93. The question now suggests itself, what is the meaning, what the function, of each of these formatives that fashion word-bases out of roots ? This subject is enormously complex and will also furnish material for many a dissertation. As in some other cases, the present writer wishes merely to throw some light on this matter by the mention of a particular instance: in many IN dictionaries there is a not inconsiderable number of word-bases beginning with dĕ-. When we survey all the cases, the conclusion follows that this dĕ- forms verbal word-bases from interjections:
| Mal.: ciṅ, “ jingle ” | dĕciṅ, “ to jingle ”. |
| Karo: kuṅ, “ cry of a quail ” | dĕkuṅ, “ to cry like a quail ”. |
| Gayo: buk, “ bump ! ” | dĕbuk, “ to fall with a thud ”. |
| Sund.: ṅek, “ shrill tone ” | dĕṅek, “ to yell ”. |
| Bulu:[1] | dĕtup, “ to bang (like a shot) ”. |
| Iloko:[1] | dessoor, “ to rustle ”. |
We may ascribe this formative dĕ, with the meaning assigned to it, to Original IN.
94. The further question arises, whether the formatives were not originally independent words. In actual fact this can, with considerable probability, be argued of many of them. Toba has word-bases like tuliṅ, “ to fall over, to be knocked over ”, tulak, “ to be turned back ”, tulus, “ to be realized, to come to pass ”; these have passive or intransitive meanings. Now in Toba we also find that by means of the preposition tu, “ to ”, and word-bases, phrases are formed which are precisely equivalent to passive verbs : thus gadis is the word-base for “ sale ” and tu gadis means “ to be sold ”. Now it is quite credible that this preposition is also inherent in the above-named tulak, etc. In that case, however, we have here what are really combinations of two roots after the fashion mentioned in § 84.
