Clarification about Spoken Sanskrit

Thu Aug 21 04:30:24 UTC 2008

dear friends,
I certainly agree with Dr. Ganesan's veiws.

further I want to clarify some points here.

The spoken sanskrit is conceived to be a small step to further studies of
kalidasas language. No body, by chatting over idli or coffee, is claiming
that they are far superior to bana or bhasa.

how to introduce sanskrit students in first step? it is the question mostly
encountered by Sanskrit educators today. people and mostly students in
India are afraid of sanskrit becuase of its so called difficulty. Spoken
sanskrit aims to quell this fear by introducing a simple form easy to
understand the sanskrit initially. then they can go to high language of bana
etc.

interestingly sanskrit through ages is spoken/ written in a very simple way
right from vedas to patanjali sabara kalidasa etc. but sometimes the style
had to be somekind of flowerish to attract the selected few, little bit
unnatural. we can not compare the simple language of kalidasa and bana.
there is very much gap in ages. hence it is aimed to bring back to original
state. do not we want to go back to beautifull language of patanjali? or
want to read bana only or else all the unnatural sanskrit of poets in
between? the beauty always lies in simplicity. I am not the person to hate
bana etc. but I admire more patanjali Shabara or vedic sanskrit for its
beauti in simplicity.

moreover mainly it is the question of how to introduce the first time
student indian student to sanskrit? since he already knows many/ or
most words (the european student sitting differently without the smell of
sanskrit (samskrita-gandha-vidhurah) being a diffrent case) it is only a
step to introduce him to syntax of sanskrit and few grammatically correct
words. exactly that what this movement is doing.

why dont we want/ can not revive the spoken sanskrit across the
subcontinent? is not Yehudi a perfect example. nobody of spoken sanskrit
champions wants to destroy all other languages and to introduce the sanskrit
in their place. nobody is dreaming about that. they are creating awareness
of this language.

regarding the the most brilliant assassination in history!

it is strange that still many people seem to be  happy without panini!  is
it? I do not know exactly.  he simply created a much needed grammar of
saskrit of his time. sanskrit vanished from common people for different
reasons (may be invasions of barbarians or others no body know exactly). but
panini survived because of different reasons. (for he was the base of vedic
and classical studies that still continue through the ages). *is it panini's
fault in writing a highly defined grammar that is still ahead in many
themes.  *stella's comments make no sense. sorry.

if sanskrit is changeble and if at all chages in futures, what is the fault?
we welcome it.

veeranaryana pandurangi

  In that sense Panini, presumably unwittingly,
> assassinated Sanskrit already 500 or 400 B.C.- Jan Houben actually proves
> the point by his statement that "In 1,000
> years time, Sanskrit will still be the same, but every other language
> will have changed beyond recognition."
> A living language changes, a dead one stays the same, regardless how
> many journals, articles, literary works etc. etc. are written in that
> language. The only "new" thing about the so called spoken (and also
> written) Sanskrit is its additional nouns and adjectives such as
> bhUmigatena rathenAgataH  "he arrived by the subway train" or
> paramANuvisphoTa  "nuclear blast" (I am inventing these) - the Hindi
> "paramANu bam" is funnier. Verbal and pronominal endings do not seem
> to change. Mummies do not change much either.
> As for the Census figures of people declaring Sanskrit their mother-
> tongue (or is it not rather father-tongue?) it has to be taken with a
> grain of salt. By the way, nobody has so far
> explained to me what happened with the 35,601 Sanskrit speakers who
> vanished between 1991-2001. Maybe they, like the Malayali poet
> Sacchidanandan's dinosaurs "died out
> because they spoke Sanskrit"? Who knows?
> Rest assured of my devotion to and love for teaching classical
> Sanskrit. And please don't accuse me of necrophilia!
> Yours
> Stella Sandahl
> --
> Professor Stella Sandahl
> Department of East Asian Studies
> 130 St. George St. room 14087
> Toronto, ON M5S 3H1
> ssandahl at sympatico.ca
> stella.sandahl at utoronto.ca
> Tel. (416) 978-4295
> Fax. (416) 978-5711
>
>
>
>  On 20-Aug-08, at 5:08 AM, Ganesan wrote:
>
> > Dear Sanskrit Lovers,
> > It is so strange that Sanskrit is called a dead language by its own
> > student !! It is not at all a dead language as it has been declared
> > as 'mother tongue' by some people though they are very few.
> > Further, other than its liturgical usage literature of big and
> > small sizes is still produced in that language in the Bharatadesa .
> > There are many Sanskrit journals, periodicals and daily newspapers
> > such as SUDHARMAA, AMRITABHAASHAA,etc. which are even now read by
> > many Sanskrit lovers in India.
> > A person living in far away europe or America may not be able to
> > understand the situation and much less appreciate.
> > Comparison with Latin does not hold good at all as production of
> > literary works in Latin is practically nil now.
> > As very strickingly put forth by Jan Houben, "In 1,000
> > years time, Sanskrit will still be the same, but every other
> > language will have changed beyond recognition." Sanskrit is
> > chiranaviinaa-ever new and youthful !
> >
> > Ganesh
> >
> > Dr.T.Ganesan
> > Chargé de Recherches
> > French Institute
> > 11, St. Louis Street
> > PONDICHERRY-605001
> > INDIA
> >
> > Tel: +91 - 413 - 233 4168 ext. 123
> > E mail: ganesan at ifpindia.org
> > Web: www.ifpindia.org
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stella Sandahl"
> > <ssandahl at SYMPATICO.CA>
> > To: <INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 8:35 PM
> > Subject: Clarification about Spoken Sanskrit
> >
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >> I seem to have stepped on many tender toes by making fun of a
> >> certain type of Spoken Sanskrit.  My main objection is entirely
> >> practical.   Over the years I have noticed that those who have
> >> been taught spoken  Sanskrit seem to have real difficulties
> >> reading even simple classical  Sanskrit such as the
> >> Kathasaritsagara and the Hitopadesa, not to  speak about the
> >> epics. It is important that there still are a few  students who
> >> wish to learn the language of Kalidasa et alii - and it  is a real
> >> pity that alamkarashastra is not given much attention among
> >> scholars of comparative literature to give just one example.
> >>
> >> Spoken Sanskrit can be quite an intellectually stimulating pass-
> >> time. Like playing chess. But trying to revive a dead language by
> >> creating words for nuclear submarines, supermarkets, tennis
> >> tournaments  etc.  is in my view a rather useless enterprise.
> >> Mass  Sanskrit is  of little interest for the large Indian
> >> population  trying to eke out a meagre living to get  one meal a
> >> day. Languages  are living organism that constantly change -
> >> bhasha calti nadi.  Sanskrit has a normative unchangeable grammar
> >> since around 400 B.C.  So can't we let it be what it is, a
> >> beautiful dead language?
> >> Nobody has tried to revive Latin in Italy since the days of
> >> Mussolini. However, Latin is still used in Western universities
> >> to  harangue recipients of honorary doctorates and such things.
> >> And it is of course used by the Vatican. There is no reason not
> >> to  use Sanskrit in a similar way to inaugurate dams, swearing in
> >> cabinets, taking ministerial oaths, and of course in solemn rites
> >> of  passage.  But trying to take a bus in Bombay/Mumbai or
> >> disputing the  taxi fare in Sanskrit is probably not going to have
> >> much effect  except amusing the drivers and the ever-present
> >> surrounding crowd.
> >>
> >> However, I do believe it is important that students do regular
> >> exercises translating into Sanskrit, not just the other way
> >> around.  At the Sorbonne we did "themes et versions" on
> >> alternating weeks (the  "themes" were Sanskrit texts translated
> >> into an often bizarre French  which we translated back into
> >> Sanskrit), and that was very useful.  More useful than chatting in
> >> Sanskrit about tea and iddlis.
> >>
> >> Best to all
> >> Stella Sandahl
> >>
> >> P.S. I do know how to transliterate - I just do not like the e-
> >> mail transliteration. And in the few cases above all members of
> >> the list  can surely supply them.
> >> P.P.S. Does anyone have the full text of Sacchidanandan's
> >> wonderful  poem about the dinosaurs who "died out because they
> >> spoke Sanskrit"?
> >> --
> >> Professor Stella Sandahl
> >> Department of East Asian Studies
> >> 130 St. George St. room 14087
> >> Toronto, ON M5S 3H1
> >> ssandahl at sympatico.ca
> >> stella.sandahl at utoronto.ca
> >> Tel. (416) 978-4295
> >> Fax. (416) 978-5711
>

-- 
Veeranarayana N.K. Pandurangi
Head, Dept of Darshanas,
Yoganandacharya Bhavan,
Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Rajasthan Samskrita University, Madau, post
Bhankrota, Jaipur, 302026.