Traditionally, anekam of anekam anyapadārthe (Aṣṭādhyāyī 2.2.24), first stated after 2.2.23: śeṣo bahuvrīhiḥ, is considered to recur in 2.2.29: cārthe dvandvaḥ, so that a dvandva can be formed from any number of padas; cf. Kāśikā 2.2.29: anekam iti vartate |anekaṁ subantaṁ cārthe vartamānaṁ samasyate ... There does not, therefore, appear to be a binary bracketing.  Regards, George
On Nov 24, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Oliver Hellwig wrote:

Dear list,

a very basic question about Sanskrit syntax: Are dvandvas, in traditional Sanskrit grammar, considered to be inherently binary, which means that dvandvas consisting of n>2 words should be bracketed by (n-1) brackets when constructing a dependency tree?

Ex.:
kaTutiktakashAyaushadha = "a herb that is kaTu, tikta and kashaya"

Should a dependency tree constructed from this expression look like ...
a. ((((kaTu + tikta)[dvandva] + kashAya)[dvandva]) + aushadha)[...] = "nested" dvandva
or like
b. ((kaTu + tikta + kashAya)[dvandva] + aushadha)[...]

Any comment is welcome!

Best regards, Oliver Hellwig

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
http://listinfo.indology.info