Re: ratyaa, ratya.m

Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote:
> 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".
>
>  
Dear Jim, Dhammanando, et al,

Thanks for your explanations.  Please don't misunderstand that there was
any intention of composing innovative Pali verses... the real reason for
asking in the first place, was to give a source to Ven. Maha Vituun for
future reference, as he said he couldn't find any explanation as to
whether one should conjugate uumi and nandi like ratti.  He even
mentioned that modern Thai teachers sometimes try to get their students
to do just that "uumiyaa, uuyaa" !?  I think the two rules given by Jim
explain the actual nature of the change in ratti:  ratti +smi.m = ratti
+ yaa = ratt + yaa (rule 1, vowel elision) = rat + yaa (rule 2,
consonant elision) = ratyaa

Best wishes,

Yuttadhammo