Dear Nina, Bryan and all,
let us now return to the original sentence in the grammar,
Sunakhakaale pacceka-Buddhe sinehena pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva ta.m rakkhati.
Earlier, I had
Sunakhakaale pacceka-Buddhe sinehena pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva ta.m rakkhati.
Only because of [his former existence as] the dog (which) went about barking with affection at the time of the Pacceka-Buddha, (this) protects him.
* matta (adv) because of
* eva (adv) only
------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan's reply:
I would take mattam here as a neuter noun as subject of rakkhati; otherwise I don't see what the subject of the sentence is. matta means "measure" or "quantity" and is used at the end of a compound to mean "nothing but", "the whole or totality", "only" (see Monier Williams dict.). Eva would be there for emphasis. So I would read this as "Only the constant (pavattita) barking [lit: "just the constant barking-totality ], out of love for solitary Buddhas in his former existence as a dog, protects him."
------------------------------------------------------------
Nina's reply:
N: I would take mattam as an adverb, and belonging to rakkhati: only his barking.... protected him.
------------------------------------------------------------
Sunakhakaale pacceka-Buddhe sinehena pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva ta.m rakkhati.
According to the book, the subject is a phrase, see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/15339 .
From what we have been doing under this chapter,
[subject] sunakhakaale pacceka-Buddhe sinehena pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva
[predicate] ta.m rakkhati
We are ok with the predicate: ta.m rakkhati = protects him.
Now, on the subject: sunakhakaale pacceka-Buddhe sinehena pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva. I have the following:
1. sunakhakaale: in former birth as a dog
2. pacceka-Buddhe: at the pacceka-Buddha (only one)
3. sinehena: with affection
4. pavattitabhukkara.na-mattameva, here pavattita (pp) can be "constant" as Bryan suggested, bhukkara.na (n) is "barking", hence "constant barking". I treat mattameva as an emphatic particle making up of two adverbs matta and eva, hence "only because of".
What do you think? Thank you.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/15402
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/15404
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/15406
metta,
Yong Peng.