Vakyapadiya (study of the concept of Sentence)
by Sarath P. Nath | 2018 | 36,088 words
This page relates 鈥楽entence-Meaning in Other Systems of Knowledge鈥� of the study on Vakyapadiya by Bhartrhari and his treatment of the Concept of Sentence in Language. Bhartrhari was a great grammarian and philosopher who explored the depth and breadth of Sanskrit grammar. These pages analyse the concepts and discussions on sentence and sentence-meaning presented in the Vakyapadiya, against the different systems of knowledge prevalent in ancient India (such as Mimamsa, Nyaya and Vyakarana).
4.3. Sentence-Meaning in Other Systems of Knowledge
In the School of Grammar, ancient preceptors like 笔腻峁噄苍颈, 碍腻迟测腻测补苍补 and 笔补迟补帽箩补濒颈 have not explicitly discussed on the nature of sentence meaning. Still, some remarkable observations can be found in their works.
笔腻峁噄苍颈 comprised all his ideas on the concept of sentence in the aphorism:
"蝉补尘补谤迟丑补岣� 辫补诲补惫颈诲颈丑颈岣�"
鈥�(Yogas奴tras 2.1.1).
While commenting upon the aphorism:
"辫谤腻迟颈辫补诲颈办腻谤迟丑补濒颈峁単补辫补谤颈尘腻峁嘺惫补肠补苍补尘腻迟谤别 辫谤补迟丑补尘腻"
鈥�(笔腻峁噄苍颈, 2.3.46),
笔补迟补帽箩补濒颈 observes that adjectival-substantive relation is something different from the word meanings and it is the sentence meaning (惭补丑腻产丑腻峁补, under 笔腻峁噄苍颈, 2.3.46). 碍补颈测补峁璦 states that sentence is 尘耻办丑测补艣补产诲补 (prime word), and the sentence-meaning is the 尘耻办丑测补艣补产诲腻谤迟丑补 (prime meaning). This view of sentence-meaning is in the nature of the relation among the wordmeanings (Under 笔腻峁噄苍颈, 1.2.45). While commenting upon this statement, 狈补驳别艣补 points out that there is a relation between a sentence and its meaning, known as 艣补办迟颈 (Udyota, under 笔腻峁噄苍颈, 1.2.45).
An ancient grammarian 痴测腻岣峣 has also presented some unique views on the nature of sentence meaning. He holds that the meaning of a word is any particular of a class (dravya). According to him, the function of a word in a sentence is to distinguish the thing it signifies, from all the similar things. Thus, the meaning of a sentence cannot be taken as the mutual connection of the word-meanings, but the mutual exclusion of those meanings. The early stages of the apoha doctrine maintained by the Buddhists can be traced in these views of 痴测腻岣峣 (Raja, 1963, p.193).
The Buddhist tradition has remarkable contributions in the semantic analysis of words and sentences. The idea of the Buddhist logicians about the essence of meaning is known as 补辫辞丑补惫腻诲补 (the theory of apoha). They maintain that the essence of meaning is characterised by negation and that words have no direct reference to objective realities. 顿颈峁卬腻驳补, the famous Buddhist logician states that words deal directly with vikalpas, which are the conceptual images constructed in the mind. Therefore the relation between the words and the external object is not real.
The conceptual image, denoted by a word is characterised by the negation of all its counter-correlates or 补苍测腻辫辞丑补.
"vikalpayonaya岣� 艣abd膩岣� 惫颈办补濒辫腻岣� 艣补产诲补测辞苍补测补岣�",
鈥�(顿颈峁卬腻驳补, quoted by Raja, 1963, p.78fn).
This is the core of the theory of apoha, developed by the Buddhists.
This concept of negative approach to the meaning is also admitted in the case of compounds and sentences, by the Buddhists. In the compound word 'blue lotus', the term blue excludes all lotuses that are not blue, and the term lotus excludes all the blue things that are not lotuses. Thus the expression signifies the exclusion of non blue and non lotus. A sentence meaning is also imported in the same way. Though the meanings of the individual words are treated as negative, the import of a sentence is taken as positive in nature. This theory of negative approach towards meaning, has been criticised by the 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻办补蝉 and 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉. But in recent times, similar concepts about meaning have been developed by modern linguists like Ferdinand De Saussure (Raja, 1963, p.85).