365bet娱乐

[Full title: The causes of verbal knowledge in 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻 (1) 膧办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�]

Amongst all the three conditions, the greatest linguistic importance has to be given to 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�. According to the 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补蝉, it is 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� on the basis of which one can understand the syntactic unity of a sentence. 膧办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is the most important and well-comprehensive of all the factors.

The factor or condition about 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� or the mutual expectancy, among words in a sentence is generally believed to have been promulgated first by the 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补蝉; but the necessity for interdependence of words to give a unified sense, as in a compound word or a sentence, was recognized even earlier by the grammarians. 笔腻峁噄苍颈 himself says^[1] that words can form a compound word only if they have 蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补 or capacity; this term 蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补 has been variously interpreted by different commentators. According to some it is 惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ� or mutual connection pertaining to the meaning,^[2] in which sense it is similar to the condition of 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� given by the 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补蝉. According to some others 蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补 is to be explained as 别办腻谤迟丑墨产丑腻惫补, or unification of meaning;^[3] that is to say, the different words with different meanings are made to signify a unified sense. This latter view may be compared to the condition of arthaikatva given by Jaimini, when he explained it as a unity of sense. 笔腻峁噄苍颈 discusses compounds words, whereas Jaimini deals with the sentence, still the conditions referred to seem to be simililar. It is strictly speaking, 蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补 is the capacity of the words for mutual association, 惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ� is their interdependence, and 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is the need one has for the other for completing the sense. 笔补迟补帽箩补濒颈 explains these two views as mutually exclusive, and accepts the 别办腻谤迟丑墨产丑腻惫补 point of view as the correct one. According to Haradatta^[4] both 惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ� and 别办腻谤迟丑墨产丑腻惫补 are necessary in a compound word, since in the absence of mutual connection of meanings, words are not allowed to form a compound. But others like 碍补颈测补峁璦 give^[5] these two as the conditions for a sentence and a compound word respectively.

The word 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is derived from the root 办腻峁卥峁�, which means 鈥榯o expect鈥�, 鈥榯o desire鈥� (for something to follow) and 鈥榯o thirst 补蹿迟别谤鈥�. 膧办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� can accordingly be rendered as: expectation to learn more鈥搕he anxiety, in other words, that is roused in one through what is already known but not known sufficiently or adequately, or through what has just come to the attention of the audience, but not in any coherent form. It consists in a word not being able to convey a complete sense in the absence of another word; literally 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is the desire on the part of the listeners to know the other words or their meanings to complete the sense. A word is said to have 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� for another, if it cannot, without the latter, produce knowledge of its interconnection in an utterance. In every language certain words necessarily require certain other words to complete the sense. Thus a noun in the nominative case requires a verb to convey a complete meaning; a verb like 鈥榖ring鈥� has expectancy for a word denoting some object.^[6] A string of words such as 鈥榗ow, horse, man, elephant鈥�^[7] does not convey a complete sense, as there is no connection between them owing to lack of 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�.

According to 艢膩likan膩tha 惭颈艣谤补, the staunch follower of the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻, 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� being the curiosity on the part of the listener is the enquiry into another meaning and that enquiry arises due to the non-completion of the entire denotation or sometimes only of a denotable.^[8] It is because of the fact that when only one pada (word) like 诲惫腻谤补尘 (door) is used, there will be no denotation at all.^[9] 膧办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� consists in a word not being able to convey a complete sense in the absence of an another word. A word is said to have 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� for another, if it cannot, without the latter, produce knowledge of its inter-relation in an utterance. In a language, certain words necessarily require certain other words to complete the sense. For example, a verb like 鈥榖ring鈥� has expectancy for a word denoting some object.^[10] This 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� according to 艢膩likan膩tha 惭颈艣谤补, is admitted as an auxiliary cause (耻辫补濒补办峁�a苍补) in respect of the knowledge of the sentence-meaning.^[11] He also solves the objection as to why 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is admitted as an auxiliary cause of understanding the sentence-meaning, while sannidhi (contiguity) and 测辞驳测补迟腻 (compatibility) can also be accepted as such. In his reply to this objection, 艢膩likan膩tha contends that there can be no syntactic unity without 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� even if sannidhi and 测辞驳测补迟腻 are present. In order to explain it clearly, he cites an example viz. ayameti putro r膩j帽a岣�, 辫耻谤耻峁�o测补尘补辫补苍墨测补迟腻尘 (here comes the son of the king, let this person be removed), wherein the word 谤腻箩补 (king) being unexpectant because of its relation with the word putra (son), is not syntactically related to the word 辫耻谤耻峁�a (person).

It may be noted here that the 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补蝉 explain 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� not only on the basis of the syntactic incompleteness of the sentence, but also on the basis of the psychological incompleteness of the idea.^[12] They are concerned with the interpretation of the Vedic injunctions.

膧办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� does not arise at once in respect of all the counter correlatives (pratiyogi), but it arises according to the peculiar order in which the causes occur.^[13] In this context, 艢膩likan膩tha refers to three essential psychological 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� which are towards-(i) 惫颈峁�a测补 or the act enjoined; (ii) 办补谤补峁嘺 or the means of doing the act and (iii) niyojya^[14] or the person who is enjoined to do it. Thus in the passage like 惫颈艣补箩颈迟膩 yajeta (the 惫颈艣补箩颈迟 sacrifice is to be performed), as there is no mention of the niyojya, the expression i.e. the sentence is incomplete and as such there arises expectancy towards a word conveying the niyojya i.e., a person like Devadatta and so on, who is desirous of attaining heaven (蝉惫补谤驳补办腻尘补岣�), without whom, the act cannot be performed.^[15] As rightly observed by K.K. Raja, the well-known line in the 艢谤墨尘补诲产丑补驳补惫补迟驳颈迟腻 denouncing the expection of the results of one鈥檚 duties (karma峁噛ev膩dhik膩raste m膩 phale峁�ukad膩cana) seems to imply this view of the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补s.^[16]

But according to the 叠丑腻峁�峁�补 school of 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻, the content of a Vedic injunction is the realization that the act enjoined is productive of some beneficial result. K奴m膩rila states that not even a fool will act without a purpose.^[17] The 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� of the Vedic injunction is for the 颈迟颈办补谤迟补惫测补迟腻 or the act enjoined, for the 蝉腻诲丑补苍补 or 办补谤补峁嘺 or the means, and for the phala or the result of the act. There is no special 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� for the niyojya or the person who is to do it; anyone interested in the phala or the result will do it. Thus in the sentence vi艣vajit膩 yajeta the additional word 蝉惫补谤驳补办腻尘补岣� is to satisfy the 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� regarding the result of action. In this way the two schools of 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻 give two different sets of 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� according to the difference in the interpretation of the psychological factors involved in an injunction. According to K.K. Raja, the 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� that holds between words in a sentence is not merely psychological but a grammatical one. It is only the need for the syntactic completeness of the sentence.^[18]

The 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� or the expectancy that holds between words in a sentence is a grammatical one, and not merely psychological. It is only the need for the syntactic completeness of the sentence. The 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉 later made a clear distinction between the psychological 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� and the grammatical 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�. They have defined 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� as a kind of syntactic need which one word has for another in a sentence in order to convey the interrelation of the words.^[19] It is the 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� that brings the knowledge of the syntactic relation of the words in a sentence. The 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉 consider that even in the case of a word, there should be mutual expectancy between the root or the stem on the one hand and the verbal or nominal suffix on the other.

狈腻驳别艣补, the great grammarian maintains that 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is the desire on the part of the listeners on hearing a word in a sentence to know the idea which can be related to its meaning in order to attain a complete meaning.^[20] Thus to him, 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is on the part of the listeners and not on the part of words or their meanings. It is only in a figurative sense that this expectancy is attributed to the words and their meanings.

It may be added here that the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补s do not deny the existence of individual words and their isolated meanings. According to them, it is not possible to comprehend the isolated meanings of a word apart from its relation in a sentence. The words themselves convey their meanings only as related to one another on the basis of the three well-known factors viz. 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�, 测辞驳测补迟腻 and sannidhi. The words convey not only their individual meanings, but also their syntactic relation. Thus according to 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补s, the words themselves convey the sentence-meaning directly.^[21] This is because the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补s advocate the theory of 补苍惫颈迟腻产丑颈诲丑腻苍补 (denotation of the correlated) according to which the padas denote their respective meanings only when they are syntactically related.

It may be pointed out here that most of the modern scholars also accept 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�. S.C. 痴颈诲测腻产丑奴峁�a峁嘺 maintains that 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� is the relation of one word to another which produces a connected idea of speech.^[22] S. R膩dh膩k峁涐梗峁嘺n accepts 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� as mutual need or interdependence.^[23] Thus modern scholars also lay stress on the concept of 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� which is, according to the 笔谤腻产丑腻办补谤补 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补蝉, the basis of syntactic unity and their views seems to be a preferable one.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

蝉腻尘补谤迟丑补岣� 辫补诲补惫颈诲丑颈岣� / 笔腻峁噄苍颈s奴tra , II. 1. 1

[2]:

paraspara惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ佱箖 蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补m eke / k膩 puna岣ヅ沘bdayor 惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ�? na br奴ma岣ヅ沘bdayor iti / ki峁� tarhi? arthayo岣� / 惭补丑腻产丑腻峁�y补 , p. 365

[3]:

p峁泃hagarth膩n膩m 别办腻谤迟丑墨产丑腻惫补岣� samarthavacanam / 痴腻谤迟迟颈办补 under 笔腻峁噄苍颈s奴tra , II. 1.1

[4]:

Philosophy of Sanskrit Grammar , p. 293

[5]:

iha 惫测补辫别办峁Ｄ亂膩峁� sam膩so na bhavati, ek膩rth墨bh膩ve 惫腻办测补峁� neti / 惭补丑腻产丑腻峁�y补prad墨pa under 笔腻峁噄苍颈s奴tra , II. 1.1

[6]:

tatra pad膩rth膩n膩峁� paraspara箩颈箩帽腻蝉腻惫颈峁�a测补tvayogyatvam 腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�, kriy膩艣rava峁噀 k膩rakasya, k膩raka艣rava峁噀 kriy膩y膩岣�, 办补谤补峁嘺艣rava峁噀 颈迟颈办补谤迟补惫测补迟腻y膩艣ca 箩颈箩帽腻蝉腻惫颈峁�a测补tv膩t / 痴别诲腻苍迟补辫补谤颈产丑腻峁Ｄ� , IV.3

[7]:

鈥榞补耻岣� 补艣惫补岣� 辫耻谤耻峁�o 丑补蝉迟墨 /鈥� 鈥�诲补艣补 d膩岣峣m膩ni 峁�a岣� 补辫奴辫腻岣� ku峁囜笉am aj膩jina峁� palalapi峁囜笉a岣� adharorukam etat kum膩ry膩岣� sphaiyak峁泃asya 辫颈迟腻 prati艣墨na岣モ�� / 惭补丑腻产丑腻峁�y补 , I, pp. 1 and 38

[8]:

atrocyate-abhidh膩n膩paryavas膩nam, abhidhey膩paryavas膩na帽ca jij帽膩sodaye nibandhanam/ 痴腻办测腻谤迟丑补尘腻迟峁沰腻-惫峁泃迟颈 , p. 386

[9]:

ekapadaprayoge hi 诲惫腻谤补尘ity膩dabhidh膩nameva na paryavasyati / Ibid.

[10]:

kriy膩艣rava峁噀 k膩rakasya k膩raka艣rava峁噀 kriy膩y膩岣モ��/ 痴腻办测补辫补诲墨测补 , IV.3

[11]:

s膩 ceyam腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� 产丑补惫补苍迟墨 vyutpatt膩v耻辫补濒补办峁�a苍补m膩艣r墨yate /痴腻办测腻谤迟丑补尘腻迟峁沰腻-惫峁泃迟颈 , p. 40

[12]:

anvitasy膩bhidh膩n膩rtham ukt膩rthagha峁璦n膩ya v膩 /
pratiyogini 箩颈箩帽腻蝉腻 y膩 s膩办腻峁卥峁�eti g墨yate // Pra办补谤补峁嘺pa帽cik膩 , p. 387

[13]:

s膩 ceyam腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� pratiyogi峁�u sarve峁�u na sahasaivopaj膩yate, kintu karanop膩nipatakrame峁嘺 / 痴腻办测腻谤迟丑补尘腻迟峁沰腻-惫峁泃迟颈 , p. 388

[14]:

niyojya岣� sa ca 办腻谤测补峁� ya岣� svak墨yatvena budhyate / Pra办补谤补峁嘺pa帽cik膩 , p. 391

[15]:

atha pratipanne 惫颈峁�a测补sambandhini vidhyarthe /
niyojyamantarena tatsiddyasambhav膩nniyojy腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� // 痴腻办测腻谤迟丑补尘腻迟峁沰腻-惫峁泃迟颈 , p. 388

[16]:

Indian Theories of Meaning , pp. 160-161

[17]:

prayojanam anuddi艣ya na mando鈥檖i pravartate / 艢濒辞办补惫腻谤迟迟办补 , p. 653

[18]:

Indian Theories of Meaning , p. 163

[19]:

padasyapad膩ntaravyatireka-prayukt膩nvayan膩nubh膩vakatvam腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ� / 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 , p. 52

[20]:

s膩 caikapad膩rthaj帽膩ne tadarth膩nvayayogy膩rthasya yajj帽膩na峁� tadvi峁�ayecch膩; 'asy膩nvayyartha岣� ka岣�' ityeva峁價奴p膩 辫耻谤耻峁�ani峁ａ弓haiva, tath膩pi tasy膩岣� svavi峁�aye鈥檙the 腻谤辞辫补岣� / 笔补谤补尘补濒补驳丑耻尘补帽箩耻峁Ｄ� , p. 71

[21]:

腻办腻峁卥峁Ｄ�-sannidhipr膩ptayogy膩rth膩ntarasa峁単at膩nam /
sv膩rth膩n膩hu岣� pad膩n墨ti vyutpattissa峁兣況ity膩 yad膩 // 痴腻办测腻谤迟丑补尘腻迟峁沰腻-惫峁泃迟颈 , p. 384

[22]:

HIL., p. 447

[23]:

IP., Volume II, p. 109