THE present work is based on my abridgement, with additions (1886), of Max Muller's Sanskrit Grammar (2nd ed., 1870). It is practically a new book. The old matter has been entirely recast, having been shortened and extended, arranged and formulated anew. Little has remained unaltered except those paradigms for which, in my opinion, no better ones could have been substituted.
The main additions embrace those parts of the grammar which I considered I had previously not treated in sufficient detail. Thus I have added a full paradigm of the passive (p. 127) and seven new paradigms of the reduplicated perfect (pp. 110-112). The largest additions, amounting altogether to about eighteen pages, have been made in the section on particles and the chapters on com-pounds and syntax. These portions of the book have at the same time, I think, been greatly improved in lucidity.
The omissions are also considerable. My guiding principle has been to leave out all matter that is to be found exclusively in Vedic literature or in the Hindu grammarians. For it has been my aim to describe only those grammatical forms which are to be met with in the actual literature of post-Vedic Sanskrit. This has sometimes led, to considerable simplification; for instance, the account of the unchangeable bases in declension here occupies only five and a half pages, as com-pared with nine in my former grammar. The student is thus not burdened with rules which can never be of any use to him. I have refrained from employing, even in a paradigm, any word which cannot be quoted from the literature; but, for the sake of completeness, individual forms have often had to be given which are represented only by other words of the same type.
Long experience in teaching has further enabled me to formulate rules with greater exactness as well as to group them with greater clearness; as, for instance, in my account of the strong and weak bases of the reduplicated perfect and their irregularities (pp. 107-109, 112).
By these means I hope to have smoothed the path, hitherto unnecessarily thorny, of the beginner of Sanskrit, while providing him with the full grammatical equipment necessary for reading and understanding any Sanskrit text.
As an introduction to the subject, I prefix a short sketch of the history of Sanskrit grammar down to the present time. From this it will appear that the Hindu grammatical system is by no means adapted to European methods of teaching and learning. The native system is a study by itself, involving great labour, and hardly to be mastered by European scholars without devoting them. selves to it for some years in India itself. It cannot be doubted that European Sanskrit grammars are still too much under the influence of that system. Even the present work will probably not be entirely exempt from this criticism. I have, for instance, followed the native grammarians in quoting certain roots with a long instead of a short vowel. This distinction, though scientifically worthless, seemed, however, to be of sufficient practical value to deserve retention.
The late Prof. Benfey used to say that he often thought it would be preferable to begin the study of the ancient language of India with its oldest phase. It seems to me, however, that the exuberance of Vedic forms would be too bewildering at the outset, and that the simpler and more regulated grammar of the later language is better adapted for the beginner. When that has been fully acquired, the additional forms of Vedic grammar can easily be learnt. As a help in this direction I have in Appendix III summarized the main differences between Vedic and classical Sanskrit.
As regards transliteration, I have abandoned the late Prof. Max Muller's system, following that adopted by the Oriental Congress held at Geneva in 1894, by the German Oriental Society, by the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, by the late Prof. Buhler in his Encyclopaedia of Indo-Aryan research, and by many individual Sanskrit scholars in their own works. This system includes the use of (pronounced with a syllabic value, as ther in French chambre) to represent the weak grade of the syllables ar and ra. The transliteration ri misrepresents the original value of this vowel. The grammar is transliterated throughout, excepting the list of verbs (Appendix I) and the syn-tactical examples at the end of the book. This exception is due to the experience that beginners are apt to become too dependent on transliteration. But even here when the Sandhi is difficult, I have given help by separating the words as far as possible and by adding the transliteration of single words here and there. Besides, by the time the student reaches the end of the grammar, he ought to be able to read the Devanagari character with some ease.
THE first impulse to the study of grammar in India was given by the religious motive of preserving intact the sacred Vedic texts, the efficacy of which was believed to require attention to every letter. Thus, aided by the great transparency of the Sanskrit language, the ancient Indian grammarians had by the fifth century B. c. arrived at scientific results unequalled by any other nation of antiquity. It is, for instance, their distinctive achievement to have recognized that words for the most part consist on the one hand of roots, and on the other of affixes, which, when compounded with the former, modify the radical sense in various ways.
The oldest grammar which has been preserved is that of Panini. It already represents a fully developed system, and its author stands at the end of a long line of predecessors, of whom no fewer than sixty-four are mentioned, and the purely grammatical works of all of whom, owing to the excellence and comprehensiveness of his work, have entirely perished.
Panini is considerably later than Yaska (probably about 500 B.C.), whom he mentions, and between whom and himself a good number of important grammarians intervene. On the other hand, Panini is much older than his interpreter Patanjali, who probably dates from the latter half of the second century B. c., the two being separated by another eminent grammarian, Katyayana. Panini himself uses the word yavanant, which Katyayana explains as 'writing of the Yavanas' (i. e. Inones or Greeks). Now it is not at all likely that the Indians should have become acquainted with Greek writing before the invasion of Alexander in 327 в.о. But the natives of the extreme north-west, of whom Panini in all probability was one, would naturally have become acquainted with it soon after that date. They must, however, have grown familiar with it before a grammarian would make a rule as to how to form from Yavana, 'Greek,' a derivative form meaning 'Greek writing. It seems therefore hardly possible to place Panini earlier than about 300 B. C.
Panini's grammar consists of nearly 4000 rules divided into eight chapters. Being composed with the utmost imaginable brevity, each Sutra or aphorism usually consists of only two or three words, and the whole work, if printed continuously in medium-sized Devanagari type, would not occupy more than about thirty-five pages of the present volume. And yet this grammar describes the entire Sanskrit language in all the details of its structure, with a complete-ness which has never been equalled elsewhere. It is at once the shortest and fullest grammar in the world.
In his endeavour to give an exhaustive survey of the bhaṣa or classical Sanskrit with a view to correct usage, Panini went on to include within the scope of his grammar the language of the sacred texts, which was no longer quite intelligible. He accordingly gives hundreds of rules about the Veda, but without completeness. His account of the Vedic language, taken as a whole, contains many gaps, trifles often being noticed, while important matters are omitted. In this part of his work Panini shows a decided incapacity to master his subjectmatter, attributing to the Veda the most unbounded grammatical license, especially in interchanging or dropping inflexions.
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist