गोपी

[Bijoy Misra]

Sabdakalpadrumah Book II page 359

would interpret  गोपी  as  व्रजवाला

It lists the names.

Early quick translation recorded in MW and others do

need revision being viewed from the scriptural context.

Early translation was done for the missionaries to create

a broad understanding compromising accuracy..  English

is much weak compared.to Sanskrit.  It is said that the

translation and the dictionary was created for the western

audience than for use in India. I would advocate to leave

the words as such or make a full contextual translation.

I see this massively in Ramayana work, which I study.

Sorry for this observation.

BM

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Bijoy Ji,

    I accept your "milkmaids of Gukula," and reduce it to "milkmaids" as the context of Gokula is evident throughout my Krishna verses.  A translation can go only so far, but I do not agree with retaining untranslated Sanskrit words in an English translation.  They may mean something to an Indian reader of English, but there is a wider readership beyond that audience to whole Sanskrit words do not communicate anything.  I appreciate your concerns and your efforts to find a balance.  With best regards,

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjU32hutKfN9t_MTfW57d3iDeWeoh3dO%2B%2BbM4hqrJOeL-g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Bijoy Ji,

    I accept your "milkmaids of Gukula," and reduce it to "milkmaids" as the context of Gokula is evident throughout my Krishna verses.  A translation can go only so far, but I do not agree with retaining untranslated Sanskrit words in an English translation.  They may mean something to an Indian reader of English, but there is a wider readership beyond that audience to whom untranslated Sanskrit words do not communicate anything.  I appreciate your concerns and your efforts to find a balance.  With best regards,

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 6:33 PM Bijoy Misra <misra...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Roland Steiner]

> Early quick translation recorded in MW and others do
> need revision being viewed from the scriptural context.
> Early translation was done for the missionaries to create
> a broad understanding compromising accuracy.

Even through constant repetition, an incorrect statement does not
become correct. The Sanskrit-English dictionary by Monier-Williams
(MW) is based on the two Petersburg dictionaries (Sanskrit-German) of
Böhtlingk/Roth ("large Petersburg Dictionary") and Böhtlingk ("small
Petersburg dictionary"), each in seven volumes. It can also be said
that MW is (not only, but) largely a partially rearranged, in general
remarkably reliable translation of these two Sanskrit-German
dictionaries. To put it briefly: The two Sanskrit-German dictionaries
were neither written for "missionaries" nor are they content with "a
broad understanding compromising accuracy". On the contrary, they
strive for the greatest possible precision and work directly from the
Sanskrit texts (published and unpublished at the time, each with
exact, verifiable references).

With best regars,
Roland Steiner

[Bijoy Misra]

They may mean something to an Indian reader of English, but there is a wider readership beyond that audience to whom untranslated Sanskrit words do not communicate anything.

How does it work if it communicates inaccurate information?   Is it not a disservice to the poet and the literature?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAB3-dzezW2poZ8-6sNEBCCse8Q67ckH-sKHqR-in5M8qNWWSVw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Roland,

"missionaries" is a hyperbole, but the question is audience.

Unlike English, a Sanskrit word is not an object label.

It has a meaning in context.  So the equivalence concept

or giving a dozen different meanings have little sense.

There is a fundamental error.  The unfortunate part is that

the material proliferates in India because ease of access

and convenience.  The "scholars" should make a "brake" to

it.  Serious westerners may help.

BM

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111110944.Horde.esBz2bNIm-JlPyM02oSgoVm%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Irene Galstian]

The problem of 'object label' vs ' meaning in context' is a bane in any language. This is why the time of dictionaries in the ordinary sense of the word is rapidly ticking away. It's well to recognise that the emphasis in upcoming years and decades should shift to corpus linguistics and parallel corpora, not mere dictionary lookups. And so, it's important to collect into such corpora translations made by scholars who knew both the source and the target languages well. This will also assist in translating to and from Sanskrit, at least in cases where translation is a appropriate way of interacting with the text. 

Irene

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

I browsed through the sections of  śrīmadbhāgavatam last night again.

I would think that Gopa is the name of the tribe (people) who inhabited Gokula.

It is unknown if such people lived elsewhere.

It is like vānara in rāmāyaṇa.  To throw "monkey" for convenience needs examination.

We are doing our neuro-circuitry seminar today. 

[Bijoy Misra]

The reason I used "missionaries" in an earlier mail because I do see the urge of the Jesuits to create

quick translation of the Bible in order to "enter" the "market".  In have not studied the engineering fully.

Lately I see the Committee translations on Ramayana from Columbia and I can see how unfortunate

they are.  Brain is rather slow in comprehension of unfamiliar concepts.  "black hole" is a good example.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/111438b0-0caf-42f4-924c-f2082dae71ee%40googlegroups.com.

[Irene Galstian]

"We are doing our neuro-circuitry seminar today."

Hope is goes well. Such seminars are very much needed, even if they aren't yet open to everybody. Gradually things will change for the better.

Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/111438b0-0caf-42f4-924c-f2082dae71ee%40googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Irene,

The seminar is open to all except nothing profound may come immediately.

We are not video-taping, but we will distribute notes.

The literature is full with therapy and drugs.  Our goal is to check the neurology

of thoughts and how a thought creates visualization and maps in brain.

I appreciate your support and encouragement.

Best regards,

BM

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/de98ef81-e5cd-43b1-95ce-a8508a4707ef%40googlegroups.com.

[Roland Steiner]

Dr. Misra,

> Unlike English, a Sanskrit word is not an object label. It has a meaning in context.

Linguistically, Sanskrit is a language like any other. Put very simply, in any language (including English) a word gets its concrete meaning in a specific context, which of course does not mean that a word can have any meaning in a given context. Monolingual and bilingual dictionaries (beginning with the Amarakośa up to the Śabdakalpadruma and the Pune Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Sanskrit) are no more, but also no less than indispensable tools for a most accurate understanding of non-contemporary texts. Particularly useful for this purpose are dictionaries and special glossaries which not only give meanings, but also provide textual references so that the actual use of a word in a specific meaning can be studied in the context of a particular text, its genre, time, region, etc. A student of Indology, in the course of his studies, must first learn to use such tools as the Petersburg dictionaries in the right way in order to do something like "corpus linguistics" (Irene Galstian). It is a naive assumption that a professional Indologist searching for the concrete meaning of a certain word in a certain text does nothing else but look it up in a dictionary and pick out any meaning that somehow seems appropriate.

With best regards,
Roland Steiner

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Roland,

You are wrong in your many assertions in the mail.

You need to live in India for a long time in your early life to appreciate the use of native language words.

Communication is different than speech.

Please do take a scientific view than the approach of arbitrary generalization.  Please examine words than understanding them!

I won't go further.

BM

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111130047.Horde.6qxHLSkr1FXHAOKzJQf4zTJ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Vidwans,

Does अर्थ  mean sense or meaning?  

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111130047.Horde.6qxHLSkr1FXHAOKzJQf4zTJ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste Roland Steiner

 

I need your help to understand the statement   < Linguistically, Sanskrit is a language like any other > An argument which  is  put forth very commonly  and almost accepted as  'axiomatic (Scriptural/ god given/  unquestionable / ? heresy to question issue.  Especially in Sanskrit  Language study circles.

 

This question was asked to me in my classes about two decades ago ( and continues to be asked even now)  in different ways :How is sanskrit difficult from English  German, Aramaic, Hebrew,.... even Prakruth's.   Honestly, I have not been able to figure out a satisfactory answer to justify this position and explain why and how the traditional model of ' Paninian Language', the language of 'Vedas, as presented in tradition, as a language of yoga and vision' can fit in to a social-historical model of language evolution, that too anchored to the Tower of Babel narrative used as a basis for World languages classification and branching.

 

I do understand the arguments of : Big Bang, human evolution, migrations, Aryan languages, Proto models   et al;   I also understand the relativity of poorve/ nootana Rushi, .....   .  I also understand the  'language difference across several class of 'Vedic resources' for which stratification of language by historicity and migration is not the  Hobson's choice explanation .    These optional models were placed before great minds like Tilak, Kane, and many others. The answers provided, the compromised solutions to fit in ancient tradition to new set of questions (and models/ evidence ) seem to have worked like a ' temporary patch'. The issue is unresolved. The issues now seem to have become  'a final settlement' debate like the  issue that was taken by the two armies  on the kurukshetra battle field.

 

  All the models so far provided ( seems to have originated from Colonial period/ around)  carry  one Unique Universal Common Point  ( some call it an agenda; and i do not subscribe to that point of view) : That is ' Discrediting the traditional stand   held by ALL Traditional Schools ( including Buddhist and Jain)  that 'Samskrutham (Brahmi in Jain case / Buddhism has a special term for this: is it divya-bhashaa ? I do  not recall ): The language of sacred discourse and Vision,  stays way beyond the land-locked bounds of society, race, historic geo-local frameworks', as the  masters of each sampradaya held and propagated.   It does not matter if this is discredited as 'faith';  but the historic texts were built around this premise; and it cannot be taken out in the name of academic research/ freedom and science evidence to discredit a living tradition and culture. At best, we can say, our generation sees tradition like this ! and trashes it as 'evidence lacking' !

 

The riddle that arises out of this situation for Samskruth Studies and Research  is :  How should one propose to study and research in Samskrutham?  How did the Panini period people understood the language model?  An issue which will not get resolved by  'Historic dating of Language or text; constructing the 'Noun words as Verbs or other wise to wriggle out of tight corners'.  Those who are in to deep grammar research know what this means as implication to each and every school of Darshana !   The clarification to be resolved are 'articulated doubts' like:

 

                        Was Panini -Patanjali- Yaska confused about the pedagogic model of Language of text for which they wrote grammar ? ?

                                                 ( The nullifying arguments for this come from  a list of stray references amidst the 99% highly technically articulate logical  explanation of word-structures? and backed by 'doubt')

                         By what pedagogic model  did tradition sustain its teachings for about three plus millennia? Fooling people? Truth seeking?  Why?How? Opposing each other using common language-tools ?

                         What are the costs of failure, deviation, compromise  or compliance ? in deviations adapted ? For the research, the community, the culture, the Truth ? the Pride?

                        Research to go by what historicity? Historicity defined by whom ?  

                        What to  trust and rely upon : Discredited -Disbelieved   continuity of traditional 'lacking evidence'  OR  ' inadequately constructed and extrapolated  Science inference ?

 

The  traditional  schools hold  Samskrutham to be 'Veda-Bhashaa'. And axiomatically hold  'Vedas are Time- space- Transcendent (युगान्ते - अन्तरिहितान् -वेदान्....) by Yuga scale; Where Yuga is defined by Gita 8-17 (sahasra-yuga-paryantam ahar yad brahmano viduh ratrim yuga-sahasrantam te 'ho-ratra-vido janah ; सहस्रयुगपर्यन्तमहर्यद्ब्रह्मणो विदुः । रात्रिं युगसहस्रान्तां तेऽहोरात्रविदो जनाः ॥). This is a stand used by almost all traditional texts.  The  human year equivalence numbers for Yuga , varying in different works of Dharma Shastra, Buddhism, Jainism are not the issue. The pedagogic model is the issue of contention and 'Doubt'.

 

The Post Colonial/ Oriental/ Semi-Traditional schools hold  their view on Sanskrit genealogy by  (a) Carbon dating of archeological evidence (b) Astronomical data reconstruction using software's and sky-maps (c) Global Comparative study of civilizations, anthropology, Preferred theological anchors for narrative of cultural identity discourse (d) Community belief systems  (e) Genetics of Language : https://www.technologyreview.com/s/409215/the-genetics-of-language/ ; https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-01837-7 - Human ancestry correlates with language and reveals that race is not an objective genomic classifier (  Baker, J.L., Rotimi, C.N. & Shriner, D. Human ancestry correlates with language and reveals that race is not an objective genomic classifier. Sci Rep 7, 1572 (2017) doi:10.1038/s41598-017-01837-7- Published - 08 May 2017 - DOI; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01837-7 )

 

So the lines of references and action perspective to build a research hypothesis is clearly laid out. Lexicons are a small yet critical part to be debated here. The errors of lexicographer, the scan document accuracy, the reconstructed image reading for text construction are fringe issues , which like package are essential. Damage to package could be an indicator to damage for the  content in the package. For Samskruth, the reference to test this is 'Panini-Patanjali-Yaska' unified position: (

 

Lexicons are supposed to be helpful tools for language-document understanding. Samskruth tradition did provide Vyakarana and Nirukta as a combined unit and complemented discipline. The ' Nirukta domain and Kosha' domain was not confused by any traditional samskruth lexicographer; least of all by Amarasimha; and at least till advent of colonial models of lexicons which replaced Nirukta  by different semantic pedagogy. This violation of  mixing 'Vedic and Bhashaa' vocabulary in a common lexicon base was pioneered by Monier Williams with all good intentions to facilitate Sanskrit studies ; but it has come with a serious price to pay.  Has any effort been made to address this issue ? An issue which i had raised on this forum almost a decade ago ?

 

A good researcher needs  a good lexicon ALNG WITH a RIGHT PEDAGOGIC MODEL OF Language of TEXT undertaken for RESEARCH STUDY TRANSALTION. I do  not have to explain the consequences of  researcher failing to apply this criterion to the tools  used for TEXT-LANGUAGE-CONTEXT analysis.  . The rule base pointers being : (दुष्टः शब्दः , मिथ्या प्रयुक्तः न तमर्थमाह ; यदधीतम् अविज्ञातम् निगग्देनैव शब्द्यते...) . Technically called as ' Vedangataa'  of these disciplines. A tradition that seems to have vibrant from Panini to Bhartruhari in Samskruth studies; kept alve in literatre study  till Jaganantha of Rasagangadhara (  even during the moghul regime).  

 

I agree that there have been great historical lapses on the home team side and many blunders of himalayan magnitude in history in safeguarding the Voice Tradition of  Text/s, the manuscript, the 'man' who was supposed to be the grooming guardian of the text and traditions'. This makes the challenge of researcher greater. It does not give a lee way for alien model substitutions and use of inappropriate pedagogy.  The situation is still not that  hopeless to be dropped off as ' irreparable, beyond damage, irrecoverable'. There is a greater need to seek rectification and see how the ancient tradition is useful for our period and globally.  There is a need to  take a course  correction action.

 

Your help to clarify this situation for Sanskrit  would be helpful. ( and it would also serve the  needs of answering the sacred language of the texts of buddhism in Tibetology).

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111130047.Horde.6qxHLSkr1FXHAOKzJQf4zTJ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

 

On <  Early quick translation recorded in MW and others do  need revision being ....  English  is much weak compared.to Sanskrit.  >  :

 

How do we get a team to go on this work?  Even to ask for  support ??   Now the dictionary needs a global English user, which means multiple English flavors !  

See note below on 'About English in America.

 

A point I have been making for the last ten years ?

 

Helpful guidance  requested.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

 

About English in America:

 

 

In a country as vast as the United States, you're hardly ever going to find a consensus on how to say something. No one can agree on whether to call it "soda," "pop," or "coke." (https://deadspin.com/the-many-dialects-of-american-english-in-one-charming-1471963562)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_English - American English varieties include many patterns of pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and particularly spelling that are unified nationwide but distinct from other English dialects around the world. Any American or Canadian accent perceived as free of noticeably local, ethnic, or cultural markers is popularly called "General" or "Standard" American, a fairly uniform accent continuum native to certain regions of the U.S. and associated nationally with broadcast mass media and highly educated speech. However, historical and present linguistic evidence does not support the notion of there being one single "mainstream" American accent. The sound of American English continues to evolve, with some local accents disappearing, but several larger regional accents having emerged in the 20th century.

 

27 fascinating maps that show how Americans speak English differently across the US (https://www.businessinsider.com/american-english-dialects-maps-2018-1#southerners-say-lawyer-differently-than-the-rest-of-the-us-7  ) :

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjU32hutKfN9t_MTfW57d3iDeWeoh3dO%2B%2BbM4hqrJOeL-g%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste

So what is the pointer ? 

a)   Move focus from ' Monier williams as  Original Designer of 'English-Sanskrit Lexicon provider' to   '  Monier Williams as more faithful Translator  from  German sources for Sanskrit ?

       - Apart from opinion, MW statement in the preface does not seem to lend support this position. MW  had his Indian base of primary date providers. And he was aware of  the design of  the two samskruth lexicons  of his period:  Shabda kalpadruma/ Vachaspatyam and their evaluation by western/ German scholars.

b)    Reg. Missionaries...: MW statement is clear enough for whom this lexicon effort was benefitting. Not only in MW Lexicon; but his other works which highlighted why missionaries should study

                                                  Sanskrit as a prerequisite for their work in India.

c)  Looking at  the ' to put it briefly': do we have to surmise from the statements:    MW used to create a  Missionary work  useful  new Lexicon  from  the two Sanskrit-German dictionaries,

        -  which  were neither written for "missionaries" nor are they content with "a  broad understanding compromising accuracy" 

        AND/Which On the contrary,

       - they ( = German dictionaries)   strive(d) for the greatest possible precision and work directly from the   Sanskrit texts (published and unpublished at the time, each with  exact, verifiable references).

What is the  preferred intent pl.?

Regards

BVK Sastry

-----Original Message-----
From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roland Steiner
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2020 5:10 AM
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} गोपी

> Early quick translation recorded in MW and others do > need revision being viewed from the scriptural context.

> Early translation was done for the missionaries to create > a broad understanding compromising accuracy.

Even through constant repetition, an incorrect statement does not  become correct. The Sanskrit-English dictionary by Monier-Williams  (MW) is based on the two Petersburg dictionaries (Sanskrit-German) of   Böhtlingk/Roth ("large Petersburg Dictionary") and Böhtlingk ("small   Petersburg dictionary"), each in seven volumes.

t can also be said  that MW is (not only, but) largely a partially rearranged, in general   remarkably reliable translation of these two Sanskrit-German   dictionaries.

To put it briefly: The two Sanskrit-German dictionaries  were neither written for "missionaries" nor are they content with "a  broad understanding compromising accuracy". On the contrary, they   strive for the greatest possible precision and work directly from the   Sanskrit texts (published and unpublished at the time, each with  exact, verifiable references).

With best regards,

Roland Steiner

--

 

[Roland Steiner]

Mr. BVK Sastry,

> I need your help to understand the statement < Linguistically, Sanskrit is a language like any other >

Sanskrit is a language. What makes Sanskrit a language, it shares with all other languages, otherwise one could not designate Sanskrit as a language. At the same time, each language is unique in different ways and in different respects. These are simple statements that probably almost everyone will agree with.

If you or others see more than a language in Sanskrit, you are free to do so. But then you leave the ground of historical scholarship, which is perfectly legitimate. It is just something different than historical research.

Apart from that, your very long e-mail, in which you raise many questions and often answer them yourself, shows me that you are not really interested in answers that could be discussed. That too is perfectly fine, albeit a waste of time, at least for me.

Best,
Roland Steiner






<sastr...@gmail.com>
Antwort an: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
   Betreff: RE: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} गोपी
        An: bvpar...@googlegroups.com


> Namaste Roland Steiner

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111130047.Horde.6qxHLSkr1FXHAOKzJQf4zTJ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200111130047.Horde.6qxHLSkr1FXHAOKzJQf4zTJ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .

>
> --
> 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 view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/5e1a1d1a.1c69fb81.ac9ac.0299%40mx.google.com.


----- Ende der Nachricht von BVK Sastry <sastr...@gmail.com> -----

[Bijoy Misra]

historical scholarship  is a loaded colonial phrase.

Roland Steiner sounds charitable.  It is a peculiar attribute still retained by some!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200112014656.Horde.IwWnA8lXQsnxHBSyA-Y6gLd%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Roland Steiner]

> So what is the pointer ?

Very simple. Bijoy Misra had claimed:

"Early quick translation recorded in MW and others do need revision
being viewed from the scriptural context.
Early translation was done for the missionaries to create a broad

understanding compromising accuracy.."

I replied that a large part of the entries in MW are actually
translations of the meanings given in the Petersburg dictionaries,
regardless of what Monier-Williams says in his preface. This is all
well-known among Sankritists – or at least it should be – and becomes
immediately apparent to anyone working with these three dictionaries
over a prolonged period of time. So it is simply not true that "early
quick translation" - "done for the missionaries to create a broad
understanding compromising accuracy" - is "recorded in MW".

By the way:

> Shabda kalpadruma

Böhtlingk and Roth not only knew Rādhākānta's Śabdakalpadruma but
explicitly used it (especially for unedited Indian dictionaries and
their commentaries; in these cases, they use the siglum "ÇKDR"). They
praise it as "a work which in many respects gives the greatest honour
to the learned author" (p. VII of the preface to the 1st volume of the
large Petersburg dictionary). Rādhākānta in turn intended to use the
Petersburg Dictionary for the second edition of his Śabdakalpadruma.
In a letter to the German lexicographers dated 17.5.1855 Rādhākānta
wrote:

"As a friend of mine intends availing himself of the aid of your Work,
specially as regards the Vaidic Vocabulary, in the preparation, under
my superintendence, of a second and more comprehensive Edition of the
Śabdakalpadruma - I shall feel myself greatly obliged by your kindly
sending me the subsequent parts of the Work and making arrangements to
furnish me with the sheets as they come out from the Press per every
Mail."

Best,
Roland Steiner

[Bijoy Misra]

Spilling opinions as "knowledge" should not be a goal of this forum.

There are many self-proclaimed Sanskritists who have read some grammar and a few books.

They hardly know the elements of the language.  A language student does not need a word dictionary!

I might have said before, somebody did volunteer to teach me Odia because he had a dictionary!

Can humility be taught!

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200112032147.Horde.5FLNTzi88jCrkOQBGBJ34jo%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Vidwans,

The question that needs to be asked is what aspects of language do other languages not share with Sanskrit.

The answer to this question is simple and straightfoward.  They do not share the Maheshwar Sutras.

The Maheshwar Sutras are important because they describe the unique nature of Vedic and Laukik phonation.  It is this uniqueness that has been lost on account of  leniency  granted by succeeding grammarians to usages.  

I am making this assertion on the basis of my study of the tradition of the Tabla which too speaks.  It speaks the tongue of laya and taala which is important for communication between the speaker and the listener.

Though all languages share a common purpose is the manner in which they achieve this goal not important?

 

Does the fruit of action not depend on the manner in which an action is executed? 

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200112014656.Horde.IwWnA8lXQsnxHBSyA-Y6gLd%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Shashi Joshi]

Is not the mAheshwara sutra important only for codification of aShTadhyAyI in a terse form? 

Sanskrit language can still be used, explained and grammar discussed without M Sutra, as was done before Panini.

Sure, the elegance and brevity won't be there due to its absence.

Thanks,
Shashi

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Vidwans,

Why did man feel the need to write?   

What happens when something is brought down on paper?

Is a carcass as good as a living animal?

Now-a-days with growing sanctity for written material has the soul in a verbal communication not been lost?

Or is it that the modern man no more has a soul?

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANu%2BFoCS1ZhiCUN0g7QU%3Do%3Dx5tuEJ_MuZOJHYWi%3DHVopUd9r_A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Shashi Joshi]

Achyut ji,

My message was purely fact based. 

Maheshwar sutra doesn't define sanskrit grammar or language, it arranges the sounds in a particular sequence to enable Panini use mnemonics and minimize the sutra lengths.

Please correct me if this is incorrect.

In no way do I intend to trivialize anything or anyone.

Thanks,
Shashi

[Sivasenani Nori]

Well, from the point of view of grammar, yes, what you described is the role played by the Mahesvara sutras. Also Panini uses abbreviations like ku, pu which are not found in Mahesvara Sutras. That said, the Mahesvara Sutras have been interpreted philosophically by Nandinatha in his Nandikesvara Kasika.

Regards

Senani

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Vidwans,

Can the protocols for preserving knowledge and transferring it from one generation to the next orally and in writing be the same?

To transfer knowledge from one generation to the next through an oral tradition a strict phonetic encoding  is necessary.  This is the purpose of the Maheshwar Sutras.  Therefore to treat the Maheshwar Sutras merely as an arrangement of sounds to serve the purpose of the Ashtadhyayi is lopsided.  We cannot forget that the oral tradition needed to fit knowledge in chanda or poetic form before it could be protected.

It is therefore wrong to impose the protocols of languages which preserve knowledge through the written word on those that preserved it orally.

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANu%2BFoCkKRdDoG7b149kU%2BcVKF211Fh%2BNLJo_kwg4c2aUkWX5g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Roland,

"If you or others see more than a language in Sanskrit, you are free to do so. But then you leave the ground of historical scholarship, which is perfectly legitimate. It is just something different than historical research."

I teach Tabla to students.  We do not need a paper and pen or pencil to teach.  The tradition is totally oral.  What part of a tradition you inherit is oral which will be passed on to the next generation orally?  It is this aspect that is unique to Sanskrit which no other language in the world has.  I doubt whether there is any one inthe west who has put to memory the Vedas and who is qualified enough to pass it on to the next generation in toto.  This has been happening in India since time immemorial.  Does there exist any parallel to this in world history?

It is for this reason that history proper starts with a writing tradition in the western world as it has no oral tradition.  

It matters very little whether you accept or do not accept the uniqueness of Sanskrit as a language.  Historical scholarship is not necessarily western.

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNPGHme_JCmKBLLaYxbrn-We3c8SoaVwZ%3DbaiY4O4OCmQ%40mail.gmail.com

[Roland Steiner]

Dear Mr Karve,

> the uniqueness of Sanskrit as a language

In one of the previous e-mails I had already written: "Each language
is unique [...]."

> Historical scholarship is not necessarily western.

I did not say that historical research is "necessarily Western".
Historical research is necessarily historical, no matter who does it.
One can be interested in it but does not have to be.

[Bijoy Misra]

All history connected with the colonial rule or occupation should be rejected.

They are mostly self-serving and false!

Any person from the west must come to terms with the insanity that caused indignity to innocent people. 

Churchill, go home.. 

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200112211447.Horde.7A3KALs1HWGGze6n8eiG0YZ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Roland,

The uniqueness of the oral tradition demanded a unique protocol which is enshrined in the Maheshwar Sutras and the Ashtadhyayi.  When words, sentences and complete works have to be orally transmitted we of the day need to appreciate that the writer needs to memorize the preceeding composition as he composes the subsequent ones.  

This part of the effort is left to the paper and the pencil now-a-days. 

Therefore the structure and form of Sanskrit too is unique though to a modern man it may appear common place as he is least interested in the form and structure of a language being only interested in its content.

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20200112211447.Horde.7A3KALs1HWGGze6n8eiG0YZ%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[Roland Steiner]

Dear Mr. Karve,

I am sure you are aware that there are also purely oral traditions in
other cultures and language communities, whatever conclusions may be
drawn from this.


> as he [the modern man] is least interested in the form and structure

> of a language being only interested in its content.

This is not applicable at least to linguists.

[Irene Galstian]

Prof. Misra,

How did the seminar go? Did interesting points come up during Q&A?

Best wishes,

Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/de98ef81-e5cd-43b1-95ce-a8508a4707ef%40googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

We had twelve attendees.  Bela made a great effort in surveying the neurology literature.

A middle school teacher came and had questions about language learning.  Other questions

were on intentionality, decision system, inhibitory functions and brain development.

Our focus is on word creation.  We distinguish between human signature and human behavior.

Weather got unusually warm to support the seminar!

I will post the slides after some corrections by Bela.  They would be educational, but technical.

The next seminar will be on "Neuro-anatomy of Cognition" by Mr. Prem Nagar on Feb 8.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/d4d6d840-a1f3-4c8f-b779-2f826d0dce48%40googlegroups.com.

[Irene Galstian]

Thank you for the update. Looking forward to slides.

Please continue to post updates on these seminars as they take place.

Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/d4d6d840-a1f3-4c8f-b779-2f826d0dce48%40googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

The research in the field has been in the area of teaching English to the world.

It is all behavioral training, like living objects being taught to imitate. Language

as a speech mechanism would be different.  My friend's historical studies

would be cited, but they don't address the creation of speech.  Most do not

even know the elementary principle that the speech is not canned.

We may not solve the problem, but the seminars may manage to set up the issues.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/f0dd6b1d-3b0c-4c2d-bae1-104f8426cb73%40googlegroups.com.

[Irene Galstian]

Even setting up the issues would be a step forward. 

That's why it's important to begin and keep going, even if no immediate solutions are available. Once the momentum is there, the solutions too will come.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/f0dd6b1d-3b0c-4c2d-bae1-104f8426cb73%40googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

We do keep going.  The question is if we can create a group who has good training in the sciences

with simultaneous training in the literature.  A strong reading of Bhtrhari would help.  I wish I had

time to create an analytic translation of the text.  A gem of a book! 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/8a5c81e6-7244-48c8-aa45-9d36c2212504%40googlegroups.com.

[Irene Galstian]

Such people will get attracted into the group gradually, which is why
keeping going is the key point right now. When people see that you
have a thing going, they come and want to be part of that thing. And
some of these people are the people you'd want to have working with
you.

>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/111438b0-0caf-42f4-924c-f2082dae71ee%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/111438b0-0caf-42f4-924c-f2082dae71ee%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 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 bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/de98ef81-e5cd-43b1-95ce-a8508a4707ef%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/de98ef81-e5cd-43b1-95ce-a8508a4707ef%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>> .

>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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 bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/d4d6d840-a1f3-4c8f-b779-2f826d0dce48%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/d4d6d840-a1f3-4c8f-b779-2f826d0dce48%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .

>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> 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 bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/f0dd6b1d-3b0c-4c2d-bae1-104f8426cb73%40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/f0dd6b1d-3b0c-4c2d-bae1-104f8426cb73%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .

>>>>
>>> --
>> 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 view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/8a5c81e6-7244-48c8-aa45-9d36c2212504%40googlegroups.com

>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/8a5c81e6-7244-48c8-aa45-9d36c2212504%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the

> Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/UyDN8w5M_cI/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to

> bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjX0XjOYB2ngi9scUaLAKpzVy-gHgezCnxtpiyNVPe%3DgdA%40mail.gmail.com.
>

[Bijoy Misra]

People do come, but people must spend time in studies.

A lot of hand-waving appear by reading newspaper reports or

religious discourses  Missionaries and our local gurus

are busy in business.  "God said" etc.

Sometimes hand-waving comes through academic garbs

by citing history.  (Galileo paradox)

I appreciate and admire your interest.

We have been too busy in BVP this morning.  Let us get back to work.

BM

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAFPaCQOpCXMEzpDKjHttwNFadAV%3Dgm3AkfWq0jkBMuCCNREPSg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Irene Galstian]

True - back to work! :-)

Irene

>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAFPaCQOpCXMEzpDKjHttwNFadAV%3Dgm3AkfWq0jkBMuCCNREPSg%40mail.gmail.com

>> .
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/UyDN8w5M_cI/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjU%2BxYe%2B1NOngr0%3DfmTHxD3m_0EE7Yg3Q6edzKnBzKP7VA%40mail.gmail.com.
>