Late Sanskrit Literary Theorists and the Role of Grammar in Focusing the Separateness of Metaphor and Simile.
The present paper is focused on the way Vayākaraṇas and Ālaṃkārikas analysed a specific kind of karmadhāraya compounds, taught in Aṣṭādhyāyī 2.1.56 and 72 and later associated with the upamā- and the rūpaka-figures respectively. On the basis of a fresh interpretation of the relevant grammatical sour...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Indian Philosophy Vol. 45; no. 2; pp. 349 - 381 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Apr2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=121658636&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 121658636 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00221791 OI3 jtl: Journal of Indian Philosophy issn: 00221791 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Apr2017 vid: 45 iid: 2 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 121658636 10.1007/s10781-017-9312-8 ppf: 349 ppct: 32 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 709KB tig: atl: Late Sanskrit Literary Theorists and the Role of Grammar in Focusing the Separateness of Metaphor and Simile. aug: au: Candotti, Maria Pontillo, Tiziana affil: Section de Langues Slaves et de l'Asie du Sud , Université de Lausanne , Bureau Ant-4135, Amphimax Building 1015 Dorigny Switzerland Dipartimento di Filologia, Letteratura e Linguistica, Faculty of Humanities , University of Cagliari , via Is Mirrionis, 1 (Room n° 50, II Floor) 09122 Cagliari Italy su: Sanskrit literature Literary theory Sanskrit language Metaphor Simile Grammar sug: subj: Sanskrit literature Literary theory Sanskrit language Metaphor Simile Grammar keyword: Ālaṃkāraśāstra Rūpaka Sāmānya Samāsa Upamā Vyākaraṇa ab: The present paper is focused on the way Vayākaraṇas and Ālaṃkārikas analysed a specific kind of karmadhāraya compounds, taught in Aṣṭādhyāyī 2.1.56 and 72 and later associated with the upamā- and the rūpaka-figures respectively. On the basis of a fresh interpretation of the relevant grammatical sources, the authors try both to understand how the theorists involved them in their analysis and to reconstruct the several steps of the inquiries realized by the modern scholarship on this topic. Nonetheless their research is targeted on the interpretation of these two Pāṇini rules and they conclude that these rules do not actually target similes and metaphorical identifications, but, on the one hand, A 2.1.55-56 deal with a functional pair of figurative compounds involving an upamāna and an upamita, i.e. a reference standard and something which is benchmarked, and, on the other, A 2.1.72 closes a series of karmadhāraya-rules, aimed at illustrating A 2.1.57. Furthermore, they exclude that Pāṇini in A 2.1.55-56 used the term sāmānya as a tertium comparationis, even though Patañjali had already advanced-but eventually rejected-this interpretation. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Journal of Indian Philosophy is a copyright of Springer, 2017. All Rights Reserved. item: Journal of Indian Philosophy holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2017 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|