Verse 3.14.35

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.35:

समुदायमुपक्रम्य पदं तस्यां प्रयुज्यते ।
विभागेन समाख्याने ततस्तद् द्वयर्थमुच्यते ॥ ३५ ॥

samudāyamupakramya padaṃ tasyāṃ prayujyate |
vibhāgena samākhyāne tatastad dvayarthamucyate || 35 ||

35. When there is a desire to express both at the same time (tasyāṃ), the compound word is used keeping the group (samudāya) in mind. Therefore, in the analytic statement, it is presented as expressive of both.

Commentary

[We have to explain such compound words as plakṣanyagrodhau dhava khadirapalāsāḥ. It is done by analysing it into parts. The parts must be shown to have as much meaning as the group. Each constituent like plakṣa is not confined to the conveying of its meaning only. As it was used keeping the group in mind, it is already connected with the other constituent. So each constituent conveys its meaning as connected with that of the other constituent. That is why the analytic sentence (apoddhāravākyam) would take the form: “plakṣau ca nyagrodhau ca iti plakṣanyagrodhau”. The meaning of words depends upon the speaker’s intention and here the intention of the speaker from the very beginning is to convey both at the same time. Really speaking, the compound is indivisible and as such it conveys the whole meaning together. In the sentence used in the world each word does not convey more than its own meaning. A dvandva is not like other compounds. In the other compounds like tatpuruṣa, the secondary word is connected with the verb expressive of action through the primary word. Not so in a dvandva where both the words are of equal importance. There one has to accept that each constituent expresses the meaning of the whole. In that way, they would become mutually connected and the whole would convey the group in which the parts also figure (udbhūtābhedasya samudāyasyābhidhānāt) and that would explain the use of the dual and plural suffixes after the compound. It is well known that the expressive power of words is not the same in a sentence and in a compound. A word may not be able to express the meaning of another in a sentence but it can do so in a compound. It is this difference which is pointed out in the vārttika—tadviṣayaṃ ca (vā. 12 on P. 2.2.29.) which says that it is in a dvandva that one sees one constituent conveying its own meaning as well at that of the other. Thus it has been shown that this Yugapadadhīkaraṇavacanatā exists in a dvandva and in the ekaśeṣa.]