Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1others again; ‘I will name you, O H. and you, ye 8.”. As to c, I would now rather prefer my alternative as in S. B. E. XXXI, and that notwith- standing khshmaibyd, the personal in the sense of the reflexive: ‘By these actions ye = yas (?) take to yourselves (2?) (khshmaibyd) a righteous character’. But yaS-5(k)yaoth(a)ndi§ may be better taken as a compositum ; | yas, stem without. suffix (cp. mdtsakhi, etc.) in composition, and the ex- pressed nom. is not necessary for daduyé(¢) = dadvé. The infin. daduyé(é) = °vé is not however impossible, and an alternative should be offered in | that sense: ‘I will speak to you - - + to establish for you Righteousness, or the Holy constitution, through Your actions’; we thus escape khshmaibyd — as reflexive. Pahl. The form of gobishnoé is indecisive as to the speaker, but vakhshyd and Sravakhshya should settle the point. I had rendered dahishnoé and adahishnd in a severely impartial manner, fearing to favour the literal exactness of the trl, but a meaning nearer to the original is almost necessary; ‘what is the regulation, and against regulation’. Read — my former printing, yours. Vivinaktwm beside vivektwm is noticeable; cp. } the inf. with n, na, nd, but see the acc. form. In J.3 the anusvara is faint, but vivinaktw gives little relief. I should say that vivinaktum was an over-— 561 sight occasioned by the use of wivinakti in v. 17. We should read a 224 pl. Read yours is the word, in my former printing. 16. Notice the difficulties as to caesura ind. Pronounce Huwégwa(?), or Huvdgrd (2), at all events with three syllables. With some wstd stéi is reduced to ‘of whom we two wish that it may go well’ (sté¢ infin.). Ustd is however the hosannah of the Gathds, and really an adverbial loc. as inter- jection, ‘salvation!’, also I think sometimes used as we might use ‘salvation to a people’; that is, ‘salvation-bringers’. I5ta, according to a very old suggestion long circulated, would be a loc. of #sti; but if khshathrd is read with K.5, the word is a pl. of the participle. As I have said in the other work, 7@st@ khshathra might cover a var(e)demam = °man, as a loc. in my former alternative sense of ‘choice abode’. Cp. also Y. 37, 3 tem ad(t) ahiirya nédment mazddvard spentétemda yazamaidé(é); cp. the name bijavara (the best of the grains), also the names Buddhivara. Bréhmanavara; cp. also the throng of words with the first member vara. So much for my former alternative; my preferred one is, ‘in fulness of power’, to vridh (vardh), loc. of var(e)dman (two syllables); others ‘in the glory’, also ‘in the citadel’. As altern. trl. with the reading khshathrem as nom. sg., render; ‘where the kingdom is in the possession (?7s¢@) of the good spirit’. Hastishn reproduces stéi as if an infin. The root idea only of usvah?, whose rare form does not seem recognized, is rendered by khérsandth in connection with a 224 s¢. Read Huogudjah in my former printing. Tam prasddam must be an accidental mistake.
2is in the possession (?7s¢@) of the good spirit’. Hastishn reproduces stéi as if an infin. The root idea only of usvah?, whose rare form does not seem recognized, is rendered by khérsandth in connection with a 224 s¢. Read Huogudjah in my former printing. Tam prasddam must be an accidental mistake. I should still prefer to correct to a nom. Ipsdno (so) renders khvdsts yekdviminéd as a pert. 17. Caesura at the 4%, yet notice the difficulty at a Read my former printing [secundum recte] comparatas - - redditam comparatae sunt. _ For afshmdné the sense of the Pahl. is nearly universally accepted; possibly ap is the root, and the idea of ‘elaboration’ is expressed. Metrical com- position was sacred to the Deity, notige the use of dpas as expressing the sacred functions of the altar. The word may be *apasman, loc. with weakened stem; anafshmam = °man is also loc., cp. Vedic occurrences of loc. in an. Sénhdni may be also loc.; an acc, pl. nt. is also not impossible, Y. 53, 6, or, lastly, the word may be a 1 sg. conj. The suggestion has been made that anafshmaim may be a gen. pl. (?). Some scholars might be disposed to regard vista (so) as a 274 pl. = *vitta (so): ‘Did you ever obtain’. One writer prefers reading véstd vé(s) + ta (cp. yergstd); ‘with this “Your” obedience the pious praises’. Vis = ‘to come’, ‘to be’ has been thought of, hada vista (s0) = ‘together being’. Vistd-vahmeng might well be a compos. ; but vistd (so) is not impossibly an instr. with Sraoshd ‘with accepted, i. e. re- cognized, obedience’. Our translations should be based upon ou judgment, 562 and not sacrificed to a wish to exhibit fresh but improbable possibilities. These should be. presented, if anywhere, in notes. One writer prefers mantt aS noun of the agent, ‘with his clever (dangra) ‘observer’, Asha’. I prefer Ashé as adverb. instr. abstract, although, as ever, with latent personality. Sraoshé has been regarded ag a 1st Sg. aor. conj. (srw) by some, ‘that I might hear’ (?). Can manta possibly be a verbal form in the active (Indian mid.)? Differences between Indian and Iranian equally great exist, and the connection temptingly calls for the verbal form. As to pavan aito-dahishnih formerly rendered literally with the sign. of warning, cp. p. 413, and read ‘in the continuing existence’, Padméni for marti is followed in my former alternative sapientia. Ner. at least testifies nega- tively against the acceptation atts as — ‘is’; sahaddtyd = aitd-dahishnth. Dakshini as a formation is possible, and may well have been meant. Read my former printing Huogudjah. : 18. Read my former text vichithem. Some writers, observing ydus the aorist of yw, have suggested; ‘who unites himself with me’ (?), Yao§, like the Indian yés, is indeclinable, we might take it as nom., or ace. Read as alternative: ‘Who is holy (?) toward me--., As chid is found in the Indian after verbs, ep. RV.
3ormer text vichithem. Some writers, observing ydus the aorist of yw, have suggested; ‘who unites himself with me’ (?), Yao§, like the Indian yés, is indeclinable, we might take it as nom., or ace. Read as alternative: ‘Who is holy (?) toward me--., As chid is found in the Indian after verbs, ep. RV. 135, 9, it looks the less strange in aschtd(t), or can as = ‘verily’ (?) + chid(t), Strengthening? Asd@ (So) we Should naturally suppose to be a nom. of astar = ‘oppressor’; but it is not impossibly an acc. pl. Daidéta as gra Sg. mid. opt., we should naturally render ‘who may accept us’, that is, ‘treat us’ as an oppressor’. But in the Gathds, as well as in the Indian, we are often forced to accept sub- stantially an active sense for the middle of dé (= dd, or dhé); see on p. 510. And it is a question whether the purposely varied accus. pl. in astd, if the form be such (?), may not have literally as well as implicitly the sense: ‘I will send affiction upon him, who may send afflictions upon — us’. This Suggestion is however alternative. Reading @stdi, with other MSS., we have: ‘who may hold us for oppression’. Véchithem is better in view of Y. 30,2. Read my former printing . . [injuriam] - +; [id]. +». The Parsi-pers., reading jan, renders ‘life’ (not so in Y. 28,0 where yan = yanim). Ydn accords better with yaos. Pavan tani (tand) = ‘in reality’, — freely for aschid(t); or for some form of ast?. Chdshédo, so according to the gloss is difficult, Dropping the gloss, chdshidé (same signs, cp. chdshidar), — might equal ‘I taught’. Andstth expressed, or was associated with, oppres- sion, yet Gsté read as anst(i)h may have suggested the form chosen. Pahl. » = h or a, or a; 4EN)ss = ansid or anastih (sic) (not andstih). The gloss diné (so) mars e, Read my former printing ydn, sadai ’va. 563 19. Caesura at the 48; disregard all former divisions after the 6t syllable as wholly informal, and intended to mark for the non-specialist a stress of voice on the 7, Mané.vistéis = mané.vistdis must mean mente- comparatis, or something similar. A valuable suggestion, long privately circulated, was ‘with all that the heart can desire’. We might consider the reading vistdzs (so) to vis = ‘arrived in the mind’, or véstdi§ (so) might equal vi + stdis = ‘pervading (extended in) the mind’, to std, root declension with transition to a. I formerly thought that the change to ménd might be preferable. See the Pahl. Also md niévistdis (see the MS. K.4(?) mani) might be considered; ‘together with all things announced by me for the sake of (instr. in the sense of ‘concerning’) the mother kine’. One scholar would render gavd az? as duals, referring to the later use of the expression azt in the Vend. I think that the ah? gé was the same whose soul bewails in Y. 29, 1. Of course all other documents are inferior to the Gathas on this point. The Indian af? finds its explanation here; see also above, p. 421. One scholar would refer s#s. to sad = ‘execute’.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1others again; ‘I will name you, O H. and you, ye 8.”. As to c, I would now rather prefer my alternative as in S. B. E. XXXI, and that notwith- standing khshmaibyd, the personal in the sense of the reflexive: ‘By these actions ye = yas (?) take to yourselves (2?) (khshmaibyd) a righteous character’. But yaS-5(k)yaoth(a)ndi§ may be better taken as a compositum ; | yas, stem without. suffix (cp. mdtsakhi, etc.) in composition, and the ex- pressed nom. is not necessary for daduyé(¢) = dadvé. The infin. daduyé(é) = °vé is not however impossible, and an alternative should be offered in | that sense: ‘I will speak to you - - + to establish for you Righteousness, or the Holy constitution, through Your actions’; we thus escape khshmaibyd — as reflexive. Pahl. The form of gobishnoé is indecisive as to the speaker, but vakhshyd and Sravakhshya should settle the point. I had rendered dahishnoé and adahishnd in a severely impartial manner, fearing to favour the literal exactness of the trl, but a meaning nearer to the original is almost necessary; ‘what is the regulation, and against regulation’. Read — my former printing, yours. Vivinaktwm beside vivektwm is noticeable; cp. } the inf. with n, na, nd, but see the acc. form. In J.3 the anusvara is faint, but vivinaktw gives little relief. I should say that vivinaktum was an over-— 561 sight occasioned by the use of wivinakti in v. 17. We should read a 224 pl. Read yours is the word, in my former printing. 16. Notice the difficulties as to caesura ind. Pronounce Huwégwa(?), or Huvdgrd (2), at all events with three syllables. With some wstd stéi is reduced to ‘of whom we two wish that it may go well’ (sté¢ infin.). Ustd is however the hosannah of the Gathds, and really an adverbial loc. as inter- jection, ‘salvation!’, also I think sometimes used as we might use ‘salvation to a people’; that is, ‘salvation-bringers’. I5ta, according to a very old suggestion long circulated, would be a loc. of #sti; but if khshathrd is read with K.5, the word is a pl. of the participle. As I have said in the other work, 7@st@ khshathra might cover a var(e)demam = °man, as a loc. in my former alternative sense of ‘choice abode’. Cp. also Y. 37, 3 tem ad(t) ahiirya nédment mazddvard spentétemda yazamaidé(é); cp. the name bijavara (the best of the grains), also the names Buddhivara. Bréhmanavara; cp. also the throng of words with the first member vara. So much for my former alternative; my preferred one is, ‘in fulness of power’, to vridh (vardh), loc. of var(e)dman (two syllables); others ‘in the glory’, also ‘in the citadel’. As altern. trl. with the reading khshathrem as nom. sg., render; ‘where the kingdom is in the possession (?7s¢@) of the good spirit’. Hastishn reproduces stéi as if an infin. The root idea only of usvah?, whose rare form does not seem recognized, is rendered by khérsandth in connection with a 224 s¢. Read Huogudjah in my former printing. Tam prasddam must be an accidental mistake.
2is in the possession (?7s¢@) of the good spirit’. Hastishn reproduces stéi as if an infin. The root idea only of usvah?, whose rare form does not seem recognized, is rendered by khérsandth in connection with a 224 s¢. Read Huogudjah in my former printing. Tam prasddam must be an accidental mistake. I should still prefer to correct to a nom. Ipsdno (so) renders khvdsts yekdviminéd as a pert. 17. Caesura at the 4%, yet notice the difficulty at a Read my former printing [secundum recte] comparatas - - redditam comparatae sunt. _ For afshmdné the sense of the Pahl. is nearly universally accepted; possibly ap is the root, and the idea of ‘elaboration’ is expressed. Metrical com- position was sacred to the Deity, notige the use of dpas as expressing the sacred functions of the altar. The word may be *apasman, loc. with weakened stem; anafshmam = °man is also loc., cp. Vedic occurrences of loc. in an. Sénhdni may be also loc.; an acc, pl. nt. is also not impossible, Y. 53, 6, or, lastly, the word may be a 1 sg. conj. The suggestion has been made that anafshmaim may be a gen. pl. (?). Some scholars might be disposed to regard vista (so) as a 274 pl. = *vitta (so): ‘Did you ever obtain’. One writer prefers reading véstd vé(s) + ta (cp. yergstd); ‘with this “Your” obedience the pious praises’. Vis = ‘to come’, ‘to be’ has been thought of, hada vista (s0) = ‘together being’. Vistd-vahmeng might well be a compos. ; but vistd (so) is not impossibly an instr. with Sraoshd ‘with accepted, i. e. re- cognized, obedience’. Our translations should be based upon ou judgment, 562 and not sacrificed to a wish to exhibit fresh but improbable possibilities. These should be. presented, if anywhere, in notes. One writer prefers mantt aS noun of the agent, ‘with his clever (dangra) ‘observer’, Asha’. I prefer Ashé as adverb. instr. abstract, although, as ever, with latent personality. Sraoshé has been regarded ag a 1st Sg. aor. conj. (srw) by some, ‘that I might hear’ (?). Can manta possibly be a verbal form in the active (Indian mid.)? Differences between Indian and Iranian equally great exist, and the connection temptingly calls for the verbal form. As to pavan aito-dahishnih formerly rendered literally with the sign. of warning, cp. p. 413, and read ‘in the continuing existence’, Padméni for marti is followed in my former alternative sapientia. Ner. at least testifies nega- tively against the acceptation atts as — ‘is’; sahaddtyd = aitd-dahishnth. Dakshini as a formation is possible, and may well have been meant. Read my former printing Huogudjah. : 18. Read my former text vichithem. Some writers, observing ydus the aorist of yw, have suggested; ‘who unites himself with me’ (?), Yao§, like the Indian yés, is indeclinable, we might take it as nom., or ace. Read as alternative: ‘Who is holy (?) toward me--., As chid is found in the Indian after verbs, ep. RV.
3ormer text vichithem. Some writers, observing ydus the aorist of yw, have suggested; ‘who unites himself with me’ (?), Yao§, like the Indian yés, is indeclinable, we might take it as nom., or ace. Read as alternative: ‘Who is holy (?) toward me--., As chid is found in the Indian after verbs, ep. RV. 135, 9, it looks the less strange in aschtd(t), or can as = ‘verily’ (?) + chid(t), Strengthening? Asd@ (So) we Should naturally suppose to be a nom. of astar = ‘oppressor’; but it is not impossibly an acc. pl. Daidéta as gra Sg. mid. opt., we should naturally render ‘who may accept us’, that is, ‘treat us’ as an oppressor’. But in the Gathds, as well as in the Indian, we are often forced to accept sub- stantially an active sense for the middle of dé (= dd, or dhé); see on p. 510. And it is a question whether the purposely varied accus. pl. in astd, if the form be such (?), may not have literally as well as implicitly the sense: ‘I will send affiction upon him, who may send afflictions upon — us’. This Suggestion is however alternative. Reading @stdi, with other MSS., we have: ‘who may hold us for oppression’. Véchithem is better in view of Y. 30,2. Read my former printing . . [injuriam] - +; [id]. +». The Parsi-pers., reading jan, renders ‘life’ (not so in Y. 28,0 where yan = yanim). Ydn accords better with yaos. Pavan tani (tand) = ‘in reality’, — freely for aschid(t); or for some form of ast?. Chdshédo, so according to the gloss is difficult, Dropping the gloss, chdshidé (same signs, cp. chdshidar), — might equal ‘I taught’. Andstth expressed, or was associated with, oppres- sion, yet Gsté read as anst(i)h may have suggested the form chosen. Pahl. » = h or a, or a; 4EN)ss = ansid or anastih (sic) (not andstih). The gloss diné (so) mars e, Read my former printing ydn, sadai ’va. 563 19. Caesura at the 48; disregard all former divisions after the 6t syllable as wholly informal, and intended to mark for the non-specialist a stress of voice on the 7, Mané.vistéis = mané.vistdis must mean mente- comparatis, or something similar. A valuable suggestion, long privately circulated, was ‘with all that the heart can desire’. We might consider the reading vistdzs (so) to vis = ‘arrived in the mind’, or véstdi§ (so) might equal vi + stdis = ‘pervading (extended in) the mind’, to std, root declension with transition to a. I formerly thought that the change to ménd might be preferable. See the Pahl. Also md niévistdis (see the MS. K.4(?) mani) might be considered; ‘together with all things announced by me for the sake of (instr. in the sense of ‘concerning’) the mother kine’. One scholar would render gavd az? as duals, referring to the later use of the expression azt in the Vend. I think that the ah? gé was the same whose soul bewails in Y. 29, 1. Of course all other documents are inferior to the Gathas on this point. The Indian af? finds its explanation here; see also above, p. 421. One scholar would refer s#s. to sad = ‘execute’.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.