Re: ratyaa, ratya.m

Dear Jim,

> I'm still somewhat baffled by ".Thaane ti kasmaa: Suppiyo...
> paribbaajako."
> Is it just to give an example where the operation of vowel elision is
> not
> found to take place? In other words, it's not an option here. "Supyo"
> would
> look very odd.

I have just had Phra Maha Nimitr round for tea and put your
question to him. His take is that when composing in Pali one
oughtn't to innovate by eliding the 'i' in any case that is
not actually attested to in any Pali text. I suspect Ven.
Yuttadhammo's teacher may have been making the same
point when he denied the possibility of "nandyo".

In his Thai translation of the Suttamaalaa Nimitr gives an
expansive rendering, based on the Saddaniiti-.tiikaa of
Pa~n~naasaami:

.thaaneti kasmaa?
"_.thaane_ was added for what purpose?"

suppiyo paribbaajako
"In order to indicate that in most cases of this sort there
will be no vowel elision; e.g., suppiyo paribbaajako."

This is accompanied by a footnote: "Even though there is a
'y' following it, the 'i' in 'pi' is not elided to make
'suppayo' because such a form is not exampled in the Pali."

Best wishes,
Dhammanando