deriv LSK ETT STT aSTA ALPH OLDHOMEPAGE NEWHOMEPAGE
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then we'll agree to call it a duck for convenience."
/pANini was not a theorist type — he wasn't much worried about making his grammar reflect the "deep structure" or language, or about making it show how languages evolve. This is completely opposite to the way Westerners see linguistics.
/pANini was entirely a practical type.
His main concern was making his grammar (A) work, that is, explain only correct forms and desauthorize the wrong forms (B) be short and memorizable.
In modern Western terms we'd say that his approach was completely synchronic (qq(see wikipedia on Synchrony_and_diachrony)), even when he explains the old language of the /veda.
This show, for instance, in its treatment of the word /pada. Western grammarians, like Coulson, explain that when a nounbase comes before a consonant /sup, it suffers the same sound changes as if it were at the end of a /pada. However, /pANini cannot see the point of being so longwinded. Instead, he just says that a nounbase IS a /pada when it is before a consonant /sup. No purpose would be served by saying "it follows the samerules as if it were".
That's the philosophy of "if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck". It shows everywhere in the /pANinIya.