepresentation of facts.

Is Kashmiri a Dardic Language?

Coming to Dard languages proper, Grierson's pet theory that these together with Kashmiri and the Kafir group constitute a special branch of Indo-Iranian can hardly withstand linguistic scrutiny. Georg Morgentierne rejects it outright by maintaining that the so-called Dardic languages are in reality Indo-Aryan and not Iranian. Their word-stock is mainly Indo-Aryan and so are their basic characteristics, he contends. Morgiensterne finds Grierson to have muddled the whole issue by clubbing together the Dardic and the Kafir languages into one single group, and so he is not inclined on the basis of his own research to accept Grierson's views. "I am unable to share these views", he observes. "The Dardic languages, in contradistinction to the Kafir group, are of pure IA (Indo-Aryan) origin and go back to a form of speech closely resembling Vedic''12.

 Endorsing Morgenstierne's observations, Emeneau adds that these (Dardic) languages are Indo-Aryan but they did not pass through the MIA (Middle Indo-Aryan) development represented by the records, while on the other hand the Kafir languages (Kati, Waigali, Ashkun, Prasun and to some extent Dameli) may occupy some sort of special position"13. With Jules Bloch and Burrow too taking the line that the Dardic (Shina-Khowar group) languages have Indo-Aryan characteristics while the Kafir group may have Iranian affiliations, there is no justification for applying a different yardstick to Kashmiri. Kashmiri too is just as much Indo- Aryan as, say, Shina to which Grierson finds it allied. By confusing Pishachi with Dardic and Dardic with Kafir speeches and all these in turn with Kashmiri, Grierson has botched up the whole question of affiliation.

 We find him going to absurd lengths in trying to establish that Kashmiri has close affinity with Shina, shutting himself out from facts and displaying on]y a superficial knowledge of Dardic phonetic and morphological systems. Ironically, while he rejects vocabulary as the determining factor in the matter of linguistic classification, he starts with using this very factor as a proof for his conclusions. Of the 128 Shina words he has listed for having cognate forms in Kashmiri 14, more than 107 are unmistakably of Sanskrit origin-a fact that he chooses to conceal. Let us have a look at some of these:

 

English	Shina	Kashmiri	Sanskrit
acid	churko	tsok	chukra
after	phatu	pati	pashchat
army	sin	sina	sena
aunt	pafi (Hindi fufi)	poph	pitushvasr
autumn	sharo	harud	sharad
be	bo-	bov	bhu
beard	dei	daer	danshtrika
between	maji (Pkt. majjh, Hindi manjh)	manz	madhya
blue	nilo (Hindi nila)	nyul	nila
Bone	atoi	aedij	asthi
bow	danu	duny	dhanush
break	put	phut	sphot
cold	shidalo	shital (the actual Kashmiri word is 'shihul')	shital
cow	go	gav	gau, gav
dance	nat	nats	nrtya
day	dez	doh	divas
death	maren	mara (marun)	maranam
dog	shu	hun	shun or shwan
dry	shuko (Hindi sukha)	hokh	shushka
ear	kon	kan	karna
eat	ko-	khe	khad
escape	much	mwkal	much, mukti
face	mukh	mwkh	mukham
far	dur	dur	duram
feet	pa	pad	pada
finger	agul	ongijy	anguli
fortnight	pach	pachh	paksha
give	di (the actual word is doiki)	di	dada
gold	son	swan	swarna
grape	jach	dachh	draksha
hand	hat	athi	hasta
leaf (of a tree)	pato (Hindi 'pat')	patir	patra
learn	sich (Hindi sikh)	hechh	shikasha
lip	onti	wuth	oshtha
man	manuzho	mohnyuv	manushya
meat	mos	maz	mamsa
milk	dut	dwd	dugdha
naked	nanno	non	nagna
name	nam	nav	nama
new	nowu	nov	nava
night	rati	rat(h)	ratri
old	prono	pron	puranam
plough	hal	ala-	hala
receive	lay	lab-	labh
right	dashino	dachhin	dakshina
rise	uth	woth	utishtha
sand	sigel	syakh	sikta
seed	bi	byol	bijam
silver	rup	rop(h)	raupya
sing	gai	gyav-	gayanaga
smoke	dum	dh	dhuma
smooth	pichhiliko	pishul	pichhala
sweet	moro	modur	madhuram
today	acho	az	adya
tongue	jip (Hindi jibh)	zyav	jivha
tooth	don	dand	dantah
vein	nar	nar	nadi
village	girom	gam (Pkt. gamo)	gramah
weep	ro-	riv-	rodan/ruv
woman	chai	triy	stri
write	lik-	lekh	likha
yes	awa	ava	ava

The Sanskrit Factor

It will not be difficult to see from these examples selected at random by Grierson that it is not the Dardic connection that binds Kashmiri and Shina but the affiliation of both to Sanskrit or the Old Indo-Aryan upon which they draw as the basic source for their vocabulary. Many of these, as Grierson hirmself admits, have cognate forms in other Indian languages too because of the Sanskrit factor and, therefore, these do not show any exclusive linkage between Kashmiri and Shina. It can also be easily marked that phonetic systems of the two languages operate along entirely different lines. The presence of one or two Shina loan words in Kashmiri does not go to prove anything for, as T. Graham Bailey has clearly pointed out, Shina in turn, particularly in its Guresi and Tileli dialects, has been influenced considerably by Kashmiri. The fact is that Dardic languages have borrowed heavily from Urdu/Hindi and Punjabi and have some singificant morphological similarities with these North Indian languages, while with Kashmiri they have practically none.

 Contrary to what is generally believed, there are wide differences between the linguistic traits of Kashmiri and Shina, too fundamental to be ignored. Proceeding one by one according to the criteria set up by Grierson himself for affiliation, let us see how tenable the arguments in support of grouping Kashmiri with Shina as a representative language of the Dardic group are. But before that let us have a look at some of the lexical and morphological similarities that link the Dardic speeches with other modern Indo-Aryan languages. These will be found to be of more than casual interest. Here are some lexical items from Shina and their corresponding Hindi equivalents.

 

Shina	Hindi	English
agar	angar	a live coal, cinder, spark
agut	angutha	thumb
ashatu	ashakt	powerless, helpless
ash	ashru, ansu	a tear
bago	bhag	part, portion, division
bar	var	husband
baris	baras	year
bachhari	bachhri	female calf
bish	vis (note the cerebrals)	poison
biz	khiti	fear
burizoiki	burna	to dip, be immersed
charku	charkha	a spinning wheel
chilu	chir	cloth
choritu	chor	thief
chushoiki	chusna	to suck
dugunia	dugna	double
dut	dudh	milk
eklu	akela	alone
gant (note the cerebral)	ghanta	hour
gur	gur	molasses
halizi	haldi	turmeric
hanz	hans	a swan
hiu	hiya	heart
jaru	jara-	old age
jinu	jivit, jina	alive/to live
kali	kalah-kari	querrelsome
kriye	kiri	anant
khen	kshan	an instant, glamoment
lash	ajja	shame
manuk	mendhak	a frog
manu	manushya, manav	a man
mos	mans	meat, flesh
musharu	mishra	mixed
mushtake	mushti, mutthi	fist
on	anna	grain, food
paku	pakka	ripe
pochi	poti	grand-daughter
rog	rog	disease
rong	rang	colour
sand	sand	a bull
sheur	shvasur, sasur	father-in-law
sheu	shvet	white
shing	sing, shring	horn
shish	shis	head
sioki	sina	to stitch, sew
tal	tal	bottom
teru	terha	crooked, bent
jo	jo	which, who that

These are but a few examples that should be sufficient to give an inkling of, how lexical items in both the languages are derived from a common source. The similarity extends to other features also. For instance, pronomial forms (first person-singular) in Shina closely resemble the corresponding Hindi, Urdu and Punjabi pronouns. The same is true of adverbs of place and of conjunctions, most of which appear to be borrowings from these languages. The Shina auxiliary and substantive verb-forms hanus, hanu, hane, haniek bear an amazing similarity to Hindi hun, hai, hain, honge. If that is the case, are we to conclude that Hindi too is a Dardic language?

Kashmiri and Shina: Phonetic Dissimilarities:

Let us go back to the dissimilarities between Kashmiri and the Dardic languages and start from their phonetic features. Though too glaring, these have never been highlighted. Some of the important differences are as follows. (1) The peculiar Kashmiri vowel sounds ae ae: i and i: do not occur in Shina and other Dardic languages, nor does Kashmiri share with them its umlaut system or "consonantal epenthesis under influence of a following vowel". In turn Kashmiri does not follow the short, very short, long, half- long vowel system of Dardic languages. (2) Almost all nasals occurring in the old Indo-Aryan exist in Shina, including the cerebral n, Kashmiri has only n and m. (3) Dardic languages have the sibllant cerebral s, Kashmiri has not. (4) Existence of two sets of so-called palatal letters, both fricatives and stops, is a marked features of Shina, while Kashmiri like other Indo-Aryan languages has only one- the fricates sh, and z and zh do not occur in it nor does cerebral j. (5) Like most modern Indian languages the cerebral letters t, d, r and n are an intrinsic part of Shina, but Kashmiri does not have n and r., the latter being used in the rural dialect only in place of r. (6) In Shina the position of the half-vowel y is very weak and often approaches e; in Kashmiri y is strong in initial, medial and terminal positions.

 There is a great divergence in the phonetic changes that words of Sanskritic stock undergo in Kashmiri and in Shina. Sanskrit s and sa almost invariably change to ha' in Kashmiri, but in Dardic languages this phenomenon seldom occurs. Some examples: Sanskrit sharad, Shina sharo, Kashmiri harud; Skt. shun Sh shun, Ksh. hun; Skt. shikasha Sh. sich, Ksh hech, Skt. shrnkhala Sh. shangal, Ksh. h:nkal; skt. shushka Sh. shuko, Ksh. hokh; Skt. vis Sh. bish Ksh. veh; Skt. shakti Sh. shat, Ksh. hekat. Initial h chances to a in Kashmiri, but is generally retained in Dardic: Skt. hasta, Ksh ath, Sh. hat; Skt. hamsa, Ksh. anz Sh. hanz; Sanskrit tr changes to cho, in Shina while in Kashmir it is generally preserved: Skt. stri Sh. chei, Ksh. triy; Skt. trini Sh che. Ksh tre; Skt. jamatr Sh. zamoch. Sanskrit dr changes to z in Shina, where as in Kashmiri the d of the compound consonant is generally preserved: Sh. heridra, Sh. halizi, Ksh. ledir, Skt. draksha zach. Ksh. dachh. Sanskrit bhr also changes to z in Shina, but not in Kashmiri: Skt. bhratr Sh. za (cf. Panjabi bhra), Ksh. boy. In Shina, as in several Indian languages, Sanskrit v becomes 'b', but in Kashmiri its position is generally strong. Skt. vish Sh. bish, Ksh. veh; Skt. vatsa Sh. batshar (c.f. Hindi bachra). Ksh. votshh. Terminal b, in Shina tends to become p and terminal d is pronounced as t in words of Persian or Sanskrit origin; gulab > gulap, garib > garlp, jibh > jip faulad > fulat. This is rarely the case in Kashmiri.

 That should be enough to blast the myth that the Kashmiri phonetic system is allied to that of Shina. The fact is that phonetically Shina has little to do with Kashmiri, though it has features that can be found in Hindi/Urdu and Punjabi. Grierson has unfortunately chosen to give selective, distorted and misleading information by taking words- from Dardic and Kafir speeches and even from the so-called Siraji and other supposed dialects of Kashmiri.

Morphological Differences

We find the same process of falsification of facts repeated when we come to morphological features. Grierson has kicked so much dust about these-accidence and syntax and so on-that it would be worthwhile to examine in brief some of the important ways in which these features differ in the two languages15:

(1) Shina has two sets of accusative-the first after transitive verbs in general and the second after verbs of striking (with hand, stick, knife etc.), the nominative having the same form as the Ist accusative.

 (2) The genetive in Shina is formed by adding the suffix- ei or -ai in Kashmiri post positions. un and iny and n and ni are added to the dative for masculine and feminine, singular and plural proper nouns relating to human beings, uk and iky and ich and ichi in case of inanimate objects. For nouns other than proper names hund or sund, hindy or sindy in case of masculine singular and plural and hinz and sinz and hinzi or sinzi in case of feminine singular and plural nouns are added.

 (3) Shina has a prepositional case to be used after most prepositions, Kashmiri has no prepositional case.

 (4) In Shina separate suffixes -r and -zh are used to denote in and on or upon in the locative.

 Examples:

(i) ai disher (in that place); hier, in (my, his, your) heart.

 (ii) mecizh, generally used with azhe, as mecezh azhe, upon the table;

 (iii) anu manuzezh (it ibareh nush, I have no faith in this man.

In Kashmiri locative is formed by using postpositions like andar, tal, dur, kyath, nyabar, pyath etc. with the dative case.

 (5) Pronouns in Shina are mostly of the Hindi/Urdu, Panjabi type, except the nominative and agentive plural of Ist person masc. be, bes which appear to be influenced by Kashmiri. Only pronouns in the 3rd person have a feminine in singular. The most important difference is that unlike Kashmiri there are no regular indefinite and relative pronouns in Shina.

 The interrogative pronoun is commonly used in their place especially in negative clauses. For example:

(i) ko, (who): ko mush, there was no one, mutu ko (someonel

 (ii) jeh (what): jega nush, (nothing at all), mutu jek (something else).

 (iii) kos thai buti daulat naye gub (the man who lost all your wealth), main jek daulat haniek, (whatever wealth there may be of mine).

6. In Kashmiri adjectives are declined and agree with the noun in gender, number and case. In Shina only adjectives ending in -u are declined, and these agree with the noun in gender and number only, not in case. Other adjectives are not declined and are treated as nouns.

 7. There are no forms for the comparative and superlative in Shina. These are expressed by means of the preposition jo or zho, (from, than). Thus: chunu, small: mojo chunu, smaller than, but, e jo chunu: smaller than all i.e., smallest. In Kashmiri the comparative and superlative are formed by using khwoti and sariviy khwoti respectively.

 8. Numerals in Shina are counted by twenties or scores, though there are words for hundred, thousand and lakh (the last two have been borrowed from Hindi/ Urdu). To form numbers beyond twenty the conjunctive particle ga is added to it. For example bi(h), twenty: biga ek, twenty and one or twenty one; bi ga dai, twenty and ten or thirty; dibyo ga che, two-twenty and three or forty three and so on. In Kashmiri cardinals are formed as in other modern Indo-Aryan languages - akavuh, twenty one; trih, thirty, tsatji, forty, teyitae:ji forty three and soon.

 9. Cardinal numbers in Kashmiri are declined in agreement with their nouns. In Shina, they are declined only when used by themselves as nouns, not otherwise.

 10. Ordinals in Kashmiri are formed by adding the suffix -m or -yum to the cardinal, whereas in Shina ordinals after pumuko or 'the first' are formed by adding - mono and -mone in masc. singular, and plural and -moni and -monye in fem. singular and plural respectively.

 11. Like Hindi/Urdu and Panjabi, noun of agency is formed in Kashmiri by adding vol (Hindi vala) in masculine and vajyen (vali) in feminine singular. This is not the case in Dardic languages. In Shina, the auxiliary verb is used to express the idea. For instance, Ek achi hanu musha hanu, one eye is man is, a one- eyed man; shei jakur hani chei hani, white hair is woman is, a white-haired woman.

 12. In Shina verbs most commonly used are thoiki (ta do) boiki (to be) and doiki (to give). Boiki and thoiki are correlative verbs used with the same nouns or adjectives to form intransitive and transitive verbs respectively. This is not the case with the corresponding verbs karun, asun and dyun in Kashmiri.

 13. Pronominal suffixes are a prominent feature of Kashmiri, but they rarely occur in Dardic languages.

 14. The present tense in Kashmiri is formed by the auxiIiary verb chhu and its various masculine and feminine forms. In Shina auxiliary forms hanus, hane, hanu, haniek etc. are used which bear a similarity to hun, hai, hain, honge etc. It must be stated that substantive verb forms based on the root chha occur in many Indian languages, but not in Dardic languages.

 15. There is no ordinary way to express the idea of continuance in Shina. While in some cases the word hel is employed to indicate habit, the conception underlying the Kashmiri bi osus khyavan (I was eating), bi gos khyavan, (I went on eating), su rud vuchha-n, (he kept looking) etc. is not expressed in everyday speech in Shina.

 Kashmiri differs from Dardic languages in numerous other ways, all of which cannot be recounted here for want of space. A few similarities there may be, but these are mainly because of the Sanskrit factor common to Indo-Aryan languages. In view of such overwhelming evidence that separates Kashmiri from the Dardic group in such important aspects as phonetics and accidence, the assertion that Kashmiri possesses nearly all the features that are peculiar to Dardic and in which Dardic agrees with Eranian" looks preposterous. It is difficult to believe, yet it is true that Grierson has gone to the extent of distorting linguistic facts and making false and misleading statments- a case of suppresso veri and suggesto falsi- in his desperate attempt to procure evidence for his pet theory. A glaring example of the tendency on his part can be seen in his suggestion that all basic Kashmiri numerals are Dardic and therefore Eranian in spite of their obvious development from the old- Indo-Aryan, or the "Pali-Sanskrit" pattern to use Siddeshwar Verma's words Similarly, it is a known fact that Kashmiri borrowed the Persian poetic forms like the Ghazal and Masnavi and the metre Bahar-e-Hajaz in the 19th century, but it is the Vakh and the Shruk that are considered to be the representative Kashmiri metres. How does this lead to the conclusion that Kashmiri metrology is basically Iranian? Fifteenth century Kashmiri works Banasur Katha and Sukh Dukh Charit have employed well-known Sanskrit metres, which have contributed primarily to the evolution of vatsun or the Kashmiri short lyric, and also some original Kashmiri metres like Thaddo and Phuro. These facts are too signiticant to be overlooked.

Kashmiri a Sanskritic Language

Just because Kashmiri is different in some ways from languages like Hindi and Gujrati, does it make linguistic sense to exclude it altogether from the Indo-Aryan family? How strong its affinities are with this family is revealed by its basic word-stock, or, to put it in Grierson's own words, "the commonest words-the words that are retained longest in any language, however mixed, and seldom borrowed". Surely words relating to parts of the body 'physical states and conditions names of close relatives, animals and bids, edibles, minerals, objects of common use etc. can be described as such words and show that their etymology can be umistakably traced to Sanskrit.16 (For details see Appendix I).

Morphological Features

Coming to accidence or morphological features, Kashmiri reveals its Sanskritic roots no less firmly. Declensions of Kashmiri nouns show how new cases have developed from old Sanskrit bases. For instance, the instrumental in masculine singulars takes the case-ending -an which is a remanant of Skt. -ena or -ena: Ksh. tsuran, Skt. chorena. The dative suffix -as or -is is obviously the same as Pali - assa, which in turn is a derivative of Skt. -asya, though there it is used with the genetive: Ksh. tsuras, Pali chorassa, Skt. chorasya. The locative singular takes the ending -i or e: Ksh. vati, Skt. pathi; Ksh. gari, Skt. grihe. The ablative masculine singular ends in -a or -i, a remanant of Skt. -at: Ksh. tsuri, Skt. chorat For agentive masculine plurals the affix used is -av which appears to have evolved from the Vedic ebhih: Ksh. tsurav, Skt. chorebhih. In the accusative/ dative masc. pl., the case-ending -an can be traced to Skt. -anam: Ksh. tsuran, Skt. choranam: Likewise, fem. sing. nouns take the affixes -yi or -i in accusative/dative/agentive case which can be said to have been derived from the Sanskrit case-endings im, -ya, yah: Ksh. d-iviyi, Skt. deviml devya/devyah.

 Like other modern Indo-Aryan languages, Kashmiri forms a new genetive by adding postpositions to the dative and agentive cases. The postpositions used are hund or sund with masculine singular and hinz or sinz with feminine singular nouns and pronouns in case of animate objects the plural forms being, hindy or sindy and hinzi or sinzi respectively Punjabi uses handa or hunda and sanda and Sindhi sanda. According to Becames, sanda is the Panjabi form of the Prakrit santah18, which becomes handa and hunda' with the s changing to h. Buhler is of the opinion that Kashrniri sund comes from Sanskrit shyunda19, which appears to be a little far-fetched. The genetive takes the postpositions un and iny also in masculine and feminine nouns denoting living things; the plural forms are iny and ni. With inanimate objects uk and ich are used in singular and iky and chi are used. These correspond to the Hindi ka, ke and ki, while in Gujrati we have no (bapno ghar- father's house). The feminine forms of the Kashmiri genetive remind one of the corresponding Marathi forms chi che etc.

 Several other cases can also be formed by adding postpositions to the dative.

 Kashmiri pronouns have preserved many old forms, which occur in Sanskrit but are not found in Prakrit. For example, the personal pronouns (third person) su (he) and su (she) are quite akin to Sanskrit sah and sa. and their plural forms tim (they masc.) and timi (they fem.) to Sanskrit te and tah. All other forms of this pronoun have evolved from the Sanskrit root tad. The Kashmiri first person pronoun bi or bo (I) is a remarkable new form which Buhler regards as "a representative of Skt. bhavat, originally present participle of bhu, 'to be"'. All other forms of this pronoun have developed from the Sanskrit root asmad, as is the case with Punjabi and some other modern Indo-Aryan languages Ksh. asy, panj. assi. Kashmiri interrogative pronoun, kus, who, and its plural kam, as also their various forms reveal a close relationship with Skt. kah and kas. The demonstrative pronouns yi, this has its origin in the Skt. root idam while the relative pronoun yus and yim come from Skt. yah yo and ye.

 Verbal forms in Kashmiri follow Sanskrit in being derived from the root of the verb, especailly in the past tense. As Buhler has pointed out, "it is impossible to explain them by Kashmiri'20. In this context Buhler cites deshun, 'to see' and dyun to give; as examples. From these we get the forms dyuth, saw', and dyut, was given', which are derived from dittho Skt. drstitah and ditto < Skt. dattah respectively. This process is visible in the formation of all basic tenses- past, present and future. Various forms of the Kashmiri auxiliary verb chhu and as, which are derived from the Skt. roots kshi, 'to be' and as, and occur in several other Indian languages too, are formed by affixing remanants of personal pronouns to the stem. The simple future tense is formed by adding the suffix -i to the nominative base in the 3rd person, a remanant of the Sanskrit suffix -syati: Ksh. kari (-he/she will do), Skt. Karis yati, Ksh. mari (-he/she shall die), Skt. marisyati, Ksh. vegli (it will melt), Skt. vigalisyati, Kashmiri imperative verbs can hardly be distinguished from their corresponding Sanskrit forms. For example we have, Ksh. gatsh, 'go' Skt. gachcha; Ksh. Iekh, write, Skt likha; Ksh. an, bring', Skt. anaya; Ksh. dav, run Skt. dhava, Ksh. lab, find', Skt. labha(sva), Ksh. kar; do', Skt. kuru, Ksh. van, tell', Skt. varnaya and so on. It appears that most Kashmiri verbs spring from Sanskrit roots.

 Verbal nouns are formed in Kashmiri by adding the suffix -un to the base, which can be easily traced to Skt. -nam or nam and is similar to the Hindi suffix -na. Examples Ksh. marun. Skt. maranam (Hindi marna; Ksh. tarun Skt. taranarn (Hindi tarana); Ksh. vavun, Skt. vapanam -(Hindi bona); Ksh. pihun, Skt. pesanarn (Hindi pisna); Ksh. pihun, Skt. pesanam (Hindi pisna); Ksh. tsihun, Skt. chusanam (Hindi chusana), Ksh. khanun, Skt. khananam (Hindi khodana Ksh. tachhun, Skt. takshanam; Ksh. thavun, Skt. sthapanam; Ksh. vuchhun, Skt. vekshanam (Panj. vekhna), Ksh. vatun. Skt. vestanam and so on.

 The Kashmiri conjunctive participle -ith preserves elements of the old Sanskrit form -tva. Thus, we have Ksh. karith (-having done), Skt. Krtva, Ksh. namith (having bowed) < namitta < Skt. namitva (nutva), Ksh. gatshith having gone) < ae gachitta (-having gone") < gachhitva < ae gachhitva (gatva), likhit < Skt. likhitva, rachhit Skt. rakshitva.

 Kashmiri adverbs too point to their old Indo-Aryan origins, quite transparently:

1. Adverbs of Time:

 

Kashmiri	English	Sanskrit
yeli	when	yarhi
teli	then	tarhi
kar	when, at what time	karhi
az	today	adya (Pkt. ajja)
rath	yesterday, yesternight	ratrih
suli	early	sakae (saka+ika)
tsiry	late	chiram
pati	afterwards	pashchat
adi	after that	ada (Vedic)
prath dohi	everyday	prati+divase
prathryati	everymonth	prati+rituh
prath vari	every year	prati+varse
gari-gari	every now and then	ghatika (Pkt. ghatia, Hindi gari ghari)
yuthuy	as soon as	yathapi
tyuthuy	at that very moment	tathapi
totany	till then	tavat
yotany	till such time until	yavat, as

2. Adverbs of Place:

 

Kashmiri	English	Sanskrit
yeti	here, wherever	yatra
yetyath	at this place
tati	there	tatra
tatyath	at that place
ati	at that place/from that place	atra
kati	at which placet (interrogative)	kutra
yot	to this place/to whichever place	itah
tot	to that place	tatah
kot	to which place	kutah, kutra
tal	under, below	tale
manz	in, inside	madhye (Pkt. majjhe, Hindi manjh)
manzbag	in the middle	madhya+bhage
dur	far	dura
duri	from far	dure
yapari	on this side	iha+pare

3. Adverbs of Manner:

 

Kashmiri	English	Sanskrit
yithi	in which manner, as in this manner	yatha
tithi	in that manner, like/that	tatha
kithi	in what manner (interrogative)	katham
yithi-tithi	somehow	yatha+tatha

Kashmiri conjunctions too show the same trend with 'ti' and, coming from Skt. tatha, 'ti', 'also' from Skt. iti'21 and beyi, and, 'more', 'again', from Pkt. 'beiya' Skt. 'dwitlya'.

Order of words

Inspite of all this massive evidence the fact that Kashmiri is an Indo-Aryan language is sought to be dismissed with the argument that the order of words in a Kashmiri sentence is not the same as in Hindi or other north Indian languages. But the order of words is not the same in any of the Dardic languages either which have a totally different syntax. Besides this is not the whole truth. True, the order of words very nearly approaches that of English in direct or coupla sentences with verb coming in between subject and object, but certain other types of Kashmiri sentences do resemble those of Hindi and even Sanskrit, as for instance, in certain types of imperative and interrogative sentences. Consider the following examples:-

(1) Imperative sentences:

 

Kashmiri	English	Hindi
yot yi ti bati khe	come here and eat your food	yahan a aur khana kha
humis adkas nishi beh	sit near that boy	us larke ke pas baith
yim palav chhal	wash these clothes	ye kapre dho
chay chyath gatsh	leave after taking tea	chay pikar ja
guris (pyath) khas	mount the horse	ghore par charh
vwazul posh an	get the red flower	lal phul la
kuthis manz par	Read inside the room	kamre mein parh
yitsi kathi ma kar	Don't talk so much	itni baten mat kar
tot dwad ma che	Don't take hot milk	garam dudh mat pi
nyabar ma ner	Don't go out	Bahar mat nikal
gyavun ma gyav	Don't sing a song	gana mat ga
vuni ma shong	Don't sleep yet	abhi mat so

Some of the simpler imperatives can hardly be distinguished from Sanskrit:&n