[INDOLOGY] Anusvara in IAST transliteration

[Jonathan Silk]

I'm pretty sure that this ship has sailed, but for what it's worth: ṃ does
not indicate a retroflex, which is what all other under-dots indicate in
Skt transcription (most: we can argue about ṛ, but for this I use r̥
anyway, also for similar reasons!). Therefore it is most logical to use ṁ.
(I started doing this when we used to use underlines, when all underdots
disappeared unless one skipped an underline in one particular place, which
was always a mess).
So maybe it's only "old man yells at cloud" but I think ṁ is the logical
way to go (as is r̥), and will continue to use it / them….

Jonathan

On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 9:03 AM Dániel Balogh via INDOLOGY <
indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

> Dear Harry,
>
> IAST is not an absolute standard in the way ISO-15919 is; it's more like a
> set of conventions, without a definitive document and hence malleable at
> the edges. There is, for example, no definite provision in IAST for the
> upadhmānīya and jihvāmūlīya (the transliterations listed on the Wikipedia
> page for IAST are just one of the options in use), nor for the Vedic
> retroflex l, much less for Dravidian retroflexes and alveolars. The same
> Wikipedia page gives ḻ for the retroflex l, which I have never seen before
> and which clashes with the convention of using ḻ for the sound in e.g.
> Tamiḻ.
> I personally have never heard of a flavour of IAST that uses an overdot
> for the anusvāra and agree with you that the IAST anusvāra is with an
> underdot. The first of two random Google hits agree:
> https://www.omniglot.com/writing/sanskrit.htm and
> https://fpmt.org/wp-content/uploads/education/translation/guide_to_sanskrit_transliteration_and_pronunciation.pdf
> I dare say that as far as IAST can be considered a standard, the "correct"
> IAST anusvāra is ṃ, while ṁ is an informal alternative. So, put in so many
> words, yes, Wikipedia is wrong.
> See also the stub on the discussion page for the IAST article:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Alphabet_of_Sanskrit_Transliteration#Anusvara
>
> All the best,
> Daniel
>
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2026 at 02:10, Harry Spier via INDOLOGY <
> indology at list.indology.info> wrote:
>
>> Dear list members,
>>
>> I had always thought that anusvara in IAST was m with underdot (thats
>> what GRETIL, SARIT and U ot Texas Etexts have and what I've always used)
>> but just now looking at the wikipedia articles: Devanagari Transliteration
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_transliteration
>> and  IAST
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Alphabet_of_Sanskrit_Transliteration
>> Both these articles have IAST anusvara as m overdot. Are these wikipedia
>> articles wrong or have we all (GRETIL,SARIT, Uof Texas, me) not been using
>> correct IAST transliteration?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Harry Spier
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>


-- 
Prof. dr. J.A. Silk
Professor in the study of Buddhism
Leiden University Institute for Area Studies, LIAS
Herta Mohr building 2.142
Witte Singel 27A
2311 BG Leiden
The Netherlands

Guest Professor, PI of ERC-Project BEST
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Department für Asienstudien, Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie
Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1
80539 München
Deutschland

website: www.OpenPhilology.eu
copies of my publications may be found at
https://leidenuniv.academia.edu/JASilk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20260302/f716e671/attachment.htm>