Xll
•grammar 0f the language or in the scope of the aphorisms. Katyayana's Vartikas and Patanfalis Mahabhashya are •devoted to the proper interpretation of the sutras and to the apt introduction of the missing links. If to Katyayana's eyes 10,000 inaccuracies are discernible in Panini, the only explanation must be that to Panini they were not inaccuracies, but by Katyayana's time the language had progressed and necessitated a fresh appendix or erratum in Panini's *glratftmatical. treatise. The period of intervention must have been sufficiently long to allow old grammatical forms ^o become obsolete and even incorrect and words and their ^meanings to become antiquated and even ununderstanda-.able. We may advantageously note a few of those promi-tuent charges:—
(i) Panini in a special rule says that S[cTC has ^cT^ for its neuter in the Vedas. Obviously he intended to exhaust the list. Katyayana has to add ^cRto it;
(ii) Pantnij when he says Ml^R.* ^JPTnRW ^1> would imply that each form has no other sense than that of a bird; but Katyayana adds that both the forms are optional in the sense of ' birds/ while in any other sense they represent separate words;
(iii) The vocative singular of neuter nouns ending in W^ such as ^§T^ is 5ffP^ but Katyayana would add an optional 3U;
(iv) Some feminine formations are not noticed by Panini, which Katyayana is forced to allow, as and