5. Three Views on the Semantic Interpretation of Sentence

The semantic interpretation of a sentence is called verbal cognition or verbal import, through which, the relation among the meanings of the words in a sentence is comprehended. Among the meanings of individual words in a sentence, one is manifested as mukhyaviśeṣya (primary substantive). Different systems hold different views regarding the primary substantive in a sentence. Generally, there are three views on the semantic interpretation of a sentence. These three views differ from one another regarding the primary substantive in the sentence. These views are discussed here in a nutshell.

1. Theory of Vyāpārārthamukhyaviśeṣyakaśābdabodha

Grammarians generally accept vyāpāra or activity, which is the meaning of the verbal root as the primary substantive. According to them, when the desired activity is performed, the goal is realized. Thus in a sentence, the root-meaning is the primary substantive and the meanings of remaining parts are treated as qualifiers.

They refer to the statement in Nirukta "bhāvapradhānamākhyātam" (4), in which, the word bhāva denotes the root-meaning, and the root simultaneously denotes vyāpāra (activity) and phala (result):

"phalavyāpārayordhāturāśraye tu tiṅaḥ smṛtāḥ",
  —(Vaiyākaraṇasiddhāntakārikā, 1).

Among them, vyāpāra is primarily qualified (viśeṣya) in a sentence, while the other meaning phala is only attributive (viśeṣaṇa) to the former. The suffix in the verb denotes kāla (substratum factor) and āśraya (number factor) and these two are (viśeṣaṇa) to the action (kriyā).

Thus, the sentence, "caitraḥ grāmaṃ gacchati" (caitra goes to the village), gives rise to the cognition in the form:

'caitrābhinnaikakartṛkaḥ grāmaniṣṭhasamyogānukūlaḥ vartamānakālikaḥ vyāpāraḥ'.

Even if the sentence is in passive voice, the cognition is the same.

2. Theory of Prathamāntārthamukhyaviśeṣyakaśābdabodha

Naiyāyikas uphold that the primary substantive (mukhyaviśeṣya) of the sentence is the meaning of the noun in the nominative case. The meanings of the remaining parts are only qualifiers.

According to them, the cognition that arises from the sentence "caitraḥ grāmaṃ gacchati", is as:

'grāmaniṣṭhasamyogānukūlavyāpārānukūlakṛtyāśrayaḥ caitraḥ'.

3. Theory of Akhyātārthamukhyaviśeṣyakaśābdabodha

According to the Mīmāṃsakas, bhāvanā or the idea of action, which is the meaning of ākhyāta or verbal suffix is the primary substantive (mukhyaviśeṣya) of the sentence.

Yāska states that

"bhāvapradhānamākhyātam"
  —(2002, p.4).

Mīmāṃsakas explain the statement as: the word bhāva has reference only to the action or bhāvanā and not to the root-meaning as argued by the grammarians.

Thus the sentence 'caitra goes to the village' can be explained as:

'caitraniṣṭhagrāmasamyogānukūlavyāpārānukūlā kṛtiḥ'.

Apart from these three views, some scholars put forth their own perspectives regarding the primary substantive in the sentence. Jayantabhaṭṭa describes that phala (the result), the meaning of the verbal root is the primary substantive (mukhyaviśeṣya). The school of Viśiṣṭādvaita uphold that, the meaning of the verbal suffix is the agent (kartā) and is the primary substantive (mukhyaviśeṣya) in the verbal cognition (Tatacharya, introduction, 2005, p.43).