Shringaraprakasha 1.p1.6

1.p1.6

stripratyāntā yathā-- gāṅgeyaḥ, saudāmeyaḥ, kārīṣagandheyaḥ, draupadeyaḥ, gaureyaḥ, śārṅgaraveyaḥ, kādraveyaḥ, kāmaṇḍaleyaḥ, yauvateyaḥ, saurabheyaḥ, bahusetrīkaḥ, suvathadhūkaḥ, iti | atha kathaṃ yauvateyaḥ iti pratyayaprakṛtāvudahṛtam ? yāvatā ’yūnasti’ (pā.4.1.77.) ityetasya taddhitasaṃjñayā prātipadikatvameva | satyamtat ; kuṃ tu satrīsāmānyaparyāyo yuvatiśabdaḥ prakṛtyantaramasti; yathā''ha--’dharmārthāṅgavidhyākālānanuparodhayan kāmasūtraṃ tadaṅgavidhyāśca purūṣo'dhīyīta, prāgyauvanādhyuvatiḥ’ (kāmasu.3.) iti | tasya, ’yūnasti’ ityetasyaiva vā ’eraktinaḥ’ iti vibhāṣitabhīṣo ḍhagutpattiḥ; yathā āditeyaḥ, saurabheyaḥ, iti; atha kādraveyaḥ, kāmaṇḍaleyaḥ, iti katham ? ṅyāporapratipadikatve'pi hi ’ṅyāprātipadikāt’ (pā.4.1.1) iti viśeṣavidhānāt, ’yūnasti’ ityotasya tu taddhitatvāt astu subutpattiḥ; ūṅastu pratyayatvena sāna sidhyati; samarthāñca taddhitena bhavitavyam | antavadbhāvādbhaviṣyati; Btathā hi--brahmavandhūrityādau ’akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ’ (pā.6.1.101.) iti dvayorekatevaṃ bhavati | yadhyevaṃ ’satrūbhyo ḍhak’ (pā.4.1.120.) iti ḍhak na sidhyati, so'pyādivadbhāvādbhavaliṣyati | ’sā'sāya devatā’ (pā.4.2.24.) iti jñāpakādūṅutpatteḥ prageva vāsubutpattiḥ iti || uktā ṣoḍhaivameṣā'pi prakṛtiḥ pratyayātmikā| athātaḥ pratipadikarūpā ṣoḍhaiva kathyate|| || pratipadikaprakṛtiḥ|| 1.7 tatra nāmāvyayānikaraṇakṛttaddhitalamāsāḥ prātipadikāni; yatāha--’arthavadadhāturapratyayaḥ prātipadikam’ (pā.1.2.45) ’kṛtetaddhisamāsāśca’ iti;

That which ends in a feminine suffix is, for example: *gāṅgeyaḥ*, *saudāmeyaḥ*, *kārīṣagandheyaḥ*, *draupadeyaḥ*, *gaureyaḥ*, *śārṅgaraveyaḥ*, *kādraveyaḥ*, *kāmaṇḍaleyaḥ*, *yauvateyaḥ*, *saurabheyaḥ*, *bahusapatnīkaḥ*, *suvadhūkaḥ*.

Now, why is *yauvateyaḥ* cited under affixal morphological bases? Inasmuch as by the rule *yūnas tiḥ* (Pāṇini 4.1.77) it has the designation of a secondary suffix, it is indeed a nominal stem (*prātipadika*). That is true; however, the word *yuvati*, being a synonym denoting women in general, is a different morphological base; as he says: ‘Without conflicting with dharma, artha, and the time for auxiliary disciplines, a man should study the *Kāmasūtra* and its auxiliary disciplines; a woman, before youth’ (*Kāmasūtra* 1.3). After that [word], or after this very one ending in the affix taught in *yūnas tiḥ*, the secondary suffix *ḍhak* originates by the optional prohibition of *ṅīṣ* according to *er ac-ktinaḥ*; as in *āditeyaḥ*, *saurabheyaḥ*.

Now, how are *kādraveyaḥ* and *kāmaṇḍaleyaḥ* [derived]? For although *ṅī* and *āp* are not nominal stems, by the specific rule *ṅyāpprātipadikāt* (Pāṇini 4.1.1), and because that which ends with the affix taught in *yūnas tiḥ* is a secondary suffix, let the nominal inflection (*sup*) arise; but in the case of the feminine suffix *ūṅ*, since it is an affix, that [derivation] would not be established, and the secondary suffix must occur after semantically compatible forms. It will occur by virtue of being treated as final (*antavadbhāva*); for thus in *brahmabandhūḥ* and so forth, by *akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ* (Pāṇini 6.1.101), the two become one. If so, the affix *ḍhak* by *strībhyo ḍhak* (Pāṇini 4.1.120) would not be established; that too will occur by virtue of being treated as initial (*ādivadbhāva*). Or else, nominal case-inflection originates prior to the origination of *ūṅ*, based on the indicator rule *sāsya devatā* (Pāṇini 4.2.24).

Thus this morphological base consisting of an affix has also been stated as sixfold; / now, from this point, that which has the form of a nominal stem is explained as sixfold.

[Morphological Base in the Form of a Nominal Stem]

1.7 In that regard, simple nouns, indeclinables, roots expressing action, primary derivatives, secondary derivatives, and compound words are nominal stems; as it is said: ‘That which possesses meaning, is not a verbal root, and is not an affix, is a nominal stem’ (Pāṇini 1.2.45), and ‘Primary derivatives, secondary derivatives, and compound words are also [nominal stems]’ (Pāṇini 1.2.46).