spelling and pronunciation

[ks nar]

Namaskarams to all !

I have great regard for Sanskrit language, but few clarifications:

(1). Most of the languages have "Eka vachan(singular)"  and "Bahu vachan (plural)". But Sanskrit has in also 'dvi vachan'(  2 quantity plural).

Kindly mail if any reason/metric for this. Any other languages have this?

(2). Among the three words, Brahma, Vishnu, Maheshwara,    word  for "Brahma"  is pronounced as "Bramha" but spelt as "Brahma".  Just interested if this is a random occurring or any reason/metric for this spelling/pronunciation  anomaly.

regards.

[Subrahmanian R]

The Wikipedia page on 'Dual (Grammatical Number)' lists about 45 languages, including Arabic. Names of most other languages listed are unheard of by me.

R Subrahmanian

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/samskrita.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[ken p]

While reading one may pronounce Brahmaa but while chanting or speaking may mispronounce it.

Regional languages may have lots of  tatsam or tadbhav sanskrit words but may not follow Sanskrit grammar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_(grammatical_number)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit_grammar

गुरुर्ब्रह्मा गुरुर्विष्णुर्गुरुर्देवो महेश्वरः ।

गुरुरेव परं ब्रह्म तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥१॥

gururbrahmā gururviṣṇurgururdevo maheśvaraḥ |

gurureva paraṁ brahma tasmai śrīgurave namaḥ ||1|| 

gurur̠b̠rhmā gurur̠viṣ̠ṇur̠gururdevo mheś̠vrḥ | 

gururev prṁ b̠rh̠m ts̠mai ś̠rīgurve nmḥ ||1|| .............One sound per letter except digraph,Schwa-a free , printing ink saving, Easy to read.

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

< "Brahma"  is pronounced as "Bramha" but spelt as "Brahma".>

Where did you pick up this nugget?  We always pronounce and spell "Brahma" as "Brahma".

Arvind Kolhatkar.

[RamanaMurthy Bathala]

Here is the screen shot from the book:

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=643NDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT99&lpg=PT99&dq=brahma+is+pronounced+as+bramha&source=bl&ots=mOaCdXG0rI&sig=wK6d0_uHuUCKEV5mBiIBif3ZPCc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj80aeyiabVAhXKNY8KHRg0A4wQ6AEIXDAJ#v=onepage&q&f=true

Even in telugu , pronunciation is different from writing

Sanskrit and telugu are phonetic language where pronunciation is exactly the same as the writing. But here in case of ब्रह्म we are finding an anomaly.

Regards

Ramana

[DR Y N RAO]

II opine that this kind of anomaly in respect of the word BRAHMA, could also be observed in the case of CIHNA (a sign or symbol), where people write correctly as CIHNA but pronounce it as CINHA.   And, after getting themselves with this pronunciation as CINHA, some people are seen using this form CINHA even while writing too.   This kind of practice is widely seen over the Hindi belt where even some Scholars also are not free from this mistake!

--Dr. Y.N. RAO,
26/07/2017

P.S.: I am sorry for I am unable to show the above Examples in Devanaagarii script since my System has just been formatted. 

[Irene Galstian]

And the same thing exists in other languages as well.

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

I do not know how far the book cited above, titled यक्षप्रश्न, should be considered a reliable guide by serious students of Sanskrit.  In the chapter called 'YAKSHA PRASHNA THE STORY' that follows the the page 'Addendum - This edition' (the book has no page-numbering, hence this somewhat awkward manner of referencing) the following verse has been printed in Devanagari:

मा तात साहसं कार्शीर्मम पूर्वपरिग्रह:

प्रश्नानुक्त्वा तु माद्रेय पिबस्व च हरस्व च

One can immediately notice that it should have been correctly shown as 

मा तात साहसं कार्षीर्मम पूर्वपरिग्रह:

प्रश्नानुक्त्वा तु माद्रेय पिबस्व च हरस्व च

A little further is another verse appearing as blow:

इदं समुत्थान समगमं महत्

पितु: च पुत्रस्य च कीर्तिवर्धनं

पठन्नर: स्याद् विजीतेद्रियो वशी 

सपुत्रपौत्र: शतवर्षभाग् भवेत्

Glaring errors are jumping out here.

I would not be willing to put my trust in anything in which a Sanskrit text has been so carelessly proof-read.  I would, instead, rely on MW.  He shows the word ’ब्रह्मन्’ in the Roman script as 'brahman' and does not hint anywhere about a variant in its pronunciation.

I think is a peculiarity of the Sanskrit language that the letter ह् never appears as the second letter joining any other letter as the first letter.  ह् always appears as the first letter and  न् म् य् र् ल् व् may appear as second letters as in अपह्नुति, ब्रह्मन्, ह्य्:, ह्रस्व, ह्राद आह्वान.  The correct pronunciation of all such letters is ह् first, followed by न् म् य् र् ल् व् .  (It is a shortcoming of my Devanagari software that in अपह्नुति, the उकार appears in the wrong place.)

Arvind Kolhatkar.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

On BVP list, this topic was discussed several times. For example,

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/roman$20phonetic$20transliteration%7Csort:relevance/bvparishat/9fpyxiU8f0c/tEBhZLuwlkYJ

--

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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/samskrita.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[RamanaMurthy Bathala]

Dear Sir,

The following is from the book: "A GRAMMAR OF THE TELUGU LANGUAGE" by Charles Philip Brown Page No: 27

Regards

Ramana murthy

On Tuesday, 25 July 2017 20:09:12 UTC+5:30, ks nar wrote:

[Irene Galstian]

Even so, there is no rule in Sanskrit which says that the letters should be so transposed in pronunciation.

[RamanaMurthy Bathala]

it seems there are some more exceptions like ब्रह्म.

Bhagavad Gita Dhyana Yoga - Essence & Sanskrit Grammar By Ashwini Kumar Aggarwal Page No. 12

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=kPubDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA12&dq=bramha+grammar+sanskrit&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoxoettqnVAhWCGZQKHQPFCNMQ6AEIQDAF#v=onepage&q&f=false

Regards

Ramana murthy

On Tuesday, 25 July 2017 20:09:12 UTC+5:30, ks nar wrote:

[Irene Galstian]

These aren't a case of 'more exceptions'. It's just that combinations like hm or hn 

are likely to be inverted and turned into mh and nh by people whose interaction with Sanskrit is

of a more casual nature. Just because something is published doesn't make it reliable. 

If you consult reputable sources, you'll find no such 'exceptions'. In Sanskrit,

one pronounces exactly what one sees.

If you are looking for intricacies, Sanskrit has plenty of them, but not in its pronunciation. 

--
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.

[hnbhat]

The following discussion on BVP group gives several links

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!searchin/bvparishat/%E0%A4%AC%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE$20/bvparishat/9fpyxiU8f0c

Many links give original sources for the practice.

On 27 July 2017, at 00:48, Irene Galstian <gnos...@gmail.com> wrote:

Even so, there is no rule in Sanskrit which says that the letters should be so transposed in pronunciation.

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:04 PM, RamanaMurthy Bathala <bathal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sir,

The following is from the book: "A GRAMMAR OF THE TELUGU LANGUAGE" by Charles Philip Brown Page No: 27

Regards

Ramana murthy

On Tuesday, 25 July 2017 20:09:12 UTC+5:30, ks nar wrote:

Namaskarams to all !

I have great regard for Sanskrit language, but few clarifications:

(1). Most of the languages have "Eka vachan(singular)"  and "Bahu vachan (plural)". But Sanskrit has in also 'dvi vachan'(  2 quantity plural).

Kindly mail if any reason/metric for this. Any other languages have this?

(2). Among the three words, Brahma, Vishnu, Maheshwara,    word  for "Brahma"  is pronounced as "Bramha" but spelt as "Brahma".  Just interested if this is a random occurring or any reason/metric for this spelling/pronunciation  anomaly.

regards.

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/samskrita.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Taff Rivers]

ks,

  In understanding such matters, it is essential to realise that Sanskrit is a specialised language.
Designed for use in formal situations that concern the divine.

That is, for ritual and ceremonial purposes.

Turn to original source and avoid the many second-hand, misrepresented versions.

Having said that, I am given to understand that even the renowned authority, Panini contains an ambiguity or two in his work.

But beware, for endless are the debates of the grammarians...

   Regards,

Taff Rivers

[ks nar]

In many regional languages(atleast Hindi, Telugu, Kannada), "Brahma" is pronounced as "Bramha" (Bra m ha, Bra followed by  letter "m" pronounced and latter "ha" is pronounced).

regards

[ken p]

प्रणब मुखर्जी(बंगाली) /प्रणव कुमार मुखर्जी (देवनागरी )
https://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%AC_%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%96%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%80

[Sathyanarayana K]

Thanks for all the answers and particularly for showing old discussion links on BVP list. I have some clarity now.

regards.

On Tuesday, 25 July 2017 20:09:12 UTC+5:30, ks nar wrote: