I generally find it best, especially at the early stages of Sanskrit learning/teaching, to avoid equating grammatical terms from different systems. Most of the Sanskrit terms are fairly precise, whereas there is often some variation in the definitions for Latinate terminology and the two don't often match up exactly. Plus, to be accurate one often ends up going on long tangents. 

The technical terms sārvadhātuka and ārdhudhātuka and the results of being so termed are very interesting as well as complex. I'm not sure how far we can associated the stem to which sārvadhātuka suffixes are added with what is commonly termed the present stem. Since all of the personal endings are termed sārvadhātuka (tiṅśit sārvadhātukam), sārvadhātuka suffixes occur with all of the tense stems.   The vikaraṇas, many of which are associated with the class signs used to build the present stem, are not universally termed sārvadhātuka either; u of the tanādi gaṇa (3.1.79) is ārdhadhātuka (it's not marked with Ś) and hence is not ṅit by P. 1.2.4 sārvadhātukam apit. Consequently there is guṇa-strengthening in karoti from √ kṛ (ḌUkṛÑ) when u follows but not in sunoti from √ su (ṣuÑ) when Śnu follows (Śnu, being treated a marked with Ṅ by P. 1.2.4 and hence blocking guṇa-strengthening according to P. 1.1.5 kṅiti ca). In any case, this can get a bit complicated quickly, so it might be best to treat each set of terms separately and not look for one to one correspondences.

Could a reference be given to Max Müller's translation? It doesn't immediately come to mind. 

All the Best,
Victor