HINDUS AMAZING SCIENCE OF SPEECH - Grammar, Phonetics, Phonologyand Morphology.Sanskrit was the classical literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the founder of the language and literature. !!!!!!
CYBERHINWA
Grammar, Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology - Sanskrit was the classical
literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the
founder of the language and literature.
Panini
Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
School of Mathematics and Statistics
University of St Andrews, Scotland
Born: about 520 BC in Shalatula (near Attock),
now Pakistan Died: about 460 BC in India
Panini was born in Shalatula, a town near to Attock on the Indus river
in present day Pakistan. The dates given for Panini are pure guesses.
Experts give dates in the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th century BC and there
is also no agreement among historians about the extent of the work
which he undertook. What is in little doubt is that, given the period
in which he worked, he is one of the most innovative people in the
whole development of knowledge. We will say a little more below about
how historians have gone about trying to pinpoint the date when Panini
lived.
Panini was a Sanskrit grammarian who gave a comprehensive and
scientific theory of phonetics, phonology, and morphology. Sanskrit
was the classical literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is
considered the founder of the language and literature. It is
interesting to note that the word "Sanskrit" means "complete" or
"perfect" and it was thought of as the divine language, or language of
the gods.
A treatise called Astadhyayi (or Astaka ) is Panini's major work. It
consists of eight chapters, each subdivided into quarter chapters. In
this work Panini distinguishes between the language of sacred texts
and the usual language of communication. Panini gives formal
production rules and definitions to describe Sanskrit grammar.
Starting with about 1700 basic elements like nouns, verbs, vowels,
consonants he put them into classes. The construction of sentences,
compound nouns etc. is explained as ordered rules operating on
underlying structures in a manner similar to modern theory. In many
ways Panini's constructions are similar to the way that a mathematical
function is defined today. Joseph writes in [2]:-
Sanskrit's potential for scientific use was greatly enhanced as a
result of the thorough systemisation of its grammar by Panini. ... On
the basis of just under 4000 sutras [rules expressed as aphorisms], he
built virtually the whole structure of the Sanskrit language, whose
general 'shape' hardly changed for the next two thousand years. ... An
indirect consequence of Panini's efforts to increase the linguistic
facility of Sanskrit soon became apparent in the character of
scientific and mathematical literature.
Joseph goes on to make a convincing argument for the algebraic nature
of Indian mathematics arising as a consequence of the structure of the
Sanskrit language. In particular he suggests that algebraic reasoning,
the Indian way of representing numbers by words, and ultimately the
development of modern number systems in India, are linked Panini
should be thought of as the forerunner of the modern formal language
theory used to specify computer languages. The Backus Normal Form was
discovered independently by John BACKUS in 1959, but Panini's notation
is equivalent in its power to that of BACKUS and has many similar
properties. It is remarkable to think that concepts which are
fundamental to today's theoretical computer science should have their
origin with an Indian genius around 2500 years ago.
At the beginning of this article we mentioned that certain concepts
had been attributed to Panini by certain historians which others
dispute. One such theory was put forward by B Indraji in 1876. He
claimed that the Brahmi numerals developed out of using letters or
syllables as numerals. Then he put the finishing touches to the theory
by suggesting that Panini in the eighth century BC (earlier than most
historians place Panini) was the first to come up with the idea of
using letters of the alphabet to represent numbers.
There are a number of pieces of evidence to support Indraji's theory
that the Brahmi numerals developed from letters or syllables. However
it is not totally convincing since, to quote one example, the symbols
for 1, 2 and 3 clearly don't come from letters but from one, two and
three lines respectively. Even if one accepts the link between the
numerals and the letters, making Panini the originator of this idea
would seem to have no more behind it than knowing that Panini was one
of the most innovative geniuses that world has known so it is not
unreasonable to believe that he might have made this step too.
There are other works which are closely associated with the Astadhyayi
which some historians attribute to Panini, others attribute to authors
before Panini, others attribute to authors after Panini. This is an
area where there are many theories but few, if any, hard facts.
We also promised to return to a discussion of Panini's dates. There
has been no lack of work on this topic so the fact that there are
theories which span several hundreds of years is not the result of
lack of effort, rather an indication of the difficulty of the topic.
The usual way to date such texts would be to examine which authors are
referred to and which authors refer to the work. One can use this
technique and see who Panini mentions.
There are ten scholars mentioned by Panini and we must assume from the
context that these ten have all contributed to the study of Sanskrit
grammar. This in itself, of course, indicates that Panini was not a
solitary genius but, like Newton, had "stood on the shoulders of
giants". Now Panini must have lived later than these ten but this is
absolutely no help in providing dates since we have absolutely no
knowledge of when any of these ten lived.
What other internal evidence is there to use? Well of course Panini
uses many phrases to illustrate his grammar and these have been
examined meticulously to see if anything is contained there to
indicate a date. To give an example of what we mean: if we were to
pick up a text which contained as an example "I take the train to work
every day" we would know that it had to have been written after
railways became common. Let us illustrate with two actual examples
from the Astadhyayi which have been the subject of much study. The
first is an attempt to see whether there is evidence of Greek
influence. Would it be possible to find evidence which would mean that
the text had to have been written after the conquests of Alexander the
Great? There is a little evidence of Greek influence, but there was
Greek influence on this north east part of the Indian subcontinent
before the time of Alexander. Nothing conclusive has been identified.
Another angle is to examine a reference Panini makes to nuns. now some
argue that these must be Buddhist nuns and therefore the work must
have been written after Buddha. A nice argument but there is a counter
argument which says that there were Jaina nuns before the time of
Buddha and Panini's reference could equally well be to them. Again the
evidence is inconclusive.
There are references by others to Panini. However it would appear that
the Panini to whom most refer is a poet and although some argue that
these are the same person, most historians agree that the linguist and
the poet are two different people. Again this is inconclusive
evidence.
Let us end with an evaluation of Panini's contribution by Cardona in
[1]:-
Panini's grammar has been evaluated from various points of view. After
all these different evaluations, I think that the grammar merits
asserting ... that it is one of the greatest monuments of human
intelligence.
Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
School of Mathematics and Statistics
University of St Andrews, Scotland
http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/history/Mathematicians/Panini.html
__________________________________________
"Panini, famous grammarian of the Sanskrit language, lived in India
some time between the 7th and the 4th centuries B.C. Following in the
steps of the Brahmi alphabet makers, he became the most renowned of
the grammarians. His work on Sanskrit, with its 4,168 rules, is
outstanding for its highly systematic methods of analyzing and
describing language.
The birth of linguistic science in Western Europe in the 19th century
was due largely to the European discovery of Panini's Sanskrit
grammar, making linguistics a science.
The modern science of linguistics is the basis for producing alphabets
for languages yet unwritten today."
JAARS Alphabet Museum
Box 248
Waxhaw, NC 28173
________________________________________
Panini's grammar (6th century BCE or earlier) provides 4,000 rules
that describe the Sanskrit of his day completely. This grammar is
acknowledged to be one of the greatest intellectual achievements of
all time. The great variety of language mirrors, in many ways, the
complexity of nature and, therefore, success in describing a language
is as impressive as a complete theory of physics. It is remarkable
that Panini set out to describe the entire grammar in terms of a
finite number of rules. Scholars have shown that the grammar of Panini
represents a universal grammatical and computing system. From this
perspective it anticipates the logical framework of modern computers.
One may speak of a Panini machine as a model for the most powerful
computing system.
Source: Staal, F. 1988. Universals. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Related articles
Aryan Language Family
_______________________________________
Panini was a Sanskrit grammarian who gave a comprehensive and
scientific theory of phonetics, phonology, and morphology. Sanskrit
was the classical literary language of the Indian Hindus.
In a treatise called Astadhyayi Panini distinguishes between the
language of sacred texts and the usual language of communication.
Panini gives formal production rules and definitions to describe
Sanskrit grammar. The construction of sentences, compound nouns etc.
is explained as ordered rules operating on underlying structures in a
manner similar to modern theory.
Panini should be thought of as the forerunner of the modern formal
language theory used to specify computer languages. The Backus Normal
Form was discovered independently by John Backus in 1959, but Panini's
notation is equivalent in its power to that of Backus and has many
similar properties.
http://history.math.csusb.edu/Mathematicians/Panini.html
_________________________________________
Peter T. Daniels
> Amazing Science - By J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
>
> Grammar, Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology - Sanskrit was the classical
> literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the
> founder of the language and literature.
This comes as a surprise to you?
Though if Panini was "founder of the language and literature," what
did he speak, and what is his grammar an analysis of?
Day Brown
ego.
phog...@abo.fi
Sanskrit sucks - Classical Arabic rocks!
CYBERHINWA
ARABIA BEFORE THE BASTARD MOHAMMED PLUNDERED
==============================================
PROOF::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
VEDIC TEMPLE THE PAST TRUTH OF ISLAMIC KAABA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HISTORICAL PROOF OF KAABA BEING A VEDIC- HINDU TEMPLE ....!!!!!!
============================================================
BREAKING NEWS .....!!!!!!!!!!!!! HISTORICAL PROOF OF KAABA BEING A
VEDIC- HINDU TEMPLE ....!!!!!!
THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
JOIN GROUP AT : http://groups.google.co.in/group/cyber-hindu-warriors?hl=en
phog...@abo.fi
>
> THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
> BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
Muslims are our brothers and cousins, part of the same monotheistic
tradition. Stop insulting them, will you?
>
> IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
I do not believe, and I think I won't read your proof.
Panini sucks, Subawayhi rocks!
Peter T. Daniels
What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
No one knows the origin of the Kaaba, but it was not "destroyed"; it's
the center of Islamic pilgrimage.
Do tell us what you know of either Panini or Sibawayh (and try to get
his name right).
phog...@abo.fi
> On Mar 10, 6:01 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 10, 7:29 am, CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
> > > BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
>
> > Muslims are our brothers and cousins, part of the same monotheistic
> > tradition. Stop insulting them, will you?
>
> > > IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
>
> > I do not believe, and I think I won't read your proof.
>
> > Panini sucks, Subawayhi rocks!
>
> What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
I was speaking about Islam, not Hinduism. Last time I checked, Islam
was indeed part of the same monotheist tradition as Christianity and
Judaism, whatever the political squibbles of the present.
>
> No one knows the origin of the Kaaba, but it was not "destroyed"; it's
> the center of Islamic pilgrimage.
That Cyberhinwa guy is suggesting the opposite, but I know as well as
you that Kaaba is the most important pilgrimage place of the Muslims.
> Do tell us what you know of either Panini or Sibawayh (and try to get
> his name right).
Panini is the name of the person to whom the classical grammar of
Sanskrit is ascribed, and Sibawayhi wrote the first systematic grammar
of Classical Arabic. As far as I know, Arabic was very exclusively a
written, classical grammar for Sibawayhi, who wasn't particularly
eloquent or fluent when speaking the language. It was not his native
language - I seem to recall he was a Persian.
Peter T. Daniels
> On Mar 10, 2:53 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 10, 6:01 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
> > > On Mar 10, 7:29 am, CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
> > > > BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
>
> > > Muslims are our brothers and cousins, part of the same monotheistic
> > > tradition. Stop insulting them, will you?
>
> > > > IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
>
> > > I do not believe, and I think I won't read your proof.
>
> > > Panini sucks, Subawayhi rocks!
>
> > What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
>
> I was speaking about Islam, not Hinduism. Last time I checked, Islam
> was indeed part of the same monotheist tradition as Christianity and
> Judaism, whatever the political squibbles of the present.
Cyberwhiner, however, was speaking of Hinduism, and if you intended
your "our" to be 1pl. exclusive, you needed to mark that in some way.
English does not grammaticalize that distinction.
> > No one knows the origin of the Kaaba, but it was not "destroyed"; it's
> > the center of Islamic pilgrimage.
>
> That Cyberhinwa guy is suggesting the opposite, but I know as well as
> you that Kaaba is the most important pilgrimage place of the Muslims.
>
> > Do tell us what you know of either Panini or Sibawayh (and try to get
> > his name right).
>
> Panini is the name of the person to whom the classical grammar of
> Sanskrit is ascribed, and Sibawayhi wrote the first systematic grammar
> of Classical Arabic. As far as I know, Arabic was very exclusively a
> written, classical grammar for Sibawayhi, who wasn't particularly
> eloquent or fluent when speaking the language. It was not his native
> language - I seem to recall he was a Persian.-
You are correct, sir. First _surviving_ Arabic grammar. He refers to
predecessors.
phog...@abo.fi
> On Mar 10, 9:00 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 10, 2:53 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Mar 10, 6:01 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
> > > > On Mar 10, 7:29 am, CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
> > > > > BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
>
> > > > Muslims are our brothers and cousins, part of the same monotheistic
> > > > tradition. Stop insulting them, will you?
>
> > > > > IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
>
> > > > I do not believe, and I think I won't read your proof.
>
> > > > Panini sucks, Subawayhi rocks!
>
> > > What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
>
> > I was speaking about Islam, not Hinduism. Last time I checked, Islam
> > was indeed part of the same monotheist tradition as Christianity and
> > Judaism, whatever the political squibbles of the present.
>
> Cyberwhiner, however, was speaking of Hinduism, and if you intended
> your "our" to be 1pl. exclusive, you needed to mark that in some way.
> English does not grammaticalize that distinction.
Well, actually I meant to use the pluralis maiestatis, in order to
sound condescending.
>
> > > No one knows the origin of the Kaaba, but it was not "destroyed"; it's
> > > the center of Islamic pilgrimage.
>
> > That Cyberhinwa guy is suggesting the opposite, but I know as well as
> > you that Kaaba is the most important pilgrimage place of the Muslims.
>
> > > Do tell us what you know of either Panini or Sibawayh (and try to get
> > > his name right).
>
> > Panini is the name of the person to whom the classical grammar of
> > Sanskrit is ascribed, and Sibawayhi wrote the first systematic grammar
> > of Classical Arabic. As far as I know, Arabic was very exclusively a
> > written, classical grammar for Sibawayhi, who wasn't particularly
> > eloquent or fluent when speaking the language. It was not his native
> > language - I seem to recall he was a Persian.-
>
> You are correct, sir. First _surviving_ Arabic grammar. He refers to
> predecessors.
I stand corrected, or rather, specified. I hope I will some day be
fluent enough in Arabic to be able to read said gentleman's grammar in
the original language. By the way, are there classical Arabic texts
(such as his grammar, for example) available in searchable electronic
form on the web?
Peter T. Daniels
You would be a lot better at finding them than I am. There were 19th-
century editions, so you could try google books, and google books are
searchable for roman-alphabet text, but I'd be surprised if they've
done that for Arabic-script text. (There are very few non-English
google books anyway.)
Joachim Pense
> On Mar 10, 6:01 am, phogl...@abo.fi wrote:
>> On Mar 10, 7:29 am, CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
>> > BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
>>
>> Muslims are our brothers and cousins, part of the same monotheistic
>> tradition. Stop insulting them, will you?
>>
>>
>>
>> > IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THEN READ MY BOOK WITH HISTORICAL PROOF..
>>
>> I do not believe, and I think I won't read your proof.
>>
>> Panini sucks, Subawayhi rocks!
>
> What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
A lot.
Joachim
Christopher Culver
During the recent California textbook row, a couple of American Hindu
organizations strived to convince the public that Hinduism was really
a monotheist faith. (So it would seem more palatable to the average
American???)
Christopher Ingham
All the gods and goddesses of Hinduism and their numerous
incarnations are regarded as aspects of the one Supreme
Being.
BTW, Hinduism is a synthesis of the religion brought into
India by the Aryans, the original speakers also of Vedic
Sanskrit.
Christopher Ingham
Joachim Pense
"Westerners" normally don't fail to assign the "deeper" ideas (involving
karma, samsara, brahman, atman etc) to the Dravidians.
--~~~~
grammatim
> > > of Classical Arabic. As far as I know, Arabic was very exclusively a
> > > eloquent or fluent when speaking the language. It was not his native
> > > language - I seem to recall he was a Persian.-
>
> > You are correct, sir. First _surviving_ Arabic grammar. He refers to
> > predecessors.
>
> I stand corrected, or rather, specified. I hope I will some day be
> fluent enough in Arabic to be able to read said gentleman's grammar in
> the original language. By the way, are there classical Arabic texts
> (such as his grammar, for example) available in searchable electronic
I found this:
http://www.hf.uio.no/ikos/studier/fag/arabisk/sibawayhi/HomePage/index.htm#contents
I know two of the three directors, and I know that it will be a superb
resource.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
CYBERHINWA <cyber...@gmail.com> posted:
Dhanyavaad for your post; I have widened its distribution.
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.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
You Arabic enthusiasts ought to have a look at CYBERHINWA's online
"book", where you will find a poem, allegedly in Arabic, allegedly in
praise of the Vedas, allegedly written in 1850 BC [sic!]. I would be
interested to know what sort of language it's in.
Ross Clark
StuBrooks
> In article <19cd52e0-a24b-4d3e...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> CYBERHINWA <cyber...@gmail.com> posted:
>
>>Amazing Science - By J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
>>
>>Grammar, Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology - Sanskrit was the classical
>>literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the
>>founder of the language and literature.
>>
>>Panini
>>Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
>>School of Mathematics and Statistics
>>University of St Andrews, Scotland
Bad INDIAN/Hindu science, jay.
All of the above were developed TENS of thousands of years before that
horse toothed piss drinker.
Hindu's are a retarded people.
You are proof, as you claim to be one.
Christopher Ingham
>
> - Show quoted text -
[I posted this message already, but it hasn't appeared.]
Features of Hinduism not traceable to the early Rigveda
(as well as the Indian elements within the early Rigveda
itself) are ascribed to the original inhabitants. The specific
Dravidian contributions, however, cannot be identified, as
their script is undeciphered and a continent-wide Dravidian
presence in any period is not attested. The influence on
Hinduism of the tribal peoples of central and southern India,
many of whom spoke languages of the Austric family, must
also be considered.
Christopher Ingham
benl...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
Looking further into this: CYBERHINWA's book is nominally authored by
someone named "Shrimati.:Aditi Chaturvedi", but clearly it owes a lot
to one Purushottam Nagesh Oak (P.N.Oak), one of whose themes was that
Arabia was formerly part of Greater Vedic India. (He is also the
author of the popular Hindutva theory that the Taj Mahal is "really" a
Shiva temple.) One of the amusing things that turned up was that an
Indian/South African Muslim preacher named Ahmed Deedat (a near
contemporary of Oak's, they both died fairly recently) took up some of
Oak's evidence, but gave it an Islamic spin: "The Arabs used to be
poor benighted Hindu polytheists -- Isn't it wonderful that Prophet
Muhammad brought them a knowledge of true religion, and they all
became Muslims." More conventional Muslims apparently did not
approve.
If we're going to live in a world increasingly dominated by religious
fanatics, we might at least get some fun out of it.
Ross Clark
CYBERHINWA
wether you believe or not who cares a fuck
you are born a asshole and will die one
CYBERHINWA
THE LANGUAGE FOR YOUR INFO IS SANSKRIT THE BASE OF THE ALL THE WORLDS
LANGUAGE .............
DONT BE PAROCHIAL / BE JUDGEMENTAL WITH A CLEAR HEAR AND UNBIASED
THINKING
CYBERHINWA
> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
> > CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> posted:
>
> >>Amazing Science - By J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
>
> >>Grammar, Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology - Sanskrit was the classical
> >>literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the
> >>founder of the language and literature.
>
> >>Panini
> >>Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
> >>School of Mathematics and Statistics
> >>University of St Andrews, Scotland
>
> Bad INDIAN/Hindu science, jay.
>
> All of the above were developed TENS of thousands of years before that
> horse toothed piss drinker.
>
> Hindu's are a retarded people.
>
> You are proof, as you claim to be one.
BETTER THAN FOLLOWING TEACHINGS OF A MAN WHO DID NOT EXIST
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
WWW.JESUSNEVEREXISTED.COM
CYBERHINWA
THE WORLD HAS TO UNDERSTAND THAT
IF IT WANTS PROOF OF THE HINDU TEMPLE
FORCIBLY CONVERTED TO KAABA IT HAS TO
READ IT IN CONJUNTION WITH THE PROOF INSTEAD
OF GETTING THEIR BOTTOMS ON FIRE ..................
EVEN THOUGH IT GOES AGAINST THEIR OWN BELIEFS
FOR PROOF IS PROOF - DID NOT WHITE MAN SAY
THAT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????
HA HA BHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
benl...@ihug.co.nz
No, Sanskrit is not the base of all the world's languages.
And no, I don't think this is Sanskrit.
But any language written in 1850 BC would be of some interest, which
is why I wanted some of the other people to look at this.
To make it a bit easier for them, I've copied it here:
"Aya muwarekal araj yushaiya noha minar HIND-e Wa aradakallaha
manyonaifail jikaratun"
"Oh the divine land of HIND (India) (how) very blessed art thou!
Because thou art the chosen of God blessed with knowledge"
"Wahalatijali Yatun ainana sahabi akha-atun jikra Wahajayhi
yonajjalur -rasu minal HINDATUN "
"That celestial knowledge which like four lighthouses shone in such
brilliance - through the (utterances of) Indian sages in fourfold
abundance."
"Yakuloonallaha ya ahal araf alameen kullahum Fattabe-u jikaratul
VEDA bukkun malam yonajjaylatun"
"God enjoins on all humans, follow with hands down The path the
Vedas with his divine precept lay down."
"Wahowa alamus SAMA wal YAJUR minallahay Tanajeelan Fa-enoma
ya akhigo mutiabay-an Yobassheriyona jatun"
"Bursting with (Divine) knowledge are SAM &YAJUR bestowed on
creation, Hence brothers respect and follow the Vedas, guides to
salvation"
"Wa-isa nain huma RIG ATHAR nasayhin Ka-a-Khuwatun Wa asant
Ala-udan wabowa masha -e-ratun"
"Two others, the Rig and Athar teach us fraternity, Sheltering under
their lustre dispels darkness till eternity"
This poem was written by Labi-Bin-E- Akhtab-Bin-E-Turfa who lived
in Arabia around 1850 B.C.
So says the web site. What do people think?
> DONT BE PAROCHIAL / BE JUDGEMENTAL WITH A CLEAR HEAR AND UNBIASED
> THINKING
That's what we're trying to do here.
Ross Clark
Craoi...@gmail.com
God be praised, Sanskrit is not the least related to the purest and
most perfect language of the world, which is, of course, my ancestral
mother tongue, Finnish.
>
> DONT BE PAROCHIAL / BE JUDGEMENTAL WITH A CLEAR HEAR AND UNBIASED
> THINKING
Look who's talking. Haven't you ever been taught to use the small
letters?
Craoi...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
>
> This poem was written by Labi-Bin-E- Akhtab-Bin-E-Turfa who lived
> in Arabia around 1850 B.C.
>
> So says the web site. What do people think?
I think that the name "Labi-Bin-E-" etc. looks like some backwoods
Hindu who has a very fuzzy idea of Arabic has tried to compose an
impressive-sounding "Arabic" name, but has inserted some Persian
ezafes, because he cannot keep his pidgin Arabic separate from his
pidgin Persian.
Craoi...@gmail.com
> wether you believe or not who cares a fuck
>
> you are born a asshole and will die one
Is this the revered Hindu civilization and politeness?
If it is, I think I prefer Muhammed and his disciples.
Craoi...@gmail.com
>
> If we're going to live in a world increasingly dominated by religious
> fanatics, we might at least get some fun out of it.
This is precisely the right time to introduce this link:
CYBERHINWA
the language may be arabic but they clearly shows that HINDU'S VEDIC
INFLUENCE EXTENDED TO THE ARABIAN LANDS AND KAABA IS NOTHING
BUT VEDIC HINDU DEMOLISHED .....................
TO SATISFY THE PERVERT MOHAMMEDS EGO ..
ONE AGAIN I BOW DOWN AND APOLOGISE TO YOU MU BROTHERS ..
PLS FORGIVE .
Craoi...@gmail.com
> reqeuest forgiveness made mistake in the same '
>
> the language may be arabic but they clearly shows that HINDU'S VEDIC
They don't. Now take your medicine, that's a good boy.
Craoi...@gmail.com
So, in Bharat they even laugh with a BH-?
Helmut Richter
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Biographies/Panini.html:
> A treatise called Astadhyayi (or Astaka ) is Panini's major work. It
> consists of eight chapters, each subdivided into quarter chapters. In
> this work Panini distinguishes between the language of sacred texts
> and the usual language of communication. Panini gives formal
> production rules and definitions to describe Sanskrit grammar.
> Starting with about 1700 basic elements like nouns, verbs, vowels,
> consonants he put them into classes. The construction of sentences,
> compound nouns etc. is explained as ordered rules operating on
> underlying structures in a manner similar to modern theory. In many
> ways Panini's constructions are similar to the way that a mathematical
> function is defined today. Joseph writes in [2]:-
>
> Sanskrit's potential for scientific use was greatly enhanced as a
> result of the thorough systemisation of its grammar by Panini. ... On
> the basis of just under 4000 sutras [rules expressed as aphorisms], he
> built virtually the whole structure of the Sanskrit language, whose
> general 'shape' hardly changed for the next two thousand years. ... An
> indirect consequence of Panini's efforts to increase the linguistic
> facility of Sanskrit soon became apparent in the character of
> scientific and mathematical literature.
In the past few months I have tried to get hold on some information on
Panini, both by browsing through the literature (in particular articles by
Scharfe, Cardona, Staal, and others) and by talking to an expert in the
Indology division of the University of Munich. The result was quite
disappointing, not so much as far as Panini is concerned but more the way he
is represented in the literature. There are two kinds of articles:
- One kind is by the Indologists, e.g. the ones mentioned above. They
understand Sanskrit, that is, both the language in which Panini's sutras
are worded and the language whose grammar they describe. This
understanding is, however, in this case counter-productive: it is a
virtue of a formal grammar that meta-language and object-language are
clearly separated, which is violated in Panini's grammar.
- The other is by computer scientists who are proud of their early
predecessor. I have the impression that these people have only got a very
superficial acquaintance with Panini's work, when they write things like:
> Scholars have shown that the grammar of Panini
> represents a universal grammatical and computing system.
Huh? What does that mean exactly? Equivalent to Turing machines or
recusively enumerable sets? Which scholar has proven what? References?
or:
> The Backus Normal
> Form was discovered independently by John Backus in 1959, but Panini's
> notation is equivalent in its power to that of Backus and has many
> similar properties.
This cannot be right when the previous statement was right. Backus NF has
*much* less power than anything that could be called universal. And it is
context-free whereas Panini's rules live by the context they specify.
If Panini makes use of recursion in a way that considerable nesting is
implied, it is probable that the language defined is not context-free -- it
could even be undecidable in the worst case. If, however, this is not the
case (morphology and sandhi are both areas where no nested structures
appear, at least not of arbitrary nesting depth), the power of Panini's
method could be drastically limited.
If the latter is the case, this does not in any way abate Panini's
importance, but its shifts the emphasis. Finding structural rules in a
language and being able to describe them algorithmically is a unique
achievement, no matter whether the formal system used to *this* end turns
out to be powerful for *other* purposes.
These questions are not ripe for answers. As far as I have been able to find
out, Panini's metalanguage has never been described in a way that would
allow translating it into a mathematical model of formal languages. (Such a
model would necessarily be ambiguous but not even a model allowing to
uniquely specify the ambiguities has been suggested.) If any reader here has
a hint in that direction, I would be grateful to learn about it.
--
Helmut Richter
Peter T. Daniels
Just to throw in another level of complexity, Panini was adopted as a
guru by early generative phonologists, and Paul Kiparsky became
seriously involved. In the first edition of Encyclopedia of Language
and Linguistics (ed. Asher & Simpson), see his "Paninian Linguistics"
and Deshpande's "Phonetics, Ancient Indian." AFAICT the topic is
omitted from the second edition.
Harlan Messinger
> In the past few months I have tried to get hold on some information on
> Panini, both by browsing through the literature (in particular articles by
Last week I went to a restaurant that, for once, had pressed, melted
sandwiches each listed as "panino" rather than "panini". I complimented
them on this detail. Oh, wait, that isn't what you were talking about,
is it?
Craoi...@gmail.com
No, but after all those crap postings I would very much prefer talking
about your panini.
Peter T. Daniels
I don't dare order one because I'd probably ask for a ['pANini] and
they wouldn't understand.
Paul J Kriha
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:9f13be16-8124-4a06...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
When in Italy, I just about manage to order simple thing like uno
cappuccino or due cappuccini. One day, I went to a coffee shop
with my son. I ordered a soft drink for him and cappuccino grande
for myself. The cashier turned around and shouted at the barista:
"Uno cappuccio, prego". Wait a minute, I thought, you pinched my
diminutive/augmentative joke! Then I remembered I was in Italy,
so it _must_ have been the correct expression. However, by the time
I finished my "cappuccio", I decided that he was just having me on.
pjk
Christopher Culver
> What's "monotheist" about Hinduism?
During the recent California textbook row, a couple of American Hindu
organizations strived to convince the public that Hinduism was really
a monotheist faith. (So it would seem more palatable to the average
American?)
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Nikolaj
>> The Backus Normal Form was discovered independently by John Backus in 1959,
>> but Panini's notation is equivalent in its power to that of Backus and has
>> many similar properties.
> If Panini makes use of recursion in a way that considerable nesting is
> implied, it is probable that the language defined is not context-free -- it
> could even be undecidable in the worst case. If, however, this is not the
> case (morphology and sandhi are both areas where no nested structures
> appear, at least not of arbitrary nesting depth), the power of Panini's
> method could be drastically limited.
> If the latter is the case, this does not in any way abate Panini's
> importance, but its shifts the emphasis. Finding structural rules in a
> language and being able to describe them algorithmically is a unique
> achievement, no matter whether the formal system used to *this* end turns
> out to be powerful for *other* purposes.
>
> These questions are not ripe for answers. As far as I have been able to find
> out, Panini's metalanguage has never been described in a way that would
> allow translating it into a mathematical model of formal languages. (Such a
> model would necessarily be ambiguous but not even a model allowing to
> uniquely specify the ambiguities has been suggested.) If any reader here has
> a hint in that direction, I would be grateful to learn about it.
AFAIK: BNF is just a notation, with it one can express languages of any
complexity from the Chomsky hierarchy of languages (from regular
expression up to the recursively enumerable languages)
From what have I studied (but I have stopped that some time ago),
Pāṇini's notation corresponds to the rules for a context-sensitive
grammar. He used grammatical cases to express the position of the term
in the substitution formula αAβ → αγβ, characteristic for
context-sensitive languages: nominative expressed the 'γ', genitive the
'A', and ablative and locative the left and right context, 'α' and 'β'.
Such substitution sūtra is usually read: 'In place of A (there) is (or
comes) γ, if preceded by α and is followed by β' - the use of cases also
metaphorically corresponds to the usual meaning they have in the grammar.
One simple example: Aṣṭādhyāyī VI.1.77:
iko yaṇaci or
ikaḥ, yaṇ, aci (without sandhi)
could be rewritten as "ik ac → yaṇ ac" in BNF. The sūtra describes one
of the sandhis where the last vowel of the first word precedes another
vowel of the subsequent word. 'aci' being locative of 'ac' is the right
context, left context is not important in this case, ikaḥ is genitive of
'ik' and 'yaṇ' is the nominative. The technical terms 'ik', 'yaṇ' and
'ac' denote the sets of characters of the Sanskrit alphabet: ik = {i, u,
ṛ, ḷ} (simple vowels, except a), yaṇ = {y, v, r, l} (semivowels) and ac
= {a, i, u, ṛ, ḷ, e, o, ai, au} (any vowel). An example of this sandhi
would be tri + ambaka → tryambaka (the three-eyed, an epithet of Śiva) -
before an 'a' of 'ambaka', the final 'i' of 'tri' changes to 'y' (i + a
→ y a}
Most of the technical terms that Pāṇini uses are what would be called
nonterminal symbols in BNF. Of course he achieves recurion with them,
there is no question about it, but he also uses some metarules, with
which he limits it.
Dušan Vukotić
> An example of this sandhi
> would be tri + ambaka > tryambaka (the three-eyed, an epithet of Siva) -
Intersting, ambaka (eye) sounds as the nasalized Serbian syntagm "oba
oka" (both eyes; Russ.оба both око eye; Slov. oba oka)
DV
Helmut Richter
> AFAIK: BNF is just a notation, with it one can express languages of any
> complexity from the Chomsky hierarchy of languages (from regular expression up
> to the recursively enumerable languages)
It was invented und used for what we call context-free languages. The
computer scientist Backus and the linguist Chomsky had the same idea at the
same time in the late 1950ies, but to rather different ends. It took a few
years until it was discovered that there is close similarity between the
approaches. The first one to note it was Saul Gorn, head of the computer
centre at UPenn, one of the pioneers of using computers in the humanities.
I doubt that Backus's name is associated with grammars that are not
context-free, but that is not really important for this discussion.
> From what have I studied (but I have stopped that some time ago), Panini's
> notation corresponds to the rules for a context-sensitive grammar. He used
> grammatical cases to express the position of the term in the substitution
> formula ?A? -> ???, characteristic for context-sensitive languages: nominative
> expressed the '?', genitive the 'A', and ablative and locative the left and
> right context, '?' and '?'. Such substitution sutra is usually read: 'In place
> of A (there) is (or comes) ?, if preceded by ? and is followed by ?' - the use
> of cases also metaphorically corresponds to the usual meaning they have in the
> grammar.
>
> One simple example: Astadhyayi VI.1.77:
>
> iko yanaci or
>
> ikah, yan, aci (without sandhi)
>
> could be rewritten as "ik ac -> yan ac" in BNF. The sutra describes one of the
> sandhis where the last vowel of the first word precedes another vowel of the
> subsequent word. 'aci' being locative of 'ac' is the right context, left
> context is not important in this case, ikah is genitive of 'ik' and 'yan' is
> the nominative. The technical terms 'ik', 'yan' and 'ac' denote the sets of
> characters of the Sanskrit alphabet: ik = {i, u, r, l} (simple vowels, except
> a), yan = {y, v, r, l} (semivowels) and ac = {a, i, u, r, l, e, o, ai, au}
> (any vowel). An example of this sandhi would be tri + ambaka -> tryambaka (the
> three-eyed, an epithet of Siva) - before an 'a' of 'ambaka', the final 'i' of
> 'tri' changes to 'y' (i + a
> -> y a}
Yes, that seems to be the general pattern but many sutras do not exactly
conform to it. Often they contain allusions which require Sanskrit knowledge
for understanding. For instance, one sutra is "aca" meaning "a as well",
implicitly referring to the preceding sutras. The indologist switches in his
head from formal language understanding to natural language understanding.
The poor guy like me who wants to learn how Panini's grammar of Sanskrit
works without knowing Sanskrit is lost, in contrast to someone who wants to
understand Backus's grammar of Algol without knowing Algol which is no
problem.
This is not a problem until one wants to ask questions about the
relationship of Panini's metalanguage to metalanguages studied in the theory
of formal languages. There is no well-defined way to translate those of
Panini's sutras that appeal to the user's natural understanding into formal
grammar rules. And without such a translation, it is hard to make meaningful
statements about the set of languages that can described by these means.
> Most of the technical terms that Panini uses are what would be called
> nonterminal symbols in BNF. Of course he achieves recurion with them, there is
> no question about it, but he also uses some metarules, with which he limits
> it.
This was sloppy language of mine. By recursion I meant a two-sided
recursion, that is a situation A -> u A w with u and w both non-void. In the
natural languages, such kind of recursion occurs with nested clauses but not
with morphology or sandhi. As far as I was able to find out, Panini has only
little interest in sentence structure, so it could be that only few such
non-regular recursion takes place, or none at all. But without the mentioned
translation into formal grammar rules, one has little chance of finding the
pertinent parts in the grammar.
My implication from one-sided recursion to regular language is premature
insofar as it is only correct for context-free rules whereas Panini's rules
have context specified. How much bearing this has, can, however, again only
be reasonable asked when we have the rules in a mathematically treatable
form.
--
Helmut Richter
Craoi...@gmail.com
> On Mar 11, 3:01 am, StuBrooks <Peeping...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
> > > In article <19cd52e0-a24b-4d3e-8061-8ea82317b...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > > CYBERHINWA <cyberhi...@gmail.com> posted:
>
> > >>Amazing Science - By J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
>
> > >>Grammar, Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology - Sanskrit was the classical
> > >>literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the
> > >>founder of the language and literature.
>
> > >>Panini
> > >>Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
> > >>School of Mathematics and Statistics
> > >>University of St Andrews, Scotland
>
> > Bad INDIAN/Hindu science, jay.
>
> > All of the above were developed TENS of thousands of years before that
> > horse toothed piss drinker.
>
> > Hindu's are a retarded people.
>
> > You are proof, as you claim to be one.
>
> BETTER THAN FOLLOWING TEACHINGS OF A MAN WHO DID NOT EXIST
As far as I know, no Christian linguist has ever appealed to Jesus as
an authority on linguistics. As God's Son, He could certainly have
spoken any languages He had chosen to speak, but it seems that He
probably confined Himself to the languages extant in Palestine at the
time, i.e. Aramaic, Koiné Greek and literary Hebrew.
Nikolaj
> I doubt that Backus's name is associated with grammars that are not
> context-free, but that is not really important for this discussion.
Ah, yes, the right side is limited to one non-terminal. But if one would
free the right side, the notation would still be BNF (some kind of
extended BNF), and the notation would be able to describe more complex
languages.
>> From what have I studied (but I have stopped that some time ago), Panini's
>> notation corresponds to the rules for a context-sensitive grammar. He used
>> grammatical cases to express the position of the term in the substitution
>> formula αAβ → αγβ, characteristic for context-sensitive languages: nominative
>> expressed the 'γ', genitive the 'A', and ablative and locative the left and
>> right context, 'α' and 'β'. Such substitution sutra is usually read: 'In place
>> of A (there) is (or comes) γ, if preceded by α and is followed by β' - the use
>> of cases also metaphorically corresponds to the usual meaning they have in the
>> grammar.
Hm... what happened to all Greek and Sanskrit letters?
>> One simple example: Aṣṭādhyāyī VI.1.77:
>>
>> iko yaṇaci or
>>
>> ikaḥ, yaṇ, aci (without sandhi)
>>
>> could be rewritten as "ik ac -> yan ac" in BNF. The sūtra describes one of the
>> sandhis where the last vowel of the first word precedes another vowel of the
>> subsequent word. 'aci' being locative of 'ac' is the right context, left
>> context is not important in this case, ikah is genitive of 'ik' and 'yaṇ' is
>> the nominative. The technical terms 'ik', 'yaṇ' and 'ac' denote the sets of
>> characters of the Sanskrit alphabet: ik = {i, u, ṛ, ḷ} (simple vowels, except
>> a), yan = {y, v, r, l} (semivowels) and ac = {a, i, u, ṛ, ḷ, e, o, ai, au}
>> (any vowel). An example of this sandhi would be tri + ambaka -> tryambaka (the
>> three-eyed, an epithet of Śiva) - before an 'a' of 'ambaka', the final 'i' of
>> 'tri' changes to 'y' (i + a -> y a}
>
> Yes, that seems to be the general pattern but many sutras do not exactly
> conform to it. Often they contain allusions which require Sanskrit knowledge
> for understanding. For instance, one sutra is "aca" meaning "a as well",
> implicitly referring to the preceding sutras.
Well, of course, it is a sūtra style text, and such which _massively_
uses various techniques for abbreviation of the text (anuvṛtti) -
remember they didn't write, they had an oral tradition. Sometimes, the
sūtra is only one word long and all other elements of the rule must be
acquired from previous sūtras.
For your case above, I would say, it only means that a reader has to
replace the subject nominative of the former sūtra, with 'a'. More in
accord with anuvṛtti it would be "one has to add to the sūtra 'a ca' all
the necessary words from previous sūtras, so that the sūtra forms a
meaningful rule".
You have, for instance:
VII.3.101 ataḥ dīrgho yañi (sarvadhātuke)
VII.3.102 supi ca (ataḥ dīrgha yañi)
First of all, the word "sarvadhātuke" is anuvṛtti from the sūtra
VI.3.95, and must be added next to the words of all the following
sūtras, up to incuding VII.3.101. Similarily, all the words "ataḥ dīrgha
yañi" must be added as anuvṛtti to the sutra VII.3.102.
So you have the rules:
VII.3.101: at (sarvadhātuka yañ) -> dīrgha (sarvadhātuka yañ),
VII.3.102: at (sup yañ) -> dīrgha (sup yañ) (ca = as well)
"ataḥ" - genitive of "at", a technical term, which means the "short
vowel a" only;
"dīrghaḥ" from sandhied "dīrgho" - "the long one (vowel)", which vowel
exactly is governed by other rules which define what "dīrgha" means in
this grammar, and from the metarules governing substitutions. (This part
is quite complex, and I don't know all about it)
"sarvadhātuke" - locative of "sarvadhātuka", denoting the right context
of the substitution, it marks certain affixes, which are added words for
inflection.
"supi" - locative of "sup", again the right context for the
substitution, it denotes a set of all nominal inflectional endings:
singular dual plural
sup = {
s(u), au, (j)as; <- nominative
am, au(ṭ), (ś)as; <- akuzative
(ṭ)ā, bhyām, bhis; <- instrumental
(ṅ)e, bhyām, bhyas; <- dative
(ṅ)as(i), bhyām, bhyas; <- ablative
(ṅ)as, os, ām; <- genitive
(ṅ)i, os, su(p) } <- lokative
"yañi" - locative of "yañ", the right context, a set of consonsnats
"{ya, va, ra, la, ña, ma, ṅa, ṇa, na, jha, bha}"
So the rules mean:
VII.3.101: short 'a' changes to long 'ā' in front of such sarvadhātuka
affixes which begin with the consonant from the above "yañ" set.
VII.3.102 short 'a' changes to long 'ā' as well, in from of such sup
affixes, which begin with the consonant from the "yañ" set.
One example for use of the second sūtra: sup affixes which begin with
"yañ" consonants are "bhyām", "bhis", and "bhyas". "bhis" and "bhyas"
endings have more specific rules (VII.1.9, VII.3.103), so this rule
applies to the "bhyām" affix only. So for the nouns in -a, like "gaja"
(elephant):
gaja (prātipadika) + bhyām (sup affix) -> gajābhyām (inst., dat., abl. dual)
> The indologist switches in his
> head from formal language understanding to natural language understanding.
> The poor guy like me who wants to learn how Panini's grammar of Sanskrit
> works without knowing Sanskrit is lost, in contrast to someone who wants to
> understand Backus's grammar of Algol without knowing Algol which is no
> problem.
I don't know about Algol, but (E)BNF for C++ is quite complicated, and I
doubt C++ can be learned for it. And some page says that C++ is even not
entirely context-free, but is in certain elements context-sensitive. But
I don't think one can compare a natural language with a 30 words
programming langugage.
As for Sanskrit: well, it can not be done without (at least some)
knowledge of Sanskrit - in fact I have found that the rules are great
for learning Sanskrit ;)
But it is wrong, when people say that Pāṇini's notation is equivalent to
the context-free grammar - it is obvious that it is context-sensitive.
And meta-rules aren't even that, they are interpretational rules
describing substitutions. If one finds the right context pratyāhāra (set
of characters), such as "yañ" above, how does one know that the first
letters of the right context are important? And if one finds two rules
that have the same left side of the substitution, how does one know that
the more specific should be used, and not the general one? How does one
know that the substitution comes in place of the last letter of what is
denoted with nominative?
This and all other meta-rules are described with the paribhāṣās, the
rules of interpretation.
So in effect the substitutions are just a subset of the whole grammar,
and for everything else knowledge of Sanskrit is much needed.
> This is not a problem until one wants to ask questions about the
> relationship of Panini's metalanguage to metalanguages studied in the theory
> of formal languages. There is no well-defined way to translate those of
> Panini's sutras that appeal to the user's natural understanding into formal
> grammar rules. And without such a translation, it is hard to make meaningful
> statements about the set of languages that can described by these means.
I think the above examples show that the substitution rules are easily
translated/represented. The problem is with the meta-rules, like those
described above, or another example: for the last three chapters of the
last book (VIII.2-4) there is a meta-rule, which says that all earlier
rules have precedence over the following rules. If the two or more rules
apply and all are from that part of the grammar, the earliest must be
used. So in formal representation some kind of an ordered set of
substitution rules would have to be used, or something like that. Maybe
one would have to write down the substitution rules as above, and then
_separately_ the "choice-rules", with which one would define which of
the substitution rules would apply, if more than one would be applicable
- that is if even the context would not be enough for determining the rule.
> This was sloppy language of mine. By recursion I meant a two-sided
> recursion, that is a situation A -> u A w with u and w both non-void. In the
> natural languages, such kind of recursion occurs with nested clauses but not
> with morphology or sandhi. As far as I was able to find out, Panini has only
> little interest in sentence structure, so it could be that only few such
> non-regular recursion takes place, or none at all. But without the mentioned
> translation into formal grammar rules, one has little chance of finding the
> pertinent parts in the grammar.
Maybe the compound building rules would use such recursion?
By "two-sided" do you mean "the non-void u and w"?
Nikolaj
Slovenian would of course be in dual, not plural: obe očesi.
The word is "ambā", it means "mother", and -ka is some kind of an affix,
"ambaka" so then means "eye". For "tryambaka" dictionary says "
three-eyed (originally probably "three-mothered" from the threefold
expression ...some sanskrit words...) -- but the computer dictionary is
a bit corrupted in this part, so I would have to check in the book.
Dušan Vukotić
> Dušan Vukotić pravi:
>
> > <nikolaj.kor...@bla.si> wrote:
>
> >> An example of this sandhi
> >> would be tri + ambaka > tryambaka (the three-eyed, an epithet of Siva) -
>
> > Intersting, ambaka (eye) sounds as the nasalized Serbian syntagm "oba
> > oka" (both eyes; Russ.оба both око eye; Slov. oba oka)
>
> Slovenian would of course be in dual, not plural: obe očesi.
Eh! I thought it is the same as in Serbian :-)
> The word is "ambā", it means "mother", and -ka is some kind of an affix,
> "ambaka" so then means "eye". For "tryambaka" dictionary says "
> three-eyed (originally probably "three-mothered" from the threefold
> expression ...some sanskrit words...) -- but the computer dictionary is
> a bit corrupted in this part, so I would have to check in the book.
Ambaka is "śiva 's eye", "eye"
http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0083-amedhas.jpg
I do not think that ambaka (eye) is related to ambika (mother; ambālā,
ambālikā, ambi; probably related to Serbo-Slavic baba, babaluk; papa,
babo; baba [grandma] = mama [mother]?).
It seems it would be more plausible if ambaka is related to Latin
'binocular' (involving both eyes; from bini + ocularis; binocle). In
addition, there are Greek amphi-, Latin ambi- (both, on both sides)
and Sanskrit abhitas (on both sides, about), the words that are
clearly related to Serbian/Slavic oba (both) and obuhvat-iti
(encompass, embrace, enclose).
I hope there is no need to explain the relation between Latin ambi-
and bini- (bis double).
DV
Paul J Kriha
> Dušan Vukotić pravi:
> > <nikolaj.kor...@bla.si> wrote:
> >
> >> An example of this sandhi
> >> would be tri + ambaka > tryambaka (the three-eyed, an epithet of Siva) -
> >
> > Intersting, ambaka (eye) sounds as the nasalized Serbian syntagm "oba
> > oka" (both eyes; Russ.оба both око eye; Slov. oba oka)
> >
>
> Slovenian would of course be in dual, not plural: obe očesi.
And similarly in Czech, where the dual is still surviving in animate
eyes, hands and ears:
dual "obě oči" versus inanimate plural "obě oka"
dual "obě ruce" versus inanimate plural "obě ruky"
dual "obě uši" versus inanimate plural "obě ucha"
pjk
Nikolaj
>> Slovenian would of course be in dual, not plural: obe očesi.
>
> And similarly in Czech, where the dual is still surviving in animate
> eyes, hands and ears:
>
> dual "obě oči" versus inanimate plural "obě oka"
> dual "obě ruce" versus inanimate plural "obě ruky"
> dual "obě uši" versus inanimate plural "obě ucha"
>
> pjk
I know about that distinction in Czech, the animate vs. inanimate, but I
never looked up on its meaning. Is animate used with living beings only?
The use of nouns "oči", "ušesa", "roke", "noge" (feet) it a bit
complicated in Slovene as well - if one talks about them in general
(indefinite), even though there are exactly two of them, they are used
in plural: "oči" or "očesa" (in Slovene "oči" is plural!) as in "oči me
bolijo" (my eyes hurt), "moja ušesa" (my ears), "imam roke in noge" (I
have arms and feet).
But if one want to be specific or if he adds the number (two) or a
pronoun "oba" (both, skt. "ubha"), then they must be in dual:
"očesi sta zdravi" (both eyes are healthy), "obe ušesi", "imam dve roki
in dve nogi".
Nikolaj
>> The word is "ambā", it means "mother", and -ka is some kind of an affix,
>> "ambaka" so then means "eye". For "tryambaka" dictionary says "
>> three-eyed (originally probably "three-mothered" from the threefold
>> expression ...some sanskrit words...) -- but the computer dictionary is
>> a bit corrupted in this part, so I would have to check in the book.
>
> Ambaka is "śiva 's eye", "eye"
> http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0083-amedhas.jpg
>
> I do not think that ambaka (eye) is related to ambika (mother; ambālā,
> ambālikā, ambi; probably related to Serbo-Slavic baba, babaluk; papa,
> babo; baba [grandma] = mama [mother]?)
ambā, ambi, ambi, ambikā, ambālikā, corrupted amma, they all mean mother.
Yes, there are scans as well. You have the Old Germanic and other
cognates on the same page that you posted at the entry for "ambā".
What I quoted is here:
first column at the top:
-ambaka: m. "three-eyed" (originally probably "three-mothered" from the
threefold expression "ambe ambike 'mbālike")
About -ka ending, my grammar says:
"The suffix "-ka" (or "-ika") may mean "referring to" or indicate smallness:
anda (end) - antaka (death)
aśva (horse) - aśvika (colt)
dharma (law) - dharmika (virtuous)
nyāya (logic) - nyāyika (knower of Nyāya, logician)
putra (son) - putraka (little son)
etc...
Harlan Messinger
> VEDIC HINDUS WERE THE REAL ANCESTORS OF YOUR
> ARABIA BEFORE THE BASTARD MOHAMMED PLUNDERED
> ==============================================
>
> PROOF::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>
> VEDIC TEMPLE THE PAST TRUTH OF ISLAMIC KAABA
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> HISTORICAL PROOF OF KAABA BEING A VEDIC- HINDU TEMPLE ....!!!!!!
> ============================================================
>
> BREAKING NEWS .....!!!!!!!!!!!!! HISTORICAL PROOF OF KAABA BEING A
> VEDIC- HINDU TEMPLE ....!!!!!!
>
> THE KAABA IS NOTHING BUT THE VEDIC TEMPLE HINDUS DESTROYED BY THE
> BASTARD MOHAMMED AND HIS BAND OF CRIMINAL AND MURDERS
>
>
Do all your proofs consist of sequences, similar to the above, of four
increasingly detailed assertions of the same thing without even a
pretense of drawing conclusions from established premises?
Your repetitiveness and screaming indicate that you're more prone to
trying to browbeat people into believing you than to inducing them to
believe you through reasoning.
Paul J Kriha
"Nikolaj" <nikolaj...@bla.si> wrote in message news:fs0fc1$4gh$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
> Paul J Kriha pravi:
>
> >> Slovenian would of course be in dual, not plural: obe očesi.
> >
> > And similarly in Czech, where the dual is still surviving in animate
> > eyes, hands and ears:
> >
> > dual "obě oči" versus inanimate plural "obě oka"
> > dual "obě ruce" versus inanimate plural "obě ruky"
> > dual "obě uši" versus inanimate plural "obě ucha"
> >
> > pjk
>
>I know about that distinction in Czech, the animate vs. inanimate, but I
>never looked up on its meaning. Is animate used with living beings only?
Yes, the animate (noun&adjective case and verbal) forms are used for
living creatures only. They are used quite consistently for all living
creatures all the way from single cell protozoa to humans. There are
also some instances where human forms are different from other
animate ones (eg some plurals).
The surviving Czech duals "oči/ruce/uši" (eyes/hands/ears)
are used whenever refering to eyes/hands/ears of living creatures.
The inanimate objects with eyes, hands and ears always require plurals, e.g.:
"Both eyes of a needle" = "obě oka jehly"
"Both handles of a jug" (literarly ears of a jug) = "obě ucha džbánu"
>The use of nouns "oči", "ušesa", "roke", "noge" (feet) it a bit
>complicated in Slovene as well - if one talks about them in general
>(indefinite), even though there are exactly two of them, they are used
>in plural: "oči" or "očesa" (in Slovene "oči" is plural!) as in "oči me
>bolijo" (my eyes hurt), "moja ušesa" (my ears), "imam roke in noge" (I
>have arms and feet).
>
>But if one want to be specific or if he adds the number (two) or a
>pronoun "oba" (both, skt. "ubha"), then they must be in dual:
>"očesi sta zdravi" (both eyes are healthy), "obe ušesi", "imam dve roki
>in dve nogi".
Alright, that's quite different in Czech then. According to textbooks
"oči/ruce/uši" are reflexes of the old duals. However, the concept of
duality as such is long lost in Czech. So, "thousands of eyes turned
to the goalkeeper" will be "tisíce očí se obrátily na brankáře"
(where "očí" is genitive of "oči"). So it's "očí", not "okou" even though
it's thousands or indefinite number of them, not exactly two.
pjk
"příliš žluťoučký kůň úpěl ďábelské ódy"
Nikolaj
words have to be corrected:
> ambā, ambi, ambi, ambikā, ambālikā, corrupted amma, they all mean mother.
ambā, ambi, *ambī*, ...
> anda (end) - antaka (death)
*anta* (end) - antaka (death)
> aśva (horse) - aśvika (colt)
aśva (horse) - *aśvaka* (colt)
> dharma (law) - dharmika (virtuous)
dharma (law) - *dhārmika* (virtuous)
> nyāya (logic) - nyāyika (knower of Nyāya, logician)
nyāya (logic) - naiyāyika (knower of Nyāya, logician)
----------------
> I do not think that ambaka (eye) is related to ambika (mother; ambālā,
> ambālikā, ambi; probably related to Serbo-Slavic baba, babaluk; papa,
> babo; baba [grandma] = mama [mother]?).
The word "mama" actually exists in Sanskrit, it is genitive singular of
"aham" ("I").
Nikolaj
>> I know about that distinction in Czech, the animate vs. inanimate, but I
>> never looked up on its meaning. Is animate used with living beings only?
>
> Yes, the animate (noun&adjective case and verbal) forms are used for
> living creatures only. They are used quite consistently for all living
> creatures all the way from single cell protozoa to humans. There are
> also some instances where human forms are different from other
> animate ones (eg some plurals).
Thanks.
>> The use of nouns "oči", "ušesa", "roke", "noge" (feet) it a bit
>> complicated in Slovene as well - if one talks about them in general
>> (indefinite), even though there are exactly two of them, they are used
>> in plural: "oči" or "očesa" (in Slovene "oči" is plural!) as in "oči me
>> bolijo" (my eyes hurt), "moja ušesa" (my ears), "imam roke in noge" (I
>> have arms and feet).
>>
>> But if one want to be specific or if he adds the number (two) or a
>> pronoun "oba" (both, skt. "ubha"), then they must be in dual:
>> "očesi sta zdravi" (both eyes are healthy), "obe ušesi", "imam dve roki
>> in dve nogi".
Actually, what I have described above, functions in the same manner also
for all other nouns which naturally occur in pairs: "ročica" (handles -
of, for instance, a wheelbarrow - literally "ročica" is diminutive of
"roka/hand"); or "ears" of the jugs, pots; trouser legs, etc...
For all other nouns the dual is obligatory, with the usual exception of
the plural only nouns.
> Alright, that's quite different in Czech then. According to textbooks
> "oči/ruce/uši" are reflexes of the old duals. However, the concept of
> duality as such is long lost in Czech. So, "thousands of eyes turned
> to the goalkeeper" will be "tisíce očí se obrátily na brankáře"
> (where "očí" is genitive of "oči"). So it's "očí", not "okou" even though
> it's thousands or indefinite number of them, not exactly two.
So then, in fact these forms are plurals, but they were the duals in the
old times. I suppose the same goes for Slovene plural alternative "oči".
> "příliš žluťoučký kůň úpěl ďábelské ódy"
It seems ok, but what does it mean?
Nikolaj
>
> Ah, yes, the right side is limited to one non-terminal. But if one would
> free the right side, the notation would still be BNF (some kind of
> extended BNF), and the notation would be able to describe more complex
> languages.
Correction: I meant "left side" of the BNF substitution rule.
Paul J Kriha
Nikolaj řekl:
> Paul J Kriha pravi:
[...]
> So then, in fact these forms are plurals, but they were the duals in the
> old times. I suppose the same goes for Slovene plural alternative "oči".
Slovene and Lusatian duals are still alive and well. (I am envious. :-)
AFAIK, they are dead in other Slavic languages. I guess 99.9% of all
native Czech speakers would not know at all about existence of three
surviving reflexes of old duals. They would assume that the existence
of two separate plural forms is somehow related to animation.
But why just three words?
Other body parts that exist in pairs (noha/nohy, plíce/plíce, koleno/kolena,
rameno/ramena, pata/paty, zápěstí/zápěstí, pěst/pěstě, etc.) all have
the usual simple pair of singular/plural forms.
That is, except "plíce" (lungs) and "zápěstí" (wrist), in the above partial list.
They are a completely different kettle of fish. "Plíce" and "zápěstí"
are pluralia tantum.
> > "příliš žluťoučký kůň úpěl ďábelské ódy"
>
> It seems ok, but what does it mean?
:-)))
That's my cut&paste tool I accidentally left behind. It contains all
fifteen Cz diacritic letters, each of them occurring just once.
It's a convoluted artificial sentence but it is grammatically correct.
It literally means "exceedingly yellow horse wailed devilish odes" :-)
in that word order.
The adjective "žluťoučký" is a diminutive of "žlutý" (yellow).
This diminutive suggests emotional feelings towards the horse.
I can't represent that with a single English word. :-)
pjk
Helmut Richter
> Hm... what happened to all Greek and Sanskrit letters?
They were vandalised by my outdated software. (The stress of update labour
is still greater than the stress of some strange characters missing but the
break-even point will soon be reached.)
> You have, for instance:
> [very helpful examples snipped]
Thank you very much for these helpful examples.
> As for Sanskrit: well, it can not be done without (at least some)
> knowledge of Sanskrit - in fact I have found that the rules are great
> for learning Sanskrit ;)
The metalanguage used by Panini has several components which one has to be
aware of -- and to discern. Consider you have someone very ignorant (such as
me: a person *not* knowing Sanskrit but only interested in how Panini's
grammar works), or, still more ignorant, a computer program supposed to
apply Panini's sutras. How much would such a person or program have to
learn?
a) the character inventory of the script
b) the rules for resolving a sutra into its constituent words or
morphemes (e.g. undo sandhi, recognise case endings, ...)
c) the meaning of these words and word fragments
c1. for formal derivations using other sutras
c2. in other formal contexts, e.g. the shivasutra
c3. in linguistic jargon
c4. in ordinary Sanskrit language
c5. as words standing for themselves
(e.g. "guNa" is (c1) formally defined with (c3) its linguistic meaning
as some kind of ablaut, it is also used (c4) as an ordinary word and as
(c5) a word that could appear literally in a sentence)
d) the influence of other sutras (e.g. when context conditions are
inherited from preceding sutras)
Now, my point was that I was not able to find an "operating manual" or
"instructions for use" of Panini's grammar in the literature. What comes
closest is a booklet by Scharfe ("Panini's metalanguage") but even this one
has much implicit or "self-evident" information not mentioned. Obviously, it
is assumed that the only possible readers are those who are already
well-educated in Sanskrit and its grammar and study Panini only as a cherry
on the Sanskrit cake they have already eaten. I do wonder how anybody would
come to be able to use Panini as a reference for the first time in his life.
Now, ignorant interested people like me are rare. Is there an audience for a
"Panini operating manual", then? I think there is:
- If one would attempt to make derivations according to Panini's sutras
automatically (per computer), the sutras must be formalised. This should
be done according to a well-defined consistent strategy even though, in
each special case, the interpretation of a sutra may not be possible in
an automatic or algorithmic way.
- Even if such an endeavour is not planned: being able to explicitly state
the rules one would have employed to understand the precise meaning of
the sutras is a huge gain in knowledge compared to just knowing what each
sutra says on a sutra-by-sutra basis. (This is a lesson I have learnt
from my own field, mathematics: It is futile to treat all mathematical
theories in a formal way -- in fact most of it is done without strict
formalism such as axiom systems and proof rules -- but it is important to
know that and how one *could* do it if necessary.)
> So in effect the substitutions are just a subset of the whole grammar,
> and for everything else knowledge of Sanskrit is much needed.
And this for two reasons: One is that it is Panini's intention that the
grammar be extremely concise but not that it be entirely formal. So,
whenever a recurrence to ordinary non-formal Sanskrit promises more
conciseness, it is done. The other one is more important: no meaningful
grammar can be entirely formal. Somewhere it has to say which rule applies
in which semantic context or for which purpose. Many of the sutras have such
a condition "if the meaning is to be ...". There is no difference here to
the formal grammars used for defining programming languages: the mere syntax
is useless unless it is equipped with a connexion between the syntax rules
and their meaning and application (e.g. the Algol 60 report is only
partially in BNF, the larger part is in plain English.)
> I think the above examples show that the substitution rules are easily
> translated/represented. The problem is with the meta-rules, like those
> described above, or another example: for the last three chapters of the
> last book (VIII.2-4) there is a meta-rule, which says that all earlier
> rules have precedence over the following rules. If the two or more rules
> apply and all are from that part of the grammar, the earliest must be
> used. So in formal representation some kind of an ordered set of
> substitution rules would have to be used, or something like that. Maybe
> one would have to write down the substitution rules as above, and then
> _separately_ the "choice-rules", with which one would define which of
> the substitution rules would apply, if more than one would be applicable
> - that is if even the context would not be enough for determining the rule.
I am not too much afraid of such situations. Extra rules about the sequence
of applying substitution rules can easily be formalised. I am more afraid of
things that are not formal in nature. (I do not think everything can or
could be formalised, but one should be able to clearly say where the
bailiwick of formalisation ends.)
> By "two-sided" do you mean "the non-void u and w"?
Yes. It is only *such* recursion where languages become non-regular. The
precise statement would be
There is a derivation A->* uAv and not both of A ->* uA and A ->* Av are
derivations as well.
But this is a much later question. When we have a form of Panini's grammar
that is so completely formalised that ignorant (of Sanskrit, not of the
formal system) people or computers can use it for derivations, the real step
is done. Using the result for determining what language class (in the
formal-language sense) the resulting language is should be the smaller
problem.
--
Helmut Richter
Peter T. Daniels
> Now, my point was that I was not able to find an "operating manual" or
> "instructions for use" of Panini's grammar in the literature. What comes
> closest is a booklet by Scharfe ("Panini's metalanguage") but even this one
> has much implicit or "self-evident" information not mentioned. Obviously, it
> is assumed that the only possible readers are those who are already
> well-educated in Sanskrit and its grammar and study Panini only as a cherry
> on the Sanskrit cake they have already eaten. I do wonder how anybody would
> come to be able to use Panini as a reference for the first time in his life.
>
> Now, ignorant interested people like me are rare. Is there an audience for a
> "Panini operating manual", then? I think there is:
Have you tried Kiparsky?
Helmut Richter
> Have you tried Kiparsky?
Not yet. I just sent an order to the library.
--
Helmut Richter
harmony
"Helmut Richter" <hh...@web.de> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.08...@lxhri01.lrz.lrz-muenchen.de...
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Nikolaj wrote:
>
>
> Now, ignorant interested people like me are rare. Is there an audience for
> a
> "Panini operating manual", then? I think there is:
>
> --
> Helmut Richter
don't feel bad; you are far from being rare. the fact is few sanskrit
professors (all white) speak any sanskrit but they feel free to pretend to
teach in various univiersities in usa, including prof weasel at the harvard
university. of course, all that can change if the universities would use
common sense and hire brown hindu professors who do speak sanskrit.
Peter T. Daniels
Racist jackass.
harmony
Racist jackass.
-------------
tch, tch. don't be an idiot pot calling the nice kettle black. you do know i
am not the one appointing non-snaskrit speaking missionary white proffesors
in various sanskrit departments of universities who misteach sanskrit,
right?.
Peter T. Daniels
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:bec90e31-c239-49d0...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
The color of one's skin tells us nothing about one's ability in
Sanskrit.
I take it you consider the very dark Tamils to be better Sanskritists
than the fair-skinned Hindis?
harmony
---------------------
no, you continue in the same foolish vein. your chutzpa is exceeded only by
your ignorance. but we can't expect better from non-hindus who wouldn't want
to give up their places of "authority" where they wouldn't want to be
confused with facts, do we?
Craoi...@gmail.com
If universities used common sense, they would abolish all instruction
in Sanskrit immediately. They should teach living languages instead,
as, for instance, Arabic. Then there is of course Classical Arabic,
Modern Standard Arabic, Egyptian Colloquial Arabic, Gulf Colloquial
Arabic, Hassaniya,...and did I mention Arabic?
Nikolaj
>>> "příliš žluťoučký kůň úpěl ďábelské ódy"
>> It seems ok, but what does it mean?
>
> :-)))
>
> That's my cut&paste tool I accidentally left behind. It contains all
> fifteen Cz diacritic letters, each of them occurring just once.
> It's a convoluted artificial sentence but it is grammatically correct.
Yes, this part I guessed, except the "just once".
> It literally means "exceedingly yellow horse wailed devilish odes" :-)
> in that word order.
>
> The adjective "žluťoučký" is a diminutive of "žlutý" (yellow).
> This diminutive suggests emotional feelings towards the horse.
> I can't represent that with a single English word. :-)
Ok, thanks. I would never have guessed it. Now that you translated it, I
see some similarities: "kůň" is "konj", "žlutý" is sometimes "žolt", but
nowadays we usually use "rumen".
Craoi...@gmail.com
> but we can't expect better from non-hindus
Racist bigotry.
harmony
<Craoi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3db7fdb-0629-4df6...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 27, 1:57 am, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> but we can't expect better from non-hindus
>
> Racist bigotry.
why did you clip out the remaaining part of the sentence that qualified
these non-hindus who in effect are missionary-motivated?
Craoi...@gmail.com
> <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Why don't you learn Arabic instead?
harmony
<Craoi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e67ed1ad-b726-43bf...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
i rather eat a bar of soap.
Peter T. Daniels
> <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
What in your sentence indicated (falsely, of course) that "these non-
hindus" are "missionary-motivated"? The vast majority of the American
professoriat either practice no religion or make no public
announcement or display of their religion.
Craoi...@gmail.com
> <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e67ed1ad-b726-43bf...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On 27 maalis, 20:19, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> <Craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:a3db7fdb-0629-4df6...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Mar 27, 1:57 am, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> but we can't expect better from non-hindus
>
> >> > Racist bigotry.
>
> >> why did you clip out the remaaining part of the sentence that qualified
> >> these non-hindus who in effect are missionary-motivated?
>
> > Why don't you learn Arabic instead?
>
> i rather eat a bar of soap.
Be my guest.
harmony
<Craoi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f2f09efe-9dcf-479b...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
at a bring-your-own-soap party?
harmony
------------------------------------
you should read the research works of thinkers like rajiv malhotra to
understand the vast network of missionary interference in sanskrit or indic
education in
universities across usa. i looked for a few book titles but could not get to
it readily to recommend here. i will post the titles when i find them which
should be soon.
it is really astounding that missionaries are so motivated to keep millions
of americans in dark and mislead them into all manners of prejudicial view
of
indian civilization. the misionaries are deeply entrnched in american
education about indic civilization.
it is as if they are scared their house cards will come crashing down should
america get the factual understanding of indic civilization. prof witzel of
harvard is just one of them which his testimony has revealed in a lawsuit.
once i met valerie tarico, the wonderful author of "the dark side" (do read
her book), at a conference and had a long talk with her. she, like many
american intellectuals at the conference just could not believe the amount
of disinformation being peddled by the missionaries in usa about other
cultures - specially india.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:67c232f6-6458-4706...@d62g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
What does "one of them" mean? Witzel has revealed he is a missionary?
Just for the record, I don't think you know what "missionary" means.
>
> once i met valerie tarico, the wonderful author of "the dark side" (do read
> her book), at a conference and had a long talk with her. she, like many
> american intellectuals at the conference just could not believe the amount
> of disinformation being peddled by the missionaries in usa about other
> cultures - specially india.
This is so reminiscent of the paranoid nonsense currently being
peddled in the movie "Expelled". Except there the evil tentacles
belong to evolutionists, not "missionaries".
Ross Clark
anal...@hotmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
If teh following extract from Wiki about Witzel is true then his
"scholarship" has an agenda, a hoary contemptible one at that.
start quote:
He has organized a number of international conferences at Harvard such
as the first of the intermittent International Vedic Workshops
(1989,1999,2004), the first of several annual International
Conferences on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India (1995 sqq.), the
yearly Round Tables on the Ethnogenesis of South and Central Asia
(1999 sqq).[32]
end quote.
benl...@ihug.co.nz
Really? Would you care to elaborate on this alleged "agenda", and how
this list of conferences reveals it?
Do you agree with harmony that Witzel is a "missionary"?
Ross Clark
Paul J Kriha
"Rumen"? That sounds like a completely strange word to me.
If I were told it was meant to mean some kind of a colour, I would
assume (incorrectly) it meant a kind of red or reddish pink.
As in a poetic expression "ruměné líce" (red cheeks).
Normal red cheeks would be "červené líce" and deep red
cheeks "rudé líce".
pjk
Dušan Vukotić
<paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
> "Rumen"? That sounds like a completely strange word to me.
> If I were told it was meant to mean some kind of a colour, I would
> assume (incorrectly) it meant a kind of red or reddish pink.
> As in a poetic expression "ruměné líce" (red cheeks).
>
> Normal red cheeks would be "červené líce" and deep red
> cheeks "rudé líce".
I see... you are not intelligent enough to understand that the Slavic
word crven (červen) is closely related (Xur-Bel-Gon basis) to rumen
(carmin, ruby).
DV
anal...@hotmail.com
Whats your take on Witzel's qualifications/motivation to host
conferences on dowry and bride-burning (assuming that he actually did
organize many of them, as alleged in Wiki) ?
Trond Engen
> Whats your take on Witzel's qualifications/motivation to host
> conferences on dowry and bride-burning (assuming that he actually did
> organize many of them, as alleged in Wiki) ?
You didn't answer Ross' questions. But never mind. The program for the
first annual conference, the one he's said to have helped organize, was
easy to find, so I suppose you read it before your post. That raises
some questions. I'll come to that, but first I quote the program in full:
> THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DOWRY AND BRIDE BURNING IN
> INDIA
> ======================================================================
>
> DATES OF CONFERENCE: SEPTEMBER 30, OCTOBER 1 & 2, 1995
>
> PLACE: HARVARD LAW SCHOOL, POUND HALL 101 (on Massachussetts Avenue)
> ----------
>
> CONFERENCE OFFICE: 53 CHURCH STREET, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS MAILING
> ADDRESS: ISADABB, P.O. BOX 8766, SALEM, MA 01971 TELEPHONES:
> 617-496)8570 (Dr. Witzel), 508-546)7354 (Mr. Thakur) fax 508- 546
> 7354 email
> ================================================================
>
> PROGRAM ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1995, SATURDAY
>
> 1:30 PM: Registration Fee $5.00 for students, otherwise $40.00
>
> 2:30 PM: Inauguration of the Conference: Michael Witzel
>
> 2:40 PM: Julia Leslie, London University "Dowry, 'dowry deaths', and
> violence against women"
>
> 3:10 PM: Attorney Rani Jethmalani, at the Supreme Court of India
> "Inertness of legal, administrative and judicial systems in India"
>
> 3:40 PM: H.B. Thakur, Chair, Board of Directors, International
> Society Against Dowry and Bride Burning in India, Inc. "A brief
> outline of practical steps towards prevention of dowry deaths"
>
> 3:55 PM: Coffee Break
>
> 4:10 PM: Enrica Garzilli, Harvard Law School "Stridhana: A millenary
> problem"
>
> 4:40 PM: Werner Menski, London University "Dowry: A survey of the
> issues and the literature"
>
> 5:10 PM: Coffee Break
>
> 5:30 PM: Michael Witzel "Little dowry, no sati: the non-prevalence of
> dowry and widow burning in Vedic India"
>
> 6:00 PM: Biswam Rambilass, Durban University, South Africa
> "Non-prevalence of dowry among Indian South Africans"
>
> 6:30 PM: Arvind Sharma Dowry and Sati: A re-evaluation of Hindu
> Scriptures
>
> 7:00 PM: END OF SESSION ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1995, SATURDAY.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> PROGRAM ON OCTOBER 1, 1995, SUNDAY
>
> <<Note that panels are still flexible if desired or necessary>>
> <<We encourage input fromte audience.>>
>
> FIRST SESSION IN THE MORNING:
>
> 9:00 AM: General Assembly, Coffee and Snacks
>
> 9:30 AM: Panel (A): "Legal system in India: its inadequacies and
> solutions" Panel moderator: Attorney Rani Jethmalani Panelists:
> Werner Menski, Atty. Subhadra Chaturvedi Panel record keeper: Ritu
> Banerji
>
> Panel (B): "Mahatma Gandhi's views on women's freedom : re-evaluation
> of Hindu Scriptures" Panel moderator: Arvind Sharma Panelists: Sita
> Kapadia, Ramnarayan Tripathi Panel record keeper: Latha Ravi
>
> Panel (C): "Practical steps towards prevention of dowry deaths in
> India" Panel moderator: Himendra Thakur Panelists: Architect Nalini
> Parikh, Bisvam Rambilass, Julia Leslie Panel record keeper: Riti
> Sachdeva
>
> 11:00 AM: Coffee break
>
> SECOND SESSION IN THE MORNING:
>
> 11:30 AM: Panel (D): "Economics of dowry, female
> infanticide/foeticide, "Stridhanam" and female inheritance" Panel
> moderator: Vijayendra Rao Panelists: Enrica Garzilli, Renuka Sharma
> Panel record keeper: Ritu Banerji
>
> Panel (E): "Past and present of dowry death cases: geographical
> distribution inside and outside of India" Panel moderator: Atty.
> Subhadra Chaturvedi Panelists: Malaya Khaund, Ramnarayan Tripathi,
> Bisvam Rambilass Panel record keeper: Monisha Dasgupta
>
> Panel (F): "Witness Account: real cases of dowry deaths" Panel
> moderator: Satya Agarwal Panelists: Attorney Rani Jethmalani,
> Himendra Thakur Panel record keeper: Lata Ravi
>
> 12:30 PM: Lunch break
>
> AFTERNOON SESSION:
>
> 2:00 PM: General Assembly : Presentation of Panel Summary, questions
> and answers:
>
> 2:00 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (A) : "Legal system
> in India: its inadequacies and solutions" Panel moderator: Attorney
> Rani Jethmalani Panel record keeper: Ritu Banerji
>
> 2:30 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (B): "Mahatma
> Gandhi's views on women's freedom: re-evaluation of Hindu Scriptures"
> Panel moderator: Arvind Sharma Panel record keeper: Latha Ravi
>
> 3:00 PM: Coffee break
>
> 3:30 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (C): "Practical steps
> towards prevention of dowry deaths in India" Panel moderator:
> Himendra Thakur Panel record keeper: Riti Sachdeva
>
> 4 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (D): "Economics of
> dowry, female infanticide/foeticide, "Stridhanam" and female
> inheritance" Panel moderator: Vijayendra Rao Panel record keeper:
> Ritu Banerji
>
> 4:30 PM: Coffee break
>
> AFTERNOON SESSION (CONTINUED):
>
> 5 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (E): "Past and present
> of dowry death cases: geographical distribution inside and outside of
> India" Panel moderator: Attorney Subhadra Chaturvedi Panel record
> keeper: Monisha Dasgupta
>
> 5:30 PM: Summary and questions/answers on Panel (F): "Witness
> Accounts: real cases of dowry deaths" Panel moderator: Satya Agarwal
> Panel record keeper: Lata Ravi
>
> 6:00 PM: END OF SESSION
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> PROGRAM ON OCTOBER 2, 1995, MONDAY FINAL SESSION OF THE CONFERENCE
>
> 6:30 PM: Sita Kapadia "A tribute to Mahatma Gandhi: his views on
> women and social change"
>
> 6:50 PM: Michael Witzel "Summary of panel discussions and evaluation
> of conference proceedings"
>
> 7:15 PM: Coffee break
>
> 7:30 PM: Renuka Sharma, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
> "Female infanticide and foeticide in India"
>
> 7:50 PM: Attorney Rani Jethmalani "Resolutions on legal and judicial
> reforms in India"
>
> 8:15 PM: Coffee break
>
> 8:30 PM: Himendra B. Thakur "Resolutions on practical steps towards
> prevention of dowry deaths in India"
>
> 8:50 PM: Julia Leslie "General summary, announcements and conclusion
> of the Conference"
>
> 9:00 PM: END OF THE CONFERENCE
(<http://lloyd.emich.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9509&L=indology&D=1&F=P&P=8008>)
Given your contempt, I expected it to be a conference devoted to the
conservation of brideburning. Now:
1. What possible other motivation than humanitarian can you read out of
this program?
2. Why do you find his support for multidisciplinary knowledge as a base
for the struggle against "Dowry and Bride-Burning in India" contemptible?
3. What in this program reveals him as being a missionary? Or broader,
what in this program do you consider specifically Christian?
4. How can it be supposed to influence on his scholarly work as a
linguist or philologist in a negative way (= constitute an 'agenda')?
5. How do you plan to come out of this with any intellectual or moral
integrity?
--
Trond Engen
- as if you had
Patrick Karl
Only you are intelligent enough to divine these relationships to the
Xur-Bel-Gon bases, no?
Dušan Vukotić
> Du¹an Vukotiæ wrote:
> > On Mar 29, 8:11 am, "Paul J Kriha"
> > <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
>
> >> "Rumen"? That sounds like a completely strange word to me.
> >> If I were told it was meant to mean some kind of a colour, I would
> >> assume (incorrectly) it meant a kind of red or reddish pink.
>
> >> Normal red cheeks would be "èervené líce" and deep red
> >> cheeks "rudé líce".
>
> > I see... you are not intelligent enough to understand that the Slavic
> > (carmin, ruby).
>
> Only you are intelligent enough to divine these relationships to the
> Xur-Bel-Gon bases, no?
Where this parachuter came from?
DV
Paul J Kriha
news:9de576c2-d82b-4c8d...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Why are you, you such a superintelligent being, why are you
wasting your time with me? Why? Long long time ago you
have figured out that I am not intelligent enough to tie my
shoelaces without help, so why, for crisakes do you bother
with me?
I told you months ago that I have never studied any South
Slavic language. So it shouldn't be a total surprise for you
to find that there are words like "rumen" than I have never
come across before. On the other hand I know very well
that "červen" (June) and "červená" (red) are related to "červ"
(worm), which was a kind of worm used to manufacture red
dyes. That is easy to figure out even for unintelligent creatures
like me. Sorry though, I will remain ignorant of the Xur-Bel-Gon
system, that is is just too taxing for my inferior brains.
pjk
Paul J Kriha
news:8fc546b4-732e-4e08...@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>> > On Mar 29, 8:11 am, "Paul J Kriha"
>> > <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
>>
>> >> "Rumen"? That sounds like a completely strange word to me.
>> >> If I were told it was meant to mean some kind of a colour, I would
>> >> assume (incorrectly) it meant a kind of red or reddish pink.
>>
>> >> Normal red cheeks would be "červené líce" and deep red
>> >> cheeks "rudé líce".
>>
>> > I see... you are not intelligent enough to understand that the Slavic
>> > (carmin, ruby).
>>
>> Only you are intelligent enough to divine these relationships to the
>> Xur-Bel-Gon bases, no?
>
>Where this parachuter came from?
Oh, he must be just another person you made to see the light.
It's a shock to realize that we are all such simpletons.
pjk
Dušan Vukotić
wrote:
> "Du¹an Vukotiæ" <dusan.vuko...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9de576c2-d82b-4c8d...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On Mar 29, 8:11 am, "Paul J Kriha"
> ><paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz>
>
> >> "Rumen"? That sounds like a completely strange word to me.
> >> If I were told it was meant to mean some kind of a colour, I would
> >> assume (incorrectly) it meant a kind of red or reddish pink.
>
> >> Normal red cheeks would be "èervené líce" and deep red
> >> cheeks "rudé líce".
>
> >I see... you are not intelligent enough to understand that the Slavic
> >(carmin, ruby).
>
> Why are you, you such a superintelligent being, why are you
> wasting your time with me?
Svaka krpa nadje zakrpu (literally: every patch finds its mending;
every block finds its hole). Simply, if I were intelligent ENOUGH I
wouldn't spend my time on this forum. I am NOT intelligent Kriha, I am
stupid; and you seem to be even more stupid than I am! ;-)
>Why? Long long time ago you
> have figured out that I am not intelligent enough to tie my
> shoelaces without help, so why, for crisakes do you bother
> with me?
Sorry, I did not know that mom is still caring for you.
> I told you months ago that I have never studied any South
> Slavic language.
Irrelevant. You are good in Czech... that's enough.
> So it shouldn't be a total surprise for you
> to find that there are words like "rumen" than I have never
> come across before.
Nevertheless, you have heard for Romans, haven't you? :-)
>On the other hand I know very well
> that "èerven" (June) and "èervená" (red) are related to "èerv"
> (worm)
Wrong! Slavic crven (červen) is directly related to the color of blood
or meat (Serb, krv => crven; Gr. κρέας/kreas meat; cf. rumen, carmin,
crimson); crv (cherv) is named like that in accordance to the Slavic
word krvo-tok (blood-circulation; cf. Serb. krvo-tok => crvo-tok =>
crvo-točina clubmoss); worms are making a vascular structure in the
body (tissue) they have occupied. In order to properly understand the
history of the above words it is necessary to start from the Slavic
word crevo (črevo; gut, intestine, hose, a flexible pipe).
> which was a kind of worm used to manufacture red
> dyes.
It just looks plausible but, in fact, it didn't happened that way.
>That is easy to figure out even for unintelligent creatures
> like me. Sorry though, I will remain ignorant of the Xur-Bel-Gon
> system, that is is just too taxing for my inferior brains.
Kriha, I was joking - you are an incarnation of the Supreme
Intelligence. Satisfied?
DV
Nikolaj
>> As for Sanskrit: well, it can not be done without (at least some)
>> knowledge of Sanskrit - in fact I have found that the rules are great
>> for learning Sanskrit ;)
>
> The metalanguage used by Panini has several components which one has to be
> aware of -- and to discern. Consider you have someone very ignorant (such as
> me: a person *not* knowing Sanskrit but only interested in how Panini's
> grammar works), or, still more ignorant, a computer program supposed to
> apply Panini's sutras.
Panini's grammar is a grammar of a language with the manual in the same
language. The analogy for a programming language C++ would be that the
'operating manual' as you say, for the EBNF for C++, would be written
using C++ programs. So the situation is the same, as if one would be
trying to learn the C++, and he would, without any pre-knowledge, get a
bunch of formal rules
(http://www.externsoft.ch/download/cpp-iso.html#toc_prod, first table)
and another bunch of C++ programs.
So the people who can read C++, can understand the programs which
describe the use of the formal rules, but they haven't rewritten yet
those programs in some other language.
> How much would such a person or program have to
> learn?
>
> a) the character inventory of the script
>
> b) the rules for resolving a sutra into its constituent words or
> morphemes (e.g. undo sandhi, recognise case endings, ...)
>
> c) the meaning of these words and word fragments
>
> c1. for formal derivations using other sutras
> c2. in other formal contexts, e.g. the shivasutra
> c3. in linguistic jargon
> c4. in ordinary Sanskrit language
> c5. as words standing for themselves
>
> (e.g. "guNa" is (c1) formally defined with (c3) its linguistic meaning
> as some kind of ablaut, it is also used (c4) as an ordinary word and as
> (c5) a word that could appear literally in a sentence)
>
> d) the influence of other sutras (e.g. when context conditions are
> inherited from preceding sutras)
>
> Now, my point was that I was not able to find an "operating manual" or
> "instructions for use" of Panini's grammar in the literature. What comes
> closest is a booklet by Scharfe ("Panini's metalanguage") but even this one
> has much implicit or "self-evident" information not mentioned. Obviously, it
> is assumed that the only possible readers are those who are already
> well-educated in Sanskrit and its grammar and study Panini only as a cherry
> on the Sanskrit cake they have already eaten. I do wonder how anybody would
> come to be able to use Panini as a reference for the first time in his life.
The "operating manual" is given together with the rules. And because of
the grammar being written with the large emphasis on brevity, it is not
given in a systematic way, like some other literature, but the
meta-rules and the substitution rules are interspersed throught the
whole grammar.
To the point b) more things should be added, like recognition and
interpretaton of compounded words, etc... I think that the linguistic
knowledge is not necessary (c3), because all the technical terms like
guṇa are defined in the grammar (guṇa is a set: guṇa = {a, e, o}). Some
of these definitions are described with a plain Sanskrit phrase, like
"halo 'nantarāḥ saṃyogaḥ". Such phrases, here 'anantarāḥ', can be
problematic without a knowledge of Sanskrit. For the word 'anantarāḥ',
the precise meaning within the grammar is quite simple, at least within
the part that I have studied. But of course this is not enough, because
there might be other meta-rules which influence the interpretation of
this rule, somewhere in the part which was not studied yet, and some
other terms might be more complex. And of course, one has to know and
understand the whole grammar at once to interpret the rules correctly.
> Now, ignorant interested people like me are rare. Is there an audience for a
> "Panini operating manual", then? I think there is:
>
> - If one would attempt to make derivations according to Panini's sutras
> automatically (per computer), the sutras must be formalised. This should
> be done according to a well-defined consistent strategy even though, in
> each special case, the interpretation of a sutra may not be possible in
> an automatic or algorithmic way.
I certainly think it would be nice to represent the Pāṇini's grammar in
a modern form. I suppose it is more of a task for people acquainted with
the formal systems, than linguists.
>> So in effect the substitutions are just a subset of the whole grammar,
>> and for everything else knowledge of Sanskrit is much needed.
>
> And this for two reasons: One is that it is Panini's intention that the
> grammar be extremely concise but not that it be entirely formal. So,
> whenever a recurrence to ordinary non-formal Sanskrit promises more
> conciseness, it is done. The other one is more important: no meaningful
> grammar can be entirely formal. Somewhere it has to say which rule applies
> in which semantic context or for which purpose. Many of the sutras have such
> a condition "if the meaning is to be ...". There is no difference here to
> the formal grammars used for defining programming languages: the mere syntax
> is useless unless it is equipped with a connexion between the syntax rules
> and their meaning and application (e.g. the Algol 60 report is only
> partially in BNF, the larger part is in plain English.)
I see this a bit differently. I don't think that the first point is at
all important, or even maybe isn't at all true. Certainly some rules
aren't strictly formal in the sense that they are simply described in
Sanskrit, rather than written in a form which computers would be able to
use. I see these as analogies of a "formal" rule "c_char ->
ANY_CHARACTER_EXCEPT_NEWLINE_SQUOTE_BACKSLASH" from the above EBNF for C++.
The semantic context you mention is necessary because of the language
the grammar describes. Natural languages are also semantically dependent
and there are words which inflect differently when they mean different
things. I see the use of such words in the grammar as terminal symbols
of the BNF. For instance there can be, now this is a made-up example, a
rule for accusative plural of feminine nouns ending in -ī. But then
there would be a special rule, that applies only to the word "lakṣmī"
when this word means the Hindu Goddess. The word "lakṣmī" is then an
exception to the general rule, and even so only when it has a certain
meaning. Here applies what I said about the "choice-rules" - one has to
define somehow, when to use a certain substitution rule, and in some
parts this dependents on semantics as well.
> I am not too much afraid of such situations. Extra rules about the sequence
> of applying substitution rules can easily be formalised. I am more afraid of
> things that are not formal in nature. (I do not think everything can or
> could be formalised, but one should be able to clearly say where the
> bailiwick of formalisation ends.)
Well, those rules are AFAIK very complex and things easily become quite
entangled. And that was only one example, there are other metarules that
define other things...
Helmut Richter
> Helmut Richter pravi:
> > Now, my point was that I was not able to find an "operating manual" or
> > "instructions for use" of Panini's grammar in the literature. What comes
> > closest is a booklet by Scharfe ("Panini's metalanguage") but even this one
> > has much implicit or "self-evident" information not mentioned. Obviously, it
> > is assumed that the only possible readers are those who are already
> > well-educated in Sanskrit and its grammar and study Panini only as a cherry
> > on the Sanskrit cake they have already eaten. I do wonder how anybody would
> > come to be able to use Panini as a reference for the first time in his life.
>
> The "operating manual" is given together with the rules. And because of the
> grammar being written with the large emphasis on brevity, it is not given in a
> systematic way, like some other literature, but the meta-rules and the
> substitution rules are interspersed throught the whole grammar.
Let me repeat the question as I asked it: I do wonder how anybody would
come to be able to use Panini as a reference for the first time in his
life.
The classical answer is to learn the 4000 sutras by heart and *then* study
what they mean. I assume this is *not* the way you learnt how to use
Panini's grammar. Somehow you must have learnt to apply the metarules of
which you gave examples. Even those that are explicit somewhere in the
grammar must be applied by the student long before he has a chance of
stumbling over them (and this even if it is assumed that he will
understand them at once). I can hardly imagine that anybody is able to
apply Panini's grammar just by reading it in its entirety in order to find
its "operating manual" underway. One may have learnt using Panini's
grammar under the guidance of a teacher or in some kind of course. Then
the course material would be a sort of "operating manual" and one would
expect to find traces of such material somewhere in the internet or in
books.
> But
> of course this is not enough, because there might be other meta-rules which
> influence the interpretation of this rule, somewhere in the part which was not
> studied yet, and some other terms might be more complex. And of course, one
> has to know and understand the whole grammar at once to interpret the rules
> correctly.
So you knew and understood the whole grammar at once before you were able
to interpret any of the rules correctly? How does one come to this
knowledge and understanding? Any other understanding is acquired step by
step, but not this one.
> I certainly think it would be nice to represent the Panini's grammar in a
> modern form. I suppose it is more of a task for people acquainted with the
> formal systems, than linguists.
Both cooperating. Each one is lost alone.
> Well, those rules are AFAIK very complex and things easily become quite
> entangled. And that was only one example, there are other metarules that
> define other things...
Everybody is less afraid of complications in his own field than of those
in a field he knows only superficially. Now, from other contributions
under your name I conclude that your field has more to do with formal
languages than with linguistics. This renders your answer to my question
above the more interesting.
--
Helmut Richter