From: Adin Eichler
Message: 9277
Date: 2005-10-23
>--
> Dear Alan,
> > I don't have any more to say until I hear from others because I have
> > expressed fully my understanding of this issue, and it is obviously
> > insufficient for dealing with some of the issues that you brought up in
> > your last post. I did note this fact too, and am noting it again.
> OK. Your "understanding of this issue... is obviously insufficient for
> dealing with some of the issues." Then please stop promoting a position
> that
> you don't understand and are not prepared to defend. Don't write that the
> final element of Bh's are nouns-- unless you can show it. Don't write that
> the final element of Bh's are *functioning* as nouns
> What this tells me is that you are actively promoting a position that you
> do
> not understand.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alan McClure" <alanmcclure3@...>
> To: <Pali@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 4:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [Pali] Bahubbiihi cpds
>
>
> > Dear Rene,
> >
> > My responses are below.
> >
> > rsalm wrote:
> >
> >>Hello Alan,
> >>
> >>Please spell my name correctly. You read French, and I am a male.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > My apologies. I am human and made a mistake. I also didn't know that
> > you are French or male.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>I think that there is some confusion in the conversations that have
> >>>
> >>>
> >>already occurred on this topic.
> >>
> >>Rene: Not only confusion, but also misinformation. Let's review some of
> >>the
> >>exchanges that have occurred:
> >>
> >>------------
> >>
> >>Alan: I just noticed that Rett and Dr. Pind have both responded to you
> >>explaining why Bahubbiihi compounds must end with nouns, so I won't go
> any
> >>further as I'm sure that their comments are clearer than anything that I
> >>could write. [Dr. Pind never said anything of the sort—Rene]
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Dr Pind did say:
> >
> > "Bh compounds are generally noun compounds having a noun as their final
> >
> > member with the addition of the idea of possessing."
> >
> >
> > However, it is true that he said this after my above comment. So, I
> > mistakenly attributed something to him before he said it. Maybe I was
> > reading into his words too much. I am certainly not psychic.
> >
> > --------
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Rene: I have read your latest post, Alan, and your reasoning is getting
> >>farther and farther away from the issue, and stranger...
> >>
> >>
> > An opinion, and one that I obviously can't share since I wrote it. I
> > was attempting to find some common ground actually. I guess that I
> > failed.
> >
> >
> >>Now, you say that the last element in a Bh has to "function as a noun"--
> >>even if it's not a noun (which, in my opinion, is backwards). OK… Let's
> >>take
> >>an example from the list of compounds in my last post: sukata kamma: 'an
> >>action well done' (Warder/188). Show us please (1) how –kata either is a
> >>noun or is functioning as a noun; (2) WHY it is functioning as a noun
> when
> >>it should be functioning as an adjective; (3) HOW it can function "as a
> >> noun" and yet the compound still be adjectival (remember: the compound
> >>takes its function after that of the last element); and (4) why your
> >>analysis is not in Warder, Perniola, and other grammar books (I exclude
> >>for
> >>now your misreading of Whitney).
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I can't do any of the above, because as I stated in my last message, I
> > don't see how this compound is a Bahubbiihi. It obviously does end in
> > an adjective, and I don't argue with that. I did state that I would be
> > happy to hear how this is a bahubbiihi when based on what I know, it
> > shouldn't be. In other words, I am open to explaination of what makes
> > this a bahubbiihi rather than simply a kammadhaaraya which would carry
> > over into correcting any false ideas I have concerning bahubbiihis.
> >
> >>-- Rene
> >>
> >>PS—I'd just like to remind you, Alan, of something you once wrote to the
> >>list:
> >>
> >>Alan: "If I am wrong, then I will accept it."
> >>
> >>Rene: I sincerely hope this is true, for your sake as well as ours.
> >>
> >>
> > Well, it is true. This is why I asked the questions about the examples
> > of Warder in my last message; so I could understand what I don't yet
> > understand. If you are asking me to accept your position even though I
> > don't understand/agree with it, then that doesn't seem reasonable. I
> > have been trying to keep this conversation friendly, so I hope that we
> > can see eye to eye on at least civility.
> >
> > I don't have any more to say until I hear from others because I have
> > expressed fully my understanding of this issue, and it is obviously
> > insufficient for dealing with some of the issues that you brought up in
> > your last post. I did note this fact too, and am noting it again.
> >
> > With metta,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
> > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
> > [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
> > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
> > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or
> > web only.
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
> [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
> [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
> [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or
> web only.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>