Re: [Samskrita] Sanskrit - 'Dead language'

[Phani Kumar]

Namaste.

1)As per Census of India (2001) over 14000 persons returned sanskrit as their mother tongue(Listed at no 17 after  punjabi in the attached statement). I could not lay my hands on 2011 census figures. Predictably the number could not have become. Number of people who speak a language are always many more than those who have a language as their mother tongue.The number of people who speak sanskrit is increasing by the day thanks to the effort of organizations like Samskritbharati.

2)Sanskrit was one of the 14 languages included in the original eighth schedule to the constitution. the number has now risen to 22 after the inclusion of Sindhi,Konkani, Nepali,Meiteilon etc.

3)Sanskrit is one of the official languages of Uttarakhand.

4)The attached Wikipedia article lists 8 sanskrit speaking villages.

5)Apart from hundreds of exclusive sanskrit schools, there are any number of schools and colleges which have sanskrit departments.There are about 13 sanskrit universities.

6) The number of institutions which teach Sanskrit abroad are also on the rise.cf; St.James Institutions of the UK, Australian National University etc(Please see the attached video). Presumably, they wouldnt be doing this if no benefit were to be had from learning sanskrit.

7)When you travel abroad, among the first things you notice is that English is not all that universal. In vast swathes of the planet, english is not even understood.In continental europe, latin America,China, knowledge of english is of a very limited help. So the point of sanskrit not being understood by many people etc doesn't wash.

8) It is possible to argue that if one were to purge all indian languages of sanskrit words, it won't be posible to speak any language.

Is it, therefore, fair to say that the last native speaker of sanskrit has died and therefore it is time its obituary was drafted?

Dr. Phani Kumar

32,Prasasan Nagar,

Road-72,

Jubilee Hills,

Hyderabad 500033

Andhra Pradesh.

कालोह्ययं निरवधिः विपुलाच पृथ्वी ।

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Usha Sanka <usha....@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste

For Sanskrit is taught as a ‘Dead language’ which is defined as a ‘ language no longer spoken by living people and in circulation in society’ (!) .   

Apart from discussions, opinions, points made individually in different contexts, is there a full-fledged paper/article/book/seminar where this issue has been academically dealt by any Samskrtam scholars? (Searched BVP and samskrita groups for the points-)

Was looking for something where the issue is systematically, academically and point-wise way analysed in these lines- 

1. What is a dead language? 

2. What are the basic criteria for a dead language? 

3. Samskrtam vis a vis other dead languages of the world 

4. Samskrtam status, standards and role as a language in modern world context.. 

5. Indian traditional approach on this issue vs non-Indian standing. 

6. Special condition of Samskrtam

Or what lines one should think and approach on this issue? Is it always to be divided between indifferent non-samskrtam and emotional samskrtam standards..? 

-vinItA

उषा

On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Dr.BVK Sastry (G-Mail-pop) <sastr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste

 

1. I am also of the same opinion: <  Inclusion of Ksha, Tra and Jna is similar to the most used combined consonants. (Samyuktakshara) evolved over centuries of Tradition, but not part of Vyakarana Scheme or Shiksha Scheme…..  Inclusion of Am/ Ah(a) is demonstrative   .. the patterns of writing including this script of Devanagari are part of recent evolution >. The influence of regional languages (Prakrutham /Desi) can not be ruled out.  Example :The short ‘e’ , sort ‘o’ from Kannada.

 

2.  The importance of ‘Oral Tradition’ in learning Samskrutham is slowly fading out under the pressure and pervasion of the ‘Roman Transliteration model of Sanskrit learning’ promoted by many  ‘Sanskrit teachers’ desirous of  ‘Quick speech (tvaritaa vaktaaro bhavema . .. ?! Mahabhashya !) In one of the Universities with a big name, the Sanskrit student has no need to learn uttering of even a single sound of Sanskrit through out the course ! For Sanskrit is taught as a ‘Dead language’ which is defined as a ‘ language no longer spoken by living people and in circulation in society’ (!) .   

 

 

3. The rosary in the hand of Saraswati may be probably better explained as ‘ A-Kshara’ maalaa = The eternal immutable sounds. The count of 63 /64 units of sounds  under  ‘Shabmbu Matha’  attributed and associated with Panini’s name and Samskrutham Vyakranam may be a teaching tradition which links  ‘ Pratishaakhya approach and Mantra-Shastra approach’ flown in to the teaching of  ‘Vednaga Vyakarana’. The supporting reason being :Learning of Samskrutham was mainly for the ‘Voice training’ critical for the  ‘Veda-Mantra –Articulation (ucchaarana)’.  That apart, why only three  ‘Samyukta-aksharas as ksha –tra-jna’ when several others are possible may be an interesting issue to deliberate.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry  

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Phani Kumar]

Namaste. Here is video clip that I could not attach to my previous mail.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

1. Is it not high time academicians such as linguists pondered over the question of why there is a resistance to the use of terms such as “dead language” in reference to languages such as Sanskrit?  Is not this resistance based on the fact that all the languages that are brought under the category of ‘dead language’ do not possess the same characteristics and the users of this term are able to see that the term ‘dead language’ is not able to communicate the idea that Sanskrit has many distinct features vis-à-vis the other similar languages which have very few or no  mother tongue speakers ? 

 

2. The statements such as "most observers would agree that, in some crucial way, Sanskrit is dead" by western scholars such as Sheldon Pollock (2001) ("The Death of Sanskrit", Comparative Studies in Society and History 43 (2): 392–426, ) were contested by western scholars only.

 

 Hannender (2002) , for example, contests Pollock's statement by saying,

 

 "On a more public level the statement that Sanskrit is a dead language is misleading, for Sanskrit is quite obviously not as dead as other dead languages and the fact that it is spoken, written and read will probably convince most people that it cannot be a dead language in the most common usage of the term. Pollock’s notion of the “death of Sanskrit” remains in this unclear realm between academia and public opinion when he says that “most observers would agree that, in some crucial way, Sanskrit is dead”?( "On "The Death of Sanskrit", Indo-Iranian Journal 45 (4): 293–310(18)),

 

Hatcher, Brian A. (2007) too contests Pollock's idea in "Sanskrit and the morning after", Indian Economic & Social History Review 44 (3): 333–361.

 

3. Hannender's words, "Sanskrit is quite obviously not as dead as other dead languages " shows that it is this distinction of Sanskrit in comparison  to the other  languages that are declared as 'dead' that makes most people rebel against the characterization of Sanskrit as a 'dead language' .

 

4. The term 'dead language' and its definition in some books of Linguistics are not so sacrosanct and unalterable that the term and its textbook definition need to be applied to Sanskrit and Sanskrit should be called a 'dead language' under that definition.

 

5. The contemporary state of Latin and the contemporary state of Sanskrit, though appear to have some similarities that prompt scholars to group the two languages under one category, in fact have many differences.  Hence even if Latin is accepted as a 'dead language' by the experts in that language for any reason(s),  Sanskrit need not be accepted as a 'dead language' for those reasons.

 

6. It should be noted  that the call for rejecting the characterization of Sanskrit as a 'dead language'  is not an emotional call but a well reasoned out academic call for a more meticulous comparative study of languages which are presently grouped under the same category without such keen analysis.

 

7.  It will be more fruitful and useful in this regard to contribute information on how the creative works in Sanskrit continued , in fact, more vigorously during the more recent centuries (post 16th ) , in the fields of aarthika side of vyaakaraNa and the prakriyaa side of the same, in the fields of alankaara such as new theories of Chamatkara, new concepts of Naayikaa-bhedas, naayakabhedas etc. emerged, new creative works at least in the form of  translations of vernacular poetry new play-works (such as vyaayogas and bhaaNas), new Vedanta works such as Achala Vedanta , later Gaudeeya VaishNava works etc. ,  came out without the assumed interruption found in the analysis of scholars such as Sheldon Pollock. I request scholars in this list contribute all such information at their disposal, if necessary, in a different thread.

 

8. That way we can reassure to ourselves that groups such as BVP or Samskrita are not post-mortem study groups. 

 

Regards,

 

Nagaraj

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Ushaji's original question was

 

Apart from discussions, opinions, points made individually in different contexts, is there a full-fledged paper/article/book/seminar where this issue has been academically dealt by any Samskrtam scholars? (Searched BVP and samskrita groups for the points-)

This blog gives many links to articles:

 

http://theanalyst007.blogspot.com/2013/04/why-indian-must-learn-dead-language-called-sanskrit.html

Nagaraj 
On Monday, March 3, 2014 8:48:19 AM UTC+5:30, Usha Sanka wrote:

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Mod Note===

This topic has already been discussed in another group. Please don't make further posts on this topic and Usha is requested not to post on multiple groups. Cross posting is not allowed in BVP.. Thanks

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Aclarification on myNote.....
I meant Specifically this thread  Sanskrit - 'Dead language'. Postings on all announcements of books, lectures, seminars, conferences, honours/recognition received, Sanskrit-related cultural events , etc. are welocme on VP that is why this list is for!!!!!

Please see postings on this thread in Samskrita group and several related posting done on this thread
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/samskrita/Ajit$20Gargeshwari/samskrita/PR2bj1VMfvw/gtnrzOGu3FAJ

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।