Reviewing My Material

[Yonathan Rey Afossaq]

Namaste_()_
My apologies about my questions but I am reviewing my years of self-Sanskrit-studies and I am perplexed with what must be a normal happening for people like me. Can anyone of you, if you please, clarify me about this so small differences that are troubling my mind?
- The difference of meaning between अयं and एतत्
I deeply thank you
Sincerely yours

[G S S Murthy]

There is a कारिका in this matter which goes as follows:
इदमस्तु सन्निकृष्टं समीपतरवर्ति चैतदो रूपम् ।
अदसस्तु विप्रकृष्टं तदिति परोक्षे विजानीयात् ॥
When you want to speak of a thing nearby you are supposed to use इदम् (अयम्,इयम्,इदम्).When referring to a thing near enough but not too near(!) you are to use एतद् (एषः,एषा,एतत्). You use अदस् (असौ,असौ,अदः) when referring to something distant.
Suffice it to say this rule is not strictly observed.
Murthy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Have you visited my web site? http://murthygss.tripod.com/index.htm

[Piergiorgio Muzi]

Hi, Yonathan,

there are two differences:

1) ayaM is masculine; etad is neuter. So, it should be better to question about the difference between <ayaM, imaM, idaM> and <eSa, eSA, idaM>, each triplet being nominative: masc. fem. and neu. respectively of two different pronouns.

2) both can be translated in English by "this"; but, even if sometimes they are interchangeable, eSa tends to have an extreme degree of proximity (samIpatara) and ayaM tends to indicate presence to senses (pratyakSa-rUpaM).

Best wishes,

Piergiorgio Muzi

 

--

[Eddie]

Yonathan,

 

ayam and etat are indeed different of gender. And Coulson makes further subtle distinctions, that can considerably overlap.

 

However, ayam  is often used as the demonstrative pronoun, while etad is the usual pronoun.

 

 

This (etad) sentence is an example of the use of this as a pronoun.

 

But this (ayam) one, employs  the demonstrative variety.

 

 

Eddie,

 

 

demonstrative pronoun

4. Gram. indicating or singling out the thing referred to. This is a demonstrative pronoun.

From: Yonathan Rey Afossaq

Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 10:24 AM

To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Subject: [Samskrita] Reviewing My Material

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 07:35:00

[Yonathan Rey Afossaq]

Yes, I am sorry, I did formulate badly this question. Well, I am understanding now and the question would be: being एषः/सः the masculine form, एषा/सा the feminine form and एतत्/तत् the neuter form, what difference in meaning exists between the anterior masculine form and अयं
I deeply thank you for your so quick as precise answers, hopping you all understand my "conditionalisms" about a so evident thing. The true is that when my mind breaks it really breaks hahahahaha
Deep thanks
Yours
Yonathan

[rahul vedi]

namo namaH yonathan varya

 

I understand the predicament because I am also in the same boat...

struggling alone and trying to make do with my own limited resources.

 

I may be completely wrong but my understanding is that ayaM and etat mean "this" with gender (linga) difference. ayam is punsak whereas etat is  napumsak .

 

hope this helps

Rahul

--

[Piergiorgio Muzi]

You are wrong indeed, sorry. They have different genders but they do not belong to the same pronoun. etat is the neuter of the pronoun <eSa, eSA, etat>, while ayaM is the masculin of <ayaM, iyaM, idaM>. In my email I tried to explain the strong similarities and the subtle differences in their meaning. Translation in English is often "this" for both.    {read:  <masc., fem., neu> }

Best wishes,

Piergiorgio Muzi 

[Yonathan Rey Afossaq]

Yes Piergiorgio,
I understood your points and I wrote it down for an hypothetical 'again' in the future. In fact I did register quite all the e-mails about this
Thank you to all
Yonathan

[Raja Srinivasan]

Bharatia Vidhya Bhavan has its Sanskrit courses and conducts regular exams. Unfortunately this is not available in the US. The one hope I've is at some time, these kind of structured programs with its testing process would be available to people like me who are not in NY City and not in India. At some point I want to be able to find out where I am in the learning process -- an I in Kinder Garten or in 1st grade? What do I do to get to 2nd Grade and the next steps in the Sanskrit learning process?

Thanks & Regards
Raja Srinivasan

[G S S Murthy]

Dear Sri. Srinivasan,
Pl visit my web site where there is much information useful for learners of Sanskrit. I conduct a Primary course through E-mail absolutely free. If you are interested you may join. Several learners are taking the Course.
Regards
Murthy

http://murthygss.tripod.com/samskrutasopanam_1.htm

[धनंजय वैद्य <deejayvaidya@yahoo.com>]

Mostly in agreement with Shri. Muzi.

etad (neuter)/eSha (mAsc)/eShA (fem) is for objects very close by. You
might have the object held in your hand or be pointing to them.
idam (neuter)/ayam (mAsc)/iyam (fem) is for objects in your presence
but not quite at hand.

You mention in your google profile that you speak French and Spanish.
You would use etad in the sort of occasion you would use "voici" in
French or "he aquí" in Spanish.
You will remember that "Voici un livre" (etat pustakam [properly:
pashyaitat pustakam]) means something more immediate than "Il y a un
livre ici" (idam pustakam, properly: atra [form of idam] pustakam
asti) in French.
Or "He aquí un libro" means something more immediate than "Hay un
libro aquí." in Spanish

Also in some rural dialects of English, you have a point-to pronoun
expression "This here book is my granpa's." where the book is in hand
or pointed to, and the sense is different from "this book is my
granpa's." where the book is only somewhere in the speaker's
presence.

This is just to dtiscuss that the need to distinguish something of
great immediacy versus something that is generally present is not a
strange and abstruse grammatical conceit only in Sanskrit. By
reminding yourself how other languages also have grammatical cues to
signal immediacy, you can get a sense when to use etad and when to use
idam.

saH/sA/tad do not imply presence.

Regards,
Dhananjay


On Aug 30, 5:24 am, Yonathan Rey Afossaq <stormv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Namaste_()_

> *

[Vimala Sarma]

Dhananjaya Mahodaya
This is a very clear explanation.
Thank you very much.
Vimala

Regards,
Dhananjay

--

[Yonathan Rey Afossaq]

Namaste
I deeply thank you for your so splendid Spanish and French examples that clears everything to me because I can say that I have four mother languages instead of only one and all of this makes part: Hebrew, Portuguese, Spanish and French.
This so vivid examples will permit me now never more forget this.
I renew my thanks
Sincerely
Yonathan

[Muzi Piergiorgio]

Dear Shri Dhananjay, just to confirm your exact and brilliant
clarification of the semantics of Sanskrit demostrative pronouns, I’m
sending these “cloka-s, of an anonymous Indian grammarian. They are quoted
in Speijer’d Sanskrit Syntax (in this book there are also several examples
of the difference between the four pronouns):
idamaH pratyakSarUpaM samIpataravarti vaitado rUpam ;
adasastu viprakRSTaM parokSe vijAnIyAt .
इदमः प्रत्यक्षरूपं समीपतरवर्ति वैतदो रूपम्।

अदसस्तु विप्रकृष्टं तदिति परोक्षे विजानीयात्॥

We could deduct:
idaM / tat = pratyakSa / paroksa = present / absent
etat / adaH = samîpataravarti / viprakRSTa = nearer / remote

They seem to me to be very interesting for their clear and logical
distinction by means of two contrasting criteria (respectively, presence
and nearness). Of course the meaning of parokSa would need some detailed
logical interpretation: it doesn’t mean that <sa, sA, tat> presupposes the
inexistence, but that it doesn’t presuppose the effective existence
(visible, at hand or so)necessarily.
Beginners will be struck by the genitive cases: idamaH, etadaH, adasaH. Of
course they are not the genitive cases of idaM, etat, adaH, but the
genitives of “idaM” , “etat”, “adaH”. That is, they are metalinguistic
technical expressions invented by grammarians (in primis, Panini) in order
to decline a quotation of a linguistic form, not the linguistic form
itself as in use.
Namaste!
Piergiorgio Muzi

धनंजय वैद्य <deejay...@yahoo.com> ha scritto:

[Muzi Piergiorgio]

Dear Shri Dhananjay, just to confirm your exact and brilliant
clarification of the semantics of Sanskrit demostrative pronouns, I’m
sending these “cloka-s, of an anonymous Indian grammarian. They are quoted
in Speijer’d Sanskrit Syntax (in this book there are also several examples
of the difference between the four pronouns):
idamaH pratyakSarUpaM samIpataravarti vaitado rUpam ;
adasastu viprakRSTaM parokSe vijAnIyAt .
इदमः प्रत्यक्षरूपं समीपतरवर्ति वैतदो रूपम्।
अदसस्तु विप्रकृष्टं तदिति परोक्षे विजानीयात्॥

We could deduct:
idaM / tat = pratyakSa / paroksa = present / absent

etat / adaH = samîpatara / viprakRSTa = nearer / remote

They seem to me to be very interesting for their clear and logical
distinction by means of two contrasting criteria (respectively, presence
and nearness). Of course the meaning of parokSa would need some detailed
logical interpretation: it doesn’t mean that <sa, sA, tat> presupposes the
inexistence, but that it doesn’t presuppose the effective existence

(visible, at hand...)necessarily.

Beginners will be struck by the genitive cases: idamaH, etadaH, adasaH. Of
course they are not the genitive cases of idaM, etat, adaH, but the
genitives of “idaM” , “etat”, “adaH”. That is, they are metalinguistic
technical expressions invented by grammarians (in primis, Panini) in order
to decline a quotation of a linguistic form, not the linguistic form
itself as in use.
Namaste!
Piergiorgio Muzi

धनंजय वैद्य <deejay...@yahoo.com> ha scritto: