pronounciation of ज्ञ

[dhaval patel]

taking clue from ongoing discussion on ज्ञानेश्वरी,

I would like to float one query...

How do we pronounce the letter ज्ञ correctly?

In Gujarat - it closely resembles ग्न

In most hindi speaking states it resembles ग्य..

but the grammar has it ज्‌+ञ

so i am curious to know how do scholars speak this letter correctly..

An audio link would be much appreciated..

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Dhaval,

I am sure grammarians will have a more authoritative answer but the
following is what I think.

I do not think there can be a 'final' answer to this and similar other
issues of pronunciation. A 'gold standard' for pronunciation does not
exist even today, with all help of technology, for any language.
English, for example, has several styles of pronunciation, each held
as a standard in its own region. The 'American' English is different
from the 'Australian' variety and both are miles away from the 'King's
English'. The 'Indian' variety of English has further subdivisions
based on the regional differences

In the case of pronunciation of Sanskrit words, the problem is
further complicated by hundreds of years of local traditions and
influences of vernacular languages.

I would go a step further and say that I doubt whether a 'standard'
pronunciation ever existed even in the distant past because the same
reasons that explain the difference today were always present even in
the past. Since recording sounds was not invented, we may perhaps
never know how letters such as ज्ञ, ष, ळ were pronounced, either
universally or even regionally. That is why ज्ञ is dnya in Maharashtra
and gya in North India, or ष is Sha in Maharashtra but is kha for
Brahmins of Mithila. A Vedic chanting tells you upon hearing it
whether the Brahmin reciting it is from South India or elsewhere.
सर्व becomes सर्ब्ब in a Sanskrit text printed in Bengal.

The placement of a letter in the list of alphabets and the
descriptions of classes of letters such as ओष्ठय, तालव्य, मूर्धन्य
help to some extent but that orderly scheme does not render much
assistance for the 'rogue' letters like ज्ञ, ष, ळ.

Some people are prone to approach this issue from a 'jingoistic' point
of view. They hold their own style of pronunciation as the 'learned'
way and deride all others as country yokels, little realizing that
differences in pronunciation are inherent.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, October 05, 2011.

[murthy]

If we accept that Sanskrit is phonetic then ज्ञ which is ज्+ञ should be
pronounced as ज्+ञ (near to "jnya").
Regards
Murthy

Dhaval,

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

[dhaval patel]

In this case the pronounciation of ञ as second part of the conjoint is difficult..

It is practically not seen in literature.

Everywhere it is seen as first part of conjoint letter only.

(Of course other than ज्ञ)

Therefore some audio would be necessary to clarify how this 'jnya' is pronounced..

Comments are welcome

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[hnbhat B.R.]

I don't think there is any problem in pronunciation. But only regional language and Prakrit language pronunciations interfere which are mistaken for correct pronunciation of the conjuncts unfamiliar in other words or less familiar in their languages.

नञ्वियुक्तस्य नञा सह समासः।

यजयाचविच्छप्रच्छरक्षो नङ्

याच्ञा (yAc-~nA), has got ञ् as the second consonant in the conjunct just in the same way as in यज्ञ (yaj-~na). If there is no problem with the च्+ञ् +अ sequence, what is specific problem with this? Only it has orthographic symbol for representing the conjunct, like क्ष, but probably due to this the popular letter was misrepresented as a new conjunct in the other language using the same ज्ञान as gyAn. Probably the other is also mispronounced, but less used in the regional languages than their own gyAn. यज्ञ is still less used. In Prakrit languages it becomes ण्ण or in the initial position very much simplified for ञान also found in Tamil without even attempting to misrepresent.

There is no error in any language in spoken form as it is established by usage. Only literary standardized language need be read under the purview of Sanskrit Grammar.

--
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
Research Scholar,

Ecole française d'Extrême-OrientCentre de Pondichéry

16 & 19, Rue Dumas

Pondichéry - 605 001

[hnbhat B.R.]

There is no error in any language in spoken form as it is established by usage. Only literary standardized language need be read under the purview of Sanskrit Grammar.

Post script to my earlier message:

 In so far it doesn't change their meaning native language Sanskrit. It is with this view a father advised his son to learn Grammar:

यद्यपि बहु नाधीषे तथापि पठ पुत्र व्याकरणम्।
स्वजनो श्वजनो माऽभूत् सकलं शकलं सकृत् शकृत्॥

“Son, even if you do not learn much, yet, do study grammar, so that स्वजन (a relative) does not become श्वजन (a dog), nor सकल (the whole) शकल (a broken piece) and सकृत् (one time) शकृत् (ordure). “

Thanks to Arvind Kolhatkar for the translation in his comments in one of SL Abhyankar's संस्कृताध्यन lessons. The difference in meaning is clear in the above pairs.

Otherwise, there is no problem how you pronounce, even though शिक्षा lays down some descriptions of articulations as Panini himself is silent on this point in his Grammar. 

Hope this will be convenient for all those who pronounce Sanskrit letters as they use to pronounce the cognates of them in their language and want it to be brought under the rules of Grammar.

[Nityanand Misra]

1. Charles Wikner discusses the phonetics of ज्ञ in the document http://sanskritdocuments.org/learning_tutorial_wikner/wikner-rm.pdf (see section 7.A.5 on page 57). He also provides methods to pronounce the other "differently pronounced" or "mispronounced" sounds like ऋ, लृ, et cetera. I especially found his notes on ऋ very useful, as an analogue of the ऋ sound exists in some East European languages. क्ष and ज्ञ are easier to master since we know how the individual consonants are pronounced - most Indians correctly pronounce ष and ञ when speaking words like कष्ट and कञ्ज. ऋ and लृ are more difficult, but the phonetic guide by Wikner makes it easy - note that Wikner is a South African is not biased by regional pronunciation variants.
2. I have my doubts if ळ was originally a part of Vedic Sanskrit or crept in later with some schools pronouncing some Vedic words differently. Shiva Sutras and Paninian grammar do not have the sound. I do not know if the other eight grammars (Aindra, Chandra, etc) have it. Vedic was probably never spoken in common parlance, but for Panini to have a so many rules for Vedic phonetics, phonology and morphology but to omit out a sound seems a bit odd.
3. Maybe what one of the scholars here could do is supplement a phonetic guide like that by Wikner with audio recordings which are free from the influence of regional languages and upload the recordings as .ogg files on Wikimedia Commons. Add to that the discussion of संवृत and विवृत अ (i.e. record the last Sutra of Ashtadhyayi) and then after feedback from peer reviewers, one could add the sound recordings on the Wikipedia page on Sanskrit.
   

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Nityānanda Miśra
http://nmisra.googlepages.com

|| आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो ||
(Thou art from/for/of/in That Ātman, O Śvetaketu)
     - Ṛṣi Uddālaka to his son, Chāndogyopaniṣad 6.8.7, The Sāma Veda

[Jay Dave Zoom]

Nityanand Mishraji,   I have this comment to offer about "if ळ was originally ..."   If I am not mistaken Rigveda starts with Idam Ile Purohitam with ळ   I would like to get corrected if I am wrong.. Only Gujarati and Marathi has retained ळ.   Jay --- On Wed, 10/5/11, Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[murthy]

I have always thought that ळ is of Marathi origin. It exists in Kannada too. It is certainly not Sanskrit.

Regards

Murthy

----- Original Message -----

From: Nityanand Misra

To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:53 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] pronounciation of ज्ञ

[narayan iyer]

Hello,

I am surprised that you think so (La being of marathi origin and that it is certainly not sanskrit origin)

In fact the very first rig vedic verse begins with "agni meeLe purohitam" (pronounced as La of marathi and kannada).  For some reason this "La" dropped out in subsequent period and was re-placed as "meeDe" (agni meeDe purohitam etc.) in yajurveda

Regards,

narayan

---

From: murthy <murt...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 9:37 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] pronounciation of ज्ञ

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Dear Murthy,

To add my one small thought if i may  The first rik of rigveda uses ळ.



Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:14 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Murthy,

To add my one small thought if i may  The first rik of rigveda uses ळ.



Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

According to Paninian धातुपाठ the verb is ईड स्तुतौ and declined in the 2nd conjugation group as 

ईट्टे - ईडाते - ईडते

ईडिषे - ईडाथे - ईडिध्वे।

ईडे - ईडिवहे - ईडिमहे।

How it is pronounced as ळे is a case for Vedic pronunciation specialists. जड is also variable with जळज, जलज, जडज etc. "शैत्यं हि यत्सा प्रकृतिर्जडस्य" is a popular saying. So ल, र, ळ are all considered sometimes as variables in certain words. In many words ल is pronounced as ळ in South Indian Languages. Taking them as प्राकृत influence may antagonize वैदिक-s. It is pronounced as अग्निमीळे. but written mostly as अग्निमीडे and commented as such I praise.

The same participle form appears in the next

अग्निः पूर्वेभिरृषिभिरीड्यो नूतनैरुत । 

स देवाँ एह वक्षति ॥२॥

It is never pronounced as ईळ्य except in Keralite pronunciation.  जाड्य is pronunced as जाळ्य also. 

[dhaval patel]

now the discussion is for 2 letters ज्ञ ळ...

lets expand the ambit to ऋ लृ also..

it is also very differently pronounced as per the regional variations

[murthy]

If it were a character recognized by a pronunciation and written symbol, I believe, it would have found a place in Paninian Maheswara sutras. As to how अग्निमीले(डे) is to be pronounced, I agree some schools pronounce it as अग्निमीळे. In my view it does not mean Sanskrit has ळ as a distinct character.

Regards

Murthy

[Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்]

All the dravidian languages use La it can be seen in tamil,malayalam,telugu, many telugu village names ends with paLLi which
eg. BanganapaLLi famous for its mangoes.

Marathi being a sync between aryan and dravidian language families might have retained the La

2011/10/6 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[Viswanath B]

Telugu does have La, and we have difficult following geetha press books, where kALi (as in telugu) is written as kAli. :-). Same with kaLyANi.

Telugu village names though, end with lli and not LLi.  So banagAnapalli is correct form as far as telugu is concerned.

Regarding ऋ, I have an interesting observation. When the veda mantras are taught, for the words begining with ऋ , the tradition has been that it is pronounced as aR. ( i am emphasizing the presence of a). However, recently i learnt that there is no concensus on this either.  I was told that some examiners (when you are giving an exam for a samhita patha), insist that you pronounce as if its an r. These are not smaller examiners, mind you. My Guru, himself both a vedic and sanskrit scholar, told me that there is a 'mata bheda' as far as this is concerned. :-).

Though not with the pronounciation. Telugu has additional alphabets (I guess other languages have too) - There are dIrgha forms for ऋ, ए, ओ. I found it initially difficult to adjust. how will you pronounce एकम् and ओषदिः  with a hraswa ए, ओ written as text ? You do pronounce with the corresponding dIrgha letters. May be there is a rule that governs these.

Thanks
Vissu

2011/10/6 Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன் <ramku...@gmail.com>

[vishvAs vAsuki]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 15:09, Viswanath B <vegav...@gmail.com> wrote:

ए, ओ

एतौ दीर्घौ एव!

तत्-सवर्णौ ह्रस्व-वर्णौ एवं लिख्येते - ऎ, ऒ । (दाक्षिणात्य-शब्दानां देवनागर्यां लेखने उपयुज्येते।)

तथा संस्कृते अपि ऋकारः त्रिमात्रासु वर्तते - ऋ, ॠ, ऋ३।

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
lalitAlAlitaH

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 01:39, Viswanath B <vegav...@gmail.com> wrote:

There are dIrgha forms for ऋ, ए, ओ. I found it initially difficult to adjust. how will you pronounce एकम् and ओषदिः  with a hraswa ए, ओ written as text ? You do pronounce with the corresponding dIrgha letters. May be there is a rule that governs these.

एचामपि द्वादश , तेषां ह्रस्वाभावात् । - says that ए ऐ ओ औ have no hrasva.
So, Sanskrit has no hrasva of these.

[Sadagopan V]

 

In Tamil there are "Kuttriyalukaram" and "Kuttriyalikaram". In fact in many cases where a word especially a sentence ends in the hrasva letters "lu" or "li" the hrasva is further shortened and pronounciation is known as "Kuttriyalukaram and "Kuttriyalikaram". Are the Sanskrit  " ऋ " and  "लृ"  closer to Kuttriyalukaram and Kuttryalikaram. The answer would enable me to relate to Tamil sounds and to that extent easier to pronounce.

 

-- Sadagopan V

[Vimala Sarma]

Murthy Mahodaya

ळ occurs only in Vedic texts as far as I am aware and not in classical Sanskrit.

अग्निमीळे is correct – pada version is “agnim īḷe purohitam”. 

īḷe is 1 sg pres Atmanepada of root  īḍ - When the consonant retroflex ḍ occurs between two vowels it becomes ḷ and ḍh becomes ḷh (this partially elides the consonant with the vowels occurring before and after so it is easier to say)

“I magnify Agni the  household  priest”.  The first line of Rgveda.

But this does not occur for semivowels such as y and v.

So: īḷe, but īdya, and mīḷhuṣe, but mīḍhvān

Vimala

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com> wrote:

Murthy Mahodaya

ळ occurs only in Vedic texts as far as I am aware and not in classical Sanskrit.

अग्निमीळे is correct – pada version is “agnim īḷe purohitam”. 

īḷe is 1 sg pres Atmanepada of root  īḍ - When the consonant retroflex ḍ occurs between two vowels it becomes ḷ and ḍh becomes ḷh (this partially elides the consonant with the vowels occurring before and after so it is easier to say)

“I magnify Agni the  household  priest”.  The first line of Rgveda.

But this does not occur for semivowels such as y and v.

So: īḷe, but īdya, and mīḷhuṣe, but mīḍhvān

Vimala

 

 

Thanks for the information.

Here is the Vicki source for your information:

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Page:Sanskrit_Grammar_by_Whitney_p1.djvu/47

And this is the related page of  Sanskrit Grammar by William Dwight Whitney .:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Sanskrit_Grammar/Chapter_II

comparing the Vedic Pronunciation with Paninian descriptions

६. १. १२ दाश्वान् साह्वान् मीढ्वान् च ।

is the related Paninian form derived from the verb मिह . 

The other forms:  "मीढ्वः तोकय तनयाय मृडय ।"  यथा इयम् इन्द्र मीढ्वः ।

 

-- 

[murthy]

Thank you madam for the detailed info.

[dhaval patel]

i ran a query through rigveda... seeking for appearance of ळ

the test through the following occurences..

These occurences confirm what has been mentioned by whitney.. and brought to our notice by Vimalaji...

अग्ने सुखतमे रथे देवानीळित आ वह | 1.13.4
इळा सरस्वती मही तिस्रो देवीर्मयोभुवः | 1.13.9

ईळते तवामवस्यवः कण्वासो वर्क्तबर्हिषः | 
हविष्मन्तोरंक्र्तः || 1.14.5

etc.

These appearances are between two vowels.

The counterexample of ड is found in this case

विशो-विश ईड्यमध्वरेष्वद्र्प्तक्रतुमरतिं युवत्योः | 
दिवः शिशुं सहसः सूनुमग्निं यज्ञस्य केतुमरुषं यजध्यै || 6.49.2

Thus i believe the observation made above by whitney is true..

Further comments are welcome

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

[dhaval patel]

PS to previous post:

The occurence of ड्व are :

०१.११८.०९.२{१९}  जोहूत्रमर्यो अभिभूतिमुग्रं सहस्रसां वृषणं वीड्वङ्गम् |

०६.०४७.२६.१{३५}  वनस्पते वीड्वङ्गो हि भूया अस्मत्सखा प्रतरणः सुवीरः

०८.०७७.०९.२{३०}  हृदा वीड्वधारयः

०८.०८५.०७.१{०८}  युञ्जाथां रासभं रथे वीड्वङ्गे वृषण्वसू

etc..

[Nityanand Misra]

Does Whitney cite any ancient grammatical text for this rule? Some schools do write and pronounce it as अग्निमीळे, some others as अग्निमीले, some as अग्निमीडे and I even remember seeing अग्निमीड़े  in some magazine two years back (using the Prakrit ड़).

Given the lack of ळ in both Shiva Sutras and Ashtadhyayi, the question still remains if the rules of a grammar on Vedic - other than Paninan grammar - or any of the Shiksha texts have the consonant ळ? It is the only consonant in Vedic texts that is absent in Laukika and most Indo-Aryan languages except Gujarati and Marathi.

What is then a more reasonable assumption, or as we statisticians say, the null hypothesis: whether the sound was present in Vedic in the time of revelation (composition if you like) of Rig Veda and vanished later due to some reasons, or it developed later as a pronunciation variant in some Vedic schools?

Thanks, Nityanand

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--

[Vimala Sarma]

“A Vedic grammar for Students’ A MacDonell cites the rule on page 3 footnote 2.

Vimala

 

From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nityanand Misra

Sent: Friday, 7 October 2011 11:18 PM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com

[Vimala Sarma]

NiyAnanda Mahodaya

I am resending this to answer the question “Is there any ancient grammatical text for this rule”.  When the Rgveda was written there were no grammatical texts that we know of.  It is very important to see things in a historical context (even though traditionalists may not agree) and to see developments over time.  The Rgveda goes back a very long time (I won’t give even an approximate date because this will immediately lead to controversy) and is considered the first piece of Indic literature.  As the Rgveda SamhitA was complied over a long period of time, it is possible for scholars to see the  changes between earlier and later hymns, in structure and phonetic rules.  Perhaps because of these inconsistencies, and irregularities, and use of subjunctives etc,  Pannini systematised and laid down rules for a  language which was a later development, and led to classical Sanskrit, with the tenses and rules as we now know it. So these rules do necessarily apply to the literature which preceded him, ie the Vedic language.  Also there was not written language at the time so the most important thing was the sound – which is of course pronounced with metre and accent, to make it easier to remember orally – (but perhaps not for us living to-day!). 

Vimala

 

From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nityanand Misra

Sent: Friday, 7 October 2011 11:18 PM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com

[Nityanand Misra]

I am inclined to disagree. Panini's system has special rules that apply to Vedic language, and Panini is the authority all the commentators from Adi Shankara to Vallabhacharya cite while interpreting Upanishads. I am not sure if Sayana refers to Panini while expounding on the mantras - other scholars can throw some light here.

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am inclined to disagree. Panini's system has special rules that apply to Vedic language, and Panini is the authority all the commentators from Adi Shankara to Vallabhacharya cite while interpreting Upanishads. I am not sure if Sayana refers to Panini while expounding on the mantras - other scholars can throw some light here.

There are other works on phonetics on the recitation of the Vedic Texts called प्रातिशाख्य-s and शिक्षा-s of which only we know पाणिनीयशिक्षा ascribed to पाणिनि through our learning in the beginning stages through सिद्धान्तकौमुदी, as अकुहविसर्जनीयानां कण्ठः etc. in so far as they are intended to be a guide to the pronunciation of the letters in the माहेश्वरसूत्र with their relevance to consider स्थान and यत्न in the substitutions for the वर्ण-s mutually सवर्ण, as required by the rule स्थानेऽन्तरतमः, and तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्।  Otherwise, there is no complete description of articulation of Vedic usage or their variations. Even प्रातिशाख्य-s do not agree each other as they are different from शाखा to शाखा like the separate शिक्षा-s recording the articulation practices of their related शाखा. That is why Panini never touched the question of articulation points in any of his सूत्र-s except random reference to other schools as in "लघुप्रयत्नतरः शाकटायनस्य"( ८।३।१८. ) in quoted in respect of the semi-vowels y, and v. We still do not have any orthographic symbol for this variation than writing य and व. The same with य, व, ल are the same, but classified as अनुनासिक and अननुनासिक but never we have a different orthographic representation for these than we know it during the operation for the relevant सूत्र for सन्धि operation, in the example विद्वाँल्लिखति. So in all probably script is short of all the variations of articulations available and while those only in currency are provided with additional symbols like ळ, ज्ञ etc. 

 

I don't think none of us have access to all the प्रातिशाख्य-s enough to quote some authority on the pronunciation variations of each शाखा nor all the प्रातिशाख्य texts are still surviving of the शाखा-s listed at the time of पतञ्जलि as recorded at his time.

As the commentaries like सायण deal with meaning and relevant Grammatical forms to derive the meaning quote the relevant Grammatical rules at random, but mostly draw on निरुक्त of यास्क for deriving their meaning and the semantic contents supported from the massive Vedic Literature. So there is no wonder, if he doesn't consider it worth to comment on the articulation differing to each शाखा. Like this, each of the commentators have their own objective in explaining the Vedic sentences and in deciding the purport of the whole prakaraNa, instead of each words in isolation they have their own standards than the articulation points involved. निरुक्त had already laid down a guiding principle:

नैकं पदं निर्ब्रूयात्। = any word (he is concerned with Vedic vocabulary) is to be explained in isolation (out of context ) and the the purport of a प्रकरण or अधिकरण is decided on the following factors:

उपक्रमोपसंहारावभ्यासोऽपूर्वता फलम्।

अर्थवादोपपत्ती च लिङ्गं तात्पर्यनिर्णये॥

So there is nothing to wonder if they do not dwell on the issue of articulation of different letters. One can swarm through the massive प्रातिशाख्या-s and शिक्षा-s including the one ascribed to पाणिनि. 

Similar was the question with the pronunciation of ब्रह्म, चिह्नम् etc. Panini himself didn't ever touch the point expressed in his शिक्षा - 

हकारं पञ्चमैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम्।

औरस्यं तं विजानीयात् कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम्॥

we know only the कण्ठ्य of ha as we are fed by our grammar works dealing with classical Sanskrit. 

I think this will throw some light in this respect. I myself am not conversant with Vedic Grammar as laid down in प्रातिशाख्य-s or शिक्षा meant for Vedic grammar and articulation purposes exclusively.  

[Vimala Sarma]

Sorry correction – I meant to say “ These rules do not necessarily apply to literature which preceded him, ie the Vedic language”, in my last post.

It was an error that I missed out the “not”.

[hnbhat B.R.]

Here is the text of Pratishakhya:

The information on ळ and ळ्ह as intervocalic variations of ड andढ will be found in the Ṛkprātiśākhya 1.21 (1.51, 52 in M.D.Shastri’s edition) and also in Ṣaḍguruśiṣya’s commentary on Kātyāyana’s Sarvānukramaṇī on RV.1.28. According to the RP Vedamitra held the place of articulation of ḍ and ḍh to be the root of the tongue and the palate. The verse cited by Ṣaḍguruśiṣya isअज्मध्यस्थडकारस्यळकारंबह्वृचा जगुः। अज्मध्यस्थढकारस्यळ्हकारं च यथाक्रमं ।। Thus वीळु and मीळ्हुषे but वीड्वङ्ग.

as I was provided from some other group on query.

I have already explained why these are not quoted in the commentaries as it is out of the scope of their commentaries with specific objective either by Sayana or Shankara.

[dhaval patel]

If the previous message showed junk characters,

This is the message once again in unicode

१.५१ जिह्वामूलं तालु च आचार्यः आह स्थानं डकारस्य तु वेदमित्रः ।

१.५२ द्वयोः च अस्य स्वरयोः मध्यमेत्य सम्पद्यते सः डकारः ळकारः ।

ळ्हकारतामेति सः एव च अस्य ढकारः सन्‌ ऊष्मणा सम्प्रयुक्तः ।

इळा साळ्हा च अत्र निदर्शनानि वीड्वङ्ग इति एतत्‌ अवग्रहेण ।   ==== ऋक्प्रातिशाख्य

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 9:53 AM, dhaval patel <drdhav...@gmail.com> wrote:

1*51 ÊVɼ´ÉɨÉڱɨÉ iÉɱÉÖ SÉ +ÉSÉɪÉÇ& +ɽþ ºlÉÉxɨÉ b÷EòÉ®úºªÉ iÉÖ ´ÉänùʨÉjÉ& *

1*52 uùªÉÉä& SÉ +ºªÉ º´É®úªÉÉä& ¨ÉvªÉ¨É BiªÉ ºÉ¨{ÉtiÉä ºÉ& b÷EòÉ®ú& ³ýEòÉ®ú& *

²½þEòÉ®úiÉɨÉ BÊiÉ ºÉ& B´É SÉ +ºªÉ føEòÉ®ú& ºÉxÉ >ð¹¨ÉhÉÉ ºÉ¨|ɪÉÖHò& *

<³ýÉ ºÉɲ½þÉ SÉ +jÉ ÊxÉnù¶ÉÇxÉÉÊxÉ ´ÉÒbÂ÷´ÉRÂóMÉ <ÊiÉ BiÉiÉ +´ÉOɽäþhÉ *

This is what the ऋग्प्रातिशाख्य text has to say

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

[hnbhat B.R.]

Here are the commentaries on the respective verse quoted in the commentary. It is to be noted it is the opinion of Vedamitra that is cited in RP as it records it. It adds one more variation to the aspirated ढ also as ळ्ह. I remember the example also समूळ्हमस्य पांसु रे as recited for the second.

१.५१ जिह्वामूलं तालु च आचार्यः आह स्थानं डकारस्य तु वेदमित्रः ।

१.५२ द्वयोः च अस्य स्वरयोः मध्यमेत्य सम्पद्यते सः डकारः ळकारः ।

ळ्हकारतामेति सः एव च अस्य ढकारः सन्‌ ऊष्मणा सम्प्रयुक्तः ।

इळा साळ्हा च अत्र निदर्शनानि वीड्वङ्ग इति एतत्‌ अवग्रहेण ।   =

Here are the above mentioned verses (Mangal Deva Shastri has split the verses into sutra-like phrases in his edition for ease of explanation, but the Pratisakhya is composed in metre; the version I have - from Maharshi Mahesh Yogi University - says, the verses are numbered 11 and 12; there is no difference in the wording though) from Rigveda Pratisakhya and UvvaTa's commentary on that (also from MD Shashtri's edition):

जिह्वामूलं तालु चाचार्य आह स्थानं डकारस्य तु वेदमित्रः ।

द्वयोश्चास्य स्वरयोर्मध्यमेत्य सम्पद्यते स डकारो ळकारः ।। 11 ।।

ळकारतामेति स एव चास्य ढकारः सन्नुष्मणा सम्प्रयुक्तः ।

इळा साळ्हा चात्र निदर्शनानि वीड्वङ्ग इत्येतदवग्रहेण ।। 12 ।।

Mangal Deva Shastri's translation:

51. The teacher Vedamitra, however, says that the root of the tongue and the palate (together) are the places of articulation of ḍ.

52. That ḍ occuring between two vowels becomes ḷ according to the same (teacher). The same (ḍ) becoming ḍh by an addition of a breathing (i.e., h) is changed to ḷh (between two vowels) according to the same (teacher). The examples here are: इळा, साळ्हा, and वीड्वङ्गः (when given) with the Avagraha.

Commentary:

अध _ नं स्थानमुपसंहरन्नाह। आयार्यो वेदमित्रो जिव्हामूलं तालु च डकारस्य स्थानमाह। कोऽन्यथा ब्रवीति। आचार्यग्रहणं पूजार्थम्।

स एवोक्तस्थानो डकारोऽस्य अचार्यस्य मतेन द्वयोः स्वरयोर्मध्ये प्राप्य ळकारभावं याति। किं च स एव डकारो हकारेणोष्मणा सम्प्रयुक्तः सन् अस्यैवाचार्यस्य मतेन ढकारे तथा सति स एव ढकारः ळ्हकातां याति। अस्यार्थस्पष्टत्वात् स्वयमेवोदाहरणनानि दर्शयति। इळासाळ्हा चात्र यथासङ्ख्येन ळकारळ्हकारयोरुदाहरणम्। इळां देवीः, मरुद्भिरुग्रः _ तनासुसाळ्हा। बहुनचनमत्र वक्ष्यमाणोदाहरणापेक्ष्यम्। वीड्वङ्ग इत्येतदुहरणमवग्रहेण सह भवति। _(व्व?)नस्प्प_ीलु। अङ्गः। स्वरयोरिति किम्। वनस्पते वीड्वङ्गः। मीढ्वस्तोकाय तनयाय।। (accents - svaras like udaatta and svarita) - not reproduced).

[Nityanand Misra]

Great, thanks a lot everybody for informing about ऋक्प्रातिशाख्य, I was unaware of the work. Now I know that the उत्क्षिप्त मूर्धन्य syllables ळ and ळ्ह are discussed in ancient वेदाङ्ग works, so it is more likely they disappeared from later Vedas. In other words, my earlier null hypothesis stands invalidated with this critical test-statistic. :)

By the way, what is the equivalent of ळ्ह in modern Indian languages? I don't recall seeing it in Gujarati - am not sure about Marathi and Dravidian languages.

[hnbhat B.R.]

By the way, what is the equivalent of ळ्ह in modern Indian languages? I don't recall seeing it in Gujarati - am not sure about Marathi and Dravidian languages.

Of the Dravidian languages, there are two allomorphs of ळ - and ळ्ह written differently in Malayalam  ള and ഴ  and Tamil. as ழ and ள. Might have been inherited from Prevedic period in common. But in modern tamil, they do not differentiate between and pronounce as    ळ only. But these words are purely Dravidian design or loan words फल becomes pazha. both in Malayalam and Tamil alike. It is allomorph of ल and not of ड or ढ of Sanskrit. For writing the above Vedic words, they use the same system as ळ and ळ्ह with "h" added to the ळ as in Sanskrit in Kannada script. Even though it is there, there is no special orthographic symbol for the second in Kannada. But I am not sure of Malayalam which has all symbols for the Sanskrit  alphabet plus its own letters. In Kannada, it is writeen as ಳ್ಹ as in Devanagari.  But there were corresponding two symbols as in the two other sister languages script, in modern language, only one is retained in Kannada. Probably the same in Telugu also. For pronunciation, it is also उत्क्षिप्तमूर्धन्य or its variety. 

The above are just a guess. Not based on any evaluation of samples.

 

[Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்]

No Sir,

You should listen to the tamil news or any other good tamil oratory many people will use the proper pronounciation for ழ and ள . only people dont have the pronounciation right merge both the words and are many times ridiculed for their wrong pronounciation

2011/10/8 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/10/8 Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன் <ramku...@gmail.com>

No Sir,

You should listen to the tamil news or any other good tamil oratory many people will use the proper pronounciation for ழ and ள . only people dont have the pronounciation right merge both the words and are many times ridiculed for their wrong pronounciation

You mean in standardized language, they read as they are written. But I was referring to spoken form of the language, which many do not retain the same difference. 

I remember a comedy of Vivek of the modern news reading. If you have seen, you also might have enjoyed it. Ok. I just casually pointed out, but not with any view of finding fault with Tamil Language. It was long ago lost in Kannada both in written and spoken form, but the difference is still valid in Malayalam Language and they never merge them. 

[Vinodh Rajan]

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:36 PM, hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com> wrote:

You mean in standardized language, they read as they are written. But I was referring to spoken form of the language, which many do not retain the same difference. 

Nope.

For the most part - The differentiation is still maintained in Spoken Tamil by the majority.

FWIW I still differentiate ழ & ள :-)

V

--
http://www.virtualvinodh.com

[Vidya R]

Agreed.  'Tamizh' still distinguishes between 'l', 'L' and 'zh' - spoken, written, official ...

Vidya

---

From: Vinodh Rajan <vinodh...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2011 11:08 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] pronounciation of retroflex L

[murthy]

In old Kannada there are two symbols called "raLa" and "kuLa". Are they cognate to what exist in Tamil?

Regards

Murthy

----- Original Message -----

From: Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்

To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2011 7:32 PM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] pronounciation of retroflex L

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 9:10 PM, murthy <murt...@gmail.com> wrote:

In old Kannada there are two symbols called "raLa" and "kuLa". Are they cognate to what exist in Tamil?

Regards

Murthy

These were present in manuscripts writing till 18th century and also in print of old Kannada poems in text books. These are transcribed by the side of r - proper R , and The are cognates for - .ra  ர  and zh ழ as far as I can gather. Caldwell's Comparative Grammar may help. I was told they were cognates to corresponding Malayalam and Tamil letters, now extinct in Kannada language. These are the two in the two languages not present in Kannada of today R ற and La ள are common to Kannada alphabet today.

I am not sure of their correspondence exactly. Some Dravidian Linguist may through light on this. 

[hnbhat B.R.]

OK. Agreed. 

[dhaval patel]

To add a Gujarati perspective to ongoing discussion,

The Gujarati language uses ळ (ળ in gujarati) as a substitute for ल only..

I dont think anywhere it is used as a substitute for ड or ढ.

Might be the same with Marathi..

So, do these present day Gujarati ળ or Marathi ळ have the same pronounciation which vedic time ळ as a substitute for ड would have been ??

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

[Vinodh Rajan]

Dear Murthy,

I suppose you are referring to the following:

ಱ - ற റ ఱ

ೞ - ழ ഴ

BTW Old Telugu Inscriptions also seems have had the Retroflex Approximant <ழ ഴ>.

The ழ ഴ sound is also present in Vedic Phonology along with the Hrasva e o <எ ஒ | ఎ ఒ | ಎ ಒ | എ ഒ >. Even though these are considered as  typical South Indian a.k.a Dravidian Phones, they are prevalent in the Vedic Tongue.

V

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 9:10 PM, murthy <murt...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
http://www.virtualvinodh.com

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Vinodh Rajan <vinodh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Murthy,

I suppose you are referring to the following:

ಱ - ற റ ఱ

ೞ - ழ ഴ

BTW Old Telugu Inscriptions also seems have had the Retroflex Approximant <ழ ഴ>.

The ழ ഴ sound is also present in Vedic Phonology along with the Hrasva e o <எ ஒ | ఎ ఒ | ಎ ಒ | എ ഒ >. Even though these are considered as  typical South Indian a.k.a Dravidian Phones, they are prevalent in the Vedic Tongue.

V

Thanks for the information.

Any प्रातिशाख्य reference to this supposition of their existence as for ळ  and ळ्ह orthographic symbols?

 

[Vinodh Rajan]

For now, I can attest personally attest that I have seen ழ in Jaiminiya Sama Veda Passages in Devanagari Script (used modified ड), Grantha Script (Printed & Manuscript)  and Malayalam Script (Manuscript). It occurs as the allophone of ड. 

(I have the scans... have to dig in for them :-/ )

The erstwhile Kanchi Shankaracharya has also mentioned this in his work "Dheyvaththin Kural" (தெய்வத்தின் குரல்).

As for Hrasva e,o, if I can recall correctly, Mahabhashya has references to it. There is also a paper by Abyankar which discusses this issue. It occurs as allophone of 'a'.

1957, "Short /e/ (/ardha ekāra/) and short /o/ (/ardha okāra/) in
Sanskrit", ABORI 38: 154-7

(I have the PDF somewhere, have to search again :-/ )

There is a  article in Sanskrit referring to these phones by the Vedic Scholar Shriramana Sharma, a friend of mine. Below is the links -

https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files

The Article is titled -

किं संस्कृते ह्रस्व एकारः ओकारो वा अस्ति ?

It can be downloaded from the above website.

V

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
http://www.virtualvinodh.com

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Vinodh Rajan <vinodh...@gmail.com> wrote:

For now, I can attest personally attest that I have seen ழ in Jaiminiya Sama Veda Passages in Devanagari Script (used modified ड), Grantha Script (Printed & Manuscript)  and Malayalam Script (Manuscript). It occurs as the allophone of ड. 

(I have the scans... have to dig in for them :-/ )

The erstwhile Kanchi Shankaracharya has also mentioned this in his work "Dheyvaththin Kural" (தெய்வத்தின் குரல்).

Thanks for the prompt answer. I am not sure whether it is different from the allophone of ड used in Devanagari   ळ in the texts of ऋग्वेद as per the प्रातिशाख्य verses quoted in this thread.  Please check the articulation points described in the the verse and the description of it in the commentary whether it is proper for it. 

Regarding, short vowels of e and o, I am also told by Sriramana personally that there is some reference to these  though he could not at the time given the reference. Thanks for the link.

 

-- 

[murthy]

Thanks Bhatji for throwing some more light.

Regards

Murthy

----- Original Message -----

From: hnbhat B.R.

To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2011 10:00 PM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] pronounciation of retroflex L

[murthy]

Dear Rajan,

Yes, exactly.

That Vedic phonology accounts for hrasva e and o is interesting. It is certainly a mystery that Sanskrit (classicall) lost them.

[Aniruddha Joshi]

Hi,

I would like to quote an interesting word in Marathi:

• कळण = [kaḷaṇa] whose meaning is as follows:n C Decoction or broth of some pulse. 2 also कळणा m The powder and fragments amongst split pulse.
  

          Ref: (http://marathi.indiandictionaries.com/meaning.php?id=10314&lang=Marathi)

• Another variant of this word is कढण or कढवण , meaning almost the same, viz. n (कढविणें) Something boiled down, a decoction; esp. broth of some pulse or grain.      
  
  Ref: (http://marathi.indiandictionaries.com/meaning.php?id=10314&lang=Marathi)

Interestingly, in some forms of Marathi (also, in the one that I speak), the word कळण/कढण is pronounced as कळ्हण, having the same meaning.

This perhaps indicates the movement ळ्ह --> ढ or ळ. This is just my guess. The learned members may be able to shed some light on it.

Thanks and Regards,

Aniruddha Joshi