1.45

अहो बत महत्पापं कर्तुं व्यवसिता वयम्
यद्राज्यसुखलोभेन हन्तुं स्वजनमुद्यताः

Printed: aho bata mahatpApaM kartuM vyavasitA vayam , yadrAjyasukhalobhena hantuM svajanamudyatAHa .

mahatpApaM k ... [8.3.23] mo'nusvAraHa
kartuM v ... [8.3.23] mo'nusvAraHa
hantuM s ... [8.3.23] mo'nusvAraHa
svajanamudyatAHa ... [8.3.15, 1.3.2, 8.2.66] kharavasAnayo visarjanIyaHa
aho b ... [1.1.15] ot
vyavasitA vayam ... [8.3.17, 8.3.22, 1.3.2, 8.2.66] bho bhago agho apUrvasya yo'shi
mahatpApam ... [6.1.72] saNhitAyAm
yadrAjyasukhalobhena ... [6.1.72] saNhitAyAm
yadrAjyasukhalobhena ... [8.2.39] jhalAm jasho'nte
svajanamudyatAHa ... [6.1.72] saNhitAyAm

Underlying: aho bata mahat pApam kartum vyavasitAs vayam , yat rAjyasukhalobhena hantum svajanam udyatAs .

COMMENTS:

• This particular stanza has a rather complex structure, and is difficult to parse correctly. Relative clauses in Sanskrit require the Predicative Adjective, if present, to be in agreement with the copula verb as well as the subject (in the common case, the nominative relative pronoun may stand in for the subject and agree with its antecedent; but the antecedent of the Trace subject may not always be present in the sentence).
• Notice that the parser must 'read in' two elided copula verbs ('smaHa' and 'santi', respectively) in clauses A.2 and A.4, once it recognizes them as Predicative Adjective clauses (a non-trivial undertaking in itself, given the missing subject in A.4).
• There is also a missing subject in clause A.4 (a Trace referring back to its antecedent 'vayam'). Hence we should normally have expected the leading relative pronoun 'ye' (NOM-P-Masculine). However, the parser instead finds 'yat' and assumes the inappropriate NOM-S-Neuter form as the relative pronoun (although it also has an indeclinable form).
• The parser now assumes that it has to insert the 3rdPerson Singular copula verb 'asti', to ensure agreement with the NOM-S-Neuter term 'yat'.
• However, at this point the parser finds that the Predicative Adjective NOM-P-Masc./Fem. 'udyatAHa' does not agree with the relative pronoun NOM-S-Neuter 'yat' nor with the copula verb 'asti' (3rdPerson Singular).
• Hence the only way around this 'agreement error' is to assume that 'yat' is an indeclinable ('since/ because'), and look for the subject elsewhere.
• The parser now assumes that the assumed relative pronoun NOM-S-Neuter 'yat' may instead be an Indeclinable i.e. instead of a relative pronoun.
• Not finding an appropriate matching subject term in clause A.4, the parser assumes the subject is to be 'read in' as a Trace from a preceding clause. It assumes the matching NOM-P 'vayam' in clause A.2 is the antecedent of the Trace in clause A.4.
• At the end of this process, the parser arrives at the correct assignments and clause structure.
• The clause assignment by the parser is similar to that described in [MM2015][1], except that infinitive verbs are not shown as independent clauses in [MM2015]. Due to this, it is not clear from [MM2015] whether the term INS-S 'rAjyasukhalobhena' is attached to clause A.3 or A.4.

---

A: aho bata mahat pApam kartum vyavasitAHa vayam smaHa yat rAjyasukhalobhena hantum svajanam udyatAHa santi

A.1:

aho:Indeclinable

bata:Indeclinable

mahat:ACC-S:mahat:Neut.:Noun

pApam:ACC-S:pApa:Neut.:Noun

kartum:-:kRu:8:P:VerbInfinitive

A.4:

vyavasitAHa:NOM-P:vyavasita:Masc.:Adj:past_participle_passive_kta_4P_vi-ava-so:Link_subj_vayam

vayam:NOM-P:asmad:Masc.:Pronoun

A.2:

rAjyasukhalobhena:INS-S:rAjya-sukha-lobha (rAjyasukhalobha) :Masc.:Noun:samAsa_tatpuruSHa(GEN)

hantum:-:han:2:P:VerbInfinitive

svajanam:ACC-S:svajana:Masc.:Noun

A.3:

yat:Indeclinable

udyatAHa:NOM-P:udyata:Masc.:Adj:past_participle_passive_kta_1P_ud-yam:Link_subj_vayam

References