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

Re: SV: SV: [Pali] obscure verse

Expand Messages
  • rett
    ... Hi Ole and group, I was aware of genitives being optionally used with the future passive participles (fpp), but it is fairly new to me that they are used
    Message 1 of 15 , Feb 6, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      >
      >
      >The use of the genitive in construction with ta-participles is common in the
      >language of the Pali canon. This use is recorded as early as Vedic Sanskrit.
      >I believe that the reason why the enclitic pronouns vo, me, no etc. have
      >been considered instrumentals in Pali is because this syntactical function
      >has not been recognised. Panini mentions it at A II.3:67. He also records
      >the use of the genitive with so-called future participles at A II.3:71 to
      >denote the agent. There are more than just a handful of such examples in the
      >canon where one would expect the instrumental, like, for instance,
      >akara.niiyo Maarassa A IV 109: Maara is unable to attack him (viz. the
      >monk), Maara is also quoted saying: akara.niiyo mayham (sic). For once the
      >pronoun is not enclitic.
      >

      Hi Ole and group,

      I was aware of genitives being optionally used with the future passive participles (fpp), but it is fairly new to me that they are used with past passive participles (ppp or -ta participle).

      I looked at A II 3:67 (and 68), but they seem to be restricted to a couple of very specific instances, and evam me sutam wouldn't appear to be covered by those rules. 67 is restricted to the sense of the present tense, the example given being ( tr to pali) rañño puujito. 'worshiped by the king'.

      68 is a bit cryptic (to me) but refers to expressing location. Ex (tr. to pali) idam etesa.m sayitam. 'this is their sleeping (place?)'

      So my question would be whether the non-enlitic-pronominal cases in the pali canon are all examples of these two rules, or whether there are further usages of genitive with -ta that aren't noted by Panini. The latter wouldn't surprise me, since there are obviously a number of syntactic facts that weren't noted by the ancient grammarians. These must have been learned by writers in a more natural way through their reading.

      Finally I'd wonder what those further uses of the genitive with ppp's are, since I doubt that it is simply optional and can be substituted for the instrumental whenever one please.

      I'm just asking in case this has been studied and you know of some of the results offhand. I'm not asking anyone to put their lives on hold to study the question, though, as usual, if anyone comes across examples in their reading I'd love to hear about them.

      best regards,

      /Rett
    • Harry Liew
      Hi Rett, Ole, John, Piya, friends, These discussions have given a beginner a percept on what learning Pali is. Rett is very contagious on treating it as a
      Message 2 of 15 , Feb 6, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Rett, Ole, John, Piya, friends,

        These discussions have given a beginner a percept on what learning Pali is.

        Rett is very contagious on treating it as a hobby.

        Thanks to you all. Definitely it is far from being a mistake in joining this group.

        Sadhu to the pioneers and all who make it living and active.

        Metta,

        Harry


        rett <rett@...> wrote: >
        the question, though, as usual, if anyone comes across examples in their reading I'd love to hear about them.

        best regards,

        /Rett




        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
        [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
        [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
        [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
        Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.



        SPONSORED LINKS
        Pali Beyond belief Tibetan buddhism Zen buddhism

        ---------------------------------
        YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


        Visit your group "Pali" on the web.

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        Pali-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


        ---------------------------------





        ---------------------------------
        Brings words and photos together (easily) with
        PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • John Kelly
        Dear Rett, I always very much appreciate the thoughtful questions you raise and your analytical thinking on issues raised in this Pali forum. Thank you. With
        Message 3 of 15 , Feb 6, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Rett,

          I always very much appreciate the thoughtful questions you raise and
          your analytical thinking on issues raised in this Pali forum.

          Thank you.

          With metta,
          John
          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, rett <rett@...> wrote:
          >
          > >
          > >
          > >The use of the genitive in construction with ta-participles is
          common in the
          > >language of the Pali canon. This use is recorded as early as Vedic
          Sanskrit.
          > >I believe that the reason why the enclitic pronouns vo, me, no etc.
          have
          > >been considered instrumentals in Pali is because this syntactical
          function
          > >has not been recognised. Panini mentions it at A II.3:67. He also
          records
          > >the use of the genitive with so-called future participles at A
          II.3:71 to
          > >denote the agent. There are more than just a handful of such
          examples in the
          > >canon where one would expect the instrumental, like, for instance,
          > >akara.niiyo Maarassa A IV 109: Maara is unable to attack him (viz. the
          > >monk), Maara is also quoted saying: akara.niiyo mayham (sic). For
          once the
          > >pronoun is not enclitic.
          > >
          >
          > Hi Ole and group,
          >
          > I was aware of genitives being optionally used with the future
          passive participles (fpp), but it is fairly new to me that they are
          used with past passive participles (ppp or -ta participle).
          >
          > I looked at A II 3:67 (and 68), but they seem to be restricted to a
          couple of very specific instances, and evam me sutam wouldn't appear
          to be covered by those rules. 67 is restricted to the sense of the
          present tense, the example given being ( tr to pali) rañño puujito.
          'worshiped by the king'.
          >
          > 68 is a bit cryptic (to me) but refers to expressing location. Ex
          (tr. to pali) idam etesa.m sayitam. 'this is their sleeping (place?)'
          >
          > So my question would be whether the non-enlitic-pronominal cases in
          the pali canon are all examples of these two rules, or whether there
          are further usages of genitive with -ta that aren't noted by Panini.
          The latter wouldn't surprise me, since there are obviously a number of
          syntactic facts that weren't noted by the ancient grammarians. These
          must have been learned by writers in a more natural way through their
          reading.
          >
          > Finally I'd wonder what those further uses of the genitive with
          ppp's are, since I doubt that it is simply optional and can be
          substituted for the instrumental whenever one please.
          >
          > I'm just asking in case this has been studied and you know of some
          of the results offhand. I'm not asking anyone to put their lives on
          hold to study the question, though, as usual, if anyone comes across
          examples in their reading I'd love to hear about them.
          >
          > best regards,
          >
          > /Rett
          >
        • Ole Holten Pind
          Hi Rett and group, For the syntactical problem of the use of gen.to denote agent in construction with ta-participles, see the Sanskrit examples quoted in
          Message 4 of 15 , Feb 7, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Rett and group,

            For the syntactical problem of the use of gen.to denote agent in
            construction with ta-participles, see the Sanskrit examples quoted in
            Wackernagel-Debrunner: Altindische Grammatik Vol. II.2 p. 583 b). This usage
            is undoubtedly an archaism as there are many Vedic parallels. You will find
            the same type of construction in Epic Sanskrit like Mahaabhaarata III
            156.14: yasyaite (yasya gen. + ete) puujitaa.h: who honored these. The Pali
            canon evidently reflects the same usage.

            OP

            _____

            Fra: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af rett
            Sendt: 6. februar 2006 22:06
            Til: Pali@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: SV: [Pali] obscure verse


            >
            >
            >The use of the genitive in construction with ta-participles is common in
            the
            >language of the Pali canon. This use is recorded as early as Vedic
            Sanskrit.
            >I believe that the reason why the enclitic pronouns vo, me, no etc. have
            >been considered instrumentals in Pali is because this syntactical function
            >has not been recognised. Panini mentions it at A II.3:67. He also records
            >the use of the genitive with so-called future participles at A II.3:71 to
            >denote the agent. There are more than just a handful of such examples in
            the
            >canon where one would expect the instrumental, like, for instance,
            >akara.niiyo Maarassa A IV 109: Maara is unable to attack him (viz. the
            >monk), Maara is also quoted saying: akara.niiyo mayham (sic). For once the
            >pronoun is not enclitic.
            >

            Hi Ole and group,

            I was aware of genitives being optionally used with the future passive
            participles (fpp), but it is fairly new to me that they are used with past
            passive participles (ppp or -ta participle).

            I looked at A II 3:67 (and 68), but they seem to be restricted to a couple
            of very specific instances, and evam me sutam wouldn't appear to be covered
            by those rules. 67 is restricted to the sense of the present tense, the
            example given being ( tr to pali) rañño puujito. 'worshiped by the king'.

            68 is a bit cryptic (to me) but refers to expressing location. Ex (tr. to
            pali) idam etesa.m sayitam. 'this is their sleeping (place?)'

            So my question would be whether the non-enlitic-pronominal cases in the pali
            canon are all examples of these two rules, or whether there are further
            usages of genitive with -ta that aren't noted by Panini. The latter wouldn't
            surprise me, since there are obviously a number of syntactic facts that
            weren't noted by the ancient grammarians. These must have been learned by
            writers in a more natural way through their reading.

            Finally I'd wonder what those further uses of the genitive with ppp's are,
            since I doubt that it is simply optional and can be substituted for the
            instrumental whenever one please.

            I'm just asking in case this has been studied and you know of some of the
            results offhand. I'm not asking anyone to put their lives on hold to study
            the question, though, as usual, if anyone comes across examples in their
            reading I'd love to hear about them.

            best regards,

            /Rett




            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
            [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
            [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
            [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
            Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web
            only.




            SPONSORED LINKS
            Pali
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Pali&w1=Pali&w2=Beyond+belief&w3=Tibeta
            n+buddhism&w4=Zen+buddhism&c=4&s=69&.sig=RZssH474O0TaqugQ21AQiA>
            Beyond
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Beyond+belief&w1=Pali&w2=Beyond+belief&
            w3=Tibetan+buddhism&w4=Zen+buddhism&c=4&s=69&.sig=b4W_NK9UTz_kVaCpXDamXw>
            belief Tibetan
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Tibetan+buddhism&w1=Pali&w2=Beyond+beli
            ef&w3=Tibetan+buddhism&w4=Zen+buddhism&c=4&s=69&.sig=SlVSzYtSxxXesVQFoyw-ag>
            buddhism
            Zen
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Zen+buddhism&w1=Pali&w2=Beyond+belief&w
            3=Tibetan+buddhism&w4=Zen+buddhism&c=4&s=69&.sig=XkT3Z_Pi4QhLhJgHaFTf0w>
            buddhism

            _____

            YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



            * Visit your group "Pali <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali> " on
            the web.


            * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            Pali-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            <mailto:Pali-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


            * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
            <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


            _____




            <http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=61298&pa
            rtner=hbtools> Upgrade Your Email - Click here!



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • rett
            Hi Ole and group, Thank you again for your very valuable contributions. I ll look at Wackernagel-Debrunner as soon as I can beg/borrow/steal a copy. (just
            Message 5 of 15 , Feb 7, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Ole and group,

              Thank you again for your very valuable contributions. I'll look at Wackernagel-Debrunner as soon as I can beg/borrow/steal a copy. (just kidding about stealing it, of course)

              > You will find
              >the same type of construction in Epic Sanskrit like Mahaabhaarata III
              >156.14: yasyaite (yasya gen. + ete) puujitaa.h: who honored these. The Pali
              >canon evidently reflects the same usage.


              This is interesting because it would seem to be an example of the Panini rule to which you referred earlier (A II.3:67). Here the -ta participle would actually convey the present tense: who honors these. This is how van Buitenen translates it as well.

              Looking back at the original 'obscure verse' I see that this fits your translation perfectly. The -ta participle in question was purakkhataa, which here means 'prefers' (or 'valuates') because the agent was in the genitive (tesa.m).

              This obscure verse has turned out to be very interesting indeed. I'm now quite convinced that the plurals were nasalized and that the genitives are agents of the ppp.

              best regards,

              /Rett
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.