33. We will now select from IN vocabularies some monosyllabic words with regard to the original monosyllabism of which there is no doubt: Old Jav. luh, “tear”, sih, “pity”, lin, “to speak” ; Karo pĕt, “to desire”; Gayo tul, “unable to get through (a narrow space)”. — Other cases will follow later.
It will now be shown by the quotation of texts that such words exist not only in the dictionary but in actual speech. For this purpose we shall select extracts from a dead language, Old Jav., and a living one, Karo:
I. Old Jav. examples. Mahābhārata, edited by Juynboll, 9: maňkana lih saň Bhĩma = “Thus spake Bhĩma”. — Mahābhārata, a, 54: deniň sih n ikaň śvāna = “Out of pity for[1] this dog”. — Rāmāyana, edited by Kern, VIII, 40, 4: humilĩ ta luh = “Then {=ta) flowed tears”.
II. Karo examples. Si Laga Man, edited by Joustra, p. 7: maka sěkali lit sada bapa ; tubuh anak-na, tapi mate rusur; jadi anak-na sada igĕlari-na si Laga Man[2] , maka[3] pět man, nina = “There + was { = lit) once a father; (there) were + born children of + him, but (they) died one + after + another ; (so it) came + to + pass + that of + (the) + children of + him one was + called by + him (= na) the greedy (in) eating that (it) might + desire to + eat, said + he” = “There was once a father who had children that all died one after another ; so he gave one the name of ' Glutton ', in order that, as he imagined, it might eat heartily ”,
34. The number of roots used as actual words is nowhere large.[4] Many languages have, apart from words of form,[5]
§ 80, and Essay III,"§§ 34-5.]
- ↑ The construction is a genitive one, as in Latin, n being a genitive preposition.
- ↑ man is a doubtful case, it may be primitive or it may be a contraction of maan, which is found, e.g., in Gayo.
- ↑ maka has very various functions; it can introduce both principal and subordinate clauses, as in this extract.
- ↑ [See § 71 and Essay II, §§ 51-2.]
- ↑ [In the original, " Formwörter ", the meaning of which term is illustrated by the examples given here and in § 72. See also Essay II, §§ 81, 84-114. " Words of form " must not be confounded with " formatives" (which are not separate words, but mere affixes, though they were often originally independent " words of form "): see Essay II,
