Namaste,
Out of curiosity, I went through a rushed scanning of many Rca-s of the Shri Rg-Veda, and I found that the "word", sakhA, is extremely popular. And, I still fail to see how the "word" has its origin in Hindi rather than in Vedic or Sanskrit, an assessment that I feel is highly unsubstantial. :dunno:
Before I post another Rca in which the word can be found in the plural, hence the sakhA, or even in the nominative singular; On page 275 of Macdonell's A Vedic Grammar for Student's, D.K. Printworld's Edition, a non-plural form of sakhi is mentioned: yāvayat-sakha (protecting friend; protective comrade; caring friend; an enduring compatriot). Due to the adjective, sakhi becomes sakha. However, in Vedic, sakhA would represent the dual-declension of the nominative, and in the ablative it would be followed by -au, hence sometimes - sakhAyau (but can also be used in dual declension as "sakhAyA").
But, I fail to see how "sakhA" can be "sakhas" in Vedic. It may be the case in Classical Sanskrit, but it is not the case in Vedic, since the -as suffix is usually found in the nominative plural declension of "R" stem nouns such as mātR/pitR/dātR and even with -an stem nouns such as rājan, hence rājānas.
In Vedic, "sakh-i" is an irregular i-stem. But, with vRddhi, it is able to form sakhA in the nominative, sakhAyam in the accusative, sakhyA in the instrumental, sakhye in the dative, sakhyur both in ablative & genitive, sakhe in the vocative...and a few other declensions (see more on page 84).
We notice that in the RV, there is the mentioning of an epithet for one or two Rishis "having the Maruts as friends", hence Marutsakhā.
Here's an example of it in the nominative, but still with the same dual ending:
yo rāyo vanir mahān supāraḥ sunvataḥ sakhā tasmā indrāya gāyata (R.V.1.4.10)
An appropriate translation would be something similar to Wilson's:
"Sing unto that Indra, who is the protector of wealth, the mighty, the accomplisher of good deeds, the friend of the offerer of the libation." (R.V.1.4.10)
