Hi Rene and group,

Here are some quick responses to some points in your last message:

>
>
>The grammars contradict that a Bh must end with a noun. One class of
>compounds, namely the Kh with a noun and adjective "used as a noun"
>can be converted to Bh (Pern/170). "manopubba.ngamaa dhammaa" is an
>example of several that Perniola gives.

I don't read pubba.ngama here as an an adjective, but as a noun,
literally a leader, the one who goes first. Sanskrit/Pali allow for
adjectives to stand alone to represent the thing qualified. If such
an adjective is then used as the final member of a bahubbiihi it
takes on an adjectival function again but in a _different way_, which
is very important to keep separate. What makes the above a bahubbiihi
is that the original can be paraphrased such that dhammas have a
thing which is preceding, namely mind. If pubba.ngama were being
used here in its _simple_ adjectival sense, qualifying Dhamma instead
of qualifying Mano, it would be nearly impossible to construe the
compound, much less the sentence as a whole.

>The same construction is used in Kh's that involve ordinal numbers,
>e.g., aanando atta-dutiyo, "Ananda with his self as second," i.e.
>who relies on himself.

In this case 'dutiyo' has a special semantic sense, namely
'companion'. English has a similar special sense of the word
'second', though it is now only a term used in duelling.

>In the same abstract vein, puriso ta.nhaa-dutiyo, "a man full of craving."

Again, a man who has ta..nhaa as his (constant) companion.

> These ordinals numbers are adjectives.

Not here they aren't. To reiterate, dutiyo has a special nominal
meaning here, 'companion'. It is no more an adjective or an ordinal
numeral than 'second' in 'the Prince arrived at the appointed place
at dawn, with his trusted friend as second'.


best regards,

/Rett