VyAkaraNa question: contextual factors in determining meaning

[Madhav Deshpande]

Grammarians have been only marginally interested in the "extralinguistic
psychological" factors.  For example, consider Panini's rule k.rtyair
adhikaarthavacane (2.1.33).  This rule allows derivation of compounds like
kaakapeyaa nadii, if some "additional significance is conveyed".  The
additional significance, as the commentators suggest is praise or blame of
the river.  While the grammarians thus admit that in some cases such
"additional meanings" are of grammatical relevance, they have not
generally gone into theorizing about how one understands these
"additional" meanings.  We do not hear of Vyanjanaa in the grammatical
tradition until we come to the works of Naagezabha.t.ta, where we have
contrary indications about its acceptance.  You may look up an interesting
paper by Saroja Bhate:  "Vyanjana as Reflected in the Formal Structure of
Language", in Paninian Studies, Professor S.D. Joshi Felicitation Volume,
edited by Madhav Deshpande and Saroja Bhate, 1991, Michigan Papers on
South and Southeast Asia, # 37, Center for South and Southeast Asian
Studies, University of Michigan, pp. 55-64.  K.P. Shukla, in his Sanskrit
work (Vaiyaakara.naanaam anye.saam ca matena zabda-svaruupa-tac-chakti-
vicaara.h, Varanasi, 1979, p. 125), refers to the factors cited by Birgit
Kellner with the term abhidhaa-niyaamaka.  They help one choose between
alternative basic meanings.  Shukla distinguishes between possible
subsequent suggestions etc. from the initial determination from among
alternative basic meanings (p. 127):  kvacic ca prakara.naadinaa artha-
bodhaanantaram vaktur boddhavyasya ca devadattader vailak.sa.nyena nava-
navonme.sazaalinyaa pratibhayaa ca vyangyo 'py artha.h pratiiyate / ...
ete ca sa.myogaadaya.h ... zaktyopasthitaanaam aneke.saam arthaanaam
ekataramaatraarthe taatparyasya nir.nayadvaaraa
tanmaatraarthavi.sayakaanvayabodhajanakaa bhavantiiti taatparyam /

Best,
                                                Madhav Deshpande



On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, birgit kellner wrote:

> Dear list-members,
>
> I would like to know whether there exist any detailed studies of
> contextual factors that assist in the disambiguation of meaning, as
> posited by VaiAkaraNas and MImAMsakas.
>
> I am referring to such factors as "context" (prakaraNa), "purpose" (artha), "suitability" (sAmarthya), "propriety"
> (aucitya). In his "Indian theories of meaning" (1963, pp.48ff.), K.
> Kunjunni Raja refers to different lists of such factors as contained
> in the BRhaddevatA and VAkyapadIya. Before I start taking a closer
> look at the primary sources he indicates, I would like to know whether
> anyone else might already have done so and provided a systematic
> comparison of these lists as well as possibly divergent
> interpretations of the invididual items.
>
> I am particularly interested in whether extralinguistic, psychological factors may (or may not) have
> been viewed as relevant in this context. Most of the items listed by
> BhartRhari and others (at least as given by Kunjunni Raja) seem to be either
> linguistic (grammatical gender, semantic restrictions imposed by other
> linguistic items) or situational (context, purpose), but there do not
> appear any exclusively speaker- or hearer-related psychological
> factors. This may of course be explicable through the grammarians'
> background, but it is nevertheless of interest to the particular
> perspective from which I am looking at these lists.
>
> Any hints will be greatly appreciated,
>
> ---
> Best regards,
>
> Birgit Kellner
> Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies
> Vienna University
>