Dear Mahinda, Jim and Nina,

thank you for the interesting discussion on the non-vikara.na suffix. It is noteworthy to know the Pali grammarians creatively added a new category of suffixes which help their students in understanding Pali verbs without additional labour on Sanskrit. However, to make up any excuse, worse if it's an ideological one, to deny the further study of the subject, is unacceptable and also unthinkable. Even so, this is interesting to me. As an amateur sociologist, I am interested in the study of extreme ideas, especially political and religious ideologies, and their effects on various functions of society.

I have referred to Warder's Lesson 30 for the discussion of desiderative verbs. I note that in Charles Duroiselle's grammar §505, the author mentions -sa- to be the characteristic suffix for similar conjugation, very much as Mahinda has explained. However, in Ven. Buddhadatta's NPC3 Chapter 3, which we have just completed in another thread, he describes desiderative conjugation much similar to what we see here in Saddaniti. I believe it may all be a matter of preference, the choice of following the Pali or the Sanskrit tradition.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/13640

I pick up the term "conjugational suffix" in Warder's as I browse through it. I think the term definitely refers to vikara.na, but not sure if it should also include novikara.na. The verb vikaroti, as Nina already noted, means change or alter. So, vikara.na literally means modifier. But, we have to proceed with Saddaniiti to arrive at a suitable English equivalent which makes sense in its grammatical context.

In Appendix 1 of his grammar, Steven Collins has novikara.na-paccaya simply as verbal suffix, which is not helpful in our discussion.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Mahinda Palihawadana wrote:

At first I thought this was to save the student the trouble of going to another language for the structure of a Pali word. But now I see an even more formidable, ideological reason. A virtual roadblock. The Pali tradition has it that Maagadhii (Pali language) is the 'muulabhaasaa' ('root' or original language) which the Buddha himself used. (Search CSCD under 'muulabhaasaa'). The very notion of derivation from an earlier linguistic stratum would then be sacrilege.