Anusvar in Sanskrit

[ken p]

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

Please post some Sanskrit words showing both conjunct letters. 

[अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः | श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् ।]

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

I would read your question to be inquiring about pronunciation of अनुस्वार, wherever it is so written.

Your question prompts me to think of two सूत्र-s in अष्टाध्यायी.

(1) The सूत्रम् – मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) specifies use of अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्.

(2) अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः (८/४/५८) specifies its pronunciation following the परसवर्ण-concept.

The second सूत्रम् suggests that अनुस्वार would be pronounced not only as न् or म् but as other nasals अनुनासिक-s also. One may come across words like अन्तःकरणम् अन्तर्यामी also written as अंतःकरणम्. अंतर्यामी. Such instances do suggest अनुस्वार being used as an option for writing न् also. One may also come across अङ्ग written as अंग. These then become examples, explaining the परसवर्ण-concept.

So अनुस्वार seems to have been used as an option for writing अनुनासिक-s in general, and not just for न् or म्. But this option seems to be more in use in vernacular languages, especially हिन्दी (हिंदी), मराठी which also are written in देवनागरी.

Apte’s online dictionary gives “No matching words found” message when searching for अंतः or अंग. So, Apte’s dictionary seems to be strictly going by मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) i.e. अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्. For the word अङ्ग one needs to input only this way, not as अंग.

Having said so, one may also find अनुस्वार written distinctly, in a special style, in words like  ताँ्स्ते (ईशावास्योपनिषत्), which is a संधि of तान् + ते or प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च (गीता 2-11) which is a संधि of प्रज्ञावादान् + च. In ताँ्स्ते the अनुस्वार will be pronounced as न्. But in प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च it will be pronounced as ञ् because the परवर्ण् is च and the अनुनासिक of च-वर्ग is ञ्.

Hope, my observations are in order and help.

[Subrahmanian R]

Respected Scholars,

The first part, the question, (is ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?) I take it is about the pronunciation of the anusvara. The second part, (Please post some Sanskrit words showing both conjunct letters.)  request for example, the statement is not clear to me.

 

I observe two types of anusvaras used in devanagari script, one is a plain dot and the other a dot over a crescent (ardha Chandra). Generally, while listing the devanagari letters only the plain dot is mentioned. The other one, to my mind, is quite rarely used. It is more common in Hindi.

 

I feel that the uccaran of the anusvara is neither न् nor म्. It is also not a shortcut or abbreviated way of representing ङ्, ञ्, ण्. ङ्, ञ्, ण् न् and म्  are anunasiks - मुखनासिकवचन: अनुनासिक: - मुखसहितनासिकयोच्चार्यमाणो वर्ण:. नासिकाऽनुस्वारस्य. ङ्, ञ्, ण् न् and म्  are स्पर्शा - hence there is a specific position - कण्ठ, तालु, मूर्ध, दन्त, ओष्ठ. Anuswara being a pure nasal without ‘stops in different portions of the mouth’ is not equal to न् or म्.

अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्ण:, तोर्लि (विद्वाल्ँ लिखति), हे मपरे वा (किं ह्लयति), पुम: खय्यम्परे (पुँस्कोकिल:, पुंस्कोकिल:) etc to my mind relate to the resultant sound when two phonemes coalesce and not the options of representing them.

The correct uccaran for sounds in any language can be learnt from a native speaker; Sanskrit has no native place; it is everywhere, but has no particular nativity. Due to passage of time and due to influence of regional languages, the pronunciation does show some variations. The anusvara is one such instance. In the absence of recorded sound, the conventions used by different people in transliteration may be used as the nearest guide.

The word संस्कृत is written as samskrita by a South Indian as the name of the group itself says, but as sanskrit in rest of India and rest of world. The न् or म् variation is pronounced when the anusvara is followed by an ऊष्माण or by ह. वंश, हंस, सिंह are transliterated with letter ‘m’ in the south and letter ‘n’ in the rest of the world - compare also Lufthansa. But in my observation, people in the North (or at least in UP/ Uttarakhand) pronounce an anusvara as a pure nasal without any trace of ‘n’ or ‘m’. For example, words like हँसना, गाँ, हूँ.

To sum up, I am of the opinion, an anuswara is a pure nasal and not न् or म्. The difference between the two types of anuswara baffles me more.

With reverence to the scholars

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

[ken p]

Thanks,

I like to simplified traditional dotted nasal sounds(Anusvar,chandrabindu) to newly added to Unicode   ॅ  ॉ  (कॉट, कॅट) sounds

If pronunciation of अनुस्वार is same then why not write in as you pronounce for an easy Roman transliteration?

संस्कृत >सम्स्कृत or as संस्कृत /saṁskṛta >samskṛta or as saṁskṛta  

 ां  िं   ीं   ें    ैं      ों   ौं    ं           ाँ ..........Traditional sounds

To

ॉ  िन् ीन् ॅ   ैन्    ोन् ौन्  न् म्        ॉ..........sounds needed for an easy Roman Transliteration

म्...goes with प फ ब भ म  and rest carry न्

 

This link may give further explanation. 

https://simplesanskrit.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/simple-sanskrit-lesson-28/#comments

[Dr P Narayanan]

Dear Shri Abhytankar,

 

Your observations are more misleading than helping.

//1) The सूत्रम् – मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) specifies use of अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्. //

No. It is not an option and not a rule for writing only. मोऽनुस्वारः means "padAnta ma, if followed by hal will turn to anusvAra. It is not an optional rule. It is mandatory and not only for writing but in every type of usage (speaking, pronouncing).

//2) अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः (८/४/५८) specifies its pronunciation following the परसवर्ण-concept.// Again, not pronunciation only.

//The second सूत्रम् suggests that अनुस्वार would be pronounced not only as न् or म् but as other nasals अनुनासिक-s also//

No. It means anusvAra should turn to ङ्, ञ्, ण्, न्, म् यॅ्, लॅ् or वॅ् when followed by यय्. The next sUtra वा पदान्तस्य (८/४/५९) makes it optional when anusvAra is at padAnta. Thus the examples given by you, अंग. अंतःकरणम्, and अंतः are all wrong, because anusvAra here is not in padAnta.

//Apte’s online dictionary gives “No matching words found” message when searching for अंतः or अंग. So, Apte’s dictionary seems to be strictly going by मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) i.e. अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्. For the word अङ्ग one needs to input only this way, not as अंग. //

It is clear Apte's dictionary is following grammatical rules as laid down py pANini and not as per your whims and fancies.That is why you do not get the result when you put a wrong input.

//So अनुस्वार seems to have been used as an option for writing अनुनासिक-s in general, and not just for न्//

The letter न also turns to anusvAra when not at padAnta and when followed by झल् as per the the sUtra नश्चापदान्तस्य झलि (८ / ३ / २४) and then naturally, it follows the rules for anusvAra afterwards. So when followed by तवर्ग, it should turn to न् (optional for padAnta).

//But this option seems to be more in use in vernacular languages, especially हिन्दी (हिंदी), मराठी which also are written in देवनागरी.//

As those languages do not follow the rules of Sanskrit and they have their on rules, हिंदी, जांच, दांत etc. are correct.

 

//Having said so, one may also find अनुस्वार written distinctly, in a special style, in words like  ताँ्स्ते (ईशावास्योपनिषत्), which is a संधि of तान् + ते or प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च (गीता 2-11) which is a संधि of प्रज्ञावादान् + च.//

This "special style" is not anusvAra, but is anunAsika svara, that is, आ in ताॅस्ते is anunAsika AkAra. alternately there can be a non-anunAsika AkAra followed by an anusvAra, i.e., तांस्ते. This is provided by various rules like अत्रानुनासिकः पूर्वस्य तु वा (८ / ३ / २) अनुनासिकात् परोऽनुस्वारः (८ / ३ /४). To understand this, you will have to learn the PaNini's rules for sandhi properly.

 

// In ताँ्स्ते the अनुस्वार will be pronounced as न्. But in प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च it will be pronounced as ञ् because the परवर्ण् is च and the अनुनासिक of च-वर्ग is ञ्.//

No. In both the cases, anusvAra is pronounced like anusvArA only. As it is followed by स् and श् respectively and not by त् or च्, parasavarNa rule does not apply here at all. (स् and श्

are not यय्)

//Hope, my observations are in order and help.//

No. They are neither in order nor would they help in this case. As for the answer to Ken's query, I have to state that ं (anusvAra) is a special svara and not equal to न् or म्

Dr. P. Narayanan

 

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

--

Dr. P. Narayanan

Medical Officer (Ayurveda)

Tamil Nadu Govt. Service

(Now on Deputation as

P.G.Student

National Institute of Ayurveda

Jaipur (Rajasthan)

Ph:7877890269/ 9442177150

[Neelesh Bodas]

Plz find comments inline...

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 4:53 PM, अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः | श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् । <sl.abh...@gmail.com> wrote:

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

I would read your question to be inquiring about pronunciation of अनुस्वार, wherever it is so written.

Your question prompts me to think of two सूत्र-s in अष्टाध्यायी.

(1) The सूत्रम् – मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) specifies use of अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्.

No.  मोऽनुस्वारः says that पदान्त  म् is converted to an अनुस्वार. It is incorrect to say the it allows "using  अनुस्वार as an option for writing म्". In general, one can't "use" one symbol for writing another. And further, there is no "option" here. The पदान्त  म् is compulsorily converted to an अनुस्वार | 

It should be noted at an अनुस्वार is a distinct entity, just like a विसर्ग, or an उपध्मानीय | 

(2) अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः (८/४/५८) specifies its pronunciation following the परसवर्ण-concept.

The second सूत्रम् suggests that अनुस्वार would be pronounced not only as न् or म् but as other nasals अनुनासिक-s also.  

No. It specifies that an अनुस्वार is converted to a परसवर्ण when followed by a यय् वर्ण: | This has nothing to do with "pronunciation". 

 

One may come across words like अन्तःकरणम् अन्तर्यामी also written as अंतःकरणम्. अंतर्यामी.

 

No. These are incorrect way of writing these words in Sanskrit, because there is no reason why an अनुस्वार should exist there. It has to get converted to the appropriate परसवर्ण | 

 

Such instances do suggest अनुस्वार being used as an option for writing न् also.

No. For the same reasons as quoted above.  BTW, note that we do have  नश्चापदान्तस्य झलि 8|3|24, which says that  "अपदान्त न् gets converted to अनुस्वार".  Again, observe the word "converted to" and note that there is no "option" here. 

 

One may also come across अङ्ग written as अंग.

No. This is grammatically incorrect. अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः 8|4|57 mandates a परसवर्ण. It is not optional, except in cases like संख्या where the word ending in the अनुस्वार is a पद, in which case "वा पदान्तस्य" 8|4|58 makes it optional.

 

These then become examples, explaining the परसवर्ण-concept.

So अनुस्वार seems to have been used as an option for writing अनुनासिक-s in general, and not just for न् or म्. But this option seems to be more in use in vernacular languages, especially हिन्दी (हिंदी), मराठी which also are written in देवनागरी.

Apte’s online dictionary gives “No matching words found” message when searching for अंतः or अंग. So, Apte’s dictionary seems to be strictly going by मोऽनुस्वारः (८/३/२३) i.e. अनुस्वार as an option primarily for writing म्.

For the word अङ्ग one needs to input only this way, not as अंग.

Having said so, one may also find अनुस्वार written distinctly, in a special style, in words like  ताँ्स्ते (ईशावास्योपनिषत्), which is a संधि of तान् + ते or प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च (गीता 2-11) which is a संधि of प्रज्ञावादान् + च. In ताँ्स्ते the अनुस्वार will be pronounced as न्. But in प्रज्ञावादाॅ्श्च it will be pronounced as ञ् because the परवर्ण् is च and the अनुनासिक of च-वर्ग is ञ्.

Hope, my observations are in order and help.

It is worthwhile to note that a चन्द्रबिन्दु: (ँ) is not same as an अनुस्वार (ं).  A चन्द्रबिन्दु: is merely a symbol used to denote the अनुनासिक-version of a स्वर | For example: अँ, which is different than अं |  The two should not be confused. 

BTW, the sandhi तान् + ते goes as follows - 

तान् + ते 

ता रुँ + ते [ नश्छव्यप्रशान् 8।3।7 इति पदान्तस्य नकारस्य रुँत्वम्]

ताँरुँ ते / तांरुँते [अत्रानुनासिक: पूर्वस्य तु वा 8।3।2 इति विकल्पेन अनुनासिक:, तदभावे अनुनासिकात्परोऽनुस्वार: 8।3।4 इति अनुस्वार:]

ताँस्ते / तांस्ते [खरवसानयोर्विसर्जनीय: इति विसर्ग:, विसर्जनीयस्य स: इति सत्वम् ]

 

As an ending remark - I think the biggest source of confusion seen all over this email is the assumption that "X is used to write/pronounce Y". This is not correct. Each वर्ण in Sanskrit has a distinct pronunciation. 

[Radim Navyan]

Dear Abhyankar ji,

There are some misconceptions in your answer. I'd like to add notes.

According to मः अनुस्वारः anusvara is a phonetic distortion of ॰म् before consonant. It sounds like a nasalisation of preceeding vowel and neither as "न्", nor as "म्"। The term of such distortion is "at the end of a pada". So samples like अंग etc. is just a doubtful simplification of the times, when there were no correct glyphs in Indian typographies. Say, the 1st edition of Apte's dictionary and his Syntax are typed in such a questionable style.

The second sutra, you mentioned, is reffered not to the way of writing, but to the way of sounding.
We have secondary distortion, which will give us a chain with variations:

1.  ॰म् + हल्॰ =‍‍> ॰ं + हल्॰
2.1. ॰ं + कु॰ => ॰ङ् + कु॰
2.2. ॰ं + टु => ॰ण् + टु॰
2.3. ॰ं + तु => ॰न् + तु॰
2.4. ॰ं + पु => ॰म् + पु॰
2.5. ॰ं + य्॰ => ॰ँय् + य्॰
2.6. ॰ं + ल्॰ => ॰ँल् + ल्॰
2.7. ॰ं + व्॰ => ॰ँव् + व्॰

Now, sutra 8.4:59 वा पद–अन्तस्य tells us that such a secondary distortion is optional at the end of a pada.

So, until it is the simplification of a publiser, anusvara may be read as nasalisation of a preceeding vowel, inherent in it. That's it.
When you write किञ्च in your blog, you use an option of a rule 8.4:59, whereas a general rule remains किंच। And in such a case we may talk about dialects in standard of pronounciation.
But in examples like पंच there is no grammatical ground for anusvara at all, so we ought to spell it like पञ्च।

Return to  the question:

is ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

My answer would be: as a general rule, ं is a distortion of a final म् before consonant, which turns preceeding vowel into nasal.

Couple of years ago I had written in Russian a handbook of Sandhi rules. And I'd be glad to hear some corrections to my explanation above from respected scholars.


20.08.2015 16:23, अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः | श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् । пишет:

[Neelesh Bodas]

Anusvar is a distinct character. It is neither न् nor म्. The pronunciation of Anusvar is done using naasika only and it does not involve any part of mouth. (नासिकानुस्वारस्य). You can see use of anusvar is a lot of cases. For example: संस्कृतम्, अंश:, संयोग:, संख्या etc. 

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:18 PM, ken p <drk...@gmail.com> wrote:

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

Please post some Sanskrit words showing both conjunct letters. 

[P.K.Ramakrishnan]

tanno vishnururukramah = tam nah

tanmaamavatu = tat maam avatu

On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 6:02 PM, ken p <drk...@gmail.com> wrote:

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

Please post some Sanskrit words showing both conjunct letters. 

[Harissh Swaminathan]

Its neither of the two. The anusvara along with the visarga are two sounds probably native only to Samskrtam. All other indian languages if they use the above two derive it from samskrtam only.

The anusvara is neither "na" nor "ma". You will find the word saMskrta itself has an anusvara. It is pronounced as "samskrtam"  (with "ma" kara) in south India and "sanskrt" (with "na" kara) in north India

However the anusvara has its own completely nasal sound. The anusvara takes the nitya anunaasika of each varga when it is followed by the aksharas of that varga. This only applies to the set of aksharas from "ka" to "ma"

If it is followed by "ya", "va", "la", then it becomes the anunaasika of "ya","va","la".

If the anusvara if followed by Ushma or repha, then it does not undergo any change and remains as anusvara (kevala anunaasika) (in the vedas there are many variations to this though)

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 6:02:56 PM UTC+5:30, ken p wrote:

[ken p]

हिरण्यवर्णां हरिणीं सुवर्णरजतस्रजाम् ।

चन्द्रां हिरण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जातवेदो म आवह ॥

तां म आवह जातवेदो लक्ष्मीमनपगामिनीम् ।

यस्यां हिरण्यं विन्देयं गामश्वं पुरुषानहम् ॥

 

चन्द्रां प्रभासां यशसा ज्वलन्तीं श्रियं लोके देवजुष्टामुदाराम् ।

तां पद्मिनीमीं शरणमहं प्रपद्येऽलक्ष्मीर्मे नश्यतां त्वां वृणे ॥

मनसः काममाकूतिं वाचः सत्यमशीमहि ।

पशूनां रूपमन्नस्य मयि श्रीः श्रयतां यशः ॥

आर्द्रां पुष्करिणीं पुष्टिं पिङ्गलां पद्ममालिनीम् ।

चन्द्रां हिरण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जातवेदो म आवह ॥

Can these above Shlokas be written this way in an easy pronunciation scheme?

(Write as you pronounce)

हीरण्यवर्णॉ हरीणी सुवर्णरजतस्रजाम् .

चन्द्रॉ हीरण्मयी लक्ष्मी जातवेदो म आवह ॥

तॉ म आवह जातवेदो लक्ष्मीमनपगामीनीम् .

यस्यॉ हीरण्यन् वीन्देयन् गामश्वन् पुरुषानहम् ॥

चन्द्रॉ प्रभासॉ यशसा ज्वलन्ती श्रीयन् लोके देवजुष्टामुदाराम् .

तॉ पद्मीनीमी शरणमहन् प्रपद्येऽलक्ष्मीर्मे नश्यतॉ त्वॉ वृणे ॥

मनसः काममाकुतीन् वाचः सत्यमशीमही .

पशुनॉ रुपमन्नस्य मयी श्रीः श्रयतॉ यशः ॥

आर्द्रॉ पुष्करीणी पुष्टीन् पीङ्गलॉ पद्ममालीनीम् .

चन्द्रॉ हीरण्मयी लक्ष्मी जातवेदो म आवह ॥

hīraṇyavarṇô harīṇī suvarṇarajatasrajām .

candrô hīraṇmayī lakṣmī jātavedo ma āvaha ||

tô ma āvaha jātavedo lakṣmīmanapagāmīnīm .

yasyô hīraṇyan vīndeyan gāmaśvan puruṣānaham ||

 

candrô prabhāsô yaśasā jvalantī śrīyan loke devajuṣṭāmudārām .

tô padmīnīmī śaraṇamahan prapadye'lakṣmīrme naśyatô tvô vṛṇe ||

manasaḥ kāmamākutīn vācaḥ satyamaśīmahī .

paśunô rupamannasya mayī śrīḥ śrayatô yaśaḥ ||

ārdrô puṣkarīṇī puṣṭīn pīṅgalô padmamālīnīm .

candrô hīraṇmayī lakṣmī jātavedo ma āvaha ||

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Simple answer is the second is wrong in many words totally inconceivable for at least for Indian readers. It may be OK for foreign readers claiming it represents as pronounced by them.

[Usha Sanka]

Namaste

​

Can these above Shlokas be written this way in an easy pronunciation scheme?

(Write as you pronounce)

Keeping aside the solution offered for Samskrt words, what is done usually by English readers when English or other languages pose same difficulty issue for them? 

    Are the words cut in the ends just for easy pronunciation?

    Are the words changed the same way they are in the examples shown by you?

    Are they tampered with just to be made simple?

    Are words meant to be written some non-standard way just for making pronunciation simple?

Once we find a solution found in other languages case, we can think about application of same technique here as well. And if it succeeds, we can think further.

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

--

"-यद्गत्वा न निवर्तन्ते तद्धाम परमं मम"

[P.K.Ramakrishnan]

तां पद्मिनीमीं शरणमहं 

I have been taught to pronounce this as

taam padminigum saranamaham prapadye

[सीताराम]

I can not say you have been taught wrong, but you can verify with data.
Here is the Text & video

http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_veda/s-sukta-accent.pdf here is the text

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjcVbd1O7KQ

ई॒रꣳ॑

ꣳ॑ is the sound pronounced with "gum" to put it in English it should not be pronounced as गुं . if you do not see this symbol then it should not be pronounced like that.

I have seen many pandits pronounce words starting withऋ as अरु, but just because one is doing does not make it correct does not matter person's position or authority.

In Sanskrit there is no substitution - Wrong is plain wrong.

ex - many of the telugu speakers pronounce विश्वनाथ as विश्वनाध । प्रथमा as प्रधमा while reading sanskrit text they do the same, but like i said it may be ok in Telugu but it is plain wrong in Sanskrit, just that simple. 

धन्यवाद: - राम 

[Subrahmanian R]

Sirs, while agreeing with Sri Ramakrishnan, I would like to say I have also noticed that some of the anuswaras in Vedic texts are pronounced close to are equal to 'gum'; Here is a sample, where it is also written in devanagari that way; in some other texts, I notice that these are marked with a crescent and dot.

ॐ ॥ स॒ह॒स्र॒शीर्॑षं दे॒वं॒ वि॒श्वाक्षं॑ वि॒श्वशं॑भुवम् । विश्वं॑ ना॒राय॑णं दे॒व॒म॒क्षरं॑ पर॒मं पदम् । वि॒श्वतः॒ पर॑मान्नि॒त्यं॒ वि॒श्वं ना॑राय॒णग्ं ह॑रिम् । विश्व॑मे॒वेदं पुरु॑ष॒-स्तद्विश्व-मुप॑जीवति । पतिं॒ विश्व॑स्या॒त्मेश्व॑र॒ग्ं॒ शाश्व॑तग्ं शि॒व-मच्युतम् । ना॒राय॒णं म॑हाज्ञे॒यं॒ वि॒श्वात्मा॑नं प॒राय॑णम् । ना॒राय॒णप॑रो ज्यो॒ति॒रा॒त्मा ना॑राय॒णः प॑रः । ना॒राय॒णपरं॑ ब्र॒ह्म॒ तत्त्वं ना॑राय॒णः प॑रः । ना॒राय॒णप॑रो ध्या॒ता॒ ध्या॒नं ना॑राय॒णः प॑रः । यच्च॑ कि॒ञ्चिज्जगत्स॒र्वं॒ दृ॒श्यते॓ श्रूय॒ते‌உपि॑ वा ॥

अन्त॑र्ब॒हिश्च॑ तत्स॒र्वं॒ व्या॒प्य ना॑राय॒णः स्थि॑तः । अनन्त॒मव्ययं॑ क॒विग्ं स॑मु॒द्रे‌உन्तं॑ वि॒श्वशं॑भुवम् । प॒द्म॒को॒श-प्र॑तीका॒श॒ग्ं॒ हृ॒दयं॑ चाप्य॒धोमु॑खम् । अधो॑ नि॒ष्ट्या वि॑तस्या॒न्ते॒ ना॒भ्यामु॑परि॒ तिष्ठ॑ति । ज्वा॒ल॒मा॒लाकु॑लं भा॒ती॒ वि॒श्वस्याय॑त॒नं म॑हत् । सन्तत॑ग्ं शि॒लाभि॑स्तु॒ लम्ब॒त्याकोश॒सन्नि॑भम् । तस्यान्ते॑ सुषि॒रग्ं सू॒क्ष्मं तस्मिन्॓ स॒र्वं प्रति॑ष्ठितम् ।

Respectfully

R Subrahmanian

[Subrahmanian R]

Sir, In the video attached, in the prelude before the suktas, it is distinctly heard - gaNAnAntvA gaNapatigum havAmahE. Of course, the 'gum' is not there in the Sukta. Am I hearing it wrongly, or the second word actually has a 'gum' suffix.

R Subrahmanian

[Hnbhat B.R.]

I remember such pronunciation is found certain consequences in Yajurveda recitals only and not a general rule for the pronunciation of Anusvara.

The general rule governing the articulation is नासिकानुस्वारस्य.

[सीताराम]

ग्ं  appears like a half baked attempt to write something to persons typing in capabilities yet to create gum sound.

I never came across halanta after swara. ग् + अं = गं what is the need to put another halanta after that.

Panini shiksha clearly states ह्रस्व & दीर्घ 

I can not type the symbol here using google IME but I am attaching a page from Panini Shiksha.

 

I see lot of tamil characters in the text that means someone typed it without the capability to create the actual symbol and instead decided to substitute it with equivalent sound.

 

[Sunil Sheoran]

On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 18:02:56 UTC+5:30, ken p wrote:

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

Please post some Sanskrit words showing both conjunct letters. 

In simple words,  ं = म् in संस्कृत् / संस्कृतम् , ALWAYS !!! ( ं not equal to न्)

Usage of  ं as न् is only due to Sanskrit script (devanagari) being mixed up with  Hindi script (again devanagari) by the early translators of Sanskrit works. In Hindi, the अनुस्वार् ( ं) is used interchangeable for न् or म् since it is a Prakrit language.

The correct name for the language itself is "Samskrit / Samskritam" but the early English translators put across the name of the language as "Sanskrit" due to them not knowing it properly. Hence the incorrect name stuck as Sanskrit, just like "INDIA" stuck to "Bharatvarsha".

In Sanskrit, the words such as किञ्चित् would have been simply be written as किंचित्, if they would have been intended to be the same.

You don't need to look far for examples, just notice the Sandhi the Devi Mahatmyam:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the text actually appears = The words that make it up

स्वपुरमायातो = स्वपुरं + आयतो (1.6)

हयमारुह्य = हयं + आरुह्य (1.8)

वैश्यमेकं = वैश्यं + एकं (1.17)

वनमभ्यागतो = वनं + अभ्यागतो (1.21)

[Hnbhat B.R.]

As the text actually appears = The words that make it up

Very strange splitting? Because of Devimahatmya?

> स्वपुरमायातो = स्वपुरं + आयतो (1.6)

> हयमारुह्य = हयं + आरुह्य (1.8)
> वैश्यमेकं = वैश्यं + एकं (1.17)
> वनमभ्यागतो = वनं + अभ्यागतो (1.21)

  We have learnt

हयमारुह्य = हयम्+ आरुह्य (1.8)
> वैश्यमेकं = वैश्यम्+ एकं (1.17)
> वनमभ्यागतो = वनम् + अभ्यागतो (1.21)

And not the reverse.

[Sunil Sheoran]

What's the strangness about? Why to debate something that doesn't even help answer the original question?

Don't you know हयम् = हयं, वनम् = वनं, वैश्यम् = वैश्यं ?? It's only a difference of form, the meaning stays the same.

Everyone knows the words with an Anuswar ending are only written with (म्) ending when they appear at the end of line.

For example, at end of line, हयं would be written as हयम् always, वनं as वनम्.

The sandhi examples I quoted were to help emphasise the sound of anuswar (like म्), otherwise these words would have been written as हयम्, वनम् only.

whereas your counter will confuse the OP even more.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Sunil Sheoran <sheo...@gmail.com> wrote:

What's the strangness about? Why to debate something that doesn't even help answer the original question?

Don't you know हयम् = हयं, वनम् = वनं, वैश्यम् = वैश्यं ?? It's only a difference of form, the meaning stays the same.

I know only according to Sandhi principles, that only  म् becomes ं अनुस्वार, only before consonants. Panini's grammar confirms this:

"मोऽनुस्वारः" ८।३।२३" मकारस्य पदान्तस्य अनुस्वारः आदेशो भवति हलि परतः। [कुण्डम्+हसति =) कुण्डं हसति। वनं हसति।  and before vowel it remains as it is without change.

त्वम् अत्र। किम् अत्र। Here the is no अनुस्वार at all, which becomes म् as you have suggested. It is the म् consonant of the suffix अम्। Only before consonant हल् it becomes.अनुस्वार. Only त्वम्+अत्र becomes त्वमत्र, in all the cases you have quoted. and not the reverse.

This is what I meant. Please explain your supposition how अनुस्वार becomes म्. Even if nothing follows, it will be म् only वनम्। only in the nominative. Without a consonant following, pleae explain how म् becomes अनुस्वार.

[ken p]

अनुस्वार

अनुनासिक और अनुस्वार उच्चार

http://susanskrit.org/oral-tradition/2010-07-17-06-21-48.html

गंगा = ग + ङ् + गा

पंच = प + ञ् + च

पंडित = प + ण् + डित 

बंधु = ब + न् + धु

कुंभ = कु + म् + भ 

संयम = स+य् (अनुनासिक) +यम

किंवदन्ती = कि+व् (अनुनासिक) +वदन्ती

संरक्षण = स+व् (अनुनासिक) +रक्षण

मतंलिका = मत+ल् (अनुनासिक) +लिका

अँश = अ+व् (अनुनासिक) +श

दंष्ट्रम् = द+व् (अनुनासिक) +ष्ट्रम्

हंस = ह+व् (अनुनासिक) +स

सिंह = सि+व् (अनुनासिक) +ह

संज्ञा = स+ञ्+ज्ञा

संक्षेप = स+ङ्+क्षेप

तंत्र = त+न्+त्र

gaṁgā = ga + ṅ + gā

paṁca = pa + ñ + ca

paṁḍita = pa + ṇ + ḍita 

baṁdhu = ba + n + dhu

kuṁbha = ku + m + bha 

saṁyama = sa+y (anunāsika) +yama

kiṁvadantī = ki+v (anunāsika) +vadantī

saṁrakṣaṇa = sa+v (anunāsika) +rakṣaṇa

mataṁlikā = mata+l (anunāsika) +likā

am̐śa = a+v (anunāsika) +śa

daṁṣṭram = da+v (anunāsika) +ṣṭram

haṁsa = ha+v (anunāsika) +sa

siṁha = si+v (anunāsika) +ha

saṁjñā = sa+ñ+jñā

saṁkṣepa = sa+ṅ+kṣepa

taṁtra = ta+n+tra 

गंगा पंच पंडित बंधु कुंभ संयम किंवदन्ती संरक्षण मतंलिका अँश दंष्ट्रम् हंस सिंह संज्ञा संक्षेप तंत्र 

gaṁgā paṁca paṁḍita baṁdhu kuṁbha saṁyama kiṁvadantī saṁrakṣaṇa mataṁlikā am̐śa daṁṣṭram haṁsa siṁha saṁjñā saṁkṣepa taṁtra 

Wouldn't  this be easy for modern Sanskrit readers in Roman Script?

gangā panca panḍita bandhu kumbha sanyama kimvadantī sanrakṣaṇa matanlikā anśa danṣṭram hansa sinha sanjñā sankṣepa tantra  ....where 'm' is anunaasik sound for p,f,b.bh,m Varg and for  the rest ' n' anunaasik sound.

गन्गा पन्च पन्डित बन्धु कुम्भ सन्यम किम्वदन्ती सन्रक्षण मतन्लिका अन्श दन्ष्ट्रम् हन्स सिन्ह सन्ज्ञा सन्क्षेप तन्त्र

One may drop a/schwa at the end of word for an easy reading in Roman script as it's done in English words pronunciations.

gangā panc panḍit bandhu kumbh sanyam kimvadantī sanrakṣaṇa matanlikā anś danṣṭram hans sinh sanjñā sankṣep tantr.........where a/schwa

[Sunil Sheoran]

Read the OP's question again: is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?

The OP means to just ask if the SOUND of Anuswar is like न् or like म् !!

The question is not about the WRITTEN FORM of the VOWEL ( ं or म्) but about the SOUND of that vowel.

I replied saying Anuswar sounds like म् and you came out with a counter to my reply taking the discussion on a different track.

Whatever the form, think about it and let us know:

Is the sound and meaning of हयं different than हयम्?

Is the sound and meaning of   वनं different than  वनम्?

Is the sound and meaning of  वैश्यं different than  वैश्यम्?

If yes, let us know the difference.

[Shyam Subramanian]

Namaste,

The pronunciation of the anusvAra is not the same as "m"  – the details are in the monograph by Shriramana Sharma at https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/samskritam. 

The first chapter – saMj~nA prakaraNam of the laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI has a section on uccAraNa according to which “~nama~NaNanAnAm nAsikA ca”, where the “ca” indicates that these are pronounce using the nAsikA as well as the normal pronunciation “sthAna” of their classes i.e., ~Na has “ka~NTha+nAsikA”, ~na has “tAlu+nAsikA” etc. For the anusvAra, the sUtra is “nAsikAnusvArasya” i.e., anusvAra is pronounced using only the “nAsika” and not like m(oShThau+nAsikA) or n(dantAH+nAsikA).

Regards,

Shyam

[Hnbhat B.R.]

,
>
> The pronunciation of the anusvAra is not the same as "m"  – the details are in the monograph by Shriramana Sharma at https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/samskritam. 
>
> The first chapter – saMj~nA prakaraNam of the laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI has a section on uccAraNa according to which “~nama~NaNanAnAm nAsikA ca”, where the “ca” indicates that these are pronounce using the nAsikA as well as the normal pronunciation “sthAna” of their classes i.e., ~Na has “ka~NTha+nAsikA”, ~na has “tAlu+nAsikA” etc. For the anusvAra, the sUtra is “nAsikAnusvArasya” i.e., anusvAra is pronounced using only the “nAsika” and not like m(oShThau+nAsikA) or n(dantAH+nAsikA).
>
> Regards,
> Shyam
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Sunil Sheoran <sheo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Read the OP's question again: is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?
>> The OP means to just ask if the SOUND of Anuswar is like न् or like म् !!
>>
>> The question is not about the WRITTEN FORM of the VOWEL ( ं or म्) but about the SOUND of that vowel.

>> I replied saying Anuswar sounds like म् and you came out with a counter to my reply taking the discussion on a different track.
>>
>> Whatever the form, think about it and let us know:
>>
>> Is the sound and meaning of हयं different than हयम्?

OK. I am not arguing with you. I agree with you. However you pronounce the anusvara, he meaning for not change. Hence both are same. Only the correct form of writing differs due to its following letter vowel or consonant. Yu can stay on your assumption that there is no difference in pronunciation.

The other member as made the difference of pronunciation of both clearly. They are not identical and the written form differs only in form due to sandhi rule. And no difference in meaning and hence both are correct for usage anywheres they do not change the meaning.

I am sorry for misunderstanding your explanation.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On 24-Sep-2015 1:44 am, "ken p" <drk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> अनुस्वार

>
> अनुनासिक और अनुस्वार उच्चार
>
> http://susanskrit.org/oral-tradition/2010-07-17-06-21-48.html
>
> गंगा = ग + ङ् + गा
> पंच = प + ञ् + च
> पंडित = प + ण् + डित 
> बंधु = ब + न् + धु
> कुंभ = कु + म् + भ 

Thanks you have found answers to your questions. If you want the grammatically correct form of the above in writing, the first set is unacceptable. If you do not care about grammatical correctness, you are free to use any conjunction you you are able to pronounce irrespective of grammatically correct forms.

> संयम = स+य् (अनुनासिक) +यम
> किंवदन्ती = कि+व् (अनुनासिक) +वदन्ती
> संरक्षण = स+व् (अनुनासिक) +रक्षण
> मतंलिका = मत+ल् (अनुनासिक) +लिका
> अँश = अ+व् (अनुनासिक) +श
> दंष्ट्रम् = द+व् (अनुनासिक) +ष्ट्रम्
> हंस = ह+व् (अनुनासिक) +स
> सिंह = सि+व् (अनुनासिक) +ह

In the above case, only अनुस्वार is possible and not म् or न्.

Anyhow congratulations for yourself finding the answers to your questions though your question has led to a lot of discussions.

So this ends the question.

[Sunil Sheoran]

On Thursday, 24 September 2015 01:44:29 UTC+5:30, ken p wrote:

अनुस्वार मुद्रण ई-मेल

अनुनासिक और अनुस्वार उच्चार

http://susanskrit.org/oral-tradition/2010-07-17-06-21-48.html

गंगा = ग + ङ् + गा

पंच = प + ञ् + च

पंडित = प + ण् + डित 

बंधु = ब + न् + धु

कुंभ = कु + म् + भ 

संयम = स+य् (अनुनासिक) +यम

किंवदन्ती = कि+व् (अनुनासिक) +वदन्ती

संरक्षण = स+व् (अनुनासिक) +रक्षण

मतंलिका = मत+ल् (अनुनासिक) +लिका

अँश = अ+व् (अनुनासिक) +श

दंष्ट्रम् = द+व् (अनुनासिक) +ष्ट्रम्

हंस = ह+व् (अनुनासिक) +स

सिंह = सि+व् (अनुनासिक) +ह

संज्ञा = स+ञ्+ज्ञा

संक्षेप = स+ङ्+क्षेप

तंत्र = त+न्+त्र

gaṁgā = ga + ṅ + gā

paṁca = pa + ñ + ca

paṁḍita = pa + ṇ + ḍita 

baṁdhu = ba + n + dhu

kuṁbha = ku + m + bha 

saṁyama = sa+y (anunāsika) +yama

kiṁvadantī = ki+v (anunāsika) +vadantī

saṁrakṣaṇa = sa+v (anunāsika) +rakṣaṇa

mataṁlikā = mata+l (anunāsika) +likā

am̐śa = a+v (anunāsika) +śa

daṁṣṭram = da+v (anunāsika) +ṣṭram

haṁsa = ha+v (anunāsika) +sa

siṁha = si+v (anunāsika) +ha

saṁjñā = sa+ñ+jñā

saṁkṣepa = sa+ṅ+kṣepa

taṁtra = ta+n+tra 

गंगा पंच पंडित बंधु कुंभ संयम किंवदन्ती संरक्षण मतंलिका अँश दंष्ट्रम् हंस सिंह संज्ञा संक्षेप तंत्र 

gaṁgā paṁca paṁḍita baṁdhu kuṁbha saṁyama kiṁvadantī saṁrakṣaṇa mataṁlikā am̐śa daṁṣṭram haṁsa siṁha saṁjñā saṁkṣepa taṁtra 

What you quote is for Hindi Grammar, is not valid for Sanskrit, and has been copied over from the source identified in the picture below. Also, it is shown in the picture, through DHATUPATH, that the correct words are गङ्गा, पण्डित, बन्ध etc. and not गंगा, पंडित, बंध respec. The latter are only correct in HINDI grammar, NOT sanskrit grammar.

If understanding the Anuswar (अं) sound by way of SANDHI is causing misunderstanding, let us go even beyond PANINI and consider the verb roots in his धातुपाठ that have the Anuswar (अं) as a part so that we can focus solely on the SOUND of Anuswar: 

शंस्  ध्वंस्  भ्रंस्  जंस्  दंश्  दंस्  कुंस्  बृंह्  रंस्  अंह्  रंह्  मंह्  हिंस्  संकेत्  अंस्

For example, all different derivation of अंस् are shown here: http://www.verbix.com/webverbix/go.php?D1=211&T1=%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8D

Now, you notice how these are PRONOUNCED by the accomplished scholars of Sanskrit and decide for yourself as to the SOUND of Anuswar.

The SOUTH INDIAN way of Sanskrit pronunciation is MORE CORRECT mostly regarding the Anuswar, the NORTH INDIAN way of pronunciation is mixed up because of double standards for Anuswar in Hindi grammar.

Also notice the ITRANS transliterations of these verb roots which tries to emphasise the spoken sound. All Anuswar in ITRANS also convert to M, indicating to you the sound of it.

It will be a tradegy of Sanskrit, a most perfect language, if the pronunciation of a VOWEL is to be differed as per conditions.

In my opinion and experience, the pronunciations in Sanskrit are very clear and fixed for each vowel and don't undergo change unless there is Sandhi and transformation.

Now the screenshot which was mentioned in the first line:

On Thursday, 24 September 2015 06:43:19 UTC+5:30, hnbhat wrote:

 

OK. I am not arguing with you. I agree with you. However you pronounce the anusvara, he meaning for not change. Hence both are same. Only the correct form of writing differs due to its following letter vowel or consonant. Yu can stay on your assumption that there is no difference in pronunciation.

The other member as made the difference of pronunciation of both clearly. They are not identical and the written form differs only in form due to sandhi rule. And no difference in meaning and hence both are correct for usage anywheres they do not change the meaning.

I am sorry for misunderstanding your explanation.

Bhat Saab, constructive debating is good and should be encouraged, it helps us all clear our doubts. That's why they had शास्त्रार्थ earlier on. :)

 

[Sunil Sheoran]

You Sir, read again the source you quote (I am sharing screenshot below). In your source, I have also found the BEST ANSWER that OP could have for his post.

The author in your quoted source (Four-Anusvaras-of-Taittiriya-Shakha.pdf) says, as per the ORAL VEDIC SHIKSHA TRADITION, the Anuswar sounds like the NASAL SOUND made with the MOUTH CLOSED. This I guess is the key to proper pronunciation of Anuswar and agrees with my contention as well that anuswar sounds closer to म्.

You try to pronounce Anuswar by making a Nasal sound with your mouth closed and decide for yourself if the Anuwar sounds somewhat like the म् sound or somewhat like the nasalised य् , व् , न् spoken with your mouth open. You can NOT make a purely Nasal sounds that sounds anything even close to nasalised य् , व् , न् .

So, let's understand that our Rishis couldn't have been stupid to prescribe difference pronunciations for a single vowel.

Who will call Sanskrit the MOST PERFECT language then?

Here is the screenshot of author mentioned in line #2:

[Shyam Subramanian]

Namaste Shri Sunil mahodaya,

Not sure whom you addressed your last email to, but here goes:

If your claim is that the anusvAra is *closer* to "m" than to "n", then we are in agreement. My only point was it is not the *same* as "m" and cannot be used interchangeably with it. It does not make sense to me that our grammarians will have sutras separately for the anusvAra when they could have just used "m" everywhere instead of it. 

Regards,

Shyam

[KN.Ramesh]

लेखननियमाः

1) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः व्यञ्जनम् अस्ति चेत् अनुृस्वारः एव लेखनीयः।

अहं सर्वदा....✅

अहम् सर्वदा....❎

सोत्कण्ठं प्रतीक्षे।✅

सोत्कण्ठम् प्रतीक्षे।❎

2) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः स्वरः अस्ति चेत् 'म्' लेखनीयम्।

गृहम् आगतः  ......✅

गृहं आगतः  ......  ❎

3) पूर्णविरामात् पूर्वम् अनुस्वारस्य स्थाने 'म' एव लेखनीयं न तु अनुस्वारः।

एकं यानं गतम् ।✅

एकं यानं गतं ।❎

[Neelesh Bodas]

2015-09-30 12:58 GMT+05:30 KN.Ramesh <knra...@gmail.com>:

लेखननियमाः

1) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः व्यञ्जनम् अस्ति चेत् अनुृस्वारः एव लेखनीयः।

No. This is not correct. In this case, one can write an अनुस्वार, or one can also write the म्. See below - 

अहं सर्वदा....✅

अहम् सर्वदा....❎

सोत्कण्ठं प्रतीक्षे।✅

सोत्कण्ठम् प्रतीक्षे।❎

all the above are correct. Why? Because मोऽनुस्वार: (that converts म् to अनुस्वार) comes in संहिताधिकार,  and संहिता is not mandated between two words of a sentence -  वाक्ये सा विवक्षामपेक्षते |

If there is samhita, then the sandhi must happen. If there is no samhita, then sandhi should not happen. 

 

2) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः स्वरः अस्ति चेत् 'म्' लेखनीयम्।

गृहम् आगतः  ......✅

गृहं आगतः  ......  ❎

This is fine. 

 

3) पूर्णविरामात् पूर्वम् अनुस्वारस्य स्थाने 'म' एव लेखनीयं न तु अनुस्वारः।

एकं यानं गतम् ।✅

एकं यानं गतं ।❎

And this too. Because in neither of these two cases can मोऽनुस्वार: be applied.

 

On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 16:50:53 UTC+5:30, Sunil Sheoran wrote:

What's the strangness about? Why to debate something that doesn't even help answer the original question?

Don't you know हयम् = हयं, वनम् = वनं, वैश्यम् = वैश्यं ?? It's only a difference of form, the meaning stays the same.

Everyone knows the words with an Anuswar ending are only written with (म्) ending when they appear at the end of line.

For example, at end of line, हयं would be written as हयम् always, वनं as वनम्.

The sandhi examples I quoted were to help emphasise the sound of anuswar (like म्), otherwise these words would have been written as हयम्, वनम् only.

whereas your counter will confuse the OP even more.

On Sunday, 20 September 2015 07:48:38 UTC+5:30, hnbhat wrote:

As the text actually appears = The words that make it up

Very strange splitting? Because of Devimahatmya?

> स्वपुरमायातो = स्वपुरं + आयतो (1.6)

> हयमारुह्य = हयं + आरुह्य (1.8)
> वैश्यमेकं = वैश्यं + एकं (1.17)
> वनमभ्यागतो = वनं + अभ्यागतो (1.21)

  We have learnt

हयमारुह्य = हयम्+ आरुह्य (1.8)
> वैश्यमेकं = वैश्यम्+ एकं (1.17)
> वनमभ्यागतो = वनम् + अभ्यागतो (1.21)

And not the reverse.

--

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On 30-Sep-2015 10:15 pm, "KN.Ramesh" <knra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> लेखननियमाः
> 1) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः व्यञ्जनम् अस्ति चेत् अनुृस्वारः एव लेखनीयः।
> अहं सर्वदा....✅
> अहम् सर्वदा....❎

This is when Sandhi is made with the next. Without Sandhi, the second is also correct.

> सोत्कण्ठं प्रतीक्षे।✅
> सोत्कण्ठम् प्रतीक्षे।❎

Here also the same. If Sandhi is made, it can be written as

सोत्कण्ठम्प्रतीक्षे also.

> 2) अनुस्वारस्य पुरतः स्वरः अस्ति चेत् 'म्' लेखनीयम्।
> गृहम् आगतः  ......✅
> गृहं आगतः  ......  ❎

मकारस्य पुरतः हल् भवति चेदेव मकारस्य अनुस्वारो भवति, न चेद् अनुस्वार एव न भविदुमर्हति। मकार एव भवति। न तु अनुुस्वास्य पुरतः स्वरो भवति चेद् मकारो भवतीति नियमः!

> 3) पूर्णविरामात् पूर्वम् अनुस्वारस्य स्थाने 'म' एव लेखनीयं न तु अनुस्वारः।

> एकं यानं गतम् ।✅
> एकं यानं गतं ।❎
>

>ां

अत्रापि अनुस्वार एव कथं भवतीति न ज्ञायते, मकारस्यैव व्यञ्जने परे एवानुस्वारो भवतीति पाणिनिनैवोक्तत्वात् अन्यत्र अनुस्वारस्य प्रसक्तिरेव न भवतीति कथमीदृशा नियमाः क्रियन्ते इति न ज्ञायते!

[KN.Ramesh]

@PKR, maalamanian,Raama, HN Bhat

अनुनासिकाक्षर स्थापनम्  :

वर्गाक्षरम्  or स्पर्साक्षरम्  : Alphabets from  क to  म  25 in number are called वर्गाक्षरम्  or स्पर्साक्षरम् . The fifth alphabets ङ्,ञ,ण, न , म ( sorry I am not able to put the halant below these- read them as consonants)  is the अनुनासिकाक्षरम् respectively for that varga. If the poorna bindu is followed by any of the above 25 letters, then that corresponding 5th alphabet अनुनासिकाक्षरम् is the आदेशम् for that anusvaaram. Hence it is to be used &  pronounced as per the वर्गोत्तमाक्षरं.

eg. गङ्ग to be written & pronounced like this only. Writing  गंग in samskritam is allowed or not, I dont know.

स्पर्सोत्तरो मकारस्तु यवलोत्तर एव च |

अनुनासिक मेतेषां सवरणं प्रतिपद्यते || ( Vyasasikshaa saastram slokas, 164,165)

 सानुनासिक अनुस्वारम् :If poorna bindu is followed by य र ल व, then it has to be pronounced nasally - तच्छं योरा वृणीमहे is to be pronounced as तच्छय्न् योरा वृणीमहे. Here य्न् is to be pronounced nasally  or the न् part is to be pronounced almost as य् , exact pronunciation I am not able to write , if required I shall pronounce and show.

There are 2 types of anusvarams in krishna yajur veda:

1)सगत्वानुस्वारम् or आगमानुस्वारम् 

2)अगत्वानुस्वारम् or केवलानुस्वारम् 

1) सगत्वानुस्वारम्: If poorna bindu is followed by श,ष ,स ,ह then ग is the आदेशम् for the anussvaaram. To be pronounced as ग्ं.

eg:हंस: to be pronounced as ह ग्ं.स: or more appropriately as ह(chandramawith bindu inside)स:. In grantha books this is written as हoस:,  सि o ह:, स o हि ता (sagumhitaa)

There are 5 types of Sagatvaanusvaaram based on the alphabets that occur in front of the anusvaara (ह्रस्व दीर्घ or प्लुतम्) and the alphabets that follow the anusvaaram ( असंयुक्ताख्षरं, संयुक्ताख्षरं   or अच् )

a) ह्रस्व पूर्वम् , असंयुक्ताख्षरं  परम् - हि ग्ंसी:, गणपतिग्ंहवामहे - here the maatraa kaalam for  ग्ं is 2 maatras.

b) दीर्घ or प्लुतम्  पूर्वम्,  असंयुक्ताख्षरं  परम् - पाग्ंसव्याय , -here the maatraa kaalam is 1 maatra

c)  ह्रस्व पूर्वम्, संयुक्ताख्षरं   परम् - स्तुहि स्रुतग्स्  स्रुतग्स् स्तुहि स्तुहि स्रुतम् -ग्ग्स्  is the pronounciation of the anusvaaram here (You have to press little and tell, dont know how to put it in writing) - maatra kalam 1 maatra - Usually denoted by double chandramaa one below the other with poorna bindu on the top chandrama. 

d)  दीर्घ or प्लुतम्  पूर्वम्, संयुक्ताख्षरं   परम् - अहीग्श्च , कल्पताग्स्स्रोत्रम् - ग्स्  is the pronounciation of the anusvaaram here - maatra kalam 1 maatra.

e) दीर्घ  पूर्वम्, अच् परम् - बाणवाग्ंउत - Here the maatra kalam is 1.25 ( 1 1/4 not eleven by 4, one-one by four).

2)अगत्वानुस्वारम् : We learnt about वर्गाक्षरम्  or स्पर्साक्षरम् rule in the first para. But this rule is not valid for ज्ञ and  घ्न . The anusvaaram म् which comes before ज्ञ and  घ्न is called अगत्वानुस्वारम् or  केवलानुस्वारम्. That means it is an anusvaaram without ग.

 ज्ञघ्नोत्तरो मकारश्चे दनुस्वारोत्र केवल:| 

द्विमात्र इति विज्ञेयो ह्यन्य धर्म विवर्जित: || (Vyasasikshaa saastram slokas, 166,167) 

 

eg, संज्ञानं, तमघ्नन्ति etc

For the jataa paatam of ज्ञात्रञ्चमे in camakam, 

मे ज्ञात्रं (2)   ज्ञात्रं मे  मे  ज्ञात्रं | (Sorry I am not able to put the svarams here) After the 2nd word  ज्ञात्रं - 2 maatra viraama kaalam ( break) is to be given and then only chanted. This is for the केवलानुस्वारम् . 

for exact pronounciations, I  request to learn from  veda pundits .

Please ignore the typos in slokas or wherever you notice.

Similarly there are 5 types of visargams w.r.to pronounciations.

Excerpts from the book, श्री रुद्राद्धयाय घन पाठं by my Guru salakshana Vidwaan  Arya somayajula Brahmasri.Venkata Jagannatha Rao, Ghanapaati.

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

वैयकरणा अत्र नाशयेयुः -

वा पदान्तस्य इत्यनेन पदान्ते विद्यमानस्यानुस्वारस्य ययि निमित्ते या परसवर्णस्य वैकल्पिकता विहिता स शङ्करभयङ्करादिपदेषु प्रवर्त्तते न वा ।

शं भयम् इत्यादीनां पदत्वं तु वर्त्तत एव  इति प्रवर्त्तेतैव सा । किन्तु शङ्करभरङ्करादीनां प्रातिपदिकत्वेन तद्घटकस्य पदताक्षुण्णैव तिष्ठति किम् ।
- इतीमां मदीयां शङ्काम् ।

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
www.lalitaalaalitah.com

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

कृतज्ञोहम् ।

जगदीश इत्यस्य विवरणमपि मम सुप्ताया आकाङ्क्षायाः शमने कारणं भवत्येव ।

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
www.lalitaalaalitah.com

2015-10-12 22:41 GMT+05:30 Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>:

On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 11:20:55 AM UTC+5:30, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः wrote:

वैयकरणा अत्र नाशयेयुः -

वा पदान्तस्य इत्यनेन पदान्ते विद्यमानस्यानुस्वारस्य ययि निमित्ते या परसवर्णस्य वैकल्पिकता विहिता स शङ्करभयङ्करादिपदेषु प्रवर्त्तते न वा ।

शं भयम् इत्यादीनां पदत्वं तु वर्त्तत एव  इति प्रवर्त्तेतैव सा । किन्तु शङ्करभरङ्करादीनां प्रातिपदिकत्वेन तद्घटकस्य पदताक्षुण्णैव तिष्ठति किम् ।
- इतीमां मदीयां शङ्काम् ।

‘शङ्कर’ ‘भयङ्कर’ इत्यनयोरुपपदसमासः। समासे प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य पूर्वपदस्य पदत्वं ‘प्रत्ययलोपे प्रत्ययलक्षणम्’ (१.१.६२) इत्यनेनाक्षुण्णम्।

‘शमि धातोः सञ्ज्ञायाम्’ (३.२.१४) इत्यनेन सूत्रेण ‘शम् (कल्याणम्) करोति’ इति लौकिकविग्रहे सति ‘शम् अम् कृ अच् सुँ’ इत्यलौकिकविग्रहे सति ‘तत्रोपपदं सप्तमीस्थम्’ (३.१.९२) इत्यनेन ‘शम्’ इत्यस्योपपदसञ्ज्ञायां जातायां ‘उपपदमतिङ्’ (२.२.१९) इत्यनेन नित्यसमासे जाते ‘शम् अम् कृ अच् सुँ’ इति स्थिते ‘कृत्तद्धितसमासाश्च’ (१.२.४६) इत्यनेन समासस्य प्रातिपदिकसञ्ज्ञायां जातायां ‘सुपो धातुप्रातिपदिकयोः’ (२.४.७१) इत्यनेन प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य ‘शम् अम्’ इत्यस्य सुपो लुकि ‘शम् कृ अच् सुँ’ इति जातम्। ‘शम् अम्’ इति सुबन्तस्य प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य ‘सुप्तिङन्तं पदम्’ (१.४.१४) इत्यनेन या पदसञ्ज्ञा जाता सा सुब्लुकि ‘शम्’ इति जातेऽपि ‘प्रत्ययलोपे प्रत्ययलक्षणम्’ (१.१.६२) इत्यनेनाक्षुण्णा। तेन प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य ‘शम्’ इत्यस्य पदत्वमक्षुण्णं सर्वाणि च पदकार्याणि प्रवृत्तानि। ततः ‘मोऽनुस्वारः’ (८.३.२३) इत्यनेन मकारस्यानुस्वारे जाते ‘शं कृ अच् सुँ’ इति स्थिते ‘वा पदान्तस्य’ (८.४.५९) इत्यनेन ययि परेऽनुस्वारस्य वैकल्पिकपरसवर्णत्वं प्राप्तम्।  परसवर्णत्वे ‘शङ् कृ अच् सुँ’ इति स्थितेऽनुबन्धलोपे गुणे रपरत्वे विभक्तिकार्ये ‘शङ्करः’ इति सिद्धम्। पक्षे ‘शं कृ अच् सुँ’ इति स्थितेऽनुबन्धलोपे गुणे रपरत्वे विभक्तिकार्ये ‘शंकरः’ इति वैकल्पिकरूपं सिद्धम्।

एवमेव ‘भयङ्करः/भयंकरः’ इति रूपद्वयम्। तत्र ‘मेघर्तिभयेषु कृञः’ (३.२.४३) इत्यनेन ‘भयं करोति’ इति लौकिकविग्रहे सति ‘भय अम् कृ खच् सुँ’ इत्यलौकिकविग्रहे सति नित्योपपदसमासः। पूर्ववत् ‘सुपो धातुप्रातिपदिकयोः’ (२.४.७१) इत्यनेन प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य ‘भय अम्’ इत्यस्य सुपो लुकि ‘भय कृ खच् सुँ’ इति जाते ‘अरुर्द्विषदजन्तस्य मुम्’ (६.३.६७) इत्यनेन मुमागमेऽनुबन्धलोपे ‘भय म् कृ खच् सुँ’ इति जातम्। शेषं पूर्ववत्।

एवमेव ‘जगदीशः’ इत्यत्र प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य पूर्वपदस्य ‘जगत्’ इत्यस्य प्रत्ययलोपेऽपि प्रत्यलक्षणं (=जश्त्वम्) ‘झलां जशोऽन्ते’ (८.२.३८) = ‘झलां जश् पदान्ते’ इत्यनेन। तेन ‘जगदीशः’ इति साधु। अन्यथा ‘जगतीशः’ इत्यनिष्टरूपं स्यात्।

एवमेव ‘राजपुरुषः’ इत्यत्र प्रातिपदिकावयवस्य पूर्वपदस्य ‘राजन्’ इत्यस्य प्रत्ययलोपेऽपि प्रत्यलक्षणं (=नकारलोपः) ‘नलोपः प्रातिपदिकान्तस्य’ (८.२.७) = ‘नलोपः प्रातिपदिकान्तस्य पदस्य’ इत्यनेन। तेन ‘राजपुरुषः’ इति साधु। अन्यथा ‘राजन्पुरुषः’ इत्यनिष्टरूपं स्यात्।

 

  

[Nityanand Misra]

On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 11:20:55 AM UTC+5:30, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः wrote:

वैयकरणा अत्र नाशयेयुः -

वा पदान्तस्य इत्यनेन पदान्ते विद्यमानस्यानुस्वारस्य ययि निमित्ते या परसवर्णस्य वैकल्पिकता विहिता स शङ्करभयङ्करादिपदेषु प्रवर्त्तते न वा ।

शं भयम् इत्यादीनां पदत्वं तु वर्त्तत एव  इति प्रवर्त्तेतैव सा । किन्तु शङ्करभरङ्करादीनां प्रातिपदिकत्वेन तद्घटकस्य पदताक्षुण्णैव तिष्ठति किम् ।
- इतीमां मदीयां शङ्काम् ।

[Bakul Shah]

&  secondly how to bring vyanjan for न्न ?   

On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 18:02:56 UTC+5:30, ken p wrote:

is  ं = न् or म् in Sanskrit?