Contronyms in Sanskrit

[shankara]

Namaste,

I request scholars to point to any journal articles or studies on contronyms in Sanskrit. Also, any info on kosas or lists of Sanskrit contronyms.

regards
shankara

[Gadi Manoj]

नमस्ते,

इमौ धातू अपि स्तः। आदरे अनादरे च।

धन्यवादाः,
मनोजः
दूरवाणीसङ्ख्या +91 80732 92851

सम्पर्कसमयः  - 8 AM to 8 PM only

Blog: https://gadimanoj14.wordpress.com/

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 6:14 PM Abhishek Mehta <abhishe...@students.iiserpune.ac.in> wrote:

Aren't contronyms a result of usage rather than a quirk of grammar? As in, they are due to regional differences in usage of words rather than a result of any grammatical derivation. For instance, 'bad' can mean both 'extremely good' and 'bad' at least in the American context. Given how rigid the grammar of Sanskrit is, I do not think there are going to be a lot of contronyms as the rigid grammar will not allow regional differences in the usage of these words to occur and accumulate.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/785540522.1238468.1737357273036%40mail.yahoo.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANVU6xJu3%2BUegQxRCw2wKJ3EheyRh2JKX6ohis3GFY_%2BH1%2Bcpw%40mail.gmail.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

अनुत्तम is the best example.

अनुत्तम 

  

न० न उत्तमो यस्मात् । अत्युत्कृष्टे । “काङ्क्षन् गतिमनुत्तमामिति, “इह कीर्त्तिमवाप्नोति प्रेत्य चानुत्तमं सुखमिति” “यशोऽस्मिन् लोके प्राप्नोति प्रेत्य चानुत्तमं सुखमिति” च मनुः ।

नञ्समासे तु अधमः ॥

सोमवार, 20 जनवरी 2025 को 12:44:45 pm UTC+5:30 बजे shankara ने लिखा:

[Rajesh Kumar]

Contronyms, also known as auto-antonyms or Janus words, are terms that possess contradictory meanings. In Sanskrit, this phenomenon is not extensively documented as a distinct category. However, the broader concepts of polysemy (multiple related meanings of a word) and homonymy (multiple unrelated meanings) have been subjects of scholarly discussion.

Emilie Aussant's work, "Sanskrit Theories on Homonymy and Polysemy," delves into how traditional Sanskrit scholars approached words with multiple meanings. While it doesn't focus exclusively on contronyms, it provides insights into the linguistic frameworks that could encompass them. 

Additionally, the inherent polysemous nature of Sanskrit is noted in various linguistic studies. For instance, the Spanda website remarks on the multiple layers of meaning in Sanskrit words, highlighting the language's rich semantic flexibility. 

While specific studies on Sanskrit contronyms are scarce, exploring works on polysemy and homonymy in Sanskrit can offer valuable perspectives on how the language handles words with multiple, sometimes opposing, meanings.

Let’s dig into the scholarly and traditional perspectives on polysemy and homonymy in Sanskrit, which often overlap with what modern linguists might call contronyms or words with dual (sometimes opposing) meanings.https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01502381/document.

• Polysemy (Anekārthatva / Aneka-artha): One word having multiple related meanings.

• Homonymy (Śabda-sāmānya / Śabdasaṅkara): One word having multiple unrelated meanings.

Classical Textual Foundations:

1. Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī (c. 4th century BCE)

   • Considered the foundational text of Sanskrit grammar.

   • Describes rules where one word has several derivations depending on context.

   • Example: "go" (cow, light, earth) — context decides meaning.

2. Yāska’s Nirukta (c. 7th century BCE)

   • The earliest etymological treatise in Sanskrit.

   • Contains lists of polysemous and homonymous words.

   • Discusses how multiple meanings can arise from the same root.

   • Famous quote: "na ekaartho hi śabdaḥ" — “A word does not have a single meaning.”

3. Bhartrhari’s Vākyapadīya (c. 5th century CE)

• Philosophical text on the nature of language.

• Deep dives into śabda-brahman (language as ultimate reality).

• Explores how one word can signify multiple meanings simultaneously depending on context and cognition.

Modern Academic Studies:

1. Emilie Aussant (CNRS, Paris) – "Sanskrit Theories on Homonymy and Polysemy: Language, Ambiguity and Cognition in the Sanskrit Grammatical Tradition"

   • Explores how Sanskrit grammarians categorized and resolved ambiguity in words.

   • Read paper here (PDF) : https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01502381/document

2. Johannes Bronkhorst – Writings on semantic flexibility in classical Sanskrit

   • Studies how Indian logicians (Nyaya and Mimamsa schools) handled ambiguity, especially in interpreting Vedic texts.

3. George Cardona – Work on Pāṇini and semantics

   • Discusses how derivation rules in the Aṣṭādhyāyī can create multiple senses from one root or base.

4. Madhav Deshpande – "Sanskrit & Prakrit: Sociolinguistic Issues"

   • Discusses how Sanskrit maintained polysemy through formal structures, often contrasting it with Prakrit’s more simplified system.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/edfe425d-e069-4a63-9ca5-3ad89c2172bfn%40googlegroups.com.

[shankara]

Rajesh ji,

Namaste! Thank you very much for your informative response. I will explore these resources.

regards
shankara

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAAodWA9eTh1Wuw2_gVU%3DfOnXRY%3DLAj%3DKL%2B6JqMxvj4D-71xh9A%40mail.gmail.com.