[INDOLOGY] Non-standard sandhi

[Madhav Deshpande]

Irregularity of avagraha has sometimes confused great scholars like
Whitney.  While editing the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā on the basis of a
single available manuscript, Whitney found a rule एकेस्पृष्टं in the
manuscript.  The two previous rules described the prayatna in the
pronunciation of spirants and vowels [ऊष्मणां विवृतं च, स्वराणां च].  These
rules described the effort involved in these two types of sounds as *vivr̥ta
*"open".  Then came the rule एकेस्पृष्टं which Whitney translated as "some
consider it as forming a contact."  He then commented that this view is
"too obviously and grossly incorrect, one would think, to be worth
quoting."  Ever since I read Whitney's edition and his comments, I had a
feeling that the original rule must have been एकेऽस्पृष्टं.  The prayatna
of vowels is described as being अस्पृष्ट in many sources, and the Śaunakīya
Caturādhyāyikā was making a presentation of the *vivr̥ta *view and the
*aspr̥ṣṭa
*view as alternatives.  This was later justified by my examination of many
other manuscripts that did use the sign of *avagraha*.  So the reading in
my edition reads एकेऽस्पृष्टम्.

Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor Emeritus
Sanskrit and Linguistics
University of Michigan
[Residence: Campbell, California]


On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:45 PM Elliot Stern via INDOLOGY <
indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

> The copper plate inscription (single) avagrahaḥ shows that even in the 9th
> century CE it could mark assimilation of at least ā + a. We cannot infer
> from this example, however, that double avagrahaḥ marking assimilation is
> an ancient usage. The only uses of double avagrahaḥ I’ve seen are in
> colonial period and later printed texts and in manuscripts copied from
> printed texts. These sources are not “quite old”.
>
> On Mar 19, 2019, at 9:20 PM, Harry Spier <hspier.muktabodha at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:49 PM Elliot Stern via INDOLOGY <
> indology at list.indology.info> wrote:
>
>> . Incidentally, the avagrahaḥ in the copper plate inscription is an
>> instance, in Whitney’s terminology, of a hyphen. The text reads:
>> vā’numodeta.
>>
>>
>> Does that mean the practice in some modern printed editions of using
> avagraha and double avagrahas to indicate the assimilations of a+a,  ā+ā,
> ā+a etc. is actually quite old?
>
> Harry Spier
>
>
> Elliot M. Stern
> 552 South 48th Street
> Philadelphia, PA 19143-2029
> emstern1948 at gmail.com
> 267-240-8418
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
> unsubscribe)
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20190319/4c6c6247/attachment.htm>