Pāṇini (Sanskrit: पाणिनि, IPA: [pɑːɳin̪i]; a patronymic meaning "descendant of Paṇi") was an ancient Indian Sanskrit grammarian from Pushkalavati, Gandhara (fl. 4th century BC[1][2]).
Pāṇini is known for his Sanskrit grammar, particularly for his formulation of the 3,959 rules[2] of Sanskrit morphology, syntax and semantics in the grammar known as Ashtadhyayi (अष्टाध्यायी Aṣṭādhyāyī, meaning "eight chapters"), the foundational text of the grammatical branch of the Vedanga, the auxiliary scholarly disciplines of Vedic religion.
Contents |
The Ashtadhyayi is one of the earliest known grammars of Sanskrit, although Pāṇini refers to previous texts like the Unadisutra, Dhatupatha, and Ganapatha.[2] It is the earliest known work on descriptive linguistics, and together with the work of his immediate predecessors (Nirukta, Nighantu, Pratishakyas) stands at the beginning of the history of linguistics itself. His theory of morphological analysis was more advanced than any equivalent Western theory before the mid 20th century[3], and his analysis of noun compounds still forms the basis of modern linguistic theories of compounding, which have borrowed Sanskrit terms such as bahuvrihi and dvandva.
Pāṇini's comprehensive and scientific theory of grammar is conventionally taken to mark the end of the period of Vedic Sanskrit, so by definition introducing Classical Sanskrit.
Nothing definite is known about when Pāṇini lived, nor even which century he lived in. The scholarly mainstream favours 600-500 BCE[4] floruit, corresponding to Pushkalavati, Gandhara. Contemporary to the Nanda Dynasty ruling the Gangetic plain, but a 5th or even late 6th century BC date cannot be ruled out with certainty. According to a verse in the Panchatantra, he was killed by a lion.[5] According to Xuanzang (Hieun-Tsang), a statue of him existed at Śalātura, the place of his birth.[6]
Pāṇini's grammar defines Classical Sanskrit, so Pāṇini by definition lived at the end of the Vedic period. He notes a few special rules, marked chandasi ("in the hymns") to account for forms in the Vedic scriptures that had fallen out of use in the spoken language of his time. These indicate that Vedic Sanskrit was already archaic, but still a comprehensible dialect.
An important hint for the dating of Pāṇini is the occurrence of the word yavanānī (यवनानी) (in 4.1.49, either "Greek woman", or "Greek script").[7] Some Greeks, such as the Persian admiral Scylax of Caryanda were present in Gandhara as co-citizens of the Persian empire, well before the conquests of Alexander the Great in the 330s BC,[8]; the name could also have been transmitted via Old Persian yauna, and the administrative languages Elamite or Aramaic, so that the occurrence of yavanānī taken in isolation allows for a terminus post quem as early as 519 BC, i.e. the time of Darius the Great's Behistun inscription that includes the Indian province of Gandara (Sanskrit Gandhāra).
It is not certain whether Pāṇini used writing for the composition of his work, though it is generally agreed that he knew of a form of writing, based on references to words such as "script" and "scribe" in his Ashtadhyayi.[9] These must have referred to Aramaic or early Kharosthi writing. It is believed by some that a work of such complexity would have been difficult to compile without written notes, though others have argued that he might have composed it with the help of a group of students whose memories served him as 'notepads' (as is typical in Vedic learning). Writing first reappears in India in the form of the Brāhmī script from c. the 3rd century BC in the Ashokan inscriptions.
While Pāṇini's work is purely grammatical and lexicographic, cultural and geographical inferences can be drawn from the vocabulary he uses in examples, and from his references to fellow grammarians, which show he was a northwestern person. New deities referred to in his work include Vasudeva (4.3.98). The concept of dharma is attested in his example sentence (4.4.41) dharmam carati "he observes the law" (cf. Taittiriya Upanishad 1.11).
Nothing certain is known about Pāṇini's personal life. According to later traditions, his mother's name was Dākṣī and his maternal uncle name was Vyāḍi.[10] Some scholars suggest that his brother's name was Piṅgala.[11] Still less is known about his father, whose name may have been Paṇi, but most scholars reject this suggestion. More than a thousand years after the fact, the Pañcatantra mentions that the Grammarian Pāṇini was killed by a lion[12]:
सिंहो व्याकरणस्य कर्तुरहरत् प्राणान् मुनेः पाणिनेः ।
siṃho vyākaraṇasya karturaharat prāṇān muneḥ pāṇineḥ ।
The Ashtadhyayi (IAST: Aṣṭādhyāyī Devanagari: अष्टाध्यायी) is the central part of Pāṇini's grammar, and by far the most complex. It is the earliest complete grammar of Classical Sanskrit, and in fact is of a brevity and completeness unmatched in any ancient grammar of any language.[13] It takes material from the lexical lists (Dhatupatha, Ganapatha) as input and describes algorithms to be applied to them for the generation of well-formed words. It is highly systematised and technical. Inherent in its approach are the concepts of the phoneme, the morpheme and the root. His rules have a reputation for perfection[14] — that is, they are claimed to describe Sanskrit morphology fully, without any redundancy. A consequence of his grammar's focus on brevity is its highly unintuitive structure, reminiscent of modern notations such as the "Backus–Naur Form". His sophisticated logical rules and technique have been widely influential in ancient and modern linguistics.
It is likely that Pāṇini's grammar and the Rg Veda are the only texts that were passed from one generation to another without being amended. In the Ashtadhyayi language is observed in a manner that has no parallel among Greek or Latin grammarians. Pāṇini's grammar marks the entry of the non-sacred into Indian thought, and according to Renou and Filliozat, it then defines the linguistic expression of that thought.[15]
The great thinkers of ancient India were primarily linguists. It is not possible to understand fully the works of philosophers such as Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva without a knowledge of Pāṇini. The Ashtadhyayi is fundamental to the structure of their thinking. It is not a didactic grammar, as it presupposes a knowledge of Sanskrit. Gradually, mainly after the X century CE, manuals were produced that reorganised the Ashtadhyayi for didactic purposes. These generally had simpler structures and were less ambitious than their Ashtadhyayi source.
Pāṇini made use of a technical metalanguage consisting of a syntax, morphology and lexicon. This metalanguage is organised according to a series of meta-rules, some of which are explicitly stated while others can be deduced. The two fundamental principles on which the metalanguage is based are non-redundancy, or the principle of economy, and the necessity of all the rules in the Ashtadhyayi.[16]
The Ashtadhyayi consists of 3,959 sutras (sūtrāṇi) or rules, distributed among eight chapters, which are each subdivided into four sections or padas (pādāḥ).
From example words in the text, and from a few rules depending on the context of the discourse, additional information as to the geographical, cultural and historical context of Pāṇini can be discerned.
The first two sutras are as follows:
In these sutras, the capital letters are special meta-linguistic symbols; they are called IT (इत्) markers or, in later writers such as Katyayana and Patanjali, anubandhas (see below). The C and Ṅ refer to Shiva Sutras 4 ("ai, au, C") and 3 ("e, o, Ṅ"), respectively, forming what are known as the pratyāhāras 'comprehensive designations' aiC, eṄ. They denote the list of phonemes {ai, au} and {e, o} respectively. The त् (T) appearing in both sutras is also an IT marker: Sutra 1.1.70 defines it as indicating that the preceding phoneme does not represent a list, but a single phoneme, encompassing all supra-segmental features such as accent and nasality. For further example, आत् (āT) and अत् (aT) represent आ {ā} and अ {a} respectively.
Thus the two sūtras consist of a term, followed by a list of phonemes; the final interpretation of the two sūtras above is thus:
At this point, one can see they are definitions of terminology: guṇa and vṛ́ddhi are the terms for the full and the lengthened ablaut grades, respectively.
its or anubandhas are defined in P. 1.3.2 through P. 1.3.8. These definitions refer only to items taught in the grammar or its ancillary texts such at the dhātupāţha; this fact is made clear in P. 1.3.2 by the word upadeśe, which is then continued in the following six rules by anuvṛtti, Ellipsis. As these anubandhas are metalinguistic markers and not pronounced in the final derived form, pada (word), they are elided by P. 1.3.9 tasya lopaḥ - 'There is elision of that (i.e. any of the preceding items which have been defined as an it).' Accordingly, Pāṇini defines the anubandhas as follows:
1) Nasalized vowels, e.g. bhañjO. Cf. P. 1.3.2.
2) A final consonant (haL). Cf. P. 1.3.3.
2a) except a dental, m and s in verbal or nominal endings. Cf. P. 1.3.4.
3) Initial ñi ṭu ḍu. Cf. P 1.3.5
4) Initial ṣ of a suffix (pratyaya). Cf. P. 1.3.6.
5) Initial palatals and cerebrals of a suffix. Cf. P. 1.3.7
6) Initial l, ś, and k but not in a taddhita 'secondary' suffix. Cf. P. 1.3.8.
A few example of elements that contain its are as follows:
Pāṇini's Ashtadhyayi has three associated texts.
The Shiva Sutras describe a phonemic notational system in the fourteen initial lines preceding the Ashtadhyayi. The notational system introduces different clusters of phonemes that serve special roles in the morphology of Sanskrit, and are referred to throughout the text. Each cluster, called a pratyāhara ends with a dummy sound called an anubandha (the so calledIT index), which acts as a symbolic referent for the list. Within the main text, these clusters, referred through the anubandhas, are related to various grammatical functions.
The Dhatupatha is a lexicon of Sanskrit verbal roots subservient to the Ashtadhyayi. It is organized by the ten present classes of Sanskrit, i.e. the roots are grouped by the form of their stem in the present tense.
The ten present classes of Sanskrit are:
Most of these classes are directly inherited from Proto-Indo-European. The small number of class 8 verbs are a secondary group derived from class 5 roots, and class 10 is a special case, in that any verb can form class 10 presents, then assuming causative meaning. The roots specifically listed as belonging to class 10 are those for which any other form has fallen out of use (causative deponents, so to speak).
The Ganapatha (gaṇapāṭha) is a list of groups of primitive nominal stems used by the Ashtadhyayi.
After Pāṇini, the Mahābhāṣya ("great commentary") of Patañjali on the Ashtadhyayi is one of the three most famous works in Sanskrit grammar. It was with Patañjali that Indian linguistic science reached its definite form. The system thus established is extremely detailed as to shiksha (phonology, including accent) and vyakarana (morphology). Syntax is scarcely touched, but nirukta (etymology) is discussed, and these etymologies naturally lead to semantic explanations. People interpret his work to be a defense of Pāṇini, whose Sūtras are elaborated meaningfully. He also attacks Katyayana rather severely. But the main contributions of Patañjali lies in the treatment of the principles of grammar enunciated by him.
The learning of Indian curriculum in late classical times had at its heart a system of grammatical study and linguistic analysis.[17] The core text for this study was the Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini, the sine qua non of learning. This grammar of Pāṇini had been the object of intense study for the ten centuries prior to the composition of the Bhaṭṭikāvya. It was plainly Bhaṭṭi’s purpose to provide a study aid to Pāṇini’s text by using the examples already provided in the existing grammatical commentaries in the context of the gripping and morally improving story of the Rāmāyaṇa. To the dry bones of this grammar Bhaṭṭi has given juicy flesh in his poem. The intention of the author was to teach this advanced science through a relatively easy and pleasant medium. In his own words:
This composition is like a lamp to those who perceive the meaning of words and like a hand mirror for a blind man to those without grammar. This poem, which is to be understood by means of a commentary, is a joy to those sufficiently learned: through my fondness for the scholar I have here slighted the dullard.
Bhaṭṭikāvya 22.33–34.
The traditional story given to account for the technical or shastric nature of the poem goes that Bhaṭṭi’s class on grammar was one day disturbed by an elephant ambling between him and his pupils. This bestial interruption necessitated an interdiction of study for a year as prescribed by the solemn law books. To ensure that no vital study time was lost our poem was composed as a means of teaching grammar without resorting to an actual grammatical text.
Pāṇini and the Bhaṭṭikāvya |
||
| Bhaṭṭikāvya canto and verse | Pāṇini sūtra | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Prakīrṇa Khaṇḍa "Diverse Rules" |
||
| 1.1-5.96 | n/a | Miscellaneous sutras.htsr |
Adhikāra Khaṇḍa "The Illustration of Particular Topics" |
||
| 5.97-100 | 3.2.17-23 | The affix Ṭa |
| 5.104-6.4 | 3.1.35-41 | The suffix ām in the periphrastic perfect |
| 6.8-10 | 1.4.51 | Double accusatives |
| 6.16-34 | 3.1.43-66 | Aorists using sĪC substitutes for the affix CLI |
| 6.35-39 | 3.1.78 | The affix ŚnaM for the present tense system of class 7 verbs |
| 6.46-67 | 3.1.96-132 | The future passive participles or gerundives and related forms formed from the kṛtya affixes tavya, tavyaT, anīyaR, yaT, Kyap, and ṆyaT |
| 6.71-86 | 3.1.133-150 | Words formed with nirupapada kṛt affixes ṆvuL, tṛC, Lyu, ṆinI, aC, Ka, Śa, Ṇa, ṢvuN, thakaN, ṆyuṬ and vuN |
| 6.87-93 | 3.2.1-15 | Words formed with sopapada kṛt affixes aṆ, Ka, ṬaK, aC |
| 6.94-111 | 3.2.28-50 | Words formed with affixes KHaŚ and KhaC |
| 6.112-143 | 3.2.51-116 | Words formed with kṛt affixes |
| 7.1-25 | 3.2.134-175 | kṛt (tācchīlaka) affixes tṛN, iṣṇuC, Ksnu, Knu, GHinUṆ, vuÑ, yuC, ukaÑ, ṢākaN, inI, luC, KmaraC, GhuraC, KuraC, KvaraP, ūka, ra, u, najIṄ, āru, Kru, KlukaN, varaC and KvIP |
| 7.28-34 | 3.3.1-21 | niradhikāra kṛt affixes |
| 7.34-85 | 3.3.18-128 | The affix GhaÑ |
| 7.91-107 | 1.2.1-26 | Ṅit-Kit |
| 8.1-69 | 1.3.12-93 | Ātmanepada (middle voice) affixes |
| 8.70-84 | 1.4.24-54 | The use of cases under the adhikāra ‘kārake’ |
| 8.85-93 | 1.4.83-98 | karmapravacanīya prepositions |
| 8.94-130 | 2.3.1-73 | vibhakti, case inflection |
| 9.8-11 | 7.2.1-7 | The suffix sIC and vṛddhi of the parasmaipada aorist |
| 9.12-22 | 7.2.8-30 | The prohibition of iṬ |
| 9.23-57 | 7.2.35-78 | The use if iṬ |
| 9.58-66 | 8.3.34-48 | visarga saṃdhi in compounds |
| 9.67-91 | 8.3.55-118 | Retroflexion of s |
| 9.92-109 | 8.4.1-39 | Retroflexion of n |
Pāṇini's work became known in 19th century Europe, where it influenced modern linguistics initially through Franz Bopp, who mainly looked at Pāṇini. Subsequently, a wider body of work influenced Sanskrit scholars such as Ferdinand de Saussure, Leonard Bloomfield, and Roman Jakobson. Frits Staal discussed the impact of Indian ideas on language in Europe. After outlining the various aspects of the contact, Staal notes that the idea of formal rules in language, proposed by de Ferdinand de Saussure in 1894 and developed by Noam Chomsky in 1957 has origins in the European exposure to the formal rules of Pāṇinian grammar. In particular, de Saussure, who lectured on Sanskrit for three decades, may have been influenced by Pāṇini and Bhartrihari; his idea of the unity of signifier-signified in the sign is somewhat similar to the notion of Sphoṭa. More importantly, the very idea that formal rules can be applied to areas outside of logic or mathematics, may itself have been catalyzed by Europe's contact with the work of Sanskrit grammarians.[18]
Pāṇini, and the later Indian linguist Bhartrihari, had a significant influence on many of the foundational ideas proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure, professor of Sanskrit, who is widely considered the father of modern structural linguistics. Saussure himself cited Indian grammar as an influence on some of his ideas. In his Memoire sur le systeme primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-europennes (Memoir on the Original System of Vowels in the Indo-European Languages) published in 1879, he mentions Indian grammar as an influence on his idea that "reduplicated aorists represent imperfects of a verbal class." In his De l'emploi du genitif absolu en sanscrit (On the Use of the Genitive Absolute in Sanskrit) published in 1881, a monograph on the genitive absolute, he specifically mentions Pāṇini as an influence on the work.[19]
Prem Singh, in his foreword to the reprint edition of the German translation of Pāṇini’s Grammar in 1998, concluded that the "effect Panini's work had on Indo-European linguistics shows itself in various studies" and that a "number of seminal works come to mind," including Saussure's works and the analysis that "gave rise to the laryngeal theory," further stating: "This type of structural analysis suggests influence from Panini's analytical teaching." George Cardona, however, warns against overestimating the influence of Pāṇini on modern linguistics: "Although Saussure also refers to predecessors who had taken this Paninian rule into account, it is reasonable to conclude that he had a direct acquaintance with Panini's work. As far as I am able to discern upon rereading Saussure's Memoire, however, it shows no direct influence of Paninian grammar. Indeed, on occasion, Saussure follows a path that is contrary to Paninian procedure."[19]
The influence of Pāṇini on the founding father of American structuralism, Leonard Bloomfield, is very clear, see e.g. his 1927 paper "On some rules of Pāṇini".[20]
Pāṇini's grammar is the world's first formal system, developed well before the 19th century innovations of Gottlob Frege and the subsequent development of mathematical logic. In designing his grammar, Pāṇini used the method of "auxiliary symbols", in which new affixes are designated to mark syntactic categories and the control of grammatical derivations. This technique, rediscovered by the logician Emil Post, became a standard method in the design of computer programming languages.[21] Sanskritists now accept that Pāṇini's linguistic apparatus is well-described as an "applied" Post system. Considerable evidence shows ancient mastery of context-sensitive grammars, and a general ability to solve many complex problems. Frits Staal has written that "Panini is the Indian Euclid." Emil Post is Pāṇini's modern counterpart, showing the relationship between a computationally typical natural language grammar and universal computation.
Two literary works are attributed to Pāṇini, though they are now lost.
|
|||||||||||||||||
