Translating a school notice into Sanskrit: three competing versions
At a government higher secondary school in Kollam, the Sanskrit club must display a bilingual notice during Vanamahotsava. The English reads: 'The garden should be protected by all students. Flowers should not be plucked.' Three students submit Sanskrit versions. A: 'udyānaṃ sarva-chātraiḥ rakṣaṇīyam; puṣpāṇi na avacchetavyāni.' B: 'udyānasya sarva-chātrāḥ rakṣaṇīyāḥ; puṣpāṇāṃ avacchedaḥ na kāryaḥ.' C: 'udyāne sarveṣāṃ chātrāṇāṃ rakṣaṇam; puṣpāṇi na avacchindyāni.' The teacher will choose one version and correct it before printing. The club has a small printing budget, so only one correction round is possible. A Malayalam-medium student asks why the first version uses an instrumental plural, and another asks whether 'rakṣaṇīyam' agrees with 'udyāna' or with 'chātraiḥ'. The teacher wants a version that is grammatically defensible and idiomatic for a public notice.
1. Which version is the best base for the notice, and what is its main strength?
Read the worked answer
Version A is the best base. It uses neuter nominative singular 'rakṣaṇīyam', which agrees with neuter 'udyānam'; it uses instrumental plural 'sarva-chātraiḥ' for the agent; and it uses neuter plural 'avacchetavyāni', which agrees with neuter plural 'puṣpāṇi'. The passive gerundive construction is idiomatic for notices because it states obligation without naming a subject. Version B misuses the genitive and the gender/number of the gerundive; version C uses a nominal 'rakṣaṇam' and an incorrect gerundive form 'avacchindyāni'. A needs no structural correction, only a check of spelling and sandhi before printing.
2. Correct the most serious grammatical error in one of the rejected versions and explain the correction.
Read the worked answer
In B, 'udyānasya ... rakṣaṇīyāḥ' is the most serious error. The genitive 'udyānasya' cannot serve as the subject of a passive gerundive, and 'rakṣaṇīyāḥ' is masculine/feminine plural, which cannot agree with neuter 'udyāna'. The correction is 'udyānaṃ ... rakṣaṇīyam' with the agent in the instrumental: 'udyānaṃ sarva-chātraiḥ rakṣaṇīyam'. The second clause of B, 'puṣpāṇāṃ avacchedaḥ na kāryaḥ', is grammatically possible but heavy and less idiomatic; 'puṣpāṇi na avacchetavyāni' is clearer for a notice. The correction shows that agreement and case, not word order, drive the choice.
3. Explain the agreement of rakṣaṇīyam and the case of sarva-chātraiḥ to the two students.
Read the worked answer
'Rakṣaṇīyam' is a kṛtya/gerundive functioning as the predicate adjective in a passive construction. Its ending agrees with the patient-subject 'udyānam' in neuter nominative singular: the garden is what is to be protected. 'Sarva-chātraiḥ' is instrumental plural because the agent in a passive construction is expressed by the instrumental case: 'by all students'. The students should see the pair as a passive obligation sentence, not as an active sentence with a missing subject. If they wanted an active sentence, they would need a finite verb and a nominative agent, e.g. 'sarve chātrāḥ udyānaṃ rakṣantu', but that is less suited to a notice.