^{page 181 note 1} Woolner, A., Introduction to Prakrit, 2nd edition, Lahore, 1928, p. 6Google Scholar.

^{page 181 note 2} Chatterji, S. K., Origin and Development of the Bengali Language, Calcutta, 1926, p. 837Google Scholar.

^{page 181 note 3} Bloch, J., L'Indo-Aryen, Paris, 1934, p. 198Google Scholar.

^{page 181 note 4} Muller, H. F., A Chronology of Vulgar Latin, Halle, 1929Google Scholar.

^{page 182 note 1} Saksena, Baburam, The Evolution of Awahdi, Allahabad, 1937, p. 180Google Scholar.

^{page 182 note 2} Pischel, R., Grammatik der Prakritsprachen, Strassburg, 1900, p. 259Google Scholar.

^{page 183 note 1} Geiger, W., Pali Literatur und Sprache, Strassburg, 1916Google Scholar.

^{page 183 note 2} Alsdorf, L., “The Vasudevahiṇḍi, a specimen of archaic Jain Mâhârâṣṭrî,” BSOS., 1935Google Scholar.

^{page 183 note 3} Edgerton, F., Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar, New Haven, 1953, p. 64Google Scholar.

^{page 183 note 4} For a further possible contraction of the final to -â, cf. Meillet, A., “Le datif védique avîrate,” BSL., xxiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 184 note 1} Mehendale, M. A., Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits, Poona, 1948Google Scholar.

^{page 184 note 2} Burrow, T., The Language of the Kharoṣṭhi Documents from Chinese Turkestan, Cambridge, 1937Google Scholar.

^{page 184 note 3} SirGrierson, G. A. explains similarities between the modern languages of the East and West by his theory of Inner and Outer languages, cf. his work “On the Modern Indo-Aryan Vernaculars”, Indian Antiquary, supplement, 1931Google Scholar. The reason for the similarity in this case lies, however, more probably in the religious contacts between the two regions.

^{page 185 note 1} Upadhye, A. N., Dhûrtâkhyâna, a critical study, Singhi Jain Series, No. 19, Bombay, 1944, p. 51Google Scholar.

^{page 186 note 1} Alsdorf, L., Harivaṃśapuráṇa, Hamburg, 1936, Introduction, p. 164Google Scholar.

^{page 186 note 2} Bhayani, H. C., Paumacariu of Svayambhudeva, Singhi Jain Series, No. 34, Bombay, 1953, pp. 64ff.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 3} R. Pischel, op. cit., p. 260.

^{page 186 note 4} Tagare, G. V., Historical Grammar of Apabhraṃśa, Poona, 1948, p. 157Google Scholar.

^{page 186 note 5} Sen, S., “Comparative Grammar of Middle Indo-Aryan,” Indian Linguistics, xi, 1949–1950, p. 59Google Scholar.

^{page 186 note 6} Alsdorf, L., Apabhraṃśa-Studien, Hamburg, 1937Google Scholar.

^{page 187 note 1} The endings -hi, -hiṃ, are not usual in the masculine locative until late in the Apabhraṃśa period and they are based on the analogy of the pronominal declension.

^{page 189 note 1} There are also some obscure cases of influence of the adverbs on declension as, for instance, Apabhraṃśa tuddha, tuddhra, which is mentioned as the genitive singular of the 2nd person pronoun by Hemacandra and occurs in the Bhavisayattakahā and the Paumasiricariu of Dhâhila, two texts that are very much akin in language. Tudhra may be based on the usual Apabhramsa genitive tuha under the influence of tatra, etc. (cf. tadru, yadru, found in the grammarians (Kî., 5, 50) and the curious demonstratives traṃ and druṃ, and the relative dhruṃ quoted by Hemacandra, iv, 360).