father; piūsē, our father; piūi, thy father; piūvē, your father;
pius, his father; piūnē, their father. A junction vowel is often
inserted between these suffixes and the main word to assist the
pronunciation. Further examples will be found under the head of
verbs.
Conjugation.—As in Marathi (q.v.) there are, in both languages, two conjugations, of which one (intransitive) has -a- and the other (transitive) -e- or -i- for its characteristic letter. The differences appear in the present participle and, in Sindhi, also in the conjunctive participle, the present subjunctive and imperative. The two latter are the only original synthetic tenses which have survived in Sindhi, but in Lahnda the old synthetic future is also in common use. Both languages have a passive voice formed by adding ij or īj to the root. This form is not employed for the past participle or for tenses derived from it. The following are the principal parts of the regular verb in each conjugation:—
| First Conjugation. | Second Conjugation. | |||
| Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | |
| Infinitive | halaṇᵘ, | halaṇ, to go. | māraṇᵘ, | māraṇ, to kill. |
| Present participle | halandō, | haldā, going. | mārīndō, | mārēndō, killing. |
| Past participle | haliō, | haleā, gone. | māriō, | māreā, killed. |
| Conjunctive participle | hali, | hali, having gone. | mārē, | mārī, having killed |
It will be observed that, as in most other Indo-Aryan vernaculars, the past participle of the transitive verb is passive in signification. There is therefore no need of a past participle for the passive voice. The Sindhi present participle of the passive voice follows a different rule of formation, and, in Lahnda, it omits the letter j, thus S. māribō (Pr. māriavvac), L. mārīndā, being killed. In other respects the passive, S. mārijaṇᵘ, L. mārījaṇ, to be killed, is conjugated like a regular verb of the first conjugation. The passive is directly derived from the Outer Prakrit passive in -ijja-. The origin of the other forms is dealt with under Hindostani and Marathi.
The present subjunctive is the direct descendant of the old Prakrit (q.v.) present indicative. It is conjugated as follows:—
| Singular. | Plural. | |||||||
| First Conjugation. |
Second Conjugation. |
First Conjugation. |
Second Conjugation. | |||||
| Person. | Sindhi and Lahnda. |
Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | |
| 1. | halā̃ | māriā̃ | mārā̃ | halū̃ | māriū̃ | mārū̃ | ||
| 2. | halē̃ | māriē̃ | māriē̃ | halō | māriō | mārō | ||
| 3. | halē | māriē | mārē | halanᵉ | halin | mārinᵉ | mārin | |
The imperative is formed very similarly. In Lahnda the future is mārēsā̃ (Pr. mārissaṁ), I shall kill, conjugated like mārā̃. The Sindhi future is formed by adding the nominative pronominal suffixes to the present participle. It will be remembered that there are no nominative suffixes of the third person. For that person, therefore, the simple participle is employed. There are slight euphonic changes of the termination of the participle in the other persons. Thus, halandō, he will go; halandusᵉ, I shall go; and so on.
The past tense is formed from the past participle, with pronominal suffixes added in both languages. As in the transitive verb the past participle is passive in signification, the subject (see article Hindostani) must be put in the agent case, and the participle agrees in gender and number with the direct object, or, if the object is put in the dative case instead of the accusative, is treated impersonally in the masculine. Examples of this tense are:—
Intransitive verb—S. haliō, L. haleā, he went; S. L. halī, she went; S. haliu-sᵉ, L. haleu-m, I (masc.) went; S. halia-sᵉ, L. haliu-m, I (fem.) went, and so on.
Transitive verb—S. māriō, L. māreā, he was killed ; S. L. mārī, she was killed; S. māriu-mᵉ, L. māreu-m, he was killed by me, I killed him; S. māria-mᵉ, L. māriu-m, she was killed by me, I killed her; S. pātishāhᵃ sajī gālhᵉ būdhāī, the-whole matter (fem.) was-related (fem.) by-the-king (agent), the king related the whole matter; S. tāhᵉ-khē sāthᵃ chaḍiō, with-reference-to-her, by-the-caravan, it-was-abandoned (impersonal), i.e. the caravan abandoned her.
There are numerous compound tenses formed by conjugating the verb substantive with one or other of the participles. The usual forms of the present and past of this verb are as follows:—
| Present, “I am,” &c. (com. gen.). | Past, “I was,” &c. (masc.). | |||||||
| Singular. | Plural. | Singular. | Plural. | |||||
| Person. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. | Sindhi. | Lahnda. |
| 1. | āhiyā̃ | hā̃ | āhiyū̃ | haī̃ | hōsᵉ | hāus | huāsī̃ | hāsē |
| 2. | āhē̃ | hē̃ | āhiyō | hō | huē̃ | hāē̃ | huaᵘ | havē |
| 3. | āhē | hē | āhinᵉ | hin | hō | hā | hā | hāin |
The past has slightly different forms with a feminine subject. Sindhi examples of the compound tenses are halandō āhiyā̃, I am going; halandō hōsᵉ, I was going; haliō āhiyā̃, I have gone; and so on. The Lahnda tenses are made on the same principles.
We have seen the important part that pronominal suffixes play in the conjugation of the verb. But their use is not confined to the examples given above. Additional suffixes may be added to indicate the object, direct or remote. Thus, S. māriē̃, thou mayest kill; māriē̃-mᵉ, thou mayest kill me; māriō (he) was killed; māriā̃-ī̃ (for māriō-ī̃), (he) was killed by-him, he killed him; māriā̃-ī̃-mᵉ, it (impersonal)-was killed by-him with-reference-to-me, i.e. he killed me; dinā̃-ī̃-sᵉ, was-given by-him to-him, he gave to him.
Numerous verbs have irregular past participles, derived directly from the Prakrit past participles, instead of being made by adding -iō to the root. These must be learnt from the grammars. We may mention a few very common ones: S. karaṇᵘ, L. karaṇ, to do, to make, past participle S. kiō, kītō, L. kītā; S. ḍiaṇᵘ, L. ḍēaṇ, to give, past participle S. ḍinō, L. ḍittā; S. labhaṇᵘ, L. labbhaṇ, to be obtained, past participle S. ladhō, L. laddhā. The many compound verbs are formed much as in Hindostani, and must be learnt from the grammars.
Literature.—Sindhi and Lahnda possess no literature worthy of the name. Such as they have consists of translations from Arabic and Persian. There is, however, as usual in uncultivated dialects, in both languages a large stock of folk-songs—rude poems dealing with the popular traditions of the country. Some of these have been published in Colonel Sir Richard Temple's Legends of the Panjab (3 vols., Bombay, 1884-1900). The late Professor Trumpp published one text of some importance under the title of Sindhī Literature, the Dīvān of Abd-ul-Latīf, known by the name of Shāha jō Risālō (Leipzig, 1866).
Authorities.—G. A. Grierson, “Vrācaḍa and Sindhī,” in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1902), p. 47; G. Stack, Grammar and Dictionary (both Bombay, 1849); E. Trumpp, Grammar (London and Leipzig, 1872). This last is still the standard work on the language, although much of the philological portion is now out of date. It was the pioneer of the comparative study of the modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars. G. Shirt, Udharam Thavurdas and S. F. Mirza, Sindhi-English Dictionary (Karachi, 1879).
W. St Clair Tisdall's Simplified Punjabi Grammar (London, 1889) also deals, in an appendix, with Lahnda. E. O'Brien, Glossary of the Multani Language (1st ed., Lahore, 1881; 2nd ed., revised by J. Wilson and Hari Kishen Kaul, Lahore, 1903); T. Bomford, “Rough Notes on the Grammar of the Language spoken in the Western Panjab,” in Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. lxiv. (1895), pt. i. pp. 290 ff.; the same, “Pronominal Adjuncts in the Language spoken in the Western and Southern Parts of the Panjab,” ib. vol. lxvi. (1897), pt. i. pp. 146 ff.; A. Jukes, Dictionary of the Jatki or Western Panjabi Language (Lahore and London, 1900); J. Wilson, Grammar and Dictionary of Western Panjabi as spoken in the Shahpur District (Lahore, 1899).
For both languages the authorities quoted under the articles Indo-Aryan Languages and Prakrit may be consulted with advantage. Vol. viii. of the Linguistic Survey of India contains full particulars of both in great detail.
SIN-EATER, a man who for trifling payment was believed to take upon himself, by means of food and drink, the sins of a deceased person. The custom was once common in many parts of England and in the highlands of Scotland, and survived until recent years in Wales and the counties of Shropshire and Herefordshire. Usually each village had its official sin-eater to whom notice was given as soon as a death occurred. He at once went to the house, and there, a stool being brought, he sat down in front of the door. A groat, a crust of bread and a bowl of ale were handed him, and after he had eaten and drunk he rose and pronounced the ease and rest of the dead person, for whom he thus pawned his own soul. The earlier form seems to have been more realistic, the sin-eater being taken into the death-chamber, and, a piece of bread and possibly cheese having been placed on the breast of the corpse by a relative, usually a woman, it was afterwards handed to the sin-eater, who ate it in the presence of the dead. He was then handed his fee, and at once hustled and thrust out of the house amid execrations, and a shower of sticks, cinders or whatever other missiles were handy. The custom
