an old question

Vidhyanath Rao vidynath at MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU
Wed Jul 15 11:55:22 UTC 1998

"T.I. Console" <info at TICONSOLE.NL> wrote:
>So the language will get a tiny little bit of contamination at each

But it does.

We pay too much attention to phonology, because that was the main
istinction in medieval India. But some registers of Sanskrit show
Prakritic influence in morphology. In case of syntax and the steady
loss of indeclinables (to be replaced by case forms or gerunds) this
conclusion is inescapable.

Also, I don't see any difference between vatersprache and gurubhaashaa
in this matter.

"D.H. Killingley" <D.H.Killingley at NEWCASTLE.AC.UK> wrote:
> If a Tamil speaker uses voiced/voiceless and aspirated/unaspirated
> oppositions in pronouncing stops in Tamil, could they not be said to have
> a 'Sanskrit accent?'

What about those who have voice/voiceless distinction, but not
aspiration (typical of priests in minor temples in Tamil Nadu) :-)


More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list