A REVIEW ARTICLE* 1. This new volume of the veteran Nirukta scholar contains eleven numbered notes (X -XX) and one article which carries no number. 1 All of them had been, or were about to be, published elsewhere. Together they contain interesting new points of view on quite a number of the problems connected with the Nirukta. I shall briefly describe them, with comments where necessary.
Note X ('AnOpa') argues convincingly that Y~ska knew the derivation ofprdcfna (< pra-c-fna < pra-ac-fna; in the Nirukta parallel to an~pa < anu-p-a < anu-dp) also found in P~nini 's A.s.tddhydyf. (Cf. w 4, below.) Note XI ('Ardhan~man') shows that ardhanaman (Nir. 1.7) does not mean "synonym of 'half'" (Sarup) but is rather a technical grammatical term which was used by 'some', apparently not for long, to designate the few words 2 which share with ndmans the property of declension, but not accentuation.
Note XII ('Vibhakti') attempts to clarify the hitherto obscure sentence yathdrtham, vibhakff.h samnamayet (Nir. 2.1). The solution lies in the word vibhakti which must not here mean 'case termination' but 'division'. The sentence now comes to say that "They [i.e., the divisions of a word into syllables or letters] (vibhaktf.h)... should be interpreted [?] (sarhnamayet) according to the sense (yathdrtham) of the word to be derived".
Note XIII ('Brahman') deals with the meaning of brahman in Nir. 4.6: tatra brahmetihdsami~ram a rhmikra .m gdthdmi~ram b havati. The A i tareya Brdhmana (33.6) contains a similar sentence at the end of the Sunal?. ~epa story: tad etat parark~atagdtham ~auna.h~epam dkhydnam. Mehendale concludes that here brahman = akhydna. He does not seem to be aware that the same two episodes had been compared by Oldenberg (1883:79-80 (466-67)) in an article dedicated to 'das altindische .Z&hy~na', who did not however go to the extent of saying that brahman and dkhydna are synonymous here. 4 Geldner's (1889:285 n. 2; ef. Thieme, 1952:119 (128)) suggestion to take brahman = brdhma.na, seems more acceptable than Mehendale's proposal. Another recent interpretation of the Nirukta sentence has been given by Horsch (1966:314): "Dieser Hymnus ist vermischt mit Gebet (brahman) und Erz~ihlung (itihdsa), s er besteht (n~imlich) aus ILk-und Liedstrophe."