Re: Kacc 271

Dear Ole,

Thank-you for your illuminating remarks on ta.myathaa and yathaata.m. I
agree that the question marks after ta.myathaa should not be there. But it
seems debatable to me whether or not the particle really is an avyayiibhaava
compound as it could just as well be two separate words with or without a
space between them. I don't see an entry for tadyathaa as a particle in MW
or Apte but they do show tad yathaa. I will continue to keep an open mind on
this matter and not come to any conclusion until I know a good deal more. I
think the ta.m in the case of Kacc 271 may be referring to what precedes
i.e. the apaadaanakaaraka. One advantage in having ta.m as the first member
of a compound is that it allows for a wider range of interpretations as to
its case and number to fit the context.

Jim


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]