काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

192 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र 'अयमेव न्यक्कारः' इति वाच्यम् । उच्छूनत्वमात्रं चानुवाद्यम्, न वृथात्वविशेषितम् । अत्र च शब्दरचना विपरीता कृतेति वाक्यस्यैव दोषो न वाक्यार्थस्य । यथा वा अपाङ्गसंसर्गि तरङ्गितं दृशोर्भ्रुवोररालान्तविलासि वेल्लितम् । विसारि रोमाञ्चनकञ्चुकं तनोस्तनोति यो सौ सुभगे तवागतः॥ ॥१८४॥ What is intended is that 'that I have enemies is itself a disgrace', and the proper order of words would be 'ayameva nyakkāraḥ'; and secondly, what should have been merely referred to, is the mere fattening of the arms, for the purpose of predicating its uselessness, which should not have been made a mere qualifying adjunct in the com- pound. [The meaning intended is that the fattening of my arms has been of no use; being of no use, therefore, being the predicated factor, should have stood by itself, while it has been made a subordinate adjunct by being placed in the middle of a compound.] Inasmuch as the fault here lies in the order of the words being reversed, the defect is attributed to the sen- tence, not to the meaning of the sentence. Another example (of 'non-discrimination of the pre- dicative factor')— 'Apāṅgasaṁsargi taraṅgitaṁ dṛśorbhruvorarālāntavilāsi- vellitam Visāri romāñchanakañchukaṁ tanostanoti yosau subhage . tavāgataḥ' 'Here has come—one who brings a tremor to your eyes, an elegant curvature to your eye-brows and a bodice of thrilling hairs to your body'.