Dear Ole,
Some corrections and further comments.
> <<pubbe.thita.m bya~njana.m sarato viyojayetvaa kattha thapetabbanti
sandeho jaayeyya |
>
> I take it that "pubbe.thita.m" stands for "adho.thita.m". The Indian
script edn. (p. 37, New Delhi, 1991) also has this line but reads "pubbe
.thita.m" instead of "pubbe.thita.m">>
After some further study of the above quote from the Nyaasa (ad Kc 10), I
have to correct my earlier remark above. The "pubbe.thita.m" explains
"pubba.m" not "adho.thita.m". "pubba.m" or "pubbe.thita.m" explains which
consonant should be separated from the vowel. "adho.thita.m" explains where
to place the consonant after its separation from the vowel. I would suggest
that after the separation takes place the antecedent consonant automatically
loses its description "pubba.m" since it no longer applies and in its place
gets a new one "adho.thita.m" which is what is brought to the subsequent
letter as a final step (Kc 11) in a series of sandhi operations.
"viyojayetvaa" in my quote above should read "viyojetvaa".
> You are quite right, I overlooked this phrase. It illustrates very well my
> point that the commentators did not understand the purpose of Kacc 10-11.
I was quite wrong about "pubbe.thita.m".
Best wishes,
Jim
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com