अरीहणादि a group of words given in P. IV.2.80 which get the taddhita affix घुञ् ( अक ) added to them as a cāturarthika affix e. g. अारीहणकम्, द्रौघणकम् etc.see Kāśikā on P.IV.2.80.
अर्क the strong blowing of air from the mouth at the time of the utte- rance of the surd consonants; cf Vāj. Śikṣā. 280.
अर्थ (I) lit.signification,conveyed sense or object. The sense is sometimes looked upon as a determinant of the foot of a verse: cf. प्रायोर्थो वृत्तमित्येते पादज्ञानस्य हेतवः R. Pr. XVII 16. It is generally looked upon as the determinant of a word (पद). A unit or element of a word which is possessed of an indepen- dent sense is looked upon as a Pada in the old Grammar treatises; cf. अर्थः पदमिति ऐन्द्रे; cf. also अर्थः पदम् V. Pr. III.2, explained by उव्वट as अर्थाभिधायि पदम् । पद्यते गम्यते ज्ञायतेSर्थो- नेनेति पदम् । There is no difference of opinion regarding the fact that, out of the four standard kinds of words नाम, आख्यात, उपसर्ग and निपात, the first two kinds नाम and अाख्यात do possess an independent sense of their own. Regarding possession of sense and the manner in which the sense is conveyed, by the other two viz. the Upasargas (preposi- tions) and Nipātas (particles) there is a striking difference of opinion among scholars of grammar. Al- though Pāṇini has given the actual designation पद to words ending with either the case or the conju- gational affixes, he has looked upon the different units or ele- ments of a Pada such as the base, the affix, the augment and the like as possessed of individually separate senses. There is practi- cally nothing in Pāṇini's sūtras to
prove that Nipātas and Upasargas do not possess an independent sense. Re: Nipātas, the rule चादयोऽसत्वे, which means that च and other indeclinables are called Nipātas when they do not mean सत्त्व, pre- sents a riddle as to the meaning which च and the like should convey if they do not mean सत्त्व or द्रव्य i.e. a substance. The Nipātas cannot mean भाव or verbal activity and if they do not mean सत्व or द्रव्य, too, they will have to be call- ed अनर्थक (absolutely meaningless) and in that case they would not be termed Prātipadika, and no case- affix would be applied to them. To avoid this difficulty, the Vārti- kakāra had to make an effort and he wrote a Vārtika निपातस्य अनर्थकस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वम् । P. I.2.45 Vār. 12. As a matter of fact the Nipātas च, वा and others do possess a sense as shown by their presence and ab- sence (अन्वय and व्यतिरेक). The sense, however, is conveyed rather in a different manner as the word समूह, or समुदाय, which is the meaning conveyed by च in रामः कृष्णश्च, cannot be substituted for च as its Synonym in the sentence राम: कुष्णश्च. Looking to the different ways in which their sense is conveyed by nouns and verbs on the one hand, and by affixes, prepositions and inde- clinables on the other hand, Bhar- tṛhari, possibly following Yāska and Vyāḍi, has developed the theory of द्योतकत्व as contrasted with वाचकत्व and laid down the dictum that indeclinables, affixes and prepositions (उपसर्गs) do not direct- ly convey any specific sense as their own, but they are mere signs to show some specific property or excellence of the sense conveyed by the word to which they are