Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 418

140
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
ON TRCÁ
Mr. Madhav Deshpande in his Brief Communication published in IIJ. 17, pp. 249250 (1975) says that in my discussion on the word trca I have ignored the condition chandasi in the Värttika ṛci trer uttarapadădilopas chandasi on Pän 6.1.37. But I have not. The condition is too obvious for any one to ignore.
The absence of any rule in Panini's grammar to account for the form treà in place of the expected tryred, and the presence of a Värttika by Katyayana to account for it was interpreted by me as indicating a change in the pronunciation of the word in the Vedic texts, the earlier pronunciation being tryṛca, the later trcd. My argument was that since Panini heard the pronunciation tryṛcá in and outside the Vedic texts, it offered no anomaly to him. Katyayana, however, heard the pronunciation tred in the Vedic texts and hence he found it necessary to take note of it. That I have not ignored the condition chandasi in the Varttika will be clear from what I have said on p. 5 of my Nirukta Notes (Series I, 1965): "... since Katyayana restricts the use of tṛca to Chandas..."
Whether we may assume a change in the pronunciation of the Vedic texts. between the time of Panini and Katyayana and whether the piece of evidence based on this assumption is of any value for determining the relative chronology of Panini and Yaşka is a different matter. What I wish to bring to the notice of the readers here is the fact that in my argument based on tṛcá I have not ignored the condition. ing factor chandasi in the Värttika.
Madhu Vidya/393
M. A. MEHENDALE