SV: Avyaya: Problem Particles

Dear Jim,

I think I collected all relevant passages when I wrote the kaama.m entry for
the CPD. You might wish to have a look at that.
Bhaavanapu.msaka has always puzzled me. There is no doubt in my mind that it
denotes a neuter nominal (noun or adjective) qualifying a verbal action
(bhaava). I suppose that indigenous grammarians interpreted adverbs of this
kind as entailing neither masculinity nor femininity and therefore looked
upon them as belonging to the category of neuter nominals, although strictly
speaking at least some of them are m. acc. like kaama.m.
Kacc visesane ca (294 in my forthcoming edition) presupposes Kaatantra II
4:32 vis.es.a.ne ca that replaces Paa.n II 3:21: itthambhuutalak.sa.ne, the
grammatical implications are the same, though.

With best wishes,

Ole

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: palistudy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:palistudy@yahoogroups.com] På vegne
af Jim Anderson
Sendt: 4. august 2005 16:39
Til: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Emne: Re: [palistudy] Avyaya: Problem Particles

> ka& (Particle:) What thing? (or: Noun:) Water, top (?)

The indeclinable 'ka.m' has the meanings: water, head, and happiness
according to the .tiikaa on Abh 1198 (vaarimhi udake, muddhani siise
ca, ka.m sukhepi). It is also included as no. 44 in the svaraadi group
of indeclinables in Panini's Ga.napaa.tha.

> kaama& If, again; (or:) certainly, as long as, how far, so far

Cone has:"according to one's wish or desire; as one pleases,
willingly; as you please; please; Abh 469; ..." also: "even if"
(yadyapisaddatthe, Abh 1196) "certainly, indeed" (eka.msatthe, Abh
1140, 1196). Another meaning given, but not correlated to Abh, is:
"granted that, although (often answered by pana or ca);".

I thought the first meaning of kaama.m (according to one's wish, etc.)
should be included in the Avyayavagga (Abh 1136-1203). It now seems to
me that most adverbs ending in the case terminations do not belong to
the nipaata class but remain as naamas (nouns or adjectives with an
adverbial function). Warder (p.116) has a short section on the
adverbial accusative (bhaavanapu.msaka) but it doesn't account for the
adverbial instrumental or ablative. Bhaavanapu.msaka is discussed in
the Saddaniiti and the term is also found in the a.t.thakathaas and
.tiikaas but apparently not in other Pali grammars or in Panini from
what I've seen so far. This raises the question of how the grammatical
rules of the various native grammars account for this rather common
type of adverb in Pali and Sanskrit. I think the adverbial
instrumental is covered by Kc 292 (visesane ca) and one could extend
it to the adverbial accusative with Kc 307 (tatiyaasattamiina~nca).
However, I cannot come up with an explanation using Panini's grammar
as I don't see any rule in 2.3.1-73 that corresponds to Kc 292 but it
could be that it's included in a more generalized rule.

So we have some adverbs classified as nouns and nouns classified as
indeclinables.

Best wishes,
Jim

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com



Yahoo! Groups Links