2023-03-29 18:10:53 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
GLOSSARY
263
vākovākya
vākovākya, 'dialogue': (1) a figure containing a remark and a reply.
(2) AP 342.32-33. (5) Vākovākya may be divided into rjúkti and
vakrôkti. The latter is the well-known alamkāra of Rudraţa and
Mammața consisting of a reply which consciously mistakes the con-
tent of the question; irony. Rjúkti is defined as 'inherent' (sahaja)
speech, perhaps conversation. Again the scope of the figures is
demonstrated (cf. bhävika). Vākovākya constitutes the sixth sabda-
lamkāra. Other figures involving conversation are praśna and uttara.
vastava
vastava, 'descriptive': (1) a generic term for those figures which are
neither comparative nor hyperbolic. (2) R 7.9-10. (5) Rudraţa
intends those figures which are more rhetorical than poetic, involving
arrangements and sequences of terms, or descriptive intimations.
The list is given in 7.11-12. See aupamya, atiśaya, and śleşa.
vidarśanā
vidarśanā, 'making apparent': (1) a figure in which a similitude is sug-
gested by attributing to one subject a property which is characterized
as really belonging to another. (2) U 5.10. (3) vinôcitena patyā ca
rūpavaty api kaminī । vidhuvandhyavibhāvaryaḥ prabibharti višobha-
tām (Udbhaṭa: "A girl without a husband, though she be beautiful,
offers a sight rivalling in ugliness the moonless night"). (4) "In
phrases full of the audible equivalents of Capital Letters, he now
went on to assure Mr. Stoyte ..." (Aldous Huxley). (5) Just as one
woman cannot carry the ugliness of something else, so capital letters
cannot be an attribute of the spoken word; nevertheless, the adjunc-
tion suggests comparability of the woman and the night, of
audible and visible sententiousness.
But for the example which Udbhața offers, this figure would be
indistinguishable from nidarśană II of Mammața, for the definitions
are almost equivalent. In Mammața, the rapprochement is via a
similar or common result, and two distinct verbs underlie the contrast;
here there is but one verb, which does not apply literally to the sense
expressed, and the rapprochement is simply with the object of that
verb, as taken figuratively. This figure is perhaps a "portmanteau"
of nidarśanā.
A second type is mentioned by Udbhata in the definition, wherein
the two situations are in fact related, but no example is offered.
263
vākovākya
vākovākya, 'dialogue': (1) a figure containing a remark and a reply.
(2) AP 342.32-33. (5) Vākovākya may be divided into rjúkti and
vakrôkti. The latter is the well-known alamkāra of Rudraţa and
Mammața consisting of a reply which consciously mistakes the con-
tent of the question; irony. Rjúkti is defined as 'inherent' (sahaja)
speech, perhaps conversation. Again the scope of the figures is
demonstrated (cf. bhävika). Vākovākya constitutes the sixth sabda-
lamkāra. Other figures involving conversation are praśna and uttara.
vastava
vastava, 'descriptive': (1) a generic term for those figures which are
neither comparative nor hyperbolic. (2) R 7.9-10. (5) Rudraţa
intends those figures which are more rhetorical than poetic, involving
arrangements and sequences of terms, or descriptive intimations.
The list is given in 7.11-12. See aupamya, atiśaya, and śleşa.
vidarśanā
vidarśanā, 'making apparent': (1) a figure in which a similitude is sug-
gested by attributing to one subject a property which is characterized
as really belonging to another. (2) U 5.10. (3) vinôcitena patyā ca
rūpavaty api kaminī । vidhuvandhyavibhāvaryaḥ prabibharti višobha-
tām (Udbhaṭa: "A girl without a husband, though she be beautiful,
offers a sight rivalling in ugliness the moonless night"). (4) "In
phrases full of the audible equivalents of Capital Letters, he now
went on to assure Mr. Stoyte ..." (Aldous Huxley). (5) Just as one
woman cannot carry the ugliness of something else, so capital letters
cannot be an attribute of the spoken word; nevertheless, the adjunc-
tion suggests comparability of the woman and the night, of
audible and visible sententiousness.
But for the example which Udbhața offers, this figure would be
indistinguishable from nidarśană II of Mammața, for the definitions
are almost equivalent. In Mammața, the rapprochement is via a
similar or common result, and two distinct verbs underlie the contrast;
here there is but one verb, which does not apply literally to the sense
expressed, and the rapprochement is simply with the object of that
verb, as taken figuratively. This figure is perhaps a "portmanteau"
of nidarśanā.
A second type is mentioned by Udbhata in the definition, wherein
the two situations are in fact related, but no example is offered.