Prof. L. A. ilodriguee ' Fellow of the Institute
l(0ilmill
OLIMP$E$ OF TIIE
[T
TllE
TURII
mn0ur0E
OF TllE 1OTll
G.
V"
u
S.p"."i" do ilcl,stln do iart{tuto
Mcnezer Bragrnqa, tf.a. f
Ttpogrefta Rugcl
-Bertori,
Goa,
i0:
f
Sdi
V
Uniformity of the vocabulary and phonology
I n the Post-Scriftum of the first article of this series a hypoI' thesis had been advanced that the Konkani Vocabulary, in two manuscript volumes, existing in the Central Library of Panjim, Goa, attributed to the Padres of
Society of Jesus then residing in the province of Salcete, is not a work of Jesuits but of Franciscans. This point of view is here explored further and the consequent implications brought out.
As a nratter of fact, each of the above two volumes, Konkani-Portugues., both lacking sorne "n{rfiJl,oguese-Konkani, pages at the beginning anil end, bears the following inscription, in a modern orthography and handwriting, on the page addecl obviously at the time of binding: " Vocabnlario da lingua canari {eito pelos Padres da Companhia de Jesus que residian: na provincia de Salcete. ", i.e. " a vocabulary of Konkani language made by the priests of the Society of Jesus, then resid,ing in the province of Salcete ". On the other hand, the manuscript of the Konkani vocabulary of Fr. Diogo Ribeiro, S.J., consisting of one volume in two parts, Portuguese.Konkani, and KonkaniPortuguese, existing in the said library, carries the following .original inscription on the first page of,the Konkani.Portuguese
6-part: ,,vocabulario da lingoa' canarim, feito pellos
Padres da .Companhia de Jesus, que residem na Christandade de Salcete, novalnente acressentatlo com varios' modos de fallar pello
e
padre Diogo Rlbeiro da mesma Companhia. Anno 16?6"., i.e. " a vocabulary o{ Konkani language, made by the priests of the Society of Jesus, rcsid,ing in the christianity of salcete, and further added with various modes of speaking by Fr' Diogo Ribeiro, of the same Society. Year 1626 " ' ( The former inscription follovrs the modern orthography in the words lingua and fclos, and bears the statement of que tesidiatt- "then residing ", while the latter, i.e. of Ribeiro, exhibits the old script in lingoa, pell'os, acressentad'o aod fal'l'ar, and says queresiiletn-
''
residiirg " ). The above two sets of manuscripts, that of Padres ( let the one mentioned first be called so ) and that of Ribeiro were from transferred, after the abolition of religious orrlers in 1835, the convents of Old Goa to the " Fublica L,ivraria ", Panjirn, (Brertes Goa, by the Government Orclinance of April 12, 1836' Notas Histdricas sobre a Bibliotheca Nacional de Nova'Goa Guilherme Ferreira, Typographia da Minerva
by Octaviano
Indiana, Nova Goa, 1906, P. 3 ). In 1907, the Librarian-Director
Nova Goa (original "Publica
of National Library of Livraria" of Panjim),
Mr. octaviano GuilherrEe Ferreira, organized a catalogue of the library (" Cat5'logo dos livros, optsculos e manuscriptos' perten' (India Portu' cenres ) Bibliotheca Nacional de Nova Goa Bibliotecirioguesa) ", Nova Goa, hnprensa Nacional, 1907, O -Director, Octaviano Guilherme Ferreira)' In this catalogue (p. 263) are entered both Padres' ahd Rtbeiro's manuscript both the vocabularies: as regards the former, it is stated that "volumeslackpagesattt'ebeginningandend'anditisdescribed as ,,vocabulerio da lingua canary feito pelos padres da ccm'
-7
I i
I
l.' [I
I i
I
i
panhia de Jesus qua resid,ia?r, na provincia de Saicete " (inscrip' tion on the added page of the vocabulary is same, as referred earlier) ; then follows the entry of Ribeiro's vocabulary in one volume with two parts, under the same titles as they are found in the vocabulary,'namely " Vocabulario da lingua canary feito pelos padres da Companhia de Jesus que residem na Christan' dade de Salcete e novamente acrescentado com varios modos de falar pelo Padre Diogo Ribeiro da mesrna Companhia. Anno !626" (however, the orthography is here modernized). Tlt" inscriptions on the two volumes of Padres' vocabulary, on their added peges, must have been put af.ter 1925, as the binding of all these vocabularies bears the initials BNVG (Biblioteca Nacional Vasco da Gama) (It was in 1925 that the Bibliotheca Nacional de Nova Goa was renamed as BNVG), and the same must have been copied from the librarian Ferreira's catalogue of. 1907'; and 1\{r. Ferreira, who organized his catalogue 70 years after the transfer of the Mss of the vocabularies frorn Old Goa to Panjim in 1836, must have made the crrncerned entry of the Padres' vocabulary on the assrlmption inferred from the title of Ribeiro's vocabulary, which states that the same is elabbrated on the vocabulary compiled by his predecessors. But Ferreira did not scrurinize the pages of the said vocabulary, in which, p. 193 at the foot of the letter F and p. 313 at the foot of the letter O, explanatory notes are given ; the first note says, inter a.lia,z " ... pot tne acomodar com o alphabeto que vay por ordem do A.b.c. purtuguez em lugar daleT&/2e h puz o I ...". i.e. " ... in order to suit mysell to the orde-fPortuguese alpha' "bet, instead of the letter ph I useil the letter f ","; the note for .O clarifies: " A letra (O) abaixo huns a falam e e6crevem como ( o ) e ouffos como (vol e dambas as tmaneiras se pode falar e escrever. E porque pode haver embarasso no buscar do nome, ou verbo fiz esta declaragio Para que todos a enten'
8d6o...
", i.e. " The letter O is pronounced and written by some
as O and by others as VO, and both the ways can be used; and as this fact can cause confusion to handle this vocabulary I made this clarification,..."; the use of first person singular (such as mgself, I used, I mad,e) denotes that the authorship of the vocabulary is claimed by one person and that it is not of collective responsibility of Padres in plural ; obviously, the name of the author in singular must have been given on the title-page which is lost,
In vieiv of all the above considerations it is fairly clear that the inscription of the Padres' vocabulary is not original and that the same is quite susceptible of being mistaken, and therefore no necessary relationehip should be sought between Ribeiro and Padres.
But an intrinsic comparative examination of the two works (l(onkani-Portuguese volumes), that of Ribeiro and that of Padres, can throw clearer light on the matter. An attempt in this sense is ventured hereby by analysing them quantitatively, their lexical system, language form, and dates and authors of compilation:
A) Quantitative
analysis.
The quantitative difference of Padres' vocabulary o v e r Ribeiro's is in thousands of entries, that is, while the latter contains around 14500 entries, the former, excluding the missing pages, has about 17500 entries. This fact alone defeats totally the librarian Ferreira's assumption that Ribeiro's vocabulary is an enlargement of Padres' work, because Ribeiro certainly would not exclude over 3000 entries from his predecessors' compilation, but, on the contrary, would add more vocables, and so his compilation would be quantitatively larger than that
oi
Padres.
I
I
l
on the other hand, the padres,
inspite of their excess of over 3000 entries, lack many entries recorded by Ribeiro, such as the following: Kameriam (weeders), Hoirum (snake), tWadd,el (palm grove), Mis (mass), Godito (toddy lees), Sar (toddy), Hanni (loss), Mod,im (pilot), Pal (mould of potatoes), Pid,do (leaf.stalk of palm tree), Rovod,r (blood), Sari (ashes or mortal remains), Sopd,o (boar), ?oy (third lunar day), Vod,d, (banyan tree), Vallo (silver ankl.et), Zabil,to (bag of coir ner), Tumba (thyme), ?or (tender mango), Nomrta (humility), Sang (pod), etc. This circumstance of number of vocables being found in one and not in the other and vice-versa suggests that the two vocabularies are not inter-related works, but that they were carried out independently by two different persons er teams with no relation of precedence or succession.
B) Lexical
system
a) The process of transliteration and the conseguent alphabetical order are. different in the tvvo vocabularies. Ribeiro uses the Roman alphabet except
I,J,Q, and lll;
Padres adopt
the same set of letters barring J,R,W and Y. That is, both omit,I and W, but rvhile Ribeiro omits.I and p, Padres drop K and Y. Ribeiro uses Y and omits
1;
Padres use
f
,, ,t
,, K for guttural C (6); P. use C for the said sound i tt ,, QUE ,, KE
tt
,, KI
'i
tt ,, QUI ,, ,, QH
,, KH f.ot aspirates i i,,,F rr PH Both Ribeiro ancl Padres or- , also for,/. ,, rr
2
and omit Y.
10b)ThelexicalorderofPadresdistinguishestheshortvolvel under a Q-al and the long vowet a $41 so that all vocables' eachletter,beginningwithshortamakeadistinctseriespredictionary ; ceding that of long a, as it is done in a devanagari and long aa in the but Ribeiro mixes indiscriminately the short the method of Padres same series for every letter' Definitely' the is technically superit' to that of Ribeiro' and therefore
latterwouldhaveuseditifhadavailedoftheworkofthe former.
of
c) Quite a good number of vocables in the vocabulary PadreshremarkedwithanabbreviationMandthisisabsentin Ribeiro.Thoughthisabbreviationconstitutesjustonemore vocabularies' it is difference in the lexical system of the two for' The first to lind out'its meaning, i'e' what M stands
difficult so all the vocables impression is that M stands f or Marathi' and marked with it are Marathi words; this is corroborated :I T., ..ht.r.,A, muito beAaenl'no;ff,fi[ierrtrjtaof theirs " Quittoh'bicha em M'ot coao A few t*ry*t atoin' in which em M rneans in M 'M means Marathi ? followsz.ObovitrX"l*r*Pdz as are M with ples of the words marked (toqnbt*'tt' (unholy), Buzavitam (to console\, Bhosn (ashes)' Col'pitaw womb)' Hur (chesi 'Dl'*fulLimagine), Dwar(door), Gorbhvas(woman's (fasting)' I-olatt (forehead) , Mond'hir (house)' Nirar . (medita.tio"):W (way), Qhir (milk), Roqha (ash), Soiro (army)' Tob ?4^ (mother)' etc' Zonony (doctotl' i"trr(g)rment), Xastuprovinn all others marked with Horvever, all the above words and almost only six M arcfound in Ribeiro as Konhani words' He records have different meanings in v.rcables stating erpressly that they
fo1tm1[ffi
KonkaniandinMarathi,andarethefollowing:
1.
Host : (Konkani-male elephant)
;
(Marathi'hand)'
2.Mart:(Konkani'scarofwouncl'pithofjack'fruit); (Marathi-form, treason' deceit)'
_J.
4.
5.
11
Mohuri: (Konkani-a kind of trumpet); (Marathi-mustard). Bhed,u: ( Konkani-bribe, fraud, treachery, etc' ); (Marathi-condition, abilitY). Potr: (Konkani-bill of debt, beggar's bowl) ; (Mara'
thi-leaf of tree). 6.
Sonkhea: (Konkani-count, sum, number) ;
(Marathi-
-room). As such it is not safe to admit the letter M as an abbrevia' tioa of the word Marathi. It is true that the priests, versed in Latin language, followed the Latin pattern and nornenclature in their linguistic works; so in their vocabularies they give verbs in lst person singular of Present of the Indicative Mood and not Infinitive; and they use {. for Latin vel (ot), Ud for In this circunund.e (hence), ul (as), s f.oc scilicet (oamelyl. stantialconspectus,itrvillnotberePugnanttothinkofLatin ol,im which means formerl'y, i' e' antiquated' So, the P'rdres might have marked with .4f (standing for olim) those vocables which were no longer in current use of com:non people, but still found'in the nrouth of the eJucated class and in the extant native written works.
C)
Language form
a) Portuguese expressions used by Ribeiro and those by Padres to give the samd meanings of the Konkani vocables almost all differ from each
1. Anhoary
other.
Some illustrd'tions follolv
:
(virgin) : Ribeiro -oirgern', donzetra; Padres virgem.
-
-mulher 2.Und,ito(breati):R_peltouroco?l'opd'oaindaquesejad'e
I
HF
i27 terra agora foll,o u,so se toma tambem Pella pd,o orilinario ; P-pd,o, fellouro da larinha.
3. Karalul
( clove
): R-crarto
da especearia; P-cra.rso
d,a
Malaca.
4. Alos (bad mood) ; R-mri disposigd,o; P-indisposigd.o. 5. Alloy (p)ank for pressing ploughed soil) : R-taboa que d,do na vargea d,epois d,e lavrad.a; P-grad,e vd, que serrse para ind,ereitar chd,o.
6. Andollo (blind) : R-sago ; P-sega cousa que nd,o oE. 7. Mund.d' (loan gioen by a landlord to a Percon for living in his froferty) z R-ewprestimo qua diio para tnorar nos paln ares; P-ilinheiro que d'd,o adiantad,o para ,norat no pal,mar. seal) : R-celo d,e farticulares, ,narca que frdetn nas ntedid,as ou em qualquer outra coasa animada iju inanimada i P sinete,
8. Sihho (stamp,
g.
-chapa,
Galimbo (fine prawn) : R-cama.rdo muito pequeno entre tod.os ; P-aamardo tnuito pequenino.
10. Kens ulli (boil) : R-empola Pequena; P-l'eicengo. I 1. Gopin (sling : R-funila de attar ; P-fund'a d'e tirar ped,ra. L2, Kill,onchnni (scream) z R-grito de meninosi P-brado, zurco. 13. Logn (marriage) conjungd,o
;
P
; R-principio
do casamento dos gentios,
recebimenlo.
-casnrmento, 14. Pishati (knife) : R-faca ; P-canivete, faquinha' 15, Lumbitam (to wash anus) : R-lartar'se e?n baixo rJat o trazoito.
; P-la-
16. Thontto (lame) : R-aleijado d'as md'os ; P-aleiiada cousa. 17. Rowpitam (to transplant): R-d,ispor, plantar cirvores jd nascid,as ; P-semear, dtspor.
E=
-l
_-15 18.
God.dhoy (hooked stake for piucking froit.; : R-gancho d'e Pdo que tiratn a fruta; P-bambu de tirar /ruta.
19. Thigili (spot, stain) ; R-nddoa; P-sinal fireto qute as\ malhercs lazem na testa. Ghighi (prop) : R-pontalete;
P-fontalete de palmeira. 21. Kal (skin) : R-pel'e d,e homem; P-Pele de gente. 22, Katolli (kernel of cocoanut) : R-a carne d,o coco; P-miolo' 20.
do coco.
23. Dukam (liquor shop) : R-taverna; P-tar)erna ile
oruaca
e de mais.
24. Gu (human excrement): R-esterco humano; P-suiidade de gente.
25. Pakulli (petal) : R-folinha de fula; P-folha d,a rosa. 26. Pond. (bottom of pot): R-|undo d'a qualquer oa.Iilha ;
P-cil
27. 28.
da earilha Zuner (rag) : R-fano famapo ; P -pano oelho e toto, Za'nnu (erudite) : R-sabedor ; P-ad'irtinhad,or, fe'iticeiro
sometimes give different meaning to the same Konkani word, e. g. :
b) Ribeiro and Padres
1. Gadd,i: Ribeiro-small cart; Padres-pulley" 2. Ghon: R-rain; P-large thing.
3. Ghanttitatt : R-to churn butter-milk; P-to grind flour. 4. Khopon: R-corpse; P-shroud. 5. Horodd'i: R-green pigeon ; P-gums. 6. Hinchonn: R-boar's tooth; P -eel. 7. Tolly: R-bridegroom's present to his bride; P-tank. 8. Torzitam: R-to give up, to affiict; P-to be cautious, to watch.
l+-c) There are also instanccs in which Ribeiro and Padres use different Konkani words for the same Portuguese meaning, such as:
1. Bad,alo (clapper of bell): Ribeiro'rogdd'o; Padresghanttnno.
2. Andorinha (swallow) : R-patakirlem ; P-catialletn. d) Ribeiro makes frequerrt use of Latin expressions parti' cularly for obscene words, such as membrum r,tirile and uas Jemineum or gas tnulieris for male and female genitals respec' tively, capil,li partis genitalis for pu$ic hair, etc., while Padres use no Latin but include a few obscene words.
e) In Ribeiro's vocabulary are found six Portuguese words, namely cras (cross\, Ygroz (church), mls (massl, hristdo (Chris' tian), pactr (priest), and vigairo (vicar) ; Padres record crtts ot curxts, pailr and che'pem (hat). It is to be noted that the vocable chepem (from Portuguese chapdu) is the only non-religious Portuguese rvord to be found in the above vocabularies, besides, a few other pre-Portuguese words referred to in the article I; Padres record this vocable in their Portuguese'Konkani volume I but it is also recorded in the Konkani'Portuguese vocabulary, edited by the Junta d,e Investigag1es do Ulttamar, which is an enlarged version of Ribeiro's Konk-Port. volume. Perhaps it is the word chefem that marks the beginning of the inflow of the Portuguese vocabuiar)' into the Konkani language which soon rvas to be overflooded. The circumstance that the above vocable is not recorded by Ribeiro in none of his Konkani vocabulary volumes, and that it is done by Padres in their second volume, further suggests that Padres' work is later to that of Ribeiro,
and closer to that edited by Junta.
--15 t
D)
Epochs antl authors of compilation
a) The Ribeiro's vocabulary is in fact a product of two different times, and as such it can be split into two distinct parts, viz. (1) the vocabulary proper which he borrowed from his predecessors, (to which he might have added more vocables), and (2) the phrases-rsdrios tmod,os de /alizr-which he augrnented to illustrate the meaning of the vocables in difterent contexts. The work of the first part must have been startefl^py-pre' Ribeiro Jesuit missionaries arouncl 1560, thar is, $f;Sf lst Provincial Council of Goa in 1567; and the second part must have been completed by 1625, as the whole vocabulary is dated L626.
The vocabulary o[ Padres seems to be later in time to the first part (i.e. vocables without phrases) of Ribeiro because the vocables of the former seem to be closer to the present Konkani words, in form and meaning, than those of the first ,part of the latter. A few instances :
1. Ribeiro-o
gsuddi ( eye brow ) ; Padres- ascod'di; Present-
askutti. aclim. (in the beginning)
; P-before ; Pres.-before. 3. R-uporiib (uvula) ; P-foddjib; Pres.-pad'd,iibb. 4. ankitam ( to make signs on ) ; P-to number; Pres' 2.
to
number.
I
;
5.
R-asrvad
6.
R-add,am,bo (slat of door)
7.
R-rnunv or
:
8.
(blessing)
P-asrirsad,
; Pres.-asirvad.
; P-addamo;
Pres.-aildamo.
; P - mrrf,o, ; P, e". R-gopin (sling) ; P-gof'n; Prcl-gofi'n. (
m os q u i t o)
rnrof,or.
16
--9. R-hillonchnrti (sst.am); P- quitlsns|; Pres.-
killonch.
10. R-logn, (beginning of the act of marriage) ; P-marriage; Pres.-marriage.
11. R-n'ipotam (ro hide); P-l,ipotam; Pres.-lifotatn. 12. R-thontto (disabled of hands); P-lame; Pres.-lame. 13. R-pagel (scoop-net); P-pager ; Pres.-fager, 74. R-rompitam (to transplant) ; P-to sow, to plant ; Pres.to sow, to plant.
15. Il-shenaoot (dry leaf of banana tree); P-shenot; Pres.shenot.
16. B-dzhalt (famine) i P-d'ucoll; Pres.- d,uhotl. 77. R-thiglli (spot, stain) ; P-tticlll (sign on forehead);
-tihli
Pres.
(sign oh forehead).
18. R-hrus(cross) ; P-curus; Pres.- ftrr;r. 19. R-zotem (pair) ; P-pair of sandals; Pres.-sandal. 20. R-oillong (naked) ; P-villongo ; Ptes.'-oingl'lo. 21. R-zonallo (maize) ;. P-zonllo ; Pres.--7ontrlo. 22. R-jholo (bouquet) ; P-ihelo; Pras.-iplo23. R-oprubay (affection) ; P-obwbay ; Pres.-opurbay. 24. R-kishir (splinter) ; P-quishh; Pres,-hisor. 25. R-sor\o (wheat) ; P-gonv; Prcs.-gonv. 26. R-nefo (tax) ; P-nofa (profit) i Pres.-zofa (profit). 27. R-hhofon (corpse); P-shroud ; Pres.-shroud. Probably the Padres' vocabulary is contemporary to the second part (i.e. illustrative phrases) of Ribeiro's vocabulary as the two manuscripts have used some similar paper bearing the sarne water marks, or even may be a little later because the
__
77
Portuguese Ianguage of t h e former, besides having clearer expression, is also slightly more mature than that of the latter. Examples:
(i)
Expression
1. Bhorhutti
small sheaf ) : Ribeiro-leixe fiequeno; leire fequenino de lenha.
2. Bhahri
(
(cake)
z R-apa
cle
arros; P-apa
d,e
padres-
larinha
d,e
arros ou de nacheny,
3. Kid,d,oiddi (tomb): R-turnba; P-tumba d,os defuntos. 4. Kuhum (vermilion) : R-asaJrdo d,e Portugal ; p-vermelhd,o que os gentios fidern na testa.
5.
Choiton (mental state of sick person): R-forga corforal,,
6'::::: ::',"^',y:#;::,:,':',:,:::;:',::^, is
7.
r ic
e
jevitam).
Posuho,
i, ett (adopted child) : R-cousa criada em casa;
P-crianga que tornd.o para criar.
8.
Toroo (nursery of corn) : R-bate nacid,o que se desbile i P-bate ou nacheny qne semedo junto para d.esfor.
(ii) Maturity 1.
Badi (border threads of cloth) : R-os fi,odo nos
fanos no(,os; P-ourella
2. Dandd,arc (leaf stem) ;
fe 3
d,a
R-astea
folha; P-taIIo de lolha
d,e
d,o
de
cabos d,os fr.os que pano.
/olha da figueira, i.e.
figueira ou d,e fapaeira.
18
-3.
Dhoshotatn
(to be startled) : R-fi'car
sobresal,tead'o;
P-
sobresaltarse,
4.
Dd,olle mod'ditam ( to wink )
: R-assenar
cotn os olhos;
P-acenar.
5.
Phugtant. (to be P-amuar-se.
6.
IVIuzu.md,ar (Revenue Collector): R--'ueador P-vead'or da lazenda ou Jeitor.
angry): R-inchar'se, i,e, emperuar-se; da
fazend'a
7. Paroi (crow-bar) : R-laoanca i P-alantanca. 8. Porsurn ( garden ) : R-lugar de ortaliga; P- quintal
;
de
ortalissa.
9. Kholl
(
P-eira
threshing floor )
: R-eita
erv que {uard,do bate;
d'e d,ebulhar a bate'
10. Sumoronn (mental prayer) ; R-oragd'o; P-otagdo mental.
11. Zof (vocal prayer) : R-reza; P-oragd'o
rtocal,
12. Thamb (paddy seedlings): R-bate em erl)a; P-bate nascido.
b) So, the vocabulary of the Padres cannot be a work of R'ibeiro's predecessors in tbe S<-,ciety of Jesus; nor would it be of his contemporary members of the same society, as they would not simultaneously produce two independent works at the same College of Rachol, their headquarters ; nor could it be of his successors in the sai'd Order, as the latter would have naturally incorporated all thg matter of Ribeiro's vocabulary, and would have added and improved further, as, in fact, it has been done in the vocabulary, edited by the Junta de Investigagdes, which is definitely a Jesuit rvork by Ribeiro's successors. In conclu' sion, the Padres' vocabulary is not a work of the Jesuits.
l-ffi::i:
-19
l I r
I I
I
Jesuits being excluded from the so-called Padres' vocabuJary, the problem of its authorship claims attention. A brief
I
examination
of external and internal proofs of the case
follows
I I
I I I
t I
I r
I t I I
l' I I
i
I
a) In the period of the missionary Konkani activity (15601660), besides Society of Jesus, the other Order, which was engaged in similar work and had scholarly members, were the Franciscan friars with colleges at Reis Magos (Bardez) and Old Goa (capital of Goa), and who are known to have produced Konkani grammars, vocabularies and religious literary works (Cunha Rivara, Ensaio Hislirico da Lingua Concani, 1858). Hence, a hypothesis in their favour is not to be excluded. But, effectively, a clue in this sense is suggested by a short inscription found on the first existing page of the Padres' Konkani-Portuguese manuscript volume, consisting of the words " S. Boaventura ", which was a Franciscan coilege in Old Goa founded in 1602; obviously, the above inscription was lvritten rvhen in 1836 the said manuscript was brought from the College of St. Boaventura to " Publica Livraria ", Panjim. Thus, there is rfason to assign the authorship of Padres' vocabulary to the Franciscans.
b) An analytic comparison between the vocalrulary of the Padres and Smtaxis Copiosissima, a Franciscan work of Gaspar de S. Miguel, (edited with an Introd'uction by Jos6 Pereira, 1968), shows that, unlike Jesuit vocabularies, the system of transliteration in the two works is identical, and also are same the meanings of the vocables and their Portuguese translation. Examples:
20i) Transliteration Gaspar uses C for guttural C
;
Padres use C; Ribeiro uses K.
8UE
,,
QUE;
KE
8UI
,,
QUI
,,
gH
,,
PH
KI KH
tt
,t
;
8Hi F;
PH
li
t I
N.B.
The above difference of PH and F between Gaspar and Padres is explained by the latter at p. 193, where the author states that, though PH is more suitable to the concerned Konkani sound, F is used to suit the serial order of the portu-
vn.llL
N. b,?r.t^t
trl^*
J I
I
ttt"Aa^Q l-r Wq"fr>,
I
t
-[
1.
Gaspar ( p. cor ag d.o,' Ri be
146
)
:
il
(p.
G 44)-feixe ball,ea; p_balea feixe; R-peixe muito 'grand,e como baleia. 3. Ghattu (Ghats): G (p. a9)-Baila{ate; p_ Bal.lagate;
5.
R-Balegate. Sallibem ( phantom, vision ) : G (p. 50)- phantasma ou sombra; P- sombra ma; R-(sailtem)-A sombra que hurn r:end,o fica assombrad,o, tambem vizd,o. Gaspar (pp.59,82): Pitam or pietam (to drink) ; or Pietam; R--Pitam.
p-pitam
Gaspar (p. 77) : Quirta-fialmeirinhas (cocoanut saplings) P__-Quirlu-falmeirinha norsa (cocoanut sa pli ng); R_;
Kirlu-coco sprout). 7.
nassido ou' bambu nassid.o (cocoanut or"b"rnuoo
Polloitam (to drive arvay) : G (p. gO)_/azer
Jugir; R-a/ugentar.
f'-= .
{
iro-l ogueo, p d,o lcake, brea d ).
Tir,tacho ,nasso (whale)
4.
rti
Undd,u-coragcio (heart); padres_
/ugir; p_/azer
{ l
I
I {
8.
-21
Gaspar
(p.86);
subd'har
; P.-M onsubid,har.
Monsubz (judge); P-Monsubu or Mon-
I
I I i:
I
Therefore, the auihor of the Padres' vocabulary is either a person who belonged to the Gaspar's team or Gaspar himself who, among other works, has a I s o compiled a " copious " Konkani-Portuguese a nd Portuguese-Konkani vocabulary (Sintaris, p. 13). That is, the vocabulary of the Padres is a work of the Franciscans.
t' The study of the above two vocabularies, that of the Jesuits and that of the Franciscans, gives a fairly good idea of the Konkani speech at the turn of the 16th. c. At this point a historical fact is relevant: the work of evangelization of Goa was shared by the Jesuits and Franciscans on a geographical basis, i.e. while the Jesuits worked in Salcele, the Franciscans did in Bardez. The speech found in the Jesuit vocabula.ry would be that spoken in Salcete, and the one of the Franciscan compilation should be of Bardez people ; effectively, Ribeiro refers to Salcete villages of MargAo, Rachol and Verna, while Gaspar de S. Miguel, in his Sintaxis, refers to Bardez villages o[ Siolim, Verem, Parra and Nerul. However, there is no significant difference betrveen the two, but both are characterized by a comrnon phonological structure and set of vocables :
a) Phonology
i) The fi.nal
rsoroels,
either long
or short, are always pro-
nounced:
:
Lon{, vowel, e.g. haha ( sister formaitam (to order) ; kod.d,e (apart), kellem (banana) mati (mud), ad.irn (before) ; ghod,d,o (horse), kkoznom (fire mortar); kuru (sign'), hantum
;
(
),
inside ).
Short oowel, e.g.; shar (a) (city), as(am) (to be) ; dror:(e) (money); raty (night), chuky (mistake); ratQD (pdund), chor(w) (thief).
L l:,
r
ii
li
ii,,
fl' H., F'
;-
8.
-2t
(p.86); Monsubrz (judge); P-Monsubu or swbdhar ; R-M onsubid,har. Gaspar
Mon-
Therefore, the author of the Padres' vocabulary is either a person who belonged to the Gaspar's team or Gaspar himself who, among other works, has a I s o compiled a " copious " Konkani-Portuguese a nd Portuguese-Konkani vocabulary (Sintaxis, p. 13). That is, the vocabulary of the Padres is a work of the Franciscans.
The study of the above two vocabularies, that of the Jesuits and that of the Franciscans, gives a fairly good idea of the Konkani speech at the turn of the 16th. c. At this point a historical fact is relevant: the work of evangelization of Goa was shared by the Jesuits and Franciscans on a geographical basis, i.e. while the Jesuits worked in Salcete, the Franciscans did in Bardez. The speech found in the Jesuit vocabulary would be that spoken in Salcete, and the one of the Franciscan compilation should be of Bardez people ; effectively, Ribeiro refers to Salcete villages of MargAo, Rachol and Verna, while Gaspar de S. Miguel, in his Sintaxis, refers to Bardez villages of Siolim, Verem, Parra and Nerul. However, there is no significant difference betrveen the two, but both are characterized by a comnaon phonological structure and set of vocables :
a) Phonology
i) The fi.nal
e67x1sls,
either long
or short, are always
pro-
nounced:
Lon! vowel,
e.g.
:
kaha (sister
), formaitam (to order) ;
kod,d,e (apart), kellem (banana) mati (mud), ad,irn (before) ; ghod,d,o ( horse ), hkoznom (fire mortar); kuru (sign ), hantu*n
i
(
inside ).
Short vowel, e.g.; shar (a) (city), as(am) (tobe) ; drov(e) (money); raty (night), chuky (mistake); ratQt) (pound), chor(u) (thief).
4)-
ii)
The mid,d'leTtowels, either long or short, are also pronounced: Long vowel, e.g.: posaro (shop), nimamno (last) ; mad,d'el (palm grove), folletarn (to see), barih (thin), mohhitam (to point) ; ,kollund.ir (r at), hullhulli (flea). Short rsowel, e.g.: chom(a)hotam (to walk), mb(a)voly ( chilli plant ); had,d(i)tam ( to take ), d'd,aiz ( heritage ), dad'(u)lo (man), nag(uld,do (naked).
iii) Verbs. There are transitive active verbs, passive verbs and causative
1. 2. 3. 4.
verbs.
Examples
:
Bhajitam ( to bake ) ; bhazotam (to be baked ) ; bhazoitam ( to make to bake ). Lashitant, (to burn ); lasotam (to be burnt); lasoitam ( to make to burn ). Ghanshitam (to rub) ; ghansotam ( to be rubbed ); ghansoitam ( to make to rub ). Sandd,itam ( to lose ) ; sanddotam (to be lost ) ; sand,d,oi. tam ( to make to lose ).
b) Vocabulary. The bulk of the vocables recorded in
the two vocabularies is the same, with mutual omissionS, which are very few in the Franciscan work but around 3000 in Ribeiro, rlue not to the actual non.existence of the words in the language spoken, but ,because the trvo compilations were carried out by two different groups of persons, of whom the Franciscan team seems to have done a more comprehensive, more accurate and more careful job. The words, which presently are found in Salcete and not in Bardez, and vice.versa, are recorded in both the vocabu. laries. For instance :
i) Words found today in
Salcete and not in Bardez : ( chomkotam to waik ), gafi* ( sling ), pishat; ( knife ), fortonnem ( loin-cloth ), god,d,koy ( hooked stake for plucking fruits ), hottuh
(salty), choitarn (to see), dhanhitaffi (to shut), fapu (kick), konclclo ( bamboo ), hul,l,hul,li (flea ), hwm (s w e a t ), himus 1mosquito
),AaIh, (4
rrt I ba"^"taS
-23
ii) Words found
presently in Bardez and not in Salcete : ttopio (chameleon), tenhddl (hooked stake for plucking fruits), ?nany (bamboo ), hulko (fleas ), khanhy ( cough ). Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the Konkani spoken in the l6th and 17th centuries was uniform both in Salcete. ( covering Old Conquests to the south of river Zaari ) and in Bardez (Old Conquests to the north of that river), and probably also in the New Conquests. It is this speech that may be called thq standard Konkani of the time, or, as Jos6 Pereira proclaims, the Promann Konhtr,ni.
And today's Salcete dialect of Konkani is closer than that of Bardez to the above common speech of the l6th and 17th cc., in which all the vowels, either fina! or middle, Iong or shorr, as shown earlier, are always pronounced. But presently :
a) the fi.nal long oowels are retained both in Salcete and in Bardez i but the final short,rsowels are pronounced in Salcete and lost in Bardez, v,g. : Salcete-vaty ( candle ), Bardez-vat ; S-chuky ( mistake ), B-chuk; S-dekhy (example), B-dekh; S-chor(u) (thief), B-chori S-kall(u) (time), B-kall; S-hhur(u) ( leg of table ), B-khur. b) Mid,dle vowels: all long and even some short vowels are retained in Salcete, but 4ll short and even some long voweis are Iost in Bardez. Examples:
i) long rsowels; S-posaro ( shop), B-posro; S-chincharo (tamarind seed), B-chinchro; nim,anno (last), B-nitnnno. short ooutels: S-nachotarn (to dance), B-nachtam; S-hapotta (chip), B-haptti; S-z;achitarn (to read), B-rsaohtanr.; S--lashitam (to burn), B-lastarn; S'-nagud,do (nakedl;
ii)
B-nagddo; S-hhonhuli ( petal), B-pahlli.
( cough
), B-hhonkl,i; S-paku.lti
2a
---
c) The phonological structure of the verbs is maintained ;rlnrost intact in Salcete ; in Bardez, however, the transitive active and passive verbs have lost their. middle vowels and henbe are pronounced identically, while the pronunciation of the .causative verbs is maintained ; thus, in Salcete there are still three distinct forms for active, passive and causative verbs, as in the original uniform speech, while in Bardez there are onll two forms, one for the active and passive, and the other for the ' causative. Examples:
t.
Salcete- bhajitarn (active), bhazotam (passive), bhazoilam ( causative ) ; Bardez : bhaztan ( act. and pas. ), bhazoitam (caus.),
2.
S-lashitam ( act.),
I,asotam ( pas. ), lasoitan ( ) ""o.. B-lastant, (act. and pas,), lasoitam (caus.)
3. S-sanililitam
;
(p"s.), sand,d.oitaru (caus.); B-sand,d,tatn (act. and pas.), sanild,oitarz (caus.) (act,.), sanildotam
An overall recapitulation of this unpretentious study may be expressed in the following three main conclusions :
a) The vocabulary of the Padres is not a work of the ]esuits but it is of the Franciscans, and perhaps its author is Gaspar de S. Miguel.
b) The Konkani speech of the 16th and 17th centuries was uniform both in Salcete and in Bardez, a n d probably all over Goa. c) The present Konkani dialect of Salcete is closer than that of Bardez to the original common Konkani language.