chunk 71: footnotes 2FOOTNOTES --------------------------------------------------------------- ←
chunk 71: footnotes 2
About
When
aorist types
Types of compounds.
About " beforepause ".
Rules trickle words down.
zrImadbhAgavatam
^ 
The nounbase lakSmI- f, means "prosperity, wealth", or the goddess thereof.
This nounbase may be nadI or not. So if you consider it to be nadI ( ie, made of some other nounbase plus GI) --
But otherwise (if you think it is a GI-less nounbase ending in
You can find the other forms in this table.
afaik, nothing in the grammar allows this word to be optionally non- nadI. Yet, you find the non- nadI forms everywhere, even in the Rgveda --
" Where, like men cleansing corn-flour in a cribble, the wise in spirit have created language,
"Friends see and recognize the marks of friendship: their speech retains the blessed sign imprinted. "
(whenkartarizapwontwork) (whe)
^ 
kartarizap only works when the tense affix means the doer. So, not here --
kartarizap works only before a hard. So, it won't work before liT or soft liG (see liTca, liGAziSi).
kartarizap does not work on the lukclass roots, because of adiprabhRti --
kartarizap only works when the root is right in front of the tense, therefore --
it does not work when the rules mentioned in verb classes add other affixes after the root, such as zlu Nic sya etc. --
The sanAdyanta roots always get zap. This includes all roots that end in Nic, like cinti and pAci.
cinti + laT tip →
pAci + laT tip
pApacya + laT ta →
lolUya + laT ta →
But not the yaGluk roots, because
roru + laT tip
Therefore, the only tenses that can get zap etc are the zabyak tenses.
By the same reasons, the only tenses that can get yak are the zabyak tenses.
^ 
ithal is the thal that got iT in front.
Ordinarily, thal gets iT because of kRsRbhRvR. However, there are plenty of exception rules (such as acastAsvat) that make thal not get iT before certan roots, or get it optionally before others.
My advice: don't waste effort on learning those rules, because thal has been largely out of use since before the epics. Knowing that
^
When you type
kR is the root, aor means that it got luG, and the [4] means that the sic affix was added to the root, and "ac sg 3" is short for " tip". So, the word was formed this way --
kR + luG →
Roots before luG always get some affix. The [4] tells us which affix it got. So this [4] has nothing to do which the [4] that is not after "aor", such as
Some examples --
aor [1] ac --
aor [1] ps --
aor [2] --
aor [3] --
aor [4] --
aor [5] --
aor [6] --
aor [7] --
Some roots can get more than one of these.
^
(This is a summary of the exception rules AcchI zapzyano.)
zatR being an ugit, it should ordinarily get num before strong only, by ugidacA. However, because of exception rules, it sometimes gets num also before the weak affixes GI ( feminine) and zI ( neuter dual).
Compulsory, when the zatR is after zap zyan and sanAdyanta
Optional after
the lukclass roots that end in
za,
and on the zatR from lRTaHsadvA.
Forbidden elsewhere, including --
after lukclass roots that do not end in
It must be mentioned that if you apply these rules wrongly you will be understood anyway, and that the epics sometimes missaply them. For instance, in the verse --
the word
Conversely, here --
good grammar wants
^
A mAtrA "measure" is a unit of time, roughly one sixth of a second. Or a bit less, if you talk fast, or a bit more, if you talk slow. Just talk at your own speed, but keep always the same speed.
The mAtrA theory says that ---
A consonant should last half a mAtrA
a double consonant should last a mAtrA
a long should last two
and an extralong should last three
veda chanters try to follow those rules as closely as possible when reciting. Anything short of that is unprofessional.
These are not
^
Sometimes I will " beforepause" in the last arrow of a line, this way --
This means that rules TAGasi akassa etc ALWAYS turn
jhalAJjazonte changes most consonants into one of
sasaju changes
kharava changes
vAvasAne optionally changes
I write things this way because I got tired of writing this --
or this --
^
This old saying translates into --
"never go against
or, using Frank Herbert's wording --
"the forms must be obeyed".
In spite of this saying, the agreement of later grammarians overrides what
The most blatant example of that is that, according to
I use these jargon words sometimes --
When I say that something is pc (Paninically Correct), that it rox, or that it is kosher, I mean that it agrees with what
Examples --
When I say that it sux, I mean it doesn't.
Examples --
^
The words in a rule will trickle down to the next rule, unless they have a good reason not to.
I shamelessly copied the following explanation from learnsanskrit dot org (imitation is the sincerest form of flattery). Suppose three rules look like this --
43 give a cow to Bill
44 a blanket to John
45 a shovel
Then they must be understood to mean --
43 give a cow to Bill
44 (give) a blanket to John
45 (give) a shovel (to John)
Here, the word "give" trickled down from 43 to 44 and 45, and the word "to John" from 44 trickled down to 45.
John, however, gets no cow, because the word cow and the word blanket both have second ending (in the supposed Sanskrit original of these), so the presence of the word blanket prevents the word cow from trickling. (If John were to get cow and blanket, rule 44 would have been "a blanket too to John".) Also, Bill gets no blanket, because the "to John" of line 44 prevents the "to Bill" of 43 from trickling down.
Now a Sanskrit example. Rules 34102 34103 34105 34106 literally say --
When flat, gets yAsuT and is Git
Yet, because words trickle down, these rules actually mean --
But when ( liG) is flat, gets yAsuT and is Git
Here the word
^ 
FOOTNOTES --------------------------------------------------------------- ←
chunk 71: footnotes 2