Dear Krishnaprasad,

It would be interesting to know the first attestation for the use of avagraha in manuscripts and inscriptions. According to G. Bühler, the oldest attestation of an avagraha used for the elision of a can be found of a copper plate inscription of the Rāṣṭrakūta king Dhruva from 834/5 CE (Indische Palaeographie, p. 86). This reference may, of course, not represent the latest state of research.

 

Best,

 

Philipp

__________________________

Dr. Philipp A. Maas

Research Associate
Institut für Indologie und Zentralasienwissenschaften

Universität Leipzig

___________________________

https://spp1448.academia.edu/PhilippMaas

Am Di., 19. März 2019 um 01:31 Uhr schrieb Krishnaprasad G via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info>:

This avagrahava is very very modern. 

In Mahabhasya Patanjali writes for भ्यसो भ्यम् as किमयं भ्यंशब्दः अहोस्विद् अभ्यम् शब्दः 

कुतः सन्देहः ? समानो निर्देशः।

And even in the time of Bhattoji Dikshita was not used.

For समुदाङ्भ्यो यमोग्रन्थे  he comments, अग्रन्थे इतिच्छेदः। 

And there is a commentary on Bhagavatam by Satyadharmatirtha he is 250 years back. Even he writes such. 

So no difference in pronunciation.

KP

On Tue 19 Mar, 2019, 3:12 AM Madhav Deshpande via INDOLOGY, <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Dear Harry,

     You have raised an interesting question.  The term avagraha is used in older texts like the Prātiśākhyas and Śikṣās to refer to a pause between members of compounds in the Padapāṭha, and some texts like the Śaunakīya-Caturādhyāyikā (3.3.35: ऋगर्धर्चपदान्तावग्रहविवृत्तिषु मात्राकाल: काल:) assign the duration of a mātrā to this type of avagraha.  The written sign of avagraha (ऽ) in later times got extended to cases like ततोऽपि and एतेऽपि, and yet I have not seen evidence for this extension in any of the phonetic texts, and to my knowledge there is no actual pause in recitation in these cases.  Such a pause would create difficulties with the meters.  How, when and why the term avagraha and the written sign (ऽ) got extended to such uses needs to be investigated.  But it has no phonetic value as far as I know.

Madhav

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus

Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan

[Residence: Campbell, California]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 12:25 PM Harry Spier via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

How are avagrahas considered in metrical verses?  

Is --- sahite 'sya --- pronounced as if it was --- sahite sya --- or is there a slight pause for the avagraha?

Harry Spier

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:43 AM Martin Gansten via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Thanks to Madhav Deshpande, Andrey Klebanov and Harry Spier for their (off-list) replies to my question, confirming that the sandhi e + a > a a is indeed non-standard. Madhav wrote:

I have not seen another example exactly like this, and have not come across a traditional rule to deal with this.  I wonder how hybrid this text is, or whether there are manuscript variants for this particular passage.  One thing I noticed is that if we keep the presumed pre-sandhi reading of "sahite asya," the meter does not work, and neither does it work with the regular sandhi "sahite 'sya."  The meter does seem to work with "sahita asya".  The last syllable of "sahita" needs to be metrically light.  So I suppose some sort of metrical compulsion may have resulted in this irregularity.  Just a thought.

The work in question is a largish one (~550 stanzas) and written in perfectly grammatical, sometimes even elegant Sanskrit in a variety of metres, with no particular suggestion of being hybrid, and the witnesses I have seen (two of the work itself, and half a dozen of another work quoting the verse in question) all agree on the reading of this passage.

Harry raised the same point about the metre (svāgatā), but it wouldn't be difficult to rephrase the pāda so as to conform to both metre and standard sandhi (e.g., tena vāpi sahite 'sya ca labdhis). So I am left with the impression that Yādavasūri must have considered his choice of sandhi in this case unproblematic, although he usually follows the stardard rule e + a > e ['].

Thanks again,
Martin

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)