| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Vakya (Samskrit: वाक्यम्) is a combination of words having certain meaning. Annambhatta in his Tarkasangraha says that a Shabda is that which has the significative relation; Vakya (वाक्यम्), a sentence, is a group of such words. Nyayasutras discussed mostly about word-meaning and its relationships and not until the later commentaries do we see the sentence meaning mentioned. Most of the early Vaiyakaranas and Naiyayikas opined that the sentence meaning merely constitutes the sum of the individual word-meanings. It is the Mimamsa school that started a detailed study of sentences and developed an elaborate siddhanta for interpretation of sentences.<ref name=":1">Kunjunniraja, K. (1988) ''Mimamsa Contribution to Language Studies.'' Calicut: University of Calicut. </ref> | + | Vakya (Samskrit: वाक्यम्) is a combination of words having certain meaning. Annambhatta in his Tarkasangraha says that a [[Shabda Vichara (शब्दविचारः)|Shabda]] is that which has the significative relation; Vakya (वाक्यम्), a sentence, is a group of such words. Nyayasutras discussed mostly about word-meaning and its relationships and not until the later commentaries do we see the sentence meaning mentioned. Most of the early Vaiyakaranas and Naiyayikas opined that the sentence meaning merely constitutes the sum of the individual word-meanings. It is the Mimamsa school that started a detailed study of sentences and developed an elaborate siddhanta for interpretation of sentences. The analysis of words and the sentences they form and the cognition of things is called [[Shabda Bodha (शाब्दबोधः)|Shabdabodha]]. Many language and cognition theories have been long debated chiefly by Mimamsakas, Vaiyakaranas and later day Naiyayikas.<ref name=":1">Kunjunniraja, K. (1988) ''Mimamsa Contribution to Language Studies.'' Calicut: University of Calicut. </ref> |
| | == परिचयः ॥ Introduction == | | == परिचयः ॥ Introduction == |
| | The first mention of a Mimamsa type of definition of the sentence seems to be found in the Katyayana Shrauta sutra <blockquote>तेषां वाक्यं निराकाङ्क्षम् २ मिथः सम्बद्धम् ३ (Katy. Shrau. Sutr. 1.3.2-3)<ref>Katyayana Shrauta Sutra ([https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%83/%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8C%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%82%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BF/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4 Adhyaya 1])</ref></blockquote>A sentence is that which is niraakanksha (निराकाङ्क्षम्) that is to say 'something which has no requirement of expectation of words outside itself to complete its meaning.' It is explained as mithah sambandha or 'mutual relationship' among the word-meanings in the sentence. It is in the Mimamsasutras of Jaimini that we first come across the definition of a sentence or vakya.<ref name=":1" /> | | The first mention of a Mimamsa type of definition of the sentence seems to be found in the Katyayana Shrauta sutra <blockquote>तेषां वाक्यं निराकाङ्क्षम् २ मिथः सम्बद्धम् ३ (Katy. Shrau. Sutr. 1.3.2-3)<ref>Katyayana Shrauta Sutra ([https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%83/%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8C%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%82%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BF/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4 Adhyaya 1])</ref></blockquote>A sentence is that which is niraakanksha (निराकाङ्क्षम्) that is to say 'something which has no requirement of expectation of words outside itself to complete its meaning.' It is explained as mithah sambandha or 'mutual relationship' among the word-meanings in the sentence. It is in the Mimamsasutras of Jaimini that we first come across the definition of a sentence or vakya.<ref name=":1" /> |
| Line 56: |
Line 56: |
| | | | |
| | ===Vedanta Darshana=== | | ===Vedanta Darshana=== |
| − | ====Advaitavedanta==== | + | ====Advaita==== |
| | The Advaitins and others reject the doctrine of sphota (speechbuds or language potentials) and admit that the letters which are the objects of recollection that results from the latent impressions born out of the cognition of each letter is the word or the sentence. Prakāśātman in his Šābdanirnaya states so. Sankara in his commentary on the Vedāntasūtra 1.3.28 states:<blockquote>''Although all the letters in a word are cognised, still like the ants thanks to their sequential configuration generate in us the idea of a line in a definite order, the letters generate in us the notion of a word thanks to their definite sequence.''</blockquote>From this it is known that it is only letters in a specific order that constitute a word. And the letters or words in a due order constitute a sentence.<ref name=":0" /> | | The Advaitins and others reject the doctrine of sphota (speechbuds or language potentials) and admit that the letters which are the objects of recollection that results from the latent impressions born out of the cognition of each letter is the word or the sentence. Prakāśātman in his Šābdanirnaya states so. Sankara in his commentary on the Vedāntasūtra 1.3.28 states:<blockquote>''Although all the letters in a word are cognised, still like the ants thanks to their sequential configuration generate in us the idea of a line in a definite order, the letters generate in us the notion of a word thanks to their definite sequence.''</blockquote>From this it is known that it is only letters in a specific order that constitute a word. And the letters or words in a due order constitute a sentence.<ref name=":0" /> |
| | | | |
| − | '''Visishitadvaita'''
| + | ==== Visishitadvaita ==== |
| − | | |
| | The Visistādvaitin-s too accept that the letters manifested in a single cognition constitute a word and the words manifested in a single cognition constitute a sentence. Vedāntadeśika in his Tattvamuktākalāpa and in his commentary Sarvārthasiddhi thereon sets forth this view.<ref name=":0" /> | | The Visistādvaitin-s too accept that the letters manifested in a single cognition constitute a word and the words manifested in a single cognition constitute a sentence. Vedāntadeśika in his Tattvamuktākalāpa and in his commentary Sarvārthasiddhi thereon sets forth this view.<ref name=":0" /> |
| | | | |
| − | '''Dvaita'''
| + | ==== Dvaita ==== |
| − | | |
| | The Dvaitin-s too subscribe to the view that letters constitute a word and the words constitute a sentence. Vyāsatīrtha in his Tarkatāndava states that Jayatīrtha in his Pramānapaddhati has defined a word as letters having a termination of inflectional ending of a case or of the person of a tense or mood at their end, and a sentence as words having syntactic expectancy, congruity and proximity.<ref name=":0" /> | | The Dvaitin-s too subscribe to the view that letters constitute a word and the words constitute a sentence. Vyāsatīrtha in his Tarkatāndava states that Jayatīrtha in his Pramānapaddhati has defined a word as letters having a termination of inflectional ending of a case or of the person of a tense or mood at their end, and a sentence as words having syntactic expectancy, congruity and proximity.<ref name=":0" /> |
| | ===Vyakarana Shastra=== | | ===Vyakarana Shastra=== |
| Line 88: |
Line 86: |
| | # Recollection of word-meanings (padartha) | | # Recollection of word-meanings (padartha) |
| | # Mutual relationship of word-meanings | | # Mutual relationship of word-meanings |
| − | There are two main siddhantas explaining the import of a sentence meaning. | + | There are two main siddhantas explaining the import of a sentence meaning expounded by Mimamsakas. However, we include the unique concept proposed by Bhartrhari regarding the cognition of vakyartha here |
| | | | |
| | === Abhihitanvayavada === | | === Abhihitanvayavada === |
| Line 105: |
Line 103: |
| | | | |
| | This siddhanta stresses on the natural method of learning a language, where a child observes activities of elders or others to comprehend the meaning of words. Hence, kriya or verb is the central unit of a sentence. The words in a sentence possess a meaning pertinent to the action meant by the sentence. One person addressing another says "Bring the cow (gaam aanaya)"; the latter thus addressed immediately brings the cow. A child observing the former's statement and the latter's actions in response to the statement, infers that the meaning of the sentence is a command to carry out the act of bringing a cow. At this stage a child understands the sentence level signification only. Only when he hears another statement "Bring a horse (asvam aanaya)" and observes the latter bringing a horse does he infer the difference in the objects and on comparing the two sentences he understands the term "bring(aanaya)" is the command for the action "to bring" and the terms "cow (gaam) and horse (asvam)" must refer to the two different animals. The mental process of "anvaya or inclusion" and "vyatireka or exclusion" thus plays a role in bringing about the general idea about the meaning of individual words. This process is a natural phenomenon and is not a deliberate and conscious act such as to learn the meanings of words. Later by the process of substitution a child is able to understand meanings of new sentences by substituting the words that he has already come across.<ref name=":02" /> | | This siddhanta stresses on the natural method of learning a language, where a child observes activities of elders or others to comprehend the meaning of words. Hence, kriya or verb is the central unit of a sentence. The words in a sentence possess a meaning pertinent to the action meant by the sentence. One person addressing another says "Bring the cow (gaam aanaya)"; the latter thus addressed immediately brings the cow. A child observing the former's statement and the latter's actions in response to the statement, infers that the meaning of the sentence is a command to carry out the act of bringing a cow. At this stage a child understands the sentence level signification only. Only when he hears another statement "Bring a horse (asvam aanaya)" and observes the latter bringing a horse does he infer the difference in the objects and on comparing the two sentences he understands the term "bring(aanaya)" is the command for the action "to bring" and the terms "cow (gaam) and horse (asvam)" must refer to the two different animals. The mental process of "anvaya or inclusion" and "vyatireka or exclusion" thus plays a role in bringing about the general idea about the meaning of individual words. This process is a natural phenomenon and is not a deliberate and conscious act such as to learn the meanings of words. Later by the process of substitution a child is able to understand meanings of new sentences by substituting the words that he has already come across.<ref name=":02" /> |
| | + | |
| | + | The controversy between Kumārila and Prabhākara has not only been popular but has also attracted deliberations from great scholars in the Indian Philosophical tradition. The critics observe both as incomplete and mistaken. For instance, Jainas, Buddhas and Vedāntins criticize Kumārila theory of abhihitānvayavāda, and construct their own interpretation of same in the forms of saṃsargavāda, nirākānkṣapadārtha. Prabhākara’s theory of verbal cognition, anvitābhidhānavāda, is an exception, none of the schools follow it.<ref name=":4">Hurdoyal. Vedika Mati, (2017) Ph.D Thesis: ''[http://hdl.handle.net/10603/262166 ŚĀBDABODHA: A Critical Analysis Of Language-Understanding In Indian Philosophy].'' Chennai: University of Madras (Chapter 2)</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | On a conclusive note, it can be said that from the point of analysing verbal cognition from a teaching perspective, the anvitābhidhānavāda of Prabhākara is a very consistent and convincing theory and from the of learner’s or listener’s perspective the ‘abhihitānvayavāda of Kumārila is equally convincing. Although both vehemently criticised each other yet they both have their importance according to the teaching and learning pattern respectively.<ref name=":4" /> |
| | + | |
| | + | === Pratibhā-vākyārtha === |
| | + | According to Bhartṛhari, a flash of awareness, which he calls pratibhā is sentence-meaning. Sphoṭa is then language and the meaning is pratibhā. Pratibhā as a sentence-meaning is known as being revealed non-differently by language (sphoṭa). Pratibhā as meaning is a communicable being. The same pratibhā is revealed and is communicated through different verbal-noises or sentence-tokens. It also functions as an incentive to an action to do or not to do when it is revealed.<ref name=":4" /> |
| | | | |
| | == References == | | == References == |