Kyoto-Harvard transliteration

[Stefan Baums]

Dear all:

[As I was writing the below Mark’s email arrived, but it is maybe 
worth adding the additional details and examples. Mark: Did you 
address the issue of mora count in your book – which I have of 
course, but not with me?]

One might add that the principle of waxing syllables (and moras, 
see below) remained operative in MIA formulaic language, see e.g. 
pp. 15 ff. of:

    Oskar von Hinüber, 1994. Untersuchungen zur Mündlichkeit früher
   mittelindischer Texte der Buddhisten. Mainz: Akademie der
   Wissenschaften und der Literatur. (Abhandlungen der geistes‐
   und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, Jahrgang 1994,Nr. 5 /
   Untersuchungen zur Sprachgeschichte undHandschriftenkunde des
   Pāli, III.)

who notes that in the Pali grammatical tradition it is referred to 
by Aggavaṃsa (under the name vācāsiliṭṭhatā) and provides the 
following reference to another early discussion of Pāṇini 2.2.34 
and the OIA side of the coin:

   W. Caland, 1931. A rhythmic law in language. Acta Orientalia 9:
    59–68.

Now the mora count of words like ār(i)ya or sūr(i)ya differs of 
course between Ṛgvedic and Pali as consonant assimilation and 
epenthesis were based on the disyllabic OIA form and operated 
after the Law of Two Moras:

   ārya > *arya > ayya, ariya / ayira

But it appears from other examples that mora count (secondary to 
syllable count) remained relevant in MIA formulas. Among the 
examples given on pp. 15–31 of von Hinüber’s study there are, at a 
glance, six cases where two adjacent member have the same syllable 
but a rising mora count:

   abhirūpa dassanīya pāsādika (4 + 4 + 4 s.; 5 + 6 + 6 m.) [18]
   dubbhikkhe dvīhitike setaṭṭhike (3 + 4 + 4 s.; 6 + 6 + 7 m.) [20]
   dubbhikkha duhitika setaṭṭika salākavutta (3 + 4 + 4 + 5 s.; 5 
+ 4 + 6 + 7) [20]
   vuḍḍhiṃ virūḷhiṃ vepullaṃ (2 + 3 + 3 s.; 4 + 5 + 6 m.) [23]
   daliddo appadhano appabhogo (3 + 4 + 4 s.; 5 + 5 + 6 m.) [29]
   aḍḍho mahaddhano mahābhogo (2 + 4 + 4 s.; 4 + 6 + 7 m.) [29]

and only one counterexample (same syllable but falling mora count):

   attamanā pamuditā pītisomanassajātā (4 + 4 + 8 s.; 6 + 5 + 13 
m.) [30]

The continued relevance of mora count in MIA rhythmic language is 
of course unsurprising seeing the rise of mātrāchandas etc. Von 
Hinüber does not seem to go into the mora side of things (unless I 
missed it), but surely this has been discussed elsewhere.

Best wishes,
Stefan Baums

-- 
Stefan Baums
Asian Languages and Literature
University of Washington