1.5. The AṢṬa:dhya:yi: and Modern Linguistics.

1.5.1. The AṢṬa:dhya:yi:, which has no rival in the Indian tradition, has won the appreciation of western scholars right from the time they came to know about it. They have further elevated it to the level of the best one among all the grammars written so far for any language noting that it is far superior to the Greek and the Latin grammars of antiquity in both methodology and coverage. i The Sanskrit language directly and the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: indirectly helped the growth of the comparative grammar in the last quarter of the 18th century and in the 19th century. The role of the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: in that great scientific discovery was to present to scholars a clear picture of the morphological structure of the Sanskrit language on the basis of which they acquired a thorough understanding of the morphological structures of Greek, Latin and other Indo-European languages (the ancient Greek and the Latin grammars contained very little morphological descriptions). ii Concepts such as the distinction among roots, nominal bases and suffixes, primary and secondary suffixes, the analysis of compounds and the system of vowel gradation (ablaut) were taken into comparative linguistics from the Indian grammatical tradition (Rocher 1975:4; 1992:143). On the other hand, being a synchronic grammar, it naturally has a direct relationship with the descriptive linguistics of the present century. The linguistics of ancient India has been hailed as 'the direct germinal origin of the linguistics of the Western world of today' (Emeneau 1955:145). It is said that Bloomfield's realisation of the value of descriptive grammar and the depth of insight that he brought to it arose out of his intimate study of Pa:ṇini (Bloch 1949:90, Emeneau 1988:755). Bloomfield praised the AṢṬa:dhya:yi:, which was one of his bedside books (Emeneau 1988:757) as 'one of the greatest monuments of human intelligence' and characterised it as 'an indispensable model for the description of languages'. As coming from a person who has contributed greatly for the development of linguistics of the modern era, his views on the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: must be quoted here in full:

The descriptive grammar of Sanskrit, which Pa:ṇini brought to its highest perfection, is one of the greatest monuments of human intelligence and (what concerns us more) an indispensable model for the description of languages. The only achievement in our field which can take rank with it is the historical linguistics of the nineteenth century, and this, indeed, owed its origin largely to Europe's acquaintance with the Indian grammar. (1929:268)

This scientific condensation, which places every feature into its proper setting, is one of the two virtues which make Indian grammar a model for us. The other is completeness. Pa:ṇini gives the formation of every inflected, compounded, or derived word, with an exact statement of the sound-variations (including accent) and of the meaning … For no language of the past have we a record comparable to Pa:ṇini's record of his mother-tongue, nor is it likely that any language spoken today will be so perfectly recorded. (1929:274)

This grammar, which dates from somewhere round 350 to 250 B.C., is one of the greatest monuments of human intelligence. It describes, with the minutest detail, every inflection, derivation, and composition, and every syntactic usage of its author's speech. No other language, to this day, has been so perfectly described. (1933:11)

Bloomfield adopted Pa:ṇini's style of conciseness and 'hatred of repetition' in writing his book, Language, which is difficult for beginners and 'even relatively advanced students … because of Bloomfield's concise, closely-knit, unemotional, quasi-mathematical reasoning and presentation, in which each sentence must be thoroughly understood and remembered before proceeding to the next.' (Hall 1949:121; Emeneau 1988:755) Pa:ṇini's grammar can be considered as the immediate source for Bloomfield's exposition of such topics as morphology, morphophonemics, suppletion, zero,

analysis of compounds, form-classes and generality and specificity (Rogers 1987:129). With regard to morphology, Bloomfield (1933:208) himself has remarked that '… in the main, our technique was developed by the Hindu grammarians'. The importance of zero element has been emphasized by him (1933:209) in the following words:

In other cases there is not even a grammatical feature: a single phonetic form, in the manner of homonymy, represents two meanings which are distinguished by means of a linguistic form, as, singular and plural noun in the sheep (grazes) : the sheep (graze). Here the Hindus hit upon the apparently artificial but in practice eminently serviceable device of speaking of a zero element: in sheep : sheep the plural-suffix is replaced by zero --- that is, by nothing at all.

Although, at the time of writing his 1929 article, Bloomfield was critical of Pa:ṇini for using the technique of ordered rules (see §1.4.17), he must have realised the importance of it at a later time since explicit ordering of rules was resorted to by him in 'Menomini Morphophonemics' (1939) and 'Eastern Ojibwa' (1958) (Rogers 1987:129).

1.5.2. Even after Bloomfield's time, the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: with its 'surprisingly modern' methods continues to attract the attention of scholars interested in linguistic theory. iii Here we do not see any direct influence of Pa:ṇini but the existence of a number of parallels between the methodology of Pa:ṇini and that of these new schools has been noticed (see Cardona 1976a:232-36; Rocher 1975:36-45). The originator of the transformational generative grammar, Chomsky himself has observed: 'What is more, it seems that even Panini's grammar can be interpreted as a fragment of such a "generative grammar" in essentially the contemporary sense of this term.' (1965:v). Although Bloomfield had categorically stated that Pa:ṇini's grammar contained syntax (see the quotation from his 1933 work in §1.5.1.), his statement was neglected by scholars for quite some time afterwards. Thieme (1956:4) stated that Pa:ṇini's grammar, '… being defined as śabda:nuśa:sana "an instruction in (the formation of ) word-forms…", is not concerned with sentences'; in addition, the absence of any statement on word order (noted elsewhere by Thieme) also seems to have contributed to such a view.iv That this is an erroneous view has been pointed out by scholars like Cardona (1967:213, note 19), Joshi (1969:16), van Nooten (1969:242-43), Staal (1976:110) and Kiparsky (1982:1).v It is, however, remarkable that the syntactic component of Pa:ṇini's work has been recognised and studied assiduously only after syntax received its due attention in general linguistics with the advent of Chomsky. Even in ancient times, some people seem to have entertained this wrong notion as is evident from Jinendrabuddhi's (7th century A.D.) remark against it.vi Since he was describing a language with complex morphological structure, Pa:ṇini had to devote a major part of his work to the morphological analysis; the natural preponderance of the morphology seems to be the root cause of the misunderstanding. The ka:raka theory (see Chapter 8) and the treatment of complex sentences with the infinitive are two of the important areas that vouch for Pa:ṇini's concern for syntax.

1.5.3. It is important to note that Pa:ṇini's system cannot be compared in toto with any of the modern systems despite the existence of partial resemblances. Staal (1966), Joshi (1969) and Kiparsky and Staal (1969) have noted similarities between the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: and transformational generative grammar in areas like sentence structure and the derivation of compounds. Pa:ṇini, however, does not derive one sentence from another, nor does he employ devices like phrase structure rules, embedding and so on (note that many of these as well as transformational rules are abandoned in the latest version of transformational grammar). Fillmore's (1968) case grammar closely resembles the ka:raka system of Pa:ṇini (see Chapter 8) in that, in the former, case roles which are based on semantic criteria and hence belong to deep structure are manifested by surface

categories like subject and object without there being a one-to-one relationship between the two classes (Ananthanarayana 1970). Yet there are many areas of difference between the two of which the following may be noted: (i) In case grammar deep structure categories such as 'agentive' and 'objective' are defined in purely semantic terms in an attempt to see that they are applicable to all languages while in the ka:raka system semantic and syntactic criteria are combined in defining some of the ka:rakas (Cardona 1976a:233). (ii) The concept of 'subject' as opposed to 'agent' employed in case grammar is absent in Pa:ṇini's system. (iii) In Pa:ṇini's system even an inanimate object can function as karta: 'agent' if the speaker wishes to attribute the quality of independence or self-promptedness to it (cf. svatantraḤ karta: 1.4.54, §8.6.). Fillmore (1968:24) originally insisted that the agent must always be animate but Cook (1979), in his revised version of case grammar, admitted the possibility of an inanimate object functioning as the agent (Sarma 1995:138). The use of partially ordered rules in accounting for morphophonemic changes is a remarkable similarity between Pa:ṇini and modern linguistics (see §1.6.11.-.14.). The level of understanding the technique of Pa:ṇini grows with the level of development of various aspects of descriptive linguistics. Because of its strong theoretical background, the AṢṬa:dhya:yi:, though composed in the hoary past, has played an important role in the evolution of various branches of modern linguistics and will retain its attraction for linguists for a long time to come. The terms sandhi and ka:raka (the former current from very early times and the latter in recent times) and less commonly the names of compounds tatpuruṢa (T.T. 109) and bahuvri:hi (T.T. 160) that have entered into the terminology of linguistics bear eloquent testimony to the great relevance of Pa:ṇini's work to modern linguistics. We may close this section with what Kiparsky (1994:2923) has to say on the subject under discussion: 'Many of the insights of Pa:ṇini's grammar still remain to be recaptured, but those that are already understood constitute a major theoretical contribution. Its impact on generative grammar was felt first in phonology (the Elsewhere Condition, unmarked rule ordering), and more recently in syntax (Linking theory). The rewards for the currently burgeoning study of morphology promise to be richer still.'

1.6. Pa:ṇini's principles of analysis and presentation.

1.6.1. Pa:ṇini's grammar may, at the theoretical level, be visualized as one that starts with semantics and ends with the phonetic realisation of the word, word group or the sentence, which is derived by the application of a series of rules. It should however be noted that there is no separate section either for semantics or for syntax and that phonetics is not discussed in the work but a knowledge of it (which is dealt with in detail in the śikṢas and Pra:ti-śa:khyas) is assumed on the part of the student of the grammar for the proper application of the morphophonemic rules (cf. stha:ne' ntaratamaḤ 1.1.50. [§6.7.] and tulya:syaprayatnam savarṇam 1.1.9; see also §1.6.10).vii Morphology, which is not separated from but is interlinked with semantics and syntax, is presented in the three Adhya:yas, the 3rd to the 5th (§2.3.); it is the focal point of the grammar. All the suffixes that occur in the language are given in this part of the work. Those of the suffixes that can be added to a root are given in the section governed by the adhika:ra su:tra, dha:toḤ 3.1.91 (§2.3.4.); the (underived) roots are listed in the Dha:tupa:Ṭha (§1.4.1.). The suffixes that can be added to a nominal stem are given in the section governed by the adhika:ra su:tra, Ṅya:ppra:tipadika:t 4.1.1. (i.e. the 4th and the 5th Adhya:yas, §2.4.1.). Since underived nouns of Sanskrit as those of any other language constitute an open class and since the inflectional morphology of nouns is more or less regular and the variations involved are largely predictable on the basis of the final sound of the nominal stems, the latter are not listed in the grammar (except a few of them mentioned in the Gaṇas [T.T. 84] for specific

grammatical operations). They have to be taken from other sources like a lexicon, which, however, includes in it both the underived and the derived ones, or one has to depend on his knowledge of the language for this purpose. The roots, underived nominal stems and suffixes are the three kinds of basic elements that serve as the input for the grammar. In addition, the word (an inflected noun) also serves as the basis in the derivation of denominal verbs (§§7.1.3.-.6), secondary derivatives (§7.3.2.) and compounds (§7.4.8.). The case suffix in such formations is deleted by supo dha:tupra:tipadikayoḤ 2.4.71. (App.I:1). In fact, in deriving these morphologically complex formations, Pa:ṇini accounted for their meanings and syntactic functions by constant reference to the phrases or sentences that correspond to them. The grammar generates the actual forms of the language by combining together these basic elements and making the necessary changes in their phonological shapes by framing appropriate rules. Variations in morphological structure are accounted for by one of the three processes: (i) substitution (§1.6.5.), (ii) preference for exception (or blocking, §1.6.6.) and, (iii) augmentation (§1.6.8.). The process of substitution is adopted in describing inflection and morphophonemic changes. Even the zero element (with all its subdivisions) is introduced as a substitute (§1.6.7.). Reduplication of the root is treated as a concomitant feature of adding the suffixes liṬ (§10.2.2.), -sa(n) (§7.1.2.) and -ya(Ṅ) (§7.1.7.). In morpho-phonemic rules, the substitution of one sound for a sequence of two sounds is also found (eka:deśaḤ [T.T. 67], §§1.6.10., 2.6.5.). The technique of assigning a suffix as an exception to the general one is used in derivation; the convention to be followed in such cases is that the exceptional suffix takes precedence over the general one under stated conditions. Although Pa:ṇini has not defined the term va:kyam 'sentence', he recognised it as a grammatical term (śabdasa·jña:, cf. vaco' śabdasa·jña:ya:m 7.3.67 'the c of vac- 'to speak' is not replaced by k before -(ṇ)ya(t) unless the derived word is a grammatical term', e.g. va:c-ya-m 'that which can be said' but va:k-ya-m 'sentence') and made use of the concept in a number of su:tras to account for the facts of the Sanskrit language (for further details, see va:kyam [T.T. 197]). Adhya:yas 6 to 8 take care of the changes that occur in the sounds (including those in accent) when a suffix combines with a nominal stem or a root or when words combine together with one another in a compound or a sentence.

1.6.2. When Pa:ṇini assigns any suffix, he specifies the following five characteristics of it by general or particular su:tras (it is hardly necessary to point out here that some or all of these may not be present in the particular su:tra but are read into it through the technique of anuvṛttiḤ [T.T. 12]): (i) The meaning of the suffix (§1.6.3.). (ii) The particular class of the base to which it is added (i.e. nominal stem or root with specification of the subtype or the individual item when required). (iii) The morphophonemic changes it causes in the base. These changes, which are chiefly conveyed by the indicator (see Chapter 4) and which may sometimes affect the base and the suffix concurrently include guṇa or vṛddhi substitution of the first or the final vowel (the first vowel of a stem commonly undergoes vṛddhi before a secondary derivative suffix, see §7.3.3.), substitution of one sound in the place of one or two consecutive sounds (in the latter case, the first sound is the final one of the base/previous suffix and the second sound the first one of the suffix that follows), deletion of a sound, addition of a new sound or sounds (i.e. augment [T.T. 35]) and the substitution of an entirely different base. In some cases, an entire suffix is substituted by a new one under specified conditions; for an example, see Ṭa:ṄasiṄasa:m ina:tsya:Ḥ 7.1.12, (§9.6.1.; also see §1.6.5.). (iv) The position of the main accent in the derived word (this also is mostly conveyed by the indicator, see §§2.6.9.,4.3.1.(iv) ). (v) The syntactic behaviour (like cooccurrence restrictions) of the derived word (§1.6.4.).

1.6.3. The meaning of a suffix is taken as primary and the suffix is assigned for the purpose of expressing the meaning that is conveyed by it. In the su:tra that assigns a suffix, the word that indicates the meaning is always given in the 7th case, which, according to the Sanskrit idiom sati saptami:, can be expanded by adding an appropriate word in the 7th case as abhidheye or va:cye as has been done by the commentators in giving the vṛtti (see note 35 for examples). The construction then means 'when meaning M is to be expressed'. Therefore, for example, karmaṇi dviti:ya: 2.3.2. (§8.8.1.)) means 'the 2nd case occurs (after a nominal stem) when the object (karman-) is to be expressed', hetumati ca 3.1.26. (§7.1.6.) means 'when the causative sense (hetumat-) is to be expressed, the suffix -(ṇ)i(c) is added to the root' and vartama:ne laṬ 3.2.123. (§10.1.1.) means 'the suffix laṬ occurs after a root when the present tense (vartama:na-) is to be expressed'.viii Thus the grammar takes the meanings as the starting point and generates the utterances that represent them much as a human being produces sounds that represent the idea he wants to convey. It may not be out of place to mention here that Pa:ṇini used semantics in two other ways. Semantic features, like phonological features, were used for identifying classes of words, roots or stems. For example, dvandvaś ca pra:ṇitu:ryasena:Ṅga:na:m 2.4.2. says that a co-ordinative compound of nouns that denote body parts, parts of a musical group or of an army will optionally be in the neuter sg., e.g. pa:ṇipa:dam 'hands and feet', ma:rdaṄgikapa:ṇavikam '(a group of) players of (the musical instruments) mṛdaṄga and paṇava', rathika:śva:roham '(an army consisting of) charioteers and cavalry'. In this the classes of words are identified by their meanings. In cases like pra:ṇistha:d a:to laj anya-tarasya:m 5.2.96. 'a stem denoting a thing found on the body of an animate being and ending in a: optionally takes the suffix -la(c) to denote the sense of possession' (e.g. cu:a:-la-/cu:a:-vat- 'one who has a crest'), the semantic criterion is combined with a phonological one. Furthermore, the meaning or the shade of meaning of the whole word to be derived is used by Pa:ṇini as a condition in deriving words as well as compounds. For example, according to Ṭa:b ṛci 4.1.9, the feminine suffix is -(Ṭ)a:(p) when the entire word refers to a Vedic stanza (e.g. dvipad-a: ṛk 'a Vedic stanza with two lines') but it is -(Ṅ)i:(p) otherwise (e.g. dvipad-i: devadatta: 'a woman by name Devadatta: who is two-legged); also cf. vaco' śabdasa ṃjña:ya:m 7.3.67. quoted in §1.6.1. In the case of compounding, the whole compound may refer to a particular object, activity or person or it may carry additional overtones like censure --- factors like these are sometimes relevant for the grammar. This is illustrated by trikakut parvate 5.4.147; trikakut with the change kakuda- > kakut- refers to a particular mountain with three cliffs while any other thing with three protrusions will be trikakuda-. 1.6.4. That the suffix assigning su:tras carry, when necessary, syntactic information will be clear from the following examples. The four su:tras beginning with yuṢmady upapade … 1.4.105 (see §10.0.7.), which were cited by the ancient commentator Jinendrabuddhi to establish that grammar is concerned with syntax also (see §1.5.2., note 33), are fairly simple examples inasmuch as they stipulate agreement between a noun/pronoun (expressed or understood) and the finite verb that is coreferential to it. Pa:ṇini's concern for precision is evident in these su:tras in two ways. First, by stating in the first one of these stha:niny api 'even when it is absent', which is to be read into the subsequent su:tras also, he overtly accounted for the absence of the noun/pronoun in the sentence. Secondly, he ensured that the correct finite verb suffix is selected when the finite verb is simultaneously in agreement with a first and a second person pronoun as in aham ca tvam ca gaccha:vaḤ 'I and you (sg.) go' by making asmady uttamaḤ 1.4.107. a later rule so that it will have precedence over 1.4.105. according to the metarule, vipratiṢedhe param ka:ryam 1.4.2. (§6.30).

dha:toḤ karmaṇaḤ … 3.1.7. (§7.1.2.) assigns the -sa(n)- suffix optionally in the sense 'to desire' to a root only when the action denoted by the root is the object of iṢ- 'to desire' and when both the root to which the suffix is to be added and the root iṢ- (which is understood) have the same person as the agent, e.g. devadattaḤ kartum icchati = ciki:r-Ṣ-a-ti 'Devadatta wants to do (something)'. In this example, kṛ- 'to do' took the -sa(n)- suffix because Devadatta is the agent for the actions expressed by both the roots kṛ- and iṢ- as stipulated by the su:tra. On the other hand, the sense of devadattasya bhojanam icchati yajñadattaḤ 'Yajñadatta desires Devadatta's eating' cannot be expressed by yajñadatto bubhuk-Ṣ-a-ti since in the former sentence the agent of bhuj- 'to eat' is different from that of iṢ-; therefore, the latter sentence means only 'Yajñadatta wants to eat'. sama:nakartṛkayoḤ pu:rvaka:le 3.4.21 says that -(k)tva: is added in the sense of 'earlier (action)' to a root when the latter is associated in the sentence with another root provided that the agent for both the actions is one and the same, e.g. devadatto bhuk-tva: vrajati 'having eaten, Devadatta goes'. The condition that both the actions should have the same agent (sama:nakartṛka-) in the above su:tra prevents the use of the suffix in a sentence like yajñadatte bhuktavati gacchati devadattaḤ 'Devadatta goes after Yajñadatta eats' in which the agents of the two actions are different. The use of a case form depends upon one of the following two factors: (i) The ka:raka role of the referent with respect to the action denoted by the verb (the ka:raka roles come under semantics to a great extent but in a few cases the semantic criterion is combined with a syntactic one, see §8.0.5.). (ii) The word (other than a verb) with which it is connected (see §8.0.6.-.9). It should be noted that the actual form of the verb in a sentence is decided first and the nouns take the cases according to it (see §8.0.7.). The second factor is purely a syntactic one; for example, the word namaḤ 'salutation' requires the noun connected with it to be in the 4th case, e.g. agnaye namaḤ 'salutation to Agni!' (see §8.10.4.)). The use of a particular laka:ra (T.T. 176) in a sentence sometimes depends upon the presence of another word as shown by the following examples. Only luṄ 'aorist' is used with the prohibitive particle ma:(Ṅ), e.g. ma: ka:rṢi:Ḥ 'Don't do!' (ma:Ṅi luṄ 3.3.175. [§10.9.1.]). liṬ 'perfect' (§10.2.) is normally used to denote unseen past events that took place before the current day (parokṢe liṬ 3.2.115.) but laṄ instead of liṬ can optionally be used to express the same sense when the word ha (a particle of emphasis) or śaśvat 'repeatedly' is there in the sentence (haśaśvator laṄ ca 3.2.116. [§10.7.1.]), e.g. iti ha + akarot (laṄ)/caka:ra (liṬ) 'he/she/it did so'.

1.6.5. The variations in form that occur in the case suffixes (sup [T.T. 241]), finite verb suffixes (tiṄ [T.T. 113]) and in some others like the gerundial suffix -(k)tva: are stated by treating the more commonly occurring form as the basic one and the others (including zero, see §1.6.7.) as its substitutes. For example, for the 3rd case sg., 4th case sg., 5th case sg. and the 6th case sg., the most common variants, namely, -(Ṭ)a:, -(Ṅ)e, -(Ṅ)as(i) and -(Ṅ)as respectively are taken as the basic ones and those that occur only after a stem ending in a short a, namely, -ina, -ya, -a:t and -sya respectively are given as the substitutes of the former (Ṭa:ṄasiṄasa:m ina:tsya:h 7.1.12, Ṅer yaḤ 7.1.13. [§§9.6.2., 9.8.2.; Table 9.1.). In the case of the derivation of the finite verb, an abstract suffix called la(ka:ra) (T.T. 176) to be added after a root is set up (for details, see §10.0.). Any one of the ten laka:ras is first substituted by one of a set of 18 suffixes called tiṄ (T.T. 113) and it, in turn, is substituted by some other one or undergoes change in shape depending upon the particular laka:ra that is the source for it and also upon the type of the preceding root. The class sign suffix, the passive suffix and some others are intoduced with overtly stated conditions as occurring after a root before a tiṄ suffix (see §10.0.9.). The gerundial suffix -(k)tva: (sama:na … 3.4.21, see §1.6.4.) is substituted by -(l)ya(p) after a root that is compounded with a gati word (T.T. 85) or a preverb (T.T. 58) but not with the negative na(ñ)- (sama:se' nañpu:rve ktvo lyap 7.1.37.), e.g. pra-hṛ-(k)tva: >

pra-hṛ-(l)ya(p) > pra-hṛt-ya 'having hit' (augment t(uk) added by hrasvasya piti kṛti tuk 6.1.71. 'the augment t(uk) occurs after a short vowel before a primary derivative that is a p-it'). If the form ultimately required can be obtained by changing or deleting one or more of its sounds, this method is also resorted to. For example, by Ṭita a:tmanepada:na:m Ṭer e 3.4.79. [App. I:2] the final vowel (+ consonant) of an a:tmanepada suffix that is the substitute of a Ṭ-it laka:ra is replaced by e and by itaś ca 3.4.100. [§10.7.2.]) the i of the parasmaipada substitute of a Ṅ-it laka:ra is deleted. Note that in the Pa:ṇinian system a substitute is identical with the substituend for all purposes except the phonological ones (stha:nivad a:deśo' nalvidhau 1.1.56. [§6.13]). By virtue of the same metarule, the former also inherits the indicators of the latter; in the case of the gerundial form given above, for example, the substitute -(l)ya(p) also is considered to be a k-it like its substitutend -(k)tva: so that the guṇa change (ṛ > ar) is prevented (cf. the example bhuk-tva: in §1.6.4.; see §4.4.11). In accounting for the allomorphic variations, Pa:ṇini observed economy in statement by putting together in a su:tra the substituends and the substitutes that occur under one and the same conditioning (e.g. Ṭa:ṄasiṄasa:mina:tsya:Ḥ 7.1.12. [§9.6.2]) and by capturing the generality involved in the change of sounds in more than one suffix (e.g. Ṭita a:tmanepada:na:m Ṭer e 3.4.79. [App.I:2], er uḤ 3.4.86. which latter applies in the 3rd sg. and pl. parasmaipada forms of loṬ 'imperative' [§10.6.2.]). One, therefore, should not expect to find all the variants of a suffix in one place or separate statements of variants for each of the suffixes when they can be brought under one general rule.

1.6.6. On the other hand, the primary (§7.2.) and the secondary derivatives (§7.3.) that have one and the same sense but occur in different environments, the feminine suffixes (§7.5.) and even the class signs in the verb (§10.1.4.) are treated as separate suffixes. In such cases, the more widely occurring suffix is taken as the general one and the suffixes that are of restricted distribution are treated as exceptions. The domain of the general one lies outside that of the exceptional one(s) (see §1.6.9.). From this, it is clear that the relationship that obtains between a morpheme and its allomorphs in modern linguistics is represented by two different types in Pa:ṇini : substitutes (a:deśaḤ [T.T. 38]) of the substituendum (stha:ni: [T.T. 246]) and restricted suffix (apava:daḤ [T.T. 18]) as opposed to the general one (utsargaḤ [T.T. 52]). Pa:ṇini makes use of one of the three types of conditioning in stating the occurrence of a substitute or a restricted suffix: (i) phonological, (ii) morphological, and (iii) a combination of the above two, which may be called phono-morphological. An illustration for the phonological conditioning is that under which the variants -ina (of the 3rd case sg.), -a:t (of the 5th case sg.) and -sya (of the 6th case sg.) occur, namely, after a stem ending in a short a (Ṭa:ṄasiṄasa:m ina:tsya:Ḥ 7.1.12. [§9.6.1.]; for examples from the feminine suffixes, see §7.5.7.(i).). An instance for morphological conditioning is the substitutions 4th case pl. -bhyas > -abhyam, 5th case pl. -bhyas > -at and 6th case pl. -a:m > -a:kam which take place only after yuṢmad- and asmad-, the second and the first person pronominal stems respectively (§9.0.4.; for examples from the feminine suffixes, see §7.5.7.(ii).). The various listings in the Gaṇapa:Ṭha and the Dha:tupa:Ṭha are all illustrations for morphological conditioning. The subtypes of it, apart from listing, include conditioning (i) by a neighbouring suffix which may sometimes be referred to by its indicator so that other suffixes with the same indicator can also be taken in, and (ii) by the particular type of compound (for examples, see §7.5.7.(ii).). There is ample evidence to show that Pa:ṇini used a third type of conditioning, namely, the phono-morphological conditioning, which should also be recognised in modern linguistics (Subrahmanyam 1990, §21). This type of conditioning involves a combination of a phonological feature with a non-phonological feature (like gender, meaning, pronominal status or just an exclusive group of stems) and, as such, is different from the other two

types. The following stem classes which serve as the conditioning factors for accounting for the suffix variants in nominal inflection are examples for this type of conditioning: (i) Neuter stems ending in a short a (after such a stem, 1st sg. -s(u) and 2nd sg. -am are replaced by -am while, after the rest of the neuter stems, the suffixes are deleted, §§9.1.,9.4.). (ii) Neuter stems ending in a vowel, a plosive, ś, Ṣ, s or h (such a stem takes the augment n(um)before 1st and 2nd pl. -(ś)i, e.g. vana:n-i 'gardens' (stem vana-) versus catva:r-i 'four (neut.)' (stem catur-) ). (iii) Neuter stems ending in i, u, ṛ (such a stem takes the augment n(um) before a suffix beginning with a vowel, e.g. va:riṇ-e 'for water' (stem va:ri-) versus manas-e 'for mind'). (iv) Feminine stems ending in -a:(p). ix (v) Feminine stems of the nadi: class (T.T. 124). (vi) The ghi class (T.T. 90). (vii) The ṢaṬ class (T.T. 218). (viii) Pronominal stems ending in a short a (versus a non-pronominal stem ending in the same vowel).x

1.6.7. We have noted above (§1.5.1.) that Bloomfield introduced the concept of zero element into modern linguistics under inspiration from Pa:ṇini. Pa:ṇini used four different technical terms, namely, lopaḤ (T.T. 190), luk (T.T. 182), śluḤ (T.T. 217) and lup (T.T. 185) in the sense of 'disappearance' (adarśanam; adarśanam lopaḤ 1.1.60). While the first one is used for the disappearance of a sound (in sandhi) as well as that of a suffix, the other three are used only with reference to a suffix (pratyayasya lukślulupaḤ 1.1.61.). The zero elements everywhere are given as substitutes for an actual, that is, overtly present form of the language --- either a sound (or a sequence of sounds) or a suffix. In other words, zero is never an independent suffix without being connected with another overt suffix. Examples for the use of lopaḤ for the deletion of a sound: ho he lopaḤ 8.3.13 'h > Ø before h', ro ri 8.3.14 'r > Ø before r'. xi Examples for its use with regard to a suffix: halṄya:bbhyo … 6.1.68 (§9.1.2.) which deletes 1st case sg. -s(u) after a stem ending in a consonant or the feminine suffix -(Ṅ)i: or -a:(p) (other details are ignored here) and eṄhrasva:t sa·buddheḤ 6.1.69 (§9.1.5.), which deletes the vocative (1st case) sg. -s(u) after a stem ending in e, o or a short vowel. The difference between the use of the word lopaḤ on the one hand and the remaining three on the other is that while in the former case the deleted suffix is considered to be present for all purposes (pratyayalope … 1.1.62. [§6.17], a suffix deleted by one of the three terms with lu will become ineffective to cause any change in the preceding stem (na lumata:Ṅgasya 1.1.63 [§6.18]). Examples for the three types of zero with lu are given in §6.18. and under the respective technical terms. Of the three, luk is more common than the other two. While śluḤ occurs only after the hu- class of roots as the substitute of the class sign -(ś)a(p)- and causes reduplication of the root (§10.1.4.), lup occurs only in a few secondary derivative forms (the retention of the plural number and gender of the stem is a peculiarity associated with the lup deletion).

1.6.8. The extra meaningless phonological material that crops up in certain contexts when two morphs are joined together poses a problem of analysis for the linguist. The treatment of such extra sound(s) (the Sanskrit term for which is a:gamaḤ 'augment', T.T. 35) by rules with the convention that an augment forms part of the element to which it is added is an important trait of Pa:ṇinian grammar (see yada:gama:s tadguṇi:bhu:ta:s tadgrahaṇena gṛhyante [no. 11 of the Paribha:ṢenduśekharaḤ] ). An augment may comprise a single sound or a sequence of sounds and it, unlike a substitute, does not replace anything but is added to a sound or morph under stated conditions.xii In the su:tra that assigns an augment, the element to which it is added is always put in the 6th case as in the case of a substitute. A Ṭ-it augment is added at the beginning (§4.4.20), a k-it

augment at the end (§4.4.11) and a m-it augment is added immediately after the final vowel (§4.4.28) of the element given in the 6th case in the su:tra. What is called 'empty morph' (e.g. the r in children; note that the term is a self-contradictory one since a morph by definition cannot be empty, i.e. meaningless) by some scholars in modern linguistics corresponds to Pa:ṇini's a:gama but Pa:ṇini did not give it the status of a pratyaya 'suffix'. It sometimes matters in Sanskrit grammar whether the augment is (considered to be) added at the end of the stem or at the beginning of the suffix. The advantages gained by the assignment of augments by general rules are the following: 1. Capturing the commonness in the allomorphic distribution of different morphemes. For example, the assignment of the augments a:(Ṭ), ya:(Ṭ) and sya:(Ṭ) to Ṅ-it case suffixes (see Chapter 9, note 8) captured the partial commonness of the suffixes and at the same time avoided the multiplicity of allomorphy in each of the suffixes. 2. Avoidance of setting up of a number of partially similar allomorphs. For example, the assignment of the augments s(uṬ) and n(uṬ) allowed Pa:ṇini to abstract the common element -a:m as the basic suffix from the three variants of the 6th pl. suffix -a:m, -sa:m and -na:m (§9.11.). thus avoiding the multiplicity of allomorphs at the same time.

1.6.9. One important principle that is normally followed by Pa:ṇini in presenting the grammar is to give the statistically predominant form or process as the general one (utsargaḤ [T.T. 52]) without any conditioning or restriction on it and give the less common one related to it as the specific or restricted one (apava:daḤ [T.T. 18]).xiii This principle holds good in many areas of the grammar like (i) the assignment of suffixes, (ii) morpho-phonemic substitutions, and (iii) the definition of technical terms. The general rule, although given first, will not apply automatically to all cases that could come under its purview but will apply only to such cases that are not covered by the specific rule(s). This convention, which should be scrupulously followed in interpreting the su:tras, has been stated in the metarules (framed by the commentators), pu:rvam hy apava:da: abhiniviśante paśca:d utsarga:Ḥ 'the restricted rules operate first and the general ones only later (that is, the latter apply in such cases not covered by the former)', prakalpya ca:pava:daviṢayam tata utsargo' bhiniviśate 'the general rule operates avoiding the domain of the restricted one(s)' (nos, 62, 63 of the Paribha:ṢenduśekharaḤ).xiv

Examples in the case of suffixes: karmaṇy aṇ 3.2.1. 'a root having a complement whose meaning is the object of the activity denoted by the former takes -a(ṇ)' is a general rule accompanied by the specific rule, a:to' nupasarge kaḤ 3.2.3. '(under the same conditions) a root that ends in a: and is not preceded by a preverb takes -(k)a'. Therefore, in the case of nṛ-pa:-, -(k)a alone occurs since the root pa:- 'to protect' ends in a: and is not preceded by a preverb (nṛ-pa:-(k)a- > nṛ-p-a 'king, one who protects people (nṛ-)' [a: > Ø by a:to lopa iṬi ca 6.4.64 'stem final a: > Ø before the i(Ṭ) augment and an a:rdhadha:tuka (T.T. 43) suffix that begins with a vowel and is a k-it or Ṅ-it']). -a(ṇ) occurs in cases not covered by this and some other specific rules, e.g. kumbha-kṛ-a(ṇ)- > kumbha-ka:r-a- 'potter' (ṛ > a:r by aco ñṇiti 7.2.115. [App. I:17]). Of the ten class signs in verbs (§§10.0.9., 10.1.4.), -(ś)a(p) is the general one assigned without any specific conditioning on the root (kartari śap 3.1.68 '-(ś)a(p) occurs after a root before a sa:rvadha:tuka suffix (T.T. 239) that denotes the agent') and the others are assigned after specific classes of roots (e.g. diva:dibhyaḤ śyan 3.1.69 '-(ś)ya(n)- occurs after the roots of the div- (i.e. the 4th) class (other conditions being the same)' ). Therefore, the former occurs in cases left out by the latter ones, that is, after a root of the first and the tenth classes and after a derived root (note that after the second and the third classes of roots also it occurs at the underlying level but is replaced by luk (-Ø-) and ślu (-Ø-) respectively). The operation of this principle on a large scale can be seen in the taddhita section in which subdivisions are mostly made on the basis of a handful of general suffixes (see §§2.4.4. - 2.4.8.). Each of those general suffixes

applies only in cases which are not covered by the specific suffixes (see §7.3.1.). Examples for morphophonemic substitutions: The general rule ho haḤ 8.2.31 'h > h before jhal (T.T. 103) and at the end of a word' is supplemented by a few specific rules beginning with da:der dha:tor ghaḤ 8.2.32 'the h of a root beginning with d is substituted by gh (under the same conditions)'. In a root like dah- 'to burn' which begins with d, the h will be substituted by gh and not by h and h > h obtains only in the cases not covered by the specific rules, for example, in lih- 'to lick' (see note 41). In the finite verbs, er uḤ 3.4.86 by which the i of the basic suffixes that are the substitutes of loṬ (§10.6.) is substituted by u is the general rule which is supplemented by two specific ones: ser hy apic ca 3.4.87 and mer niḤ 3.4.88 which teach the substitutions, 2nd sg. (P.P.) -si(p) > -hi and 1st sg. (P.P.) mi(p) > -ni respectively. Therefore, 3.4.86 will not apply to these latter cases but will apply only elsewhere. An example in the realm of technical terms is as follows. The term bham (T.T. 161) applies to a nominal stem before a nominal suffix (other than a sarvana:mastha:nam [T.T. 237]) beginning with a vowel or y (yaci bham 1.4.18). This is modified by siti ca 1.4.16 which says that before such a suffix that has s as the indicator the preceding stem is a padam (T.T. 135). The term bham will not be applicable in the latter case.

1.6.10. The morphophonemic rules occupy a large part of the AṢṬa:dhya:yi:, namely, the Adhya:yas from the 6th to the 8th. Some of them are given even in the earlier Adhya:yas along with the suffixes when they are individualistic and not amenable to any generalisation. For example, pu:takrator ai ca 4.1.36 assigns the feminine suffix -(Ṅ)i:(p) after pu:takratu- simultaneously replacing the stem final u by ai so that pu:takrata:y-i: 'wife of P.' is derived. The morphophonemic rules account for partial or complete change in the base as well as in the suffixes and for the augments that crop up between them (§1.6.8.). The aṄga:dhika:ra (§2.6.21.) is specifically devoted to the changes in the nominal stems and roots when they come into contact with specific suffixes or groups of suffixes. In morphophonemic rules, the basic form, which undergoes change, is given in the 6th case (§6.6.), the substitute or the augment in the 1st case and the conditioning factor is given in the 5th case if it precedes (§6.20) and in the 7th case if it follows (§6.19). As far as possible, the rules are framed so as to bring out the similarity in the behaviour of sounds that form a natural class; the pratya:ha:ra su:tras (see Chapter 3) have been designed only for this purpose. The allomorphic variations are normally accounted for by changes in some of the sounds of the basic form; where this is not feasible, the entire basic form is replaced by a new one. While the substitution of one sound for another is the norm, there are cases in which a single sound occupies the place of two successive sounds; the latter are given in the single substitute section (6.1.84. - .111, §2.6.5.). There are certain su:tras like ho haḤ 8.2.31 (see note 41) which directly replace one sound by another. But usually Pa:ṇini captures the generalisations involved in changes of similar sounds by stating changes in features utilising the concepts of sa:varṇya 'phonetic similarity' (T.T. 238) and a:ntaratamya 'maximum similarity' (see §6.7.). For example, jhayo ho' nyatarasya:m 8.4.62. provides for the optional substitution of h after jhay 'a non-nasal stop' (T.T. 101) by a sound similar to the preceding stop, e.g. va:g hita: > (optional) va:g ghita: 'nice word', Ṣa hala:ni > (optional) Ṣa

hala:ni 'six ploughs' tad hi > (optional) tad dhi 'that surely'. Here the sa:varṇya principle says that h should be replaced by a velar after a velar, by a retroflex after a retroflex and so on. The a:ntaratamya principle decides which one among the sounds of a series should be selected. Since h has the phonetic features ghoṢavat 'voiced' and maha:pra:ṇa 'aspirated', that sound is chosen which also has these features so that the final choice is limited uniquely to the voiced aspirate (gh, jh, etc.) of each of the series.

1.6.11. The presentation of the su:tras in a particular order in certain sections of the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: is one of the features of that work that have won the appreciation of linguists. The correct forms are derived only when one keeps in mind the implications of such an ordering in applying the rules. The sections in which the su:tras are purposely arranged in the particular order in which they occur are (i) the ekasa·jña:dhika:ra (§2.1.6.), and (ii) the Tripa:di: (§2.8.3., T.T. 116). The ekasa·jña:dhika:ra is controlled by the metarule, vipratiṢedhe param ka:ryam 1.4.2. so that, in cases of conflict, the technical term assigned by a later rule supercedes the one assigned by an earlier one (for further discussion and examples, see §6.30.). Here it may be noted in passing that ordering is significant also in the pratya:ha:ra su:tras (Chapter 3), and in listing the sup (T.T. 241) and the tiṄ suffixes (T.T. 113), nominal stems in the Gaṇapa:Ṭha and roots in the Dha:tupa:Ṭha. The ordering followed in arranging the 14 pratya:ha:ra su:tras and in listing the sounds in each one of them cannot be changed since any such change will lead to wrong interpretation of the terms coined on the basis of them. The order of items even in the Gaṇapa:Ṭha and the Dha:tupa:Ṭha in some instances is very crucial. For example, certain items within the sarvana:magaṇa (T.T. 236) are referred to as tyada:di 'items beginning with tyad-' (see tyada:di:na:m aḤ 7.2.102, etc.); it is clear that the items that come under the latter group should be kept apart from those that do not by strictly retaining the order. Similarly in the Dha:tupa:Ṭha also, order is important not only in the arrangement of roots in the ten classes but also in cases involving smaller groups like 'the four roots beginning with vṛt-' referred to in the su:tras (see na vṛdbhyaś caturbhyaḤ 7.2.59.).

1.6.12. As stipulated by pu:rvatra:siddham 8.2.1., a su:tra of the Tripa:di: section is not ready (asiddham) for the operation of a su:tra of the first seven Adhya:yas or that of the first Pa:da of the eighth Adhya:ya (sapa:dasapta:dhya:yi:m prati tripa:dy asiddha:); similarly, even in the Tripa:di: section, a later su:tra is not ready for the operation of an earlier one (tripa:dya:m api pu:rvam prati param śa:stram asiddham). What this means is that in a derivation, if a su:tra of the Tripa:di: is applied, we should not apply on the product of the former any su:tra that is earlier to it even if the conditions for the application of the latter are present. This is a classic case of 'rule ordering' which occupies an important place in modern linguistics (see Kiparsky 1982:77-120). The asiddha device is employed by Pa:ṇini in three places; the other two su:tras in which the term is used are Ṣatvatukor asiddhaḤ 6.1.86 (§1.6.13.) and asiddhavad atra:bha:t 6.4.22. (§1.6.14.). As explained by Ka:tya:yana (Ṣatvatukor asiddhavacanam a:deśalakṢaṇa-pratiṢedha:rtham utsargalakṢaṇabha:va:rtham ca, va:rttika 1 under 6.1. 86, Maha:bha:Ṣya [Kielhorn III:65]), the asiddha device is useful in two ways: it (i) prevents a substitute from causing a change (a:deśalakṢaṇa-pratiṢedha:rtham), and (ii) allows a change caused by the underlying form even when the latter had undergone substitution by something else (utsargalakṢaṇabha:va:rtham). The asiddha restriction imposed only on the su:tras of some parts of the grammar indicates that in general there are no order restrictions on the operation of the su:tras in the grammar. In other words, we can say that the general principle sarvatra siddham (not explicitly stated but presupposed by pu:rvatra:siddham 8.2.1. and the other two su:tras which use the asiddha principle) holds good in

the entire grammar barring the places where such a restriction is imposed (see Kiparsky 1982:79). This means that, in general, one su:tra can operate on the product of another one in a derivation if the conditioning for the former is satisfied irrespective of the relative positioning of them in the grammar. Examples for the asiddha principle:

(i) asmai 'for him' + uddhara 'lift!' > asma:y uddhara (ai > a:y by eco' yava:ya:vaḤ 6.1.78 [App.I:6]) > asma: uddhara (y > Ø optionally by lopaḤ śa:kalyasya 8.3.19 [§1.2.7.(viii) (c)]). On this a:d guṇaḤ 6.1.87 (App.I:7) could have operated (resulting in a: + u > o ) but this is prevented since 8.3.19 that causes the deletion of y is a Tripa:di: su:tra and hence is asiddha (considered not to have operated) with respect to 6.1.87 which is a non-Tripa:di: su:tra. In other words, because of pu:rvatra:siddham 8.2.1., the deleted y between a: and u is considered to be present for the operation of 6.1.87, which, as a result, cannot operate.

(ii) asau 'he' + a:dityaḤ 'sun' > asa:v a:dityaḤ (au > a:v by eco' yava:ya:vaḤ 6.1.78) > asa: a:dityaḤ (v > Ø optionally by lopaḤ śa:kalyasya 8.3.19 [§1.2.7.(viii) (c)]). On the product of this Tripa:di: su:tra, akaḤ savarṇe di:rghaḤ 6.1.101 ([App.I:10], which is a non-Tripa:di: su:tra), could have operated (resulting in a: + a: > a:) but this is prevented by 8.2.1. as explained under example (i).

(iii) ra:jan-bhis 'by the kings' > ra:ja-bhis (n > Ø by nalopaḤ pra:tipadika:ntasya 8.2.7. [App.I:28]) > ra:ja-bhiḤ. Since the stem after the deletion of n ends in a, ato bhisa ais 7.1.9.(§9.7.1.) could have operated on this (resulting in -bhis > -ais) but this does not happen since 8.2.7. that deletes the n is a Tripa:di: su:tra and 7.1.9., which is a non-Tripa:di: su:tra, cannot operate on the product of the former.

(iv) suparvan-au 'two gods' > suparvaṇ-au (n > ṇ by aṬkupva:Ṅnumvyava:ye' pi 8.4.2. [App. I:29]) > suparva:ṇ-au (a > a: by sarvana:mastha:ne ca:sa·buddhau 6.4.8. [§9.3.1.]). But for 8.2.1., 6.4.8. could not have operated in this derivation since according to the latter the vowel that precedes a stem final n (but not ṇ) is lengthened and n had already been converted to ṇ by 8.4.2. 8.2.1. ensures that the change n > ṇ is ignored for the operation of 6.4.8. The last example is an instance for utsarga-lakṢaṇabha:va:rtham and the earlier three for a:deśalakṢaṇapratiṢedha:rtham (note that Ø is the a:deśaḤ for y/v/n in the above examples).

1.6.13. Ṣatvatukor asiddhaḤ 6.1.86 'the single substitute (taught in the section 6.1.84. - 6.1.111. [§2.6.5.]) is not ready (asiddha) for the change s > Ṣ and for the addition of the augment t(uk)' uses the asiddha device to prevent the change of s > Ṣ on the one hand and to ensure the addition of the t(uk) augment on the other. An example for the non-operation of s > Ṣ: In ko' siñcat (here as in such other cases ' has no phonetic value) derived from kas 'who' + asiñcat 'sprinkled' ( >> ko + asiñcat > ko' siñcat), o + a is replaced by the single substitute o by eṄaḤ pada:nta:d ati 6.1.109 'the first sound is the single substitute for word-final e/o + a (short)'. Now, since o comes under the iṇ (T.T. 46) group, there is a possibility of s to change to Ṣ by a:deśapratyayayoḤ 8.3.59. 'the s which is a substitute or belongs to a suffix is substituted by Ṣ after iṇ (T.T. 46) or a sound of the k series'.xv But this is prevented by 6.1.86, which makes the single substitute, o, non-existent. 8.3.59. cannot apply since the sequence here has to be taken as oas and not as os. An example for the addition of the t(uk) augment: In adhi:tya 'having studied' (< adhi + i-(l)ya(p) [i- 'to go']), t(uk) cannot be added to i- since i + i > i: by akaḤ savarṇe di:rghaḤ 6.1.101. (App.I:10) and the su:tra that assigns t(uk) stipulates that the vowel should be short (hrasvasya piti kṛti tuk 6.1.71. [§1.6.5.]). But, by virtue of 6.1.86., the single substitute i: is considered not to have come into existence and consequently the way is cleared for the addition of the t(uk) augment.

1.6.14. asiddhavad atra:bha:t 6.4.22 also stipulates that the asiddha principle holds good between two su:tras of the section called A:bhi:yaprakaraṇa (i.e. 6.4.22. - 6.4.175. [§2.6.22]). Examples:

(i) e-dhi 'Be!' is the imperative 2nd sg. (see §10.6.) of as- 'to be'; in this, as-hi > ae-hi (s > e by ghvasor ed dha:v abhya:salopaś ca 6.4.119. 'the final sound of the ghu (T.T. 91) roots and of as- is substituted by e before 2nd sg. -hi and the reduplicated syllable is deleted') > e-hi (a > Ø by snasor allopaḤ 6.4.111 'the a of the class sign -(ś)na(m)- and of as- is deleted before a sa:rvadha:tuka (T.T. 239) k-it or Ṅ-it suffix') > e-dhi (-hi > -dhi by hujhalbhyo her dhiḤ 6.4.101 '-hi > -dhi after hu- "to sacrifice" and a root ending in jhal (T.T. 103)'). Because of 6.4.22, the e substitute (caused by 6.4.119) is non-existent for the operation of 6.4.101 and the root is considered to be still ending in s, which is a jhal sound.

(ii) śa:-dhi 'Rule!' is the imperative 2nd sg. form of śa:s- 'to rule'. śa:s-hi > śa:-hi (śa:s- > śa:- by śa: hau 6.4.35) > śa:-dhi (-hi > -dhi by hujhalbhyo her dhiḤ 6.4.101; see example (i)). Because of 6.4.22, the s that disappeared is considered to be present for the substitution in the suffix which depends upon a preceding jhal consonant.

(iii) ja-hi 'Kill!' is the imperative 2nd sg. form of han- 'to kill'. han-hi > ja-hi (han- > ja- by hanter jaḤ 6.4.36 'han- > ja- before -hi'). In this form, ato heḤ 6.4.105 '-hi > Ø after a stem ending in a short a' could operate since -hi occurs after a short a but because of 6.4.22 the substitution han- > ja- caused by 6.4.36 is considered not to have taken place with respect to 6.4.105 and, as a consequence, -hi is not deleted.The change effected by one su:tra of this section is considered to be non-existent only with respect to another su:tra of this section but not with respect to a su:tra that is outside this section. For example, the nasal of rañj- 'to be dyed' is deleted by a su:tra of this section, i.e. ghañi ca 6.4.27, and this holds good for the following su:tra which does not belong to this section: ata upadha:ya:Ḥ 7.2.116 [App.I:19] according to which the penultimate (short) a of the stem undergoes vṛddhi before a ñ-it or ṇ-it suffix. As a result, the penultimate a changes to a: in ra:g-a 'dye' (with -(gh)a(ñ) ). If ñ were considered to be present, a in the above root will not be the penultimate and, as such, could not have undergone the change prescribed by 7.2.116.

i Cf. 'Indo-European comparative grammar had (and has) at its service only one complete description of a language, the grammar of Pa:ṇini. For all other Indo-European languages it had only the traditional grammars of Greek and Latin, wofully incomplete and unsystematic.' (Bloomfield 1929:270).

'… this grammar describes the entire Sanskrit language in all the details of its structure, with a completeness which has never been equalled elsewhere. It is at once the shortest and the fullest grammar in the world.' (Macdonell 1971:xi)

'We shall see below that the people of India, aided by the great clearness of their language, had carried very far the analysis of the component parts of a word which convey meaning, and the investigation of word-formation. But Greek and Latin were far from the transparency of Sanskrit, and the Greeks and Romans did not attain anything like the Indian mastery of word-analysis.' (Pedersen 1967:3)

'The Indian grammatical tradition is not only independent of the Greco-Roman but also earlier, more diverse in its manifestations and in some respects superior in its achievements.' (Lyons 1968:19)

'Pa:ṇini's grammar of Sanskrit has frequently been described, from the point of view of its exhaustiveness (within the limits which it sets itself, i.e. mainly with regard to the structure of words), its internal consistency and its economy of statement, as far superior to any grammar of any language yet written.' (Lyons 1968:20.)

Also see note 10.

ii Scholars like Whitney and Pedersen maintained that Sir William Jones was aided in his discovery of genetic relationship between Sanskrit on the one hand and Greek, Latin (and some others) on the other by the 'peculiar structural clarity' of the Sanskrit language (Rocher 1975:4). However, Emeneau (1955:149) has rightly pointed out that Sanskrit is inherently no more transparent in structure than Greek or Latin but Pa:ṇini's analysis of that language made it appear to be so. Master's doubts (1956:187) whether Sir William Jones had access to Pa:ṇini's grammar are unfounded since, as later clarified by Emeneau (1971:960), even if Jones had atually studied only a later grammar (the Siddha:ntakaumudi: (§1.4.7) or the Mugdhabodha) it still is a representative of the Pa:ṇinian system. The latter work by Bopadeva (13th century A.D.) is a simplified version of the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: with changes in the wording of the su:tras (see Belvalkar 1976:87ff.).

iii Cf. 'First of all, the importance of the great grammarian is considerable, due to the synchronic view which he gives of the language of his time and due to the method which he uses in the description of this language. This method is in certain respects archaic, but often surprisingly modern, and always precise and rigorous. Furthermore, the technique of Pa:ṇini (and his school) is of interest for those who are working toward an axiomatization of grammar; in this respect Pa:ṇini's grammar represents a model that has no equal in antiquity.' (Renou 1969:481).

iv In his 1957 article (p.263), Thieme made another controversial statement questioning Bloomfield's view that the AṢṬa:dhya:yi: is a 'perfect description of a language'. Strangely enough, he went to the extent of claiming that it should not be called a 'grammar' at all: 'When speaking of Pa:ṇini's work … as a 'grammar', we are actually committing a little inaccuracy… it is imperfect as a full description of speech usage. Pa:ṇini's work is exclusively concerned with defining (lakṢaya-) the procedures of regular word-formation (sa·ska:ra) --- anything else does not fall within its scope; it is dealt with either sweepingly, as for example the unanalysable nominal stems (3.3.1. uṇa:dayo bahulam), or not at all. There are, for example, no rules concerning word order, no rules concerning gender unless it is a function of a particular suffix. There is no phonetic instruction.' A little reflection would reveal that the reasons adduced by Thieme in support of his view are extremely weak. No grammar can be expected to contain a list of unanalysable nominal stems with specification of their gender; it is only the lexicon that should contain them. Pa:ṇini has listed some of such stems in the Gaṇapa:Ṭha when they show some grammatical peculiarity or other. Regarding phonetics, Pa:ṇini used the phonetic theory in his grammar (as in tulya:syaprayatnam savarṇam 1.1.9. [T.T. 238]) expecting his students to know the details from the öikṢas and Pra:tiśa:khyas; it is clear form this that Pa:ṇini considered phonetics as a discipline that is allied to but still different from grammar. He even stated the positional variants (allophones) of the basic sounds (phonemes). Since there is no fixed order in Sanskrit for the occurrence of the subject, verb and the object nor for that of the adjective and the noun in a sentence, Pa:ṇini cannot be blamed for not giving any rules in this regard. However, it is not true to say that there are no rules at all concerning word order as can be understood from the following examples: (i) The position of a preverb (T.T. 58) and a gati word (T.T. 85) with respect to a verb in a sentence is mentioned (te pra:g dha:toḤ 1.4.80 'they occur before a root', chandasi pare' pi 1.4.81 'in the Veda, they occur even after it', vyavahita:ś ca 1.4.82 'in the Veda, they occur also separated from it'). (ii) In kṛñ ca:nuprayujyate liṬi 3.1.40 the perfect forms of kṛ(ñ)- 'to do' are declared to be added after (anuprayujyate; but not before) the root of the main verb with the suffix -a:m (see §10.2.3.). (iii) kaṢa:diṢu yatha:vidhy anuprayogaḤ 3.4.46 stipulates that in the case of a primary derivative form with the -(ṇ)am(ul) suffix derived by the su:tras 3.4.34 to 3.4.45 a verb from the same root to which the above suffix is added follows it,

e.g. samu:laka:Ṣ-am kaṢati 'plucks out withroots'. (iv) yatha:vidhy anuprayogaḤ pu:rvasmin 3.4.4 ensures that im examples like luni:hi luni:hi + ity eva + ayam luna:ti 'cuts vigorously (lit., saying 'cut!', 'cut!')' the verb from the same root from which the repeated imperative is formed follows it. It is unfortunate that this ill-considered criticism of Thieme is highlighted by Robins (1967:144): '… it is not what would ordinarily be called a complete grammar of the Sanskrit language.'.

v The following statement of Kiparsky (1982:1) is representative of this view: 'Pa:ṇini's grammar of Sanskrit has been appreciated for its morphology and phonology ever since it became known in the West, but it was not fully realized until recently that it also includes a detailed and interesting treatment of syntax.'

vi The Nya:sa commentary under na pada:nta… 1.1.58 (§6.15): kim punar idam ra:jaśa:sanam --- padasa·ska:ra:yaiva śabda:nuśa:sanam kartavyam iti? atha śa:straka:rasyaiva + ayam abhipra:ya iti cet, na. śa:straka:reṇa hi "yuṢmady upapade sama:na:dhikaraṇe stha:niny api madhyamaḤ" iti yuṢmada:dyupapade madhyama:di-puruṢavidha:na:d va:kyasa·ska:raprayuktam api śa:stram etad iti su:citam. 'Is it a royal command that a grammar must be written only to account for words? If it is said that this is the opinion of the author (i.e. Pa:ṇini) himself, it is not so. By assigning second person (verbal) suffixes when the sentence contains a second person pronoun (in yuṢmady upapade… 1.4.105 [§10.0.7]) and similarly other personal suffixes, it was indicated by the author himself that the purpose of the grammar was also the correctness of sentences.'

vii There are only six su:tras that deal with phonetic details in the entire work. One of them, namely, mukhana:sika:vacano' nuna:sikaḤ 1.1.8 defines the term anuna:sika (T.T. 10). Another one, u:ka:lo' j jhrasvadi:rghaplutaḤ 1.2.27 defines the terms hrasvaḤ (T.T. 252), di:rghaḤ (T.T. 118) and plutaḤ (T.T. 155). The remaining four su:tras define the three accents: uccair uda:ttaḤ 1.2.29 (T.T. 53), ni:cair anuda:ttaḤ 1.2.30 (T.T.9), sama:ha:raḤ svaritaḤ 1.2.31 and tasya:dita …1.2.32 (T.T. 249).

viii Cf. the vṛttis 'expansions' provided by the commentators for the su:tra, hetumati ca 3.1.26: (Ka:śika:) preṢaṇa:dilakṢaṇo hetuma:n, tasminn abhidheye dha:tor ṇic pratyayo bhavati 'hetumat- means "causatioṇ and the like"; when that is to be expressed, -(ṇ)i(c)- suffix occurs after the root'; (Siddha:ntakaumudi:) prayojakavya:pa:re preṢaṇa:dau va:cye dha:tor ṇic sya:t.

ix The peculiarities of a stem ending in -a:(p) in inflection are the following: (i) deletion of 1st sg. -s(u), (ii) 1st & 2nd du. -au > -(ś)i:, (iii) a: > e before 3rd sg. -(Ṭ)a:, 6th & 7th du. -os and vocative sg. -s(u), (iv) addition of augment ya:(Ṭ) to a -Ṅ-it suffix (if, however, the stem is a pronoun, the augment is sya:(Ṭ) ), (v) addition of augment n(uṬ) to 6th pl. -a:m (but the augment is s(uṬ) if the stem is a pronoun), and (vi) 7th sg. -(Ṅ)i > -a:m ( (v) and (vi) are found also after other feminine stems called nadi: (T.T. 124) and some individual stems).

xThe distinction pronominal versus non-pronominal in the case of stems ending in (a short) a is required to account for the variations in five case suffixes as shown below (a stem ending in a is either masculine or neuter; the difference counts only in the case of 1st and 2nd cases).

After a pronominal stem After a non-pronominal stem

1st pl. -(j)as > -(ś)i: (a + i: > e) (a + as >) a:s4th sg. -(Ṅ)e > -smai > -ya5th sg. -(Ṅ)as > -sma:t > -a:t6th pl. -a:m augment s(uṬ) (plus a > e) augment n(uṬ) (plus a > a:)7th sg. -(Ṅ)i > -smin (a + i >) e

xiAn example for 8.3.13 is li:ha- 'that which is licked' (from the root lih- 'to lick') derived as follows: lih-(k)ta- > lih-ta- (h > h by ho haḤ 8.2.31 'h > h before jhal (T.T. 103) and at the end of a word') > li

h-dha- (t > dh by jhaṢas tathor dho' dhaḤ 8.2.40 't/th > dh after jhaṢ (T.T. 105) but this will not operate in the case of dha:- 'to bear' ') > lih-ha- (dh > h by ṢṬuna: ṢṬuḤ 8.4.41 [App. I:38]) > li-ha- (h > Ø by 8.3.13) > li:-ha- (i > i: by hralope pu:rvasya di:rgho' ṇaḤ 6.3.111 'the aṇ (T.T. 6) vowel that precedes the deleted h/r is lengthened'). An example for 8.3.14 is hari: ra:jate 'Hari thrives' from hari-s(u) + ra:jate > hari-r(u) ra:jate (s > r(u) by sasajuṢo ruḤ 8.2.66. [App. I:31]) > hari ra:jate (r > Ø by 8.3.14) > hari: ra:jate (i > i: by hralope … 6.3.111).

xiiIn a few cases like the following (both of which are from the Vedic dialect), Pa:ṇini treated the extra phonological material that is found optionally at the end of a suffix as augment. (i) as(uk) added optionally to 1st pl. -(j)as after a stem ending in a/a: (e.g. deva-(j)asas(uk) >> deva:saḤ 'gods' besides deva:Ḥ, a:j jaser asuk 7.1.50). (ii) ya(k) added optionally to the gerundial suffix -(k)tva: as in da-tva:ya 'having given' besides da-tva: (ktvo yak 7.1.47).

xiiiThis has been noted by Patañjali (Maha:bha:Ṣya, Paspaśa:hnika [Kielhorn I:6]): kiñcit sa:ma:nyaviśeṢaval lakṢaṇam pravartyam yena:lpena yatnena mahato mahataḤ śabdaugha:n pratipadyeran.. kim punas tat? utsarga:pava:dau. kaścid utsargaḤ kartavyaḤ kaścid apava:daḤ.. kathamja:ti:yakaḤ punar utsargaḤ kartavyaḤ katham-ja:ti:yako' pava:daḤ? sa:ma:nyenotsargaḤ kartavyaḤ. tad yatha:. karmaṇy aṇ (3.2.1.). tasya viśeṢeṇa:pava:daḤ. tad yatha:. a:to' nupasarge kaḤ (3.2.3.). 'The grammar that has general and specific rules should be composed so that large numbers of words can be obtained with a minimum of effort. What is it? General rules and exceptions. One should be framed as the general rule and another as an exception. Then, what type should be made the general one and what type the exception? The general rule must be made to contain no restriction. It is as follows: karmaṇy aṇ. The exception rule must be made with a restriction. It is as follows: a:to' nupasarge kaḤ' (for meaning and examples, see §1.6.9.).

xivSee also the Maha:bha:Ṣya (under kartari kṛt 3.4.67 [Kielhorn II:178]): eṢa eva nya:yo yad uta:pava:dair utsarga: ba:dhyeran 'it alone is the convention that general rules are superceded by specific rules'.

xvNote that the root in asiñcat is given as Ṣic- in the Dha:tupa:Ṭha. Ṣ > s by dha:tva:deḤ ṢaḤ saḤ 6.1.64. 'the Ṣ at the beginning of a root is substituted by s'. The s, therefore, is a substitute.