Re: [Pali] Re: SN XII.2 relational grammar.
- Dear Jim,
I am so glad you remind us of the relational grammar. Very true.
with appreciation, Nina.
op 29-07-2005 23:39 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@...:
> Dear Nina and Alan,
> I may be inaccurate in writing: ' The "ya.m"
> qualifies "a~n~naa.na.m"...' I think "qualifies" is normally used to
> describe an adjective + noun relation which would be the case if it
> were "whatever nescience...(there is)". But in our case I translated
> it as "whatever is nescience regarding..." with a copula "is" which
> causes "whatever" to lose its adjectival function.
> From Ven. Pandita's Relationl Grammar, the nominal identity relation
> below seems to come closest to describing the ya.m + a~n~naa.na.m
> <<A.1. Nominal Identity (Ordinary) Relation [NIO]
> so acariyo = He (is/was) (a/the) teacher.>>
> Best wishes,
>> op 29-07-2005 16:38 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...:
>>> I agree that this is a pronoun but with the meaning "whatever"
>>> instead of "it". The "ya.m" qualifies "a~n~naa.na.m" in each of
>>> four occurrences in the sentence but omitted in the last three
> due to
>>> ellipsis. Your sentence is incomplete without the concluding main
>>> clause "aya.m vuccati bhikkhave avijjaa". What you have is a
> chain of
>>> four relative clauses: