Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:10:35.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Note on the above

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

E. H. Johnston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I am grateful to the Society for letting me see the above paper before publication and giving me space for a few comments. Circumstances at the moment debar me from access to libraries; and, as it is also hard to answer briefly arguments depending on assumptions which appear to me unwarranted by the available evidence, this note may be found incomplete.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 72 , Issue 2-3 , June 1940 , pp. 189 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 190 note 1 Dr. Tarn talks of Sauvīra-Sindhu; except where metrical needs require this order, it is usually found as Sindhu-Sauvīra. In his analogy Sauvīra should be Hungary, not Austria.

page 192 note 1 This would possibly explain how Buddhaghosa came to use a different recension for part of the text.

page 192 note 2 Writing from memory, I can only quote Edgerton on the k-suffixes of Indo-Iranian, , in JAOS., xxxiGoogle Scholar, which does not include classical Sanskrit, and Bloomfield on the diminutive pronouns of Jaina Sanskrit in Indian Studies in Honour of C. M. Lanman. Wackernagel's grammar only deals with it so far as affixed to compounds. See also Pischel ss. 598, and Bloch, , L'Indo-Aryen, p. 164Google Scholar.

page 193 note 1 There is a passage (Demiéville, p. 130, n. 1) which is very closely related to the Mahāvibhāṣā and suggests a connection with the Sarvāstivādins, whose literature is in Sanskrit.