SANSKRIT BE NATIONAL LANGUAGE AND ENGLISH OFFICIAL
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Sanskrit be National Language and English Official
Like Israel where Hebrew is there for Sanskrit.
Instead of Khariboli Hindi spoken by only 15% of Indians
and no better than a regional language!
Though Rajasthani and Bhojpuri are being tried to be
included in Hindi actually they are seperate rich langauges
with seperate culture and literature!
This imposition of Hindi is one of the major causes of
seperatism and anti-Hindi agitations in different non-Hindi
states.
Sanskrit is the mother of most Indian langauges and also
show the power of Hindu nation hence only it should be
national language.
Israels have hence make Hebrew and not later day Aramaic
(like Hindi derived from the mother language) the national
langauge!
All our philosphies and literature from ancient times are
in Sanskrit which is also teh mother of most Indo-European
languages where Hindu traders and preachers went from
ancient times to reform the wild Germanic tongues of
Europe!
Khariboli Hindi is spoken by 15% Indians and even total
Hindi family including other labguages like Mewari,
Marwari, Angika, Bhojpuri, Brajabhasha, Maithili, etc form
35% of Indians.
Atmost 5% other Indians understand it. Others mostly don't
including me! Though as a Brahmin I am qualified in
Sanskrit and found it the most scientific and easiest to
learn.
So why should the majority 60% follow Hindi a cheap and
relatively new langauge than other Indian languages like
Bengali or Punjabi with 1000s of years of culture!?
Also why should Hindi speakers get an extra advantage over
the majority others and why should others learn an extra
language -- Hindi!?
Hence the only option is Sanskrit!
Who said it was never spoken by like Hebrew in Israel!?
Rather Israelis spoke Aramaic derived from Hebrew like
Hindi, Bengali, etc from Sanskrit!
Sanskrit was spoken in India's glorious period and later
from its Apobhransha several Prakrit languages e.g, Purvi,
Paschimuttari, Dakshini, etc were derieved!
It is also the mother of Malaysian and Indonesian languages
and to make India glorious once again we need to revive it
as the national language.
True classical Sanskrit of Panini is not the mother of
European and Iranian languages but Vedic Sanskrit is.
It spread from Sapta-Sindhu the homeland of Vedic Indians
to Iran and then Turkey (Hittites, Mittanis of Anatolia)
then by its neighbour Greeks and Romans spread it to whole
Europe when Roman Empire covered it!
Arya & Aryan different and later never existed ! Aryan
Invasion Theory is a figment of imagination and inferences
based on that, which was never proved satisfatorily.
Arya in ancient Sanskrit and Iranian texts means 'noble'
and DIFFERENT FROM 'ARYAN RACE' WHICH NEVER EXISTED!
Dravidians were also part of Sanskrit -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_people#Origins_of_the_word_Dravidian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_Jat_people#Indo-Aryan_origin_of_Jat_people
Oldest Model negated later by British and their agents to
subdue in -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_India_theory
Kautilya's 'Arthasashtr' says that 'Shoodras are
essentially Arya'.
Sanskrit texts say that Dravidas are fallen Kshatriyas like
Yadavas and Kirats who do not follow Vedas strictly, now
Kshatriyas cannot be a diffferent race.
Even in Manusamhita it is clear that there was no Aryan
race and even Shudras were called Arya!
Accepting Hindi automatically means extra advantage for
Hindi speakers against the majority Indians!
And Sanskrit is better than all and we need it if we are
proud Hindus.
Plebiscite on Hindi & Sanskrit for National tongue
Apart from Marathis we Bengalis are strictly against Hindi
except Bollywood and will never let it succeed here as our
Bengali language and literature is much older and richer
including the only Nobel Laureate Tagore in literature from
here!
Gujarat also take pride in Gujarati Ashmita!
And Sanskrit is the best and mother of all so why not it
which is the universal language of the Hindu nation!?
Also problem for the majority is not anything contructive
by making a minority language like Hindi National Language
for which it has no quality as majority of the nation don't
like Hindi at all & I challenge you all Hindiwallahs a
plebiscite on Sanskrit and Hindi!
Sanskrit is also the mother of ancient Tamil
Reverand G K Pope in Introduction to Tamil Text books, 1861
mentioned that the more we enter into Dravidian languages
like Tamil, Malayalam, etc the more we find affinity with
Sanskrit and that their close relation is of most remote
origin.
Glover and Bish Caldwell who discovered the individual
characteristics of Dravidian langauges also said that both
Sanskrit and Tamil has numerous exciting resemblances from
the oldest times, quoted in the same book mentioned above.
J C Nesfield in his Brief Review of the Caste System said
that there is no concrete physical or scientific evidences
to prove that Dravidians are totally different from other
Indian races.
In Press Note Released by the Mythic Society, Bangalore at
Seminar on the Aryan Problem, 1991 Dr. R Nagaswamy of
Chennai declared that in Srilanka, Karnataka, Orissa and
Andhra the Tamil speakers have been historically identified
as Dravids or Dramids and that Dravida did not mean any
seperate race but only the Tamil tongue though Karnataka
and Andhra are so called other Dravidian states!
India & Kashmir particularly is Bible's Paradise ! After
the Great Flood which hit civilized Asia in ancient times
mentioned in Bible and even Hindu texts as Mahaplabon
(Great Innudation) few humans survived and mostly in Indian
Kashmir!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_India_theory
Sage Kashyap who must have been there is credited to drain
Kashmir and elsewhere after the flood and hence from his
name Kashyap Marg or Kashmir is derieved. Similiarly
Kashyap Sagar or Caspian Sea named after him is there in
Central Asia not too far from Kashmir. He might have ruled
this area after the flood.
Beyond this to the north is homeland of Turko-Mongol people
of ancient times and thus Kurgan culture cannot be homeland
of so called Aryan race. Aryan languages and people end
with Afghanistan and Tajikistan as the northern most
boundary in Central Asia. (V Gordon Childe -- Th Aryans,
London, 1926 & Journal of the Indo-European Studies -- The
Kurgan culture and its substratum by Jan Machinik)
Later they spread through Iran and Turkey to Europe
carrying with them their language and hence most Europe is
today Indo-European speakers whose language has been
derievd from ancient Vedic Sanskrit.
Hence Sanskrit is also the mother of all major world
languages today.
It spread its influence on Chinese, Japanese, Korean also
later through Buddhism and hence Chan/Zen religionists of
these nations derieve their name from Sanskrit Dhyan -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen
In 1773 Lord Hastings became the Viceroy of India and under
his patronage study of Sanskrit started and he appointed
Charles Wilkins who produced the first English Translation
of Bhagvad Gita in 1785.
William Jones in Asiatic Researches, 02/02/1786 remarked
that Sanskrit is older than Greek and Latin and much
diverse and perfect than them and that their source is one.
Also he mentioned that the Vedic dieties was worshipped in
vogue in Greece and Italy in similiar or altered ways. That
the mythologies and epics also resemblame each other.
30 years after that Indologist France Bopp proved through
his research that Sanskrit is the origin of all European
Languages and that the source is Kashmir. That Kashmiri
Pandits are the purest of anything called Arya. This was
published by this German Scholar and Grammarian in
Adelung's Theory -- Histoirie do I'antisem, VOl III, pg --
325.
Friedrich Schlegel wrote that a group of Indian Brahmins
were the colonizers of Egypt and Israel (Judea) in his
Hitorical Ideas, 1808. The migration started due to
climatic changes in Kashmir and Punjab (sapta-sindhu bhumi)
and also for reaching the mythical Uttar Kuru.
In 1810 Goress proved that Semitic race came from Eastern
Lands and that Abraham was from centre of human evolution,
i.e Kashmir. He went to Palestine from there. This is the
reason some claim that Jesus after resurrection came to
Kashmir tracing this path and his grave is still there!
Like wise between 1810-12 after intense research Cruezer
proved that Brahminical Hinduism is the origion of Judaism.
Abraham/Brahma & Sar/Saraswati were Brahmins from Kashmir.
In true Arya society there is no casteism hence Kashmiri
Pandits are all Brahmins and have no other caste! Barbaric
Hoardes of Turko-Mongols (indigenous to Central Asia and
not Aryans) came and ransacked Kashmir and it was only the
Brahmins who tried their best then to save the light of
true knowledge. (Rene Gerard -- L' Orient et la pensee
romantique allemande, pg -- 132)
Sanskrit is the pride of India & can be National
Speaking it will not be hard if from schools this is taught
as elders are not going to learn Hindi or Sanskrit anyway!
Furthermore if there will be any afternoon coaching classes
for Spoken Sanskrit (Like Spoken English now) in the
eventuality of it being national language many like me will
go to learn it but never for Hindi!
Hindi is the langauge of Hindi speakers like Bengali for
Bengalis like me but Sanskrit is for all!
India could find a place of pride in the comity of nations
only though National Language Sanskrit which automatically
fills an Indian with pride and honour and respect from
others!
Voltaire in Dictionnarie philosophique -- articles 'Adom' &
'Genes' proved categorically that Adam got his everything
including name from India.
Jean Bailey in Encyclopedia of Deodarot wrote that Indian
Astronomy was much older than Egypt. John Holwell and
Alexandar Dow in 1769 and later French naturalist Pierre de
Sonnerat told that all major Western mythologies had deep
relations with India and were from here. They also proved
that Moses was a Brahmin who denounced Sanatan Dharm and
left and that Prophet Mohammad was a fraud! Also that the
origion of human race is India and not Africa.
Cf. Michelet in A choice of Texts by L. Fevr, Paris, 1946
and Paramesh Choudhury in his The Aryan Hoax, Kolkata, 1995
said that "The mountainoues part in the Auvergene (France)
corresponds to the central of the Himalayas. The
Merovogians are Indo-Persians or Trojans. To clarify these
relationships, migrations and filiations, atleast with
somewhat more care and research than has been devoted to
themso far is very necessary".
Michelet proved that through Persia and Turkey (Anatolian
Hindu Mittani) Indians settled in Europe.
Linguist Esop in 1837 proved that Indians were the origins
of Europeans and Lerux also approved it saying we cannot
cling to only the Abrahamic religions and keep aside the
Great Indian Philosophy the basis of all good and pure
knowledge and spirituality on Earth!
Lastly I must say that it is the Hindiwallahs (Speakers and
propagandits for its national language status) for whom
Hindu Indian unity is not being possible.
These chauvinists forget that it is a mere minority
regional language like many others and get bashed all over
in non-Hindi states which are majority for trying to impose
it upon all others.
Accept Sanskrit and whole India will be proud of you!
End of forwarded message from Suraj Prasad
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Dušan Vukotić
Jai Maharaj)
> All our philosphies and literature from ancient times are
> in Sanskrit which is also teh mother of most Indo-European
> languages where Hindu traders and preachers went from
> ancient times to reform the wild Germanic tongues of
> Europe!
These people are really crazy!
Sanskrit is a "compiled" language, mostly "obtained" from the European
conquerers of India. Everyone who had ever seriously studied the
morphology and internal semantic structure of Sanskrit words would
have easilly noticed it.
DV
Dušan Vukotić
> Arya in ancient Sanskrit and Iranian texts means 'noble'
> and DIFFERENT FROM 'ARYAN RACE' WHICH NEVER EXISTED!
Arya is the eagle-shaped sun god Horus.
It is the reason why that bird eagle is so widely represented in the
heraldry of the Europen people. Of course, "noble" is a tertiary
meaning
1) Horus (Slavic Hors)
2) eagle (Serb. orao, from h/orao; Czech orel; Russ. орел; Skt.
garuda)
3) noble (Ger. Her, Skt. raja. Lat. rex)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Byzantine_eagle.JPG
DV
karmalube
news:a3d109f1-c3ad-4ede...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
DV
I'm afraid you have your historical perspective some what backwards.
Peter T. Daniels
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> Forwarded message from Suraj Prasad
>
> Sanskrit be National Language and English Official
>
> Like Israel where Hebrew is there for Sanskrit.
With the slight difference that (one of) the official language(s) of
Israel is not Biblical Hebrew, but the modern language that has been
developed from it, both naturally over 2000 years and by reinvention
in the late 19th century.
The parallel would be if you made Hindi or Bangla or Oriya the
National Language of India.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
> "Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Yes, Du%an is as crazy as the OP, but the "backwards" of this
proposition is no more true than the "forwards". Sanskrit is not
derived from European languages. Nor are European languages derived
from Sanskrit. They are "sprung from some common source", as Sir
William Jones observed more than 200 years ago. People who want to
learn more about what has been discovered since that time could hang
around sci.lang. Those who just want to exercise their nationalistic
prejudices may find congenial company on the other groups.
Ross Clark
tripur...@yahoo.com
>
> Sanskrit be National Language and English Official
>
I wish the secular politicians who are ready to appease Anti-
Hindus,Christians and Muslims listen to this excellent suggestion
Thanks again
ranjit_...@yahoo.com
In order for that to be feasible, there would have to be people who
can express themselves in Sanskrit. Those who make such suggestions
don't seem to be able to write anything substantial in Sanskrit. Where
can we find the Indian Constitution translated to Sanskrit? For a
start, try to find someone who can translate even one paragraph (the
following one) to Sanskrit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_Principles_of_India
The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines to the central
and state governments of India, to be kept in mind while framing laws
and policies. These provisions, contained in Part IV of the
Constitution of India, are not enforceable by any court, but the
principles laid down therein are considered fundamental in the
governance of the country, making it the duty of the State[1] to apply
these principles in making laws to establish a just society in the
country. The principles have been inspired by the Directive Principles
given in the Constitution of Ireland and also by the principles of
Gandhism; and relate to social justice, economic welfare, foreign
policy, and legal and administrative matters.
tripur...@yahoo.com
> In order for that to be feasible, there would have to be people who
> can express themselves in Sanskrit. Those who make such suggestions
> don't seem to be able to write anything substantial in Sanskrit. Where
> can we find the Indian Constitution translated to Sanskrit?
Constitution can be translated even into Vietnamese! Translating into
Sanskrit is no problem. I know many scholars but wont bother to ask
them!
Peter T. Daniels
How about anything at all written in the 21st century in Classical
Sanskrit? Without errors?
cyberhinwa
http://postilla.mch.mii.lt/Kalba/baltai.en.htm#SANSKRIT
SANSKRIT AND LITHUANIAN
One of the most important stimuli for the emergence of historical-
comparative linguistics was the acquaintance of Europeans with
Sanskrit, the old language of India. Europeans believed that a
Sanskrit scholar could understand and be understood by a Lithuanian
farmer.
In 1786, Wiliam Jones (1746-1794), an English Justice of the Supreme
Court of Judicature in Calcutta, read a paper before the Asiatic
Society, founded by himself, in which he proclaimed that Sanskrit,
this "wonderfully structured old language of India" is derived from
the same source as Greek, Latin, and perhaps even Gothic and Celtic.
This was a very bold idea, which produced a veritable revolution in
linguistics.
European scholars turned their attention to Sanskrit, and started with
old European languages. They created precise methodology which enabled
them to understand phonetic changes and distinguish original words
from loans. They taught themselves through the comparison of related
words in different languages to reconstruct the extinct forms, which
were very often similar or even identical with Sanskrit forms.
Linguists believed that comparative linguistics without Sanskrit is
like astronomy without mathematics.
It is not difficult therefore to imagine the surprise of the scholarly
world when that learned that even in their time somewhere on the
Nemunas River lived a people who spoke a language as archaic in many
of its forms as Sanskrit itself. Although it was not exactly true that
a professor of Sanskrit could talk to Lithuanian farmers in their
language, coincidences between these two languages were truly amazing,
for example:
Sanskrit sunus son - Lith. sunus;
Sanskrit viras man - Lith. vyras;
Sanskrit avis sheep - Lith. avis;
Sanskrit dhumas smoke - Lith. dumas;
Sanskrit padas sole - Lith. padas.
We can be safe in asserting that these Lihuanian words have not
changes their forms for the last five thousand years.
The most prominent Eurpean linguists visited to Lithuania in order to
learn this archaic language from the lips of Lithuanians themselves,
which helped them to investigate the history of other Indo-European
languages.
Today, there is no doubt that Lithuanian has retained many ancient
Indo-European forms. It is hard to say whether it was due to the
character of the Lithuanians or of geographic position that their
language has changed so little in the course of several thousand
years. Scholars often make references to the Lithuanian language when
conducting research on the history of other languages.
No wonder that Lithuanian is taught and studied not only in this
country or Latvia. There are specialists of Lithuanian in Germany,
Poland, Russia, Ukraine, the Czech Republic, Norway, Sweden, Denmark,
the Netherlands, Finland, Italy, Switzerland, France, the USA and some
other countries. The capital city of Lithuania - Vilnius - has become
a world centre for Baltic studies.
The Lithuanian community in the United States of America founded the
Department of the Lithuanian Language at Illinois State University in
Chicago in 1984 in order to better know the culture and language of
their parents and grandparents.
Because of its complex morphology and shifting stress, Lithuanian is
not an easy language for foreigners to study. But increasingly more
people want to learn it. Every summer, a group of people from abroad
take a Lithuanian course at Vilnius University.
From the "Lithuania in the World", 1996 No1.
MORE AT :
LITHUANIAN QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
links at :
benl...@ihug.co.nz
> SANSKRIT IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES :
>
Craoi...@gmail.com
> SANSKRIT IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES :
No, it isn't. Our esteemed friend Mr Daniels asked a question: does
anyone write about 21st century matters in Classical Sanskrit, without
errors? We would like to have an answer. None seems to be forthcoming.
Craoi...@gmail.com
Of course it can be translated into Vietnamese, because Vietnamese is
a vigorous modern language, spoken by a vigorous modern people.
Sanskrit is not a vigorous modern language. It is a classical
language, probably with no modern terminology.
Dušan Vukotić
> Sanskrit sunus son - Lith. sunus;
> Sanskrit viras man - Lith. vyras;
> Sanskrit avis sheep - Lith. avis;
> Sanskrit dhumas smoke - Lith. dumas;
> Sanskrit padas sole - Lith. padas
Nonsense!
Sanskrit sole (paadatala) is related to floor (bhuutala) as Serbian
peta (heel; cf. Lith. peda, Latv. pēda sole, heel, Lat. pes pedis;
Eng. foot) is related to pod (floor); it is the reason why in Serbian
shoemaker is called po(d)stolar (Serb, po(d)stolje, Eng. pedestal).
AFAIK, you cannot make the same comparison between Lithuanian padas
(sole) and floor (aukštas, dugnas, grindys, grįsti, paklotė, vieta);
of course, there is the Lithuanian word dugnas that means both sole
and floor, but that word is related to Serbian dno (bottom; from
dolina, udubljenje cavity; cf. Serb. dlan palm (of the hand)).
The Sanskrit word for "son" is sūnuḥ (similar to Serbian sinak, sin
son). Naturally, this word is related to the sun (Serbian sunce,
sunac), As you can see, Lithuanian "sun" is saulė (Lat, sole, Russ.
solnce) and it is impossible to draw a direct line from the sun to
"sunus" (son). A son in the house always meant "power" (Serb. snaga
power; hence other Serb. words as snaha /daughter in law/, zaneti /get
pregnant/, snošaj /copulation/), and the ancient man realized that all
the earthly power is coming from the sun.
Where did you find that Sanskrit vīryaṃ means "man"? This word might
be related to Latin virilitas (manhood; manfulness) and Serbian vrlina
(virtue; cf. Lat. 'pro virili parte' to the best of one's ability).
Sanskrit dhūma (smoke) is equal to Serbian dim (smoke), taman (dark),
Russ. tuman (fog, mist); Cz. dýmat, dým (smoke). Serbo-Slavic dim is a
reduced form of the word dimljenje (smoking), All the above words are
derived from the same Gon-Bel-Gon basis, from which are derived other
IE words as Latin nebula, Serbo-Slavic nebo (sky) and oblak (cloud);
cf. Lithuanian debesis (cloud) and Serbian nebesa (sky, clouds).
The name of sheep is similar among the many of IE languages: Skt.
aviḥ, Lat, ovis, Serb. ovca, Gr. οιεος (of sheep). What makes you
believe that Lithuanian avis (avinas) must be something special?
DV
Nikolaj
Do you insist on 21st century, or it can be also 20th century?
Craoi...@gmail.com
>
> <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 6:31 am, tripurant...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In order for that to be feasible, there would have to be people who
> > can express themselves in Sanskrit. Those who make such suggestions
> > don't seem to be able to write anything substantial in Sanskrit. Where
> > can we find the Indian Constitution translated to Sanskrit?
>
> Sanskrit is no problem.
BTW: you wrote "_even_ into Vietnamese". This suggests that you regard
it as some kind of surprise that it can be translated into Vietnamese.
It is not: Vietnamese is a modern language, which has all the modern
terms. Are you somehow bigoted or prejudiced against the Vietnamese
and their language?
Peter T. Daniels
It's a little too late to write Classical Sanskrit in the 20th century.
Peter T. Daniels
> The Lithuanian community in the United States of America founded the
> Department of the Lithuanian Language at Illinois State University in
> Chicago in 1984 in order to better know the culture and language of
> their parents and grandparents.
Illinois State University is not in Chicago.
The Deep
Don't hold your breath on getting a translation (into Sanskrit) from
this guy - he doesn't know any Sanskrit, I assure you.
And yes, this blowhard is a garden variety Tamil chauvinist who knows
not, and values little, any other human's achievements. In fact, he
has complete contempt for anything that did not originate from his
delusional mind. I'd say arguing with this idiot is a complete waste
of time. I do hope that the idiot perceives the word "idiot" as abuse,
and so will stop posting any further.
Now, if only we stop dignifying the astrologer's cut-and-paste jobbies
by replying to them, will we get respite from tiresome chauvinist
nonsense.
Dinesh
gitarthi
Why do not you a write a PhD thesis on it giving all the authentic
references.
tripur...@yahoo.com
> On Apr 7, 4:12 am, Craoibhi...@gmail.com wrote:
> Don't hold your breath on getting a translation (into Sanskrit) from
> this guy - he doesn't know any Sanskrit, I assure you.
>
> And yes, this blowhard is a garden variety Tamil chauvinist who knows
> not, and values little, any other human's achievements.
Thank you for revealing your attitude. What we want is facts, so we
can discuss. You do not establish your case by abuse. Just a lesson in
manners, proper debate.
Never abuse. No need. Have you seen me do that *once*? Just take my
example and follow
harmony
globe, until a few decades back. now more hindus than the whole europe put
together know english. this happeneed, actually, after the english left the
shores of india thanks mostly to hitler.
what made that happen? this shows hindus take to education like fish takes
to water. so, it is only a matter of time before the hindus will come full
circle and restart the most civilizing and divine language of sanskrit. ahum
brahmasmi!
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20080405MyH0U8m6MPZVBJ9ZQzZ8Ot1@ZSu2q...
Peter T. Daniels
> the hindus did not know a word of english, a language half way around the
> globe, until a few decades back. now more hindus than the whole europe put
> together know english. this happeneed, actually, after the english left the
> shores of india thanks mostly to hitler.
Oh, this is gonna be good. How did Hitler influence Gandhi?
tripur...@yahoo.com
Harmony usually writes in cryptic language. Takes some knowledge and
background to understand him. May be difficult for you. He means
Hitler weakened the Brits sufficiently and they were unable to
continue their barbarism in India. So it is good
Craoi...@gmail.com
You said "Constitution can be translated _even_ into Vietnamese". This
suggests that you see it as somehow surprising that it can be
translated into Vietnamese. However, Vietnamese is the living language
of a modern people. Sanskrit is a classical language, which probably
does not have terminology and words for modern concepts such as
democracy, computer or progressive taxation. The natural conclusion
is, that it is more, not less, difficult to translate a modern text
into Sanskrit than into Vietnamese. To suggest that Vietnamese is
somehow a less modern, less civilized, or less developed language than
Sanskrit, smacks of anti-Vietnamese bigotry.
Craoi...@gmail.com
> On Apr 7, 2:48 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 7, 2:14 pm, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > the hindus did not know a word of english, a language half way around the
> > > globe, until a few decades back. now more hindus than the whole europe put
> > > together know english. this happeneed, actually, after the english left the
> > > shores of india thanks mostly to hitler.
>
> > Oh, this is gonna be good. How did Hitler influence Gandhi?
>
> Harmony usually writes in cryptic language. Takes some knowledge and
> background to understand him. May be difficult for you.
Is that offensive condescension something that comes to you naturally,
or do you do it on purpose?
harmony
<Craoi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:aa41f2cb-4ae6-4b0f...@n14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
tripurantak ji is absolutely right. there would be no independnce and fredom
for hindus if hitler had not undone the brits.
it is hard be humble when you are as good as tripurantak ji. still, he is,
to his credit, a very humble man - and truthful..
tripur...@yahoo.com
To infer that what I wrote meant bigotry towards the Vietnamese
language is so far fetched, I think it is better we do not discuss any
more. We will never think alike, in my view. Better to abandon
discussing with you. Good bye
Peter T. Daniels
> <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
So in harmony's world, if Gandhi had never lived, or if he had simply
become a prosperous lawyer in the Union of South Africa, what would be
the status of India today?
Paul J Kriha
news:e7368fb2-3aad-4515...@d1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 7, 6:10 pm, cyberhinwa <CYBERHIN...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > SANSKRIT IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES :
> >
> No it's not. Can't you read? Lithuanian is!
A stranger sitting in the shadows of the back row screams apodictically:
Yes, but the GRANDMOTHER of all languages is Serbian!
pjk
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> posted:
> On Apr 7, 3:47=A0pm, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:aa41f2cb-4ae6-4b0f...@n14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 7 huhti, 21:56, tripurant...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >> On Apr 7, 2:48 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> > >> > On Apr 7, 2:14 pm, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> nd
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > globe, until a few decades back. now more hindus than the whole
> > >> > > europe put
> > >> > > together know english. this happeneed, actually, after the english
> > >> > > left the
> > >> > > shores of india thanks mostly to hitler.
> >
> > >> > Oh, this is gonna be good. How did Hitler influence Gandhi?
> >
> > >> Harmony usually writes in cryptic language. Takes some knowledge and
> > >> background to understand him. May be difficult for you.
> >
> > > Is that offensive condescension something that comes to you naturally,
> > > or do you do it on purpose?
> >
> om
> > for hindus if hitler had not undone the brits.
>
> > to his credit, a very humble man - and truthful..-
>
> So in harmony's world, if Gandhi had never lived, or if he had simply
> become a prosperous lawyer in the Union of South Africa, what would be
> the status of India today?
I don't know what harmony ji's response will be to
the above, but being from that era I can assure everyone
that another with the capabilities of Mahatma Gandhi would
have come to the forefront.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
of Sanskrit around the world.
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
In article <47fa64a2$0$4074$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
> the hindus did not know a word of english, a language half way around the
> globe, until a few decades back. now more hindus than the whole europe put
> together know english. this happeneed, actually, after the english left the
> shores of india thanks mostly to hitler.
>
> what made that happen? this shows hindus take to education like fish takes
> to water. so, it is only a matter of time before the hindus will come full
> circle and restart the most civilizing and divine language of sanskrit. ahum
> brahmasmi!
> http://www.mantra.com/jyotish (Dr. Jai Maharaj) posted:
tripur...@yahoo.com
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> In article <0974766e-4eb9-465c-99da-03c98aa73...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> posted:
>
> I don't know what harmony ji's response will be to
> the above, but being from that era I can assure everyone
> that another with the capabilities of Mahatma Gandhi would
> have come to the forefront.
I am positive too. If Gandhiji had not been there there were many
others such as Acharya Vinobha Bhave, Sardar Patel, Pundit Nehru were
already there, not to mention numerous others!
Indian Independence was inevitable. Gandhiji gave it a different
dimension!
Now we have to be truly independent and recover our culture from
foreign influence, as they still *colonise our mind*!
The Deep
What you really want is something that will validate your bigotry,
effing moron! Smarmy SOB, you want a debate? There is nothing that one
says here that will penetrate the thick cranium of yours, unless it is
in line with your worldview. You call that a debate? A debate requires
open minds. Your closed mind, selective parsing, and inability to
comprehend even the simplest English will never get us anywhere.
How can I establish my case when I am quite certain that you don't
know any Sanskrit, and your knowledge of Tamil literature does not
extend beyond the prose/poetry you studied in your high school text
books? Bloody kook, go to a good library and hit the books harder, you
might be able to actually learn something.
Oooooh, the latter day Miss Manners wants me to follow her (his?)
example! Self-righteous SOB, you've got to be kidding! I guess your
pea brain does not quite see that your sweeping statements cause much
more damage than personal insults. So, bugger off!
Dinesh
The Deep
It comes naturally to this moron, trust me.
Dinesh
Nikolaj
> ahum brahmasmi!
This is not correct Sanskrit!
Nikolaj
FWIW, 'computer' seems to be 'gaṇaka'. There exists a computer program
for aṣṭādhyāyī called 'gaṇakāṣṭādhyāyī' or, let's say, 'aṣṭādhyāyī for
computers'.
I wouldn't be surprised it 'democracy' and 'constitution' also exist. If
not, I guess they could be easily constructed.
I found once this basic grammar in pictures:
http://www.vedamu.org/Sankrit/LearnSanskrit/sankritinpictures.asp
Pages 3 and 6 show some words for modern devices, such as telephone
(dūravāṇī), TV (dūradarśana), sewing machine (sīvanayantra)...
Nikolaj
Well, Classical Sanskrit was not a mothertongue, but a learned language,
in the past just as today. So nothing really changed from those days.
Cardona's bibliography is full of various modern texts in Sanskrit.
Isn't that Classical Sanskrit? It most certainly isn't Vedic Sanskrit. I
can't say a lot about errors though...
Nikolaj
This should be added:
"...Cardona's bibliography on the research of the history and literature
in Indian grammatical tradition."
Craoi...@gmail.com
>
> Now we have to be truly independent and recover our culture from
> foreign influence, as they still *colonise our mind*!
You are welcome to give us back all the Western technology that is
colonising your mind, and move back into your traditional Indian huts,
where you can learn as much Sanskrit as you want. You could start that
by leaving this newsgroup and taking all your fellow countrymen with
you.
Peter T. Daniels
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> Not only Hindus but many others have taken up the study, teaching and prachaar
> of Sanskrit around the world.
And that really galls you, doesn't it.
Craoi...@gmail.com
How come I'm not surprised?
tripur...@yahoo.com
Kindly explain why it is not correct. He wrote in Roman letters. His
scheme of transliteration may be different from yours. Any way, please
explain how you are so definite he is wrong. Thanks. Looking forward
to your comments with eagerness
Joachim Pense
Nikolaj
Yes 'ahum' is problematic and he should have marked the long 'a' somehow
in 'brahmasmi'. Simply saying that the short and long vowels are
transliterated with the same letter 'a' isn't an option regardless of
the script.
tripur...@yahoo.com
> tripurant...@yahoo.com pravi:
> > Kindly explain why it is not correct. He wrote in Roman letters. His
> > scheme of transliteration may be different from yours. Any way, please
> > explain how you are so definite he is wrong. Thanks. Looking forward
> > to your comments with eagerness
>
> Yes 'ahum' is problematic and he should have marked the long 'a' somehow
> in 'brahmasmi'. Simply saying that the short and long vowels are
> transliterated with the same letter 'a' isn't an option regardless of
> the script.
Then how can the word "apart" be okay in English! Same "a" with short
and long!
I think he could have he did not understand. But not it is not correct
sanskrit. Harmony did not write in devanagari!
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
tripur...@yahoo.com posted:
harmony ji wrote the word correctly because that is how
it is pronounced -- with the u in ahum as the u in the Munglish
word mum, and the a as the first a in America.
I learned Sanskrit, Hindi and Bharatiya-British English simultaneously
as a child growing up in Uttar Pradesh.
harmony
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20080407Z7g9jq97wa0p9b2ZGtcn6pt@Di1An...
mahatma gandhi contributed to india immensely, but in a different way which
i will speak about later if needed.
hitler provided the most visible cause-n-effect relationship to the freedom
of the hindus.
peter needs to do his homework and assess hitler's role leading upto the
events of 1947 and answer whether the hindus would have attained their
freedom in 1947 if it weren't for hitler.
would the so-called 3rd world have attained their freedom if hitler, to use
peter's language in peter's world, had been a successful architect designing
shelters?
harmony
jai maharaj ji, this is the level of "sanskrit teaching" that takes place in
most american universities where missionaries teach with an ulterior intent:
artificial discussion for an artificial problems. devabhasha must be learned
using devanangari.
Joachim Pense
>
> Joachim
> nAstikAsmi
Wrong. Second attempt:
nAstiko 'smi
Joachim
Tony Levin
> harmony ji wrote the word correctly because that is how
> it is pronounced -- with the u in ahum as the u in the Munglish
> word mum, and the a as the first a in America.
You and "harmony" are one the same idiot, Jay.
> I learned Sanskrit, Hindi and Bharatiya-British English simultaneously
> as a child growing up in Uttar Pradesh.
Liar.
YOU were born in Indiana, and fled to Hawaii, where you run a push
cart selling badly cooked hot dogs to tourists.
You were NEVER in any other country then the USA.
Nikolaj
> devabhasha must be learned
> using devanangari.
I agree with this part, devanāgarī should be learned as well while
studying Sanskrit. You could have written that phrase devanāgarī script.
Nowadays that isn't a problem anymore:
अहम्ब्रह्मास्मि ।
Nikolaj
>> Yes 'ahum' is problematic and he should have marked the long 'a' somehow
>> in 'brahmasmi'. Simply saying that the short and long vowels are
>> transliterated with the same letter 'a' isn't an option regardless of
>> the script.
>
> Then how can the word "apart" be okay in English! Same "a" with short
> and long!
Yes, well, English is not Sanskrit. Sanskrit, written in Devanāgarī
script has different characters for a and ā and that should be preserved
in transliteration.
> I think he could have he did not understand. But not it is not correct
> sanskrit. Harmony did not write in devanagari!
If he doesn't like one of the existing transliteration schemes for
romanisation he could have invented his own for all I care, as long as
it is consistent. One can not write one 'अ' as 'a' and another 'अ' as
'u'. By writing 'अहम् aham' as 'ahum', he really distorts the original
sequence of characters of devanāgarī.
tripur...@yahoo.com
> 'u'. By writing 'अहम् aham' as 'ahum', he really distorts the original
> sequence of characters of devanāgarī.
Ahum phonetically is the same as aham
Craoi...@gmail.com
> On Apr 7, 3:19 pm, Craoibhi...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On 7 huhti, 19:56, tripurant...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> To suggest that Vietnamese is
>
> > somehow a less modern, less civilized, or less developed language than
> > Sanskrit, smacks of anti-Vietnamese bigotry.
>
> language is so far fetched, I think it is better we do not discuss any
> more. We will never think alike, in my view. Better to abandon
> discussing with you. Good bye
So you are leaving this newsgroup? Fine. Good bye, and Jesus bless you.
António Marques
> On Apr 8, 12:51 pm, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor...@bla.si> wrote:
>> tripurant...@yahoo.com pravi:
>
>>> Kindly explain why it is not correct. He wrote in Roman letters. His
>>> scheme of transliteration may be different from yours. Any way, please
>>> explain how you are so definite he is wrong. Thanks. Looking forward
>>> to your comments with eagerness
>> Yes 'ahum' is problematic and he should have marked the long 'a' somehow
>> in 'brahmasmi'. Simply saying that the short and long vowels are
>> transliterated with the same letter 'a' isn't an option regardless of
>> the script.
>
> Then how can the word "apart" be okay in English! Same "a" with short
> and long!
In sanskrit, /a/ and /a:/ are different phonemes and sanskrit writing
makes a point of marking such differences.
> I think he could have he did not understand. But not it is not correct
> sanskrit. Harmony did not write in devanagari!
Iirc, it was only with the spread of the printing press brought by the
british that sanskrit began to be consistently written in devanagari,
the local scripts being used before that.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
ranjit_...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote ...
> > On Apr 7, 6:10 pm, cyberhinwa <CYBERHIN...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > SANSKRIT IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES :
>
> > No it's not. Can't you read? Lithuanian is!
>
> A stranger sitting in the shadows of the back row screams apodictically:
> Yes, but the GRANDMOTHER of all languages is Serbian!
There was no Serbia 2000 years back when classical Latin was spoken,
so where was this grandmother of classical Latin spoken?
ranjit_...@yahoo.com
> Our esteemed friend Mr Daniels asked a question: does
> anyone write about 21st century matters in Classical Sanskrit,
Yes:
http://girvanavani.googlepages.com/newsheadlines
http://sanskritdocuments.org/sanskritnews.html
> without errors?
Dunno.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
>
> http://www.mantra.com/jyotish (Dr. Jai Maharaj) posted:
Yes indeed. The Roman script can't even depict all the sounds of Munglish
with correctness and uniformity.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Nikolaj <nikolaj...@bla.si> posted:
USENET was designed with lower-ASCII characters in mind, not the
upper-ASCII ones that render as gibberish.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
tripur...@yahoo.com posted:
> On Apr 8, 3:11 pm, Nikolaj <nikolaj.kor...@bla.si> wrote:
> > tripurant...@yahoo.com pravi:
> One can not write one '=E0=A4=85' as 'a' and another '=E0=A4=85' as
> > 'u'. By writing '=E0=A4=85=E0=A4=B9=E0=A4=AE=E0=A5=8D aham' as 'ahum', he =
> really distorts the original
> > sequence of characters of devan=C4=81gar=C4=AB.
> Ahum phonetically is the same as aham
True, except to those who would mistakenly use
the second a in "aham" as the a, say, in "bay",
or in "cat", etc.
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>
> news:e7368fb2-3aad-4515...@d1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 7, 6:10 pm, cyberhinwa <CYBERHIN...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > SANSKRIT IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES :
>
> > No it's not. Can't you read? Lithuanian is!
>
> A stranger sitting in the shadows of the back row screams apodictically:
> Yes, but the GRANDMOTHER of all languages is Serbian!
>
How many times I have to repeat that there is neither "grandmother"
nor "older" languages among IE. Of course, there are
"compiled" ("unnaturally" developed) languages as Sanskrit or Albanian
(English in some degree), where the almost complete native vocabulary
was replaced with loanwords.
Kriha, do not try to be smart - you are stupid by nature and you are
only making yourself more stupid when you try to hide your moronity.
DV
Nikolaj
No, it's not. ... I wanted to write more why not (Sanskrit being a
language where every phonetic change is recorded in the script), but
later I realised why he wrote 'ahum'. I think he is really using the
English phonetic value of 'hum' (see
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hum). But does he realise that
the character 'u' in English has many (5, 10?) different phonetic
values. Try to listen to the sound in the word 'human'
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human).
That is the way English is, phonetcally it is a mess. How would you
write the long u (ऊ), as 'oo'? But even 'oo' has different phonetic
values in different words (fool, door). Using the English phonetic
values in writing Sanskrit is the worst possible option and it distorts
devanāgarī.
In 'अहम्' there are four letters: 'अ, ह्, अ, म्'. The first and the third
are the same, and it should be so regardless of the script. That is why
scholars and enthusiasts later invented different transliterations
(IAST, HK, ...) which don't rely on English language for phonetic value
of Sanskrit charaters.
Dušan Vukotić
The Grandmother of Latin died long before than its mother was born!
DV
M. Ranjit Mathews
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> In article <47fbbb53$0$4041$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> >http://www.mantra.com/jyotish(Dr. Jai Maharaj) posted:
> > > I learned Sanskrit, Hindi and Bharatiya-British English simultaneously
> > > as a child growing up in Uttar Pradesh.
How would you say that in Sanskrit?
> > devabhasha must be learned
> > using devanangari.
> Yes indeed.
The Indian Journal of the History of Science published by the Indian
Academy of Sciences uses only a Latin script for Sanskrit. Why must a
Japanese scientist who publishes in it learn to write yaSTi in
Devanagari rather than a Latin script? (I remember reading an article
by a Japanese scientist who quoted various terms, including yaSTi,
from a Sanskrit source).
> The Roman script can't even depict all the sounds of Munglish
> with correctness and uniformity.
It can. Look up the Arpabet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpabet
Paul J Kriha
news:e83707f6-cbfb-4819...@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
You cannot correctly transliterate text written in language in which
the vowel length is phonemic without somehow representing
the difference between short and long vowels.
pjk
For the list of languages with phonemic vowel length see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_length
Paul J Kriha
news:428bdea8-f704-412e...@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Tell that to the bedraggled stranger shouting from the shadows.
pjk
P.S. You didn't think my paradoxical statement was meant to be
serious, did you? S being grandmother of all while L is a mother of
them all too?
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Yes I saw it, you fucking dunderhead (look at my answer to Ranjit
above), but why didn't you make fun of your Czech by saying it was the
"grandmother of all the languages"?
DV
Paul J Kriha
news:ae84b044-62e6-4ce8...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Coprographia is compulsive, repetitive, and almost ritualistic in
manner like coprolalia and copropraxia. It is also repetitious,
associated with an overwhelming URGE, can be suppressed
for a time, and prone to waxing and waning like tics.
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> "Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
You are a coprophagous idiot Kriha!
It is not the first time you have treated the Serbs and Serbian
language with indignity and disrespect.
DV
Paul J Kriha
>>
>> >> Tell that to the bedraggled stranger shouting from the shadows.
>> >> pjk
>>
>> >> P.S. You didn't think my paradoxical statement was meant to be
>> >> serious, did you? S being grandmother of all while L is a mother of
>> >> them all too?
>>
>> >Yes I saw it, you fucking dunderhead (look at my answer to Ranjit
>> >above), but why didn't you make fun of your Czech by saying it was the
>> >"grandmother of all the languages"?
>> >DV
>>
>> Coprographia is compulsive, repetitive, and almost ritualistic in
>> manner like coprolalia and copropraxia. It is also repetitious,
>> associated with an overwhelming URGE, can be suppressed
>> for a time, and prone to waxing and waning like tics
>
>You are a coprophagous idiot Kriha!
>
>It is not the first time you have treated the Serbs and Serbian
>language with indignity and disrespect.
>DV
I never treated Serbs, Serbian language, or any other language
with disrespect. The "bedraggled stranger shouting from the
shadows" was you, not the language.
Do you want me to pull some of your old posts from the Google
archives? You know the ones in which you declared Serbian
being older than Sanskrit?
pjk
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> "Dusan Vukotic" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:21405282-3de4-45e8...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 14, 3:00 pm, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> >wrote:
> [...[
>
> >> >> Tell that to the bedraggled stranger shouting from the shadows.
> >> >> pjk
>
> >> >> P.S. You didn't think my paradoxical statement was meant to be
> >> >> serious, did you? S being grandmother of all while L is a mother of
> >> >> them all too?
>
> >> >Yes I saw it, you fucking dunderhead (look at my answer to Ranjit
> >> >above), but why didn't you make fun of your Czech by saying it was the
> >> >"grandmother of all the languages"?
> >> >DV
>
> >> Coprographia is compulsive, repetitive, and almost ritualistic in
> >> manner like coprolalia and copropraxia. It is also repetitious,
> >> associated with an overwhelming URGE, can be suppressed
> >> for a time, and prone to waxing and waning like tics
>
> >You are a coprophagous idiot Kriha!
>
> >It is not the first time you have treated the Serbs and Serbian
> >language with indignity and disrespect.
> >DV
>
> I never treated Serbs, Serbian language, or any other language
> with disrespect. The "bedraggled stranger shouting from the
> shadows" was you, not the language.
These are your words: "A stranger sitting in the shadows of the back
row screams apodictically: Yes, but the GRANDMOTHER of all languages
is Serbian!" Did you not expose the Serbian language to mockery and
contempt? It doesn't matter who "a screaming stranger" is.
> Do you want me to pull some of your old posts from the Google
> archives? You know the ones in which you declared Serbian
> being older than Sanskrit?
Please. do it... post my "incriminated" messages.
As I told many times before, there are natural and unnaturally
developed languages. Sanskrit is a "creolized" (combined, compiled)
language and for that reason it cannot be older than any of the
natural Germanic, Slavic or Romance language (including Serbian, of
course). Natural languages must be older than unnatural, it is
natural, isn't it?
DV
Paul J Kriha
Of course not. If I do expose anything or anybody to mockery and
contempt (your words), then it's the person who is on record as
having said many idiocies about Serbian language.
>> Do you want me to pull some of your old posts from the Google
>> archives? You know the ones in which you declared Serbian
>> being older than Sanskrit?
>
>Please. do it... post my "incriminated" messages.
>
>As I told many times before, there are natural and unnaturally
>developed languages. Sanskrit is a "creolized" (combined, compiled)
>language and for that reason it cannot be older than any of the
>natural Germanic, Slavic or Romance language (including Serbian, of
>course). Natural languages must be older than unnatural, it is
>natural, isn't it?
Jesus Kristus, don't you understand already, the problem is your
idisyncratic terminology. It's a matter what language we call Serbian
and from what period of time people spoke the language recognisably
Serbian.
For example, in the past, one can identify several periods of time
when the Czech language went through sudden changes which
effectively resulted in a new and different language being spoken
(or written). Czech language as we know it today more-or-less
did not exist before the 15th century. Sometimes, the language
spoken in the period between 15th and 17th century is referred
to as Middle Czech. But Czech spoken between 10/11th century
and the 15th century was definitely a different language. Today,
it's called Old Czech. Prior to 10/11th century the language had
only few special characteristics distinguishing it from Common
Slavic. Sometimes, it's referred to as Proto-Czech, but basically
it was just a collection of local dialects of Common Slavic. They
took over four hundred years (~500 to 1000) to gell into a language
distinct from Common Slavic.
I expect, Serbian has gone through a similar development from
the Common Slavic. The significant changes will most probably
have occurred at different times for different reasons and have
resulted in a different language from other Slavic languages.
Be it as it may, the language we call Serbian did not exist when
people natively spoke Sanskrit. Even a distinct Slavic probably
did not exist then.
pjk
>DV
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> >> >It is not the first time you have treated the Serbs and Serbian
> >> >language with indignity and disrespect.
> >> >DV
>
> >> I never treated Serbs, Serbian language, or any other language
> >> with disrespect. The "bedraggled stranger shouting from the
> >> shadows" was you, not the language.
>
> >These are your words: "A stranger sitting in the shadows of the back
> >row screams apodictically: Yes, but the GRANDMOTHER of all languages
> >is Serbian!" Did you not expose the Serbian language to mockery and
> >contempt? It doesn't matter who "a screaming stranger" is.
>
> Of course not. If I do expose anything or anybody to mockery and
> contempt (your words), then it's the person who is on record as
> having said many idiocies about Serbian language.
I think it would be correct if you stopped mentioning my "idiocies
about Serbian language", without letting people to see how that
"idiocies" look like in reality. Do you have any evidences to support
your above "idiotic" statement or you are just babbling like an old
(widowed and bored) woman in the marketplace?
> >> Do you want me to pull some of your old posts from the Google
> >> archives? You know the ones in which you declared Serbian
> >> being older than Sanskrit?
>
> >Please. do it... post my "incriminated" messages.
>
> >As I told many times before, there are natural and unnaturally
> >developed languages. Sanskrit is a "creolized" (combined, compiled)
> >language and for that reason it cannot be older than any of the
> >natural Germanic, Slavic or Romance language (including Serbian, of
> >course). Natural languages must be older than unnatural, it is
> >natural, isn't it?
>
> Jesus Kristus, don't you understand already, the problem is your
> idisyncratic terminology. It's a matter what language we call Serbian
> and from what period of time people spoke the language recognisably
> Serbian.
It doesn't matter at all what the name of Serbian or any other
naturally developed language was in the past. Unfortunately, you are
unable to understand even the much simpler things and I have no time
to spend on your basic education. :-)
DV
benl...@ihug.co.nz
Yes, the marketplace is full of the most colourful and interesting
people. Like that fellow we just met who told you he was a teacher?
Heh heh. No, the real teachers are busy at the school. He's a harmless
madman who's here almost every day. Babbles away about language, and
thinks the rest of us are idiots because we don't understand him. Now
and then someone will stop to argue and maybe give him a penny or two.
I guess that's what he calls "teaching". Still, he doesn't look
hungry, so I guess somebody takes care of him.
Ross Clark
Dušan Vukotić
Do you think that Kriha is feeble-minded and unable to speak for
himself?
DV