What does MN 18's "delineate a delineation" phrase mean? What is the meaning of the phrase "delineate a delineation" from MN 18?

What is its message?

Is it connecting papanca (objectification-classification or reification) with dependent origination?


  "Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is
  eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a
  delineation of contact. (Note1) When there is a delineation of contact, it
  is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When
  there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will
  delineate a delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of
  perception, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of
  thinking. When there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that
  one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions
  &amp; categories of objectification.
  
  "When there is the ear...
  
  "When there is the nose...
  
  "When there is the tongue...
  
  "When there is the body...
  
  "When there is the intellect, when there are ideas, when there is
  intellect-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a
  delineation of contact. When there is a delineation of contact, it is
  possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there
  is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will delineate a
  delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of perception,
  it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When
  there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that one will
  delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions &amp;
  categories of objectification.
  
  "Now, when there is no eye, when there are no forms, when there is no
  eye-consciousness, it is impossible that one will delineate a
  delineation of contact. When there is no delineation of contact, it is
  impossible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When
  there is no delineation of feeling, it is impossible that one will
  delineate a delineation of perception. When there is no delineation of
  perception, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of
  thinking. When there is no delineation of thinking, it is impossible
  that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the
  perceptions &amp; categories of objectification.
  
  "When there is no ear...
  
  "When there is no nose...
  
  "When there is no tongue...
  
  "When there is no body...
  
  "When there is no intellect, when there are no ideas, when there is no
  intellect-consciousness, it is impossible that one will delineate a
  delineation of contact. When there is no delineation of contact, it is
  impossible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When
  there is no delineation of feeling, it is impossible that one will
  delineate a delineation of perception. When there is no delineation of
  perception, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of
  thinking. When there is no delineation of thinking, it is impossible
  that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the
  perceptions &amp; categories of objectification.
  
  Note1 (Thanissaro commentary):
  The artificiality of this phrase — "delineate a delineation" — seems
  intentional. It underlines the artifice implicit in the process by
  which the mind, in singling out events, turns them into discrete
  things.
Ven. Bodhi's MN 18 version:


  "When there is the eye, a form, and eye-consciousness, it is possible to point out the manifestation of contact.233 When there is the manifestation of contact, it is possible to point out the manifestation of feeling. When there is the manifestation of feeling, it is possible to point out the manifestation of perception..."


and footnote:


  The Pali idiom phassapaññattiª paññ›pessati, in which the verb takes an object derived from itself, is difficult. Ñm originally rendered “that one will describe a description of contact.” “To point out a manifestation” is less literal, but it should do justice to the meaning without jeopardising intelligibility. MA says that this passage is intended to show the entire round of existence (va˛˛a) by way of the twelve sense bases; §18 shows the cessation of the round (viva˛˛a) by the negation of the twelve sense bases.


Prof. Piya Tan shares similar explanation:


  So vat‟āvuso cakkhusmi sati rpe sati cakkhu,viāe sati phassa,paatti paāpessatîti hāna. Comy says that this passage shows the entire round of existence (vaā) by way of the 12 sense-bases. The next section [§18] shows the cessation of the round (vivaa) by the negation of the 12 sense-bases. (MA 2:78). The structure paatti paāpessati (lit “he describes the description,” “he defines the definition”) is idiomatic, meaning simply “he describes; he defines.” Paraphrased, this sentence may also read “It is possible to define contact as the meeting of sense-organ, sense-object and sense-consciousness.”