Borrowings

[Anand Venkt Raman]

Dominik Wujastyk wrote:

>I am also unaware that the Sanskrit grammarians ever made a
>synchronic/diachronic distinction beyond the primitive "bhasayam" and

It is certain that Sanskrit grammarians never made a distinction between
synchronic and diachronic aspects of language change.  It was becasuse
they all, including Panini, considered Sanskrit to be eternal and
unchanging.  According to R.E.Asher, it was this assumption that facilated
some of their breakthroughs which we are still able to learn from
today.

- &


> From indology-l at pwyz.rhein.de 08 1996 May +0100 20:51:00
Date: 08 May 1996 20:51:00 +0100
From: indology-l at pwyz.rhein.de (Peter Wyzlic)
Subject: Re: Appeal font users, please ...
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: Peter at pwyz.rhein.de

Hello ralphbunker,

In your
message: <UPMAIL07.199605080101260768 at msn.com>
date: <08 May 96>

You wrote on "RE: Appeal font users, please ...":

>... support 1100 Devanagari characters (spread across 5 fonts)....

You have to rewrite the teaching books, it seems. :-)

>Most people don't seem to be interested in beautiful Devanagari
>though. --ralph

Some people don't seem to use M$-Word though.

\bye
Peter Wyzlic