Re: [Pali] Re: Saddaniiti
- On 12/31/08, gdbedell <gdbedell@...> wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who has commented on my translation of the introductoryWe can take it as equivalent to "knowledge-enhancing" or "knowledge-enhancer"
> Ito para.m pavakkhaami, sotuuna.m mati-va.d.dhana.m;
> kriyaa-pada-kkama.m naama, vibhatt'-aadiini diipaya.m.
> But I don't understand how to interpret mati-va.d.dhana.m as a
> bahubbiihi compound (attributive in Collins' terminology):
(ya.m mati.m va.d.dhati, ta.m mativaa.d.dhana.m : "mati-va.d.dhana is
what enhances knowledge".)
> The-which sounds plausible, though I am not sure.
> real problem is how to construe sotuu.na.m mati-va.d.dhana.m. I agree
> it would be clearer if it were dative, but I think we can take it as what
> Collins calls 'adverbial accusative' (7. p. 22).
> Mahinda Palihawadana suggested the following translation:Agreed.
> I shall henceforth proclaim the order of the verb, which serves to enhance
> the understanding of those who hear (the Pali texts), explaining the
> case-endings etc.
> I have a few bones to pick with this as well. First, it seems to me that
> 'proclaim' is not really the right word.
> Second, I think we cannot translate vibhattiQuite. Actually, it was an oversight on my part.
> here as 'case-ending'.
> Mahinda's version highlights three issues. The first has to do with sotuu.nam, which he-which would in this case mean 'learners' or 'students' as you now translate.
> renders as 'those who hear (the Pali texts)'.
> The second issue has to do with sotuuna.m mati-I won't be dogmatic about it. My 'feel' of the Pali language tells me
> va.d.dhana.m, which he renders as 'which serves to enhance the
> understanding of those who hear (the Pali texts)'. What is it which
> does this? My version has that it is A.'s teaching which has this effect.
> In Mahinda's version it is rather the content of the teaching, the
> 'order of the verb' which has this effect.
that although the verse says it is the content that enhances
understanding, what is implied in the context is that it is the
author's explication of this content that does this. So I do not
object to your interpretation.
>Again, I think Mahinda isThis is what the bahubbiihi samaasa does. It makes an adjective of a noun.
> probably right, but the Paali verse isn't explicit. And there is nothing
> in the Paali which corresponds to the relative pronoun 'which' or the
> verb 'serve'.
>The third issue has to do with kriyaa-pada-kkama.mI would now suggest that the appropriate translation is "the Verbal
> naama, which he renders as 'the order of the verb'.
>My original version
> was 'the terminology of verbs'. It is appropriate because 'terminology' refers not
> just to a collection of terms, but to a system (kama.m) of terms.
System", without bringing in the idea of terms.
> I don't believe we can ignore naama on the grounds that kriyaa-pada-It is an indeclinable in this context and can be translated as
> kkama.m is the name of the chapter (it isn't). I don't really understand
> the way naama is used here (notice that it is a bare noun stem, with no
'namely'. I think the construction is "kriyaapadakkama.m naama
sotuunaa.m mativa.d.dhana.m pavakkhaami". (I will describe the
enhancer of students' understanding -or knowledge-, namely the Verbal
> I now recount, to enhance the understanding of students,This is a satisfactory rendering, except for 'terminolgy'.
> the terminology of verbs, explaining the endings, etc.
- Dear Mahinda,
Thanks! I agree with you on both of your objections. I also found a
'naamavibhattiihi' in the 6th pariccheda and the obvious meaning of 'noun
endings' there would also have to apply to a conjectured naama-vihbatt'- in
the 2nd pariccheda which, by the way, has something to say about the noun
endings or the absence thereof (see avibhattikaniddeso). In the case of your
objection regarding 'naama' and the cases of words that can precede it, I
was unsure about this to start with. Thanks for quoting the examples with
the accusative and genitive cases and thereby clearing up the matter for me.
> Dear Jim, George and others,
> With reference to Jim's exegesis, I see two possible objections:
> (1) Compounding naama with vibhattyaadiini will give the sense "I will
> explain the noun endings etc." (naama being a technical term in Pali
> grammar for noun) . This will not fit this chapter since it deals with
> kriyaavibhatti etc.
> (2) It is not mandatory that the referent of naama should be in the
> nominative case. Compare the following: (a) so gaama-vaasiihi saddhi.m
> agga-sassa-daana.m naama adaasi. (b) aha.m gotama-buddhassa naama
> saasane agga-savaka-.t.thaana.m patthesi.m. In these instances the
> referent is in the accusative and genetive cases. The examples are
> from The Aggasaavaka-vatthu of the Dhammapada commentary.