artha अर्थ
Definition: lit. signification,conveyed sense or object. The sense is sometimes looked upon as a determinant of the foot of a verse: cf. प्रायोर्थो वृत्तमित्येते पादज्ञानस्य हेतवः R. Pr. XVII 16. It is generally looked upon as the determinant of a word (पद). A unit or element of a word which is possessed of an independent sense is looked upon as a Pada in the old Grammar treatises; cf. अर्थः पदमिति ऐन्द्रे; cf. also अर्थः पदम् V. Pr. III.2, explained by उव्वट as अर्थाभिधायि पदम् । पद्यते गम्यते ज्ञायतेSर्थोनेनेति पदम् । There is no difference of opinion regarding the fact that, out of the four standard kinds of words नाम, आख्यात, उपसर्ग and निपात, the first two kinds नाम and अाख्यात do possess an independent sense of their own. Regarding possession of sense and the manner in which the sense is conveyed, by the other two viz. the Upasargas (prepositions) and Nipātas (particles) there is a striking difference of opinion among scholars of grammar. Although Pāṇini has given the actual designation पद to words ending with either the case or the conjugational affixes, he has looked upon the different units or elements of a Pada such as the base, the affix, the augment and the like as possessed of individually separate senses. There is practically nothing in Pāṇini's sūtras to prove that Nipātas and Upasargas do not possess an independent sense. Re: Nipātas, the rule चादयोऽसत्वे, which means that च and other indeclinables are called Nipātas when they do not mean सत्त्व, presents a riddle as to the meaning which च and the like should convey if they do not mean सत्त्व or द्रव्य i.e. a substance. The Nipātas cannot mean भाव or verbal activity and if they do not mean सत्व or द्रव्य, too, they will have to be called अनर्थक (absolutely meaningless) and in that case they would not be termed Prātipadika, and no caseaffix would be applied to them. To avoid this difficulty, the Vārtikakāra had to make an effort and he wrote a Vārtika निपातस्य अनर्थकस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वम् । P. I.2.45 Vār. 12. As a matter of fact the Nipātas च, वा and others do possess a sense as shown by their presence and absence (अन्वय and व्यतिरेक). The sense, however, is conveyed rather in a different manner as the word समूह, or समुदाय, which is the meaning conveyed by च in रामः कृष्णश्च, cannot be substituted for च as its Synonym in the sentence राम: कुष्णश्च. Looking to the different ways in which their sense is conveyed by nouns and verbs on the one hand, and by affixes, prepositions and indeclinables on the other hand, Bhartṛhari, possibly following Yāska and Vyāḍi, has developed the theory of द्योतकत्व as contrasted with वाचकत्व and laid down the dictum that indeclinables, affixes and prepositions (उपसर्गs) do not directly convey any specific sense as their own, but they are mere signs to show some specific property or excellence of the sense conveyed by the word to which they are attached; cf. also the statement 'न निर्बद्धा उपसर्गा अर्थान्निराहुरिति शाकटायनः नामाख्यातयोस्तु कर्मोपसंयेगद्योतका भवन्ति । Nir 1.3. The Grammarians, just like the rhetoricians have stated hat the connection between words and their senses is a permanent one (नित्य), the only difference in their views being that the rhetoricians state that words are related; no doubt permanently, to their sense by means of संकेत or convention which solely depends on the will of God, while the Grammarians say that the expression of sense is only a natural function of words; cf. 'अभिधानं पुनः स्वाभाविकम्' Vārttika No.33. on P. I.2.64. For द्योतकत्व see Vākyapadīya of Bhartṛhari II. 165-206.
|
|
Dictionary: Abhyankar
Literary Sources:
Synonyms:
Wikipedia: |