"When, in consequence of the incompatibility of the principal meaning of a word, and yet in connection with it, another meaning is indicated through notoriety or a motive, this is 'Indication,' the superadded function of the word." Now the word "this" [_i.e._, _tat_ in the neuter, which the neuter _yat_ in the extract would have naturally led us to expect instead of the feminine _sá_] would have signified some neuter word, like "implying," which is involved as a subordinate part of the verb "is indicated." But _sá_ is used in the feminine [by attraction to agree with _lakshaṇá_], "this is indication," _i.e._, the neuter "this" is put in the feminine through its dependence on the predicate. This has been explained by Kaiyaṭa, "Of those pronouns which imply the identity of the subject and the predicate, the former takes the gender of the former, the latter of the latter."[437] Now "expert (_kuśala_) in business" is an example of Indication from notoriety; for the word _kuśala_, which is significant in its parts by being analysed etymologically as _kuśaṃ_ + _láti_, "one who gathers kuśa grass for the sacrifice," is here employed to mean "expert" through the relation of a similarity in character, as both are persons of discernment; and this does not need a motive any more than Denotation does, since each is the using a word in its recognised conventional sense in accordance with the immemorial tradition of the elders. Hence it has been said-- "Some instances of 'indication' are known by notoriety from their immediate significance, just as is the case in 'denotation' [the primary power of a word]." Therefore indication based on notoriety has no regard to any motive. Although a word, when it is employed, first establishes its principal meaning, and then by that meaning a second meaning is subsequently indicated, and so indication belongs properly to the principal meaning and not to the word; still, since it is superadded to the word which originally established the primary meaning, it is called [improperly by metonymy] a function of the word. It was with a view to this that the author of the Kávya-prakáśa used the expression, "This is 'Indication,' the superadded function of the word." But the indication based on a motive is of six kinds: 1. inclusive indication,[438] as "the lances enter" [where we really mean "men _with_ the lances"]; 2. indicative indication, as "the benches shout" [where the spectators are meant _without_ the benches]; 3. qualified[439] superimponent indication, as "the man of the Panjáb is an ox" [here the object is not swallowed up in the simile]; 4. qualified introsusceptive indication, as "that ox" [here the man is swallowed up in the simile]; 5. pure superimponent indication, as "_ghí_ is life;" 6. pure introsusceptive indication, as "verily this is life." This has been all explained in the Kávya-prakáśa [ii. 10-12]. But enough of this churning of the depths of rhetorical discussions.