Re: Interrogative pronoun at end of sentence

sorry, for not having attached examples. I now have assembled some. Unfortunately I can’t give the exact page and line number in most cases, since at the moment I don’t have access to the printed editions. Therefore, I refer to the spot where I translated those passages in my book Verlorene Gaṇṭhipadas, as far as the passages are dealt with there.

Regarding kiṃ there are in fact not so many examples for the mere kiṃ, it more often occurs in combinations like kiṃ taṃ, kiṃ tena, kiṃ iminā, kiṃ bahukāya, kiṃ bahunā, kiṃ sandhāya, yathā kiṃ, etc. But each time referring back to  a preceding statement.

For similar usage of some combinations in Sanskrit (kiṃ-viśiṣtāḥ?, kiṃ kṛtvā?, kam?), see Tubb & Boose, Scholastic Sanskrit, p. 152, etc.(see Index).

In commentarial ṭīkā literature the following construction: „proposition“ ti, kiṃ?, „answer“ becomes very common. Thereby the kiṃ at the end of the proposition makes a question out of the whole proposition, that means, one can link the kiṃ to the preceding ti. But one could also simply translate the preceding proposition that ends with ti, then the interrogative pronoun, and finally the answer. In searching the CSCD I find 934 occurrences of this type of construction. It is especially frequent in Dhammapāla’s commentaries and becomes more common in the younger ṭīkā literature (ca. 12th/13th cent.).

Examples for mere kiṃ:

Vjb 533,18ff: tattha nadīsu jaggato ti pālentassa. kiṃ? hatthiyūthaṃ gantun ti vadanti (see Verlorene Gaṇṭhipadas III, p. 2301).

MP-nṭ (sorry, can’t give the pagenumber for the moment, but you can find it on the CSCD by searching): … abhibhavatī ti bhūri. kiṃ? rāgādiṃ ...

Nirutti° (see CSCD) ekapadasaṃyoge ti. kiṃ? padantarasaṃyoge pare rassā mā hontū ti.

Examples for kasmā:

From Sp 312,17-20 … dukkaṭaṭṭhāne yeva tiṭṭhati. kasmā? avahārassa sahapayogattā ti (Gaṇṭhipada book, I, p. 478, n. 7).

For further examples from Sp, see Verlorene Gaṇṭhipadas I, p. 516, note 4;  522, note 15; p. 661, note 4, etc.

From Vjb 75-76: idaṃ  yujjati. kasmā ? yasmā  sekhiyesu paññattijānanam  eva pamāṇaṃ, na vatthumattajānanan

 ti.

For further examples from Vjb see Verlorene Gaṇṭhipadas, I,  pp. 408; 554;  672; 673; 697, etc.

From Sp-ṭ III 274 lower part of the page

ten’ eva MāTIKāṭṭHAKATHāYA LĪNATTHAPPAKāSANIYAṂ vuttaṃ: 

„aññaṃ tattakaṃ yeva paricchedan ti (Kkh 12,,21–22) dutiyaṃ udakukkhepaṃ anatikkanto

pi kopeti. kasmā? attano udakukkhepasīmāya paresaṃ udakukkhepasīmāya

ajjhotthaṭattā sīmāsambhedo hoti, tasmā kopetī“ ti.

Examples for kathaṃ:

Khuddas-pṭ 201,1-10: duvidho samayo ca veditabbo. kathaṃ? gimhānamāsesu … (Verl.Gps II,  p. 1169, note 23)

Vjb 215,7ff.: pākaṭattā. kathaṃ? naṭṭhavinaṭṭhacīvarādīnaṃ dhāraṇassa abhāvato katacīvaraṃ eva idhādhippetan ti pākaṭaṃ. (Verl. Gps, II, Z 137, p. 909).

Vjb 235,1-237,8 (can’t locate the exact page for the time being): ayam attho dīpito hoti. kathaṃ? atirekacīvarassa …. (See Verl. Gps II, Z 146, p. 983)

For further references see Verl. Gps,I, p. 350; 352; 428, n.21; 461, n. 19; 557; 655; 661, n. 4 (Sp); 706; 738; 752; 851, n. 12 (Sp); II pp. 1192, 1193, 1194, 1339, 1544, 1579, 1683, etc.

Hope that substantiates my claim.

Regarding Sanskrit, I did not find anything explicit regarding such constructions in Sanskrit in Speyer’s Syntax.

Best wishes,

Petra

Am Feb 3, 2015 um 12:58 schrieb Nyanatusita nyanatusita@... [palistudy] <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>:

Dear Petra,

the problem may simply arise from the punctuation of the editions. The problem can be easily solved if you take them as two sentences. 

ekaṃ nāma. kim? „There is one. Which? …

This works in the case of the Kumarapanha but I don't see how it can work in the other examples (gacchasi kim, katam kim, etc.) where it seems to function in a same was as the interrogative pronouns often put at the end of sentences in Sinhala, e.g. ''Mahatteage nama mokak da?' ``The mister's name is what?''

It is very usual in commentary style to make a statement which then is followed by an interrogative pronoun. Sometimes this is given as part of the sentence, sometimes separately. In translating, one can stick to the literal variant or combine it, as context and language into which it is to be translated require.

If it is very usual, then it should not be difficult to provide us a few examples, especially of ones given as part of a sentence. I just went through the whole first book of Buddhaghosa's Digha Nikaya commentary and except for the expression yathā kiṃ?  (Sv I 201), all occurrences of kiṃ are found at the start of sentences or clauses and preceding verbs. I can not find any example in the first book of the Digha Tika.

Has it been mentioned by any of the Pali grammarians in their works?

Best wishes,
                            Bhikkhu Nyanatusita

Best,

Petra

Am Feb 3, 2015 um 10:28 schrieb Nyanatusita nyanatusita@... [palistudy] <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>:

Dear members,

I have a few questions with regards an unusual type of sentence construction in Pali. 

 

In Kumārapañhā section of the Khuddakapāṭhā the interrogative pronoun kiṃ is placed at the end of a sentences in Ekaṃ nāma kiṃ? Sabbe sattā āhāraṭṭhitikā. Dve nāma kiṃ? Nāmañca rūpañca. Tīṇi nāma kiṃ? Tisso vedanā.etc. : “What is the one? All beings are sustained by nutriment. What are the two? Name and matter. …”.

 

The parallel of the first question in the Sangiti Sutta of the Digha Nikaya instead has Katamo eko dhammo? Sabbe sattā āhāraṭṭhitikā. “What is the one thing? …”

 

The question sentences are very short and there are no explicit verbs.

I have not been able to find any other examples of kiṃ occurring at the end of a sentence in Pali works.  Are there any other examples? 

Can this construction be due to influence of Sanskrit or Sihala? Did Panini make a rule on this?

 

Ven. Ānanda Maitreya in his Pāḷi Made Easy (lesson 9) states that, “A question [in Pāḷi] begins with ‘api’, ‘api nu’ or ‘kiṃ’. ‘Kiṃ’ may be placed even at the end of a sentence, e.g. … kiṃ gacchasi? gacchasi kiṃ? (Do you go?).''

However, I have not been able to find any examples of this in any of the digitalized Pali works on the Chaṭṭha Saṅgāyana edition of VRI. 
Perhaps Ānanda Maitreya is basing himself on a source influenced by Sanskrit or Sinhala grammars?

In Sanskrit can apparently be placed at the end of similar short sentences. I found this in an online spoken Sanskrit dictionary, but the source is not given :

अस्याः नाम किम् ?	asyAH nAma kim ?	sent.	What is its name?  [ object is feminine ]
	तव नाम किम्?	tava nAma kim?	sent.	What is your name?
	भवतः नाम किम् ?	bhavataH nAma kim ?	m	What is your name?
	भवत्याः नाम किम् ?	bhavatyAH nAma kim ?	f	What is your name?

http://www.spokensanskrit.de/index.php?script=HK&beginning=0+&tinput=nAma+kim%3F+&trans=Translate&direction=AU

 

In the commentary on the Khuddakapāṭhā a comment is found regarding the Ekaṃ nāma kiṃ? question. Although it does not discuss the placement of kiṃ, it mentions an unusual Sinhalese variant reading, kiha instead of kiṃ. Could this possibly indicate that the placement of kim at the end of the sentence is due to the influence of the Sihala language? 

Ettha ca ekaṃ nāma kinti ca kihāti ca duvidho pāṭho, tattha sīhaḷānaṃ kihāti pāṭho. Te hi kinti vattabbe kihā ti vadanti. Keci bhaṇanti ‘‘ha-iti nipāto, theriyānampi ayameva pāṭho ti ubhayathāpi pana ekova attho. Yathā ruccati, tathā paṭhitabbaṃ. Yathā pana sukhena phuṭṭho atha vā dukhena, dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ paṭisaṃvedetī’ ti evamādīsu katthaci dukhanti ca katthaci dukkhanti ca vuccati, evaṃ katthaci ekanti, katthaci ekkanti vuccati. Idha pana ekaṃ nāmāti ayameva pāṭho.

 

Nyanamoli, Minor Reader and Illustrator p. 81-82 translates: “ And here in the phrase 'One is what?' (ekaṃ nāma kiṃ) the reading is twofold as kiṃ and ki ha. Herein, the Sinhalese reading is ki ha; for they say 'ki ha' when 'kiṃ'should be said. Some assert that ha is a particle, and also that this too is the reading of those of the Elders' Tradition. However, the meaning is the same in either case, and it can be read according to preference. …”

 

The exact origins of the Khuddakapāṭhā are not known. It appears to be a chanting book for novice monks and might have been compiled in Sri Lanka. Are the Kumārapañhā found in the works of any other early Buddhist tradition?

 

The only other occurrence of kiṃ at the end of question sentence that I know of is in a modern version of the question and answer version of the preliminary duties that is recited before the Pātimokkha recital. It is only done in one tradition in Sri Lanka and probably composed around the middle of the 20^th century. In this version, one monk questions whether the preliminaries have been done and the other answers. These are examples of the questions:

Chanda-pārisuddhi. Chandārahānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ chandapārisuddhi-āharaṇaṃ kataṃ kiṃ? ... Utukkhānaŋ:  hemantādīnaŋ  tiṇṇaṃ utūnaṃ, ettakaṃ atikkantaṃ, ettakaṃ avasiṭṭhan’ti. Evaṃ utu-ācikkhanaṃ kataṃ kiṃ? .... Ovādo. Bhikkhunīnaṃ ovādo dātabbo dinno kiṃ? .... Uposathassa etāni pubbakiccan’ti vuccati kiṃ.

In these version kiṃ is preceded by a verb and parts of a verses found in the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī Pātimokkha commentary (i.e. Chandapārisuddhi, utukkhānaṃ, / Bhikkhugaṇanā ca ovādo. / Uposathassa etāni / Pubbakiccanti vuccati.)

 

The sentence construction of these questions appears to be quite unusual. Can it be influenced by Sinhala or Sanskrit?

Best wishes,

                              Bhikkhu Nyanatusita