Re: viyoga (Kc 10) --comment

Dear Ole,

<< Yes, The real problem of Kacc 10 is the presence of the term adho.thitam.
It can only denote a consonant that is placed below. It starts as pubba,
pubbabhuuta or pubba.thita and is subsequently turned into one that is
adho.thitam. This is how Nyaasa paraphrases Kacc-v. My point is that we
are dealing with a a description of the widespread practice of writing any
given consonant below a preceding one. It would not make sense to write a
consonant below a vowel. The rule is in my opinion not a sandhi rule: rule
11 naye para.m yutte must refers to writing. >>

I'd like to make two points:

1) In line with your interpretation of "adho.thita", the phrase "sara~nca
upari katvaa" (and having made the vowel above) in Kacc-v 10 would therefore
suggest that the vowel should be written above the adho.thita consonant.
This, of course, wouldn't make sense--as you say.

2) Writing a consonant under a preceding one points to a conjunct of two or
more consonants. One often sees a consonant written below the one above in
the Devanagari or Burmese writing systems. However, in following the
commentators, it doesn't appaear that adho.thita consonants are restricted
to a conjunct situation. The Nyaasa cites "so siilavaa" which has no
conjunct as you can see. Here the antecedent consonant /s/ is, according to
Kc 10, separated from the vowel /o/. In this case, under what could you
write the adho.thita consonant /s/ ?

Best wishes,
Jim


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