La naissance de la grammaire

Dear Andrew,
this is a nice list of approximate equivalents or equivalents under certain
conditions.
The list is misleading (in both directions) if the =- signs are taken too
literally.
As the list is attached to an online grammar the user should be able to
find out that a word ending in dvitīyā may have other functions than the
'accusative' and the 'accusative' may be expressed by other vibhaktis than
the second (cp. in classical Sanskrit yaj 'sacrifice' in the sentence
indram ajena yajati "to Indra he sacrifices a goat"). And the (partial)
equivalence only works if 'accusative' is taken as a flat indication of a
case ending, forgetting the conceptual basis of the term 'accusative'. Nor
is ṣaṣṭhī simply the 'genitive', etc.  (Mutatis mutandis this applies to
terms such as 'optative' etc.).
Among printed Sanskrit grammars for students I believe that
Devavāṇīpraveśikā
<https://sanskritstudio.wordpress.com/2012/11/14/review-of-devavanipravesika-by-robert-p-goldman/#:~:text=Sutherland%20Goldman%20is%20a%20typical,serve%20as%20a%20reference%20book.>
by
Goldman & Goldman is one of the first to give *again* Sanskrit grammatical
terms for Sanskrit students at the introductory level.
*again*: Historically, introductions to Sanskrit since the nineteenth
century are rather characterized by gradually filtering out Sanskrit
grammatical terms (compare Max Mueller's 1870 *Sanskrit grammar for
beginners* with the "New and abridged edition" of Max Mueller's grammar
prepared by Macdonell and published in 1886). R G Bhandarkar in his  *First
Book of Sanskrit* and *Second Book of Sanskrit *(from 1860s) tried to adopt
"the terminology of the English Grammarians of Sanskrit" while "strictly
following Panini, as explained by Bhattoji Dikshita in his
Siddhantakaumudi" (unfortunately without giving a concordance of English
and Sanskrit grammatical terms).

Best,
Jan Houben

On Thu, 5 Sept 2024 at 09:28, Andrew Ollett via INDOLOGY <
indology@list.indology.info> wrote: