シトゥ『三十頌註』研究 : 格助詞・累加副助詞・接続助詞・選択詞

Si tu’s Commentary on the Sum cu pa: Case-related Particles, Adjunctive-adversative Conjunctions, Adjunctive-explicative Conjunctions, Disjunctive-and-interrogative Conjunctions

PAṆ CHEN DON GRUB

NEMOTO Hiroshi

比較論理学研究

The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic

[PISSN] 1880-6376

[NCID] AA12025285

The current study, following our previous paper, seeks to clarify the Tibetans’ comprehension of the Tibetan script and language, with a specific focus on the perspective of Si tu chos kyi ’byung gnas. This paper explores the theory of particles (tshig phrad) expounded in verses 9c–17a of Thu mi’s Sum cu pa. These particles encompass the la particles, genitive markers, ergative-instrumental markers, adjunctive-adversative particles (kyang, etc.), adjunctive-explicative particles (ste, etc.), disjunctive-andinterrogative conjunctions (gam, etc.), and ablative case markers.
Si tu was undeniably an innovative grammarian. His profound knowledge of Sanskrit grammar led him to formulate a unique system of Tibetan grammar, characterized not as descriptive but as normative grammar. Nevertheless, previous studies have not adequately examined Si tu’s originality as a commentator in interpreting individual verses in the Sum cu pa. This paper takes a closer look at verses 9c–11 of the Sum cu pa, revealing Si tu’s critical analysis and new interpretations, particularly based on his critique of Rnam gling pan. chen’s ideas.
As a result of our investigation, it becomes evident that Si tu’s new interpretations excel in many respects compared to previous ones. He was fully aware of problems in earlier interpretations, and concurrently, he strongly believed that the Sum cu pa was written in accordance with the scholar’s method of composition (mkhas pa’i bstan bcos kyi lugs). Ensuring that Thu mi’s statements in the Sum cu pa make sense and providing a rational interpretation are crucial principles in Si tu’s commentary.

jpn

広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター

Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic, Hiroshima University