[Footnote 30: In the dictionary of Boehtlingk and Roth we read _s.v._ +gnâ+, “scarce in the singular; nom. sing. seems to be +gnâs+, according to the passage Rv. IV. 9, 4, and Naigh. I. 11, in one text, while the other text gives the form +gnâ+.” Against this, it should be remarked, that it would make no difference whether the MSS. of the Naighaṇṭuka give +gnâ+ or +gnâs+. +Gnâ+ would be the nom. sing., +gnâs+ would be the form in which the word occurs most frequently in the Veda. It is easy to see that the collector of the Naighaṇṭuka allowed himself to quote words according to either principle. Devarâja, in his commentary on +gnâ+, explains it: “Gamer dhâtor dhâpṛ́vasyajyatibhyo naḥ (U. S. III. 6) iti bahulakân napratyayo bhavati ṭilopaś ca; ṭap. Gatyarthâ buddhyarthâḥ jânanti karmeti gnâḥ. Yadvâ gacchati yajñeshu; abhí yajñám gṛṇîhi no gnâvaḥ (patnîvaḥ) Rv. I. 15, 3. Chandâṃsi vai gnâ iti brâhmaṇam iti Mâdhavaḥ. Asmấ îd u gnấś cid (Rv. I. 61, 8) ity api; gâyatryâdyâ devapatnya iti sa eva. Tasmâc chandasâm gâyatryâdînâm vâgrûpatvâd gnâvyapadeśaḥ.” In his remarks on Nigh. III. 29, it is quite clear that Devarâja takes +gnâḥ+ as a nom. plur., not as a nom. sing. He says: Menâ gnâ iti stríṇâm; ubhâv api śabdau vyâkhyâtau vânnâmasu. Mânayanti hi tâḥ patiśvaśuramátulâdayaḥ, pûjyâ bhûshayitavyâś ceti smaraṇât. Gacchanty enâḥ patayo patyârthinaḥ. The passage quoted in the Nirukta III. 29, gnâs tvâkṛntann apaso ’tanvata vayitryo ’vayan, is taken from the Tâṇḍyabrâhmaṇa I. 8, 9. “O dress! the women cut thee out, the workers stretched thee out, the weavers wove thee.” Thus every support which the Nighaṇṭu or the Nirukta was supposed to give to the form +gnâḥ+ as a nom. sing. vanishes. And if it is said _s.v._ +gnâspati+, that in this compound +gnâḥ+ might be taken as a nom. sing., and that the Pada-text separates +gnâḥ-patiḥ+, it has been overlooked that the separation in Rv. II. 38, 10, is a mere misprint. See Prâtiśâkhya, 738. The compound +gnâspatiḥ+ has been correctly explained as standing for +gnâyâspatiḥ+, and the same old genitive is also found in +jâspatiḥ+ and +jâspatyam+. See also Vâjasan. Prâtiśâkhya, IV. 39. It is important to observe that the metre requires us to pronounce +gnâspati+ either as +gnăāspătĭḥ+ or as +gănāspătĭḥ+. There is, as far as I know, no passage where +gnâḥ+ in the Veda can be taken as a nom. sing., and it should be observed that +gnâḥ+ as nom. plur. is almost always disyllabic in the Rig-veda, excepting the tenth Maṇḍala; that the acc. sing. (V. 43, 6) is, however, disyllabic, but the acc. plur. monosyllabic (I. 22, 10). In V. 43, 13, we must either read +gn̆āḥ+ or +ōshădhī̆ḥ.+]