Book Title: Sanskrit Prakrit Jain Vyakaran aur Kosh ki Parampara
Author(s): Chandanmalmuni, Nathmalmuni, Others
Publisher: Kalugani Janma Shatabdi Samaroha Samiti Chapar
View full book text
________________
६ संस्कृत-प्राकृत व्याकरण और कोश की पराग
V miś means primarily stroke, rub' (cf Lalin mulcco) and with pra- might be nearly synonymous with pra-vir), though the attested occurrenccs mcan rather 'lay hold of, handle' and figuratively 'lay hold of mentally, rcflcct upon, consider'. The meanings under vms as well as pravers seem to exclude this rool from consideration here But whether pram;sjargam is based on pra-v mr) or prav mrs, it is certainly not classical the gerundive should have the same stem as the infinitivc.13 Thus, if from Vinsj thc gerundive is mārstarja or märjilaija, since the infini. tive is either mürsum or mārpitum," Monier-Williams (MW) also lists marsjum (with the guna-increment) which thcorctically would allow *marsjavya,16 If, on the other hand, it is from V mộs, the infinitive of which is only marssimi, the gerundive ought to be *marsțavya, in practice, however, only marśanīya is used 16 In any case then, Su's pramrsavyam is not a standard form 17 It is of some interest to note that in two MSS pramarśanījam is subjoned to piamrsfayyam, a clear indication that the author of that gloss derived omrstaryam from pra.vmś instead of the more plausible pra-v/mirj
The geaitive singular of strī is striyain the classical language, but Su uses striyah with short final syllable in at least five instances (45, 72, 85, 102, 104), there is also a doubtful example in 106 This usage seems to be based on the analogy of the monosyllabic stems like dhī which allow either the brief or fuller form in the genitive i e dhiyal or dluyah
Polysyllabic feminines in long -ī form their locative in -ām in cl Skt , thus, from valabhī is made valabhyām But in the vigraha of the compound bhavanavalablau (42) Su uses valabhau which would be allowable only from a feminine in short -1 bhavanas ya valabli grhopari kuțțih varandīsi vā tasyām bhavanavalabhau Only, therefore, if valabhī here were a transcriptional error for valabhih would valabhau be the 'correct locative, in this case, of course, valabhyām would be equally 'correct', since faminines in short -1 have either option
In the analysis of varsāgi abundūn (39) agre is employed as the nominative masculine plural of agra 'first varsāyāh ye agre bindayah prathamajalakanāh vai sāgrabinūaval tän varsāgra
