Word splitting & hyphenation conventions in roman transliteration

[Rolf Koch]

Because the texts alltogether lead to the following conclusion:
an initial h ( eg. hi) softens a preceeding mute (eg. tat becomes tad) and is being
changed itself to the soft aspirate of that mute (eg. h becomes dh
since dh is the soft aspirate of the mute t).
tat hi becomes taddhi but never tad dhi.


Jan Brzezinski wrote:

> Why was tad dhi chosen rather than tadd hi? That way, the latter word would preserve its original form, as is usually the case in these transliterated sandhis.
>
> Jan