Abstract In Vedic Sanskrit, masculine a-stem nominals exhibit two different forms of the nom/voc.pl, a short form (ending in ‑ās) and a long form (ending in ‑āsas). In this article, we will argue that the scope of this variation is not a single nominal but the entire noun phrase. This means that whereas the short form may occur several times in a noun phrase, the long form is either absent or occurs only once. From a functional point of view, complex noun phrases containing one long form are equivalent to simple noun phrases consisting of one long form. In contrast, complex noun phrases containing only short forms are equivalent to simple noun phrases consisting of one short form. The presence or absence of the long form marks the presence or absence of a certain linguistic feature, the exact nature of which still has to be determined. We will argue that in those cases in which two long forms occur in relative proximity to each other, they either have to, or at least can be interpreted as being part of two distinct noun phrases. In order to do so, we will apply morphological, semantic, syntactic as well as stylistic and metrical criteria.

中文翻译：

---

复杂名词表达中吠陀阳性 a 词干的主格/呼格复数

摘要 在吠陀梵语中，阳性 a 词干名词有两种不同的 nom/voc.pl 形式，一种是短形式（以 ‑ās 结尾），另一种是长形式（以 ‑āsas 结尾）。在本文中，我们将论证这种变体的范围不是单个名词而是整个名词短语。这意味着尽管名词短语中的短形式可能出现多次，但长形式要么不存在，要么只出现一次。从功能的角度来看，包含一个长形式的复杂名词短语等价于由一个长形式组成的简单名词短语。相反，仅包含短形式的复杂名词短语等效于由一种短形式组成的简单名词短语。长格式的存在与否标志着某种语言特征的存在与否，其确切性质仍有待确定。我们将争辩说，在两个长形式彼此相对接近的情况下，它们要么必须，要么至少可以解释为两个不同名词短语的一部分。为此，我们将应用形态、语义、句法以及文体和度量标准。