Bhante Sujato Pali Course 2023: Warder lesson 6

[Dheerayupa]

Question 3: That man must come
= etu so puriso

‘etu’ is the imperative form for the third person singular.

Does this mean that we can use imperative structure to mean ‘must or should’ in English? Hence, the syntax of the English translation will be different from the Pāli?

Question 4: Let the priest not trouble
= tiṭṭhatu brāhmaṇo

tiṭṭhatu brāhmaṇo– I would say in English “The brahmin please don’t mind that/please let it be?” Would it be correct? Ajahn @Sujato translated it as ‘let it be’ in SuttaCentral

Question 5: The king said this: “We must go”
= raja etad avoca: mayam gacchāmā

Could we conclude from what we’ve learnt so far that for direct speeches, we can use both ‘ti’ and the colon?

Question 6: I do not say this world doesn’t exist
= na n’ atthi ayam loko ti vadāmi

6.1 Could we derive a structure from Warder’s answer that the object of the verb to say comes in front of the verb no matter whether it is a phrase or a clause? “n’ atthi ayam loko” is a clause.

6.2 Why do we need ‘ti’ here?

Or, should we wait until we come to the lesson on direct and indirect speeches?

Question 7: Study! (plur.)
= sajjhāyaṃ karotha

Could we simply use the verb adhīyati? So, the answer would be adhīyatha.

Question 8: Ask the fortunate one (about) this subject-matter
= etaṃ atthaṃ bhagavantaṃ pucchatha

Since pucchatha is the verb form for the plural you, If it is directed to a singular second person, it should be etaṃ atthaṃ bhagavantaṃ pucchasi?

Thank you

[sujato]

I’m coming to this a bit late, sorry, and I see that thanks to Stephen many of the questions have already been answered, so I’m going to respond only to those that I think are unanswered: please let me know if I have missed any.

@Dheerayupa

If you address someone, that person is the ‘second’ person

@Dheerayupa

In the above case, we don’t consider the nouns as third person nouns. We simply indicate that nouns can be used as pronouns.

It seems like an obscure distinction? The point is simply that when the third person imperative is used to address someone, it is a polite voice.

@Dheerayupa

etu bhagavā
= Let the Fortunate One come.

@Dheerayupa

Is this one ok? Would the Blessed One please come?

Sure. I’d say:

Please come, Blessed One.

@Dheerayupa

ayaṃ samaṇo Gotamo āgacchati
= This is the philosopher Gotama coming.

Is this one ok? The Ascetic Gotama is arriving.

Depends a little on context. The ayaṁ would be expressed if you wanted to say, "That was not Gotama coming, this is Gotama coming.

@Dheerayupa

Is this one ok? (You singular) Get out if able

@Dheerayupa

nibbeṭhehi sace pahosi
= Rebut (it) if you can.

Is this one ok? (You singular) Get out if able

It’s okay, not great English though!

@Dheerayupa

Is this one ok? “Drink and eat”

Sure.

@Dheerayupa

Is this one ok? Dear Great King, please proceed.

Sure.

@Gillian

it helps to separate the semantics from the grammar

Exactly, great point. (Which kind of illustrates the problem with abstractions: you think the grammatical cases will explain the different situations, but as soon as you give language that capability, someone will use it for something else …)

@stephen

I though ‘youse’ was New York

Huh maybe, I think Australia got it from the Irish.

@Rev.Sanghamitta

Usually kāya iti = kayā 'ti for any short vowel immediate preceeding “ti” is lengthened.
Can you please kindly explain why kāyo ti

Because in Pali vowel mathematics, a + a = ā, but here the final vowel is o, and o + a = o (as the a gets swallowed). Check the Vowel Gradation chart on Warder p. 12.

@Dheerayupa

Does this mean that we can use imperative structure to mean ‘must or should’ in English?

Yes. But there are also other ways to express this.

@Dheerayupa

Hence, the syntax of the English translation will be different from the Pāli?

I’m not sure what you mean here.

@Dheerayupa

Ajahn @Sujato translated it as ‘let it be’ in SuttaCentral

Bhante Sujato might occasionally be subconsciously influenced by the songs he grew up listening to …

@Dheerayupa

Could we conclude from what we’ve learnt so far that for direct speeches, we can use both ‘ti’ and the colon?

-ti comes at the end, and is indicated in the manuscript. Punctuation is added by editors and translators, so they can use whatever they like. Typically the start of direct speech is marked with either a colon or a comma. Generally I’ll mark a block of major direct speech with a colon, but use commas for short snippets and conversations.

@Dheerayupa

Could we derive a structure from Warder’s answer that the object of the verb to say comes in front of the verb no matter whether it is a phrase or a clause?

I dunno, it seems like a swift generalization! Normally, I guess.

@Dheerayupa

Why do we need ‘ti’ here?

Because it ends a quote. This kind of embedded quote is typically used instead of indirect speech. It can be translated with either:

“I do not say, ‘it does not exist’.”
“I do not say that it does not exist.”

@Dheerayupa

Question 7: Study! (plur.)
= sajjhāyaṃ karotha

Could we simply use the verb adhīyati? So, the answer would be adhīyatha.

You can, although as it happens that form does not appear to exist in the Pali canon. So the given form is more idiomatic.

@Dheerayupa

Since pucchatha is the verb form for the plural you, If it is directed to a singular second person, it should be etaṃ atthaṃ bhagavantaṃ pucchasi?

It’s an imperative voice, so the singular would be puccha as in this direct quote from DN 11, which I think you should be able to translate:

Gaccha tvaṁ, bhikkhu, tameva bhagavantaṁ upasaṅkamitvā imaṁ pañhaṁ puccha

[Gillian]

@sujato

this direct quote from DN 11, which I think you should be able to translate:

Gaccha tvaṁ, bhikkhu, tameva bhagavantaṁ upasaṅkamitvā imaṁ pañhaṁ puccha

This quote seems to contain a gerund? … which Warder hasn’t got to yet.

[Gillian]

For ayaṃ samaṇo Gotamo āgacchati Warder gives “This is the philosopher Gotama coming.”

Would it also be acceptable (depending on context) to render it, “That/The philospher Gotama is coming”?

[sujato]

@Gillian

For ayaṃ samaṇo Gotamo āgacchati Warder gives “This is the philosopher Gotama coming.”

Would it also be acceptable (depending on context) to render it, “That/The philospher Gotama is coming”?

(Already asked by Dheerayupa above …)

@sujato

The ayaṁ would be expressed if you wanted to say, "That was not Gotama coming, this is Gotama coming.

[Gillian]

@sujato

(Already asked by Dheerayupa above …)

Not really. She asked:

@Dheerayupa

Is this one ok? The Ascetic Gotama is arriving.

You avoided saying, but I guess it’s a “No” to both of us?
I don’t understand, but I feel there’s no point in questioning an example with no context.

But ayaṃ can mean that as well as this, right?

[stephen]

Yes. ‘Having approached”/ ‘having gone up to’’. .
Yes, ‘ayam’ can mean ‘that’.

[Luis]

Please clarify the idiomatic order of the words when there is a quotation.

For the exercises “The king said this:“we must go”” and “I do not say this world doesn’t exist” I tried to imitate Warder’s example of “n’eso n’atthī ti vadāmi”, but I think I got the phrase all scrambled

etad rājā mayaṃ ema ti avoca

ayaṃ an eso loko n’atthì ti vademi

What are the options for the proper order of the words?

[stephen]

Hi,
Does Warder give his suggestions for these at the back of the textbook?

[Dheerayupa]

@sujato

Gaccha tvaṁ, bhikkhu, tameva bhagavantaṁ upasaṅkamitvā imaṁ pañhaṁ puccha

= Mendicant, go to the Buddha and ask him this question.

I wish the Buddha were here. There were so many questions to ask him. But of course, if he were here, he would be speaking a modern language and I wouldn’t need to study Pali!

[stephen]

That is an idiomatic translation, but as a student of Pali I would suggest that you translate more literally.

[Dheerayupa]

@stephen

That is an idiomatic translation

Which translation are you referring to?

[stephen]

@sujato

Gaccha tvaṁ, bhikkhu

I was referring to the translation of this sentence in your last post.

[Dheerayupa]

It’s not mine. It’s Ajahn Sujato’s.

[stephen]

Yes, I know.
My point is that for a Pali language student, translating literally and reading literal translations is valuable.

[Dheerayupa]

@stephen

reading literal translations is valuable.

Thank you.

An ideal example for me to understand a language is to see both literal translation and the translation (or explanation) that conveys the real meaning and register and all implications and connotations of the source text.

The latter is useful for me to find an equivalent in my own language though a 100% match is not always possible.

I’m also aware that providing the latter is time-consuming and a translation expert may not have time/patience to do so.

Example: ‘This is a book’. Primary-school students in Thailand are told that it means 'นี่คือหนังสือ" (literal translation), but I’ve never heard anyone in Thailand uses this sentence in real life. Of course, this translation is useful for children to understand another language. However, educated adult learners would benefit more from detailed explanations, and their understanding of the language will be accurate and deeper, and as a result, their translation would be close to being ‘perfect’.

My way of learning might sound too ambitious for those who are skilled in Pali. But it has taken me decades before I can understand English the way I do now. I can’t afford the same amount of time to understand Pali.

[christie]

@stephen

That is an idiomatic translation, but as a student of Pali I would suggest that you translate more literally.

I agree. Or leave idiomatic phrases and context sensitive words untranslated (my preferred approach).

From my experience studying Japanese, a lot of stock idiomatic Japanese phrases (like よろしくお願い and even ただ今) are not easily translatable to English without losing a lot of cultural context and I absolutely hate these translated as “Nice to meet you” or “Honey, I’m home!”.

With regards to the the sentence containing bhavaṃ I would probably leave that word untranslated as well as māṇava (thanks @sujato for clarifying this is a taddhita affixed noun indicating a profession or someone possessing a “quality” - perhaps not everyone in the class would have understood the significance of this but I did and I was very grateful):

May bhavaṃ be to the honourable Jotipāla the Māṇava!

PS - sorry for being quiet lately. I have not been well, I guess my karma has been catching up on me.

[Khemarato.bhikkhu]

Still no thread yet for Lesson 7, Bhante @sujato ?

[Dheerayupa]

I guess he is busy?

I have lots of questions to ask (as usual) and am looking forward to hearing the answers!

[Indira]

I was looking too Venerable…