In an example like this, where the subjects in the two clauses are different, Pāli would use an absolute construction - either locative absolute or genitive absolute, both of which we haven’t learnt about yet. Otherwise it would just break it up into two independent sentences.
2 Likes
Thank you so much 
Another day for Pali, but I could finish only the first part of the exercise. 
Question 1: Word order
Adjective (modifier) before the noun: Meiland on Page 55 gives some examples of Present Participial verb phrases:
• paridevantena raññā saddhiṃ brāhmaṇo pakkāmi = ‘The brahmin left with the
lamenting king.’
Though the word order in Pali may not be strict, could we say that generally the modifier (here = paridevantena) comes before the noun it modifies?
Question 2: dānena n’ atthi puññaṃ
= There is no merit (to be gained) with a gift.
Is this one acceptable: “Spiritual weath doesn’t come from giving”?
Question 3: maṃ abhivādetvā pakkāmi
= He, having bowed to me, left.
Is this one acceptable: “After he had bowed to me, he stepped aside”?
Question 4: diṭṭhā bho satta jīvasi
= It’s wonderful, honourable (bho) being, (that) you live!
Is this one acceptable: “It’s wonderful that Your Honor lives.”?
Question 5: jayaṃ veraṃ pasavati
= Winning, he generates hatred.
Is this one acceptable: “Whilst he is victorious, he generates animosity”?
Question 6: brāhmaṇo brahmunā manteti
= The brahmin takes council with Brahmā.
Why is this translation incorrect: “Brahmin gives advice with the aid of God Brahmā”?
Question 7: kālaṃ karonto avoca
= Dying, he said: …
I have problems with DPD, which says that avoca is reflexive singular for the third person. 
Question 8: jhānaṃ jhāyati
= He meditates jhāna.
Is this one acceptable: “He/she does jhāna meditation”?
Question 9: mayaṃ bhagavantaṃ saraṇaṃ gacchāma, dhammañ ca
= We go for refuge to the Blessed One, and to the Teaching.
Is it possible to interpret the word gacchāma here to mean ‘to make something become something’? My translation: We make the Buddha and the Dhamma become our refuges. 
Question 10: jīvitaṃ demi
= I give life.
Ajahn Brahmali explains that in context, this sentence means ‘I grant (them) (their) life’.
I wonder if in another context, it could mean “I give/offer (someone, e.g. you) my life”? I’m thinking of Devadatta saying this to the Buddha. 
1 Like
@Dheerayupa, I was suggesting that this would be a possibility in Pali, when there are two verbs with different subjects/ agents. Sorry I was too brief. 
1 Like
I am puzzled about two sentences from the answer keys for the translation into Pali exercise.
In these te is at the beginning of the sentence. Given this, I assume that it’s NOT an enclitic, since enclitics can’t begin sentences. So what is this te?
(te) iminā dvārena pavisanti
te upasaíkamitvā ime pañhe pucchāmi
Perhaps the plural demonstrative pronoun?
Nom/Acc te-tāni-tā
(I think this was discussed with Ven. Khemarato last week. I gave the example ‘te bhikkhū…’)
1 Like
Some quick answers:
Q1:
Because Pali is a highly inflected language word order is very fluid.
Q2:
‘dānena’ is instrumental. Your example seems to be ablative, and ‘giving’ is also a different part of speech.
Q3:
pakkamati means to go away, depart
Q4
Possible, but probably better to translate literally.
Q5
See 4. ‘Jayam’ is the present participle of jayati.
Q6
‘Brahmunā’ is the instrumental form of Brahma.
Q7:
‘Avoca’ is the 3rd person sing aorist of vatti/vacati. ‘He said’.
Q8:
‘Jhāyati’ is to meditate
Q9:
‘gaccāma’ is 1st per. plu. of the verb gacchati. ‘We go’.
Q10:
No, I don’t think so.
3 Likes
Please forgive me if I make a mistake that could confuse you further, @Gillian
@stephen please correct me if I’m wrong.
The question is to translate this sentence into Pali:
“Having approached them I ask these questions”
My formula (parsing the sentence) = te (masculine plural pronoun, accusative) + upasaṃkamitvā (upasaṅkamati in absolutive = indeclinable) + imāni / ime (idaṃ demonstrative adjective for neuter plural) + pañhāni / pañhe (neuter, accusative plural) + pucchāmi (pucchati in present indicative, 1st person singular)
te here is the object of the verb upasaṃkamitvā (in the absolutive form).
So, the answer is: te upasaṃkamitvā imāni/ime pañhāni/pañhe pucchāmi
That looks good, but I’m not aware of ‘pañha’ being neuter. ‘Pañhe’ (masc. acc. plu.) seems much more normal. A https://tipitika.org search produces 27 hits for it in suttapitaka, 74 in atthakathā.
Edit: ‘Pañhāni’ does seem to exist, 2 hits in the suttapitaka: one in Jātaka, one in Patthāna.
2 Likes
@Dheerayupa I agreed with your parse. 
@stephen does this mean that in some of its uses te is not enclitic and in other uses it is? & if so, how does one learn to distinguish them? 
Well, an enclitic pronoun does not start a sentence like a demonstrative.
Also, I think the enclitic ‘te’ only stands for the indirect cases, not nom/acc.
(‘Te’ as a demonstrative pronoun is the plural of so & tam. ‘Those’ instead of ‘that’, ‘he’ etc. )
2 Likes
& as a demonstrative te is a full form.
I’d not realised that.
Thank you
You got it!
I see there is another thread about what ‘namo tassa’ means- another pronoun!
Maybe it should be incorporated here?
1 Like
This thread is dedicated to Warder Lesson 8. We can add a link to it here.
1 Like
DPD gives three entries for pañha. neuter, masculine and feminine!
1 Like
On pg. 44 in further uses of the instrumental case:
“sīlehi samannāgato”
second word in the nominative plural
Warder’s explanation seems to say "…used with the word indicating the virtue or vice in question [which is] in the instrumental
Which is to explain why “sīlehi” is in the instrumental – but “samannāgato” is not
OK, understood. But then, further down:
“iminā p’aṅjena”
second word in the instrumental plural
Warder’s explanation equates it to the first example above
But “aṅjena” is NOT in the nominative
I’m confused here?
1 Like
I’m not sure how they are meant to be the same.
The adjective ‘samannāgato’ takes the instrumental.
In the second sentence fragment the demonstrative pronoun matches in instrumental plural.
2 Likes
Hi,
May I ask a few questions below?
Q1:
maṁ abhivādetvā pakkāmi
Can it be translated like this?
After he formally greeted me, he left.
Q2:
jayaṁ veraṁ pasavati.
Can jayaṁ be also past particle instead of present particle? It looks awkward but it will be something like:
[Having won]/[What was won] generates hatred.
Q3:
In which lesson of Warder that gehaṁ and padeso are mentioned?
Q4:
Having approached (and) greeted the fortunate one, they sat down.
Can I use ca here as below?
upasaṁkamitvā (ca) abhivādetvā bhagavantaṁ nisīdiṁsu.
1 Like
My questions Part 2
Question 11: The king, having greeted the fortunate one, sat down
= rājā Bhagavantaṃ abhivādetvā nisīdi.
Is this word order acceptable? bhagavantaṃ abhivādetvā rājā nisīdi
Question 12: Having approached (and) greeted the fortunate one, they sat down
= Upasaṇkamitvā Bhagavantaṃ abhivādetvā nisīdiṃsu.
Is this word order and my use of ca acceptable? bhagavantaṃ upasaṃkamitvā ca abhivādetvā ca nisīdisuṃ
Question 13: Having approached them I ask these questions
= te ahaṃ upasaṇkamitvā ime pañhe pucchāmi.
Can ahaṃ be omitted? te upasaṃkamitvā imāni/ime pañhāni/pañhe pucchāmi
Just curious — how to choose which one to use when one has to rely on the dictionary, not one’s memory? Imāni or ime, pañhāni or pañhe.
Question 14: Having dressed, taking a bowl I entered the village
= (ahaṃ) nivāsetvā pattaṃ ādāya gāmaṃ pāvisiṃ.
Is my attempt to insert commas here acceptable? (ahaṃ) nivāsetvā, pattam ādāya, gāmaṃ pavisiṃ
Question 15: Gentlemen! do not say thus
= mā bhavanto evaṃ avacuttha.
Why did Warder translate bhavanto as gentlemen?
Question 16: I do not take counsel with God
= N’ahaṃ (or just na) brahmuṇā mantemi.
I somehow automatically put na before the verb. brahmuṇā na mantemi. Is it ok? Warder says ‘na’ is placed in front of the word or phrase negated, or at the beginning of a negative sentence.
Question 17: He is (hoti) satisfied with the resting place
= so senāsanena santuṭṭho hoti
Do we need ‘so’ here? If so (English word here ), why?
Thank you very much in advance. You guys are so kind, compassionate and generous!