Printer Friendly

On the semantic foundation of P[a.bar]ninian derivational procedure: the derivation of kumbhak[a.bar]ra.

The treatment of upapada-tatpurusa compounds in Grimal, Venkataraja Sarnia, and Laksh-minarasimham's (2007) Book of Compound Words and the treatment of the starting point in Paninian derivation in several recent papers by Houben (2003, 2009a, 2009b, 2010) occasion a rearticulation of initial phases and particular points of Paninian derivational procedure. Grimal et al. (2007) omit early steps from their derivations and, as a result, show nominal terminations present at their first step in the derivation of upapada tatpurusa compounds. (1) Even though their annotations reveal the correct understanding of P[a.bar]nini's derivational procedure, omitting early steps gives the incorrect impression that P[a.bar]nini's derivational procedure begins with these speech forms present rather than with the semantic and syntactic conditions that occasion them. Their exposition closely follows that of Bhattojidiksita; yet the latter himself diminishes the role of semantic and syntactic conditions in derivational procedure in departure from his predecessors. Houben (2003, 2009a, 2009b, forthcoming) deliberately argues that P[a.bar]ninian derivation begins with speech forms and does not begin with the early steps in question at all. He asserts that the derivation begins with a sentence or phrase that the speaker uses the grammar to check for correctness. He argues that semantic and syntactic conditions are incapable of determining speech forms without the guidance of user decisions, and that the grammar is used merely to reconstitute a preliminary sentence that the user of the grammar has in view in order to validate its correctness. Given these challenges to the view that P[a.bar]ninian derivation begins with semantics, the occasion is ripe for an investigation of just what speech forms are in view at the start of a P[a.bar]ninian derivation and what semantic conditions are required. The pivotal issue arises in the derivation of the upapada-tatpurusa compound kumbhak[a.bar]ra 'potter'.

1. WHAT THE POTTER HAS TO DO WITH SEMANTICS

1.1 Basic assumptions in linguistics

The clarification of what speech forms and what semantic conditions are in view at the start of a P[a.bar]ninian derivation requires first a clarification of some basic assumptions about the nature of linguistic science as it was conceived by the ancient Indians. Ancient Indian linguists begin from the conception of speakers and end with speech. While Indian grammatical works presuppose an analysis of speech and early modern Indian semantic works are concerned with cognition from the perspective of a listener, none of the extant Sanskrit grammars begins with actual speech. They all, from the ancient phonetic treatises proper to particular Vedic traditions (Pr[a.bar]tisakhyas) to medieval non-P[a.bar]ninian grammars and early modern reworkings of P[a.bar]ninian grammars, derive actual speech from basic elements previously abstracted in accordance with an assumed prior analysis. The rules produce speech; they themselves, formulated to take the prior analysis into account, do not analyze it. In that sense Indian grammar is generative. It is constructed from the point of view of the speaker, not of the listener. P[a.bar]ninian grammar in particular uniformly instructs which speech forms are to be used under various conditions, including some 735 semantics conditions described in Scharf 2009a (101-9); conversely, the grammar never instructs what meaning is to be understood from a speech form. P[a.bar]ninian grammar is therefore a generative grammar beginning from basic linguistic units and semantics and ending with actual speech forms. While P[a.bar]ninian grammar is generative, it is not fully transformational; that is, it does not transform one actual utterance into another. While it is transformational to the extent that certain morphemes are posited as basic and variations are produced by replacements, it does not give preference, for instance, to the active voice over the passive voice in the basic speech forms posited (as some forms of modern transformational grammar do). Instead, alternate syntactic constructions that express some common meaning are derived from abstract non-phonetic categories. Identical conditions stated in various rules account for the common meaning while variant conditions or unconditioned alternation account for the differences in the alternate speech forms. P[a.bar]ninian grammar therefore does not have a sentence as its starting point. It has as its starting point a conception in the mind of a speaker embodied to a limited extent, before the application of any rules, already in certain basic, phonetic elements, namely roots and underived nominal stems.

The question of what, if any, speech forms are in view as the starting point for P[a.bar]ninian derivation is determinable from an examination of the set of rules and its supplementary lists. The only speech forms permissible at the start of a derivation are those (roots and stems) listed as basic elements, those inferrable as being of the same kind in lists of exemplary elements ([a.bar]krtigana), and those included by specific semantic criteria. The supplementary lists consist in particular of the Dh[a.bar]tupatha and ganas to which rules of the Ast[a.bar]dhydyi refer. Numerous rules provide operations on some 282 lists (gana) mentioned in those rules, beginning with A. 1.1.27 sarvaclini sarvan[a.bar]m[a.bar]n by which speech forms in the list beginning with sarva 'all' are termed sarvandman 'pronoun'. Roots listed in the Dh[a.bar]tupatha are termed dhatu by 1.3.1 bh[u.bar]v[a.bar]dayo dh[a.bar]tavah. Finally an open class of additional speech forms is included as basic elements under the sole specification that they be meaningful. By A. 1.2.45 arthavad adh[a.bar]tur apratyayall pr[a.bar]tipadikam, meaningful speech forms (arthavat), other than roots, affixes, and speech forms that end with them, are termed pr[a.bar]tipadika 'nominal base'. By A. 1.2.46 krttaddhitasam[a.bar]s[a.bar]s at, complex speech forms derived by the grammar, including derivates from roots, derivates from nominal stems, and compounds, are also termed pratipadika. Other basic elements (affixes and augments) are explicitly introduced by rules. Nominal bases and roots are then generally referred to as preceding contexts in rules that provide affixes after them (e.g., dh[a.bar]toh in 3.1.91 and pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]t in 4.1.1). These are the only speech forms present at the start of P[a.bar]ninian derivation; there are no others. Semantic conditions serve as the remainder of the initial conditions for the operation of rules of the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[i.bar].

1.2 Reconstitution rather than synthesis?

Houben accepts that there is a synthetic part to a grammar user's use of P[a.bar]ninian grammar. What he denies is that semantics lie at the foundation of sentence generation. He (2009b: 13) rightly points out that certain basic units of speech are included at the start of a P[a.bar]ninian derivation when he writes, for instance, "the selection of a suitable root is normally the starting point of the synthetic part of his consultation cycle." He indicates (p. 14) the complementary absence of pure semantics while elaborating on the presence of basic units of speech--writing, "the concrete starting point for a derivation in the synthetic phase of the consultation cycle of a user of grammar in PAnini's time will then never be 'pure' meaning or an autonomous level of semantic representations but the selection of a root--for instance, bh[u.bar] 'to be'--or a form from lists of underived stems, pronominal forms, etc. in which form and meaning are inseparably integrated." He reiterates (p. 13) criticism formulated in Houben 1999 of the views of Kiparsky and Staal (1969), Bronkhorst (1979), Joshi and Roodbergen (1975), and Kiparsky (1982) "according to which 'semantics' or 'meanings' form the starting point of the derivation," and directs that criticism against Kiparsky (2009), who postulates a level of semantic information that forms the starting point of the derivation of a complete sentence in which "k[a.bar]rakas are assigned on the basis of 'semantic information'." While accepting "at least two distinct levels of derivation ... a level of morphological representations (where we find roots, stems, suffixes) and a level of phonological representations (with words in their final form after the application of all substitution rules including those of sandhi)" (p. 15), Houben writes, "no additional level of representation is needed to account for Panini's system." He regards syntax and semantics "as domains of consultation, which allow the user of the grammar to label the linguistic forms of his preliminary sentence according to the syntactically relevant categories of meaning or according to semantically relevant generalizations of form (suffixes)" (p. 15), stating, "As I argued extensively in 1999[: 26-27], the view that P[a.bar]ninis grammar is a device 'to encode a given meaning and to produce an expression' is untenable" (p. 13).

Rather than accepting a semantic foundation for P[a.bar]ninian derivation, Houben asserts instead that the starting point is a preliminary statement. Houben asserts that "the starting point" of a P[a.bar]ninian derivation "is a preliminary sentence that needs to be checked or that needs some little extra refinement" (2009a: 524). He writes (2009b: 14),
  The system of P[a.bar]nini's grammar "clearly requires a user who
  wants to check and possibly improve a preliminary statement"
  (Reuben 2003: 161). The system implies the presence of a
  Knowledgeable user, a preliminary statement, and the application of
  first analytic and next synthetic procedures to the words in it, with
  the user keeping in mind the preliminary statement and its purport,
  and aiming at the best possible, sam-skrta form of his preliminary
  statement.


Houben writes (2009b: 19), "no-one has ever produced a correct form through P[a.bar]nini's system that was not already his starting point, or among his starting options. Usually the correct form is put at the beginning after which it is derived through the system." He continues, "the derivation of a word in a preliminary statement by any potential user of P[a.bar]nini's grammar will normally start with the selection of a root in the Dh[a.bar]tu-p[a.bar]tha corresponding to a selected problematic word in his statement." In conclusion, he considers it "more comprehensive and realistic" to view "P[a.bar]nini's grammar as 'reconstitutive' rather than one-sidedly 'synthetic" (p. 19). Houben reiterates these views in his most recent work (forthcoming: 3-4), disputing that "the starting point is in semantics (meaning elements, meaning conditions, etc.)" and asserting instead that it is "in a preliminary statement."

1.3 Karman: conceptual object rather than speech unit

Although much of Houben's concern is with the sociological question of the practical use of the grammar rather than with its formal features, his description betrays a fundamental misconception of P[a.bar]nini's linguistic system: he views speech forms rather than meanings as the fundamental conditions for syntactic organization. In Houben's view, speech forms rather than meanings are designated by karaka terms, and speech forms rather than meanings are the conditions for abstract tense. He would assign karaka terms and abstract tenses (lat, etc.) "to the words of the preliminary utterance" rather than "to the semantic representations of level one" (2009b: 16). Although his critical analysis of V[a.bar]kyapad[i.bar]ya 1.46 (2003: 148-55) is perspicuous in other respects, he is confused himself when he calls "confused and confounding" understanding that the term bruvikarman refers to an object of saying (p. 151 n. 32). He insists there that the karman 'object' of saying cannot refer "to an extralinguistic object," that it must refer to "a grammatical object" and hence, "requires bruvi to refer to the verb, not to its meaning." Here Houben asserts that a karman is a speech form rather than a semantic object denoted by a speech form, and that it has relation to a speech form, i.e., a verb, rather than to the object denoted by a verb, namely an action. Such an assertion is erroneous. Semantic objects, not speech forms, are classed as karman under conditions stated in A. 1.4.49-53 kartur [i.bar]psitatmam karma, etc. Semantic objects so classed are then the conditions for speech forms, namely, for nominal terminations, as provided by 2.3.2 kartnaui dvitzy[a.bar], etc. The karman is not a speech form; it is an object, viewed as a participant in an action, that is desired by the agent of the action. It is objects, not speech forms, that participate in action, and it is participants in action, not speech forms, that are designated by k[a.bar]raka terms.

It is precisely the issue of the status of what is termed karman as the condition for the occurrence of krt-affixes and nominal terminations that is the crux of a problem in the derivation of the upapada tatpurusa compound kumbhak[a.bar]ra by Bhattojid[i.bar]ksita and hence by Grimal et al. The fact that the derivation of the compound does not begin with a corresponding phrase is significant for Houben's contention that the derivation must begin with a "preliminary statement." The sequence in which speech elements in the derivation are introduced and the conditions for them reveal the extent to which P[a.bar]ninian derivation begins with abstract semantic entities. Examination of P[a.bar]ninian discussions concerning the derivation of the compound kumbha-k[a.bar]ra 'pot-maker' demonstrates that nominal terminations are not present at the stage of the provision of krt-affixes, that krt-affixes are conditioned by speech forms denoting semantic items designated by specific k[a.bar]raka terms, which in turn are conditioned predominantly by semantics.

2. THE UPAPADA-TATPURUSA COMPOUND KUMBHAK[A.bar]RA

A reader seeing the compound kumbhakara would easily recognize that it consists of the element kumbha 'pot' compounded with k[a.bar]ra 'maker' and that the latter term governs the former. The first assumption concerning its P[a.bar]ninian derivation might be that it is a sasth[i.bar]tatpurusa compound equivalent to the corresponding phrase (vigraha v[a.bar]kya 'analytic phrase'), *kumbhasya k[a.bar]rah, as provided for by A. 2.2.8. A. 2.2.8 sayth[i.bar] provides that a word (pada) terminating in a sixth-triplet nominal termination is optionally compounded with another word ending in a nominal termination and that the resulting compound is termed tatpurusa. Such compounds are merely optional because A. 2.2.8 occurs under the heading A. 2.1.11 vih[a.bar]s[a.bar], which allows the corresponding phrases to occur usually. The s[u.bar]tra accounts for compounds such as r[a.bar]ja-purusa that have corresponding phrases such as r[a.bar]j[n.bar]ah purusah.

The possibility that kwnbhak[a.bar]ra is a sasth[i.bar]-tatpurusa compound is indeed raised by Pata[n.bar]jali, who mentions the example as falling within the scope of 2.2.8 as well as 2.2.19 under 2.2.19 vt. 3. He later rejects this position, however, with linguistic justification. The phrase * kumbhasya k[a.bar]rah never occurs in Sanskrit, and k[a.bar]ra in the meaning 'maker' never occurs as an independent word, only as the final element of a compound. Hence, commentators on the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[i.bar] cite kumbha-k[a.bar]ra as an example of an upapada-tatpurusa compound provided by A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin. For instance, Pata[n.bar]jali cites the example kumbhak[a.bar]rah in the Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya on this sutra as does Jay[a.bar]ditya in the K[a.bar]scik[a.bar].

P[a.bar]nini accounts for derivates that occur only as compound-final elements in composition with the terms they govern by stating the governed words (upapada) as conditions in rules that provide an affix after a root, and by having syntactically subordinate speech forms serve as conditions for the morphological derivation of the final compound elements. He proceeds as follows. The governed terms are stated in the locative in rules under the heading 3.1.91 dhatoh, valid through the end of the third adhy[a.bar]ya. A. 3.1.92 tatropapadath saptam[i.bar]stham states the principle that an item taught in the locative in a sutra under that heading is termed upapada. The obligatory compounding of a governed word with the word that governs it is accounted for by A. 2.2.19-20. The term nityam 'obligatorily' recurs in A. 2.2.19-20 from A. 2.2.17. These rules occur under the heading A. 2.1.1 samarthah padavidhilz, which requires that potential compound elements be syntactically connected with each other. The order of elements in the compound is determined by two additional metarules. A. 1.2.43 pratham[a.bar]nirditstain samosa upasarjanam provides that an item taught in the nominative in a atta in the compound section is termed upasarjana, and A. 2.2.30 upasarjanam p[u.bar]rvam provides that an item termed upasarjana occurs first in the compound. The sutra A. 2.2.19 provides that a word termed upapada, excluding one that terminates in a finite verbal affix (tin), is obligatorily (nityam) compounded with a second item. Because the term upapada is taught in the nominative in 2.2.19, the governed words under the heading 3.1.91, termed upapada by 3.1.92, are termed upasarjana by 1.2.43 and therefore occur first in the compound.

The compound kumbha-k[a.bar]ra is derived as an upapada-tatpurusa compound with the vigraha v[a.bar]kya kumbham karoti, instead of as a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa compound formed in accordance with A. 2.2.8 with the vigraha v[a.bar]kya *kumbhasya kit" rah. The full derivation of the compound (excluding accent) is shown in Table 1.(2) The entry under kumbhak[a.bar]ra in Grimal et al.'s (2007: 266) The Book of Compound Words clearly lays out the steps of the derivation immediately relevant to compound formation. The steps in their derivation in order are steps 7, 9, 17, 20, 21, 18, 19, 22, 24, 25 of the derivation shown in Table 1. (2) The first line of their derivation cites A. 3.2.1 karmany an (cf. Table 1, step 7), which occurs under the heading A. 3.1.91 dh[a.bar]toh. The term karman in A. 3.2.1 is taught in the locative in a s[u.bar]tra under the heading A. 3.1.91 and so is termed upapada by A. 3.1.92 (cf. Table 1, step 5). The affix an, termed krt by A. 3.1.93 krd at[I.bar]n (cf. Table 1, step 6), occurs under the condition that an agent is to be denoted in accordance with A. 3.4.67 kartari krt (cf. Table 1, step 7a). Grimal et al. explain, in their brief comment on their first derivational step, that the affix at/ occurs after the root kr (marked with [n.bar]) on the condition that the agent (kartr) is to be denoted if a direct object (kar-man) is the subordinate term (upapada) connected with it (karmany upapade kr[n.bar]-dh[a.bar]toh kartari an-pratyayah). After accounting for strengthening (vrddhi) of the root kr in the second step (cf. Table 1, step 9), Grimal et al. cite A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin in the third step (cf. Table 1, step 17) and explain that it accounts for the compound of the upapada kumbha with k[a.bar]ra which ends in a kr-affix. In the sixth step they cite A. 1.2.43 pratham[a.bar]nirdistam sam[a.bar]sa upasarjanam (cf. Table 1, step 18) and explain that it accounts for the speech form kumbha being termed upasarjana (kumbha-sabdasya upasarjana-samj[n.bar][a.bar]). In the seventh step they cite A. 2.2.30 upasarjanath p[u.bar]rvam (cf. Table 1, step 19) and explain that it accounts for the upasarjana kumbha being placed first (upasarjanasya kumbha-fabdasya p[u.bar]rva-nip[a.bar]tah). Grimal et al. explain the formation of the compound in their notes (tippan[I.bar]): the affix an occurs after the root kr 'make' in the meaning of the agent where the speech form kumbha 'pot', denoting the direct object (karman), is the governed item (upapada) (karma-v[a.bar]cini kumbhasgabde upapade kplah kartr-arthe an-pratyayah).
Table 1 Early steps in the derivation of kumbha-kara  [irrelevant
stages, such as the deletion of markers, are left out; '+"
designates compounding; '-' designates affixation]

1

2    kumbha[ipsitatama]
     kr[dh[a.bar]tu]
     x [svatantra]

3    Kumbha [[I.bar]psitatama]        1.4.54

     kr x[kartr]
4    Kumbha [karman]                  1.4.49
     kr x[kartr]

5    Kumbha [karman]                  3.1.92
     [upapada] kr
     x[kartr]

6    [dh[a.bar]tu]                    3.1.93
     -an[krt]
7    Kumbha                            3.2.1
     [karman] kr-a

7a                                    3.4.67

8    kumbha                           1.4.13
     kr[anga]-a

9    kumbha k[a.bar]                 7.2.115
     [anga]-a

10   kumbha k[a.bar]ra                1.1.51

11   kumbha [pr[a.bar]tipadika]       1.2.45
     k[a.bar]ra

12   kumbha-nas                        4.1.2
     k[a.bar]ra

12a                                   1.4.22

12b                                   2.3.65

13   kumbha[ahga]-nas                 1.4.13
     k[a.bar]ra

14   kumbha-nas[pada]                 1.4.14
     k[a.bar]ra

15   kumbhasya[pada]                  7.1.12
     k[a.bar]ra

16   Kumbhasya[pada]                  1.2.46
     K[a.bar]ra
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]

*    kumbhasya [ pada] k[a.bar]ra-s    4.1.2

*a                                    1.4.22

*b                                    2.3.46

17   kumbhasya[pada]                  2.2.19
     +k[a.bar]ra

18                                    1.2.43

19                                    2.2.30

20   (kumbhasya+k[a.bar]ra)           1.2.46
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]

21   (kumbha+kdra)                    2.4.71
     [pratipadika]

22   (kumbha                           4.1.2
     +k[a.bar]ra)-s

22a                                   1.4.22

22b                                   2.3.46

23   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-s)          1.4.14
     [pada]

24   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-ru)         8.2.66
     [pada]

25   kumbhak[a.bar]rah                8.3.15

1

2    kumbha[ipsitatama]
     kr[dh[a.bar]tu]
     x [svatantra]

3    Kumbha [[I.bar]psitatama]       svatantrah kart[a.bar]
     kr x[kartr]

4    Kumbha [karman]                 kartur ipsitatamam karma
     kr x[kartr]

5    Kumbha [karman]                 Tatropapadam saptamistham
     [upapada] kr
     x[kartr]

6    [dh[a.bar]tu]                   krd atin
     -an[krt]

7    Kumbha                          karmany an
     [karman] kr-a

7a                                   kartari krt

8    kumbha                          yasm[a.bar]t pratyayavidhis
     kr[anga]-a                      tad[a.bar]di pratyaye ngam

9    kumbha k[a.bar]                 Aco [n.bar]niti
     [anga]-a

10   kumbha k[a.bar]ra               ur an raparah

11   kumbha [pr[a.bar]tipadika]      arthavad adh[a.bar]tur
     k[a.bar]ra                      apratyayah pr[a.bar]tipadikam

12   kumbha-nas                      Svaujasamautchas ...
     k[a.bar]ra

12a                                  Dvyekayor dvivacanaikavacane

12b                                  kartr-karmanoh krti
                                     (an-abhihite 1)

13   kumbha[ahga]-nas                yasm[a.bar]t pratyayavidhis
     k[a.bar]ra                      tad[a.bar]di pratyaye fhgam

14   kumbha-nas[pada]                suptihantam padam
     k[a.bar]ra

15   kumbhasya[pada]                 t[a.bar]nasinas[a.bar]m
     k[a.bar]ra                      in[a.bar]tsy[a.bar]h


16   Kumbhasya[pada]                 krttaddhitas[a.bar]m[a.bar]s ca
     K[a.bar]ra
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]

*    kumbhasya [ pada] k[a.bar]ra-s  Svaujasamautchas ...

*a                                   Dvyekayor dvivacanaikavacane

*b                                   pratipadik[a.bar]rtha
                                     -linga-parm[a.bar]na
                                     -vacana-m[a.bar]tre
                                     pratham[a.bar] (an-abhihite 1)

17   kumbhasya[pada]                 upapadam atin
     +k[a.bar]ra

18                                   pratham[a.bar]nirdistam
                                     sam[a.bar]sa upasarjanam

19                                   upasarjanam p[u.bar]rvam

20   (kumbhasya+k[a.bar]ra)          krttaddhitasam[a.bar]s[a.bar]s
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]             ca

21   (kumbha+kdra)                   supo
     [pratipadika]                   dh[a.bar]tupr[a.bar]tipadikayoh


22   (kumbha                         svaujasamatitchas ...
     +k[a.bar]ra)-s

22a                                  dvyekayor dvivaccmaikavacane

22b                                  pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]rtha
                                     -linga-parim[a.bar]na
                                     -vaeana-m[a.bar]tre
                                     pratham[a.bar]

23   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-s)         suptihantam padam
     [pada]

24   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-ru)        sasajuso ruh
     [pada]

25   kumbhak[a.bar]rah               kharavasanayovisar-jan[I.bar]yah

                                     The thought of the speaker is
                                     represented in an image
                                     incidentally.

1                                    [A masculine form is derived
                                     rather than the feminine
                                     kumbhak[a.bar]ri which is
                                     accounted for by 4.1.15. As the
                                     grammarians would say,
                                     in the current derivation
                                     feminine gender is unintended
                                     (strltvam avivaksitam); see
                                     table 2 for the derivation of
                                     a feminine form. Image from
                                     http://www.mainIesson.com/
                                     dispIay.php7auth or=
                                     iacobs&book=indian&story=notes]

2    kumbha[ipsitatama]              Basic lexical speech forms are
     kr[dh[a.bar]tu]                 selected to denote objects
     x [svatantra]                   and actions the speaker has
                                     in mind.

3    Kumbha [[I.bar]psitatama]       The independent participant in
     kr x[kartr]                     the action is termed 'agent'
                                     (kartr).

4    Kumbha [karman]                 The object most desired by the
     kr x[kartr]                     agent is termed 'direct object'
                                     (karman).

5    Kumbha [karman]                 The speech form denoting the
     [upapada] kr                    item termed karman, because the
     x[kartr]                        term karman occurs in the
                                     locative, is termed upapada.

6    [dh[a.bar]tu]                   The affix an in 3.2.1 is termed
     -an[krt]                        krt.

7    Kumbha                          The affix an occurs after the
     [karman] kr-a                   root km on condition that a
                                     speech form denoting a direct
                                     object (karman) is the
                                     subordinate term (upapada)
                                     connected with it.

7a                                   The affix an, termed krt, occurs
                                     on condition that the agent
                                     (kartr) is to be denoted.

8    kumbha                          That speech form beginning with
     kr[anga]-a                      that after which an affix is
                                     provided is termed anga
                                     with respect to that affix.

9    kumbha k[a.bar]                 Before an affix marked with
     [anga]-a                        [~.n] or n, the final sound of
                                     a stem (anga) ending in a vowel
                                     is replaced by its closest
                                     vrddhi sound.

10   kumbha k[a.bar]ra               An a, i, or u that replaces the
                                     vowel r is followed by an r.

11   kumbha [pr[a.bar]tipadika]      A meaningful speech form, other
     k[a.bar]ra                      than a verbal root or an
                                     affix, is termed pratipadika.

12   kumbha-nas                      A nominal termination occurs
     k[a.bar]ra                      after a nominal stem, or a
                                     speech form ending in a
                                     feminine affix hi or [a.bar]p.

12a                                  A dual or singular nominal
                                     termination occurs to denote
                                     dual or singular number
                                     respectively.

12b                                  The sixth triplet nominal
                                     termination occurs if the
                                     agent or direct object, being
                                     undenoted (an-abhihita) by a
                                     verbal termination, krt-affix,
                                     taddhita affix, or compound is
                                     to be denoted and a nominal
                                     base ending in a krt affix is
                                     used (for the action in which
                                     the agent or direct object
                                     participate).

13   kumbha[ahga]-nas                That speech form beginning with
     k[a.bar]ra                      that after which an affix is
                                     provided is termed anga
                                     with respect to that affix.

14   kumbha-nas[pada]                A speech form ending in a
     k[a.bar]ra                      nominal or verbal
                                     termination is termed pada.

15   kumbhasya[pada]                 After an a-final stem (anga),
     k[a.bar]ra                      ta, nasi, and nas are replaced
                                     by ina, at, and sya respectively.

16   Kumbhasya[pada]                 A meaningful speech form that
     K[a.bar]ra                      ends in a krt or taddhita affix
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]             or is a compound is termed
                                      pr[a.bar]tipadika.

*    kumbhasya [ pada] k[a.bar]ra-s  A nominal termination occurs
                                     after a nominal stem, or a
                                     speech form ending in a
                                     feminine affix ni or [a.bar]p.

*a                                   A dual or singular nominal
                                     termination occurs to denote
                                     dual or singular number
                                     respectively.

*b                                   The agent being denoted
                                     (abhihita) already by the
                                     krt-affix an, the first-triplet
                                     nominal termination s arises to
                                     denote just the meaning of the
                                     nominal base, gender, and number.

17   kumbhasya[pada]                 An upapada that does not end in
     +k[a.bar]ra                     a verbal termination is
                                     obligatorily compounded with
                                     a syntactically related speech
                                     form.

18                                   A speech form taught in the
                                     nominative in the compound
                                     section is termed upasarjana.

19                                   A speech form termed upasarjana
                                     occurs initial in the compound.

20   (kumbhasya+k[a.bar]ra)          A meaningful speech form that
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]             ends in a krt or taddhita
                                     affix or is a compound is
                                     termed pr[a.bar]tipadika.

21   (kumbha+kdra)                   Nominal terminations within a
     [pratipadika]                   pr[a.bar]tipadika are deleted
                                     without a trace (i.e., are
                                     replaced by luk).

22   (kumbha                         A nominal termination occurs
     +k[a.bar]ra)-s                  after a nominal stem or a
                                     speech form ending in a
                                     feminine affix ni or [a.bar]p.

22a                                  A dual or singular nominal
                                     termination occurs to denote
                                     dual or singular number
                                     respectively.

22b                                  A first-triplet nominal
                                     termination occurs if just
                                     the meaning of the nominal
                                     base, gender, a measure, or
                                     number are to be denoted.

23   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-s)         A speech form ending in a
     [pada]                          nominal or verbal
                                     termination is termed pada.

24   ((kumbha+k[a.bar]ra)-ru)        The final s of a pada is
     [pada]                          replaced by ru
                                     (rmarked with u).

25   kumbhak[a.bar]rah               Before a voiceless consonant or
                                     pause, pada-final r becomes
                                     visarga.


Although the sixth-triplet nominal termination arises after the nominal base kumbha in syntactic connection with k[a.bar]ra, it is not the case that a nominal termination arises after k[a.bar]ra (Table 1, step *). A sixth-triplet nominal termination is provided after a base, such as kumbha in syntactic connection with an item ending in a krt-affix, k[a.bar]ra, by A. 2.3.65 kartr-karmaryrn krti (Table 1, step 12b). The condition for the nominal termination in A. 2.3.65 is that it be an agent (kartr) or direct object (karman) in syntactic connection with an item ending in a krt-affix. These conditions are satisfied. The form k[a.bar]ra ends in the krt-affix (an), and kumbha denotes the karman of the action of making denoted by the root kr. After step 16 the step marked with an asterisk would provide the nominal base k[a.bar]ra with a nominal termination, which steps *a and *13 would restrict to a singular first-triplet nominal termination. However, the steps never occur because the obligatory compounding between the prior element and the subsequent element that ends in the krt-affix in step 17 preempts it. The arising of a nominal termination after the separate speech form k[a.bar]ra is prevented because the tatpurusa compound of the upapada kumbha with the speech form kara is brought about by A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin before nominal terminations have the opportunity to arise.

The issue of the non-occurrence of nominal terminations after upapada-tatpurusa compound constituents is discussed in Patarijali's Mahabhasya under A. 2.2.19 (Kielhorn vol. 1, p. 418, lines 1-13), which Grimal et al. aptly summarize in their notes. The principle (paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar]) 75 gati-k[a.bar]rakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih saha sam[a.bar]sa-vacanam pr[a.bar]k sub-utpattelj states that the provision of a compound of a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or an upapada with an item ending in a kit-affix occurs prior to the arising of nominal terminations. Since a nominal termination has not yet arisen, there is not even a chance for the formation of a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa compound in accordance with A. 2.2.8, which requires that an item terminating in a sixth-triplet nominal termination compound with another item ending in a nominal termination. As Grimal et al. write, an-utpanne supi saythi-samasa-prasaktir eva nasti. Even if one could somehow form a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa in accordance with A. 2.2.8 before nominal terminations arose, such a compound is optional (vibh[a.bar]s[a.bar] recurs in A. 2.2.8 from A. 2.1.11) while in contrast A. 2.2.19 is obligatory (nityam recurs in A. 2.2.19 from A. 2.2.17). The obligatory upapada-tatpurusa compound would occur, leaving no scope for the optional compound. The result is that rule A. 2.2.8 never even comes into conflict (vipratisedha) with A. 2.2.19, so that even the vigraha v[a.bar]kya *kumbhasya karate has no opportunity to occur.

The derivation provided in the entry under kumbhak[a.bar]ra by Grimal et al. (2007: 266) is almost entirely correct. Yet despite the practical utility of the kumbhak[a.bar]ra entry and the penetrating analysis of subtle issues by the authors in the notes, there appears to be a problem with the derivation, which the authors have overlooked. Although Grimal et al. in their notes clearly recognize that the sixth-triplet nominal termination cannot arise prior to the provision of the krt-affix an, the first step of derivation shows the sixth-triplet termination has (as marked with it) already present when the krt-affix an (a marked with ti) is provided. They silently include the sixth-triplet nominal termination has after the nominal stem kumhha in the first step of their derivation at the step in which A. 3.2.1 karmany an provides the kit-affix an (cf. Table 1, step 7). Their step 1 first presents the string kumbha-as + kr-a. However, such a string is impossible. The nominal termination cannot be present already in step one of the derivation where the krt-affix is provided, as it is presented, because the krt-affix must be provided first in order to serve as a condition for the provision of the sixth-triplet nominal termination.

Grimal et al. recognize that the krt-affix is a condition for the sixth-triplet nominal termination in their notes, which state, "the sixth-triplet nominal termination arises after the nominal base kumbha on condition that the latter occurs in syntactic connection with an item ending in a krt-affix (krd-yoge kumbha-sabd[a.bar]t sasth[I.bar])." Yet they apparently overlook the implication for the first step of their derivation. The sixth-triplet nominal termination after a base in syntactic connection with an item ending in a krt-affix is provided by A. 2.3.65 kartr-karmanoh krti (cf. Table 1, step 12b). The condition for the nominal termination in A. 2.3.65 is that it be in syntactic connection with an item ending in a krt-affix. In the case of kumbhak[a.bar]ra, the krt-affix an is provided by A. 3.2.1 (cf. Table 1, step 7). The application of A. 2.3.65 requires A. 3.2.1 to have already applied; A. 2.3.65 has no scope prior to the application of A. 3.2.1. Hence the nominal termination cannot be present already in step 1 of the derivation.

Moreover, a nominal termination never has the opportunity to arise after the speech form k[a.bar]ra by itself (Table 1, steps *, *a, *b) since compounding occurs obligatorily (Table 1, step 17) and takes precedence over the provision of the nominal termination there. In contrast to an upapada, which is subject to obligatory compounding with an element ending in a krt-affix by A. 2.2.19, words ending in sixth-triplet nominal terminations provided by A. 2.3.65 are subject to optional compounding with another element ending in a nominal termination (supa) by A. 2.2.8 sayth[I.bar]. The terms sup and sup[a.bar] recur in A. 2.2.8 from A. 2.1.2 and A. 2.1.4 respectively so that the compounding takes place between elements termed pada by A. 1.4.14 suptifiantarh padam. In particular, the v[a.bar]rttika stated under A. 2.2.8., krdyog[a.bar] ca, allows such compounds with syntactically connected words whose nominal bases end with krt-affixes. Only where there is such optional compounding is there the possibility for a nominal termination to arise after the krt-affix and then for compounding to take place between the two elements both of which end in nominal terminations. That there is no equivalent corresponding phrase *kumbhasya k[a.bar]rat? in Sanskrit usage for the compound kumbha-k[a.bar]ra is therefore critical: it is for this very reason that P[a.bar]anini forms the compound with the subsequent element without the nominal termination by A. 2.2.19 rather than with one by A. 2.2.8.

Is is crucial to note that there is no equivalent corresponding phrase *kumhhasya k[a.bar]rah in Sanskrit usage for the compound kumbha-k[a.bar]ra with which to begin a P[a.bar]ninian derivation, nor does P[a.bar]nini's derivational procedure begin with the string kumbha-as + kr-a since the krt-affix an does not arise until step 7, and the sixth-triplet nominal termination has does not arise until step 1.2. The only speech forms available for a "preliminary statement" are kumbha and kr. A preliminary statement consisting of these speech forms would be incomplete and incapable of determining the derivation of the desired compound. The derivation would still depend upon pure semantics--disembodied meanings still unencumbered by corresponding speech forms--to condition the proper affixes and compound formation.

3. COMPOUND ELEMENTS WITHOUT NOMINAL TERMINATIONS

3.1 Upapada-tatpuru.ya compounds

A close examination of the commentaries demonstrates that P[a.bar]nini's derivation of upapada-tatpurusa compounds does not begin with a corresponding phrase (vigraha-vakya) nor with nominal terminations present. Such an examination also reveals complex linguistic issues in the syntax and morphology of compounds and the techniques adopted by various commentators to account for the complexities within the P[a.bar]ninian linguistic system. Some of the techniques employed by certain commentators to solve certain difficulties create undesirable side effects which are then dealt with by subsequent commentators. The presence of a sixth-triplet or second-triplet nominal termination on the initial compound element in upapada-tatpurusa compounds before the application of A. 3.2.1 karmany an is such an undesirable side effect produced by medieval commentators. That the presence of a nominal termination at this stage of derivation is a problem has apparently remained unnoticed. Its solution requires revision of the conclusions of the commentators in question as well as of the scholars who relied upon them.

In the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar], compounds are generally formed from words ending in nominal terminations and alternate with corresponding phrases. To ensure that compounds be formed from elements ending in nominal terminations, the technical term for nominal terminations sup recurs throughout most of the compound section, which extends from A. 2.1.3 pr[a.bar]k kad[a.bar]r[a.bar]t sam[a.bar]salt to A. 2.2.38 kad[a.bar]r[a.bar]h karmadh[a.bar]raye at the end of the second pada of the second adhy[a.bar]ya. Interpreted in accordance with A. 1.1.72 yena vidhis tadantasya, sup refers to a speech form that ends in a nominal termination. The term recurs in two inflected forms, in the nominative from A. 2.1.2 sub [a.bar]mantrite par[a.bar]ngavat spare and in the instrumental from A. 2.1.4 saha sup[a.bar]. Together with other headings, these terms indicate that a speech form ending in a nominal termination compounds with a semantically and syntactically connected speech form that ends in a nominal termination. Likewise, the term vibh[a.bar]s[a.bar] 'optionally' is stated as a heading in A. 2.1.11 and recurs throughout most of the compound section to allow compounds to alternate with corresponding phrases.

There are, however, compounds that cannot properly be formed from constituent elements that end in nominal terminations. These include compounds in which the prior element must compound with a subsequent element that has not yet been supplied with a feminine affix. The feminine affix must in turn occur prior to the provision of a nominal termination. Because the selection of the appropriate feminine affix depends upon the specific semantic, syntactic, and co-occurrence conditions of the compound, the correct feminine affix can only be provided subsequent to compound formation, and the nominal termination only subsequent to that. Notable examples include compounds such as dhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] '(a female) bought with wealth' formed from A. 2.1.32 kartrkarane krt[a.bar] bahulam, and kacchap[I.bar] 'a female tortoise', an upapada-tatpurusa compound formed from A. 2.2.19. The derivation of the example kacchap[I.bar] is presented in Table 2. If the compounds were required to be formed from constituent speech forms terminating in nominal terminations, erroneously only the form dhanakrit[a.bar] would result from A. 2.1.32, and the incorrect form kacchapa would result from A. 2.2.19 (Table 2, step 16). The feminine affix t[a.bar]p would occur after the final constituents prior to compound formation in accordance with A. 4.1.4 aj[a.bar]dyatas t[a.bar]p (Table 2, step * after 1.5). Instead, in the derivation of the correct form, the feminine affix nip occurs after the compound stem subsequent to compound formation in accordance with A. 4.1.48 kr[a.bar]t[a.bar]t karanap[u.bar]rv[a.bar]t or A. 4.1.63 j[a.bar]ter astr[I.bar]visayad ayopadh[a.bar]t (Table 2, step 19).

In exception to the general pattern of forming compounds from words already equipped with nominal terminations, nominal terminations are avoided on the final compound element prior to compound formation in these examples. In the derivation of dhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar], the term krt[a.bar] in A. 2.1.32 specifies that the initial compound element combine with a subsequent element that is a nominal base ending in a kit-affix rather than with a word ending in a nominal termination. (The term bahulam 'variously' in A. 2.1.32 is interpreted as allowing dhanakr[I.bar]t[a.bar] as well.) Likewise, to form the upapada-tatpurusa compound kacchap[I.bar] correctly, A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin must be made to apply in the absence of nominal terminations on the final compound element. The term a-tin, referring to a speech form that does not end in a verbal termination, indicates that the restriction to speech forms that end in nominal terminations is no longer valid. Commentators and modern translators differ in their characterization of the criteria specified by the rule and the interpretation of the significance of the term a-tin. They do agree that the term nityam 'obligatorily' in A. 2.2.17 nityam kr[I.bar]d[a.bar]j[I.bar]vikayoh, which recurs through A. 2.2.20, stops the recurrence of vibh[a.bar]s[a.bar] in the rule, which thereby forms compounds obligatorily and does not permit corresponding phrases.
Table 2
The derivation of kaccha-pi
[irrelevant, stages, such as the deletion of markers, are left
out; '+' designates compounding; '-' designates affixation]

1

2    kaccha[s[a.bar]dhakatama]
     p[a.bar] [dh[a.bar]tu]
     x[svatantra]

3    kacca[s[a.bar]dhakatama]     1.4.54
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]

4    kaccha[karana] pa            1.4.42
     x[kartr]

5    kaccha[karana]               1.2.45
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]

6    Kaccha-[a.bar] p[a.bar]       4.1.2
     x[kartr]

6a                                1.4.22

6b                                2.3.18

7    Kaccha[ariga]- [a.bar]       1.4.13
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]

8    kaccha-ina p[a.bar]          7.1.12
     x[kartr]

9    kacchena p[a.bar]            6.1.87
     x[kartr]

10   kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]   3.1.92
     x[kartr]

11   [dh[a.bar]tu]-ka[krt]        3.1.93

12   Kacchena[upapada]            3.2.4a
     p[a.bar]-a[krt]

12a                               3.4.67

13   kacchena[upapada]            1.4.13
     pa[anga]-a[krt]

14   Kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]   6.4.64
     [krt]

15   kacchena[upapada]            1.2.46
     pa[pr[a.bar]tipadika]

*    kacchena [upapada]            4.1.4
     pa-[a.bar]

16   kacchena + pa                2.2.19

17   (kacchena + pa)              1.2.46
     [pratipadika]

18   kacchapa[pratipadika]        2.4.71

19   kacchapa-i                   4.1.63

20   kacchapa[anga]-i             1.4.13

21   kacchapa [anga] [bha] - i    1.4.18

22   kacchapi                    6.4.148

23   kacchapis                     4.1.2

23a                               1.4.22

23b                               2.3.46

24   kacchapts[pada]              1.4.14

25   kacchapi                     6.1.68

1

2    kaccha[s[a.bar]dhakatama]
     p[a.bar] [dh[a.bar]tu]
     x[svatantra]

3    kacca[s[a.bar]dhakatama]    sva-tantrah kart[a.bar]
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]

4    kaccha[karana] pa           S[a.bar]dhakatamam karanam
     x[kartr]

5    kaccha[karana]              arthavad adh[a.bar]tur
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]         apratyayah pr[a.bar]tipadikam
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]

6    Kaccha-[a.bar] p[a.bar]     svaujasamautchas ...
     x[kartr]

6a                               Dvyekayor dvivacanaikavacane

6b                               kartrkaranayos trtiy[a.bar]

7    Kaccha[ariga]- [a.bar]      vasm[a.bar]t pratyayavidhis
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]           tad[a.bar]di pratyaye 'ngam

8    kaccha-ina p[a.bar]         t[a.bar]hasihas[a.bar]m
     x[kartr]                    in[a.bar]tsy[a.bar]h

9    kacchena p[a.bar]           [a.bar]d gunah
     x[kartr]

10   kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]  Tatropapadarh saptami-stham
     x[kartr]

11   [dh[a.bar]tu]-ka[krt]       krd atin

12   Kacchena[upapada]           supi ([a.bar]tah kah 3)
     p[a.bar]-a[krt]             [yoga-vibh[a.bar]ga]

12a                              kartari krt

13   kacchena[upapada]           yasm[a.bar]t praiyayavidhis
     pa[anga]-a[krt]             tad[a.bar]di pratyaye 'ngam

14   Kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]  [a.bar]to lopa iti ca
     [krt]

15   kacchena[upapada]           krttaddhitasam[a.bar]s[a.bar]s
     pa[pr[a.bar]tipadika]       ca

*    kacchena [upapada]          aj[a.bar]dyatas t[a.bar]p
     pa-[a.bar]

16   kacchena + pa               upapadam atin

17   (kacchena + pa)             krttaddhitasamasas ca
     [pratipadika]

18   kacchapa[pratipadika]       supo
                                 dh[a.bar]tupr[a.bar]tipadikayoh

19   kacchapa-i                  j[a.bar]ter astrlvisay[a.bar]d
                                 ayopadh[a.bar]t

20   kacchapa[anga]-i            yasm[a.bar]t pratyayavidhis
                                 t[a.bar]dadi pralyaye 'ngam

21   kacchapa [anga] [bha] - i   yaci bham

22   kacchapi                    yasyeti ca

23   kacchapis                   svaujosamaufchas ...

23a                              Dvyekayor dvivacanaikavacane

23b                              Pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]rtha -
                                 linga - parim[a.bar]na - vacana
                                 - m[a.bar]tre pr[a.bar]thama

24   kacchapts[pada]             sitptinantam padam

25   kacchapi                    Halny[a.bar]bbhyo
                                 d[I.bar]rgh[a.bar]t sutisy
                                 aprktam hal

1                                The thought of the speaker
                                 is represented in an image
                                 incidentally. The image
                                 depicts the penultimate
                                 scene in the tale of the
                                 tortoise and two geese
                                 (Kacchapa jataka Fausb0ll
                                 215; Pancalantra 1.13;
                                 Hitopadesa 4.2).
                                 [Image from:
                                 http://www.
                                 allindiaarts.com
                                 /painting_detail.asp?
                                 paint_id=205&country=eu]

2    kaccha[s[a.bar]dhakatama]   Basic lexical speech forms
     p[a.bar] [dh[a.bar]tu]      are selected to denote
     x[svatantra]                objects and actions the
                                 speaker has in mind.

3    kacca[s[a.bar]dhakatama]    The independent participant
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]           in the action is termed
                                 'agent' (kartr).

4    kaccha[karana] pa           The object most efficacious
     x[kartr]                    in accomplishing the act is
                                 termed 'instrument
                                 (karana).

5    kaccha[karana]              A meaningful speech form,
     [pr[a.bar]tipadika]         other than a verbal root or
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]           an affix, is termed
                                 pratipadika.

6    Kaccha-[a.bar] p[a.bar]     A nominal termination occurs
     x[kartr]                    after a nominal stem or a
                                 speech form ending in a
                                 feminine affix hi or
                                 [a.bar]p.

6a                               A dual or singular nominal
                                 termination occurs to denote
                                 dual or singular number
                                 respectively.

6b                               The third triplet of nominal
                                 terminations occurs on
                                 condition that an agent or
                                 instrument not already
                                 denoted is to be denoted.

7    Kaccha[ariga]- [a.bar]      That speech form beginning
     p[a.bar] x[kartr]           with that after which an
                                 affix is provided is termed
                                 anga with respect to that
                                 affix.

8    kaccha-ina p[a.bar]         After an a-final stem
     x[kartr]                    (anga), ta, nasi, and has
                                 are replaced by ina,
                                 [a.bar]t, and sya
                                 respectively.

9    kacchena p[a.bar]           Short or long a and a
     x[kartr]                    following dissimilar simple
                                 vowel are replaced by the
                                 latter's corresponding guna
                                 sound.

10   kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]  The speech form ending in a
     x[kartr]                    nominal termination, because
                                 the term supi occurs in the
                                 locative, is termed
                                 upapada.

11   [dh[a.bar]tu]-ka[krt]       The affix ka in 3.2.4a is
                                 termed krt.

12   Kacchena[upapada]           The affix ka occurs after an
     p[a.bar]-a[krt]             [a.bar]-final root on
                                 condition that a speech form
                                 ending in a nominal
                                 termination is the
                                 subordinate term (upapada)
                                 connected with it.

12a                              The affix ka, termed krt,
                                 occurs on condition that the
                                 agent (kartr) is to be
                                 denoted.

13   kacchena[upapada]           That speech form beginning
     pa[anga]-a[krt]             with that after which an
                                 affix is provided is termed
                                 ahga with respect to that
                                 affix.

14   Kacchena[upapada] p[a.bar]  The final [a.bar] of a stem
     [krt]                       (ahga) is deleted (replaced
                                 by lopa) if ... an affix
                                 marked with k or h follows.

15   kacchena[upapada]           A meaningful speech form
     pa[pr[a.bar]tipadika]       that ends in a kit or
                                 taddhita affix or is a
                                 compound is termed
                                 pratipadika.

*    kacchena [upapada]          The affix t[a.bar]p occurs
     pa-[a.bar]                  after a nominal base
                                 (pratipadika) in the
                                 feminine.

16   kacchena + pa               An upapada that does not end
                                 in a verbal termination is
                                 obligatorily compounded with
                                 a syntactically related
                                 speech form.

17   (kacchena + pa)             A meaningful speech form
     [pratipadika]               that ends in a krt or
                                 taddhita affix or is a
                                 compound is termed
                                 pr[a.bar]tipadika.

18   kacchapa[pratipadika]       Nominal terminations within
                                 a pratipadika are deleted
                                 without a trace (i.e., are
                                 replaced by lnk).

19   kacchapa-i                  The feminine affix n[I.bar]s
                                 occurs after a nominal base
                                 (pr[a.bar]tipadika) that is
                                 a generic term, that does
                                 not occur exclusively in the
                                 feminine, and that does not
                                 have a penultimate y.

20   kacchapa[anga]-i            That speech form beginning
                                 with that after which an
                                 affix is provided is termed
                                 anga with respect to that
                                 affix.

21   kacchapa [anga] [bha] - i   A speech form followed by an
                                 affix beginning with su
                                 (taught in 4.1.2 and
                                 following rules) not termed
                                 sarv[a.bar]namasth[a.bar]na
                                 that begins with y or a
                                 vowel is termed bha.

22   kacchapi                    A vowel of the i or a class,
                                 final in a stem (anga)
                                 termed bha, is deleted
                                 (replaced by lopa) if an
                                 affix beginning with i or a
                                 taddhita affix follows.

23   kacchapis                   A nominal termination occurs
                                 after a nominal stem or a
                                 speech form ending in a
                                 feminine affix ni or
                                 [a.bar]p.

23a                              A dual or singular nominal
                                 termination occurs to denote
                                 dual or singular number
                                 respectively.

23b                              A first-triplet nominal
                                 termination occurs if just
                                 the meaning of the nominal
                                 base, gender, a measure, or
                                 number are to be denoted.

24   kacchapts[pada]             A speech form ending in a
                                 nominal or verbal
                                 termination is termed pada.

25   kacchapi                    After a speech form that
                                 ends in a consonant, or a
                                 long vowel that is a
                                 feminine affix n[I.bar] or
                                 [a.bar]p. the singular
                                 first-triplet nominal
                                 termination su, or the third
                                 or second person singular
                                 verbal terminations si or
                                 ti, when a single consonant,
                                 are deleted.



3.2 K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana and Patat[[n.bar]]ali

Examination of the statements of commentators concerning the prevention of nominal terminations on final compound constitutents prior to compounding begins with K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana (fourth or third century B.C.E.). In A. 4.1.48 varttika 4 gatik[a.bar]rakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih saha sam[a.bar]savacanam, K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana requires that certain initial compound elements be compounded with a final compound element that is a nominal base terminating in a krt-affix. The initial compound constituents to which the requirement applies include preverbs and other preverbal elements termed gall, speech forms denoting participants in action (k[a.bar]rakas), and upapadas. The second category includes compounds such as dhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] provided by A. 2.1.32; the third includes compounds such as kacchapi provided by A. 2.2.19.

Among the reasons for stating the varttika, Pata[n.bar]jali (c. 150 B.c.E.) mentions the provision of the feminine affix nis after a generic term (j[a.bar]ter nisvidhane prayojanam) and supplies vy[a.bar]ghr[I.bar] 'tigress' and kacchap[i.bar] 'female tortoise' as examples. Pata[n.bar]jali explains the motivation for the varttika with respect to the first example; (3) his explanation is adapted here to apply to the latter, since kacchapa is an upapada-tatpurusa compound, so that reference may be made to the derivation in Table 2. Patailjali cites kacchapah as an example to which the first portion of A. 3.2.4 divided into two rules is applicable (Table 2, step 12). If compound constituents ended in nominal terminations, the feminine affix tap would occur after the nominal stem of the final constituent prior to compounding by A. 4.1.4 ajadyatas t[a.bar]p (Table 2, step * after 15), and the final constituent pa terminating in long a would be compounded. The feminine affix n[i.bar]s would then not occur by A. 4.1.63 j[a.bar]ter astr[I.bar]visayad ayopadh[a.bar]t (Table 2, step 19) since it is provided only after a nominal base ending in a short a. (As the Kasika observes, the term atah 'after a short a' recurs from A. 4.1.4.) The statement of the V[a.bar]rttika solves the problem.

Under A. 2.2.19, Pata[n.bar]jali argues that it is not necessary to state v[a.bar]rttika 4 under A. 4.1.48 because the mention a-tin in A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin achieves its purpose. The recurrence of sup and sup[a.bar] in A. 2.2.19 would disallow the rule from applying to finite verbs anyway, even without mentioning that it does not apply to speech forms ending in verbal terminations (a-tin). Patanjali writes,
  Therefore, since it is successful in this way, the fact that the
  teacher (P[a.bar]nini) mentions the negation, "not a speech form
  ending in a verbal termination," serves to make known that the terms
  sup and sutra do not recur in these two rules (A. 2.2.18-19). What is
  the reason for making this known? The principle
  (paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar]) that a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or upapada is
  compounded with a nominal  base ending in a krt-affix need not be
  stated. (evam tarhi siddhe  sati yad atin iti pratisedham
  s[a.bar]sti taj j[a.bar]apayaty  [a.bar]c[a.bar]ryo  'nayor yogayor
  nivrttam sup supaiti. kim  etasya j[n.bar][a.bar]pane prayojanam.
  gatik[a.bar]rakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih saha
  samaso bhavat[I.bar]ty es[a.bar] paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar]
  na kartavy[a.bar] bhavati. MBh. 1.417.18-20 (4)


Finally, Pata[n.bar]jali clarifies that the final compound constituent with which elements termed gati, speech forms denoting participants in action (k[a.bar]rakas), and upapadas are compounded is simply a semantically and syntactically related speech form. The Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya passage continues, "If this is made known, then with what are they compounded? With a semantically and syntactically related speech form" (yady etaj j[n.bar][a.bar]pyate kened[a.bar]n[I.bar]m sam[a.bar]so bhavisyati. samarthena). The final compound constituent can be any speech form; it need not be one that ends in a nominal termination.

As mentioned in section 2, K[a.bar]y[a.bar]yana's v[a.bar]rttikas 3-4 under A. 2.2.19 and Pata[n.bar]jali's commentary thereon conclude that the formation of an upapada-tatpurusa compound by A. 2.2.19 takes precedence over the formation of a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa compound by A. 2.2.8. V[a.bar]rttika 3, "an upapada-tatpurusa compound takes precedence over a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa compound by vipratisedha" (sasth[I.bar]sam[a.bar]s[a.bar]d upapadasam[a.bar]so vipratisedhena. MBh. 1.418) suggests that A. 2.2.19 takes precedence after the two rules come into conflict (vipratisedha) since each rule has its own scope while they both have scope in the formation of compounds such as kumhhakara. Presumably, the latter rule would apply in accordance with the principle stated in A. 1.4.2 vipratiyedhe param k[a.bar]ryam that the latter rule applies in cases of such conflict. Katynyana in varttika 4 and Patafijali in his comments thereon reject v[a.bar]rttika 3's suggestion that A. 2.2.19 takes precedence over A. 2.2.8 by vipratisedha. Varttika 4 states, "no, an upapada-tatpurusa compound occurs because there is no sasthi-tatpurusa compound" (na va .yasthisamasasyabhavad upapadasamasak MBh. 1.418). A. 2.2.8 has no scope to form compounds such as kumbhak[a.bar]ra, Pata[n.bar]jali points out, because of the statement of the principle that a gati, karaka, or upapada is compounded with a nominal base ending in a krt-affix prior to the arising of nominal terminations (gatikarakopapadanarhkrdbhit saha samasavacanam prak subutpatter iti vacanat. MBh. 1.418.7-8). Since he has just argued that the statement of this principle is not necessary, he offers a second reason: A. 2.2.19 is obligatory while A. 2.2.8 is optional (upapadasamaso nityasamasab sasthisamaso vibhasa. MBh. 1.418.10). An obligatory rule takes precedence over one that is not obligatory.

The fact that Katydyana and Pata[n.bar]jali consider the possibility that the compound be formed by A. 2.2.8 sasth[I.bar] implies that they consider that a sixth-triplet nominal termination is present in the initial compound constituent at the stage of compounding (Table 1, step 17). The statement of the principle that a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or upapada is compounded with a nominal base ending in a kit-affix prior to the arising of nominal terminations preempts the occurrence of a nominal termination only in the final compound constituent. The inclusion of a-tin in A. 2.2.19 that makes the statement of this principle unnecessary likewise preempts the occurrence of a nominal termination only in the final compound constituent.

Although K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana and Pata[n.bar]jali accept that the initial compound constituent in an upapada-tatpurusa compound terminates in a nominal termination prior to compounding, Pata[n.bar]jali nowhere insists that the term upapada itself implies the presence of nominal terminations. Hence there is no reason to assume the presence of a nominal termination in kumbha at the time of application of A. 3.2.1 karma iv an (Table I, step 7) just because that which denotes the direct object (karman is termed upapada by A. 3.1.92 tatropapadath saptamistham (Table 1, step 5). The question arises as to whether the term upapada implies the technical sense of the term pada provided by A. 1.4.14 suptitiantath padam, namely, that it terminate in a nominal termination because the term upapada includes the string pada. A similar question arises with regard to the terms for compound constituents purvapada and uttarapada. The answer is that the terms do not imply the technical sense of the term pada provided by A. 1.4.14; they do not necessarily have to terminate in nominal terminations.

Under A. 3.1 .92, Pata[n.bar]jali accepts that the reason for stating the long technical term upapada is that it be understood as a term in accordance with its conventional meaning (mahaty[a.bar]h sa[n.bar]jn[a.bar]y[a.bar]h karana etat prayojanam anvarthasa[n.bar]j[n.bar]a yath[a.bar] vij[n.bar][a.bar]yeta. MBh. 2.76.7-8). The term upapada is a long term (upapadam iti mahatiyam sa[n.bar]j[n.bar][a.bar] kriyate. MBh. 2.76.6). The conventional meaning to be understood from it is the adjacent word uttered (upocc[a.bar]ri padam upapadam. MBh. 2.76.8). The hint of the word pacda in the term upapada serves to induce the principle in rules in which the term is mentioned that the rule concerns syntactically related speech forms (yavato cedunah padagandho 'sti padavidhir ayam bhavati. padavidhis ca samarthanarit bhavati. MBh. 2.76.9-10). The term thereby prevents rules from applying to syntactically unrelated speech forms. The point is that the speech forms must be syntactically related, not that they terminate in nominal terminations.

In this context, Pata[n.bar]jali debates the application of A. 3.2.1 karmany an to cases where the verb has an independent connection with two verbal complements not directly connected with each other. He considers the case in which the vigrahav[a.bar]kya contains two accusatives, mahantarn kumbhath karoti. If the sentence means "he makes a great pot," there is a direct syntactic connection between the two accusatives, and these have a uniform connection with the verb. In that meaning Pata[n.bar]jali permits the rule to apply (bhavitavyaM yadaitad v[a.bar]kyark bhavati: mah[a.bar]n kumbho mah[a.bar]kumbhah, mah[a.bar]kumbhath karotiti mah[a.bar]kumbhak[a.bar]rah MBh. 2.75.22-76.1). However, if the sentence means "he makes the pot large," there is no direct unmediated syntactic connection between kumbham and matteimam, so the rule does not apply (yad[a.bar] tv etad vakyam bhavati: mah[a.bar]ntarn kumbharh karot[I.bar]ti tada na bhavitavyam. MBh. 2.76.2). In that case Pata[n.bar]jali disallows the rule to apply because of the lack of syntactic connection (tatra as[a.bar]m[a.bar]rthy[a.bar]n na bhavisiyati. MBh. 2.76.10). He does, however, make an exception in the similar case of at least one compound formed with the affix cvi (istam evaitad gonard[I.bar]yasya). In the sentence "I want a maker of wild sugarcane grass into mats" (icch[a.bar]my aham kathkat[I.bar]k[a.bar]ram), A. 3.2.1 does provide the affix an after kr with two complements k[a.bar]sa 'wild sugarcane grass' and kata 'mat' (MBh. 2.76.13-14).

While the debate concludes by broadening the scope of rules that include an upapada as a condition so that they include cases of slightly looser syntactic connection, it illustrates well what Patai[n.bar]jali means the purpose of stating the long term upapada to be: it indicates that rules apply to syntactically related speech forms, not to speech forms that are not syntactically related. Pata[n.bar]jali makes no mention of a requirement that the hint of the word pada (pada-gandha) in the term upapada implies that an upapada in a rule such as A. 3.2.1 must terminate in a nominal termination in accordance with the formal requirements of A. 1.4.1 suptinantarh padam. Hence there is no need for a nominal termination in kumbha at the time of application of A. 3.2.1 (Table 1, step 7). In contrast, the reason a nominal termination is required in kacchena at the time of application of A. 3.2.4a supi (Table 2, step 12) is that the rule specifically refers to a speech form ending in a nominal termination sup.

3.3 Jinendrabuddhi and Bhoja

According to Jinendrabuddhi (c. 750 c.E.) in his Nyasa on the K[a.bar]sik[a.bar] (seventh century) under A. 2.2.19 upapadam atin, nominal terminations are generally present neither in the initial nor in the final compound element in upapada-tatpurusa compounds. He considers that the mention of the term a-tin serves as an indication that neither sup (from A. 2.1.2) nor sup[a.bar] (from A. 2.1.4) recurs in A. 2.2.19. Jinendrabuddhi considers it appropriate that neither term recurs (yukta dvayor api nivrttih) because the indication applies generally to interrupt the nominal termination heading (s[a.bar]m[a.bar]nyena subadhik[a.bar]ra-nivrtty-upalaksan[a.bar]rthatvat). He considers that the term upapada does not necessarily mean a speech form ending in a nominal termination (subantam) in accordance with the technical sense of pada in A. 1.4.14 supthiantarh padam. First, in accordance with Pata[n.bar]jali's statement under A. 3.1.92, he accepts that the term upapada includes not only what is taught in the locative under the heading A. 3.1.91 in accordance with A. 3.1.92 tatropapadath saptam[I.bar]stham (na hi dvit[I.bar]yadh[a.bar]tvadhik[a.bar]re yat saptamy[a.bar] nirdistarh tad evopapadasayhjiiath bhavati) but also that which is enunciated nearby (api tu yad apy upocc[a.bar]ritarit pathuh tad apy upapadarh bhavaty eva). Moreover, he takes the term pada in upapada to mean "that by means of which a meaning is understood" (padatvarh punas tasya padyate gamyate 'nen[a.bar]rtha iti krtv[a.bar]), not "that which ends in a nominal termination" (na tu subantatvat). The reason he interprets pada in this way is that it is impossible that a nominal termination occur after the final compound element in the derivation of forms such as asvakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] 'a female bought with a horse' (iha supo 'sumbhav[a.bar]t). In asvakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] as in kacchap[I.bar], nominal terminations occur after the feminine affix (Table 2, steps 23, 23a, 23b). The feminine affix i occurs in accordance with A. 4.1.50 kr[I.bar]t[a.bar]t karama[[u.bar]rv[a.bar]t only after the compound ava-krita is formed (cf. Table 2, step 19); before compound formation, the affix [a.bar] would occur after the final compound element kr[I.bar]ta in accordance with A. 4.1.4 aj[a.bar]dyatas t[a.bar]p (Table 2, step *). Therefore, nominal terminations do not arise in upapada-tatpurusa compounds prior to compounding (subanutpatteh pr[a.bar]k samasat).

Jinendrabuddhi is aware that there are cases in which nominal terminations are required after the first compound element. To account for these, he asserts that the indication that neither sup nor supd recurs does not apply universally (asarvavitsayatv[a.bar]d asya j[n.bar]apakasya). He asserts that the indicated principle (paribh[a.bar]y[a.bar]) that compounding occurs prior to the provision of nominal terminations for certain speech forms including upapadas does not apply universally (na by anena sarvatra 'gatikdrakopapadandth krdbhih prak subutpatteh samdso hhavati' iti j[n.bar][a.bar]pyate). Rather (kith tarhi) it applies only in certain desired instances (kva cid evesta-visaye). It is known that Panini permitted nominal terminations to occur at the end of the initial compound element before a final element ending in a krt-affix because he allows nominal terminations not to be deleted in such compounds. A. 6.3.14 provides non-deletion (a-luk) of a seventh-triplet nominal termination before a final compound element that ends in a krt-affix (tatpuruiye krti hahulam iti krdanta uttarapade saptamyd alugvidh[a.bar]n[a.bar]t). If nominal terminations never arose at the end of initial compound elements before final compound elements that end in krt-affixes, it would make no sense to provide for the non-deletion of seventh-triplet nominal terminations because they would not have arisen in the first place. Moreover forms such as bileklya 'lying in a cave', where the singular seventh-triplet termi-nation occurs, would not be accounted for. Therefore, Jinendrabuddhi concludes that a compound occurs prior to the arising of nominal terminations only in certain instances (tasmat kvacid eva prak subutpatteh sam[a.bar]sah), not universally (na sarvatra). In this way one can account for dhanakr[I.bar]t[a.bar], where the feminine affix t[a.bar]p does occur after the final compound element prior to compounding, as well as dhanakr[I.bar]t[i.bar], where it doesn't. In the latter, the final compound element is left ending in a short a so that instead the feminine affix n[I.bar]s occurs after compound formation (cf. Table 2, step 19).

In his Srg[a.bar]rapak[a.bar]sa (1005-1062 C.E.), Bhoja agrees with Jinendrabuddhi on the one hand that neither sup nor supa, which specify that compound constituents end in nominal terminations, recurs in A. 2.2.18-19, and on the other that the principle that a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or upapada is compounded with a nominal base ending in a krt-affix prior to the arising of nominal terminations does not apply absolutely. He argues that the term sup does not recur because the mention of a-tin, which is explained as a separate sutra divided from A. 2.2.19 that completes both A. 2.2.18 and A. 2.2.19, stops it ('kugatipr[a.bar]dayali', 'upapadam atin' ity atra atingrahanenobhayas[u.bar]trasesatay[a.bar] vt[a.bar]khy[a.bar]yam[a.bar]nena sub ity etasya nivrttih kriyate. SPr., p. 46). Likewise the term sup[a.bar] does not recur because in A. 2.1.32 it is understood that compounds form at the stage where the final constituent ends in a krt-affix. One gets that the final constituent ends in a kit-affix already just by the fact that the compound is provided for initial constituents that denote an agent (kartr) or an instrument (karana). (Agents and instruments are participants in action. Action is denoted by roots, and krt-affixes are provided after roots. Hence the only speech forms that denote participants in action that take nominal terminations are krt-derivates.) Because kit is specifically mentioned even though one already understands this, its mention particularly indicates a krt-final nominal base without a nominal termination. ('kartrkarane krt[a.bar] bahulam' ity atra ca kartrkaranayoly sam[a.bar]savidh[a.bar]n[a.bar]d uttarapadasya krdantat[a.bar]y[a.bar]m labdh[a.bar]y[a.bar]m krdgrahan[a.bar]d atirikt[a.bar]t tadant[a.bar]vasthoy[a.bar]m eva sam[a.bar]s[a.bar]bhyanuj[n.bar][a.bar]ne supety etad api nivartate. SPr., p. 46.) Bhoja concludes that the non-recurrence of these terms justifies the formation of gati, karaka, and upapada compounds from speech forms that don't end in nominal terminations.

Conversely, Bhoja concludes that the inclusion of the term bahulam in A. 2.1.32 allows such terminations where desired.
  Therefore, the principle that a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or upapada is
  compounded with a nominal base ending in a kit-affix prior to the
  arising of nominal terminations is made known. And it is determined
  that compounding occurs in some instances between two nominal bases,
  in some instances between two speech forms ending in nominal
  terminations, and in some instances between a speech form ending in a
  nominal termination and a nominal base because the mention of
  'variously' (bahularn) in A. 2.1.32 serves the purpose of achieving
  whatever is desired. (tatas ca gatikarakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m
  krdbhih saha  sam[a.bar]savacanam subutpatteh pr[a.bar]g eva
  bhavat[I.bar]ty  [a.bar]khyatam. bahulagrahanasya
  cestasiddhyarthatv[a.bar]t sa  kvacin n[a.bar]mabhy[a.bar]m kvacit
  subant[a.bar]bhy[a.bar]m  kvacin n[a.bar]masubant[a.bar]bhy[a.bar]m
  nisc[I.bar]yate. (SPr., p. 46 with correction of sentence and
  paragraph segmentation.)


Bhoja cites and justifies examples of compounds that require nominal terminations on initial constituents (carmak[a.bar]rah) and on final constituents (dadhisek, dhanakrit[a.bar]). He also cites and justifies examples of compounds that require the absence of nominal terminations on initial constituents (as[u.bar]ryarnpasy[a.bar]) and on final constituents (clhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar]). It is necessary to allow the initial or final element in karaka and upapada compounds to end in a nominal termination to account for operations on the initial or final element that can only occur under the condition that it is termed pada. A. 1.4.14 suptinantarh padarn provides that a speech form that ends in a nominal or verbal termination is termed pada. A number of rules in the eighth adhyaya of the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]ly[I.bar] provide operations that take place at word boundaries. For example, A. 8.3.109 s[a.bar]tpad[a.bar]dyoh negates retroflexion of the initial s of a pada where retro-flexion would otherwise occur after a simple vowel other than a or [a.bar] located in a prior compound element by A. 8.3.104 p[u.bar]rvapad[a.bar]t. Many rules provide replacements to sounds that occur final in a pada. Thus A. 8.2.7 nalopah pratipadikantasya occurs in the section headed by A. 8.1.16 padasya. Thereby the term padasya is understood to recur in A. 8.2.7. This rule then provides the deletion of the final n in a nominal stem (pratipadika) that is termed pada. The rule accounts for the deletion of the n of r[a.bar]jan 'king' in the masculine nominative singular r[a.bar]j[a.bar], and in oblique forms beginning with a stop or spirant such as the instrumental plural rajabhih and locative plural rajasu. A. 8.2.7 likewise accounts for the deletion of the final n when the word occurs as the initial element in compounds such as r[a.bar]ja-purusa.

Bhoja gives dadhi-sek 'yogurt-sprinkler' as an example of a compound requiring its final constituent to end in a nominal termination (SPr., p. 46). A. 8.3.109 s[a.bar]tpad[a.bar]dyoh negates retroflexion of the initial s of sek if it is a pada. If the final compound constituent sec did not end in a nominal termination prior to compounding, it would not be termed pada by A. 1.4.14, and the initial s of sec would be subject to retroflexion by A. 8.3.104.

As an example of a compound formed from an initial constituent ending in a nominal termination and a final constituent consisting of a nominal base, Bhoja gives carmakarah 'leather-worker' (SPr., p. 46). The compound carma-k[a.bar]ra is an upapada-tatpurusa compound accounted for by A. 2.2.19 just as kumbha-k[a.bar]ra is (Table 1, step 17). Prior to compound formation, A. 3.2.1 provides the affix an after the root kr when carman occurs as an upapada in relation to the root kr, just as it does when kumbha occurs as an upapada in relation to the same root (Table 1, step 7). The deletion of the final n of carman 'leather' is required when it occurs as the prior member in the compound carma-ka ra. Now if the prior element did not end in a nominal termination, it would not be termed pada by A. 1.4.14, and the deletion of the final n would not occur by A. 8.2.7.

Bhoja writes, "the final subsequent compound constituent in dadhisek is made to end in a nominal termination to achieve the negation of replacement by retroflex s initial in a pada by A. 8.3.109 s[a.bar]tpad[a.bar]dyoh, and the prior compound constituent in carmak[a.bar]ra is made to end in a nominal termination for the purpose of deletion of pada-final n." ('dadhisek' ity atra uttarapadasva, 's[a.bar]tpad[a.bar]dyoh' iti pad[a.bar]di-nibandhana-satva-pratisedha-siddhaye 'carmakara' ity arta tu p[u.bar]rvapadasya pad[a.bar]nta-laksatja-naloparthath subantata kriyate. SPr., p. 46.)

Why dhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] requires the absence of nominal terminations on the final constituent to condition the feminine affix n[I.bar]s and dhanakr[I.bar]t[a.bar] requires their presence to condition the feminine affix t[a.bar]p has been explained above. Finally, Bhoja cites asarywhpa.s500. The initial constituent a-s[u.bar]rya, he asserts, is a compound formed from the nominal bases na[n.bar] (the negative particle with the final marker [n.bar]) and s[u.bar]rya 'sun' without nominal terminations.
  There are no nominal terminations on na[n.bar] and slitya in
  asarvathpascya because na[n.bar] and sarva are not in direct
  syntactic connection. The negative particle nail surya 'sun' are
  mutually unconnected because negation denoted by nail and the sun
  denoted by s[u.bar]rya are both connected with the action of seeing
  denoted by the root trs. (and by the present stein pa.slya
  which replaces it by A. 7.3.78 p[a.bar]ghradhm[a.bar]
  ...). For here. in the corresponding phrase, "They don't see even
  the sun" (sarvam api na pa.s5anti), the negative particle nun expects
  the action of seeing which has the sun as its direct object: it does
  not expect the entity the sun directly. The compound is formed just of
  the two nominal bases (zaman), nail and stirya (devoid of nominal
  terminations), even though they are not syntactically connected,
  because of the explicit mention of a-s[u.bar]rya in A. 3.2.36
  as[u.bar]-lal[a.bar]tayor drsi-tapoh. ('asarvainpagy[a.bar]' ity
  atra nansuryayor drsikriyaya sambandh[a.bar]t parasparam
  asambandhe s[a.bar]marthy[a.bar]bh[a.bar]v[a.bar]d
  vibhaktyabh[a.bar]vah, atra hi s[u.bar]ryam api na
  pasyant[I.bar]ti na[n.bar] suryakarmik[a.bar]m
  drsikriy[a.bar]m apeksate, na suryasatt[a.bar]m, '
  as[u.bar]ryalalatayor drsitapoh' (A. 3.2.36) iti vacanad
  as[a.bar]marthye' pi n[a.bar]mmor eva samaso bhavati. SPr.,
  pp. 46-47.)


Jinendrabuddhi and Bhoja understand Pata[n.bar]jali (see section 3.2) to mean that neither sup nor sup[a.bar] recurs in A. 2.2.18-19 and that the mention of a-tin allows both initial and final compound elements in upapada-tatpurusa compounds to lack nominal terminations at the time of compound provision. They account for the required presence of nominal terminations on these elements at the time of compounding in numerous examples by broadening the scope of indeterminate variation indicated by the term bahulam in A. 2.1.32 kartrkarmanoli koi haliulam. Rules of indeterminate variation carry a cost to the robustness of linguistic description. Linguistic science in general and P[a.bar]ninian grammar in particular engage in the systematic explanation of language. Rules of indeterminate variation should he appealed to as little as possible to preserve the robustness of the scientific explanation. As I wrote (2008: 16), paraphrasing Thieme (1935: 61). "it is likely that Panini formulated such rules to account for such unusual occurrences after he had exhausted all attempts at systematic explanation." I therefore. concluded (p. 15), "the new school account of the subjunctive is more convincing than the old school account because it provides a more precise systematic account of a larger scope of data than the old school and relies on rules of indeterminate variation for a smaller scope of data." It is the undesirability of broad rules of indeterminate variation that prompts Kaiyata, Haradattamigra, and later grammarians to frame the rules regarding terminations on compound constituents more precisely. (5)

3.4 Kaivata and Haradattamiscra

In disagreement with Jinendrabhuddhi and Bhoja, HaradattamiSra (c. 1100 c.a.) in his Padama[n.bar]jarion A. 2.2.19 upapadamatin understands that the paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar] gatik[a.bar]rakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih pr[a.bar]k subutpatteh sam[a.bar]so bhavati concerns the occurrence of nominal terminations only after the final compound element. He writes that the principle means, "the compound formed from a gati, k[a.bar]raka, or upapada as initial element compounded with a krt-derivate as final element is to be formed before the occurence of nominal terminations on the final element, but the initial element does indeed terminate in a nominal termination when it compounds" (gatin[a.bar]m k[a.bar]rak[a.bar]n[a.bar]m upapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m ca krdbhih saha yah sam[a.bar]sas tena tena laksanena sa uttarapadat subutpatteh pr[a.bar]g eva k[a.bar]ryah, p[u.bar]rvapadarh to subantam eva samasyate). With Bhoja's remarks regarding asaryarkpaiya in view, he apparently mocks his predecessors who allow terminations to occur at random and apparently pays respect to Kaiyata's Pradipa commentary on Pata[n.bar]jali's Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya. For he concludes with the verse
  tad etat pratipadyantam bh[a.bar]sye krtapariaramah. n[a.bar]nye
  sahasrarn apy andh[a.bar]h s[u.bar]ryam payanti n[a.bar][n.bar]jasa.
  Let those who have exerted effort in the Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya
  understand this; Even a thousand other blind people
  do not see the sun without ointment.


In his Prad[I.bar]pa commentary on the Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya on A. 2.2.19, Kaiyata (c. eleventh century C.E.) remarks on Pata[n.bar]ali's statement that a-tin serves to make known that the terms sup and sup[a.bar] do not recur in the two rules A. 2.2.18-19. He writes that the inclusion of the term a-tin indicates that only the term supti ceases to recur, but the term sup does indeed recur in order to allow operations that take place on a pada to occur on the initial constituent (tena supety asyaiva nivrttir j[n.bar][a.bar]pyate. subgrahanam tu p[u.bar]rvasya padak[a.bar]ry[a.bar]rytham anuvartata eva). The term supt[a.bar] in the instrumental indicates that the final compound element ends in nominal terminations; its cessation allows the final element not to have nominal terminations. Kaiyata takes the term a-tin in apposition to the heading samizsalt in A. 2.1.3 pr[a.bar]k kad[a.bar]r[a.bar]t sam[a.bar]sah. That the resulting compound is a-tin amounts to making the final compound element, which ends in a krt-affix, a-tin. (6)

Kaiyata initially rejects the example dadhi-sek 'yogurt sprinkler' adduced by Bhoja as evidence of an upapada-tatpurusa compound whose final compound constituent has nominal terminations prior to compound formation. Kaiyata suggests that the compound is not an upapada-tatpurusa compound formed by A. 2.2.19 upapadam atilt at all; rather it is a sasthi-tatpurusa compound formed by A. 2.2.8 sasth[I.bar]. The final element is not a derivate formed on condition that an upapada occurs in syntactic connection with a root; rather, it is a derivate formed by provision of the affix kvip after the causative of the root sic without dependence upon an upapada by A. 3.2.178 anyebhyo 'pi drsyate (kvip 177). (7) Since there is no doubt that A. 2.2.8 requires nominal terminations on both constituents, it is clear that the final constituent sec is termed pada and is subject to the negation of retroflexion stated in A. 8.3.109. Kaiyata represents the rejected view as follows:
  But if a nominal termination does not arise after the final compound
  constituent, then in compounds such as dadhisecau (masculine or
  feminine nominative or accusative dual of dadhisee), the negation of
  replacement by retroflex s by A. 8.3109 s[a.bar]tpadadyott would not
  occur because the dental s does not occur at the beginning of a pada.
  And because it is not termed pada, it cannot be designated a final
  compound constituent uttara-pada and therefore the accent that
  depends upon it being so termed would not succeed. (yadi tarhy
  uttarapadat sub notpadyate tad[a.bar] dadhisecav ity adau
  pad[a.bar]ditv[a.bar]hh[a.bar]v[a.bar]t yatvapratisedho
  na prapnoti. padatv[a.bar]bh[a.bar]v[a.bar]d
  uttarapczdavyapadeta  ca na, taws ca tannibandhanasvaro na sidhyati.)


A. 6.2.139 gatik[a.bar]rakopapad[a.bar]t krt (uttarapada 6.2.111) provides that the original accent of the final constituent following a gati, karalca, or upapada is retained in a tatpurusa compound. Kaiyata rejects the objection:
  This is not a problem. The negation of replacement by retroflex s
  will occur because a sasth[I.bar]tatpurusa compound will be formed
  after having provided the affix kvip following the causative of the
  root sic without an upapada. (naisah dosah. nirupapadat secayateh
  kvipi krte  sasth[I.bar]sam[a.bar]sah kriyata iti satvanisedho
  bhavisyati.) (8)


However, Kaiyata subsequently withdraws his suggestion for reinterpreting the compound dadhi-sec as a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa instead of an upapada-tatpurusa because he recognizes that it is necessary to accept indeterminate variation regarding the presence or absence of nominal terminations on the final compound constituent anyway in order to account for dhanakrit[a.bar], which requires nominal terminations on the final compound constituent, as well as dhanakr[I.bar]t[I.bar] which requires the absence of nominal terminations on the final compound constituent (see section 3.3).
  Or rather, since the term sup[a.bar] ceases to recur, in order to
  achieve operations as desired, a compound is formed in some instances
  after a nominal termination has arisen and in some instance before a
  nominal termination arises. In this way, because of the mention of
  bahulam 'variously', a k[a.bar]raka compound too occurs in some
  instances after a nominal termination has arisen. Thus the usage "For
  she is his woman bought with money (dhanakrit[a.bar])" is accounted
  for.(9) (yad va supety asya nivrttau satyarn yathestam karyasiddhaye
  kvacid utpanne supi sam[a.bar]sah kvacit pr[a.bar]k
  subutpatteh. evam karakasam[a.bar]so 'pi bahulagrahan[a.bar]t
  kvacit subutpatter bhavatiti sa hi tasya dhanakriteti
  prayoga upapannah.)


Now if the final compound constituent in dadhi-sec is accepted as being a nominal base without nominal terminations at the time of compound formation, it remains to justify the accent in accordance with A. 6.2.139, which requires that the final compound element be termed uttarapada. Kaiyata concludes that the term uttarapada conventionally refers to any speech form that occurs as a subsequent compound constituent. It does not refer to what is termed pada in the technical sense of the term; that is, its scope is not limited to what ends in nominal or verbal terminations as required by A. 1.4.14 suptthantath padam. Kaiyata there-fore concludes, "there is no problem there either because the term uttarapada conventionally refers to a particular part of a compound" (uttarapadasabde samasavayavavisesasya rudhir iti tatrapy adosah). Regarding the accentual rule A. 6.2.139, which provides that the original accent of the final constituent following a gati, karaka, or upapada is retained in a tatpurusa compound, Joshi and Roodbergen (1973: 223) clearly state, "in these rules the term uttarapada does not mean a case-inflected final cp.-member, that is, A pada in the technical sense of the word, but it only means the final part of a cp."

According to Kaiyata, the recurrence of sup in the nominative in A. 2.2.19 requires that the initial compound constituent terminate in a nominal termination, not the final compound constituent. The initial constituent is then termed pada in the technical sense of the term by A. 1.4.14. Since the initial compound constituent is termed pada, the principle stated in A. 2.1.1 samarthah padavidhih, which is relevant to rules concerning a pada, applies. The principle restricts compound formation to semantically and syntactically connected speech forms. Where Patanjali writes under A. 2.2.19 that an element termed gati, a speech form denoting a participant in action (karaka), or an upapada is compounded with a semantically and syntactically related speech form (see section 3.2), Kaiyata states that this is due to the fact that the principle of semantic and syntactic connection presents itself because compound formation is a rule concerning a pada by virtue of the fact that the term sup recurs (sub ity asy[a.bar]nuvrttau saty[a.bar]m sam[a.bar]sasya padavidhitv[a.bar]t samarthaparibh[a.bar]sopasth[a.bar]n[a.bar]t). The final compound constituent, according to Kaiyata then, can be any semantically and syntactically related speech form.

3.5 Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita, N[a.bar]gesca, and their commentators

Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita (early seventeenth century) adopts the view propounded by Kaiyata and Haradattamigra that in upapada-tatpurusa compounds the initial compound constituent terminates in a nominal termination and that just the final compound constituent does not. He goes further in stating that it is a pada that is termed upapada by A. 3.1.92 tatropapadam saptamistham in rules under the heading A. 3.1.91 dh[a.bar]toh. He thereby departs from Jinen-drabuddhi's conclusion that the term upapada does not include the technical sense of pada as that which ends in a nominal or verbal termination (see section 3.3). He makes clear that the nominal termination present at the time of compounding by A. 2.2.19 upapadam atilt in the derivation of kumhha-k[a.bar]ra is a sixth-triplet termination (a genitive ending), not a second-triplet one (an accusative ending). N[a.bar]gega (eighteenth century) concurs.

In the Siddhantakaumudi, Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita makes clear that a nominal termination occurs at the end of the upapada, which occurs as the initial member of the compound, but not on the derivate formed from the root, which occurs as the final member. The term sup, designating the subordinate compound element that ends in a nominal termination, recurs in A. 2.2.19 from A. 2.1.2 sub amantrite parangavat svare, but the term sup[a.bar] in A. 2.1.4 saha supa, designating a principal compound element that ends in a nominal termination, does not. He writes under A. 2.2.19 upapadam (din, "an upapada that ends in a nominal termination is obligatorily compounded with a syntactically connected item" (upapadam sub-antam samarthena nityam samasyate). In contrast, he states that the term supa in the instrumental does not recur from A. 2.1.4 (sup[a.bar] iti ca nivrttam). It is the absence of the nominal termination on the subsequent compound element, the derivate -kara, at the time of compound formation by A. 2.2.19 that satisfies the principle (paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar]) that the compounding of an upapada with a krt-derivate occur prior to the arising of a nominal termination (tath[a.bar] ca'gatikarakopapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih saha sam[a.bar]savacanam pr[a.bar]k subutpatteh' iti siddham).

V[a.bar]sudevadiksita provides the example of carmak[a.bar]ra in the B[a.bar]lamanorama to demonstrate the necessity of understanding that a nominal termination occurs generally after the prior element in upapada-tatpurusa compounds. The deletion of the n in carman is required if it occurs as an upapada in an upapada-tatpurusa compound. He writes, "nor can one argue that there is no reason for the term sup to recur (in A. 2.2.19 from A. 2.1.2) because it serves the purpose of the deletion of n in carma-k[a.bar]ra (na caivam sub ity anuvrtteh prayoj[a.bar]nabh[a.bar]va iti v[a.bar]cyam, carmak[a.bar]ra ity atra nalop[a.bar]rthakatv[a.bar]t).

In order to demonstrate that no nominal termination occurs after the subsequent compound element that is a krt-derivate in an upapada-tatpurusa compound, Bhattojid[i.bar]ksita cites the form kacchapi 'female tortoise'. Vasudevadiksita indicates that the parallel sentential usage that illustrates the meaning of the compound is either kacchena pibati " ... drinks by means of the edge," or kacche pibati " ... drinks at the edge." He writes kacchah tiram, tena tasmin v[a.bar] pibat[i.bar]ti kacchap[i.bar]. The derivation of the form shown in Table 2 assumes the first meaning.

In a departure from the views of Kaiyata and Bhoja, Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita introduces an innovation in stating that it is a pada that is termed upapada in a s[u.bar]tra of the section headed by A. 3.1.91 dh[a.bar]toh. He writes under A. 3.1.92 tatropapadam saptam[I.bar]stham,
  When there is a word ending in a seventh-triplet nominal termination,
  such as karmani, a pada such as kumbha that denotes a direct object
  (karman), present as that which is to be denoted by the term karmani,
  is termed upapada. And only when that is present does the affix that
  will be provided occur. (saptamy ante pade karmani ity [a.bar]dau
  v[a.bar]cyatvena sthitam kumbh[a.bar]di tadv[a.bar]cakam padam
  upapadasamj[n.bar]am syat. tasmims ca saty eva vaksyam[a.bar]nah
  pratyayah sy[a.bar]t)


In the B[a.bar]lamanorama. V[a.bar]sudevad[I.bar]ksita writes thereon.
  The affix an occurs after the root in the meaning of an agent. but
  the pada that denotes the direct object (kanttan), such as kumbha,
  is to be understood as termed upapada. The result is that only when
  the upapada is present does the affix au occur. (dh[a.bar]tor an
  sy[a.bar]t kartary arthe, karmav[a.bar]cakam to kumbh[a.bar]dipadam
  upapadasanjnam pratyetavyam tasminn upapade saty ev[a.bar]n
  sy[a.bar]d evan syad iti phalati.)


Commenting on A. 3.1.92 in his Laghusabdendusekhara, N[a.bar]gega too insists that the upapada terminates in a nominal termination in A. 3.2.1 karmatyy an as well as in s[u.bar]tras in which the term supi occurs. In commenting on Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita's use of the term pada in the phrase "the pada that denotes that (karman)" (tadv[a.bar]cakath padam), he states, "a pada here ends in a nominal termination" (padam at ra vibhaktyantam). Bhairavamisra, in his commentary Cadrakal[a.bar] on the Laghulabdetzdttlekham, summarizes N[a.bar]gega's conclusion, "the term upapada applies only to a pada" (padasyaivopapadasamj[n.bar][a.bar]).

N[a.bar]gesa confirms that the prior element in upapada-tatpurusa compounds ends in a nominal termination, commenting on A. 2.2.19 in the Laghusabdendusekhara. He writes that Bhattojidiksita's qualification of the term upapada with the term 'ending in a nominal termination' (subanta) is gotten by force of the fact that it is a long term (subantam iti mahasanjnabalalabdham). The Candrakala glosses N[a.bar]gesa's use of the term mah[a.bar]sa[n.bar]j[n.bar][a.bar] under A. 3.1.92 stating that a long term is used for the purpose of indicating a sense in accordance with its meaning. In this case that meaning is the word (pada) enunciated nearby (s[a.bar] c[a.bar]nvarthatv[a.bar]ya krt[a.bar]--sam[I.bar]pa uccariwm padam N[a.bar]gega considers that any use of the term upapada refers to a word that ends in a nominal termination. N[a.bar]gega makes very clear, in sharp contrast to Jinendrabuddhi, that he considers that the term upapada includes the term pada in its technical sense, even in sutras headed by A. 3.1.91. He interprets the principle stated in A. 3.1.92 tatropapadam saptamistham in application to A. 3.2.1 karmany an to mean that the word ending in a nominal termination that denotes the direct object (karman) is termed upapada.

Likewise in his Paribh[a.bar]sendusekhara, N[a.bar]gega writes that the reason for stating paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar] 76 gatik[a.bar]rakpapad[a.bar]n[a.bar]m krdbhih saha sam[a.bar]savacanant pr[a.bar]k subtapatteh is to prevent the incorrect feminine affix as [a.bar](t[a.bar]p) from occurring on the final compound element asvakriti, vy[a.bar]ghri, and kacchap[I.bar]. The correct affix i (nis) occurs after the compound stem and requires that the compound be formed prior to the occurrence of nominal terminations. That the paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar] is not obligatory (nitya) allows [a.bar] where it occasionally occurs, as in asvakrita. Alternatively, such words are included in the list ajadi, allowing tap to occur in exception to iris by A. 4.1.4 aj[a.bar]dyatas t[a.bar]p, and the paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar] is obligatory, including in cases such as kumbhak[a.bar]r[a.bar]. The paribh[a.bar]s[a.bar] does not prevent terminations from occurring after the initial compound element. Quite the contrary. Not only does N[a.bar]gega want the termination after the initial compound element prior to compound formation, he wants it prior to provision of the kit-affix av that forms the final compound constituent.

The termination that occurs on the initial compound element is a sixth-triplet nominal termination, not a second-triplet nominal termination. The sentence with an accusative ending is provided just as an actual usage in parallel meaning, not as a prior step in the derivation of the compound. Immediately after he gives the example kumbhakara and shows its meaning with a parallel sentential usage that contains the word kumbha in the accusative (i.e., with a singular second-triplet nominal termination) (kumbhath karotiti kumbhakarah), Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita shows a grammatical formula at a step in the derivation prior to the formation of the compound. The derivational formula contains a singular sixth-triplet nominal termination (iha kumbha as kara ity alaukikam prakriyav[a.bar]kyam). V[a.bar]sudevad[I.bar]ksita makes clear in the B[a.bar]lamanorama that the grammatical formula, not the parallel sentential usage, is the precondition for the derivation of the compound: "the essence is that only the grammatical formula is the basis for the occurrence of the compound; the sentence kumbhark karoti is merely for showing its meaning" (alaukika-vigraha-v[a.bar]kya eva samasa-pravrttilh kumbham karotiti tadartha-pradarsana-m[a.bar]tram iti bh[a.bar]vah). He goes on to emphasize that a sixth-triplet nominal termination, not a second-triplet one, occurs in the derivational formula. He states that kumbha-am kara is an erroneous reading because the sixth triplet is provided in conjunction with a krt-derivate (kumbha am kara ity apap[a.bar]thah, krdyoge sasthy[a.bar] vidhanat). The sixth triplet occurs in accordance with A. 2.3.65, as explained above and shown in Table 1, step 12b.

N[a.bar]gda likewise affirms that it is a sixth-triplet nominal termination and not a second-triplet nominal termination that occurs at the end of the word kumbha in the derivation of the upapada-tapurusa compound kumbha-k[a.bar]ra. The sixth triplet provided by A. 2.3.65 kartrkarmarjoh krti occurs in exception to A. 2.3.2 karmani dvitiy[a.bar]. It is not the case that the latter takes precedence over the former by virtue of the principle of being more internally conditioned (antarahga). He entertains the supposition that A. 2.3.2 would take precedence over A. 2.3.65 because A. 2.3.65 depends on the direct object having connection with action denoted by a kit-affix because the sutra states krti. He rightly dismisses this suppostion because A. 2.3.2 equally depends upon the direct object having connection with action, even without mentioning a term referring to action, just by virtue of a direct object (karman) being a participant in action (k[a.bar]raka): "and here a sixth triplet occurs conditioned by connection with a kft-affix--nor is the second triplet more internally conditioned (antarariga)--because a general rule applies considering the domain of its exceptions" (krdyogalak.sand catra sasthi. na cantaranga dvitiya. prakalpyapavadaviyayam utsargapravrtteh). At the same time Nagega denies that kumbha-k[a.bar]ra is a sasth[I.bar]-tatpurusa compound formed by A. 2.2.8. The reason he denies this is that an upapada-tatpurusa compound formed by A. 2.2.19 is more internally conditioned because it is provided prior to the arising of nominal terminations on the final compound constituent (atra tgasthisamaso na. uttarapade vibhaktyutpattetz parvam evasya pravrttyantarahgatvat). (10)

3.7 Joshi and Roodbergen

Joshi and Roodbergen (1973: 42) accept that sup recurs in A. 2.2.18-19 and just sup[a.bar] is discontinued, in disagreement with Jinendrabhuddhi and Bhoja, and in agreement with Kaiyata, Haradattamigra, Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita, and N[a.bar]gega. The result is that in an upapada-tatpurusa compound an initial compound constituent that ends in a nominal termination is compounded with a final constituent that is any syntactically related speech form. They comment, "Tradition rejects the continuation of the condition sup sup[a.bar] as a whole ... Our assumption is that supd is discontinued on the basis of s[a.bar]marthya ... The point is that the cp.-constitutents are joined together before a case ending (or a fem. suffix) is added to the second cp.-constituent." Likewise they write (p. 203), "But the fact is that in all desired upapada cps the upapada is always a case-inflected word ... What we want is the discontinuation of sup with reference to the word with which the upapada is to be compounded. That is to say, we want the discontinuation of the condition sup[a.bar]." They correctly observe (p. 220), regarding the derivation of kacchapi, "in order to derive the desired form, the upapada is compounded with a krdanta stem, before the case-ending has been added." The purpose of discontinuing sup[a.bar] is to prevent the feminine affix t[a.bar]p from arising after the stem pa in kacchapi, after the stem ghra in vy[a.bar]ghri, and after the stem krita in dhanakriti, asvakriti, vastrakriti, etc. They provide derivations of several of these forms. (11)

Working out the details of the derivation of the forms under discussion in the commentaries brings problems to light that went unnoticed previously. One such problem is determining exactly which nominal termination is present on the upapada prior to compounding. A second is determining the sequence of the provision of the nominal termination on the upapada and the provision of the krt-affix. In the derivation of kacchapi, Joshi and Roodbergen show the first step as (kaccha-am + p[a.bar]-ka) with the nominal termination after kaccha already present at the time of the provision of the krt-affix after the root pa. There they make the provision of the krt-affix simultaneous with the compounding of the upapada with the krt-derivate kara by A. 2.2.19. (12) They argue that the upapada denoting the karman in kumbha-kara is accusative rather than genitive. In their translation of Patanjali's Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya on A. 2.2.19, they comment (p. 203), "we can derive kumbhak[a.bar]rah: 'pot-maker' from (kumbha + am) + k[a.bar]ra," and show a singular second-triplet nominal termination on the upapada kumbha. In their translation of the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar] (1997: 45), they analyze the compound differently to show that the upapada denoting the karman is a condition for the affix an: ((kumbha-am + kr)-su). Their braces indicate that the second-triplet termination is present before the affix can is provided by A, 3.2.1 karmauy an. They rule out a genitive because the rule that provides a sixth-triplet nominal termination requires the presence of the kit-affix in advance. In their translation of A. 2.3.65 kartrkarmanott krti, they write (1998: 112), "(the sixth case endings are added after a pr[a.bar]tipadika) in the sense of kartr 'agent' or karman '(direct) object', given (construction with a word ending in a) krt (-suffix) (unless the kartr or karman has already been expressed otherwise)." The phrase, "given construction with a word ending in a krt-suffix," implies that the affix an is already present before the rule applies. They recognize (1973: 232) that a problem of mutual dependence would arise if the sixth-triplet nominal termination provided by A. 2.3.65 were required to be present prior to the provision of the krt-affix an by A. 3.2.1: "P. 2.3.65 only applies when the word representing the object is connected with a krdanta form. That is to say, unless kara has been derived we cannot apply P. 2.3.65. But in order to derive kara from the root kr-we must shoW that kr-is accompanied by a karma-upapada." They propose to solve the mutual dependency by having the karman be denoted by a second-triplet nominal termination provided by A. 2.3.2 karmani dvitiya instead: "the only rule by which we can show that kumbha is a karma-upapada is P. 2.3.2. Therefore the technical analysis should read [(kumbha + am) + kr-]+an (1973: 232)."

Joshi and Roodbergen must be credited with recognizing that the problem of mutual dependency would arise if the sixth-triplet nominal termination denoting a karman were required prior to the provision of the kit-affix web As pointed out towards the end of section 2 above, the sixth-triplet nominal termination denoting a karman is provided after a nominal base by A. 2.3.65 under the condition that it occurs in connection with a speech form ending in a krt-affix, but the krt-affix an is provided by A. 3.2.1 after a root on the condition that an upapada denoting a karman occurs. It is impossible for the upapada to get the sixth-triplet termination before the root gets the krt-affix that is a condition for getting the sixth-triplet termination. The only solution they see is to provide a second-triplet termination to denote the karman rather than a sixth-triplet termination. They therefore conclude (1973: 238), "For the derivation of the form kara we require an upapada which is a karman: 'object'. In order to assign the sense of karman to the upapada, we can only apply the general rule P. 2.3.2, which prescribes the accusative case and not the genitive. Therefore the analysis of kumbhakarah can only be [(kumbha + am) + kr-] + an."

Historically, their proposal has some merit. Many similar compounds, such as janamejaya, priyarhvada, and vacamyama preserve what appears to be an accusative termination on the prior compound constituent. Yet Panini does not analyze them thus. He does not provide non-deletion (aluk) of a second-triplet nominal termination before a final compound constituent (uttarapada), although he provides such non-deletion in some twenty-four rules headed by A. 6.3.1 alug uttarapade for third-through seventh-triplet nominal terminations. Instead he provides the augment mum at the end of the initial compound constituent by A. 6.3.67-72. The first of these, A. 6.3.67 arurdvisadajantasya mum, provides the augment where the final compound element is formed by adding affixes marked with kh after roots. The affixes khal and khac are provided by A. 3.2.28-47 after roots under the condition that there is an upapada. A. 3.2.28 ejeh khas provides the affix khasc after the root ji in the example janamejaya, and A. 3.2.38 priyavae vadat) khac and veici yamo vrate provide the affix khac after the roots vad and yam in the examples priyarhvada and veicarhyama respectively. A. 2.2.19 then forms upapada-tatpurusa compounds. If P[a.bar]nini had provided non-deletion (aluk) of the second-triplet nominal termination before a final compound constituent (utta-rapada), then there would be the possibility that the wrong termination, namely the sixth-triplet nominal termination rather than the second-triplet termination, would enter into usage in examples such as janamejaya, etc. However, since Papini derives such examples with the augment mum instead, there is no such possibility. What looks like an accusative singular in these examples is not, according to Parrini, hence it cannot serve as evidence of the provi-sion of a second-triplet nominal termination rather than a sixth-triplet in upapada-tatpurusa compounds like kumbha-k[a.bar]ra in P[a.bar]ninian derivation.

In spite of its historical merit, and in addition to the linguistic evidence adduced in its favor in the preceding paragraph being irrelevant, Joshi and Roodbergen's conclusion is untenable. In P[a.bar]nini's derivational system a second-triplet nominal termination does not have the opportunity to arise. The second-triplet nominal termination is provided after nominal bases by A. 2.3.2 karmani dvitiy[a.bar] on condition that a karman is to be denoted and under the additional condition that it has not already been denoted. A. 2.3.2 comes under the heading A. 2.3.1 anabhihite 'not already denoted'. In answer to the question, "Not already denoted by what?" (ken[a.bar]nabhihite?), Jay[a.bar]ditya replies in the k[a.bar]sik[a.bar] "by a verbal termination, a krt-affix, a taddhita affix, or a compound" (tinkrttaddhitasam[a.bar]saih), citing K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana's v[a.bar]rttika 5 and Pata[n.bar]jali's comment theron (tinkrttaddhitasamasaih parisamkhyanam. MBh. 1.441.20-22). Nominal terminations are not provided after nominal bases denoting participants in action until after verbal terminations and krt-affixes are provided after the roots denoting the action to which the participants are subordinate. Even in the equivalent sentence kumbharh karoti, derived from kumbha-am kr-u-tip, the verbal termination tip is provided by A. 3.2.78 tiptas-jhi, etc., prior to the provision of the nominal termination am by A. 4.1.2 svaujas, etc. This is necessarily so, because it is only by virtue of being undenoted by the verbal termination tip that the direct object (karman) is denoted by the second-triplet nominal termination by A. 2.3.2 karmarzy an. If the karman were denoted by the verbal termination te (< ta), A. 2.3.2 would not apply. The first-triplet nominal termination would occur instead by A. 2.3.46 pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]rtha-litiga-parim[a.bar]na-vacana-m[a.bar]tre prathama, and the passive sentence kumbhah kriyate would result instead. Just as selection of the nominal termination depends upon the selection of the verbal termination in the derivation of the equivalent sentence, it depends upon the selection of the krt-affix in the derivation of the upapada-tatpurusa compound. No nominal termination can arise on the upapada denoting a direct object (karman) until an affix arises after the verbal root denoting the action in which the direct object participates. Therefore. the rule that provides the krt-affix an after the root occurs prior to either of the rules that provide a nominal termination after the upapada come into play. In particular, A. 3.2.1 karmany an. applies prior to either A. 2.3.2 karmani dvitiya or A. 2.3.65 kartrkarmanoh krti coming into play.

Joshi and Roodbereen are correct to state (1973: 238), "for the derivation of the form k[a.bar]ra we require an upapada which is a karman: 'object." However, it is incorrect for them to suggest that A. 2.3.2 has anything to do with assigning the sense of karman to the upapada. They argue (1973: 238), "in order to assign the sense of karman to the upapada, we can only apply the general rule P. 2.3.2, which prescribes the accusative case and not the genitive." Moreover, their statement (1973: 232) that A. 2.3.2 is "the only rule by which we can show that kumbha is a karma-upapada" is irrelevant. Such statements confuse the relation between semantics and phonetics in Pituinian grammar. Parini does not "assign sense." He does not teach meanings on the ground of phonetic conditions; he teaches speech forms on the ground of semantic conditions. The sense of karman does not depend upon the accusative case or the genitive case; rather second-triplet or sixth-triplet nominal terminations are provided in various contexts under the condition that a karman is to be denoted. That an object is termed karman does not necessarily require any speech form at all; an object may be termed karman under purely semantic conditions without reference to any speech forms whatsoever. Although certainly some rules do take co-occurrence conditions into account, it is essential to note that general karaka rules do not. A. 1.4.49 kartur ipsitatamam karma, for example, terms a pot karman in the derivation of kumbhakara (Table 1, step 4) under the sole condition that it is most desired by the agent. The pot is termed karman regardless of the speech form used to denote it, and, patently, regardless of the nominal termination (second triplet or sixth triplet) used to denote that it is a karman.

Moreover, the accusative case is not necessary to condition the affix an by A. 3.2.1; only that an object has been termed karman is. It is irrelevant whether or how the presence of such an object can be shown by speech forms. The upapada that serves as a condition for the affix an in A. 3.2.1 must therefore be any semantically and syntactically related speech form that denotes an object termed karman: it need not be a pada, in the technical sense of the term, ending in a nominal termination.

Therefore, Kaiyata is correct in his suggestion that the pr[a.bar]tipadika denotes the karman. Commenting on kumbhak[a.bar]rah under A. 2.2.19, varttika 3, Kaiyata suggests that the pr[a.bar]tipadika itself, possessed of five meanings (a generic property, an individual object, its gender. its number, and its participation in the action), denotes the karman: "if the group of five is the meaning of a nominal base, then because the nominal base itself denotes the direct object, the affix an must he provided on the condition that just the nominal base is the upapada" (pancake pr[a.bar]tipadikarthe pr[a.bar]tipadikenaiva karmana uktatv[a.bar]t tatraivopapade 'n[a.bar] bh[a.bar]vyam). A. 2.3.2 or A. 2.3.65 would still apply to provide a nominal termination after the nominal base, even though its being the direct object in relation to the action was denoted by the nominal base, since the nominal base is not among the speech forms denoted by which a participant in action would not condition a nominal termination. Hence A. 3.2.1 applies when just the nominal base (pr[a.bar]tipadika) is upapada. Moreover, this works even if participation in action is not accepted as being denoted by a nominal base. A. 3.2.1 requires that a speech form that denotes a direct object (karman) be upapada; it does not require that the speech form denote the relation of being a direct object (karmatva). The nominal base denotes the direct object already, even without a second-triplet or sixth-triplet termination conditioned by its being termed karman. Therefore, mutual dependency is avoided in the derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra even if a sixth-triplet nominal termination is provided after the nominal base kumbha; A. 2.3.65 will apply after the affix an has been provided by A. 3.2.1 but before A. 2.2.19 where a nominal termination is required. Although not required in the derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra, a nominal termination is required in the derivation of like compounds such as carma-k[a.bar]ra to allow operations that depend upon its being termed pada, in the technical sense of the term, to apply to the initial compound constituent.

3.8 Grimal et al.

The derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra presented in Grimal et al. follows the views expressed by Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita, V[a.bar]sudevadiksita, N[a.bar]gega, and Bhairavamigra. The initial compound constituent, the upapada, in an upapada-tatpurusa compound terminates in a nominal termination; the final compound constituent terminating in a krt-affix does not. The sixth-triplet nominal termination provided by A. 2.3.65 is accepted as the termination on the upapada. The presence of the sixth-triplet nominal termination on the upapada at the time of application of A. 3.2.1 indicates that they accept that the term upapada implies the technical sense of the term pada; that is, to be termed upapada, it must end in a nominal termination just as it must to be termed pada. Unfortunately, Grimal et al. did not notice the mutual dependency that these views entail.

3.9 Mutual dependency

In a few instances (13) Pata[n.bar]jali escapes from the mutual dependence of the provision of an affix upon the presence of a preceding speech form and vice versa by stating that the affix in the locative is a locative of domain (visaya-saptam[I.bar]) rather than a right-context locative (para-saptam[I.bar]). For example, he escapes from the mutual dependence of the provision of an ardhadhatuka-affix conditioned by a preceding root and a root replacement conditioned by a following affix in this way. At the conclusion of his commentary on A. 2.4.35 [a.bar]rdhadhatuke he proposes that the term [a.bar]rdhadhatuke is a visaya-saptami. The replacement thereby occurs in the intended domain of an ardhadhatuka-affix rather than when followed in sequence by the speech form (asati paurv[a.bar]parye visayasaptami vifriasyate. [a.bar]rdhadhatukavisaya iti). Jay[a.bar]ditya in the K[a.bar]sik[a.bar] on A. 2.4.35 states that thereby the replacements are made under the intention to use an [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuka-affix; once the replacements have been made, the affixes occur as provided afterwards (visayasaptami ceyarh, na parasaptami. tenardhadhatuka-vivaks[a.bar]y[a.bar]m [a.bar]delesu krtesu pasc[a.bar]d yath[a.bar]pr[a.bar]ptarh pratyay[a.bar] bhavanti). For example, A. 2.4.52 aster bh[u.bar] provides that the root as is replaced by the root bhu in the domain of an ardhadhatuka-affix. A. 3.1.97 aco yat provides that the affix yat occurs after a vowel-final root. In order to obtain the form bhdvyam the affix yat must occur after the root bh[u.bar]. However, the affix yat cannot occur until the root as is replaced by bhu since it only occurs after vowel-final roots; it doesn't occur after the root as, which ends in a consonant. If ardhadhatuke were a para-saptami, the replacement of the root as by the root Mir, could only occur after the [a.bar]rdh[a.bar]dhatuka-affix had been provided.

Similarly, the question of the mutual dependence of a secondary-root-forming affix and a following [a.bar]rdh[a.bar]dhAtuka-affix arises under A. 3.1.31 [a.bar]y[a.bar]daya [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke v[a.bar]. There Pata[n.bar]jali writes,
  This is not a problem. [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke is not a
  para-saptam[I.bar];  rather it is a visaya-saptami meaning 'in the
  domain of an [a.bar]rdhadh [a.bar]tuka-affix'. In that case, once the
  secondary-root-forming affixes beginning with [a.bar]ya (provided in
  A. 3.1.28-30) have been provided in the domain of an
  [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuka-affix, the affix that
  would occur after the secondary root occurs. (naisa dosah.
  [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuka iti naisa parasaptami. ka
  tarhi. visayasaptaimi. ardhadhatukavisaya iti. tatra
  [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tukavisaya [a.bar]y[a.bar]diprakrter
  [a.bar]y[a.bar]disu krtesu yah yatatt pr[a.bar]tyayah
  prapnoti sah tato bhavisyati. MBh. 2.41. 17-19)


The k[a.bar]sik[a.bar] states, "the secondary-root-forming affixes beginning with [a.bar]ya (provided in A. 3.1.28-30) optionally occur in the domain of an [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuka-affix, i.e., when there is the intention to articulate an Ardhadhatuka-affix" ([a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tukavisaye [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tukavivalsvayam [a.bar]y[a.bar]dayah pratyay[a.bar] v[a.bar] bhavanti).

The third and final situation in which Pata[n.bar]jali solves the question of mutual dependence by resorting to a locative of domain is under A. 4.1.90. A. 4.1.90 y[u.bar]ni luk (aci 89) provides deletion (luk) of the affix previously provided in the sense of a yuvan-descendant. The deletion occurs if a vowel-initial affix in the section headed by A. 4.1.83 is to follow. The vowel-initial affix provided after the nominal base denoting the yuvan-descendant occurs after the form of the stem once the yuvan-affix has been deleted, but the yuvan-affix is deleted on condition that the vowel-initial affix is provided. If the locative in the term aci were a parasaptami, the rule would provide deletion before a vowel-initial affix that had already been provided after the form of the nominal base terminating in the yuvan-affix. Thus wrong affixes would result. (y[u.bar]ni lug aciti cet pratyayasy[a.bar]yathestaprasangah. A. 4.1.90, v[a.bar]rttika 1. MBh. 2.242.15,) To get the correct form, provision of the vowel-initial affix has to occur once the deletion has been done. To avoid mutual dependence, Pata[n.bar]jali states that the term aci in A. 4.1.90 is a visaya-saptam[I.bar] meaning "in the domain of a vowel-initial affix." In that case, the affix that occurs after the nominal base is the affix that would occur once deletion has been done in the domain of the vowel-initial affix. (naisa dosah. aciti naisa parasaptami. ka tarhi. viyayasaptami. ajadau visaya iti. tatraci visaye luki krte yah yataly pratyayah prapnoti salt taw bhavtyyati. MBh. 2.242,21-23.) The K[a.bar]sik[a.bar] states, "deletion (luk) occurs in place of the yuvan-affix when the vowel-initial affix provided under the heading A. 4.1.83 is intended to be articulated, still in mind, not yet arisen. Once the yuvan-affix has been deleted, the affix that would occur after the nominal base in that form occurs" (pr[a.bar]gdivyatiye aj[a.bar]dau pratyaye vivaksite buddhisthe 'nutpanna eva yuvapratyayasya lug bhavati. tasmin nivrtte sad yo yatah pr[a.bar]pnoti sa tato bhavati).

The visaya-saptami is only resorted to under duress. It is preferable to find another means to achieve derivation. P[a.bar]nini avoids similar situations of the mutual dependence of stem and affix by stating the relevant rules in the asiddhavat section headed by A. 6.4.22 asiddhavad atr[a.bar]bh[a.bar]t. For example, the verbal stem s[a.bar]s is replaced by s[a.bar] before the second person singular active imperative termination hi by A. 6.4.35 s[a.bar] hau. At the same time, the second person singular active imperative termination hi is replaced by dhi after the root hu and roots ending in a non-nasal stop or spirant by A. 6.4.101 hujhalbhyo her dhih. Neither rule would apply if subject to the conditions produced by the other having applied first. The derivation works by applying rules in the section headed by A. 6.4.22 asiddhavad atrabhat as if operations provided by other rules in that section had not taken place.

If nominal terminations were required on upapadas prior to the provision of krt-affixes, the result would be mutual dependence between the rules that provide the nominal terminations and the rules that provide the krt-affixes. The fact that the Mahabh[a.bar]sya does not raise the issue of mutual dependence between rules that provide krt-affixes and rules that provide nominal terminations on upapadas serves as evidence, though it be evidence of silence, that Pata[n.bar]jali did not consider nominal terminations to be required.

The conditions under which the krt-affix an occurs require that there be a speech form termed upapada denoting an object termed karman. For the object to be termed karman, a nominal termination is not required. Quite the opposite; it is the condition for the occurrence of the nominal termination. The only circumstance that suggests that there is a nominal termination present at the time of A. 3.2.1 coming into play is the interpretation of pada in the term upapada in the technical sense that it is provided by A. 1.4.14 suptinantam padam. A. 1.4.14 terms a speech form pada if it ends in a nominal or verbal termination. This inter-pretation is questionable. It requires accepting that the purpose of using a long term (upapada) is that the term carry its meaning and that the specific meaning it carry be the technical sense requred by A. 1.4.14. That the purpose of using a long term (upapada) is that the term carry its meaning is not objectionable. But that pada therein carries the technical meaning of a speech form ending in a nominal termination is objectionable. The latter is not accepted by Jinendrabhuddhi or Bhoja. Jinendrabuddhi provides a conventional meaning for the term pada instead: that by means of which a meaning is understood. Although Haradatta is quite right to point out that a nominal termination must be permitted to occur on the upapada prior to compounding so that it does get termed pada according to A. 1.4.14 and become subject to operations that require the technical term (such as deletion of pada-final n by A. 8.2.7 in which the term padasya recurs), there is no need for the term upapada to carry that technical sense of the term pada. After the occurrence of the krt-affix an (Table 1, step 7), conditions are satisfied to allow a sixth-triplet nominal termination to arise in accordance with A. 2.3.65 (Table 1, step 12b) and for the upapada, which now does end in a nominal termination, to be termed pada by A. 1.4.14 (Table 1, step 14). Not before. Conditions are simply not present to allow a nominal termination to arise on the upapada prior to the provision of an affix after the root. The morphology of the governing word determines that of the governed.

4. SEMANTICS DRIVE PANINIAN DERIVATION

Grimal et al. did not include early steps in the derivation. They did not work out the steps by which a nominal termination would arise on the upapada prior to the provision of the krt-affix an after the root. The result is that they reproduced the views of Bhattojid[I.bar]ksita, Nagega, and their commentators, and steps critical to demonstrate both the sense of the compound and P[a.bar]nini's methodology are absent. One is allowed to get the impression that the derivation begins with speech forms already in mind, either in the form of a vigraha v[a.bar]kya such as *kumbhasya keirah or in the form of a string such as kumbha-as + kr-a. The latter string could result directly from the provision of the affix an by A. 3.2.1 karmatyy an only if the term krti in A. 2.3.65 kartrkarmanob krti were a visaya-saptami. In that case the speaker's anticipation of a certain speech form would serve as the condition for the provision of another speech form. This anticipation of speech forms in P[a.bar]ninian derivation is resorted to only rarely, only three times under duress in the case of mutual dependence of speech forms on each other. It is not necessary in the derivation of upapada-tatpurusa compounds, nor is it the general procedure adopted in P[a.bar]ninian grammar.

That P[a.bar]ninian derivation begins with speech forms already in mind is the assertion Houben erroneously makes. He asserts that the derivation begins with some sort of sentence that the speaker uses the grammar to check for correctness (see section 1.3). Yet, as explained in section 1.1, the only speech forms available at the start of a derivation are roots and nominal bases. Semantic conditions are required in the grammar to determine their relation, the proper affixes used to denote those relations, and compound formation. The only speech forms available at the start of the derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra are the nominal base kumbha and the root kr. The derivation of kumhha-k[a.bar]ra does not require any other speech form at all until the affix art is introduced after kr in step 7 of Table 1. As sections 2-3 have argued, the condition for the affix my is a semantic object termed karman, not a sixth-triplet nominal termination as stated by Bhattojidiksita, Nagesa, and their commentators, and reiterated by Grimal et al., nor a second-triplet nominal termination as argued by Joshi and Roodbergen. The condition for the affix an is not a speech form at all; it is a semantic object devoid of any speech form whatsover; it is a disembodied meaning intended by the intellect of a speaker.

Although a user of the grammar may have sentences in mind he wants to check the procedure of the grammar he uses to check them derives such sentences by relying on semantic conditions. It is not the case that semantics are resorted to just to "label the linguistic forms of his preliminary sentence according to the syntactically relevant categories of meaning," as Houhen asserts. It is not the linguistic form that gets labeled; it is a meaning, accompanied or not by any linguistic form. In the derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra, it is not the speech form kumbha that is termed karman, it is the pot, regardless of the word used for it or the language. The pot is termed karman solely by that object's relation to an action, without regard to any speech form. Even the presentation of the derivation in Table 1 is susceptible to the misinterpretation that the speech forms such as kumbha are k[a.bar]rakas. They are not. The semantic objects denoted by these speech forms are k[a.bar]rakas. K[a.bar]rakas are participants in the action. It is the objects that participate in action, not the words that denote those Objects. The words that denote objects are introduced in the derivational steps in the tables only because in some derivations, though not in the ones presented, co-occurrence conditions are taken into account even at the stage in which objects are designated by k[a.bar]raka terms.

P[a.bar]nini derives speech forms from the point of view of the speaker. He begins with semantics, with what the speaker wants to express. Objects in the conception of the speaker are the starting point. Specifying semantic objects and co-occurring speech items as conditions, he designates items by k[a.bar]raka terms. Items designated by specific k[a.bar]raka terms condition verbal terminations, krt-affixes, and compounding. Only semantic conditions that remain undenoted after verbal terminations, krt-affixes, taddhita-affixes, or compounds have been provided condition the occurrence of nominal terminations. Therefore, nominal terminations would not arise after kumbha in the derivation of kumbha-k[a.bar]ra until steps 12-12b, after the provision of the krt-affix an in step 7.

Pata[n.bar]jali explicitly states in several places that semantics drives the derivation of speech forms and not vice versa, and details the sequence of derivational steps from verbal semantics, to the semantics of participation in the action of the verb, to the provision of karaka terms for those participants, and finally to the arising of nominal terminations. He does so, for example, under 2.3.50 vt. 5 uktam parvena. The context concerns an explanation of why a sixth-triplet nominal termination arises after the stem tajan and not after the stem puntya in the phrase rapialy purusah. While his remarks concerning the derivation of the particular phrase in question there are not relevant for the derivation of kumbhakara, his general remarks are.
   na hi sabdakrtena n[a.bar]m[a.bar]rthena bhavitavyam. arthakrtena
   n[a.bar]ma sabdena bhavitavyam. For it is not the case that meaning
   occurs caused by speech forms; speech form occur caused by meanings.
  (MBh. 1.464.15-16; also at 1.362. 17-18)


Pata[n.bar]jali proceeds to provide details of the sequence of derivational steps as follows:
  Particular relations of the objects denoted by nominal stems
  originate caused by the action. And the terms karman, karanam,
  ap[a.bar]d[a.bar]nam, samprad[a.bar]nam, adhikranam arise caused by
  those particular relations. And those in turn are sometimes adopted as
  conditions for the arising of triplets of nominal terminations,
  sometimes not. And when are they adopted as conditions for the
  arising of triplets of nominal terminations? When they differ from
  the meaning of a nominal base. For when they don't differ from the
  meaning of the nominal base, then the explicit terms themselves,
  karman, kranam, ap[a.bar]d[a.bar]nam, sarhpradanam, adhikaranam, occur
  (pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]rth [a.bar]n [a.bar]m kriy[a.bar]krt[a.bar]
  vises[a.bar] upaj[a.bar]yante tatkrt[a.bar]s c[a.bar]khy[a.bar]h
  pr[a.bar]durbhavanti karma k[a.bar]ranam ap[a.bar]dan [a.bar]m
  samprad[a.bar]nam  adhikaranam iti. t[a.bar]s ca punar
  vibhaktin[a.bar]m utpattau kad[a.bar]cin nimittatvenopadiyante kadacin
  na. kada ca vibhaktinam utpattau nimittatvenop[a.bar]diyante?
  yad[a.bar] vyabhicaranti pr[a.bar]tipadik[a.bar]rtham. yad[a.bar] hi
  na vyabhicaranty akhyabhuta eva tada bhavanti karma  karanam
[a.bar]pad[a.bar]nam samprad[a.bar]nam adhik[a.bar]ranam iti. MBh.
1.464. 18-23)


Kaiyata provides the example "he cuts with a knife" (d[a.bar]trena lun[a.bar]ti) to show what happens when the object denoted by the nominal base participates in an action. The relation the knife (datra) has with the action differs from the meaning of the nominal base; the relation is not denoted by the base, but instead conditions a third-triplet nominal termination. He provides the example "the knife is the instrument" (d[a.bar]tram karanam) to show what happens when the relation is explicitly stated by the nominal base. The relation does not differ from the meaning of the nominal base and does not condition a third-triplet nominal termination; it occurs in the nominative.

The crucial point is that semantics drive P[a.bar]ninian derivational procedure. Semantics condition the naming of certain intentional objects by k[a.bar]raka terms. These k[a.bar]raka terms then condition speech forms. It is worth reiterating my explanation (Scharf 2009a: 101) that the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar] is composed in a manner that selects certain speech forms for use on the basis of certain semantic conditions. Subrahmanyam (1983) demonstrates the significant role semantics plays in the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar], and I describe the role of some 735 semantic conditions stated therein (2009a: 101-11). The procedure of the grammar models the fact that a speaker selects speech forms to use on the basis of the meaning he wishes to convey. As I explained (1995), K[a.bar]ty[a.bar]yana himself says so in his very first v[a.bar]rttika (MBh. 1.6.8): "since the usage of speech is prompted by meanings in accordance with ordinary usage, the science (of grammar) restricts (usage to correct speech forms) for the sake of dharma." The restriction set forth by the grammar limits speech forms on the basis of semantic conditions in the same manner speakers select speech forms on the basis of the meanings they wish to convey.

(1.) See the review by Scharf 2009b.

(2.) Accent is not shown since it would needlessly complicate the issue at hand to which it is not relevant. For a discussion of accentuation replete with the derivation of examples see Scharf 2008.

(3.) subant[a.bar]n[a.bar]m sam[a.bar]sah. tatr[a.bar]ntarangatv[a.bar]t t[a.bar]p. t[a.bar]py utpanne sam[a.bar]sah. ghr[a.bar]sabdah samasyeta. tatra j[a.bar]ter astr[I.bar]visay[a.bar]d ayopadh[a.bar]d ak[a.bar]r[a.bar]nt[a.bar]d iti n[I.bar]s na pr[a.bar]pnoti. MBh. vol. 2, p. 218, line 26-p. 219, line 2.

(4.) Cf. Joshi and Roodbergen's (1973: 214-15) translation.

(5.) Regarding the account of the subjunctive examined by me in Scharf 2008, Haradattamigra and N[a.bar]gesa. in contrast. opt for broad coverage of rules of indeterminate variation over a more precise systematic account.

(6.) See Joshi and Roodbergen 1973: 218 for detail.

(7.) Joshi and Roodbergen (1973: 223) suggest alternatively that the final constituent sec is derived from the root sic + vic by A. 3.2.75 anyebhyo 'pi drlyate without causative meaning.

(8.) See Joshi and Roodbergen 1973: 216-17.

(9.) See Joshi and Roodbergen 1973: 217.

(10.) Bhairavamisra's candrakal[a.bar] glosses asya here as upapadasam[a.bar]sasya.

(11.) ry[a.bar]ghr[I.bar] on pp. 218-19, *vy[a.bar]ghr[a.bar] on pp. 219-20; kacchap[I.bar] on p. 220, and *kacchap[a.bar] on pp. 221-22; vastrakriti and vastrakrit[a.bar] on p. 222.

(12.) It is apparently an oversight that they provide (p. 220) a second-triplet termination rather than the third or seventh indicated as possibilities by V[a.bar]stidevadiksita and give the s[a.bar]tra number for the affix can (A. 3.2.2) rather than ka (A. 3.2.4). See section 3.5 above and Table 2, steps 6b and 12.

(13.) [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke in A. 2.4.35 [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke; [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke in A. 3.1.31 [a.bar]y[a.bar]daya [a.bar]rdhadh[a.bar]tuke v[a.bar]; and aci in A. 4.1.90 y[u.bar]ni luk (aci 89).

REFERENCES

Bronkhorst, J. 1979. The Role of Meanings in P[a.bar]nini's Grammar. Indian Linguistics 40: 146-57.

Cardona, George. 1967-68. Anvaya and vyatireka in Indian Grammar. In Dr. V Raghavan Felicitation Volume. Adyar Library Bulletin 31-32: 313-52.

Grimal, F.; V. Venkataraja Sarma; and S. Lakshminarasimham. 2007. P[a.bar]niniyavy[a.bar]karanod[a.bar]haranakosah; La Grammaire panineenne par ses exemples; Paninian Grammar through Its Examples, vol. II: Sam[a.bar]saprakaranam, Le Livre des mots composes; The Book of Compound Words. Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha Series, no. 150; Collection indologie 93.2. Tirupati: Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha; Pondichery: Ecole Francaise d'Extreme-orient; Institute Francaise de Pondichery.

Houben, Jan E. M. 1999 [20011. Meaning Statements in Panini's Grammar: On the Purpose and Context of the Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar]. Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 22: 23-54.

--.2003. Three Myths in Modern P[a.bar]ninian Studies. (Review of Recent Research in Paninian Studies, by George Cardona.) Asiatische Studien I Etudes Asiatiques 57: 121-79.

--.2009a. Bhartrhari as a "Cognitive Linguist." In Bhartrhari: Language, Thought, Reality: Proceedings of the International Seminar on Bhartrhari, New Delhi, December 2003, ed. Mithilesh Chaturvedi. Pp. 523-43. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

--.2009b. P[a.bar]nini's Grammar and Its Computerization: A Construction Grammar Approach. In Sanskrit Computational Linguistics: Third International Symposium, Hyderabad, India, January 15-17, 2009, Proceedings, ed. Amba Kulkarni and Gerard Huet. Pp. 6-25. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, no. 5406. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

--. Forthcoming. Studies in India's Vedic Grammarians, 1: N[a.bar]rayanabhatta's Prakriy[a.bar]sarvasva and P[a.bar]nini's (ms. provided by author, a preliminary version of which was presented at the 14th World Sanskrit Conference, 1-5 September 2009, Kyoto University, Kyoto). In Proceedings of the 14th World Sanskrit Conference, 1-5 September 2009, Kyoto University, Kyoto: Vyakarana, ed. George Cardona and Hideyo Ogawa.

Joshi, S. D., and J. A. F. Roodbergen. 1973. Pata[n.bar]jali's Vyakarana-Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya tatpurus[a.bar]hnika (P. 2.2.2-2.2.23): Edited with Translation and Explanatory Notes. Pune: University of Poona.

--.1975. Pata[n.bar]jali's Vy[a.bar]karana-Mah[a.bar]bh[a.bar]sya k[a.bar]rak[a.bar]hnika (P. 1.4.23-1.2.55): Introduction, Translation, and Notes. Publications of the Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Class C, no. 10. Pune: University of Poona.

--. 1997. The Ast[a.bar]dhy[a.bar]y[I.bar] of Panini: with Translation and Explanatory Notes, vol. VI: 2.2.1-2.2.38. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.

--. 1998. The Astadhyayi of P[a.bar]nini: with Translation and Explanatory Notes, vol. VII: 2.3.1-2.3.73. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.

Kiparsky, P. 1982. Some Theoretical Problems in Panini's Grammar. Post-graduate and Research Department Series, no. 16. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

--. 2009. On the Architecture of P[a.bar]nini's Grammar. In Sanskrit Computational Linguistics: First and Second International Symposia, Rocquencourt, France, October 2007; Providence, RI, USA, May 2008: Revised Selected and Invited Papers, ed. Getard Huet, Amba Kulkarni, and Peter Scharf, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, no. 5402. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009. http://sanskrit.inria.fr/Symposium/Program.html.

Kiparsky, P., and F Staal. 1968. Syntactic and Semantic Relations in Mini. Foundations of Language 5: 83-117.

MBh.: The Vy[a.bar]karana-mahahh[a.bar]sya of Pata[n.bar]jali. Ed. Lorenz Franz Kielhorn. 3 vols. BSPS 18-22, 28-30. Bombay: Government Central Press: Vol. I, 1880; Vol. 2, 1883; Vol. 3, 1885. Second edition: 1892, 1906, 1909. Third edition revised and furnished with additional readings references and select critical notes by K. V. Abhyankar. Pune: BORI, 1962, 1965, 1972. Reprint: 1985. (references: volume, page, line)

Scharf, Peter. 1995. Early Indian Grammarians on a Speaker's Intention. JAOS 115: 66-76.

--.2008. Minim Accounts of the Vedic Subjunctive: let krnvaite. Indo-Iranian Journal 51.1: 1-21.

--.2009a. "Modeling P[a.bar]ninian Grammar." In Sanskrit Computational Linguistics: First and Second International Symposia, Rocquencourt, France, October 2007; Providence, RI, USA, May 2008; Revised Selected and Invited Papers, ed. Gerard Huet, Amba Kulkarni, and Peter Scharf. Pp. 95-126. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5402. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009.

--.2009b. Review of Grimal et al. 2007. JAOS 129.4: 715-19.

Subrahmanyam, P. S. 1983. Panini's Use of Semantics. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Studies in the Ast[a.bar]dju[a.bar]y[I.bar] of P[a.bar]nini (Held in July 1981), ed. S. D. Joshi and S..D. Laddu. Pp. 127-36. Pune: University of Poona.

SPr.: Srg[a.bar]raprak[a.bar]sa [S[a.bar]hityaprak[a.bar]sa], vol. 1 [1-14 Prak[a.bar]sa] critically edited by Rew[a.bar]pras[a.bar]da Dwived[I.bar] and Sad[a.bar]givakum[a.bar]ra Dwived[I.bar]. New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts; Varanasi: K[a.bar]lid[a.bar]sasamsth[a.bar]na, 2007.

Thieme, Paul. 1935. P[a.bar]nini and the Veda: Studies in the Early History of Linguistic Science in India. Allahabad: Globe Press.

PETER SCHARF BROWN UNIVERSITY
COPYRIGHT 2011 American Oriental Society
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2011 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Scharf, Peter
Publication:The Journal of the American Oriental Society
Article Type:Essay
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2011
Words:24035
Previous Article:On the origin of the Middle Indic future suffix -hi-.
Next Article:Portmanteau characters in Chinese.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters