vimzati? -vimzatikA?

[Ashok Aklujkar]

vi.m;satikaa is a diminutive of vi.m;sati. However, sometimes diminutives
lose their 'edge' or special connotation. Sometimes the connotation is
ignored for the sake of metre, etc. In the case of a text title ending in
vi.m;satikaa, there is an even greater likelihood that this would happen,
either because not much significance may be seen in the diminution of a
specific number or because 'twenty' is already (relatively) small or short
and hence not particularly inviting for further diminution.

The intention in applying the suffix -ka/-ikaa in the first place (assuming
that authors like Vasu-bandhu chose the title -- that the title with the
diminutive suffix is the original or genuine title) could have been to
indicate modesty (cf. usages such as 'my small contribution, my two cents
worth') or the short span of the metre (20 verses in sragdharaa or
;saarduula-vikrii.dita take far more space thatn 20 anu.s.tubh-s). The
application of the diminutive suffix could also be due to the affection the
later tradition had for the work. Diminutives frequently connotes
endearment.  -- ashok aklujkar

Jonathan SILK wrote:

>Probably this is a stupid question, but:
>
>Is there something more than free variation going on in the parallel use of
>both VetalapamcavimzatikA and Vetalapamcavimzati? A relatively brief look
>at the books I have which might mention this turned up nothing other than
>the fact that editions and studies seem to use the two interchangeably (as
>far as I could notice in a cursory glance).
>
>Jonathan SILK
>
>****Note New Email Address***:
>
>jonathan.silk at yale.edu