of the first person, it seems to have been reduplicated to convey its original meaning, as -, an addition which is likewise made to the other pronouns, with the same object of laying stress, or emphasis upon, or of singling out, a particular person—vide infra.

Second person. seems to have been originally the only nominal base for the second person, without a distinction of gender; see declension in Addenda, p. 100; and like, it conveys per se no meaning beyond that of a vocal, or, as the Tamils designate it, the signification of a "noun referring to persons standing before us" (Rhenius' Tamil Grammar, p. 21.) Thus (see § 41) qxi, a, ê,

, The sounds ma 'I,' tha 'thou,' and an 'other.' In course of time, however, the original simplicity of the language seems to have been abandoned by the formation of a feminine form for the second person, (see Introduction, p. xlii.) and the adoption of different other nouns for the second person; e. g. 'yonder' (see § 42), which was anciently used for the third person, has been since invariably applied to the second; and if the same be now used in its original import, 99 out of a 100 persons will take it in the sense of a pronoun for the second person. We have already noticed (see note † at p. 41) that a plural pronoun is often used for the singular, with a view of conveying respect to the person addressed. This is the case also in English. Professor Ollendorff says, in his "New method to learn a language in six months," and in reference to the modern use of the plural pronoun of the second person, "It is perhaps, through an abuse of civilization that the use of the second person plural you, has been introduced into modern languages. The Italians, however, go still further, and use, as the pronoun of address, even in speaking to a man, the third person singular feminine Ella, which they begin with a large letter, out of deference for the person they speak to, and to distinguish it from the third person feminine. It relates to Vostra

Signoria (contracted: Vossignoria, abridged V. S., Your Worship), which is understood."

Owing to changes in the usage of the language, such as those which we have noticed, a question has arisen as to the proper selection of a pronoun for the second person in certain cases. In determining this, we experience no difficulty in a grammatical point of view. The grammarian has more than once left all disputes arising out of changes in the language, to the just decision of the tribunal of usc. That by this use or usage is meant 'the present, reputable, and national usage,' there can be but little doubt. Dr. Campbell, in his Philosophy of Rhetoric, book II. chap. 1, § §1, 2, 3, has considered this subject in the abstract; and we refer the reader to his own language. He inquires, "In what extent of signification must we understand the word present? How far may we safely range in quest of authorities? Or at what distance backwards from this moment are authors still to be accounted as possessing a legislative voice in language?" Dr. Campbell, after much sound sense added to a rich stock of erudition, and after noticing all the objections pro and con, states-" One inclines to remove the standard to the distance of a century and a half; another may with as good reason fix it three centuries backwards; and another six. And if the language of any of these periods is to be judged by the use of any other, it will be found, no doubt, entirely barbarous. To me it is so evident either that the present use must be the standard of the present language, or that the language admits no standard whatsoever, that I cannot conceive a clearer or more indisputable principle from which to bring an argument to support it." Now as to the present use of as a pronoun for the second person, even if we should remove this "standard" to the distance of nearly four centuries and a half backwards, we shall still find our best authors agreed as to the present use. For, in almost every standard writer, from the Kaviasekare down

wards, we find an uninterrupted use of , where respect
was intended, as a substitute for 3, e. g.
In the Kusajatake occurs the following:

බෟරවගෙන මෙ ඔ බ ...පබවතබිසව්හුත් ලෑ ඛ
මෙමා එන තෙමොබ ...රජ කරව පැට සු බසින්සු බ

"By reason of the good request to the effect: receiving (all this) do thou (oba) reign until I, having obtained Pabawati, shall return thither.""

The elegant writer of the Guttile has made a similar use of 2. Here is a specimen:

මොකදුරු හි මිනිසා...

බ€හන්ස කසා

තෙව ා බන අසා... මෙඔබහ මගුරු

නෙවෙයි පවසා

"On account of our lord the Teacher of Niwana, he having first learned the four Diána, and having also heard the tripitaka doctrines, and having then affirmed that thou (oba) art not his master."

One other from the Kaviasekara will suffice:

හිමි ඔබ නැන වෙසෙස... පසස උන්නෙමුස බකුස කියමෙපමහා බස...තිසන්හි හැඳිනඅදහස "They having said thus much: 'Lord, praising the extent of thy (oba) wisdom, have we been in the heart of this assembly:' he learned their intention, and being satisfied sat."

and, also does not occur

From, it is believed, are derived nouns for the second person. Although in books, නුබ nevertheless does: e. g. හෝම පියන් ආ කල්හි කලිඟු රජහුපුත් යුව රජ සුළු කලිඟු කුමාර තමා බෑ මහ කලිඟු රජහු ගෙ උදහසින් අටුවනයෙහි යහුයේ මාහෝ වැලෙහි දැක මා අවුද්දන්හුබ දෙදෙනා දැක්කැටිව සිටියේ යුහු~" When the parents had returned she said unto them: The young prince Kalingu, who was sub-king, and moreover the son of king Kalingu, having, by reason of the wroth of his elder brother, the (present) king Kalingu, arrived hither, now abides in the forest; and, having seen me near the meandering rivulet, and having accompanied me, he is now here wishing to see you both.""

In the above selection from Pradeepikawa," a book of the highest authority among the Singhalese for the depth of its learning, and the purity of its language," is used for the accusative plural you,' without any difference of termination; and it is to be apprehended that, the plural termination in, and 3, which we now use, is the result of a modern refinement. Nor do we find a termination for in the plural number, except when compounded with an honorific or another noun. and

are declined alike in both the numbers, and a in like manner in the singular.

Besides the above we have at present various other terms. for the second person; and a correct use of the same by foreigners is as difficult as that of 'shall' and 'will' by the Singhalese. From his own' (see § 40, an ante selection from Pradeepikawa), which is frequently found as a possessive in the third person, and which, different from its original import, is now used for the second person, are derived තුමුයේ, තමුන්නැගේ, මුන්නා, තමුන් වහන්

Lambrick's notes on To and Obawahanse, p. 46.

From we obtain, and the termination proper to the same in the verb in the Imperative mood singular, is iad.

Tuis should be

by suppressing the sound of in God.

; but usage has assigned a less lengthy form

, and retaining the inflected vowel a.one

සේ. තමා is used by superiors to their inferiors without conveying any disrespect. go by husbands towards their wives and vice versa; and also by some low caste people to the inferior classes of the Vellalas, by Upasampada priests towards their pupils, or Samanaras; and even by servants of a higher grade towards the young members of their master's families. agsinuan, ngsis ɔsiad, agansiad are forms of the same word, each succeeding one conveying a degree of respect higher than that which preceded it. gic is used towards each other by persons of an equal station in life amongst the highest class of the Singhalese, and amongst the Priesthood.

From ඔබ and නුබ are produced ඔz වහන්සේ and නුබ Os in prose, which loves a greater luxuriance of expression than poetry. In their use, they are confined to the highest personages, such as nobles, &c. The hono rific in Singhalese, of which add andələn are corruptions, bears a clear resemblance to the like honorifics in the cognate languages-Sanscrit, and Pali, and means Honor,' Excellency.' As to the identity of the words, භවත්, භවනත and වහන්සේ both in their significations, and in the use of them, there exists no reasonable doubt. * The interchange of and in the cognate languages of Sanscrit and Singhalese is well known (see p. lv.); and the addition of a ∞ by the rule § 22 b. is frequent, especially where the Sanscrit has an aspirate letter. Thus Sanscrit, . Singhalese, 'a name;' : Sanscrit, 6 Singhalese, 'stream;' Sanscrit, ç Singhalese, 'holy writ;' 6 Sanscrit, ɔ Singhalese, 'royal abode;' Sanscrit, e Singhalese, 'mediSinghalese, 'power of proceeding

tation;' Sanscrit,

in the air;' (compare the other words in § 22 b. together with

" භවත්, an honorific term for go, and which, like your Honor,' Vossignoria, &c., although used for the second, is a pronoun of the third person."-Wilson's Grammar, p. 85.