Re: Saddaniiti Chapter 1 (6)

Dear Yong Peng & Nina,

> Sa`nkhepato pana duvidhaava naamapaccayo aakhyaatapaccayo caati.
> So, from the collection [given above], moreover, [is] the two-fold
> noun-suffix and verb-suffix.

I agree with Nina in that "sa'nkhepato" should be translated as "in brief".
The quote covered by "ti" at the end starts at "naamapaccayo". It helps to
think of a colon after "duvidhaava".

Transl: But, in brief, it is of just two kinds: the noun suffix and the verb
suffix.

> * duvidhaava = du-vidhaa-eva

correct

> Tatraapi aakhyaatapaccayaa duvidhaa
> vikara.napaccayanovikara.napaccayavasena.
> There, the verbal suffixes, two-fold too, [are] through the influence of
> vikara.na-suffix and non-vikara.na-suffix.

Instead of "through the influence of", I would suggest "by way of".

> Tattha vikara.napaccayo akaar-aadi-sattarasa-vidho agga-hita-g-gaha.nena
> pannarasa-vidho ca.
> There, the vikara.na-suffix [is] seventeen-fold akaar-and-so-on, and
> fifteen-fold with the foremost useful taking.

transl: Therein [among the verbal suffixes], the vikara.na suffix is of
seventeen kinds beginning with the letter "a" and of fifteen kinds by not
taking what is [already] included.

I think the two vikara.nas left out in the count of 15 are: "a" and "o",
both of which occur twice in the count of 17.

> Novikara.napaccayo pana kha cha saadi-neka-vidho.
> The non-vikara.na-suffix, however, kha, cha, sa-and-so-on [is] many-fold.
>
> Ye ruupa-nipphattiyaa upakaarakaa attha-visesassa jotakaa vaa ajotakaa vaa
> lopaniiyaa vaa alopaniiyaa vaa, te saddaa paccayaa.
> Those words, which [are] self-expanatory or not self-explanatory or
> suitable for elision or not suitable for elision, of a variety of
> meanings, from the effective endings of the form, are suffixes.

I would avoid "words" for "saddaa" here since suffixes are most often not
words but smaller units within words.

transl: Suffixes are linguistic items which are helpful in the derivation
(or formation) of a word-form, that show or do not show a distinction of
meaning, or are to be elided or not to be elided.

> * lopaniiya = lumpaniiya?

not sure.

> Pa.ticca kaara.na.m ta.m ta.m, entiiti paccayaatha vaa;
> Because each and every action, the suffix now [is] "enti" or;

The Pali seems to be giving a derivation of the word "paccayaa" which is
made up of the prefix "pa.ti" plus the verbal root "i", a kit suffix "a"
which I haven't yet identified, and a syaadi suffix. In "paccayaatha vaa",
"atha vaa" (alternatively) should be read with the following line in the
same verse. The meaning of the plural verb "enti" (from the root "i" (go))
is not at all clear to me in this context. At the moment I'm working with
"they follow". "pa.ticca kaara.na.m ta.m ta.m" could mean "going back to
this or that reason or cause".

> Pa.ticca saddanipphatti, ito etiiti paccayaa.
> Because [of] the word-ending, now "eti" [is] the suffix.

I wonder if we should read "pa.ticca kaara.na.m ta.m ta.m" here also for
"pa.ticca".

transl: [Alternatively,] going back [to this or that reason], the formation
of a word follows from it.

This seems to suggest a meaning of "condition" for "paccaya", i.e., the
conditions involved in forming a word.

Best wishes,
Jim