Differences in the three texts in our case may be classified under loss and chaage in text. The possibility of addition is out of question, since N is fragmentary, though complete in the extant portions, MF is not complete, for all the quotations from the author'ere not traceable in it, wad it is fragmentary in many stanzas. Loss in the case of N is due to an external cause of courup- tion- complete set of folios unfortunately got detached and was lost; the transcripts at Puri and at Madras (indicated as M3. may be said to be colection their nature as they omit those stanzas which are either fraginontary or irere missing in the original frola which they wore copied. Omissions are the street tests of affinity in this case of M3 and the Puri transcript, wlich are derived from the same source. Toe omission of stanzas in M13 sesins to ba delibe- rate in the fifth canto, for nearly all those stanzas are omitted whish are frog mentary, while in other cases such omissions are cases of oversight by flie soribe, e... the eye wanders froin à particular word or portion of a word to a similar word elsewhere in the context with the result that the intervening words are omitted. This is known as omissio ex konceotelonio. In the case of poems when a seribe has finished.cne stanza his eye waaders to the closs of another stanza and hs muy begin to zito the next one omitting that which he bad to write in the actual sequence. Another possible source of omission mes he due to the overlocking of lines in the first instance but shown on the raaigin and their total disappearance in the second instance. It may also be mentioned that several copies may have boon prepared at one sine by asking several scribes to write to dictation, and the slow "writer tas liable to omit contain passages In order to keep pace with tie rapid writer, and the copy of the former was never correcteci Copies from this incorect copy put in circulation amplified the mistakes. Omissions may hs due to haplography i.e. one only of the two identical or similar syllables or sords is written. This loss of syllables decurred speci- sliy ire the salvdalankšras of VI and XVIII cautos, Another source of error is dittography is. repetition from the immediato or neighbouring texts For details ses the footnotes in the tost and the comparative statement of variants. The possibility of confusion varios according to the chaiacter of piphan bet in which a text has been copied; ; Tha minor scribal errors noticed in the footnotes in our text which have caulted in actual variants are due to the special orthographic similurities in the script. In Uriys the following letters can be confused in this contusion ta:
पृष्ठम्:कप्फिणाभ्युदयं महाकाव्यम्.pdf/२४
एतत् पृष्ठम् अपरिष्कृतम् अस्ति
