Lars Martin Fosse lmfosse at ONLINE.NO
Sat Feb 21 16:10:25 UTC 1998

At 10:00 21.02.98 -0600, you wrote:
>It seems to me that there are  contradictions here in the various
> postings by linguistic scholars.

>And there are other experts who say that the language of the
>vedas cannot even be called as Sanskrit and has to be termed as

This is partly a simple question of terminology. Vedic Sanskrit is Sanskrit
in the same way that Homeric Greek is Greek. The point is that Vedic differs
from classical Skt. in a number of ways, both in terms of grammar and
vocabulary. But the difference is not so big that we could say that Vedic is
a different language altogether! As far as I can see, the difference between
Vedic and Classical Skt. is less than the difference between - say - avadhi
or braj on the one hand and khari boli on the other.

It is practical to have a term for Vedic Skt. Then we know what we are
referring to: the language of the four Vedas, the Brahmanas and the
classical Upanishads.

>Please explain to me as to who among all these is correct.

They are all correct! There is no contradiction.

Best regards,

Lars Martin Fosse Lars Martin Fosse
Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,
0674 Oslo

Tel: +47 22 32 12 19
Fax: +47 22 32 12 19
Email: lmfosse at
Mobile phone: 90 91 91 45

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list