Etymology And Magic Yaskas Nirukta Flatos Cratylus And Riddle Of Semanticetymologies

Author(s): Johannes Bronkhorst
Publisher: Johannes Bronkhorst

Page 13

170
Johannes Bronkhorst
Ervmology and Magic
171
tion that came to play a role in the thought of later Platonic thinkers as we will see below.
I will not pursue the further development of semantic etymologizing in classical Europe. The Stoics actively practiced it, as did the Alexandrian tradition of grammarians. The situation in European antiquity came to be somewhat complicated by the fact that some ideas about the development of one language out of another one came to be ac. cepted. Latin, in particular, was often thought of as having derived from Greek. Myths, such as the one about the origin of the founders of Rome, supported this belief (Strobach, 1997: 85). When, therefore, an author like Plutarch derives Latin words from Greek words, he may intend his etymologies to be understood as histories of the words con cerned. Whether all his etymologies are to be understood in this manner remains unclear (Strobach, 1997: 55 ff.). There can however be no doubt that texts like Plato's Cratylus deal with semantic etymologising, not with historical etymologies.
I think we are entitled to conclude from the above observations that early Indian and classical European thinkers were aware of some of the difficulties surrounding semantic etymologies. The author of the Nirukta tries to formulate the rules that permit us to obtain valid semantic etymologies, but does not feel free to doubt their validity The author of the Cratylus, on the other hand, arrives at the conclusion that the validity of semantic etymologies almost inescapably implies that individual sounds have each their own meaning. Since he finds this difficult to accept, he raises doubts as to the validity of such etymologies.
Two directions are open to us. On the one hand, we can try to understand semantic etymologies against the background of their respective cultures, in other words, Indian semantic etymologies are to be explained in terms of Indian culture, Greek semantic etymologies in terms of Greek culture, and so on. Alternatively, we can see in semantic etymologies a universal phenomenon, not inherently linked to any particular culture, and therefore look for a universal explanation. The examples adduced in the preceding pages should have left no doubt that semantic etymologizing is indeed a universal phenomenon, which is in need of a universal explanation. However, before tuming to it we will have to pay attention to the one serious attempt that has been made to understand Indian semantic etymologies as an Indian phenomenon.
Eivind Kahrs' recent study called Indian Semantic Analysis: The nirvacana' tradition (1998) presents a new and interesting hypothesis concerning semantic etymologies in classical India, not primarily Vedic etymologies. For Kahrs, etymologies are part of the Indian universe of discourse. That is to say, etymologies are part of the methods used in Indian culture to interpret its texts. The study of etymologies in India is therefore the investigation of a systematically applied means of interpretation (p. 9). By finding here patterns that are repeated over and over again, one may detect certain basic features of classical Indian traditions. "For the present investigation --- Kahrs states on p. 11 - "it is precisely the constant factors and the indigenous interpretations of them at various points in time which are of interest
Kahrs study concentrates, as far as etymologizing is concerned, on the Nirukta, and on some Saiva texts from medieval Kashmir. These texts use etymologizing as a conscious device. Briefly put, Kahrs claims (p. 174) that "it is possible to argue that ultimately all nirvacanas (= semantic etymologies, JB) are to be understood according to a substitutional model".
Chapter 4 ("The universe of Yaska") deals in great detail with the various ways in which nirvacanas are presented in the Nirukra. The most important ones of these, Kahrs argues on the basis of copious material, use essentially a genitive case ending. The most perfect way of presentation is of the type megho mehatiti satah, which literally
For us, modern researchers, the validity of semantic etymologies is no longer an issue: semantic etymologies are not generally valid. Neither Yaska's method nor Plato's speculations as to the meanings of individual sounds are acceptable to us. We are nevertheless confronted with the problem that many people apparently did accept these etymologies as valid, and our problem is to make sense of that.