ulUkhala (was pie/sanskrit)

[Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan]

This is what Thieme writes in his review.

<<ulU'khala- 'mortar' (380) occurs several times in RV 1.28.6, a hymn
designated for recitation at a simple ceremony, the pressing of Soma not on
the sacrificial ground  but in the house, in the presence of the wife
(compare Goldner's translation). It is a word, then, I should say, most
probably taken from the language of women, who use the mortar as a kitchen
tool. We need only transpose it into the sounds of the educated language,
used by the poets, to get an unimpeachable analysis: *urU'-khara
'characterized by a broad khara (that is, by a broad "ground, stamping
ground")' (thus Grassman). For khala '[stamping] ground, [threshing] floor'
(382) is, again, not a 'certain Dravidian loan', but the vernacular
counterfeit of the educated form khara, used in the sacrificial language as a
designation of the square, slightly elevated and specially prepared 'ground
where the sacrificial vessels are kept when not in use'. kAtyAyana, in my
opinion, already analyzed the word correctly: it is to kha 'hole, empty
space', what USara 'salty' is to USa 'salt step', kuJjara 'elephant' to kuJja
'thicket, copse', etc. (vArtt. 1 on pAN. 5.2.107). He has met with scepticism
from Wckernagel-Debrunner (2.2.686b), but obviously only because they rely on
the somewhat foolish assumption of the kAzikA that kAtyAyana speaks of khara
'donkey'. In reality, he is thinking, of course, of the sacrificial khara,
which is indeed a 'place whhere there is kha', being void of grass, as the
'threshing ground' (khala) and the pate (khalati 'baldheaded') are void of
growth, or as a particular mountain called khalatika (vArtt.1 on pAN. 1.2.52)
is void of trees. Patanjali's remark makes this certain (1.229.2): 'Forests
that are not far away from a "mountain without trees" (khalatika m.) are
called "khalatika".' The soundness of kAtyAyana's linguistic sense is
vindicated by Akhara 'hole [inhabited by animals]' (RV+), which belongs to
Akha (mahAbh. I.256.9 derives this, together with Akhara, from khan 'dig') as
khara to kha.>>

I would appreciate a rigorous analysis of the above from the esteemed
linguists and Vedic scholars of the list.

Regards
S. Palaniappan