chunk 64: short definitionsDEFINITIONS -------------------------------------------------- ←
chunk 64: short definitions
The Tit tenses are
ff means "and following".
Add "only" to a rule when it does not make sense without "only".
The
The numbers are singular, dual and plural
former and latter
What means purpose or result is an aim.
An
variants of
about the affix
About alternatively.
Some feminines get
original and replacement
Tenses are
caesura
mf means m or f
adjectives
weak affixes are the nounbase affixes that are not strong
persons are third person, second person, and first person
Chop means "delete last letter".
The
ashtadhyayidotcom
^ 
There are many old grammarians mentioned by name in the rules. For instance, lopazzAkalyasya says "
In some cases, this "according to so-and-so" makes the rule optional. In other cases, it must be ignored, as the name of the grammarian is mentioned only pUjArtham (to show respect).
So how do I figure out when such a cameo means "optionally" and when it must be ignored?
You cannot. You may wish to trust the opinions of other grammarians. Most of the time they agree. There is no universal agreement about the lopazzA, however. So, some say that, when joining
^ 
These six, when replaced with a bent, are affected by Tita or thAsasse.
^ 
Example. Rule rossupi says
"before sup, replace ru ",
but it actually means
"before sup', replace ONLY ru; do not replace any other
Such rules, to which "only" must be supplied to understand the sense, are called niyama rules or restrictive rules.
We know that a rule must be a niyama rule when it makes no sense without the ONLY. For instance, in the above case, the literal meaning "before sup, replace ru" makes no sense, because the previous rule already replaced all
NOTE: in the epics, sometimes we find that a verse does not make sense unless we add "only" --
This appears to be saying "when the end of the world is near, men will have their wife as friend", but that's nonsense, because even nowadays most men can count their wife as a friend, most as their best friend. Given the apocalyptic sense of the chapter, we have to conclude that the verse means "when the end of the world is near, men will have their wife as their only friend". Be careful with these.
Of course, it might that it's us that have the bad habit of adding "only" or "even" even if redundant. For instance, here --
the English translation seems to be crying for an "even without being struck".
Hm. Wasn't a
As I said elsewhere, no one knows. But let me try again --
^ These four, when replaced with a flat, are affected by itazca, tasthastha and nityaMGitaH.
For instance, rule ( tasthas will work on these four tenses. Here it changes the mip that replaced liG --
and here rule itazca changes the tip that replaced laG --
I have a doubt. Here tip replaced laG. Therefore, rule sthAnivad says that this tip inherits the
This tip inherited no
Wait. If tip got no
Indeed that mip did not inherit
^ To be precise, a vArttika is a correction or addition to
Nearly every vArttika is supported by most grammarians, just like the
^ Each one of the thirty-nine affixes in the lists svaujas and tiptas belongs to one of three groups called singular, dual or plural.
These rules explain which affix belongs to which group --
tAnyeka -- list tiptas goes all singlar dual plural singular dual plural and so on
These rules explain when to use which group --
bahuSubahuvacanam -- use plural for three or more
dvyekayordvivacanaikavacane -- use dual for two and singular for one
inria uses the abbreviations sg du pl.
My dictionary says that plural means two or more. May I say
No. When we talk about Sanskrit, plural means three or more. No exceptions.
^ All compounds except the dvandvas are made of two halves, the former and the latter.
Examples --
(whatmeanspurposeorresu) (wha)
^ In the following examples, the
Here
And here
Some more examples --
Such expressions do not clarify if the purpose was achieved or not --
It is sort of odd
In modern usage, when a fourth is used, it almost always means purpose or result.
^ For instance, tip gets IT (turns into
These
Is the
No. That one is an iT, added by ArdhadhAtukasyeD, then lengthened by graholiTi.
^ The term
" any of the three feminine affixes TAp, cAp,
Of those, TAp is very common. It is made by rule ajAdyataSTAp.
The other two work the same way, but are seldom found. The differences are --
cAp has
^ Rule zeSAdvibhASA says that the
Examples. Compounding
or
And compounding sa- and
This kap is compulsory after certain words such as
It is also compulsory after
When kap is optional, it is uncommon, except metri causa.
^ I use alternatively to mean "but if we don't apply this optional rule".
Example. The optional rule
Optionally replace
^ GI is a feminine affix. It has some variants, like GIS and GIp, that have different accent.
Whatever ends in
The ugit get GIp ( ugitazca). This includes whatever ends in zatR matup vasu, and all adjectives that end in
A few of the
^ The original (
The replacement (
Example. When rule ikoyaNaci turns
Careful. There is ANOTHER word
^ 
These ten can be split into four groups --
Present tense --
Future tenses --
Past tenses --
Might-be tenses (see also Wikipedia on Irrealis mood) --
Of those, laT liT luT lRT leT loT are Tit tenses,
and laG liG luG lRG are Git tenses.
Rules itazca, tasthastha, nityaGGitaH only work on replacements of Git tenses.
Rule Tita only works on replacements of Tit tenses.
See also inria codes for tenses .
Wait. Doesn't the affix lyap start with ell?
Nope.
^ Rule midaco says that
So, when rule nonfunny teaches that "
Where's the lengthening coming from?
And how did
^ A caesura (pronounced "seizure" in English,
Or, explained in another way, a caesura is a point in a verse where you MIGHT pause if it were prose, but at which you won't usually pause in verse. Call it an "imaginary pause" if you like.
In old times, a zloka was usually recited as two verses of sixteen syllables each. The point between the eight and ninth vowels of each verse was a caesura. This means that the eight vowel was almost always the last vowel of a word, but the reciting was not ordinarily paused after that word.
In these times of
Okay. But why should that matter for anything? Pausing after a word is always allowed, and so is not pausing. I do not even NEED to know that.
You DO. That freedom is only allowed in PROSE. Please see
May I pause at the caesura point that is after the first three feet of an
Some people do that. If they do that after a light vowel, I say they are idiots. Or have zero sense of rythm.
^ When a nounbase is flagged with mf, this means there are two nounbases, one m and one f, with the same form and the same meaning. So if I say that
Almost all nounbases that mean living beings are mf. Therefore, very few neuters mean living beings. The converse is not true.
What's a "converse"?
I mean, it only works one way. So, lots of mf mean nonliving things.
^ An adjective is a set of three nounbases with the same letters, one m one f and one n. They always describe some other noun (which is not an adjective), and you must use the nounbase that has the same gender as that other noun.
Examples:
Counterexample:
Compounds ending in
In dictionaries, these are marked with the letters " mfn", "mnf" or "adj".
The noun that they describe does not need to appear in the sentence --
there is no need to say in full
^ The zabyak tenses are --
laT,
laG,
loT,
The doer affixes and nondoer affixes that replace these four make the root get zap, yak, or the affixes listed at verb classes , such as zlu zyan.
Those yak, zap, zlu etc won't appear before the other tenses.
Why not?
The soft liG and the liT are not hard (see liTca ff), so they don't make the rules that add yak zap etc work. The other tenses, namely lRT lRG luT luG, make the root get sya sya tAs cli. Then the root is no longer right in front of the hard affix, and those rules cannot work.
^ 
Being a valAdi soft, san gets iT sometimes. When it does, kric works --
san + iT →
As in
Of course the kric rule, being in the tripAdI, always works last of all. But to save space, I'll often write such things this way --
^ The nounbase affixes are those that come right after nounbases, namely: the sup, the feminine affixes, and the taddhita.
All of those are said to be weak, except the strong affixes.
Examples --
aN (a taddhita) is always weak
GI (a feminine affix) is always weak
Gi zI TA bhis ( sup affixes) are always weak
su is weak after a neuter (but it then gets deleted by svamorna), and strong after m f.
jas is always strong (after a neuter it turns into zi, which is strong by zisa; otherwise it is strong by suDa).
zi is always strong (nvm if it replaced jas or zas earlier)
zas is weak after m and f, but strong after a neuter, when it turns into zi
Why does weakness matter?
weak affixes make rules svAdiSva and yacibham work, and those two in turn make alloponaH and other rules work.
^ These are explained at --
Summarizing those rules: whatever includes you but not me in the meaning is second person, whatever includes me is first person, and everything else is third person.
Please notice that what Western grammarians call third person, second person, first person is called by Sanskrit grammarians
What's the
There ain't any. You just have
Okay, what do MODERN grammarians call it?
hyderabad tools use
^ That is, they mean "this has" or "there is in this". They are --
Examples:
Of those, matup vatup
^ In other words, yac are all letters except the val. What is not a valAdi is a yajAdi.
^ Rule midaco says so.
Example. When rule luGlaG teaches "
^ See Adyantau.
Example. Rule hrasva;nady;AponuT says that Am gets
^ For instance, rule nityaMGitaH teaches "chop
^ Example. Rule ekAca:: upadeze 'nudAttAt says that some ekAc roots are aniT. Therefore the roots that are not ekAc, such as pAci and yuyutsa, are all seT.
^ When something gets
As for instance, rule Anemuk says that
^ The gaNapATha is a list of word groups mentioned by
There is a modernized version of that list at ashtadhyayidotcom
^ You can find a list of gaNapATha groups at --
As for instance, the group number 45 in that list reads --
The
The groups that are marked with the word AkRtigaNa were not started by
DEFINITIONS -------------------------------------------------- ←
chunk 64: short definitions