Universals of Language and Literature - An Indian Traditional Perspective
Subrahmanyam Korada
Professor of Sanskrit (Retd)
Ph:09866110741
Megh Kalyanasundaram
--
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/CAKj2ELTOD0cixhPuoz9%3DptJ5iSypmVqy0xrrkHHXFascaASYjg%40mail.gmail.com.
BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)
Namaste
1. Thanks for sharing the illuminating and thought provoking paper titled : ‘Universals of Language and Literature - An Indian Traditional Perspective’. I place below some of the snippets I liked from your paper.
In fact, these are deliberations covered under ‘Vak-Yoga: The science of cognitive linguistics, the Vak-Yoga-Vijnana model of Bhashaa – Darshana-Shastra.
The cycle of ‘vak(vivakshaa, bhavaakhyana- samkhyana) to ‘vakya / sukta / sukti’ is the scope of ‘shadanga- vedanga-framework’ of Samskrutha- Vak-Darshana- / Vak-Tantra-Shaastra.
Your paper is drawing attention to these points, demanding a review on the basic question: ‘How are we learning- using – promoting- preserving Panini-Patanjali / Tolkappiyum pedagogy of Samskrutham, as the foundation of ‘Brahmi Linguistics’ : The base of Linguistics of Indian Languages?
Surely, this question would not be to the liking of many, yet needs a review if the intention is to preserve the < norm which helped to save Sanskrit Language from deterioration (‘Language changes’ is the general rule ) and today it is the only Language that is suitable for machines (Computers) . > .
As a curiosity question, have you or any one come across any current ‘Sanskrit Teaching system and institution’ which is adapting / incorporating all the pointers made by you in higher studies and research ?
I do know a handful of ‘Samskruth Gurukuls’, on their way to ‘coma state’, still continuing to do the Panini-Patanjali training system to teach ‘Bhashaa based on ‘Veda-First’ approach. This ‘gurukul’ method is not the welcome model in many major institutions popularizing ‘ Simple -Sanskrit – Social Outreach’ for ‘adult learners and researchers’.
2. I liked the following observations, snippets placed below from the paper.
Quote- 1: In fact व्याकरणम् is not Grammar – it is a rough translation.
Quote:2: So just like in the case of विवाह , which is translated as Marriage, taking the common aspect of ‘living together’ ( and not equality in terms of धर्म, अर्थ and काम ) , व्याकरणम् is translated as Grammar taking the common aspect of Parts of Speech and this is called rough translation .
Quote-3: Some people translate the term शब्द as Word ( ‘W’ in capital ) . This is not correct as ‘back translation’ fails – word = पदम् । The term शब्द is pregnant with meaning . It can be used to denote any one of the following units of Language –
1.वर्णः (Phoneme) 2. प्रकृतिः / प्रत्ययः (Root / Suffix – Morpheme ) 3.पदम् ( Word) 4.वाक्यम् (Sentence) 5.अवान्तरवाक्यम् ( Sub-sentence) 6.महावाक्यम् (Discourse) 7.ध्वनिः (Sound) 8.शब्दप्रमाणम् ( Authoritative Statement) 9-12. परा , पश्यन्ती, मध्यमा (स्फोटः / Sphota) , वैखरी (all four Philosophical) . So better adapt the term ‘Sabda’ , just like य़ोग (yoga) , पुण्य (punya) , धर्म ( dharma), which are Culture specific and therefore untranslatable ( one may provide some explanation in parenthesis /footnotes /endnotes ) .
Quote-4: The concept of स्फोट is useful in the task of Translation , both Manual and Machine .
Literally स्फोट means वाचकशब्द ( the expressing agent) . The fact is that वाक्यम् (sentence) is the very candidate that transforms meaning from the speaker to the listener , But the sentences that are used , being used and going to be used are innumerable , the Grammarian has to come down to words . Since It is difficult to analyze the gamut of words one has to come down to Phonemes .
Many studying ‘Panini Language’ for technology applications, seem to push below the carpet the fundamentals pointed by you in the paper; and prefer to mount ‘English likeness’ on modeling ‘ Bhashaa –part of Panini language’, using ‘visual shape, listing and cluster- combinations of phonemes’ as provided in a preferred industry standard.
The ‘Anglican- dressed- heuristics , modeling and analytics’ of ‘Vedic language’, preferred all over Computer schools addressing Techno-Sanskrit – Linguistics, seems to trace its roots to conceptual framework of ‘universal language’ provided in Chomsky’s writings. The study of Chomsky was ‘ an industry sponsored report, to develop High level Programming langauges using English based model , using ‘ English like / European language like ‘consumer-context’.
The same model is ipso facto extended to the ‘techno-linguistic studies/ computational Sanskrit- linguistics’, in pursuit of a goal marked as ‘Panini – Sanskrit – Programming Language’ for development of ‘Human Language-Models and Interactive Interfaces for Indian Language end consumers of A.I applications/ machine programming’. The deep rooted hermeneutic error in analyzing ‘Sanskrit like English’:: The ‘Anglicized modeling of Panini Language- Grammar-Concepts’ seems to remain intact like a ‘sleeping cancer cell’.
Regards
BVK Sastry