39 Joining (sandhi) of diphthongs (eC): Section 2 of the Laghu-Siddhanta-Kaumudi (contd.)

After dealing with the sandhi of vowels, the Laghu Siddhanta-Kaumudi proceeds further with diphthongs:

Laghu 29. Eco ‘yavāyāvaḥ (Panini 6.1.78)

This actually follows right after 6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci, which we saw earlier (“the semi-vowels yaṇ= y, v, r, l substitute for the corresponding vowels iK= i, u, ṛ, ḷ (long and short), when follwed by a vowel aC”). The first term in 6.1.78, eco = ecaḥ, in genitive case singular (6/1); it denotes the entity which is being replaced, i.e. the substituend. It refers to the sounds contained in the pratyāhāra eC, or Siva-sutras 7 and 8: e, o, ai, au (what are called diphthongs in English grammar). The entity which replaces, the substitute, is the set of sounds listed in the sutra: ay, av, āy, āv (the whole collectively given a plural ending).

We have to understand carry-over by anuvṛtti of the word aci (7/1) from the preceding sutra; that is, in the environment of a following aC (vowel), the respective substitutions are made. Examples for the addition of suffixes:

Ce + ana = cayana(ṃ)
Lo + ana = lavana(ṃ)
Lau + aka = lāvaka(ḥ)

The Laghu interposes a meta-rule to control the substitution among the two sets (eC and ay-av-āy-āv):

Laghu 30. Yathā saṃkhyam anudeṣaḥ samānām (Panini 1.3.10)

The paraphrase: Yathā saṃkhyam (0, indeclinable= ‘as the number’) anudeṣaḥ (nominative singular 1/1 = ‘assiignment’) samānām (genitive pluural 6/1 = ‘of the same, similar’). Or,
“Assignment of equivalents for equal numbers of elements follows the order of enumeration” (Sharma).

In other words, assignment from one list (the substituends) to another (the substitutes) of equal number of elements, is done by matching their numerical or ordinal positions: the first with the first, etc. Here, it matches the elements ay with e, av with o, āy with ai, and āv with au.

More examples (from the Laghu):
Hare + e = haraye ‘to Hari’
viṣṇo + e = viṣṇave ‘to Vishnu’
nai + aka = nāyaka ‘leader’
pau + aka = pāvaka ‘purifier; fire’

As we can appreciate, the S-K brings together the relevant sutras where it will add to clarity; we can then begin to develop our awareness of how the different parts of the grammar hang together right from the initial stages. Here, a sutra from Book 6 is being elucidated with another from Book 1, Chapter 3.

The next succeeding sutra from Panini is also given in the Laghu:

Laghu 30. Vānto yi pratyaye (Panini 6.1.79)

The item denoted by vānto = va-antaḥ are those ending in –v, i.e. av and  āv. “The substitution of” is to be understood. The word pratyaye (‘affix’, locative case), being in locative case (7/1), denotes the right-context in which the substitution takes place; the qualifier yi denotes an affix starting with the sound y. The sutra means:
“The substitution by v-final items (i.e. av and āv) of o and au [to be understood by carry-over], when followed by a y-initial affix (an affix beginning with the letter y).

That is, the substitutions come into operation not only when a vowel or diphthong follows, but also when a y- sound follows. Examples:

Go + yam = gavyam ‘pertaining to cow’
Nau + yam = nāvyam ‘pertaining to boat’

Vasu (p.1075) helpfully throws further light on the conditions required:
1) it happens only with av and āv, which means to the sounds o and au, and not to e and ai;
2) the succeeding affix has to start with y-, so the substitution does not take place in forms like gobhyām, where the affix does not have a y-;
3) the following element has to be an affix. However, there is one exception which is illustrated by the commentator, in the vārttika; this is in words referring to distance measures,

adhva parimāṇe ca
‘And in distance measures’

go + yũti = gavyũti, ‘a distance of about four miles’; here the substitution by av has taken place, even though yũti is not an affix.

It happens in the Vedas; in normal parlance, we use goyũti.

38 Vowel joining (ac-sandhi)-II: Section 2 of the Laghu-Siddhanta-Kaumudi

Proceeding further with the Laghu S-K, we come to this seemingly connected sutra, which actually introduces a totally new concept:

Laghu 24. Anaci ca (Panini 8.4.47)

It looks connected because of the ca ‘and, also’, which makes it look like a continuation of a preceding chin of thought (calling for us to furnish the missing words from preceding sutras by anuvṛtti (ellipsis). We will be right in thinking so, but the preceding sutra from which the missing words need to be brought in, is not that in the Laghu, but that in the panini sutras:

Panini 8.4.46. aco rahābhyām dve
The words are:
Acah (genitive case, ‘of the vowels aC’) dve (‘two, reduplication’) rahābhyām (ablative case dual number, ‘from the r and h sounds’)

We may note here the use of the ablative case (rahābhyām) denotes something to be done to the right, i.e. to a following entity (Panini 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya, see previous post here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2016/06/37-vowel-joining-ac-sandhi-i-section-2.html).

Even this, however, requires completion by bringing in words from previous sutras:

anuvṛtti: samhitāyām (from 8.2.108, ‘in samhitā = close proximity, contact) yarah (from 8.4.45, ‘of a sound denoted by yaR’), vā (‘optionally’).

The yaR sounds, as per the siva-sutras, comprise of all the consonants from the ya of siva-sutra 5, to the sa of no.13: it omits only the consonant ha. (R stands for the end-marker, so we do not stop at the ra of siva-sutra no.5 itself). The whole thing is rendered thusly by Sharma:
“A sound denoted by the abbreviatory term yaR, when occurring in close proximity after a vowel followed by r and h, is optionally replaced with two” (Sharma, Vol.VI, p.771).

In a nutshell, where a vowel followed by r or h, is again followed by any consonant (except h), it results (optionally) in duplication; but of what? The accepted interpretation is: of the consonant (except the h sound). Thus, we get (Sharma, ibid.)

Arkkah
Markkah
Brahmmā
Apahnnute

Having retraced this from the Panini, we can now get back to the Laghu:

Laghu 24. Anaci ca (Panini 8.4.47)

This sutra follows immediately upon 8.4.86 aco rahābhyām dve. Thus it is assumed to continue the idea of reduplication (dve).

An-aci (locative case, ‘in [the context of] a non-vowel’) ca (‘also’)

We have to supply the following by anuvṛtti (ellipsis): samhitāyām (from 8.2.108, ‘in samhitā = close proximity, contact) yarah (from 8.4.45, ‘of a sound denoted by yaR’), vā (‘optionally’), aco dve (from 46). The paraphrase (vṛtti) is as follows:

Acah uttarasya yaro dve bhavatah anaci paratah
“A sound denoted by yaR” [that is, all the consonants except h] “and occurring after one denoted by aC” [a vowel or diphthong] “is, optionally, replaced with two, even when aC does not follow” ((Sharma).

A consonant (except h) coming immediately after a vowel is reduplicated:

Daddhy atra ‘milk here’ [from dadhi atra]
Maddhv atra ‘honey here’ [from madhu atra]

We notice that in both these examples, the reduplicationn of the aspirated dh has resulted in the first being reduced to the unaspirated:  -ddh- instead of –dhdh-. This is, actually, explicitly covered by a subsequent sutra:

Laghu 25: jhalām jaś jhaśi (Panini 8.4.53)

This beautifully alliterative aphorism says that:

jhalām (genitive case, ‘[in place] of jhaL = consonants in pratyahara jhaL from jha to ha ‘) jaŚ (‘sounds represented by pratyahara jaŚ =  j, b, g, ḑ and d’) jhaśi (‘in [the presence of] the sounds represented by pratyahara jhaŚ’).

To correctly interpret the three words with their case endings, we have, of course, to recall the meta-rules for genitive case (sixth case) (ṣaṣṭhī sthāne yogā) and locative (seventh) case (tasminniti) already covered. Where a jhaŚ follows, a jhaL is replaced by a jaŚ. This implies that the first of a pair would be de-aspirated:

Labdha (not labhdha)
Dogdhā (not doghdhā
Boddha (not bodhdha)

This is obviously the result of a natural propensity in articulation (aspiration cannot be articulated without an intervening vowel sound, however tiny, between the two consonants), and also demonstrates the extremely close attention paid by the grammarians.

In the example given for a previous sutra:

sudhī (‘the intelligent’) upāsya (‘to be worshipped’) = sudhyupāsya (‘the intelligent fit to be worshipped, or God’.

We are now told that the we can optionally derive

Sudhdhyupāsya or suddhyupāsya

By the optional reduplication. Panini feels that this does not reflect the actual practice, so he provides the rule

Laghu 26. Samyogāntasya lopah (Panini 5.2.23)

Samyoga- (‘conjunction of consonants’) –antasya (genitive, ‘of its ending’) lopah (‘elision, deletion’)

The last element in a combination of consonants (without any inter-vocalic) is to be elided. The commentary interprets this as saying that the entire pada is to be deleted:

Laghu vŗtti: Samyogāntam yat padam tadantasya lopah syāt

Obviously this will a drastic, and counter-productive, culmination. (Actually, one does not see why the rule should be interpreted in such a drastic manner). In the example of

suddhyupāsya
 the laghu feels that the “pada suddhy- ends with a compound consonant; hence, according to the rule, the whole padsa ought to disappear”. However, the grammarian provides the following rule to limit this action:

Laghu 27. Alo’ntyasya (Panini 1.1.52)

We have already come across this one (here: http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2015/11/26-further-rules-on-substitution.html). This says that a substitution ordered for any letter aL (by showing it in the genitive case, aLah), only acts on the final letter (antya). Thus any elision in suddhy- will operate only on the –y-, which would presumably yield suddh-upāsya. But here “Katyayana interferes”, and states:

Lagu 28. Yaņah pratişedho vācyah

“The prohibition of the rule (No.26) in the case of yaŅ should be stated” (Ballantyne, p.11). So “the elision does not take place, and the formation of the word suddhyupāsya (a name of God – ‘He who is to be worshipped by the intelligent’) is completed” (ibid).


In broad terms, we see that the S-K (and more so the Laghu) does not always provide all the links in the logical chains. We may have to bring in additional material from the full version. In this context, the S-K or Laghu S-K may be thought of more as an aid to memory, by citing key formulas. These are like triggers to bring up the fuller logical trains from the Astadhyayi.

37 Vowel joining (ac-sandhi)-I: Section 2 of the Laghu-Siddhanta-Kaumudi

As I said before, the advantage in following a rearranged version of Panini’s grammar, such as the Siddhanta-Kaumudi or its Lite version, the Laghu-S-K, is that it takes us rapidly into the bowels of the system, as related sutras which may be far apart in the original, are brought together according to the topic under discussion. There are some differences even between Varadaraja’s Laghu and its mentor, the S-K of Bhattoji Dikshita, which I will explain later; for the present, I will follow the Laghu.

The last two posts covered the first section of the Laghu, that to do with defining terms (saṃjñā), with a number of sutras drawn from the first quarter (pāda) of Panini’s first Book (adhyāya), and a few besides from other pāda-s. Now the second section of the Laghu is captioned Ac-sandhiḩ, or Vowel-joining. However, the corresponding section in the full-length S-K is captioned Paribhāṣā-prakaraṇam. We will follow the Laghu in the first instance here.

This section starts off with

Laghu 21. Iko yaṇaci (Panini 6.1.77)

We have referred to this already in the course of Panini’s first pāda. Two issues are in consideration here: one, the import or meaning of this sutra, and the other, the specific significance of the particular case (vibhakti) endings (sUP forms), i.e. the meta-language used by Panini. We have actually already covered these topics; here’s how the Laghu S-K approaches them (Laghu 21):

ikaḥ (possessive case, of the iK = of the vowels i, u, ṛ, ḷ, and their variants) sthāne (in place) yaṇ (nominative case, the yaṆ semi-vowels =  y, v, r, l) syāt (let there be), aci (locative case, in [the presence of] the aC = the vowels) saṃhitāyām viṣaye (in the matter of saṅhitā = contact)

Ballantyne’s rendering: “Instead of a letter denoted by the pratyāhāra iK, let there be one denoted by the pratyāhāra yaṆ, in each instance where one denoted by the pratyāhāra aC immediately follows”.

That is, when one of the vowels included in the set iK is followed by any other vowel in “closest proximity” of contact called saṅhitā (see the previous post # 36, here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2016/06/36-section-i-of-laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi.html), then the first vowel is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ from the set yaṆ.

The example given is a phrase such as sudhī (‘the intelligent’) upāsya (‘to be worshipped’) = sudhyupāsya (‘the intelligent fit to be worshipped, or God’. The long –ī at the end of the first word, sudhī, is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ sound from the yaṆ set, y. It is apparent that the two sets, which have an equal number of members (four in each) are matched in the order given in the siva-sutras: i (and its variants) with y, u with v, ṛ with r, and ḷ with l. A point to note is that each member of the iK also refers to its variants (as regards length, etc.).

The second issue was to do with the meta-language of Panini. In this sutra, there is a clear application of the special sense in which the possessive case, the nominative case, and the locative case of technical terms are used. The paraphrase suggests these conventions: the possessive case denotes ‘in place OF’, the nominative case denotes the item which is used, and the locative case denotes the condition IN which the operation takes place. This special usage of technical terms is explicitly defined as follows:

Laghu 22. Tasminniti nirdişţe pūrvasya (Panini 1.1.66)

We have of course already dealt with this and other meta-rules (see Post 31 here), where we also studied Panini’s sutra 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya. Taking 1.1.66 first, Panini refers to terms in the locative case by tasmin iti, ‘in that, thusly’.  The word nirdişţe itself is in the locative case, which I rendered as ‘in the specification (that)’. Tasminniti nirdişţe  (‘given the specification in that, or a locative case ending’), pūrvasya (‘of the preceding’) (eva, ‘only’  kāryam bhavati, ‘work transpires, exists’). Sharma calls this a “right context” for the operation itself.

In our example, the presence of a vowel immediately after the iK is required for the substitution to transpire. This is denoted by aCi, locative (seventh or saptamī vibhakti) case form of aC, ‘vowels a to au’. This is what Sharma calls a “right context” for the operation on the preceding item, the iK vowel. So according to this meta-rule, a term in the locative case refers to the mandatory condition or environment that follows (is to the right of) the thing operated on in a phrase.

Ballantyne’s version: “When a term is exhibited in the seventh case, the operation directed is to be understood as affecting the state of what immediately precedes that which the term denotes”.

Admittedly, this is a convoluted sentence that most of us may find difficult to understand. A simpler way of putting it is that a term in the locative case specifies the condition or context required for a certain operation to take place on something which comes before (precedes) it. It may be noted that the meaning and terminology of the case endings are themselves laid out in some other, much later sutras (Laghu 137, to be precise, and similarly in Panini). Thus my understanding that the grammar is not really expected to be used in a linear (first to last) sequence, but in a recursive, even circular, manner. That is what pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps connotes!

The Laghu then goes on to:

Laghu 23. Sthāne antartamaḥ (Panini 1.1.50)

We have already dealt with this one too. It says that when choosing substitutes, we select the closest in place (of order in a list, or place of articulation?) to that which is replaced. A palatal y is put in place of a front vowel i, and so on, out of the two ‘matching’ sets iK and yaṆ, as already explained above.

Now the S-K brings in a number of sutras from later parts of the Panini. This is one of the benefits of following the S-K. There are of course some differences between the Laghu and the full S-K. I will take up the sutras in the Laghu in the next post. I mentioned the other similar meta-rule sutra

Panini 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya.

This is dealt with in the S-K proper in this same section, but is apparently in some other section in the Laghu (this has to be verified!). Very similarly to 1.1.66, this one (1.1.67) lays down that when a (technical) term is used in the ablative case of ‘from that’ (fifth, pañcamī, case), it denotes the condition which gives rise to an operation on a following, or later object (uttarasya kāryam bhavati). Analogously to the previous, Sharma calls this a “left context” for an operation on something to its right, i.e. later in the phrase or sequence. It denotes an ‘if-then’ conditional rule.

36 Section I of the Laghu-Siddhanta-Kaumudi. Terms (saṃjñā-prakaraņam)

Continuing with the Laghu-Siddhanta-Kaumudi, we next come upon the statement

Adarśanaṃ lopaḥ  (1.1.60)
Non-appearance is (termed) lopaḥ

(Note: I have used the symbol ṃ to represent the anusvāra, the final nasal sound, as used by standard transliterations like Sharma’s. Likewise, ḥ is used to represent the visarga, the -ha sound which echoes the vowel immediately preceding; in previous posts I was using the simpler -h,  leaving it to be understood that the –a sound was to be supplied the end).

As can be seen from the cross-reference, this is actually sutra 1.1.60 of Panini. We have already dealt with this: see Post 29 here: http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2015/11/29-reducing-element-to-zero-lopa.html. There was quite a long discussion on fifferent types of lopa (what we may equate to ‘elision’). However, the Laghu does not refer to any of this discussion, but goes on directly to:

Tasya lopaḥ  (1.3.9)

The paraphrase given in the Laghu is:
Tasyeto (tasya itaḥ, of that iT) lopaḥ (elision, deletion) syāt (let be). Ņādayo’ (Ņ  ādayaḥ, of Ņ  etc.) ‘ņādyarthāḥ (a-Ņ  ādi arthāḥ, not-Ņ etc. is the meaning, purport).

Here we have the instance of a sutra from deeper in the Panini (1.3) being pulled up to the front in the Laghu. Looking at 1.3.9, we get the actual context in which the word tasya (of that) is used: it refers to a preceding sutra,

1.3.2 upadeśe’janunāsika it
Word parsing:
Upadeśe (in the initial statement, citation), aC (vowel) anunāsika (nasalized) it (iT, marker)
‘The  nasalized vowel of an item in an original direction, upadeśa, is termed an iT’)

This feeds into the sutra 1.3.9:
Tasya lopaḥ  (1.3.9)
‘There is disappearance of that which is termed iT’.

It has to be mentioned that the sequence is different in the full Siddhanta-kaumudi, as 1.3.2 is actually presented first. But proceeding with the Laghu, the lopaḥ or ‘deletion, disappearance’ is understood to be referring to those iT (what I have been calling ‘end-markers’) in the Siva-sutras or Pratyahara (see Page here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/p/siva-sutra.html) which mark the end of each set of sounds. Thus the first set is of the short vowels

A I u Ņ
The final Ņ is the nasal sound, anunāsika, which is to be ignored, elided, as it is merely a marker, an iT. It has to be noted here that not all the iT are nasalised sunds; thus in the second pratyahara,

Ŗ ļ K
The marker is a guttaral K, not a nasal. We understand that all the end-markers are considered to be ‘disappeared’, not just the nasals.

The Laghu then cites

Ādirantyena sahetā (1.1.71)

We have already covered this in Post 32 here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2016/05/32-form-versus-meaning-what-terms.html

The word parsing is as follows:
Ādiḥ (‘initial’) antyena saha (‘with the final’) itā (iT)

This sutra was explained as follows: ‘An initial item joined with a final iT denotes not only itself but also all intervening items’. Obviously a significant component has been added to the terse statement. Thus aŅ  refers to all the items from the initial a to the final Ņ (the iT marker), which is the set a i u. Similarly aC refers to all the sounds from a to the marker C in the third siva-sutra (basically, the vowels and diphthongs a I u ŗ ļ e o ai au). It does not include the end-markers, K, Ŋ, in the intervening siva-sutras, or the final end marker C. The name of all the consonants is similarly hL, and of all the sounds, aL, as we already saw in an early post (see Page on siva-sutras).

The Laghu then goes on to a set of sutras dealing with length and tone:

Laghu 9: ūkālo’jjhrasvadīrghaplutaḥ (Panini 1.2.27)

This is another illustration of the spin-offs of following the S-K: we are taken into deeper territory, but staying on the subject of terms (definitions). This sutra is parsed as follows:

Ū- (u, ū, and ū3) kālaḥ (duration) aC (‘a vowel’) hrasva (‘short’) dīrgha (‘long’) plutaḥ (‘extra-long, prolated’)
Paraphrase:
A vowel which has the duration of one mora (measure of time), two morae, and three morae is termed (respectively) hrasva (‘short’) dīrgha (‘long’) plutaḥ (‘extra-long, prolated’)

The Laghu does not go into more detail (although Sharma has a whole page of commentary). Panini follows this with
Panini 1.2.28 acaśca
Word parsing:
aCaḥ (‘in place of a vowel’) ca (‘and, also’)
Paraphrase: A replacement which is specified by hrasva (‘short’) dīrgha (‘long’) plutaḥ (‘extra-long, prolated’) should come in place of a vowel (aC).

 The next three sutras define the three ‘tones’  (such as used especially in Vedic chanting):

Laghu 10: uccairudāttaḥ (Panini 1.2. 29)
uccaiḥ (‘with a high [pitch]’) udāttaḥ (‘udātta, high-pitched’) [and add by ellipsis, anuvŗtti: aC, ‘a vowel’]
“(A vowel) which is pronounced in a high (pitch) is termed udātta, ‘high-pitched’”

Laghu 11: nīcairanudāttaḥ (Panini 1.2. 30)
nīcaiḥ (‘with a low [pitch]’) anudāttaḥ (‘anudātta, low-pitched’) [and add by ellipsis, anuvŗtti: aC, ‘a vowel’]
“(A vowel) which is pronounced in a low (pitch) is termed anudātta, ‘low-pitched’”

Laghu 12: samāhāraḥ svaritaḥ (Panini 1.2. 31)
samāhāraḥ (‘a combination’) svaritaḥ (‘svarita’) [and add by ellipsis, anuvŗtti: aC, ‘a vowel’])
“(A vowel) which is pronounced in a combination (of high and low pitch) is termed svarita, ‘high-low-pitched’”
The term svarita connotes an articulation presenting svara, (musical) notes. If you listen to a recording of the Vedic chants (for example, Rigveda here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCQCSN38KYY). You can make out the two-note tone, actually low-high rather than high-low. It is clearest in the chanting of the actual Rig hymns, starting at 1:45 in the linked video (one of the clearer renderings I have found on the web).

Ballantyne’s translation denotes the accents as acute (high tone), grave (low tone), and circumflex (combination of high and low). In the Veda texts, they are indicated by an underline for low tone, and a small vertical line (like an apostrophe) for high (and svarita) tone.

After the tones, we have the two qualities of nasality and non-nasality:

Laghu 13: mukhanāsikāvacano’nunāsikaḥ (Panini 1.1.8)
Mukha- (‘mouth’) nāsikā- (‘nose’) vacanaḥ (‘speech’) anu-nāsikaḥ (‘through nose, nasal’)

This rule assigns the term anunāsika to nasalized speech or sounds. This multiplies by two the number of distinct sounds that can be distinguished from each of the vowels, over and above the three based on duration, the three based on tone; the total comes to 3x3x2=18 species for each of theses vowels (for example).

Then we come to certain statements about the sounds, which we have actually come across earlier:

Laghu 14:  tulyāsyaprayatnaṃ savarṇaṃ (Panini 1.1.9)

We had this in Post No.6, here: http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2011/01/6-sounds-of-colour-flock-together-in.html.  This sutra defines savarṇaṃ, ‘homogeneous, of the same type’ as those sounds that are produced with similar place of articulation  (tulyāsya) and effort (prayatnam). The S-K elaborates this at some length in Laghu 15. Thus, the throat (kaṇṭhaḥ) is specified as the place of articulation of the “guttural” sounds a, ā, k, kh, g, gh, ṅ (or ŋ, h, and the visarga ḥ (akuhavisarjanīyāni, neuter gender plural). The palate (tālu) is that of the “palatal” sounds I, ī, c, ch, j, jh, ñ, y and ś (icuyasāni); and so on. We can see here that adding the marker U to the unvoiced consonant in each series denotes all five (including the nasalized version): kU, cU, yU, pU etc.

Laghu 16 gives further technical terms (which are the pattern adopted in modern phonetics, as well). Effort (yatnah) is two-fold: within the mouth (with five sub-types touched, slightly touched, slightly open, open, and contracted), and “external as regards the mouth, belonging to the throat”.

It is in this context that the famous last, final aphorism of Panini is quoted (in the full length S-K para 11):

A a (Panini 8.4.68)
“An open (vivŗta) a is now classed as closed (saṃvŗta)” (Sharma).

Ballantyne (Laghu-S-K) explains as follows: “In actual use, the organ in the enunciation of short a is contracted; but it is considered to be open only, as in the case of the other vowels, when the vowel a is in the state of taking part in some operation of grammar. (The reason for this is, that if the short vowel a were held to differ from the long ā in this respect, the homogeneousness mentioned in No.14 would not be found to exist between them, and the operation of the rules depending upon that homogeneousness would be debarred. In order to restore the short a to its natural rights, thus infringed throughout the Ashtadhyayi, Panini with oracular brevity in his closing aphorism gives the injunction ‘a a’, which is interpreted to signify “Let short a be held to have its organ of utterance contracted, now that we have reashed the end of the work in which it was necessary to regard it as being otherwise” (Ballantyne, p.6).

That is, we process all the rules as if short a and long ā were versions of the same sound, the open variety. But in actual practice, we revert to the more closed short a in our pronunciation. (Only Hindustani singers are repeatedly cautioned not to lapse into the closed a when they do their alap!).

We remember that 1.1.9 was followed by 1.1.10

Panini 1.1.10 nājjhalau
Which is parsed as
Na (not) aC (vowels) haLau (and consonants, dual number) (and, by anuvŗtti, we add from 1.1.9: tulyāsyaprayatnaṃ savarṇaṃ)
“Sounds denoted by aC (vowels) are not termed savarņa (homogeneous) with sounds denoted by hL (consonant)” (Sharma).

Thus it is worth remembering these two sutras as a pair (they are often a question in examinations!).

Now we have another clarification:

Laghu 17: aņudit savarņasya cāpratyayaḥ (Panini 1.1.69)

We have already come across this one as well.
aņ (the pratyāhāra aŅ, that is the sounds from the first a up to the final marker or iT in siva-sutra 6, Ņ, comprising of a, I, u, ŗ, ḷ, e, o, ai, au, h, y, v, r, l), udit (ut- it) ca (and those marked by the marker U) savarņasya  (of all the homogeneous ones) a-pratyayaḥ (not a pratyaya, affix).

The first part is straight-forward: a sound from any of the aŅ, denotes not only itself but all its savarņa sounds: in the case of a vowel, a, for instance, it includes the three variations by pitch or tone (low, high, combined), the two based on nasality or absence of nasality, and three variants by duration (short, long, extra-long), totaling to 18 variants.  The second part refers to technical terms marked by the marker U: as mentioned above, kU refers to the four velar stops and velar nasal (k kh g gh ṅ). Here the variations are based on voicing, aspiration, nasality (but not duration or pitch, as there is no extended vowel sound).

The condition is that these items should themselves NOT “propounded as an affix or operative agent, but as something to be operated upon” (Ballantyne).

Two sutras which define contact:

Laghu 18:  paraḥ saṃnikarṣaḥ saṃhitā  (Panini 1.4.109)

“Maximum proximity between sounds is termed saṃhitā” (Sharma, Vol.2, p.312).

According to Sharma, the word paraḥ denotes ‘extremity’, which we can understand as ‘extreme’ closeness of touch (saṃnikarṣaḥ), interpreted by Sharma as “half a mora”. Example: between dadhi atra, a samhitā of half a mora exists, which enables other rules to be processed (6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci, giving dadhyatra ‘yogurt here’).

Laghu 19: halonantarāḥ saṃyogaḥ (Panini 1.41.7)
halaḥ (‘sequence of hL sounds, consonants’) an-antarāḥ (‘un-interrupted’) saṃyogaḥ (‘termed saṃyoga).

“A sequence of consonants (hL) uninterrupted by a vowel (aC) is termed saṃyogaḥ ‘cluster, conjuct’.” (Sharma)

The final sutra in this first section of the Laghu S-K is a new, but one which has been encountered in passing throughout Pada 1 of Adhyaya I:

Laghu 20: suptiṅantaṁ padam (Panini 1.4.14)

This introduces two very important species or terms: sup, or sUP, which denotes the forms of declined nouns (with all those case endings, rāmaḥ rāmau rāmāḥ, and so on); and tiṅ (or also transcribed as tiŋ, and pronounced somewhat like thing!), whuch is the inflected form of a verb. Now these terms can be thought of as made up of a representative ending, with an attached marker or iT: from the basic noun ending in masculine singular nominative, -aḥ or –as, with marker UP, we get sUP; from the basic verb ending in present tense, -ti, with marker Ṅ or Ŋ, we get the term tiṄ (or tiŊ). These terms stand for the endings; and the words in the sutra mean:

Sup-tiṅ-antaṁ (‘ending in sUP, noun endings, or tiŊ, verb endings’) padam (‘padam, word’)
“A form which terminates in sUP or tiŊ is termed pada” (Sharma).


Sharma has an extended discussiion why the term –antam had to be used in the sutra; otherwise, the sUP or tiŊ endings themselves would have got the nomenclature of pada, which is not the intention.

This brings us to the end of the first section of the Laghu. It may be noted that this has omitted a number of sutras that have been cited in the first section of the full S—K, culled from different places in the Ashtadhyayi: including our familiar friends 1.1.1 vŗddhir ādaiC, and 1.1.2 adeŊ guņaḥ. These will occur further on when the Laghu comes to discuss sound joins (sandhi) further ahead.

35 Starting the Siddhanta-Kaumudi

As I said before, there is an advantage in following a rearranged version of Panini’s grammar. It allows us to make entry into the operational rules quickly, as related sutras which may be far apart in the original, are brought together in many of the rearrangements, for the better guidance of the student. One such is the Siddhānta-Kaumudī of Bhattoji Dīkshita, which comes also in a ‘lite’ version, the Laghu S-K of Varadarāja. I chanced upon an old copy of the Laghu S-K in one of Bangalore’s famed used-book stores, edited and presented by James R. Ballantyne from the Benaras College, first published in 1849. It had already gone into the fourth edition by 1891, and my copy is the seventh reprint (2001) by Motilal Banarasidass Publishers, Delhi.

Explaining the need for such a work, Ballantyne quotes Colebrooke as follows: “The studied brevity of the Pāninīya sūtras renders them in the highest degree obscure”, and “with every exertion of practised memory”, the student must still experience “the utmost difficulty
 in combining rules dispersed in apparent confusion through different portions of Panini’s eight Lectures”. But the re-arrangements, while bringing together rules related to a particular inflection (derivation) of word forms, require a “commentator’s exposition” to throw light on the sutras that have been dragged out of their contexts in the original.

The Ballantyne edition does not carry any biographical details of the authors, but apparently Bhattoji Dikshita was an early 17th-century Sanskrit grammarian (see the Wiki entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bha%E1%B9%AD%E1%B9%ADoji_D%C4%ABk%E1%B9%A3ita), as was Varadaraja, his disciple (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varadar%C4%81ja).

The Laghu can be downloaded at https://archive.org/details/laghusiddhantaka014967mbp, or http://www.sanskritebooks.org/2009/04/laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi-english-translation-jr-ballantyne/ , whereas the full-length S-K can be got from http://www.sanskritebooks.org/2011/02/siddhanta-kaumudi-sanskrit-english-commentary-saradaranjan-ray-kumudranjan-ray/ , or https://archive.org/details/siddhantakaumud00agoog. One of the problems I see with these scanned versions is that the typefaces are rather indistinct. The Saradaranjan edition is a bit clearer, but the English is a bit defective; it does have a longish introductory essay and overview. One should probably  download many versions and use the best of each.

Let us get into the Lagu S—K now. The first section is called Samjñā-prakaraņam, which is about the technical terms, as we have seen in our previous discussion of the original sutras of the first pāda of the first book of Panini. First the Siva-sutra or Maheswara sutras are presented: a I u Ņ, ŗ ļ K, and so on to the last, ha L; see our PAGE here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/p/siva-sutra.html.

Laghu-1: Iti māheśwarāņi aŅ ādi samjñārthāņi
Thus the terms aŅ and so on, known as māheśwarā ‘s.

Laghu-2: Eşām antyā itah
Of these, the finals (are) iT’s

This is the denotation of the final letters of each pratyāhāra’s as an iT. In the name aŅ, the final Ņ is an iT. The name stands for the sequence or set of sounds (vowels) a i u, and so on. We called the the markers or labels, and they will reappear in other contexts (for labelling a type of grammatical form, for instance). They are not real words in the language, but a part of the meta-language or technical terms.

Laghu-3: Hakārādišu akāra uccāraņārthah
In the terms Ha and so on, the a-sound is for the sake of enunciation

That is, unlike the vowels, when we name the consonants, we add a small a-sound, but only for the sake of articulating it. By ha, ya, va, etc. we really mean only the bare consonants h, y, v, etc.

Laghu-4: LaŅ madhye tu iT samjñakah
In the midst of the term laŅ, however, (the short vowel a) is named an iT.

This refers to the sixth pratyahara, laŅ. The short vowel a itself is an iT, a marker.

Now we hit the first example of a nugget from the original sutras of Panini:

Laghu-5: hal antyam | 1-3-3

For our convenience, this has been cross-identified as sutra 1-3-3 of Panini. We haven’t yet come to this part of the Panini sutras, so as promised, the S-K is now taking us deeper into the stream without having to wade through the shallows. Let’s look at the original context and paraphrasing of 1-3-3. It is seen that it takes over the preceding sutra 1.3.2 by anuvŗtti, elipsis (see Post #11 here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2014/12/11-carrying-sutra-over-span-of-sutras.html).

1.3.3 hal antyam (upadeśe iT from 1.3.2)

The explanation in the Laghu is as follows:
Upadeśe (in the upadeśa, instruction, definition) antyam (final) hal (haL, consonant) it (an iT, marker) syāt (let be). Upadeśa (an upadeśa is (defined as)) adyoccāraņam = ādya-uccāraņam (‘original enunciation’). Sūtreşu (in the sutras, aphorisms, statements) a-dŗşțam (not seen) padam (word) Sūtrāntarāt (from an other sutra) anuvartanīyam (to be supplied, reverted) sarvatra (everywhere).

According to Sharma (Vol.II, p.141), an upadeśa is literally an ‘instruction’, but is used in grammar “to refer to the initial teachings or citations (ādyoccāraņa)”, which may be referring to “a rule, a linguistic item, or a collection of rules or linguistic items”. There is an involved discussion of the word hal used here: while it defines the final consonant haL as an iT, the word itself uses an iT, the final L. We will not go into the logical resolution of this tautology. Sometimes, we just have to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps!

The sutra from which the anuvŗtti (ellipsis) is carried over is:

1.3.2 upadeśe aC anunāsika it
upadeśe (in an instruction) aC (a vowel) anunāsika (nasalized) iT (an iT, a marker)
‘The nasalized vowel of an item in upadeśa or ‘initial citation’ is termed it’ (Sharma, p.141).

This associates nasalization to the role as a marker, an iT. Let us also anticipate by noting that the sutra 1.3.2 is put at Laghu-36, under the section 'aC-sandhih’, vowel-joins.

34 Structure and themes of Panini’s Ashtadhyayi

Before going on to an alternative arrangement of the sutras as found in the Siddhanta-Kaumudi of Bhattoji or the short version, the Laghu- Siddhānta-Kaumudi of Varadarāja, let’s take a look at the general structure and arrangement of themes in the Ashtadhyayi itself (assuming that there is some method in the madness!).

According to Ram Nath Sharma (Vol.I, p.74 onwards, see the References Page), the method in Panini’s arrangement is to group sutras in domains, so as to mark off the range of action of particular directions. He sees another motivation in this, that of developing a metatheory, which to me is seems a bit obscure as a concept. The thematic content is arranged as follows according to Sharma:

Book I:
(a) major definitions and interpretational rules
(b) rules dealing with extensions (atideśa)
(c) rules dealing with ātmanepada nad parasmaipada
(d) rules dealing with the kāraka’s

Book II
(a) rules dealing with compounds
(b)  rules deletion with nominal inflection
(c) rules dealing with number and gender of nouns
(d) rules dealing with replacements relative to roots
(e) rules dealing with deletion by LUK

Book III
(a) rules dealing with roots ending in affixes saN, etc.
(b) rules dealing with derivation of items ending in a Kŗt
(c) rules dealing with derivation of items ending in a tiŊ (basically, verb forms)

And thus it goes on. So basically, the definitions of terms (called saɱjña) and many of the metarules – the conventions about technical terms and operants – is contained in the first quarter of Book I. Because of the “dominance of the terms”, Sharma says that Book I is labeled as saɱjñādhikāra, ‘domain of names’.

One issue with this separation of terms and applications is that we will have to bring together sutras from far corners to make sense. In the last article, I suggested that if we have defined a vŗddham (a word having a long vowel ā or diphthong ai, au as the first of its vowels), it would be nice if we immediately came upon a note at least alluding to its applications. This the grammar does not furnish (no doubt because of the aphoristic character of Panini’s work, essential to fix the sutras in the mind with least difficulty), and it is the commentator who has to supply these cross-references. The sutras are like bare formulae, and the whole exercise of studying them is to remember the cross-references, exceptions and conflicts, prohibitions and hierarchies or orders of precedence in the subsequent applications.

Further discussion on the structure will not make much sense until we have gone through more of the chapters: it will be like those scientific definitions of a common object which fail to strike a bell, but which become obvious once the answer is revealed (this characterizes certain exaggeratedly scholastic works). We will next proceed to the Laghu version of Varadarāja, and see where that leads.

33 Words with long vowels: vŗddham

Before wrapping up Part 1 (Pāda 1) of the first book (adhyāya), let us just look at the final sutras that we summed up in the last post:

1.1.73 vŗddhir yasyācām ādistadvŗddham
Parsing of words:

vŗddhih (1/1, nominative singular: ‘long vowels, vŗddhi’) yasya (6/1, genitive, singular: ‘whose’)  acām (6/3. Genitive, plural: ‘of the vowels, aC’) ādih (1/1, nominative singular: ‘initial, first’) tad (1/1” ‘that’) vŗddham (1/1)

Paraphrase (vŗtti):

Acām (of the vowels, aC) madhye (in the midst of) yasya (whose) vŗddhi-samjñaka (a vŗddhi letter) ādi-bhūtah (first occurring)  tat śabda-rūpam (that word-form) vŗddha- samjñam (a vŗddha-term) bhavati (is).

That is, a word in which a vŗddhi letter (a long vowel ā or diphthong ai or au, see Post 2 here) occurs as the first of its vowels (aC, see the Pratyahara page here), is called a vŗddham. This technical term, or samjñam, is given for convenience in other rules.

Sharma (Vol.2, p. 73):
“That item, the first of whose vowels is a vŗddhi, is termed vŗddha”.

Vasu (Vol.1, p.66):
“That word, among the vowels of which the first is a vŗddhi, is called vŗddham”.

These words may come to have the said vŗddhi letter as a result of a rule application or derivation (tad-bhāvita), or by itself (a- tadbhāvita). Examples of the former (derived forms) include aupagavah, aupagavīyah from upagu, a name. Examples of the latter (naturally occurring) are the words śālīyah (‘that which pertains to a house, śālā’),  and mālīyah (‘that which is found in a garland, mālā’), where the vŗddhi letter ā is already contained. These forms are derived as per sutra 4.2.115, and will come in handy in other rules.

The next is:
1.1.74 tyadādīni ca

Parsing:
Tyad- ādīni (1/3, nominative plural: ‘tyat and following words’) ca (0, particle: ‘and’).
(vŗddham, by anuvŗtti, ellipsis, from #73)

The import is:
Tyad-ādīni (tyat and following) śabda-rūpāņi (word-forms) vŗddha- samjñāni ( vŗddha-terms)  bhavanti (are) ca (also).

Sharma (Vol.2, p.74) gives the list of ‘tyad etc.’, which are a part of the sarvādīni (sarva and following) words that were defined as sarvanāman (‘pronoun’), see post 16 here. Some of these are reproduced below, along with the forms derived by rule based on their being defined as vŗddha words (without having a vŗddhi letter as the first among their vowels).

Tyad ‘he, she, it’ → tyadīyam ‘his, etc.’
Tad ‘he, that’ → tadīyam ‘his’
Etat ‘this’ → etadīyam ‘this one’s’
Idam ‘this’ → → idamīyam ‘this one’s’
Adas ‘that’ → adasīyam ‘that one’s’
Yuşmad ‘you’ → tvadīyam ‘yours’
Asmad ‘I’ → → asmadīyam ‘mine’
Bhavat ‘you (polite)’ → bhavadīyah ‘yours (polite)’
Kim ‘what, who’ → kimīyam ‘whose’

The final sutra of part 1 (the first Foot or Quarter, Pāda) of Book 1 is the following:

1.1.75 eŋ prācām deśe
(yasyācām ādistadvŗddham from #73)

This says that
eŋ (1/1, nominative singular: ‘the letters e, o’) yasya ācām (‘of whose vowels’) ādih (‘first’) tat (‘that’) prācām (6/3, possessive, singular: ‘of eastern’) deśe (7/1, locative, singular: ‘in a country’) vŗddha- samjñam (termed vŗddha) bhavati (‘is’).

This extends the vŗddha definition to eastern place-names, that have –e- or –o- as the first of the vowels, rather than the vŗddhi vowels ā or ai, au. Examples include

bhojakața → bhojakațīyah ‘a resident of Bhojakața’

Presumably, these formations will be altered if the place is not in the eastern country. Perhaps a resident of Roma would be a romakah, not a romīyah!

Having worked valiantly through the entire first Pāda, I propose to make a diversion by taking up one of the variations, the Siddhanta-kaumudi of Bhattoji Dikshita or even the light version, the Laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi of Vardaraja. There are at least two incentives to do this. One is to see whther there are alternate arrangements of the ideas presented in the sutras ((and obviously there are); for instance, why doesn’t Panini put the sutras dealt with in this post right after the definition of vŗddhi (the first sutra, 1.1.1, to be exact)? It would be interesting to see what the other authors do: indeed, it will be seen that Panini’s first sutra is not the first sutra in their alternative arrangements.

The second purpose is to re-discover the sutras of Panini’s first quarter, with a fresh insight due to the different sequencing of ideas. A related benefit would be to cover a lot of sutras from different parts of Panini’s work, which will hopefully give an accelerated view of the great grammarian’s opus, and make it that much more enlightening when we come back to Panini.

32 Form versus meaning: what terms represent

We now come upon another metarule, a rule about rules or a convention. This is

1.1.68 svam rūpam śabdasyāśabdasamgῆā

Parsing:

Svam (1/1, nominative singular: ‘own’), rūpam (1/1: ‘form’),  śabdasya (6/1, genitive singular: ‘of a word’), ā-śabda-samgῆā (1/1: ‘not-word-technical term’)

A word occurring in the grammar denotes its form only, and not its meaning or synonyms; except when it is a technical term or name,  samgῆā, in which case it obviously refers to the thing denoted by that term, and not its form or shape. Note the extremely condensed way in which the last word – a phrase in itself – is built up.

In popular speech, a word has some meaning as it refers to a concrete thing or entity that may be referred to by other synonymous names.  This sutra is saying that we should not assume any such equivalence when we see words used in the grammar. Most words refer to some form or shape, rather than to a concrete thing as would be assumed in normal conversation.

Here’s the grammarians’ interpretation or Vŗtti (paraphrase):

Śāstre (‘in the treatise’) svam eva rūpam (‘own form only’) śabdasya grāhyam bodhyam pratyāyyam (‘the word’s significance’) bhavati (‘is’), na bāhyo (a)rthah (‘not any other meaning’) śabda-samgῆām varjayitva (‘technical terms excepted’).

In the above rendering, I have to admit that I have sort of glossed over the word-for-word translation. 

Sharma (Vol.II, p.68) just renders it as follows:

“A word other than one which is a technical term (samgῆā) of the grammar denotes its form only”.

Let’s see whether Vasu makes it any clearer:

“In this Grammar, when an operation is directed with regard to a word, the individual form of the word possessing meaning is to be understood, except with regard to a word which is a definition” (Vol.1, p.61).

Some examples from the literature are then provided. There is a sutra or rule 4.2.33 agner ḍhak. This denotes that after the word agni comes the suffix dhak or ḍhaK, a code or iT, which transforms the word to mean ‘whose deity is’: it makes the form āgneya, ‘belonging to agni’. The rule 1.1.68 says that the transformation will apply only to the specific word form agni, and not to its synonyms (fire). Other examples are given.

The book of explanations (vārttika) gives four exceptions to this principle, as follows. These are words ‘marked’ with the iT-markers S- (sit), P- (pit), J- (jit) and JH (jhit) (Sharma, p.69; Vasu, p.62). The words do not actually carry these letters, but are defined in a virtual manner to be so marked.  There is apparently no uniformity in the way these species behave in rules. One may represent themselves and their synonyms, in which case a rule may extend to their own form (sva-rūpa) as well as the synonyms; another may refer only to synonyms, not themselves. We will not go into these details; let us go forward to some of the subsequent developments.

1.1.69 aņudit savarņasya cāpratyayah

aņudit (1/1, nominative singular) savarņasya (6/1, genitive singular: ‘of similar letters’) ca a-pratyayah (1/1, nominative singular: ‘and not-an-affix’)

The first word is a compound, made up of the terms aņ and ut. The first aņ represents the letters from a to the marker Ņ in the Siva-sutras (look up the Page!). It may be noted that the marker Ņ occurs twice, and this sutra refers to the second of them: this covers the whole range of vowels (a to au) as well as the consonants h, y, v, r, and l. The second component ut or UT represents sounds marked with U. For instance, there is a set marked with U termed kU: these represent the set of velar stops, k kh g gha and ŋ, that is, k and its savarņa’s.

This is apparently an exception (or, one could say, an extension) of the rule 68 which said that a word represents only its own form. Here we are saying that a sound denoted by aŅ (the vowels from a to marker Ņ) will represent not only itself, but also similar letters (those sounded in similar fashion, including long and nasal versions). Further, letters marked by U will also denote all the savarna’s, and not just their own form (svam rūpam). Analogously, the other consonant series are termed cU, ṭU, tU, pU.

This extension does not include sounds which are added as affixes (pratyaya). Obviously, the rule-maker must take care to remember this caveat when formulating his rules!

Here’s one more extension:

1.1.70 taparastatkālasya

Parsing:

Ta-parah (1/1, nominative singular) tat-kālasya (6/1, genitive: ‘of that duuration’) (svam rūpam)

The first word ta-parah can be interpreted as ‘that which is followed by a T’ OR ‘that which follows a T’, a T being a marker (an iT). 

Sharma translates the Vŗtti as follows:

“A vowel followed by by t denotes sounds of the same duration” (p.71).

Vasu has:

“The letter which has t after or before it, besides referring to its own form, refers to those homogeneous letters which have the same prosodial length or time” (p.63). This is obviously a little more forthcoming than Sharma’s rendering!

Thus a form denotes at (aT) will include variants of a, like different tones, and nasalised, but not long a or extra-long a. If there were not the T (before or after the letter), however, all forms would be denoted, as per the preceding sutra about aŅ (see above).

Yet another explanation:

1.1.71 ādir antyena sahetā

Word parsing:

Ādih (1/1, nominative: ‘an initial item’) antyena (3/1, instrumental) saha (0: ‘with a final’) itā (3/1, instrumental: ‘with an iT’) (svam rūpam).

I’m not giving the detailed paraphrase (vŗtti) but going to the translations set forth by Sharma:

“An initial item joined with a final iT denotes not only itself but also all intervening items” (p.72)

And Vasu:

“An initial letter, with a final iT letter as a final, is the name of itself and of the intervening letters” (p.64).

This rule is supposed to be the one which tells us that a pratyāhāra includes all the letters in the range from the initial letter to the final iT.

1.1.72 yena vidhistadantasya

Yena (3/1: ‘by which’) vidhih (1/1: ‘a rule’) tat-antasya (6/1: ‘having that at its end’) (svam rūpam).

Vasu: “An injunction which is made with regard to a particular attribute, applies to words havig that attribute at their end as well as to that attribute itself”.

Sharma: “That (qualifier) by means of which a provision is made (in a rule) denotes an item which ends in it”.

This is understandable: it stretches a denotation to a whole set of similarly ending words. An explanation states that this should not be stretched to compound words with the given ending.

This brings us to the end of the svam rupam series. What is left in this quarter of the first adhyaya are a couple of sutras: 1.1.73 states that words which have a vŗddhi as the first among its vowels will be called vŗddham. Sutra 1.1.74 states that the words tyad etc. are also called  vŗddham. This denotation apparently facilitates the application of certain derivations given in later rules. The last type of vŗddham is in rule 1.1.75, which states that names of Eastern countries with the letter e or o (eŋ) as the first among their vowels, will also be designated as vŗddham.

We thus come to the end of the first quarter or chapter of Book One, 1.1, and it’s quite an achievement. Just to vary the pace a bit, I propose to shift to another version of the grammar, the Laghu or Light version of Varadaraja, the Laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi, which itself is an abridgement of the Siddhanta-kaumudi of Bhattoji Dikshita. The arrangement and sequence is different from the Ashtadhyayi, although the material is substantially the same. Let us see whether the cryptic and convoluted structure of the Paniniyam is mitigated at all by the Kaumudi!

31 Metarules: locative, ablative

Here’s two metarules (rules about rules) now; i.e. prescriptions on how certain conventional case forms are to be interpreted (this has already been talked about in the early posts; we will reinforce that here).

1.1.66 tasminniti nirdişţe pūrvasya

Parsing of words:

Tasminn (7/1) (in that) iti (0, so saying) nirdişţe (7/1, in the specification), pūrvasya (6/1, of the preceding)

Vŗtti (paraphrase):

Tasminn iti (saying ‘in that’) saptamyartha- (in the meaning of the saptamī, i.e. seventh or locative, case) nirdeşe (in the specification) pūrvasyaiva (pūrvasya eva) kāryam (operation of the preceding only) bhavati (is, transpires), nottarasya (na uttarasya, not of the following).

“An element which is referred to by a locative (saptamī) form is understood as a right context for an operation on that which preceded it” (Sharma, II.67).

Thus, we may interpret the technical word in the locative case (saptamī) as something like ‘in the case of’, ‘in the context that’. In short, the locative case denotes the ‘if’ part of a ‘if-then’ statement. An interesting feature of the sutra is that it uses the very technical device it is defining, by putting nirdişţe in the locative case: if we translate nirdeşa as ‘specification’, the term reads ‘in the specification in the seventh case’, which we can expand as ‘in the context of a specification in the seventh case’ or ‘in the presence of… etc.’. In simple terms, ‘if there is a (term) specified in the seventh (locative, saptamī) case, then…’.

The ‘…then’ part is given by the last word, pūrvasya, ‘of the previous’, which is in the genitive, sixth case.  We obviously have to supply some words to round out the meaning.  The vŗtti sensibly supplies the term kāryam, ‘operation, work’. That is, if there is a term specified in locative case, then the operation is that of the preceding (term), the term (technical or operative word) that comes before the term in the locative case. Sharma calls the locative word a “right context” for the operation specified previously in the given rule. That is, the ‘if’ portion is given on the right of the operative term, which means that this is a ‘do Y if X’ type of instruction (X being the required condition, the subsequent term in locative case, and Y the antecedent, operation term), rather than ‘if X then Y’.   This is just a convention of ordering the terms, as far as I can make out at this stage.

An example is the already familiar rule  6.1.77 iko yaņ aci, where the last word aci is in the locative case: ‘in (the case of occurrence of a) vowel’; i.e. ‘if there is a vowel aC’. This is the X, the if- condition, but here termed the “right context” not just because it comes at the end of the rule, but implying that the X has to be present to the right, i.e. after the element on which the operation Y is to be performed. And what is the action Y (kāryam) to be performed, the ‘do’ instruction? That is: iko yaņ which uses the genitive case of iK, ‘of the short vowels (iK)’. This genitive (possessive, sixth case) has to be interpreted according to 1.1.49 şaşţhī sthāne-yogā, ‘the possessive case (means, signifies) the replacement-relation’. Or, ‘(in place) of short vowels (iK) (put) semi-vowels (yaŅ), IF there is a vowel aC following (right context)’.

Here’s another case ending which has a specific grammatical interpretation:

1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya

Word parsing:

 tasmād (5/1) (‘from that’) iti (0) (‘so saying’) uttarasya (7/1) (‘of the following’)

Sharma (II:68) denotes this as a “left context” of the operation to be carried out as per the following term ‘uttarasya’. Vŗtti (paraphrase):

tasmād  (tasmāt ‘from that’) iti  (‘so saying’) pañcam-artha-nirdeśa (‘fifth case signifying specification’) uttarasya eva kāryam (‘operation only of the following’) na pūrvasya (‘not of the preceding’)

“An element referred to by an ablative form (not otherwise interpretable in a given context) is a left context for an operation on what follows it” (Sharma, II:68).

“An operation caused by the exhibition of a term in the ablative or fifth case, is to be understood to enjoin the substitution of something in the room of that which immediately follows the word denoted by the term” (Vasu, p.60; decidedly a prolix rendering totally at odds with the spirit of the old grammarians!).

 The “left context” implies that the operation prescribed is to be done on the element which follows the instruction: ‘if x then do Y’. I like to look at the ablative as emanating something that affects the target and effects the change: in 8.4.61, for instance, it states that after ud with following sthāna and stambha, substitution of the initial of the second (following) word is done with “a letter belonging to the class of the prior” (Vasu, p.60), i.e. stha- or sta- is replaced with sounds homologous to the –d of ud-, giving forms like utthāna. In this sutra, the ablative case is used for the originating condition: udah. Given ud on he left, stha- is replaced by a sound of the dental class, etc.

Here are two gratuitous comments from my side. One is, the nebulous nature of the distinction between the two types of clauses, ‘do Y in case of X obtaining’ using the locative case, and ‘from the influence of X do Y’ using the originator in the ablative. Both pretty much seem to imply ‘if X, Y follows’.   The distinction seems to be mainly that in the first formula, the X is to be verified to the right, after the element operated upon; in the second, the originator is already on the left of the element acted upon. One wonders whether there is not a simpler way of specifying these conditions.

The second comment is that the actual case suffix form (the sUP-antam) of ablative and genitive are often the same, if not also the locative. So in some cases it must be a close call, and the  choice is made probably on some prior external knowledge of the patterns in the language!

Before we leave these two metarules, let’s just take a glimpse of how the Mahābhāşya treats them (Shastri, III:218 to 231). The close parallelism between the two rules is shown by treating them together, quoting them together at the opening.

Patanjali (as per the commentary by Shastri) deals with three aspects. The first is kim udāharaņam, what is the example(s). These are given as the rule iko yaņ aci for tasminn…, leading to the derivation of forms (like) dadhyatra and madhvatra (replacement of I, u by y, v before a vowel aC). For tasmād…, the examples are the derivation of dvīpam, antarīpam for rule 6.3.97 dvyantarupasargebhyo’pa īT, whereby in dvi+ap ‘two waters’, the final sound in the preceding dvi conditions the initial sound in the subsequent ap giving dvi+ip, dvīp (Sharma, II:68). There follows a discussion on the import and effect of the word iti (which I have rendered in my home-spun way as ‘so saying’), when treated as a technical term in the grammar. The commentator says that the word iti “changes the meaning of the word”: tasminn iti means the locative case (rather than ‘inside something’), tasmād iti means ‘the ablative’ (rather than ‘out of something’). Then follows an extended quibble about which is the general class, which is the specific case (example): we can know this “from the desire of the speaker”.

The second issue dealt with is the use of the word nirdişţe in the sutra. Here (as I understand the sentence) the operation takes place on the word (śabda) in locative (saptamī) case, and not on the meaning (artha) denoted by that word, which may the case in certain other rules: in 4.2.81 janapade lup, or  5.3.55 atiśāyane tambişţhnāu, the words in locative case “denote ar tha and not  śabda” (Shastri III:221).

The third issue taken up is kimartham punaridam ucyate ‘what for are these sūtras read?” (Shastri III:222). Since the locative or ablative case ending can apply equally to right-condition or left- condition  (pūrvatva and uttaratva), as I have also hinted above, statement of the two sutras “is for niyama, as in dadhyudakam and pacatyodanam” (I would interpret niyama as rule, constraint). The use of locative or ablative as the case may be will then serve to decide “whether, when both are mentioned in a sutra, the kārya happens to that which precedes or to that which follows”; in case of vipratişedha conflict, the later rule generally prevails (Shastri III:223). There follow a number of applications of these principles in elucidation of various rules.

30 Definitions of final elements in words

The next couple of sutras assign names to certain elements in words.

1.1.64 aco’ ntyādi ti

Acah (6/1) (of the aC range of letters, i.e. vowels) antyādi (1/1) (ādi, beginning with, antya, the last) TI (1/1) (termed TI)

 Vŗtti, paraphrase:

Acām (of the aC, i.e. vowels) sannivişţānām (? Of the entered) yo (yah) antyo (antyah) (which is the final, last) aC tadādi (that beginning with) śabdarūpam (word form) Ți samjñam (element called Ți) bhavati (is).

“That part of an item which begins with its last vowel (aC) is termed  Ți” (Sharma).

“The final portion of a word, beginning with the last among the vowels in the word, is called Ți” (Vasu).

This is therefore a technical definition, rather than a concept: it is a shorthand way of referring to the last segment of any word that starting from the last vowel (aC). The term Ți is an artificial creation, but is indicative of the last vowel; the Ț is an indicator, while the i can be seen as standing in for all vowels aC (one supposes it could also have been called by some other code like Ța or Ģu, but perhaps the grammarians chose Ți as it mimics the common verb ending –ti). The term Ți is used in other rules which prescribe modifications in the last vowel-segment, e.g. change of –ti or –i in a transitive, active (parasmaipada) verb form to –te or –e in the intransitive or reflexive (ātmanepada form,  bhavati versus vartate (is, exists): 3.4.79 Țit ātmanepadānām Ţere.

Incidentally, it is to be noted that even a single-letter word can have a final vowel-segment; this is an application of

1.1.21 ādi-antyavad (-vat) ekasminn (‘in a single(eka)-element, the element may be like (vat) a head (ādi) or a final (antya’).

If the previous sutra gives a technical name to the last vowel-initial segment, the next sutra defines another segment, this time the letter or element just before the final letter:

1.1.65 alo’ntyāt pūrva upadhā

Alah (5/1) antyāt (5/1) pūrva (1/1) upadhā (1/1)

As can be seen from the word parsing above, the first two are in the fifth case (ablative, ‘from’). The first noun aL refers to all the letters in the alphabet, or rather, since it is in singular number, any letter; the second word antyāt (‘last’) is also in ythe ablative, and can be taken as a qualifier, giving the sense of ‘from the last letter’.

Vŗtti (paraphrase):

Dhātvādau varņa-samudāye (in the group of letters, sounds) antyād (antyāt, 5/1) (from the end) alah (5/1) (from the letter, sound, aL) pūrvo (pūrvah) (prior, before) yo (yah) varņah (which letter, sound) so (sah) (that) alopadhā- (aLa upadhā-) (letter, aL) upadhā- samjño (samjñah) (upadhā – term) bhavati (is, constitutes).

“The sound (aL) which precedes the final sound of an item is called upadhā ‘penultimate sound’“ (Sharma).

“The letter immediately preceding the last letter of a word is called the penultimate” (Vasu).

Once again, the term upadhā is a coined name, but a different type from the Ți of the previous sutra in that it is not a marker or labelled term; upadhā is a noun, and may possibly stand for some meaning. The particle upa- denotes a sub-class of its type, dhā may be linked to the verbal root which means ‘to bear, hold’, so that there is a sense of something sub-ordinate, hence pen-ultimate, in contrast to the previous sutra which talked of the ultimate or last, antya. The need to define the penultimate sound will be met with in various other rules (of substitution or elision), such as 7.2.116 ata  upadhāyāh, which directs the replacement of short by long a in pac+aka (Sharma, II:67).  

29 Reducing an element to zero: lopa

Sutra 1.1.60 introduces a concept that has, if I remember right, been made much of in linguistics theory: the ‘zero’ affix or element, which still remains in a hidden form to condition the preceding base. This concept allows many transformations to be carried through in a virtual sense even without an actual element being present, somewhat like scaffolding and centering allows complicated constructions to be erected.   

1.1.60 adarśanam lopah

a-darśanam (1/1) lopah (1/1)

This is a definition of the concept lopah, the paraphrase, vŗtti, being:

a-darśanam (‘non-visiblity’) aśravaņam (‘non-audiblity’) anuccāraņam (‘non-vocalizing’) anupalabdhih (‘non-attainablity’) abhāvo (‘non-existence’) varņavināśa (‘letter or element destruction’) iti (thus, and so on) anarthāntaram (‘converting to non-entity, neutralizing’) etaih śabdaih (‘by such words’) yo’artho (‘this meaning’) (lopah)

 “Non-appearance (adarśana) is termed LOPA” (Sharma).

“The substitution of a blank (lopa)signifies disappearance”, also called ‘elision’ (Vasu).

There is a certain amount of (seemingly pedantic!) discussion to the effect that lopa refers to the concept of adarśanam (‘non-visiblity’) etc., and not the actual sounds represented by the letters. In the absence of this clarification in the commentaries, one may be tempted to substitute the actual letters lopa or adarśana wherever a sutra prescribes it. As put by Sharma (Vol.ii, p.61) “…the term LOPA should be  assigned to the meaning of the word adarśana and not to its form, the word adarśana itself”. It is also noted that lopa is the disappearance of some entity that was in existence in some context, and not merely absence.

The grammarians recognise different types of blank or zero elements:

1.1.61 pratyayasya lukślulupah (#60 adarśanam)

Pratyayasya (6/1) lukślulupah (1/1)

The paraphrase, vŗtti is

Pratyaya-adarśanasya (the non-appearance, disappearance of an affix) luk ślu lup iti (like LUK, ŚLU, LUP) etāh samjñā bhavanti (these are the entities, terms)

“Non-appearance of an affix is termed LUK, ŚLU, or LUP” (Sharma, II.62)

“The disappearance of an affix when it is caused by the words LUK, ŚLU, or LUP are designated by those terms respectively” (Vasu, p.56).

These terms LUK, ŚLU, or LUP are obviously technical codes, samjñā, created by the grammarians to trigger certain routines, and not real words in the language (which is why we have shown them in upper case, as we do markers or iT’s). These samjñā will be provided in other rules dealing with elision operations in certain appropriate contexts. There is again discussion (in my opinion somewhat pedantic) of the chicken-or-egg question of anyony-āśrayitva ‘interdependency’  (we saw this in 1.1.45 ig yaņah samprasāraņam, see post #23): there has to be something for the lopa operation to work on, which means there has to be an assignment of the name LUK or ŚLU  or LUP before the elision can take place. “Commentators resolve this difficulty by stating that whenever these terms are used in ordering the operation of zeroing, the assignment of the name follows zeroing. That  is, assignment of a name (samjñā) is treated as ‘yet to be brought about’ (bhāvinī)” (Sharma, II.63). The three types of elision (zeroing) operations are collectively termed LU-mān, and are marked respectively by K, Ś and P in the connected rules. It is noted that the LU- elisions are applied to affixes (pratyaya) and not to bases.

Here are some examples from Vasu (p.56). Rule 2.4.72 attaches the label LUK to the affix (augment, vikaraņa) śap in forming the present singular from the verb ad, ‘to eat’: ad + śapLUK + ti = ad+ti = atti ‘(3^rd person/1) eats’. The LUK indicates that the śap (which would have introduced –a-) is elided. In forming juhoti ‘(3^rd person/1) invokes’ the śap is elided by the label śLU (2.4.75). Why the same code is not used in both situations is not clear at this point, hopefully it will become clearer as we come across those other sutras.

Here is a further complication or extension dreamed up by our grammarians: certain operations are carried out even under the elision condition (this is the feature so admired by twentieth century linguistics). This gives the grammarian the facility to make general rules of transformation applicable in a wider range of situations.

1.1.62 pratyayalope pratyayalakşaņam

Pratyaya-lope (7/1)  pratyaya-lakşaņam (1/1)

Vŗtti, paraphrase:

Pratyaya-lope kŗte ([even] given affix-elision) pratyaya-lakşaņam (affix-? Indication; “the effect by which an affix could be recognised”, Vasu p.57) pratyaya-hetukam kāryam (operations conditioned by affix) bhavati

“An operation conditioned by an affix applies even if the affix has been replaced by zero” (Sharma).

“When elision of an affix has taken place (lopa), the affix still exerts its influence, and the operations dependant upon it, take place as if it were present” (Vasu).

The repetition of the words pratyaya and lopa indicate that this rule obtains only where the whole affix has been elided, and not if only a part of it has been elided. Only such subsequent operations are allowed as are caused by the affix as such, not orthographic changes due to particular letters etc.

As an example is the word agnicit ‘he who heaped the fire’ or somasut ‘he who pressed soma (the energetic drink of the Vedic priests)’, which have had their final case ending sUP (nominative case, singular, see the Vibhakti Page) elided or lopped off (lopa) . A pada is defined as an entity with a case ending sUP-anta or a verb ending tiŊ-anta (1.4.14 suptiŋantam padam). On this basis, the words cited will not be called pada, so that operations permitted on a pada will be precluded. However by the sutra 1.1. 62 the entity still functions like a pada, as if the elided case ending sUP or  affix (pratyaya) were still visible.  

As is usual, the latitude conferred by #62 is restricted by

1.1.63 na lumatāŋgasya

Na (0)  lumatā (3/1) aŋgasya (7/1) (#62 pratyayalakşaņam)

Vŗtti:

lumatā śabdena (‘by a term which contains [the marker] LU’) lupte pratyaye (given the elision of an affix’) yad aŋgam (‘a pre-suffixal base’) tasya (‘its’) pratyaya-lakşaņam kāryam (‘operation in the presence of the affix’) na bhavati (does not take place’).

“An operation for a pre-suffixal base (aŋga) does not apply (although it would otherwise apply by 1.1.62) if the affix in question is replaced by zero referred to by a term which contains LU (LUK, ŚLU or LUP; see 1.1.62)” (Sharma).

Thus not all elisions to zero preserve the original character of the lopped off (lopa) affix. If the lopping has been the end effect of a LU instruction, then the elided affix’s properties will not persist. The definition of an aŋga, or pre-suffixal base, is the root (dhātu) followed by the affix (pratyaya), before attaching the case-ending (sUP).

28 Substitute treated like the original

The next bunch of sutras talks of the equivalence of the substitute with the original (substituendum) for subsequent operations, with certain qualifications or exceptions. That is, we can do unto the substitute  as we would to the original, under certain conditions.  The first of these sutras is

1.1.56  sthānivad ādeśo’ nalvidhau

The word parsing is as follows:

Sthāni-vat (0) ādeśah (1/1) an-al-vidhau (7/1)

The first term means ‘like the Sthāni, i.e. the original’; being an indeclinable, it is marked (0) as to case and number. The second word, ādeśah, means the ‘substitute’; in the general parlance it means ‘an order, direction’, and is in nominative case, singular number (1,1). The third word is made up of the negative prefix an-, then aL, which is the pratyāhāra or code standing for ‘all letters’ (click on the Pratyahara TAB at top of page for some more info on these!); and vidhau, the seventh case (locative singular, 7/1) of vidhi, which means ‘rule’. The word al-vidhi is ‘a rule (based on) a letter’, or say a ‘letter-rule’; an-al-vidhi would be the ‘negation‘ or ‘absence’ of such a rule. The locative case form an-al-vidhau can be taken to mean ‘in the absence of a letter-rule’.

The paraphrase,  vŗtti, is:

Sthāni-vat (like a substituendum, i.e. the original) ādeśah (substitute) bhavati (is), āśrayeşu kāryeşu (? in related operations), an-al- āśrayeşu (? in non-letter related) sthāni-al-āśrayāņi (?letter-related) kāryāņi (operations) varjayitvā (having excluded)

“A substitute is treated like a substituendum, except when an operation relative to an original sound (aL) is to be performed” (Sharma, Vol.II, p.56).

“A substitute (ādeśa) is like the former occupant (sthānī), but not in the case of a rule the occasion for the operation of which is furnished by the letters of the original term” (Vasu, p.42).

We understand by this that any (subsequent) operations can be performed on the substituted term just as if it were on the original, except where these subsequent operations are closely linked to the actual letters or types of letters that were replaced. For example, if a vowel were to be replaced by a non-vowel, operations specifically possible on the vowels would obviously not be carried over to the substitute non-vowel. Let’s look at some of the examples provided; here Vasu is the more helpful, as he discusses each type of substitute individually.

According to the śāstrakāra-s then, there are 6 types of substituenda (plural of substituendum, (sthānī): dhātu ‘root’, aŋga ‘pre-suffixal base’, kŗt ‘primary affix’, taddhita ‘secondary affix’, avyaya ‘indeclinable’, sUP ‘nominal ending’ or ‘case affix’, tiŊ ‘verbal ending’ or ‘conjugational affix’, and pada ‘fully inflected word’ (Sharma, p/57; Vasu, p.43). In each case, the substitute orderd by any rule, would get the same treatment as the original it replaces, whatever the type was: substitute of a root (dhātu) is treated as a root, substitute of a case-ending (sUP) is treated as a case-ending, and so on. Let’s take just one example, from the many discussed by Vasu.  

From the table of noun case-endings or sUP (click on ‘Vibhakti’ TAB at top of page to get a tabular statement!), we know that Ŋe (Ŋ is the nasal at the back of the soft palate, ng) is the code for the dative (fourth, caturthī) case, denoting ‘to’ the noun. Obviously the letter Ŋ is just a marker or code provided by the grammarian (which is why it is shown in capitals by convention), and the actual case affix is –e. The marker Ŋ also shows that it is of the type ŊiT (see sutra 1.1.53), which is a grammarian’s contrivance, probably so that it can attract certain other rules with their own specific consequences. Now, as per the example cited by Vasu (p.44), by 7.1.13  ‘ya is the substitute of the sUP-affix Ŋe after an inflexive base ending in short a’. Then the ya is treated just like the original Ŋe, and by another sutra 7.3.102, there is “lengthening of the vowel”, e.g. vŗkşāya, dative of vŗkşa ‘to the tree’.

Now we need an example for the clause na-al-vidhau, ‘not in the presence of a letter-rule’, i.e. if the transformation refers to the particular sound (aL) in the original. Vasu (p.45) gives very briefly the following examples of substitution: of –v by –au in the word div by rule 7.1.84 to give inflected case-form dyauh, -n by -ā in pathin by 7.1.85 to give panthā, -d by –a in tvad by 7.2.102 to give the sah. The point is that of these affixes had been treated just like the originals. Rule 6.1.68 would have applied, “and the case-affix su [sU, the nominative singular] would have been elided”.  

Sharma (Vol.II) gives detailed examples in the Appendix (something which I have only recently realised!), and the an-aL-vidhau rule is illustrated on p.397 onwards in each of four distinct interpretations of the term. Vasu’s examples come under the second variation, “alah vidhih ‘operation obtaining after an item occurring after aL’ ” (Sharma, p.398). As rule 7.1.84 div aut (#1.1.52 alo ‘ntyasya) would require replacement by au of the terminal letter –v, Shrma says that the final s would have to be deleted in the inflected form div + s (U) = diau + s (I am not quite clear why!). Instead, we assume that an-al-vidhau comes into operation, the au is not treated as a v, so that diau+s will yield dyau+s, and by conversion of s into visarga h, dyauh. Similarly or the other examples above.

There are two more sutras in this vein:

1.1.57 acah (6/1) parasmin (7/1) pūrvavidhau (7/1) (#56 sthānivad ādeśah), whose paraphrase is:

Ac ādeśah (aj ādeśah) (substitute for a vowel) paranimittakah (? Conditioned by a right context) pūrvavidhau kartavye (with respect to an operation on a preceding element) sthānivad bhavati (is treated like its substituendum)

Further exceptions to 1.1.57 are given in 1.1.58 and 1.1.59, which I will not go into here at this first reading!

27 Substitution: some ‘prior exceptions’

We had skipped over a couple of sutras in taking up 1.1.49 on substitutions introduced by the sixth case (post #24 to #26). This is as opportune a juncture as any to dispose of these, which are in the nature of ‘prior exception’ to the locational intructions for substitution already covered in the afore-cited posts. We start with

1.1.46 ādyantau ţakitau

Ādi antau, ādyantau (1/2) ţakitau (1/2)

Both are in nominative case, dual number. The first word means ‘first and last’, ‘beginning and end’;  the second term refers to two types of entities (affixes, for instance) marked by the letters Ţ and K respectively (these markers are supplied by the grammarian when giving labels to the respective affixes; they are not something natural or intrinsic to the language!). The sutra lays down that affixes marked with Ţ will attach to the start of the substituendum or sthānin (1.1.49 şaşţhī sthāneyogā, see post #24), and those marked by K will attach to the end. This sutra overrides any subsequent ones, such as 1.1.52 alo’ ntyasya, which fix the location of the substitute at the end of the original. This sutra 1.1.46 (as also #47, #48) is termed a prior exception to 1.1.49, which is why it is given before the latter.

The paraphrase,  vŗtti, is:

 Ādis Ţid bhavati (the initial is marked by  Ţ, i.e. is a Ţit), antah Kid bhavati (the final is marked by  K, i.e. is a Kit), şaşţhī nirdişţasya (of that specified in the genitive, sixth, case). We recall that iT is the technical term for generic marker terms.

“Elements marked with Ţ or K become the initial and final segments respectively of items in the genitive  to which they are introduced” (Sharma, Vol.II, p.45).

“ Of whatsoever the augments enunciated are distinguished by an indicatory Ţ or K, they precede or follow it accordingly” (Vasu, p.35) (a somewhat clumsy expression?).

The point to note is that this does not prescribe substitution of the original like 1.1.49 onwards, but an addition to it, either at the start or the end, respectively. Such elements are termed vikaraņa, augments, rather than ādeśa, substitutes (substituents) (Sharma, p.46). The elements are prescribed in other rules, naturally.

Examples given in Vasu (p.35) are easier to follow, since he gives the relevant sutra number, although the same examples are also cited in Sharma (p.46). One is sutra 7.2.35, which says that an ‘ārdhadhātuka’ affix starting with any consonant other than y (valādi, which leaves out h and y in the pratyahara h^aL of consonants) will take an  iŢ augment. The Ţ marker shows that –i- should be placed at the beginning of the affix.  One such ‘ārdhadhātuka’ affix is the future tense suffix syati, which has to take the –i- augment at the beginning, bhū+iŢ+syati= bhavişyati (Vasu, p.35; obviously other rules determine change of –ū- to -av-, -s- to –ş- etc. Another example cited by Sharma (p.46) is kaņ+tās, where tās is an ‘ārdhadhātuka’ suffix and will take the iŢ augment at the start, kaņ+i+tās = kaņitā.

 An example of an iK augment at the end of an affix (Vasu, p.35) is following sutra 7.3.40, whereby the root bhī (fear) takes the şUK suffix to make the causative (to cause to fear); being marked by K, ş is added at the end of bhī, rather than replacing bhī, giving bhīş-, and the form bhīşayate by further rules.

1.1.47 midaco’ntyātparah

mit (1/1) acah (6/1) antyāt (5/1) parah (1/1)

This is also a prior exception to şaşţhī sthāneyogā, which would have required substitution in its entirety of the word in şaşţhī (sixth case, genitive). This rule states that if the substituting (actually the augmenting) element is marked with M (mIT), it comes in after (parah) the end (antyāt) of the vowels (acah). 

The paraphrase,  vŗtti, is:

Acām sannivişţānām (of the marked vowels) antyād (antyāt) acah paro (parah) (after the end, last vowel) mid (miT) (the augment that has an indicatory M) bhavati (is, comes)

“Given an operational rule which introduces unit Y to unit X, Y should be introduced after the last vowel of X if Y is marked with M” (Sharma, Vol.II, p.46).

“The augment that has an indicatory M comes after the last among the vowels, and becomes the final position of that which it augments” (Vasu, p.35).

Examples will elucidate. Take the augment nUM, where the actual letter to be added would be –n-, the -UM being markers or iT. Thus the derivation of the plural of payas ‘milk’ is, by 7.1.42, payas+nUM+I, where only the n is added to the last of the vowels of payas, which gives paya+n+s+I; the a is lengthened as per other rules (6.4.8), giving payānsi. Sharma gives many other examples.

1.1.48 eca ig hrasvādeśe

ecah (6/1) ik (1/1) hrasva ādeśe (7/1)

 

Vŗtti:

eco (In place of eC vowels: e, o, ai, au) hrasvādeśe (in the case of substitution  by short vowels), kartavya (to be done) ig (ik) (iK  vowels i, u, ŗ, ļ) eva (only) hrasvo (hrasvah) bhavati (are the short vowels) na anyah (not any other).

“If a short vowel is to replace an eC (e, o, ai, au;  and a substitute is not specified), iK (i, u, ŗ, ļ) alone is to be understood as a replacement” (Sharma, Vol.II, p.48).

This talks about the substitution of short vowels for e, o, ai, au, which do not have homologous short versions (Dravidian languages do have short e and short O, for instance). The default substitutes are the iK vowels, i and u, but not really extending to ŗ, ļ as they are far from homologous (the rule 1.1.50 sthāne’ntartamah). It is clear that i is closest to e, and u to o, and these will be the logical replacements for those two long vowels.  In the case of ai and au, ruling out the choice of ŗ and ļ, and also ruling out a (not part of the iK set), the most similar pairs are i for ai, u for au. Thus there are only two logical substitutes i and u, for the four eC sounds (e, o, ai, au). The corresponding pratyāhāra (see relevant Page!) for I and u alone is iŅ, but Sharma guesses that the grammarian did not use this as there is another boundary marker Ņ further down the Shiva-sutras (the sixth, laŅ), which may cause confusion. Of course, that raises the question why the Shiva-sutras use certain boundary markers more than once.

Example:

Vasu gives a simple example following from rule 1.2.47, which declares that “the short vowel is the substitute in the neuter of a crude form provided it end in a vowel” (Vasu, p.36). In the compound ati+rai, the ai must be shortened. The equivalent short being I, we get ati+rai= atiri ‘extravagant’ (Sharma has ‘he who has excelled riches’). Similarly ati+nau= atinu, ‘disembarked or landed’ (Sharma: ‘he who has excelled boating’); upa+go= upagu (‘near a cow’). Avyayībhāva compounds, which are all neuter, will have this replacement.