Comparison and substitution are in the background of whatever kind of scientific analysis and Pāṇini’s grammar also relies on a presupposed bi–planar analysis of Sanskrit linguistic forms. This sounds quite similar to the renowned method of Bopp’s Zergliederung, but the most important device employed by Pāṇini in the process of “word formation” is definitely substitution instead of affixation. Nevertheless, Pāṇini’s substitution pattern — an incomparably sophisticated and clear–cut system — deserves to be spelt out in its own terms in order to avoid a skin–level comparativism which would, and in fact sometimes does, deprive modern scholars of its most interesting and enticing parts. We will show in this paper how one of the crucial features of Pāṇini’s replacement is the absence of purely abstract linguistic levels and the consequent fluidity of the units used to describe language. It is important to take Pāṇini’s model of substitution out of its supposed limited domain of allomorphy, to show that it is part of a broader conceptualization of linguistic units in spatial terms, i.e. as “places” where “things” happen. It is this lack of fixed status which was not understood by later Sanskrit commentators who came from a culture which had meanwhile deeply changed. It has neither been fully appreciated by modern scholars, who are rather focused on a derivational and/or multilayered interpretation of the system, which is more in tune with modern expectancies.

Fluidity of linguistic segmentation in Pāṇini’s grammar

Pontillo, Tiziana
2021-01-01

Abstract

Comparison and substitution are in the background of whatever kind of scientific analysis and Pāṇini’s grammar also relies on a presupposed bi–planar analysis of Sanskrit linguistic forms. This sounds quite similar to the renowned method of Bopp’s Zergliederung, but the most important device employed by Pāṇini in the process of “word formation” is definitely substitution instead of affixation. Nevertheless, Pāṇini’s substitution pattern — an incomparably sophisticated and clear–cut system — deserves to be spelt out in its own terms in order to avoid a skin–level comparativism which would, and in fact sometimes does, deprive modern scholars of its most interesting and enticing parts. We will show in this paper how one of the crucial features of Pāṇini’s replacement is the absence of purely abstract linguistic levels and the consequent fluidity of the units used to describe language. It is important to take Pāṇini’s model of substitution out of its supposed limited domain of allomorphy, to show that it is part of a broader conceptualization of linguistic units in spatial terms, i.e. as “places” where “things” happen. It is this lack of fixed status which was not understood by later Sanskrit commentators who came from a culture which had meanwhile deeply changed. It has neither been fully appreciated by modern scholars, who are rather focused on a derivational and/or multilayered interpretation of the system, which is more in tune with modern expectancies.
2021
9788825541205
Allomorphy; Bopp’s Zergliederung; Indian Linguistics; Kiparsky’s “Elsewhere condition”; Pāṇini; Substitution descriptive model
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
STAMPATO Candotti & Pontillo 2021 CISPELS.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: versione editoriale
Dimensione 1.16 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.16 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11584/316937
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact