Re: Ablative/-to

Dear Tadao,

>Hi, Jim:
>I will reliterate my question on what you have found.
>(i) First, it doesn't make sense that we have so-called ablative
>case marker /-to/ beside the regugular ablative case endings.

Agreed.

>(ii) Historically, the so-called ablative /-to/ must have developed
>from a regular word, which has then transformed to be a so-called
> postpostion /-to/, which assumed the ablative sense as its primary
> function.

It seems unlikely to me that this affix originated from a word.

>(iii) The question here is why did the Pali speakers want to
> have the /-to/ postpotion besides the regualr ablative endings.
>(iv) My guess is that they needed at least one ending/postposition which
> is flexible in its (case) use (due to a metrical reason?).
>(iv) In other words, the so-called ablative /-to/ is not ablative
>at all, but should be regarded as a kind of "universal"
>case marker.

Agreed.

>(v) If the above hypothesis is correct, then, we should be able to
>predict the following two findings:
>    (a) regualr ablative case endings are used always as their
>       ablstive senses
>       (so that you would never say/find something
>        like: saara.m saarsmaa ~natvaa; meanwhile

I think the following sutta from the Saddaniti shows that ablative case
endings aren't always used in their ablative senses:

657 sahasaddhi.myoge tatiyatthe kvaci pa~ncamii.

"In some cases the fifth (ablative) in the sense of the third (instrumental)
in combination with 'saha' and 'saddhi.m'.

You can also see from a look at the suttas that there is a surprising amount
of overlapping among the cases -- cases used in the sense of other cases and
the same usage being capable expression by two or more cases.

>    (b) we would be able to find numerous examples of the use of the /-to/
>       as an uninversal case marker (functioning as nominative down to
>       genetive).

The Astadhyayi and Saddaniti give examples in support of this.

>(vi) If both (a) and (b) are supported emperically, then, we can
> conclude that the affix /-to/ should neither be regarded as a mere
> ablative marker, nor be as a case marker (in the sense that
> it is a universal postpositon, foreseeing the future of the end of
> the inflectional languages in India, as being manifested in Hindi
> or Punjab).
>
> Does my arugment make sense to you?  tadao

Sorry, your argument doesn't make complete sense to me. It appears that (a)
is not supported but (b) is. I thought that /-to/ could be a kind of
universal case marker (from iv above). I agree that it shouldn't be regarded
as a mere ablative marker.

Jim


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com