Conclusion
In the preceding we have argued that brevity in the form of Generalizing Brevity is an important theoretical principle underlying Panini's grammar. It applies blindly at the metalevel, when the grammar is being chosen. Generalization is a concern at one remove: A device for the metalanguage is only chosen such that its use in accord with the maximum brevity leads to some generalization. Many potential brevity increasing devices are not chosen for this reason. But at the metalanguage level brevity is paramount. To prove this we have shown that Panini maximizes brevity in many cases at the cost of other possible theoretical principles. We have also shown that many features of the grammar flow from the brevity criterion. We have concluded that logical organization, generality, and other aspects of explanation largely follow from brevity and that this can be regarded as a substantial aspect of the explanatory power of the theory behind the grammar. Generalization should follow on the heels of maximum brevity. And, considering Panini's domain of data this is a perfectly reasonable expectation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bare, Guy Stanton (1976). Phonetics and Phonology in 133–02: The System of Features Implicit in the 133–03. Ann Arbor: Phonetics Laboratory, University of Michigan.
Buiskool, H. E. (1939). The Tripādī. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Cardona, George (1969). ‘Studies in the Indian Grammarians I: The Method of Description Reflected in the Śivasūtras.’ Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol. 59, Pt. I.
Cardona, George (1976). 133–04: A Survey of Research. The Hague: Mouton.
Joshi, S. D. and Paul, Kiparsky (1979). ‘Siddha and Asiddha in 133–05 Phonology.’ Current Approaches to Phonological Theory, ed. by D. Dinnsen. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kiparsky, Paul (1968). ‘Linguistic Universals and Linguistic Change.’ Universals in Linguistic Theory, ed. by E. Bach and R. T. Harms. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kiparsky, Paul (1990). Pānini for Linguists. Ms., Stanford University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I would like to thank Paul Kiparsky for his many valuable comments on earlier drafts of this paper. The author is of course responsible for remaining errors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Smith, H. Brevity in Pānini. J Indian Philos 20, 133–147 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157342
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157342