A Central Asian Buddhist Term: Remarks on Khotanese saña- and Tocharian B sāñ, A ṣāñ
Abstract The Khotanese masculine substantive saña- ‘artifice, expedient, means, method’ cannot be a loanword from the Gāndhārī feminine saṃña ‘perception, idea’ (< Sanskrit saṃjñā-), as has been recently suggested. Bilingual evidence for its meaning, its metrical use, and the contexts where it oc...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 其他作者: | |
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| 出版: |
2021
|
| In: |
Indo-Iranian journal
Year: 2021, 卷: 64, 發布: 3, Pages: 199-240 |
| Further subjects: | B
Tocharian
B saṃjñā B 方便 B language contact B Gāndhārī B Khotanese |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 總結: | Abstract The Khotanese masculine substantive saña- ‘artifice, expedient, means, method’ cannot be a loanword from the Gāndhārī feminine saṃña ‘perception, idea’ (< Sanskrit saṃjñā-), as has been recently suggested. Bilingual evidence for its meaning, its metrical use, and the contexts where it occurs show unambiguously that it differs formally and semantically from the Khotanese feminine saṃñā- ‘idea, notion, perception, etc.’, the actual loanword from Gāndhārī saṃña. Since the meaning of Tocharian B sāñ, ṣāñ and A ṣāñ ‘expedient, means’ agrees with that of Khotanese saña- ‘artifice etc.’, the old view should not be abandoned that the latter is a genuine Khotanese word < Iranian *sćandi̯a- (to the root *sćand- ‘to appear, seem (good)’) and is the source of the corresponding loanwords in Tocharian. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8536 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Indo-Iranian journal
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15728536-06402002 |