Closed funderburkjim closed 1 year ago
OLD
<div n="P1">-kta [3. <ab>pl.</ab>] {@sám@} 3) óṣadhīs <lbinfo n="6"/> mádhvā {288,21}.
NEW
<div n="P1">-kta [2. <ab>pl.</ab>] {@sám@} 3) óṣadhīs <lbinfo n="6"/> mádhvā {288,21}.
print change
The following gives a rather tortuous amateur analysis that confirms the suggested correction.
See the RV reference 288,21 (https://sanskrit-lexicon.github.io/rvlinks/rvhymns/rv03.054.html#rv03.054.21)
The sentence is सदा॑ सु॒गः पि॑तु॒माँ अ॑स्तु॒ पन्था॒ मध्वा॑ देवा॒ ओष॑धीः॒ सं पि॑पृक्त
.
The sentence has two clauses
सदा॑ सु॒गः पि॑तु॒माँ अ॑स्तु॒ पन्था॒
मध्वा॑ देवा॒ ओष॑धीः॒ सं पि॑पृक्त`
अ॑स्तु॒ is imperative (3rd person singular) , with subject पन्था॒
panthās lemmatizes as: [pathin]{m. sg. nom.} ( Huet stemmer).
देवाः is plural either nominative, accusative, or vocative
ओष॑धीः॒ is accusative plural
मध्वा॑ is instrumental singular pf maDu
पि॑पृक्त may also be imperative, by analogy with अ॑स्तु॒.
Patrick
Could we attract Patrick for more error checking? @funderburkjim
I sent a note to Patrick requesting him to get a Github account to help with the integration of GRA VN (per @Andhrabharati's observation of VN in #1015.)
Hope he will be able to help.
I sent a note to Patrick requesting him to get a Github account
Thanks, let us see.
Now that the VN del/chg updation is done by Jim himself, this issue is closable now.
date: 10/26/2022 18:52:41 dict: gra Lnum: 5737 hw: pṛc old: Stamm II. pipṛc: LB -kta [3. pl.] sám 3) óṣadhīs mádhvā 288,21. new: Stamm II. pipṛc: LB -kta [2. pl.] comm: False parsing. Corrected in later editions