chunk 72: footnotes 3 chunk 72: footnotes 3
about
verb classes
unchanging has neither
non-third person
replacing a thing with itself looks pointless
how to learn rule
^ 
There are two groups of vibhakti affixes --
The prAgdizIya affixes are vibhakti affixes, by rule prAgdizovibhaktiH
The sup and tiG affixes are vibhakti too, by rule vibhaktizca.
Several rules work on vibhakti affixes, such as aSTana::A, tyadAdInAmaH, navibhaktautusmAH.
^ 
The roots listed in the dhAtupATha are divided into ten groups called verb classes. These are the numbers of the ten verb classes, the affix that their roots get (when before a hard doer affix), my name for the class, and the rule that adds the affix --
[1] zap zapclass kartarizap
[2] luk lukclass adiprabhRtibhyazzapaH
[3] zlu zluclass juhotyAdibhyazzluH
[4] zyan zyanclass divAdibhyazzyan
[5] znu znuclass svAdibhyazznuH
[6] za zaclass tudAdibhyazza
[7] znam znamclass rudhAdibhyazznam
[9] znA znaclass kryAdibhyazznA
These ten affixes are called vikaraNa ("changer") affixes by grammarians other than
Rules one to nine above only work when the root is right before a hard doer affix. Rule ten, however, ALWAYS adds Nic, no matter what is afterwards. If what is afterwards is a hard doer affix, the Nic becomes
The lukclass roots do not get a luk affix; I just use the word luk in the list to mean that they get no affix at all.
The numbers [1] [2] [3] etc appear in inria reader when you type a verb of that class that contains the affix. If inria shows " ca", the verb has causative Nic and works as if it were a [10]. See Using parsers to split verbs into root plus affix for examples.
Summarizing --
" zap luk zlu zyan znu za and znam u znA Nic are the ten affixes"
^ 
When I say " noun", I mean
Some examples of nouns, with the sup they have. What is before the sup is either a nounbase, or a nounbase with a feminine affix added at the end.
Notice that you cannot trust the translation of a sentence to know if something is a noun or not. In
^
Whatever has a tiG at the end is a verb (in Sanskrit:
as + laG →
Students should keep in mind that whatever does NOT have a tiG at the end is not a verb, no matter if it translates into English as an English verb or not. As an example, in this sentence --
there are three words that have a root inside and mean an action, but none of them is a verb, even though their English translations may be English verbs ("went", "saw" are verbs). That's why when you drop that sentence into inria you get no red words. The red color means that there is a tiG at the end.
inria reader always paints red whatever has a tiG at the end, and paints blue whatever has a sup. The exception to that is the Am'' verbs like
^
An old jingle goes,
Sanskrit words can be divided in three groups, that inria paints blue, red and pink --
blue -- nouns OR
red -- verbs OR
pink -- unchanging OR
blue are nouns, made by adding a sup ( noun ending) after a nounbase. We may add different sup to the same nounbase.
red are verbs, made by adding a tiG ( verb ending) after a root. We may add different tiG to the same root.
Everything else is pink -- unchanging.
Pink words either don't get a sup tiG at all, or always get the same sup. So they always look the same.
Feel free to call these unchanging words with other grammatical terms that will help you remember. For instance you might call
Notice that ktvA and tumun are kRt affixes, so in a sense,
(nonthirdpersonliTisver) (nont)
^ 
The liT tense has been seldom used since the epics. And even in the epics, only the third person endings are found -- Nal atus us ez AtAm irec.
As all those start with vowels, they never get iT. Which means you don't need to pay much attention to the rules, such as kR;sR;bhR;vR;stu;dru;sru;zru and others, that add iT to the valAdi liT (namely thal va ma se''' dhve''' vahe''' mahe'''),
If we take seriously the
And similarly, you can use the first person liT only when you talk about something that you don't remember having done or claim to not have done --
Frankly -- If you are going to use a first or second person liT, do not worry about the
(replacingathingwithits) (replacit)
^
Rule atom says "replace su with am and am with am". At first sight, replacing one thing with itself looks stupid, but lets look at the previous rule too. Rule
svamorna says "after neuter, replace su with luk and am with luk"
and the next rule is an exception to it,
atom , and it says "but if the neuter ends in
Therefore, when su follows a neuter, we replace it with luk, UNLESS the neuter ends in
And, when am follows a neuter, we replace it with luk, UNLESS the neuter ends in
In English, we might have worded the second rule as --
"but if the neuter ends in
However, in rule jargon, it turns out that saying ' replace su with am and do not replace am ' is a waste of words, because saying "replace su and am with am" is much shorter, and the students do not have to spend so much time chanting the rules.
(howtolearnruleaTku) (howleare)
^
Because of rule aTku, when we add
Students take a long time to get used to this, and will often say or type
Yet, when someone has grown up learning Sanskrit by ear, the change of
There is an important difference between the tap-R sound of Spanish or English and the
1. In most American accents, the
2. But in Sanskrit, after
This is NOT the same that happens after the Tu. After these five, the tongue moves forward and down inmediately.
Now: if while the tongue is thus raised or curled up that way, we get to the
Practice this tongue movement by saying words such as
chunk 72: footnotes 3