Switch to: References

Citations of:

Artha: Meaning

Delhi, IN: Oxford University Press India (2011)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Cow is to be Tied Up: Sort-Shifting in Classical Indian Philosophy.Keating Malcolm - 2013 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 30 (4):311-332.
    This paper undertakes textual exegesis and rational reconstruction of Mukula Bhaṭṭa’s Abhidhā-vṛttta-mātṛkā, or “The Fundamentals of the Communicative Function.” The treatise was written to refute Ānandavardhana’s claim, made in the Dhvanyāloka, that there is a third “power” of words, vyañjanā (suggestion), beyond the two already accepted by traditional Indian philosophy: abhidhā (denotation) and lakṣaṇā(indication).1 I argue that the explanation of lakṣaṇā as presented in his text contains internal tensions, although it may still be a compelling response to Ānandavardhana.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Classical Sāṁkhya on the Relationship between a Word and Its Meaning.Ołena Łucyszyna - 2016 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 44 (2):303-323.
    The aim of this article is to reconstruct the classical Sāṁkhya view on the relationship between a word and its meaning. The study embraces all the extant texts of classical Sāṁkhya, but it is based mainly on the Yuktidīpikā, since this commentary contains most of the fragments which are directly related to the topic of our research. The textual analysis has led me to the following conclusion. It is possible to reconstruct two different and conflicting views on the relationship between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Lakṣaṇā as a Creative Function of Language.Nirmalya Guha - 2012 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 40 (5):489-509.
    When somebody speaks metaphorically, the primary meanings of their words cannot get semantically connected. Still metaphorical uses succeed in conveying the message of the speaker, since lakṣaṇā, a meaning-generating faculty of language, yields the suitable secondary meanings. Gaṅgeśa claims that lakṣaṇā is a faculty of words themselves. One may argue: “Words have no such faculty. In these cases, the hearer uses observation-based inference. They have observed that sometimes competent speakers use the word w in order to mean s, when p, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • A Controversial Provision for the Nominative Ending: Nominal Sentences and Aṣṭādhyāyī 2.3.46.Davide Mocci & Tiziana Pontillo - 2022 - Journal of the American Oriental Society 140 (1):47.
    The present joint contribution offers a tentative comprehensive re-interpretation of Pāṇini’s rule A 2.3.46, and shows how that rule teaches the application of the nominative ending without making use of the notion of “subject,” a notion that belongs to other grammatical systems, but not to Pāṇini’s. We discuss the controversial domain of some segments of its wording by attempting to adhere to Pāṇini’s framework and his usus scribendi. In particular, we read the first constituent of the compound prātipadikārtha­ liṅgaparimāṇavacana­ as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark