Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The New Pali Course Part III [49/120] gerund and gerundive.

Expand Messages
  • Ong Yong Peng
    Dear Nina and Bryan, thank you. Thanks to Nina for the references to Warder and Duroiselle. Thanks to Bryan for the derivation of vandiya , which got me
    Message 1 of 102 , Jul 10, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Nina and Bryan,

      thank you. Thanks to Nina for the references to Warder and Duroiselle. Thanks to Bryan for the derivation of 'vandiya', which got me stuck.

      I guess we are dealing with a "murky" area which many modern (English) books on Pali grammar have not clarified well. I say it is a "murky" area because, here we discuss about verbal _nouns_ (gerunds) and verbal _adjectives_ (gerundives) and try to apply them to Pali, but strictly in Pali there is no clear distinction between nouns and adjectives. Hence, I gave the Latin definitions of gerund and gerundive just to relate to English.

      We may have to delve into the classical grammars or Sanskrit to go further in this area. To close off, I like to ask a few questions on gerund and gerundive more relevant to our usual discussions:

      (a) on gerundives

      Since vandiya and vanditabba are both gerundives (or future passive participle), then using both in the same verse is primarily due to metrical reasons?

      Also, based on what I wrote above, I would prefer using "future passive participle" than "verbal adjective" or gerundive.

      (b) on gerunds

      Forms like vanditvaa, "having praised", do we call them gerunds, or should we call them absolutives instead? If we define gerunds strictly as "verbal noun", then words like vanditvaa are hardly used as nouns in Pali.

      One example is 'gacchati', we have 'gantvaa' meaning 'having gone', and we also have 'gamana' meaning 'going'. In this case, 'gamana' fit the description of a gerund better than 'gantvaa'. Do you agree?


      metta,
      Yong Peng.


      --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Levman wrote:

      A future passive participle and a gerundive (also called a gerundivium which is its Latin name) are the same thing - a "future passive participle" (another name for a gerundivium) which is a verbal adjective, with the meaning "to be [past participle]" or "should be [past participle]", or "ought to be [past participle]."

      In this case vandiyaa is a gerundive meaning "to be praised" ("ought to be praised" or "should be praised") modifying the Buddhaas; the Sanskrit equivalent is vandya ("to be praised"), so vandiyaa, with the extra epenthetic -i- must be an eastern form (which is very common in Paali, e.g. ariya for ayya from Skt. arya.)

      vanditabba is derived from Skt. vanditavya which also means to be praised and is also a future passive participle, gerundive, a verbal adjective modifying Tathaagataas.. In Skt. there are three principle endings which create a gerundive: -ya, -tavya and  -aniiya,, all added to the root in its gu.na grade. Paali also has more than one form as is apparent.

      All gerundives are passive. Gerunds are usually active (but can also be passive), but are always indeclinable. Since these gerundive forms (vandiyaa and vanditabbaa) are both in agreement with a noun (in nom. pl.) then one knows right away that they must be gerundives (verbal adjectives), not gerunds.  The gerund form from the verb vandati is vanditvaa and it usu. means "having praised" and would generally take an object in the accusative.

      >> YP: vandiya (PTS: gerundive of vandati) to be honoured.
      >> YP: vanditabba (future passive participle of vandati) should be
      >> honoured.
      >> YP: This is the first time I encounter a "gerundive" and a
      >> "future passive participle" of the same verb so close together.
      >> In Latin, a gerund is a verbal noun, while a gerundive is a verbal
      >> adjective.

      > N: I looked up Warder lesson 8: a gerund (pubbakiriya) is an
      > indeclinable participle, expressing a action preceding the action
      > of the main verb. Agent of gerund is the same as agent of main
      > action.
      > endings on -tvaa, itvaa, or ya.
      > We have met forms like: upasa.mkamitvaa, having approached... And
      > aadaaya, having taken.
      > Duroiselle, at end deals with Gerund, but not with gerundive.
      > But now we have here a gerundive, or in Latin: gerundivum, a form
      > with: must, or, to be: vandiya.
      > As you say, this is a verbal noun.
    • Bryan Levman
      Thanks Nina for the explanation. You certainly know more about this material (Abhidhamma) than I do, Metta, Bryan ... From: Nina van Gorkom
      Message 102 of 102 , Jul 26, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks Nina for the explanation. You certainly know more about this material (Abhidhamma) than I do,

        Metta, Bryan



        --- On Tue, 7/26/11, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:

        From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...>
        Subject: Re: [Pali] The New Pali Course Part III [50/120]
        To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
        Received: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 1:47 PM
















         









        Dear Bryan,

        Op 26-jul-2011, om 14:52 heeft Bryan Levman het volgende geschreven:



        > I am not so sure about maggaphala as a dvandva. The PED seems to

        > suggest that the compound is identical with sotaapattiphala, i. .e

        > the fruit of entering upon the path, which would make it a gen.

        > tatpurusa.

        ------

        N: There are the expressions: sotaapatti magga and sotaapatti phala.

        I think that these refer to the magga-citta (lokuttara kusala citta)

        of the sotaapanna and the phalacitta (lokuttara vipaakacitta

        immediately following) of the sotaapanna. Thus, sotapattiphala: who

        has realized the fruition-consciousness of the stage of the sotaapanna.

        I have come across the expression of someone who should realize

        maggaphala. I take this as: realize maggacitta and phalacitta.



        -------

        Nina.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



























        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.