Shringaraprakasha 10.p1.5

10.p1.5

130–132 The threefold nature of an uninflected nominal stem under the forms of a noun and so forth, along with its separate divisions with examples. The threefold nature of an onomatopoeic/imitative word. 132 The meaning of the word 'case-inflection' (vibhakti). Its threefold nature, along with internal divisions and examples. 133 The threefold nature of a subordinate member, along with its internal division and examples. 134 The objection regarding the optionality of compounding in “kiṃ sabrahmacārī”. 135 Elucidation of the meaning of a compound word, along with its divisions and examples. 136–138 Examples of uninstantiated entities and so forth. The statement regarding the substantive and non-substantive status of words like “daṇḍin” and so forth. Exposition of the meaning of the sūtra “tatra tenedam iti sarūpe”. 139 The discussion of the compound in “aśrāddhabhojī”. 140 The discussion of the compound in “abrahmaṇaḥ”. 141–142 The discussion of the negative tatpuruṣa compound. The division of compounds according to the different meanings of the negative particle ‘nañ’. 143–145 The polysemy of the word ‘eka’. Summary of the principal subject matter of the Second Chapter. Synopsis of the subject matter to be established in the Third Chapter. || Thus ends the table of contents of the Second Chapter || Topics in the Third Chapter, on the morphological base and other linguistic forms: 146–148 The essential nature of a word (pada). Its threefold classification under the form of action and so forth. The eighteen varieties of a word through a sixfold division of each, along with their examples. 149 Inquiry into the middle-voice agentive word (karmakartṛ), with examples. 150 Examples of a primary nominal derivative (kṛdanta) that also has the nature of an action, in the verbal state, in the object, in the agent, and in both the verbal state and the object. 151–152 Examples of agent-of-the-state, middle-voice agent, and so forth; exposition of divergent views therein; the syntactical integration of sūtras such as “laḥ karmaṇi…” with the rule “dvyekayoḥ…” when an integrated meaning is intended to be expressed. 153–155 The sentence-meaning of “eko hi pacati” and so on. Raising the fault in [holding that verbal endings] denote number alone, and its refutation. The objection concerning the impossibility of syntactic agreement because a capacity serves as a syntactic role when the agent is denoted by a finite verbal affix, and its resolution. 156–157 Number, object, and so forth being the meaning of a case-inflection. Demonstration of the consensus of the Mahābhāṣya and the author of the Vārttikas regarding the denotation of the agent and the object by a finite verbal affix.