etymol. final r, s / optionality of ext. sandhi?

[Lars Martin Fosse]

>
>1. Renou gives, in flexional forms, always final r or s, never
>visarga. In particular he keeps the distinction between final V+s
>and V+r (V not a or aa). For example he gives for the aorist par.
>of kR 2sg "akaarSiis", 3pl "akaarSur" while for the same forms SEL
>would give "akaarSiiH" and "akaarSuH". Is there _any_ reason what-
>soever (not only in such forms but in any hidden corner of the
>language) to keep this distinction (between final Vr and Vs, V not
>a/aa) or is this just a little etymological pedantry?

It is a little etymological pedantry. Gonda does the same in his small
introductory book to Skt.

Best regards,

Lars Martin Fosse


Dr.art. Lars Martin Fosse
Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,
0674 Oslo

Tel: +47 22 32 12 19
Fax: +47 22 32 12 19
Email: lmfosse at online.no
Mobile phone: 90 91 91 45