Panini’s grammar of Sanskrit, written in the sixty center B.C., is the earthiest description of the language and is the source and inspiration for the development of comparative philology and modern linguistics. The Astadhyayi remains the most correct and complete grammar ever written and is considered grammar ever and considered a model for all grammars.
Sumitra M. katre’s expert translation of the work to use Roman Transliteration for the Skrit text. Not only scholars of Sansrit but also general linguists will find accessible this new presentation of the classic work, which relies on the Roman alphabet’s and lower-case letters, italics, and small capitals to visually present the operation of panini’s metalinguistic technique. This work also consistently indicates the manner in which the ellipsis created by the formulation of Panini’s strings of aphoristic rules is to be filled in by using his own metalinguistic procedures. Included are help full appendices and lists.
Sumitra M. Katre is professor emeritus of Oriental and African languages at the University of Texas at Austin and Former director or Deccan College Research Institute, Poona. General Editor of the Dictionary of Sanskrit on Historical Principles, katre is the author of a number of books and some there hundred papers in scholarly journals.
Besides the capable editing and formatting by Douglas Fix, I would like to acknowledge the work of the following in producing the print-ready copy, Gail Roy, and Becky Woodruff. Funding was provided by a grant. From Dr. E. Douglas for Indo-European studies, and by the University vice President and Provost, Gerhard J. Fonken, for computer time.
Although there have been three renderings of Pannier’s Astadhyayt in modern European languages, they have been particularly addressed to those w hose primary interest is in Sanskrit language and literature. The first of these was in German, published during 1839-40 under the title Perini’s acht Bircher qramrrcatiecher Regeln in two volumes by Otto Bi::ihtlingk, consisting of sutra-s and scholiast, German comments on the sutra-s and various indexes. A new edition in 1887 entitled Patinas 'Gramrnatik with a German translation and various indexes became the standard reference work on Panini, and was reissued in 1964. Two English translations appeared in 1882; Perini’s Eight Books of Gram- metical Suira-s by W. Goonatileke and The Astadhyayi of Panini, edited and translated into English by Srisa Chandra Vasu in 1891. Louis Renou's La qramrnaire de Par:ini irradiate du Sanskrit avec des extracts des commentaries indigenes in French appeared in three fascicles during 1948-54 from Paris, and a revised edition in two volumes, with the Sanskrit text of the sutras, appeared in 1966. In all these translations, the sutra text is given in Devanagarl characters. Renou used Roman transliteration for the illustrative examples in his French commentary. The need for an edition which gives the text of the sutras as well as illustrative material in transliteration appears necessary in the interest of those who are not primarily interested in Sanskrit language and literature, but mainly concerned with it in relation to their work in linguistics.
It was the discovery of Sanskrit grammar in the last quarter of the 18th century and the proneuncernent of Sir William Jones, at the inagitation of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, positing a relationship between Sanskrit and the classical languages of Europe, that led in the early 19th century to the development of Comparative Philology and its ultimate transformation into modern Linguistics. The influence of Panini and the Indian schools of grammarians can be gained from the number of scholars who have expressed their appreciation as well as criticism of this tradition, a selection of whose contributions have been presented by J.F. Staal in A Reader on the Sanskrit Grammarians (MIT Press, 1972). Recently a great number of studies on this subject have appeared both in India and abroad in the shape of monographs, research papers and doctoral dissertations. A very comprehensive survey of research on Panlni has been published by George Cardona (Mouton: 1976). In view of the importance which Panini's work has for the development of modern Comparative Philology and Linguistics a new edition using Roman Transliteration both for the sutra-s and the examples used in illustrating them is not out of place. Indeed it has the further advantage that the roman typography with its several faces and upper and lower case letters representing individual phonemes obviates the cumbrous use of Devanagarr writing which is syllabic. Moreover, the metalinguistic features of Panini's rule-formation can be clearly perceived visually by metalinguistic use of roman, italic, small capitals and capitals and even indicate the use of vowels which Paninl sometimes uses for ease of enunciation in presenting morphemes where those vowels are not integral parts of the morphemes themselves.
While no attempt has been made in this presentation at giving a critical edition of the accompanying Dhatupatha and Ganapat.ha, care has been taken to compare the items as included in several editions and contributory studies. A comparative study of Dhatupatha-s as well as Ganapat has formed themes for doctoral dissertations presented to the Poona University, the first having been published by that University in 1957. The text of Ast. Itself has come down with very few alterations since Patanjali's time, and while Kasika presents a slightly inflated text, Siddhanta-kaumudi in general preserves the text as given in Mahabhasya. The oral transmission of the text from time immemorial has preserved much of the original Vedic and post- Vedic literature, par-ticularly the sutra-literature. Patafijali indicates in his work that during his time people learned the Vedic texts without prior study of grammar (MBh. I 5, 8-10) and considered the study of grammar as not purposeful, which probably led to the gradual loss of much of Mahabhasya itself which was later subsumed by the efforts of savants like Bhartrhari. We have on the other hand such significant remarks in the Kasika [a kumara-m. yasah panine-h 'Panini's fame has reached the young'] which are supported by the observations of the Chinese pilgrim I Tsing (691-92) as: "Children begin to learn the Sutra when they are eight years of fifteen begin to study this commentary (i.e.,Vrt-ti-sutra or Kaslka) and understand it after five years" (ibid., p. 14) and with reference to MBh (referred to as Curni of Patanjali) "Advanced scholars learn this in three years" (ibid., p. 15). Probably the lost tradition which Pataiijali mentions was revived after Bhartj her-l's restoration of the MBh.
The advantages of presenting the Sanskrit text in roman transliteration are obvious. Instead of the syllabic orthography we have the single phoneme character of the individual roman alphabet (except for the aspirate consonants kh, eh, th and ph) and the process of deriving the surface forms from underlying deep structures appears more elegant. Secondly for those not interested in pursuing special studies in Sanskrit literature, it has the advantage of a universal script which is commonly used in all modern linguistic studies.
Many of the metalinguistic features of Ast… have found their place in modern linguistics, such as the concept of, the markers with specific functions, etc. The influence of Panini can also be seen in the founding of several systems of grammar following Ast… in India, and similar sys- "terns developed for Pali, fully influenced by Paninr's model, such as Kaccayan a-vy-a-kar-ana and those of Moggallana and Aggavarhsa. For other Middle Indo-Aryan languages there are similar treatises composed in Sanskrit. The chief feature of these works is the tacit assumption that Sanskrit is the basis from which the Prakrit languages have sprung, and taking Maharstri as the most favored Prakrit, since it was the medium of poetic com positions, a set of correspondences has been set up to explain the phonology and morphology of these MIA dialects. Indeed, long before comparative philology developed during the 19th century, the concept of a family of languages, derived from a common parent, apparently formed the bedrock on which these grammars were based, though no reconstructions appear to have been attempted. Indeed the tradition of Ast… was so strong that even grammars of some of the Dravidian languages were composed on its pattern, such as Tolkappiam for Tamil, Lrlatllakam for Malayalam, Andhra-sabda-clntarnani for Telugu and Karnataka-bhasa-bhusana and Sabda-rnani-darpana for Kannada. The latest work in this tradition is the Kerala-Paninryarn of Rajarajavarman (1863-1918) in the recent past.
This work was undertaken while I was Director of Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute in Poona as part of Parisian Studies, included in its Building Centenary Series. However, the actual work was carried out during my stay in Austin at the University of Texas where I had been invited first as a Visiting Professor in 1966 in the Department of Linguistics and then in 1970 at the recently created Department of Oriental Languages and Literatures. My thanks are due to Professors W.P. Lehrnann and Edgar C. Polorne for inviting me to Austin, and for their constant encouragement. The present work has been made possible by a grant-in-aid by the American Council of Learned Societies for the year 1978-7Q (ACLS NEH GIA '7Q) while I was serving as a Distinguished Visiting Lecturer in the Department of Lin- guistics at California State University, Fullerton. My thanks are also due to Professor V.I. Subramanian, Vice-Chancellor of Tamil University, Tanjore, and the guiding spirit of the Dravidian Linguistic Association in Trivandr um, for inviting me to visit India under their joint auspices during 1982to Enable me to revise this work and make it ready for publication. I must also express my thanks to Professors M.B. Emeneau and George Cardona for sponsoring my work to ACLS for a grant. In con- collusion, I also express my grateful thanks to Douglas L. Fix and the staff of the Linguistics Research Center for formatting the complicated text so carefully and to the University of Texas Press for including this work in its Linguistic Series.
The Astadhyayt' of Panini is the earliest extant descriptive grammar of Sanskrit as currently spoken during his time (c. 6th cent. B.C.) and occasionally referred to by him as [Bhasa], in the north-west region of India (now Pakistan). His extraordinary perception of linguistic facts covered, however, a wider region, since he not only refers to the earlier stage of the language as occurring in Vedic literature, but also spreads over the northern and eastern parts of India whose regional variants he also notices in his majestic sweep. However, it is certainly not the first grammar composed about Sanskrit. Panini mentions ten predecessors [Apisali, Kasyapa, Gargya, Galava, Cakravarmana, Bharadvaja, Sakayana, Sakalya, Senaka and Sphotayana], none of whose works have survived to our days. Of these earlier grammarians two are specifically referred to in Patafijali's Mahabhasya. Apisali is mentioned by Katakana in his vartt.ika 2 or! 4.1.14 [purva-sutra-nir-deso=VA=apisala-m adh-I-te 'studies the grammar of Apisali '] while Patafijali refers to grammars promulgated by Panirri, Apisali and Kasakr tsna [painina pr-o-k-ta-m = painn-fya-m kayakers-m MBh. I 12, 5-6] and cites a verse line [nama ea dha-tu-ja-m. an-a nir-uk-t-e vy-a-kar-ae saka-a-8ya ca toka-m MBh. II 138, 14-16] in which Sakatayana is men- tined as holding the view that all nominal stems are derived from verbal stems. It is thus probable that during the times of both Katakana and Patafijali their grammars were still available for study and were not overwhelmed by Panini's own work. A few traces of their work are to be found in commentarial literature on the systems of Sanskrit grammar.
The title of Panini's grammar as Astadhyayi occurs initially in the Mahabhasya (e.g., on 6.3.109). It is derived from the underlying string ast-au adhy-ay-af: sam-a-hr-t-ah/asta-nam adhy-ay-a-n-am sam-a-hr-t-ah/.asta-nam -adhy-ay-a+NTP (2.1.52; 4.1.21) = a/jfa0+adhy-ay-0+f (8.2.7; 6.4.148) and denotes 'a collection of eight chapters'. By Panlni's rule 5.1.58 (sarh-khya-y-af: 1 sarh-Jiia-2sarh-gha-3sutra=4adhy-ay-ane-/ju) the expression i:>ta-ka-m (= a/j-au adhy-ay-af: pri-ma-na-m a-sya = astan+ kaN = C£/j-a-ka-m) also denotes, among other things, a work consisting of eight chapters. Panini evidently refers here to already existing works of that nature, but commentators have cited ietat pray, in-Fay-m as an illustration of this rule, and consequently it is known alternatively by this title. It is possible that Panlni might Alkali’s grammar in view when formulating this rule, since according later tradition Apisali is said to have composed his grammar also in chapters.
The name Panini itself is a patronymic derived from Pa (6.4.165; 4.1.95: praying-sya apatya-m = parrying +I = pft; ry, in 0+idicating a son of Panin-a. However, Kasika has both pray, inyupa-j1 (2.4.21) / pary, in-o-pa-jig-m (6.2.114) a-kiil-ak-arii vy-a-kar-ary, a-m. Both names apply to Panini, then Panin-a as applied to him indica yuvan (4.1.163-4) descendant of Pan-in. This makes him a grand: Pan-in, but he has sometimes been called Pani-put-r an also. Among' synonyms we have Daksi-put-ra and Salaturiya which latter presupposes that Salatura was his ancestral abode (4.3.94).
The text of the Astadhyayi is preceded by a repertory or catalogue phonemes divided into 14 strings or sutra-s, commonly designated Praty-a-har-a-sut-ra- (PS), Siva-sut-ra (SS) or Mahesvara-sut-ra and followed by two lexicons enumerating the verbal (Dha-t.u-pat.h-a) and groups of nominal stems which undergo parti grammatical operations (Gana-path-a}. While the text of Ast. Remained almost unchanged since Patanjali's time, the same can m said of the Dhat.upatha or Ganapatha.
In view of the sutra style of the work, which, within a little less than 4000 algebraic statements, gives a complete description of the lang t-he work became the central piece of exegetical works, and in the hi of linguistic texts, it occupies the premier position in that near thousand treatises have been produced during the two millennia Since was composed by Panini. The earliest are the vartt-ika-s, chief Katakana (c. 4th c. B.C.) who supplements the rules of Panini, criticizing them. His vartt-ika-s have been further commented along with the sutra-s by Patanjali in his Mahabhasya " Great Commentary' with great finesse. These three sages, forming a fable triumvirate, represent the high mark of Parisian tradition. Neither of these two works covers the whole text of Ast. All most a thousand years later we have the full text commented upon in Kasi-ka of Vamana and Jayaditya (c. 7th cent. A. D.) With ample illations under each rule and a full citation of the gana-s under part rules dealing with them. Kasika itself became the focal point, other early commentaries by Jinendrabiddhi (Nyasa or Kasika-vi-var-ana-panj-lk-a) and Hardhats (Panamanian-T]. Since the Ast. Was meant to be transmitted verbally, the sutra style imposed severe restrictions on the structure of the work, where even the saving of a Mora was considered meritorious. In order to preserve the mathematic structure of aphoristic rules topical arrangement had to be sacrificed to effect economy, resulting in a very recondite work, necessitating a lot of exegesis and running from section to section to generate the surface forms from the strings of underlying deep structure. So in course of time a rearrangement was effected by such works as Pra-kri-ya-kau-mud-j and Sided=anta-Kau-mud-I which later became extremely popular at the expense of Kasika as a standard text in both traditional and university schools.
The eight chapters of Ast. Are subdivided into quarter chapters [pada-s) each of which contains a certain number of sutra’s, The first sutra of the first quarter of the first chapter begins with the definition of the technical term vfd-dhi [vfd-dhi-r at=aiC] wherein the technical term precedes the definition against the general pattern seen in the following sutra [aT=eN guna-h] and Patarijali explains this as Panini's wish for auspiciousness that he uses this word first. According to tradition, indicated by Pataiijali, such auspicious expressions should be used at the beginning, middle and end of a work so that those studying the text may be successful in their endeavors. Here Panini uses this auspicious word at the beginning of his text. This is just another proof that the repertory of phonemes in SS is not an integral part of Panlni's text, but is based on it, since all the sigla he uses for explaining the grammatical operations are based on it. Pataiijali's Marathas a begins with althea sabda=anu=sas-ana-m which he tries to explain himself. According to Kaiyata this expression is Patanjali's own which he comments on. Most original sutra works generally begin with the word atha followed by a word which describes the text which ensues. The word therefore cannot have been the title of Panini's own work.
Panini's description of Sanskrit as it was spoken during his time is based on three fundamental units: (1) nominal sterns (prati-pad-ika-), (2) verbal sterns (dha-tu-) and (3) affixes (praty-ay-a-) introduced after the first two to generate additional sterns as well as finished words [pada-s], with a set of rules to generate the surface forms from their deep structures, and a set of rules on government to generate sentences as units of communication. The Dhatu-path-a catalogues all available verbal sterns divided into ten specific classes, while the Cana-path-a records groups of nominal stems which undergo specific grammatical operations given in the rules. There is, thus, no lexicon of nominal stems, since their number is without any limit and depends upon actual usage. Since the object of grammar, according to the statements of Katakana and Patanjali, is specified as explaining the usage current among the speakers of the language and is not prescriptive, such a listing of nominal stems appears to be incapable of completion. Patanjali cites here the case of the divine Br has-patl and Indra, who, through continuous recitation of individual lexemes, could not come to an end, even in a thousand divine years! To achieve, therefore, a possible manner in which one can attempt a description which can cover the whole range of the language, Panini has attempted to arrange his sutra-s under two major headings: [ut-sarg-a-] a general rule which encompasses the largest number of linguistic items, and [apa-vad-a-] an exception which covers a smaller group not subject to the general rule.
In order to affect economy of expressions in the sutra style Panini has devised a special metalinguistic language. In the first place, on the basis of the Praty-a-her Sutra-s a number of sigla have been used to denote the group of phonemes which are subject to a specific grammatical operation. The model provided by these introductory sutra-s has been followed in the as, by having a number of markers with specific indications. These markers are either phonemes occurring at the end or beginning of a morpheme or accent markers [udatta, anudatta or svarita] or a nasalized vowel (anu-nas-ika). Next in order come the technical terms which are two-fold: current words, but with technical definitions, as in the case of vrd-dhi, gura, or artificial ones like TI, GHU, and BHA.
In the formulation of rules special use is made of three declensional groups of affixes: ablative for indicating the right context, locative for the left context and genitive for the substituendum. Special use of the locative is made to indicate (a) the subordinate (b) also to indicate the meaning of an expression, particularly with reference to those of verbal stems. This is followed regularly in the meanings assigned to verbal stems in the Dhatu-patha which, as originally compiled, did not contain the meanings.
For privacy concerns, please view our Privacy Policy
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist