<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>elisa freschiWhat shall one avoid in the case of eye-diseases? &#8211; elisa freschi</title>
	<atom:link href="https://elisafreschi.com/2017/10/13/what-shall-one-avoid-in-the-case-of-eye-diseases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://elisafreschi.com</link>
	<description>These pages are a sort of virtual desktop of Elisa Freschi. You can find here my cv and some random thoughts on Sanskrit (and) Philosophy. All criticism welcome! Contributions are also welcome!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 19:06:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>What shall one avoid in the case of eye-diseases?</title>
		<link>https://elisafreschi.com/2017/10/13/what-shall-one-avoid-in-the-case-of-eye-diseases/</link>
		<comments>https://elisafreschi.com/2017/10/13/what-shall-one-avoid-in-the-case-of-eye-diseases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>elisa freschi</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[language and linguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[śāstric Sanskrit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Veṅkaṭanātha/Vedānta Deśika]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elisafreschi.com/?p=2573</guid>

				<description><![CDATA[A problem with polysemy. Veṅkaṭanātha discusses in his commentary on PMS 1.1.9 the case of words having multiple meanings. On the one hand, there are words which have multiple meanings and whose meaning can be fixed only due to the proximity to other words. On the other, there are words which have one prevalent meaning, but which can assume [&#8230;]]]></description>
					<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em id="gnt_postsubtitle" style="color:#770005;font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:1.3em;line-height:1.2em;font-weight:normal;font-style:italic;">A problem with polysemy</em></p> <p>Veṅkaṭanātha discusses in his commentary on PMS 1.1.9 the case of words having multiple meanings. On the one hand, there are words which have multiple meanings and whose meaning can be fixed only due to the proximity to other words. On the other, there are words which have one prevalent meaning, but which can assume a different meaning due to the proximity of other words. Therefore, the proximity of other words is not in itself a disambiguating factor. The Nyāya objector takes advantage of that to suggest that one needs to resort to convention.<span id="more-2573"></span></p>
<p>The example Veṅkaṭanātha uses is somewhat obscure, namely:</p>
<blockquote><p>The one who has an eye-disease should avoid rubbing the eye (?) with hands, feet or tongue (śarkarāṃ pādajihvābhyām akṣirogī vivarjayet). </p></blockquote>
<p>Here, <em>śarkarā</em> &#8212;which usually means &#8216;pebble&#8217; or &#8216;piece of candied sugar&#8217; seems to be the term which assumes a new meaning, which I imagined being &#8216;rubbing the eye&#8217;. <strong>Did you ever encounter <em>śarkarā</em> in this sense? Or do you have alternative suggestions?</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			

		<wfw:commentRss>https://elisafreschi.com/2017/10/13/what-shall-one-avoid-in-the-case-of-eye-diseases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
				<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">2573</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>