Guest guest Posted June 3, 2006 Report Share Posted June 3, 2006 Dear Members of Indology, The release of the new version 5.5 of Ganakashtadhyayi which is undergoing final tests is held up due to optional results. I have been successful in implementing the optional rules. For "sudhI + upAsyaH", you now get the two results: 1. sudhyupAsyaH , 2. suddhyupAsyaH. However, I am having some problem with the sUtra "8.4.47 anaci ca" giving optional results in other examples of hal sandhis. For instance: rAmas + cinoti is also giving two results: 1. rAmazcinoti, 2. rAmazzcinoti. Are these optional results generated by Ganakashtadhyayi acceptable to Panini? Similarly many other examples of 'hal sandhis' where "yar" is preceded by "ac" and not followed by any "ac", are yielding optional results with the reduplication of "yar" letters. Neither the puryudAsa nor the prasajya interpretation is coming to any rescue. Did I miss anything here? I would appreciate if scholars of Panini can send their comments to my personal e-mail address: swamiji (AT) vsnl (DOT) com With best wishes, Dr Shivamurthy Swamiji __ Sri Taralabalu Jagadguru Brihanmath, Sirigere - 577 541, Chitradurga Dist, Karnataka [india] www.taralabalu.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Dear Swamiji, Since the change of 's' in rAmas to 'z' before cinoti takes place by P.8.4.40 (stoH zcunA zcuH), this change is to be treated as siddha with respect to P.8.4.47 (anaci ca), and hence I see no problem in the doubling of this 'z' by P.8.4.47. However, such and similar doublings were in general problematic and dialectally variable. This is evident from Panini's rules like 8.4.50 (triprabhRtiSu zAkaTAyanasya), 8.4.51 (sarvatra zAkalyasya), and 8.4.52 (dIrghAd AcAryANAm), 8.4.64 (halo yamAM yami lopaH), 8. 4.65 (jharo jhari savarNe) etc. Katyayana's vArttikas suggest further variability. This variability is further demonstrated by the treatment of this phenomenon in the Pratisakhyas. ZaunakIya CaturAdhyAyikA (iii.4: sasthAne ca) will probably prevent the duplication in your example. Also see the related rule savarNe (iv.110, vAjasaneyi prAtizAkhya). Also see vArttika dvirvacane parasavarNatvam on P.8.2.6 indicating possible difference between Panini and Katyayana. Best, Madhav Deshpande University of Michigan INDOLOGY, "Dr Shivamurthy Swamiji" <swamiji> wrote: > > Dear Members of Indology, > > > > The release of the new version 5.5 of Ganakashtadhyayi which is undergoing > final tests is held up due to optional results. > > > > I have been successful in implementing the optional rules. For "sudhI + > upAsyaH", you now get the two results: 1. sudhyupAsyaH , 2. suddhyupAsyaH. > However, I am having some problem with the sUtra "8.4.47 anaci ca" giving > optional results in other examples of hal sandhis. For instance: rAmas + > cinoti is also giving two results: 1. rAmazcinoti, 2. rAmazzcinoti. Are > these optional results generated by Ganakashtadhyayi acceptable to Panini? > > > > Similarly many other examples of 'hal sandhis' where "yar" is preceded by > "ac" and not followed by any "ac", are yielding optional results with the > reduplication of "yar" letters. Neither the puryudAsa nor the prasajya > interpretation is coming to any rescue. Did I miss anything here? > > > > I would appreciate if scholars of Panini can send their comments to my > personal e-mail address: swamiji > > > > With best wishes, > > > > Dr Shivamurthy Swamiji > > __ > > Sri Taralabalu Jagadguru Brihanmath, > > Sirigere - 577 541, Chitradurga Dist, Karnataka [india] > > www.taralabalu.org > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.