BrhatīおよびNyāyamañjarīに見られるパーニニ文法学批判
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
It has already been quite well known, that in the system of Pāṇinian grammar(pāṇinīyavyākaraṇa), technical terms, or sañjñās such as dhātu, prātipadika, each kārakas, etc. play a very important role. They enabled ancient grammarians, not only who belongs to the tradition of Pāṇinian grammar, but also to the tradition of other grammar, to encode the fruits of their linguistic observation into a more condensed form of information known with the name of sūtra. sūtras must be pithy enough to describe/prescribe the language in scope, and sañjñās in co-operation with some other techniques can divide the linguistic units and linguistic notions into suitable sets. For the reason of its importance, whether each of all the sañjñās works well or not had been discussed repeatedly and repeatedly by the grammarians, and very interestingly, also by the famous Indian thinkers, such as Prabhākara Miśra (ca. 700) and Jayanta Bhaṭṭa (9c). Some critical remarks about sañjñā system of Pāṇinian grammar, appear in the Prabhākara's Brhatī (B) and Jayanta's Nyāyamañjarī (NM), though have not been studied enough.// The purpose of this paper is to perform following two attempts: (1) To examine whether the concerning part of NM is parallel to that of B or not by comparing these arguments. (2) To examine the contents of these two text with other older treatises of Pāṇinian grammarians, i.e. Kātyāyana's Vārttika (V), Patañjali's Mahābhāṣya (MBh), and Bhartrhari's Vākyapadīya.// As a result of these two attempts above, I got following three conclusive ideas: (1) The arguments appear in B and NM show a certain degree of similarity both in the text and its content, although there exsist several differences in detail. (2) Most part of the critical remarks we meet in B and NM are already appeared in V, and argued in MBh. But the argument concerning with the finite verb form of the root gaṇḍati does not follow the older example. (3) Cakradhara, the author of a commentary on NM (Nyāyamañjarīgranthibhaṅga) regards at least one phrase, “ghaṭambhūyata iti ca” as a parallel text to B.
- 2011-03-31
著者
関連論文
- BrhatīおよびNyāyamañjarīに見られるパーニニ文法学批判
- 文法学の意義を巡る議論 : Nyayamanjari第六日課を中心に
- 文法と術語 : BrhafiおよびNyayamanjariにおけるAstadhyayi批判の特徴