A simple question for Sanskritists

[Madhav Deshpande]

It should be noted that doublets like patra and pattra are allowed by
Panini's optional rules of consonantal doubling, cf. Panini 8.4.47.  This
sort of doubling is purely a case phonological variation, and is not
connected with etymology.  In some cases, however, the occurrence of
geminates is directly related to the etymology of the words, e.g. tattva,
dattvaa etc.  Thus, we have phonological variation for vartate/varttate,
but v.rtti has to have two t-s.
        Best,
                                Madhav Deshpande

On Fri, 12 Feb 1999, harry spier wrote:

> "patra" or "pattra"
>
> Monier-Williams on-line dictionary, Cappeller on-line dictionary ,
> Bhagavad Gitas of Radhakrishnan and Winthrop Sargeant use "pattra"
>
> Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary and the on-line dictionary site,
> Bhagavad Gita's of Warrier, Divine Life Society, Swami Prabhupada use
> "patra"
>
> Same definition in all cases:  i.e. leaf, lotus etc.
>
> If "patra" is correct and "pattra" wrong, does the written edition of
> Monier-William's have the same misprint/error?
>
> Harry Spier
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>