Verse 3.14.411

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.411:

सति शिष्टबलीयस्त्वाद् बाह्ये ङीषि च सत्यपि ।
उपमानस्वरो न स्यात् तस्मात् स्त्र्यन्तः समस्यते ॥ ४११ ॥

sati śiṣṭabalīyastvād bāhye ṅīṣi ca satyapi |
upamānasvaro na syāt tasmāt stryantaḥ samasyate || 411 ||

411. As the accent which comes at a later stage is stronger, even if the feminine suffix ṅīṣ is added

Commentary

after the formation of the compound, the upamāna accent (P. 6.2.2) would not result. Therefore, the second constituent, already ending in the feminine suffix, is combined.

[It was pointed out above that if the word upasarjana is taken in the worldly sense, there would be difficulty in regard to the feminine suffix ṅīṣ. To get over the difficulty, it is suggested that the ṅīṣ is added after the compound is formed. But it is shown that it would lead to a difficulty in regard to accent. Taking tittirikalmāṣī as an illustration, here the first term tittiri is masculine. If the second term refers to the same object as the first term, it would also be in the masculine gender. One would then say tittirir iva kalmāṣaḥ before the compound is formed. Here there is no feminine suffix at all. When the compound is made, the second term would be upasarjana in the worldly sense and so P. 4.1.14 would prevent the addition of ṅīṣ taught in P. 4.1.40. Even if it is added on the ground that the whole compound is not upasarjana even if the second term may be so then the accent of ṅiṣ, which comes at a later stage would be retained, being satiśiṣṭa and, therefore, stronger and the accent of the first term, expressive of the standard of comparison, taught in P. 6.2.2., would be set aside. But that is not desired. If the accent of the upamāna is to prevail, the feminine suffix must be added before the compound is formed and not as the last grammatical operation.]

All this difficulty arises according to the view that the word expressive of the common property refers to the standard of comparison.]