3.1. Salient Features of Yāska’s Etymology (Introduction)

It is needless to say that Yāska has given a systematic shape to the science of etymology. Next to Brāhmaṇas, it is only Yāska who has done a tremendous work in the field of etymology.

First of all he is of the strong opinion that all nouns are derived from verbs—

nāmāni ākhyātajātāni, (Nirukta 1.12).

But Yāska also mentions that there is a difference of opinion among scholars, regarding this notion and quotes the different views of Gārgya. However he has refuted the arguments of Gārgya and established his theory that nouns are derived from verbs and on the basis of this, any word(noun) can be derived.

Words (nāma pada) are of three types, i.e.—

1. One word (ekapada);
2. Secondary affixes (taddhita) and
3. Compound (samāsa).

i. One word

The words, the accent and the grammatical form of which are regular and are accompanied by an explanatory radical modification, should be derived in the ordinary names. To clarify it a fit further it can be said that as per Yāska, in case of words where accent and grammatical formation (svarasaṃskārya) would be in agreement with the meaning (expressed) and also are accompanied by (phonetic) quality, which is in accordance with the grammatical derivation (prādeśika), should be analysed accordingly.^[1]

ii. Derivation on the basis of meaning (Semi-opaque words)

But the meaning being irrelevant and the explanatory radical modification, they are non existant, one should always examine them with regard to their meaning by analogy of some common course of action.^[2] To illustrate further, if a word with its expressed meaning is not compatible with the next meaning and shows an other meaning in that case, it should be derived, keeping stress on its meaning and also similar action or similar form (phonetic formation) elsewhere.

iii. Derivation on similarity of syllables or sounds

Where there is no such analogy (similar phonetic formation), one should explain or derive even by the community of a single syllable letter.^[3]

But emphatically Yāska says that—

na tveva na nirbruyāt

“One should never give up the attempt of derivation”.

Example of this is seen in Nirukta (4.10) where the word Lakṣmi has been analysed with six meanings (to obtain, to indicate (Lakṣaṇa), to mark, to desire (√laṣ) to cling (√lag) and to praise (√lajj). In this case all verbal bases share the syllable la with Lakṣmi.

iv. Not much importance on grammatical form

In derivation, there should not be too much importance on grammatical form because these complex formations (vṛttayaḥ) are often subject to exceptions—

na saṃskāramādriyate, viṣayabatyo hi vṛttayaḥ bhavanti.

So this principle is a clarification on the ii and iii points discussed above. To clarify a bit further it may be said that in derivation, the parts of the word should be changed as per the meaning. For example the word Prattam and Avattam where the final letter is tta. It is seen outwordly that the only difference is the initial part (Upasarga). But if it is analyzed, it is seen that pra+√dā + kta = prattam and Ava + √do (divide) + kta. So this principle is an addition to the principle no. ii, described earlier.

v. The principle of elision (lopa), modification (vikāra) and anaptyxis (upajana)

a) Elision = As per Yāska while deriving a word one should be attentive about elision of vowel and consonants. It is because when there is no gradation of vowels (guṅavṛddhi) then the initial letter is elided.^[4] For example in staḥ and santi, the initial letter of the root √as is elided. Again the final letter also get elided elsewhere. For example, in gatvā the final m of √gam is elided.

b) Modification (Vikāra)–There is also the case of modification of penultimate (upadhā). In case of Rājan and Daṇḍin the letter a and i have become long and the words have been formed accordingly.

c) Alteration in the initial part of the root (Ādivyāpathi)–The root √dyut becomes Jyoti and √han become ghana (killer) and etc.

d) Alterations of the final part. The root √vah becomes Oghaḥ,√mih becomes Meghaḥ and etc. where the final parts have been modified.

e) Metathesis (ādyantaviparyaya)–Here the place of the former and later letters are interchanged. For example √ścut (a drop), √sṛj) become stokah, raijuḥ etc. where the letters are interchanged.

f) Anaptyxis (varṇopajana)–In some cases, some new letters are added in the word. For example from the root asu (throw), vṛ (to bar) and eti becomes āsthat and dvāra etc. Here new letters are added to the word.

vi. Extension and non-extension form of the roots (samprasāraṇa and asamprasāraṇa).

If a semi-verb comes prior or latter to the vowel of the root, then two forms are seen i.e. one is extended and the other non-extended. In this case first the non-extended words (samprasāṇarahita śabba) is first to be considered. If the above is not suitable then, the extended form of the word is to taken into consideration. For example from √av (to protect), √prath (to extend), words like uti, pṛthu are formed respectively.^[5]

vii. Derivation of classical words through the Vedic words.

Vedic words should be taken as the base if classical Sanskrit words do not find their roots in them (classical),

athāpi naigamebhyo bhāṣika, (Nirukta 2.2).

For instance, the word uṣṇ a and ghṛta have not roots in classical language. But in Vedic literature, the root √uṣ means the burn and √ghṛ means to glitter.

viii. Different uses of Verbs and primary affixes (Kṛdanta).

It is seen that some words derived from verbs are used in various senses in different occations.

athāpi prakṛtayaḥ evaikeṣu bhāsyante vikṛtayaḥ ekeṣu, (Nirukta 2.2).

As for instance the verbs śavati from √sav meaning motion (gatau) is used in Kamboja but the word śava from this root (√sav), is used as dead body in Northern parts. Again from the roots √dā, to tear up or cut, the word dāti is formed and it means cutting in the eastern region but the northern people use it in the sense of dātra or sickle. So in this way single words may be derived.

ix. Derivation of words having uniform meaning and multiform meaning.

If the meaning of the nouns are uniform, their etymology is uniform but if the meaning is multiform, then the etymology is multiform.

tānic ̣et samānakarmaṇi samāṇanirvacanāni, nānākarmani cet nānā nirvac anāni, (Nirukta 2.8).

For example, one of the names of Pṛthivi is Nirṛtiḥ meaning pleasure giving [ni √ram (pleasure)]. The people roam here freely (with pleasure) Nirṛtirnirramaṇāt, Nirukta ,2.7. It has been taken from Ṛgveda, (1.16.43) “ya im c akāra... nirrtimāviveśa”. Interestingly, Yaska’s interpretation is accepted by Etymologists and Parivrājakas. According to Parivrājakas (ascetics) it means calamity or pain (ni +ṛcch (pain/calamity) and to etymologists it refers to the phenomenon of rain. So, words should be derived as per the context.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

[...] Ibid.2.1

[2]:

[...] Ibid.2.1

[3]:

[...], Ibid.2.1

[4]:

[...], Ibid.2.1

[5]:

[...], Ibid.2.2