Re: [INDOLOGY] Patañjali's syntax

Wed Oct 30 14:21:12 UTC 2013

Dear All,

A clue as to how to interpret yad apazabdaH may lie in the morphology of apabhASitavai, which is a Vedic formation; not also the Vedic particles ha vai. This may make it possible to interpret the passage mleccho ha vai eSo yad apazabdaH as an instance of what I have termed the "invariable yad-construction" (see the grammatical notes in my UpaniSadic Reader); so the translation would be something like this 'That indeed is barbarous [taking mleccha as adjective], namely/viz. incorrect speech.'

All the best,

Hans Henrich Hock

On 30 Oct 2013, at 09:06, Adriano Aprigliano wrote:

Thanks to Dominik W. and Lars F. for the propositions.

I think yad is the main problem in fact... and still. It is solved by Lars as 'because': the syntax becomes smooth in terms of order, but still taking apazabdah as bahuvriihi sounds to me quite strange.

As for Naageza's explanation brought up by Dominik, it leaves yad out, as far as I could gather from the translation.

Understanding mleccha as an adjective of apazabda, albeit uncommon, as noted by Naageza himself, seems rather ok. But next the text goes: mlecchaah maa bhumety adhyeyam vyaakaranam.

So it seems to me that maybe the commentators were a bit at lost with that construction themselves, don't you think?

Best

(first response went just to D. Wujastyk, sorry)

Prof. Dr. Adriano Aprigliano
Área de Língua e Literatura Latina

Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas
Universidade de São Paulo
São Paulo, Brasil

Em 30/10/2013, às 11:40, Dominik Wujastyk escreveu:

This exact point was discussed in the Pradīpa and clarified further in the Uddyota.   One might think, Nāgeśa said, that the word mleccha would usually refer to a person or a place; how could it refer to a bad word?  But in this case it is a term of criticism.  "A bad word (apaśabda) is really despicable (mleccha)."

("Bad word" is of course probably not one's final choice for translating apaśabda.)

--
Dr Dominik Wujastyk
Department of South Asia, Tibetan and Buddhist Studies<http://stb.univie.ac.at/>,
University of Vienna,
Spitalgasse 2-4, Courtyard 2, Entrance 2.1
1090 Vienna, Austria
and
Adjunct Professor,
Division of Health and Humanities,
St. John's Research Institute,<http://www.sjri.res.in/> Bangalore, India.
Project<http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/caraka/> | home page<http://www.academia.edu/DominikWujastyk> | HSSA<http://hssa.sayahna.org/> | PGP<http://wujastyk.net/pgp.html>

On 30 October 2013 13:38, Adriano Aprigliano <aprigliano at usp.br<mailto:aprigliano at usp.br>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

I have been having doubts on how to translate this MBhāṣ sentence (Kielhorn, p.2, line 8):

te'surāḥ. te surā helayo helaya iti kurvantaḥ parābabhūvuḥ. tasmād brāhmaṇena na mlecchitavai nāpabhāṣitavai. mleccho ha vā eṣa yad apaśabdaḥ.

The problem is on the last sentence, what to make of that yad apaśabdaḥ. I start with ' for this one/he is indeed a mleccha...".

Any suggestions?

best wishes

Prof. Dr. Adriano Aprigliano
Área de Língua e Literatura Latina

Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas
Universidade de São Paulo
São Paulo, Brasil

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
http://listinfo.indology.info<http://listinfo.indology.info/>

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
http://listinfo.indology.info

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20131030/f7aa87d2/attachment.htm>