[INDOLOGY] Misprint in Vedic Sanskrit text or something else?

[Carmen Spiers]

Dear Harry,
it isn't necessarily a typo as vocatives of this type can occasionally end
in long -ā instead of the regular short -a; for some possible reasons for
this see Debrunner and Wackernagel's Altindische Grammatik III §46b (1975,
p.96) (and perhaps check Klaus Strunk's book on pluti).
Best, Carmen Spiers (IFP Pondicherry/GREI Paris)

Am So., 27. März 2022 um 03:00 Uhr schrieb Harry Spier via INDOLOGY <
indology at list.indology.info>:

> Dear list members,
> I've been looking at the Śrī-sūktam text in Scheftelowitz's  Apokryphen
> des Rgveda.
>  In his text of the hymn  in verse 12 there is the phrase: ... ciklītā
> vasa me gṛhe
> but in verse 16 a few verses on, the same phrase is spelled:  ciklīta
> vasa me gṛhe
> (See attached pdf page.)
>
> I've checked the other online  Ṛg-veda khilāni but they are all derived
> from Scheftelowitz and agree with his spelling of these two verses.
> Scheftelowtiz in his study on the Śrīsūkta translates the phrase the same
> in both verses.
> Verse 12  Ciklīta ("Schlamm"), wohne in meinem Gehöfte
> Verse 16  Ciklīta wohne in meinem Gehöfte
>
> Is the spelling  ciklītā in verse 12 a misprint in Scheftelowitz's text
> or is  do the  two different spellings represent how it actually is in the Ṛg-veda
> khilāni
>
> Thanks,
> Harry Spier
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>


-- 
Carmen Sylvia Spiers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20220327/f655cf1b/attachment.htm>