The spoken Bengali of Midnapore is quite an old form of Bengali. Midnapore’s place in the cultural life of Bengal is also quite important. The people of Midnapore have never lost their vitality of life, even when passing their days enduring countless insults. Indeed, in the pre-Pathan era, the Pathan and Mughal eras, and even in the beginning of British rule, which was witness to the Chuyar Rebellion [cuyáŕ vidroha], we have seen great agitation for freedom there; later, in 1942, there was an earth-shaking, stirring agitation. I can see today that many of you have come here from Midnapore. The spoken language of the western part of Midnapore, which means Jhaŕgrám subdivision, is a dialect of central Rarhi Bengali. This same dialect is prevalent in Mayurbhainj and Singhbhum. The spoken language of the southern coastal areas of Midnapore, from the mouth of the Rasulpur River to the mouth of the Suvarnarekha River, I have named Contai Bengali. The full pronunciation of the consonants is present in great measure in this dialect. Based on the evidence, it is easy to arrive at the conclusion that the poet Kalidasa was from this area.

Anyhow, the northern part of our well-known land of Rarh, which we generally call north Rarh, was known in olden times as Varddhamán Bhukti. Roughly speaking, north Rarh consisted of modern-day Birbhum, Dumka, Dhanbad, western Murshidabad, Burdwan and Hooghly. Southern Rarh, or Dańd́a Bhukti, consisted of certain parts of Hooghly, certain parts of Burdwan, Howrah, Midnapore, Bankura, Purulia, Singhbhum, Baleshwar and certain parts of Mayurbhainj District. This Dańd́a Bhukti was invaded several times during the reign of the Kesharii kings of Orissa (Anantakesharii, Yayatikesharii). During the Maratha invasions, when part of Orissa’s revenue had to be given to the Marathas, the then nawab, Alivarddi Khan, placed certain parts of Midnapore, along with 24 Paraganas, Chittagong and Burdwan, partially in the hands of the British. Dańd́a Bhukti was known as Hijlii during the Pathan and the beginning of the Mughal eras. When what we call kájubádám [cashew nut] was brought to this country by the Portuguese, it was first cultivated in Hijlii. Thus the actual Bengali name for cashew nut is hijlii bádám. This nut was also cultivated extensively in Kerala. When the farmers of that region wanted cash value in exchange for their nuts they used to pronounce it as “cashu”. Consequently the name hijlii bádám later became “cashew nut”. A certain gájii from a region in Turkey by the name of Soharward arrived in Hijlii to preach his religion.⁽¹⁾ He wanted to convert Hijlii into an ideological centre for his religion, thus he gave it the name Madinápur. When Nawab Alivarddi Khan turned over this Madinápur to the British they christened it “Midnapore”. Rather than using either name, Midnapore or Madinápur, the local people call it Mediniipur. Near the end of British rule Bengal’s first minister (at that time he was not called chief minister) was Mr. H. S. Soharwardi, a descendant of the gájii who came from Soharward. This Midnapore is an ideological centre for various reasons.

The next subject of discussion is the ablative case [apádána káraka]. The word apádána s derived apa – á – dá + anat́. It means “to take something from something else”. In Bengali the indeclinables hate [from], theke, t́heine (t́háni-e), and so on, are used for this. Similarly in Hindi the indeclinable se is used, in Oriya ru, etc.

It is said that the ablative is the fifth case. The root word of the word paiṋcamii [fifth] is panc. It is a Vedic word which means “hand-work”. Whatever may be the work done by the hand – whether patting someone on the back or making rice-cakes – it all comes within the scope of panc. In later times the word shilpana came to be used in Sanskrit for work done by hand. Thus one who did work by hand, or shilpana kriyá, is a shilpii. Nowadays the word shilpii is used all over. For example, one who sings is called kańt́hashilpii [vocal artist]. Now we can call someone skilled in handiwork a shilpii, for example, vayanashilpii [knitter], tantushilpii [weaver], and so on. But how is it that one who is skilled in vocal work can be called shilpii? On the one hand, the word yantrashilpii [instrumentalist] can be used. The word shilpii can work for someone who plays a sitar. But the word kańt́hashilpii is not correct. The word kańt́hashilpii is an oxymoron like “gold stone-dish”. A dish can be gold or a dish can be stone but it cannot be both. Similarly, one who sings is a gáyaka [singer], not a shilpii. Those who sing are called gáyaka if they are male and gáyakii if they are female. Many people call lady singers gáyiká but this is incorrect; the proper word is gáyakii because gae + ńaka = gáyaka. By adding the feminine suffix uniip we get gáyakii. I would like to add here that as with gáyiká, the word seviká is incorrect. Nevertheless the feminine form seviká of the word sevaka is extremely common. Its correct form is sevaká.

Now the question is: why is iṋa used to spell paiṋca instead of na or ḿ? The rule for both Sanskrit and Vedic is that if the original word or original verbal root is spelled with the apadánta na or ma then the corresponding word takes the fifth letter of that varga. For example, the original verbal root panc is pronounced with apadánta na and since ca is added to it then it is spelt with the fifth letter of the ca varga, or iṋa. The word sauṋga comes from the verbal root sanj in accordance with the very same rule. Here the na is not padánta, it is not at the end of the word. Since the ja is replaced by ga then the concerned varga’s fifth letter is used, that is, uṋa instead of na. For this reason it is spelled uṋga. Similarly the word raiṋjana comes from the verbal root rańj. The ńa in rańj is apadánta, so instead of ńa or ḿ the fifth letter ina is used. Similarly, gauṋgá is spelled with unga. The word gauṋgá is derived gam + gam + d́a + feminine á. Gam means “towards ga” and ga here means “an extensive land”. Gam + d́a + feminine á = gá, that is, “a woman who so goes”. Gauṋgá means “that river which flows through an extensive land” – from Gangotri towards Gangasagar. Gauṋgá is spelled with padánta ma, thus should it not have an anusvár? No, it does not because even though the m (with hasanta) of the first gam is padánta, it is not by itself a word or a verbal root. It is the singular second case of the word ga. After the second gam is joined to the first the ma is dropped so it does not come under consideration. Hence gauṋgá is definitely spelled with the fifth letter of the ga varga, that is, unga. However in the spelling of sampádak, shauṋkar, and so on, either the fifth letter ma, or una, or the anusvára can be used, that is, either sampádak or saḿpádak, shauṋkar or shaḿkar. Nowadays we see a tendency to spell gauṋgá with the anusvára instead of una, but this is incorrect. In some languages they go so far as to spell the word vasanta as vasaḿta.

As I was saying, the original Vedic word panc means “work done by hand”. Now the hand has five fingers, thus the meaning of panc became “five”. The Vedic panc became painj in Farsi; it also means “five”. That which is formed out of five áb, or five streams of water, is paiṋjáb. An impress of five fingers is called paiṋjá in Farsi. Fighting with the wrist and the help of five fingers is called paiṋjá kaśá.

The rule that the ablative case is the fifth case is followed closely in Sanskrit. The ablative case uses the fifth case-ending to indicate that something is taken from a specific source. For example, narát [from man], Rámát [from Rama], and so on.

In Sanskrit the fifth case has its own separate form but this is not true in Bengali or in any other Indian language. In most cases the fifth case is formed by adding ablative-indicating indeclinables, such as theke, ceye, hate, etc. after the sixth case-ending, for example, Rámer theke [from Ram]. In Hindi the indeclinable se is added to form the fifth case, for example, Ramse. In such an instance there is no need for the sixth case-ending. In English the preposition “from” is used for this purpose. In old English “unto” was also used. In the old English of twelve hundred years ago “unto” had three common uses corresponding to “towards”, “to”, and “from”. In modern English “unto” is practically not used at all, however in the Bible it is used to mean “to”.

In old Bengali, from fifteen hundred years ago to about six hundred years ago, the word hante was used, meaning hate [from]. The word hante appears in the Sriśt́irahasya, written by Saeyad Mohamad Alawal, the court poet of the king of Arakan. The language of the people of Arakan was Magii, a Burmese language. Bear in mind here that all languages in Burma are Burmese languages. For example, Arakanii or Magii, Chin, Kachin, Tenaserim, Burman and so on. However the principal language is Burman. It is also the language of the central government. Although Magii is a Burmese language, it is not Burman. All of these Burmese languages are written in more or less the same script. Of course there is a slight difference between some of the letters. The Burmese alphabet is Indo-Aryan, that is, it is formed with the Indian letters – a, á, ka, kha, etc.

The script of Thailand’s Thai language and of the Tibetan language belong to the same family. Although the people of these lands belong to the Mongolian race, unlike the Chinese their scripts are not pictorial, but rather Indo-Aryan. The royal language or government language of Arakan was Bengali. The word hante was common in the Bengali of that time. Saeyad Alawal has written:

Káke kalla nirbalii káháke bali ár
Háŕ hante nirmiyá karaya puni hár

The modern Bengali word haite or hate comes from the word hante. The ablative-indicating indeclinable theke comes from the old Burmese word táikiyá. The Burmese word táikiyá became táikyá in the southern Chittagong dialect and from this comes the modern Bengali thákiyá or theke. The mixed dialect that was formed from an admixture of Magii and southern Chittagong’s Coxbazaar dialect is known colloquially as Zarvadi Bengali. The word táikiyá no longer exists in modern Magii or Burmese but theke is used extensively in modern Bengali.

All languages have an ablative case. In Bengali and most of the Indian languages the fifth case is created by first putting the original word in the sixth case and then adding the corresponding ablative-indicating indeclinable. For example, from maen [I] comes mujhse [from me]. Urdu follows the same rule. In Hindi and Urdu se functions in both the third and fifth cases. “With” does not fall into any specific case. Even though in Sanskrit “with” indicates the third case and makes it instrumental (as in saha-yoge trtiiyá [adding “with” makes it third case]), saha-yoge trtiiyá does not hold true in Bengali. Adding “with” makes it the sixth case and genitive as well – in Sanskrit, mayá saha [with me], Rámeńa saha [with Ram], but in Bengali ámár saunge, Rámer saunge.

Nowadays in modern Bengali many people use the word sáthe interchangeably with saunge, however the word sáthe is not native Bengali; it comes from Hindi and Gorkhali. In pure Bengali and pure Maethilii the use of saunge is more proper. In our Calcutta Bengali we do not say sathe; we say saunge.

Even though there is great grammatical similarity between Hindi and Urdu there are some differences as well, for example, gender. There used to be more difference between Hindi and Urdu in the feminine plural, however nowadays that has lessened somewhat. For example, in Hindi laŕkiyán já rahiin thiin. Formerly in Urdu one used to write laŕkiyán ja rahiin thiin. Of course, in the beginning people used to write it this way in Hindi as well. According to the normal rule, foreign words are feminine in Hindi. However this rule is not followed very strictly because there are many exceptions (what we call in Hindi apavád). For example, the word kalam [pen] is foreign (Farsi). Kalam is feminine in Hindi. It is not only because it is foreign. The Sanskrit synonym for kalam is lekhanii which is also feminine. Hence kalam is feminine in Hindi, that is, we say merii kalam [my pen]. Since kalam is a foreign word it should also be feminine in Urdu but it is not. It is masculine in Urdu, that is, one says merá kalam. If we use the word kalam in Hindi in masculine form then it does not mean a writing pen; it means “grafted plant”, as in “mango graft”, “blackberry graft”, and so on.

The Farsi word dukán changes gender when the spelling changes. If it is spelled with u – dukán – then it is feminine, for example, merii dukán. But if we spell it with ú – dúkán – then it becomes masculine, that is, merá dúkán.

Different rules also exist side by side in Hindi for some half-Sanskrit words, for example, cálcalan. Some people use it in masculine gender and others in feminine. The Urdu synonym for átmá [soul] is rúh. Rúh is feminine so in Hindi many people use átmá in feminine gender. However the word átmá is not feminine in Sanskrit, so in order to maintain concordance with Sanskrit some people use it in masculine gender. I support the second opinion so in my Hindi writings I have generally used the word átmá as masculine.

In Hindi number and gender affect the verb. In English number affects the verb but gender does not, for example, “he goes”, but “they go”. In this case number affects the verb according to the general rule. But if I say “Ram is going and Sita is going” then one can see that gender does not affect the verb while number does.

The languages of Bihar also have an ablative case but they do not have a separate form for the fifth case-ending. As in Bengali the fifth case is constructed in these languages by adding an indeclinable, se, after the sixth case form. Incidentally, it should be mentioned that the pronunciation of se is somewhere between se and sa. For example, the Hindi for “from me” is mujhse. In Angika it is hamrásan. In Oriya ru is added to make the fifth case, for example, vrkśaru (in Oriya the pronunciation is vrukśaru).

Anyhow, all languages have the ablative case but no Indian language apart from Sanskrit has a separate form for the fifth case-ending. There was no Vedic grammar. Early on there was no Vedic dictionary; only towards the end of the Vedic era did it come into existence. The famous composer of the Vedic dictionary, Yaska, lived long after the end of Rgvedic age. Since there was no Vedic grammar the question of what was correct and what was incorrect did not arise. Often errors were accepted because they were common usage among the Aryans. For example, during the Rgvedic age the word shikśa was pronounced as if it had a long ii, that is, if it was written it would have been written shiikśa. Similarly, the verbal root ji was used in átmanepadii, for example, jayate, jayete, jayante (that is, te, áte, ante). However in Sanskrit the verbal root ji is parasmaepadii, in other words, jayati, jayatah, jayanti (or ti, tas, anti). Generally in Sanskrit if a prefix is added before a parasmaepadii verbal root then it becomes átmanedpadii, for example, vijayate. Later on Panini faced a lot of difficulties because of this, so he made a compromise between the two and gave it the name ubhayapadii [ubhaya means “both”].

Verbs are not used in átmanepadii form at all in Laokika Sanskrit. By accepting them as ubhayapadii he was able to maintain concordance [bojhápaŕá] with the Vedic language.⁽²⁾ Another example is the verbal root cal [to move]. In Laokika Sanskrit this verbal root is 99.99 percent parasmaepadii but Panini accepted it as ubhayapadii. Apart from one saying of the Buddha, one will not come across any other example of the verbal root cal being used as átmanepadii. That saying of the Buddha is:

Ihásane shuśyatu me shariiraḿ
Tvagasthimáḿsaḿ pralayaiṋca yátu
Aprápya bodhiḿvahukalpadurlabháḿ
Naevásanát káyamatashcalisyate

[Let my body be parched in this posture. Let the bones, flesh and skin perish. My body will not move even an inch from this position unless I attain the supreme enlightenment which is difficult to attain in lives together.]

At any rate, whether or not the ablative case has a separate form, it exists in all languages. In Bengali hate, theke, haite, t́heine, and so on, are used for this purpose. Some people might be a little surprised to hear the word t́heine but there is no cause for wonder because all languages have distinctive [áládá] specialities of pronunciation and meaning. For example, the English word “double” also means “double” in Bengali, but in Angika it means “very big”. It is worth pointing out here that the word áládá comes from a Farsi word, aláhidá. Nowadays this word áládá can no longer be separated [áládá kará] from the Bengali language.

I was saying before that the word kalam is feminine in Hindi and masculine in Urdu. The feminine gender is used in Hindi to refer to weapons but barchá [spear], pharsá [axe], bhálá [lance], etc. are masculine in Hindi although they denote specific weapons. The word talvár is feminine in Hindi but masculine in Urdu.

The next subject of discussion is the genitive case. The genitive is the sixth [śaśt́hii] case. The word śaśt́hii begins with the letter śa. The Yajurvedic pronunciation of śa is kha, so the Yajurvedic pronunciation of śaśt́hii is khaśt́hii. However if it is in the beginning of a compound letter then it is not pronounced kha. In Bihar the word śad́ayantra is pronounced khaŕyantra following the Yajurvedic pronunciation. In the same way santośa is pronounced santokha in Panjabi and shiśya is pronounced shikh.

Anyway, the sixth case is used to relate one with another. In Bengali the indicator for the sixth case is r or er. For example, kalikátár, Rámer. If the last letter ends with the pronunciation of a consonant then er is added, for example, varddhamán-er → varddhamáner. Although varddhamán is not spelled with a hasanta it is pronounced as if it had one. Hence it is varddhamáner, but cuncŕor.

Just as r and er are added to form the sixth case, e, te, and ete are added to form the seventh case. E is added in all cases except for those words ending in i, ii, u or ú. Ete is added after those words whose pronunciation ends with an hasanta, whether or not they are spelled that way, and te added in the remaining cases. For example, Krśnanagar-e, Varddhamán-ete, Kalikátá-te.

This kind of rule does not exist in Sanskrit. The sixth case-ending form differs according to the word. For example, the singular sixth case form of the word nara is narasya, but the sixth case singular for muni is muneh. For such reasons it is difficult to learn the word forms in Sanskrit. In English “of” and apostrophe “s” are used to make the sixth case. The pronunciation of “of” in English is like “ov”. Many mistakenly pronounce it like “off” but this is incorrect. “Off” means “far” and is spelt with double “f”.

Hindi uses different indicators for the sixth case according to number and gender, namely ká, kii, ke. Ká is used for the masculine, kii for the feminine and ke for the masculine plural, for example, Rám ká bhái [Ram’s brother], Rám kii bahan [Ram’s sister], and so on. In Marwari rá, ri and re are used; in Panjabi da, dii, and de; in Angika ra and ker; in Maethilii ak and ke; in Bhojpuri ke and ka; in Oriya ra and aḿk; in Assamese ra; and so on. In French the definite article (the) changes according to the gender – le for the masculine, la for the feminine and les for the plural. This change in the definite article does not take place in English, nor in Hindi. Nor is there any change according to gender in the numerical article in either English or Hindi and Urdu. In other words, both masculine and feminine use ek [one]; the feminine does not use ekii. In English “a” or “one” remains unchanged but in French the numerical article also changes according to gender. The masculine form is un and the feminine is une. In this respect English is a bit more difficult than Bengali, Sanskrit even more difficult, Hindi more difficult still and French quite difficult.

Many people do not accept the genitive case as a true case, but this is a matter that deserves careful consideration. As regards the genitive case, in Bengali the sixth case does not maintain a direct link with the verb, but often it maintains an indirect link due to the influence it exerts over the verb. For example, Rámer bhái khácche [Ram’s brother is eating]. Here there is no direct relationship between the verb khácche and Rám, but since the one who is eating is related to Ram therefore Ram maintains an indirect relationship with the verb, especially if Ram’s brother does any true or untrue work of some magnitude. For example, Rámer bhái ek lakśádhik t́áká dán kareche [Ram’s brother has donated over one hundred thousand rupees]. The brother is giving – this is the root expression and it is nominative. However by saying “Ram’s brother”, the word “brother” is indirectly modified, and when people hear it they will say: “O, Ram’s brother! He would be the one to make the donation. He takes after his brother.” But if we say that Ram’s brother is drinking too much wine these days, then people will say: “Fie, fie! He’s Ram’s brother and he’s drinking! What a disgrace!” Thus the genitive indeed does indirectly influence the verb.

“Ram’s brother is eating.” Here “brother” is a noun and “Ram” qualifies this noun. Now that which qualifies a noun or a pronoun is an “adjective”. The verb cannot be qualified because a verb is not a qualitative entity, so in the case of the verb a modifier is used instead of a qualifier. That which modifies a verb is called an “adverb”. The adverb is linked to the verb, so the adverb is said to belong to the same family as the genitive. Hence if the adverb is accepted in the genitive sense then the genitive case must also be accepted. If brinjal [begun] dipped in gram flour and fried is begunii then will pat́ol dipped in gram flour and fried be pat́ol fried meat instead of pat́olii? Since the adverb modifies the verb it has to be accepted as genitive case. “The pandit’s boy drinks wine.” Nowadays many boys all over the world drink so there is nothing about this that is much cause for surprise. But the moment we hear that the pandit’s boy drinks, our surprise increases, is it not? In other words, even though the genitive case “pandit” is not directly connected to the verb, it cannot be denied that it influences the verb significantly. So therefore how can the need for the genitive be denied?

I mentioned earlier that Sanskrit has a separate form for the sixth case. However the sixth case form differs for different words and it can be very far removed from the original word. For example the sixth case form for the word asmad is mama or me, for ávayoh it is nao, and for asmákam it is nah. In the case of Hindi pronouns ham becomes hamárá, hamáre, hamárii; tum becomes tumhárá, tumháre, tumhárii; and so on, differing according to number and gender. In Bengali ámi becomes ámár and tumi becomes tomár. In English, although “of” and “ ’s” are used for the genitive case, there are fixed forms for the pronouns: “my” from “I”, “your” from “you”, “thy” from “thou”, and so on. If the genitive pronoun follows “of” then altered forms are used, that is, “my” becomes “mine”, “thy” becomes “thine”, “your” becomes “yours”, “her” becomes “hers” and “his” becomes “hiss” in old English – in modern English it is written with one “s”. In French “my” is mon, ma or mes depending on number and gender. A moi, a toi, etc. are used when the voice changes.

In Bengali and other modern Indian languages this kind of usage does not exist. In Sanskrit it exists to some extent but not so much, nor is there any need for it. In Sanskrit when there is an effort to speak circuitously or indirectly then generally this is done by making use of the sixth case, for example, máturna vyathate manah. In Bengali the sixth case is employed for this kind of expression, however there is less of this practice of indirect speech in Bengali. An example of indirect speech is:

Sakále vikále kabhu náoyá hale pare
Gámachá kariyá tárá chot́a mách dhare

[After taking their bath, whenever it may be, morning or afternoon/they use their towel to catch small fish]

Although as far as languages go French grammar is quite difficult, in most cases more so than either Sanskrit or Latin, it is my firm conclusion that in the realm of ideas it is a very expressive language, one whose match is difficult to find in this world. Bengali also has great expressive power, however this power has not been harnessed as it should have been.

Footnotes

(1) Gájii if one survives, shahiid if one dies – in other words, in Islam when an individual offers their life in order to establish their religion but manages to survive they are called gájii. One who embraces death in order to establish their religion is called shahiid.

(2) Nowadays the Hindi synonym for bojhápaŕá [literally, “mutual understanding”] – samjhaotá – is spreading orally, but one should keep in mind that the word bojhápaŕá has not yet died out. Similarly, the word ekt́áná [continuous] still enjoys excellent health in Bengali though the synonym lágátár has entered the language.