Page:Sanskrit syntax (IA cu31924023201183).pdf/99

 111. § 110-111. 83 the most different logical relations will find their ex- pression by it. When dividing the whole of its dominion by setting up such categories as the possessive gen., the subjective, objective, partitive, that of origin, matter, quan- tity etc., it must not be overlooked, that these divisions have been made for clearness' sake and do not affect the unity of the grammatical duty discharged in all these cases by the genitive. For the rest, not rarely the or- dinary logical distinctions may fall short of classifying some given genitive, as in the cas of gaan, or Utt. II, p. 28 cm: (the way to the hermitage of A.) etc. Concurrent constructions are 1. compounding the gen. with the subst., it qualifies : = T: Th, see 214, 2. using instead of the gen. the derived adjective, as 17ª =4Elddi Jad đánh=4 or J1Tie1 I etc. Of these substitutions the latter is comparatively rare, when contrasted with the utmost frequency of the former. Rem. The so called appositional or epexegetic genitive is not used in Sanskrit. It is said goog, not as in English »the city of Pushp." R. 2, 115, 15 fìn áuná ungà (Lat, pignus soccorum, the pledge [represented by] the slippers). When pointing out the genitive as the case to put in such substantives as are wanted to qualify other sub- stantives, it is by no means said that no other con- struction may be used for the same purpose. Verbal nouns often retain the verbal construction. So, if a moving to or from some place is to be expressed, nouns must be construed just as verbs; it is said graag may not Cp. Rem. on 41.