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'.