Ancient India

Pnini: The avant-garde grammarian

By Ratnadeep Banerji

Patanjali, a later grammarian, describes Pnini as analpa-matihh, that is

infinitely intelligent.
It is intriguing to know that Pnini never mentioned the name of the
language for which he wrote the grammar. Tradition ascribes Paninis
grammar ancillary to the Vedas but hardly 300 rules out of his nearly 4000
rules of grammar describe Vedic intricacies. This notion might thus be
dispelled.
A serenade of obscurity lurks around this progenitor of grammar. When, where, why as well as the language
targeted by him find dubious answers. And yet, this man stands out of obscurity to profundity, veritably a
vanguard heralding the flourish of several languages. Pnini has endowed a model not for Sanskrit alone
but classical languages like Pali and Prakrita, Indian languages like Marathi, Kannada and Tamil
notwithstanding non-Indian languages like Persian as well.
Pnini is conjectured to belong to a place then called altura, presently identified as Lahur, a village beside
the Indus River between 5th and 4th century BC. It falls in the then Gandhara region of the modern day
Attock District of Pakistans Punjab province. Tradition imputes Pnini with several books on grammar
Ashtadhyayi, Dhatupatha, Ganapatha, Paniniyasiksa besides Jambavativijaya being a drama. Before the
advent of Pnini, Aindra system of grammar existed. Several VedangasNirukta, Nighantu and
Pratishkayashad gained credence. Pnini was a reformist who did not compose a totally new grammar but
transformed it into a pragmatic and prudent one. Classical Sanskrit that bloomed to its immaculateness has
Pnini as its helmsman.
Ashtadhyayi is esteemed as Vedanga, an ancillary to the Veda. The Vedanga corpus is considered
indispensable as auxiliary scholarly disciplines of the Vedic religion. Ashtadhyayi per se name has eight
chapters and each chapter further subdivided into eight padas further shredded into stras amounting to
3995 aphorisms, according to tradition. The padas are a series of grammatical statements while the stras
contain the essence of a thought, in omnidirectional manner but free from ambiguity. Pnini instilled an
ingenious contraption involving technical terminology, abbreviatory tools, and devices for information
chaining and appended the decoding mechanism as well.
What the world echoes
Leonard.Bloomfield, one of the proponents of structural linguistics in America as well as the main founder of
the Linguistic Society of America, hails Paninis work as one of the greatest monuments of human
intelligence.
Paul Thieme, one of the last great Indologists and a noted comparative linguist and philologist regales the
experience: Studying Pninis science of vyakarana we are in the presence of a momentous hour in the
history of the development of human thinking. It is an hour of birth. It is the birth of science out of magic. He
goes on further to brand it as, prodigious sagacity and his ingenious intuition the splendor of which the
millennia could not tarnish.
The father of modern structural linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure was highly influenced by Pnini and the
later Indian linguist Bharathari.
Noam Chomsky has heaped kudos on Pnini for having led him to moot the notion of an explicit generative
grammar. On dint of the recursive device of embedding sentences amidst sentences, unlimited extension of
a language such as in English has been possible.
August Wilhelm Schlegel, the ace German Indologist, remarked that Pninis aphorisms could be compared
with algebraic formulae. Pnini presents a mathematical model for language analysis which consists of finite
set of rules for explaining infinite number of speech units.

Otto Von Bohthlingk, a towering figure in comparative philology, compiled an edition of Pninis Grammatik
Ashtadhyayi, with a German commentary. Most fittingly he remarked: The more thoroughly one studies
Pninis grammar the more one is struck by the acuteness and the successful mystery of the vast matter,
shown in it. It is indeed in its kind a masterpiece of the first rank. He was so intrigued that forty-seven years
after publishing his initial book, he republished it with a complete translation in German. Patanjali a later
grammarian describes Pnini as analpa-matihh, that is infinitely intelligent.
Paninis indelible imprint upon modern linguistics
The BNF grammar (Backus Normal Form) used to denote modern programming languages has profound
resemblance with Pninis grammar rules. To acknowledge his contribution, BNF grammar is also referred
as Pnini-Backus form.
The inlaid integrity of Pninis metarules, transformations, and recursion has been hailed as a modern Turing
machine. A consequence of his succinct grammar embodied in highly unintuitive structure invokes
contemporary machine languages
Modern formal language theory (mathematical linguistics) and formal grammar are but a sequel to Pninian
grammar.
Pninis theorem on Constant Ranking showcases the hypothesis formulating the relation between specific
and general constraints thereby laying the cornerstone of Optimality Theory.
Paninis hallmarks: A sneak-a-peek into Pninis grammar of Sanskrit
His generative model and stra mode form the mainstay of his approach. His descriptive technique is hailed
as a boon to linguistics. The stra mode of composition that was already in practice was further honed and
sophisticated with Pninian chisel. Thus Pninian stras being a perfect model exemplify the genre of stra.
His structural approach is an outstanding feature that rendered perspicuity to Sanskrit giving an edge over
Greek. Pnini made a significant contribution in the field of structural linguistics with his theory of
substitution. During the process of derivation substitution transmutes a crude base. This step-by-step
construction has a functional basis rendering his analysis a mathematical foundation.
Pnini workshop also showcases adroit principle of economy and thereby its management.
Panini formulated a grammar of Sanskrit language in Sanskrit itself. But his metalanguage, the language of
description is strikingly different from the object language, the language that he describes.
In a unique mlange, Panini doles out a language description entwining both matter and mind.
Paninis grammar is descriptive and not prescriptive as it tells how a language is used and not how a
language should be used. He describes the structure of a language in generative mode.
Paninis grammar is derivational wherein he shows that larger linguistic units are but a conglomerate of
smaller linguistic elements. The Pninian breakup of a sentence is not merely grammatical units strung
together but each one bears a subtle meaning individually as well as in coexistence with its neighbour.
Paninian model
This model is comparable to a machine that has bases and affixes as the input and subsequently churns out
sentences as the output.
The entire Paninis grammar consists of general rules utsarga and particular rules upwaad. His stras have
six orientationsrule of definition, rule of interpretation, a general rule, a particular rule, a rule of extension
and governing rule.
Rivetting anecdotes grew around Panini
There have been several mythological accounts about Pnini but they hardly hold any ground. Even Han
Tsang has recorded a couple of anecdotes in vogue during AD 602-AD 644 in the northwest frontier of India.
He recounts to have reached a place called So-lo-tu-lu-he, then believed to be where Pnini had composed
his chingminglun (grammar). In the later years, Patanjali, in the second century BC wrote the
Vyakaranamahabhashya, a treatise on Paninis grammar. To commemorate Pninis colossal flamboyance,
he was worshipped as a deity, with statues erected during ancient period.
A certain verse explicates that Pnini met with a sudden death when he was attacked by a lion while he was

engrossed with hatching the last stra of his grammar. The tale may have been on account of the diction
used in the stra but reveals Pninis steadfast perseverance over work, oblivious of surrounding.
Patanjali, a later grammarian, recounts an anecdote. About Brihaspati, the Lord of Learning. Indra, the God
of Gods as his pupil wanted to know about the nitty-gritty of languages. The teaching based on word-byword became an endless process proving a blunder. Thereafter a prudent methodology consisting of general
and particular rules were hatched in fact by Pninis predecessors but found the right tenor under Pnini.
The big conundrum looms large
It is intriguing to know that Pnini never mentioned the name of the language for which he wrote the
grammar. Tradition ascribes Paninis grammar ancillary to the Vedas but hardly 300 rules out of his nearly
4000 rules of grammar describe Vedic intricacies. This notion might thus be dispelled. Another conjecture
hints at a budding language towards the final phase of the Vedic language. This very language was
presumably the spoken language around the frontier falling around Punjab and Pakistan. Vedic literature
upholds this language in high esteem as a standard language.
We are led to believe that Paninis grammar primarily quarried upon this dialect prevalent in northwestern
India and only secondarily touched upon Vedic language. However Pnini took umbrage to reveal existing
aberrations in other dialects as well that were spoken in adjoining regions. He plodded through a wide
compass of linguistic geography surmising that dialectical variations happen only on phonetic and
morphemic levelsthere being no dichotomy between spoken and composed or written language.
The flipside of the genius
Paninis grammar standardised the language of the elite that later evolved to classical Sanskrit. All the
classical writers of Sanskrit have paid heed to Pninian norms. This straitlaced adherence to Paninis
grammar down the ages has tantamounted to arresting the natural evolution into a spoken language for the
hoi polloi as well. It remained stinted to genre of a written language. But then again, due to this factor, a fully
matured language with a colossal vocabulary with extraordinary suppleness withstood all possible ravages
and braved the possible vicissitudes still donning a marvellous capacity to communicate the subtle nuances
with panache.
The Ashtadhyayi presents a formidable look even to one proficient in Sanskrit. Both linguistic terms as well
as syntax prove stumbling blocks as the metalanguage stands discordant with Sanskrit language. Copious
use of symbolic code words in the metalanguage renders this unsavoury experience. This prompted Sir
William Jones to cast aspersions on the stras, calling it: Dark as the darkest Oracle.
Greek has fared better than Sanskrit in preserving Proto-Indo-European elements.
Morphology is the cornerstone of Pninian grammar. Syntax has been implicitly dealt with morphology.
Phonetics and semantics do not have explicit corroboration that find a sanctimony in modern linguistics.
Though semantics has been used extensively in his both structural and descriptive analysis, meaning has
been taken for granted. But then again, this has proved conducive for the development of the later semantic
categories. Pnini felt every word to be agglomeration of meanings of varied sort, factual and emotional and
every phoneme casting subtle nuances from each other.
Ashtadhyayi serves as a historical testimonial
Pnini follows a sifting process through the various social strata for his etymological approach while collating
a huge linguistic data. This lets open several aspects of cultural, geographical, political, economical, social
India between 5th and 4th century BC, now submerged in oblivion. Many of these startling revelations
concur with Kautilyas Arthshastra compiled during 4th century BC. Names of kingdoms and types of
government mentioned herein fathom out various theories about ancient Indian polity.
Bibliography
Otto Bhthlingk, Paninis Grammatik, 1887, reprint 1998, ISBN 3875481984
Katre, Sumitra M., Ashtadhyayi of Panini, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1987. Reprint Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1989. ISBN 0292703945
Vasu, S.C. (1962). The Ashtadhyayi, Motilal Banarsi-dass, Delhi, India
Saroja Bhate, Panini, Sahitya Academy, ISBN 81-260-1198-X