28.2 15

Dear Professor Tull,

I have no strict guidance to offer but can cite from my ‘Introductory note’ to a volume comprising a collection of papers in 2001.

“The absence of strict uniformity in the use of diacritical marks in the transliteration of Bengali words in the Bibliography requires explanation. The Sanskrit spelling of Bengali tatsama words could not always be reflected in their Roman transliterarion in the Bibliography as, for example, there are established conventions for the names of periodicals like Basumati where Vasumatī would have been unacceptable” (Tarividyam: Subarnarekha, Kolkata: x )

The unwritten guideline is that established conventions should be adhered to.  When there is no established convention the semivowels, irrespective of whether they are pronounced as plosives or not, are written as semi-vowels. Our faculty of humanities is called Vidya Bhavan without the addition diacritics, so is the southern-most bridge in Calcutta called Vidyasagar Setu. Youngsters also write vishan for bhishan but that is not approved in learned circles and regarded as unsophisticated. The retroflex ṣ is transcribed sh, the palatal ś as plain s, ṇ is n, c is ch, and so on. Aberrations are numerous. यामिनी राय (যামিনী রায়) is written Jamini Roy. So goes Jatindra Mohan; also Jodhpur (in Hindi).

In the thirties, forties and fifties Sunitikumar Chatterji, Durgamohan Bhattacharyya, Rajsekhar Basu and other intellectuals had been employed by the Government to standardize the spellings and transliterations. But the nonchalant, lackadaisical Bengali intellectuals deemed it below dignity to abide by norms.  

Net outcome -- Go as you like stating the method!

Best

Dipak Bhattacharya