deriv SD cv (1067) ashtadhyayi.com hei.de L 1067 ETT STT a 4.1.82 ALPH OLDHOMEPAGE NEWHOMEPAGE

samarthAnAm prathamAd vA

समर्थानां प्रथमाद्वा ONPANINI 41082

(Add a /taddhita) after the first of the words connected by sense.

In more words —

When the following sUtras show words connected by sense, you may add a /taddhita after the word meant by the one that comes first in the sUtra.

Example.

Rule tasyApatyam 10>, a bit downriver, translates literally to

"his son".

These two words are related by meaning. and the word tasya तस्य "his" comes first in the sUtra. So according to this rule, the real meaning of tasyApatyam 10> must be —

"after a word meaning anyone that has a son, you may add a /taddhita to mean his son"

Therefore tasyApatyam 10> allows us to build —

upagor apatyam उपगोरपत्यम् "son of Upagu" → aupagavaH औपगवः "son of Upagu"

More examples.

The rule tenakrItam literally translates to "bought with it", but means —

"you may add an affix to a word meaning a price to express whatever was bought with that price"

And tasmaihitam "suitable for it" means —

"you may add an affix to a word meaning anything whatever is good for it"

Okay, Q&A time.

Those rules all say that we may add a /taddhita, but, WHICH /taddhita exactly?

Other rules teach that. As for instance, when tasyApatyam 10> is applied, upagu- उपगुॱ gets /aN'', vinatA- विनताॱ gets /Dhak, and so on.

Wait, vinatA- विनताॱ is a woman name, so, how come the rule "his son" applies to her son?

Even though /pANini does not bother to say so, it is a general rule of Sanskrit that the masculine expresses both sexes in general statements like this one.

Shouldn't bhrAtRputrausv... take care of that?

No.

Your use of the expression "both sexes" makes me feel uncomfortable. As I was expecting to hear from you something like "all gender identities", the word "sexes" sounds like a retrograde, sexist expression to me.

That is okay. Feel free to feel as uncomfortable as you think proper. I'm fine with it.