More on word splitting and hyphenation in transliteration

[Dermot Killingley]

>putting spaces between words wherever possible results in
> some unpronounceable words being written separately in roman.  i.e. "tv
> asti" for "tvasti" etc.

True, but I don't think that is objectionable. If you know how to
pronounce Sanskrit (and there is no point in using a written text
for recitation if you do not know one of the many ways of
pronouncing it) you will soon get used to words which are not
syllables, or which end in non-syllables. Further, sandhi in
recitation may not follow the same rules as written sandhi, so you
are free to pronounce written 'tv' as 'tu' if it's more comfortable.

> not producing a pada text, but making a samhita text "look" outwardly a
> little like a pada text.  i.e. looking like individual words.

Unless you have a true pada text, you won't separate sequences such
as tadovAca (tadA/uvAca).

> a) Have the roman transliteration mirror the devanagari.  (To my western
> trained eye this made long undivided sentences seem complicated.)  I
> think Dr. Killingley indicates in his letter that this is an alternative
> practice.

I also tried to indicate, gently, that I thought it a pointless
practice.

Dermot
Dr Dermot Killingley (Reader in Hindu Studies)
Department of Religious Studies,
University of Newcastle upon Tyne,
Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
Tel: (0191) 222 6730. Fax: (0191) 222 5185