Jaina Philosophy of Language

SR No.: 001601
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith
Publication Year: 2006
Total Pages: 168
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, & Language
File Size: 10 MB

Page 113

The Jaina Philosophy of Sentence : (87) objects, denoted by the terms. If there is hindrance for such a relation, the terms will then lack the consistency of sense. For example, we say 'wet with fire,' the phrase will mean nothing for the simple reason that there is no relation between 'fire' and 'wetting'. A sentence is not made of non related terms or of terms lacking the consistency of sense for mutual relationship. There is no unanimity of opinion regarding the exact role of yogyată in the comprehension of the meaning from a sentence. Some Naiyāyikas hold that a decisive knowledge of yogyatā is pre-requisite for verbal cognition whereas Kumārila maintain that incompatibility with the actual facts does not prevent verbal comprehension, but the validity of the knowledge.
(3) Samnidhi (contiguity) - Samniddhi is generally explained as the condition that the words in a sentence should be temporally contiguous. It is the uninterrupted utterance or the unbroken comprehension of words. It means pronunciation of words/terms without long pause by the speaker. The sentences are neither made by the terms spoken by many persons without pause nor are they made by terms spoken by a single person but after long pause, say a pause of an hour after every term. Lack of saṁniddhi can occur in two ways viz. not being uttered together and being signified by words. The Bhāțța Mimārsakas hold that the verbal cognition is possible only when the necessary words are together in the mind. The Prabhākara considers that only the contiguity of cognition of the sense is necessary. Thus in the case of elliptical sentences, the Bhātta Mīmārsakas want the missing words to be actually supplied.
(4) Tātparya (Purport or intention)- The term tātparya refers to the meaning intended to be conveyed by an utterance, and its purport refers to the intention of the speaker. According to the Naiyāyikas this is also one of the necessary conditions for the comprehension of the meaning of a sentence. The right determination of the meaning of a sentence is impossible without the understanding of the speaker's intention especially when the term has more than one meaning. If a term is used in some special sense say ironically or when some terms are left unexpressed in a sentence, then also the intention of the speaker or his use of conjunctions etc., in the sentence becomes the basis of the understanding of meaning.