Bahuvrihi Compounds (fwd)

[Richard Salomon]

I agree with Brendan Gillon's reply to the bahuvrihi question, i.e. that
the term is nothing but what it looks like, namely a technical term
of the self-illustrating-example type; cf. modern terms like "bow-wow
word".  (Also old linguistic jokes like "methatasis" and "haplogy".)  Like
the names of other compound types, the term was evidently traditional
and conventional already by Panini's time [note the (non-)definition in
Pa.2.2.23], and we can hardly hope to pin down its origins beyond that. 
Some of the other terms are more problematic than "bahuvrihi," especially 
"karmadharaya"; see, for example, Edgerton's article in JAOS 72 (1952),
pp.80-1.

Richard Salomon
Asian Languages & Literature
University of Washington
Seattle WA



 


> From THRASHER at MAIL.LOC.GOV 05 1993 May GMT 15:33:15
Date: 05 May 1993 15:33:15 GMT
From: ALLEN W THRASHER <THRASHER at MAIL.LOC.GOV>
Subject: URDU EPHEMERA OFFER

          Would  any library with  an exchange and  gift relation with  the 
          Library of Congress like about  250  Urdu pamphlets from Pakistan 
          from  1960-1980,  mostly  ultra-routine  Islamic  materials   and 
          religiopolitical materials (e.g.  on  the  status  of Jerusalem). 
          These would be duplicates for  any library that had received Urdu 
          ephemera from  the cooperative acquisitions (PL480) program.   We 
          have decided that  the items in question are  too trivial for  us 
          even  to  fiche  in collections.If  the  referees  don't  object, 
          perhaps the response should go  to  the networks and  not  to  me 
          directly, so  that people  can  know they've already been claimed 
          and if they're interested know where they go. 
           
          Allen Thrasher 
          Asian Division 
          Library of Congress 
          Washington, DC 20540-4744 
          USA 
          thrasher at mail.loc.gov 
           
          tel. 202-707-5600 
          fax 202-707-1724