Thanks, Madhav. 

The padapāṭhakara evidently considered askṛta to be anomalous from his synchronic perspective; and Pāṇini’s treatment too makes synchronic sense. Here as elsewhere we need to remember that the Sanskrit grammatical tradition was synchronic, whereas western approaches to Sanskrit, especially to Vedic, tend to be diachronic.

For historical-comparative linguists this difference, and the different conclusions regarding forms like askṛta, pariṣkṛta, should actually be quite instructive; they raise interesting questions about the development of the language after the “Ur-Ṛg Veda”. (George Cardona has had interesting things to say in this regard, in reference to metrical issues.)

I hope you are keeping well,

Hans

On 29 Oct2020, at 17:53, Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh@umich.edu> wrote:

Hello Hans,

     The fact that R̥gveda 10.127.3 has askr̥ta but the Padapāṭha has akr̥ta, probably explains why Pāṇini did not include a root skr̥, but only proposed a contextual insertion or augmentation with "s". Best,

Madhav

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Hock, Hans Henrich <hhhock@illinois.edu> wrote:

Addition: A Sanskrit example of s-mobile would be the coexistence of a root tan- and a root stan-, both meaning ‘thunder’

Dear Madhav and All,

There is also pari-ṣkṛta-. Unfortunately, Mayrhofer could not find any convincing parallels outside Sanskrit. However, there is a general phenomenon in Indo-European, called s-mobile (the varying presence or absence of a root-initial s). The Wikipedia entry "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_s-mobile” has a useful summary, as well as some relevant references. (An alternative, but more speculative explanation would be that in structures like namaskṛ the s was reinterpreted as a simplification of earlier ss (similar to asi ‘you are’ for expected as-si, not also the Vedic external sandhi for -s#st etc.) and that this led to the notion that there is an alternative root form skṛ-.)

All the best,

Hans

On 29 Oct2020, at 16:58, Madhav Deshpande via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Dear colleagues,

In R̥gveda 10.127.3 there is a verb form askr̥ta showing the trace of the root skr̥.  The Padapāṭha of Śākalya presents this form as akr̥ta, indicating that the root skr̥ as an independent root is no longer recognized. What is going on? Can one presume that forms like saṃskaroti where Pāṇini prescribes the insertion of "s" are actually survivals of this earlier root skr̥.  Please suggest references that I can look up.

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

_______________________________________________
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)