>
Correction: Please read
But the traditional scholars among whom Sanskrit has been surviving as spoken language through a paramparaa do not find problem with sandhis are long compounds.

as

But the traditional scholars among whom Sanskrit has been surviving as spoken language through a paramparaa do not find problem with sandhis or long compounds.

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, some of the spoken Sanskrit activists believe in your approach.

But the traditional scholars among whom Sanskrit has been surviving as spoken language through a paramparaa do not find problem with sandhis are long compounds.

My observation is, even the new learners once they get the hang of it, enjoy doing sandhis and using long compounds, using idiomatic ways such as passive voice (in contrast to the preference for active voice in a fresh learner), bahuvreehis etc.

If you see the language of the plays both in Prakrit and Sanskrit portions, there is a balance. Sandhis are not broken. But too long compounds are avoided.

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:11 AM, Artur Karp <karp@uw.edu.pl> wrote:
Nagaraj:

> But in Sanskrit it does not work that way. 

If you'd want to revive Sanskrit as a spoken language, it would have to work that way. 

No sandhi in writing; absolutely minimal number of compounds. 

2016-09-18 20:48 GMT+02:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com>:
Perhaps you have something like bon après-midi   in mind, where words are separated from each other in writing, but sandhi is applied during pronunciation only. But in Sanskrit it does not work that way.  

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:
Let us take the example of रामः च and रामः चरति ।

For ease of communication, saying रामः चरति may seem better (than रामश्चरति). But even for ease of communication, रामः च does not look good ( रामश्च is the only way you can say that) .

But this question of ease of communication is only modern. रामश्चरति is natural.

Visandhika pronunciation turns out to be even 'wrong' in compound words such as विद्युच्छक्तिः ( विद्युत् शक्तिः is not correct. )

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Artur Karp <karp@uw.edu.pl> wrote:
भिन्नै रागमदर्शनैः भिन्नै स्स्वतर्ककृतदर्शनै र्न खलु!

-aiḥ or -air before bhinnais?

Have pity on me and remove my doubts,

Artur

PS. Being a Pole and a habitual user of an inflected language, I'd tend to write: 

bhinnaiḥ ...darśanaiḥ ...bhinnaiḥ  ...darśanaiḥ

In languages such as Polish (and other Slavic languages) the rules how word-endings are to be pronounced when in contact with other words (-air, -air,  -ais, -air) do not interfere with the rules of writing. 

phonological vs. phonetic


2016-09-18 10:23 GMT+02:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com>:
भिन्नै रागमदर्शनैः भिन्नै स्स्वतर्ककृतदर्शनै र्न खलु!

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Jan E.M. Houben <jemhouben@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Ananya,
Thanks for sharing this valuable argument and position, which not only deserves close and critical attention of Sanskritists all over the world, it also deserves to be translated, at least for its main outlines, into Hindi, Urdu and especially Sanskrit, in order to reach those most directly concerned.

Let us take one out of numerous important points in your argument: 
“It's [Sanskrit is] part of everything that has to be fought over
to protect the diversity and inclusiveness of India, its secular state and its
egalitarian Constitution.”
How to say this in Sanskrit? 
Several possibilities, here is my proposal: 
संस्कृतं भागमेव सर्वस्य योधनीयवस्तुनः, 
भारतस्य नानाविधत्व-व्यापकत्व-लौकिकत्वानां च तत्साम्यलक्षितसंविधानस्य च रक्षणार्थम् ।  

After all, why should we systematically refuse to speak the language of those about whom we are discussing ? Nevertheless, in Sanskrit studies this is exactly what has been going on since at least the beginning of the 19th century. 
And was it not precisely the exclusive focus on the archival function and the systematic neglect of the communicative function of Sanskrit which contributed significantly to its antiquarianization and to the complete marginalization of contemporaneous carriers of the Sanskrit tradition? 
Q: Was Sanskrit then a living language or means of communication when it was discovered by westerners ? R: A crucial personality is here Melputtūr Nārāyaṇa Bhaṭṭa : on the one hand he argued, in the beginning of the 17th century, for a liberal approach to Sanskrit grammar and gives a Pāṇinian grammar of “living” Sanskrit 
-- see “Pāṇinian grammar of living Sanskrit”: www.academia.edu/28515426 --
on the other hand he was aware of westerners who show both lack of respect and curiosity for Brahmins (tantudhārin) and their teachings (C. Rajendran 2008: 64 referring to Prabandhamañjarī ed. N.P. Unni p. 295-296). 
In order to deal AT ONCE with the lack of awareness of Sanskrit and its precious heritage outside India (not counting the very small number of specialists dispersed over a few academic institutions) AND the danger of its one-sided excess within India, I propose to invoke the regulatory concept of “ideodiversity” (मत-विविधता, which, within cultural and intellectual evolution, is or could be what “biodiversity” जैव-विविधता is within biological evolution): 
see my article “La ideodiversidad como valor planetario”
which recently appeared in: Eadem utraque Europa : revista de historia cultural e intelectual, 
Año 12, No. 17, Agosto 2016, ISSN 1885-7221, pp. 11-42, trilingual summary at
The entire article can be briefly summarized in Sanskrit by referring to the view of Bhartrhari
prajñā vivekaṁ labhate bhinnair āgama-darśanaiḥ | 
kiyad vā śakyam unnetuṁ svatarkam anudhāvatā ||
(view of Bhartrhari as formulated probably by his student: note, in addition to other arguments, the exceptional and unnecessary metrical clumsiness in pāda a ; to write a metrically more smooth pāda a would not have been that difficult, for instance : prajñā vivekitāṁ yāti) 

Best wishes,
Jan



      

Jan E.M. HOUBEN

Directeur d’Études

Sources et histoire de la tradition sanskrite

École Pratique des Hautes Études

Sciences historiques et philologiques 

54, rue Saint-Jacques

CS 20525 – 75005 Paris

johannes.houben@ephe.sorbonne.fr

https://ephe-sorbonne.academia.edu/JanEMHouben

www.ephe.fr


On 15 September 2016 at 14:27, Ananya Vajpeyi <vajpeyi@csds.in> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

The fall issue of World Policy Journal, titled "History's Ghosts", is just out. 

The issue published by Duke University Press journals, is now live online, and here is a direct link to my article in it, titled "The Return of Sanskrit". 

The Return of Sanskrit
How an Old Language Got Caught up in India’s New Culture Wars
 
Indian scholar Ananya Vajpeyi examines the way the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party is using Sanskrit to advance a Hindu supremacist agenda. She argues that academics need to step out of the ivory tower and resist the government’s manipulation of this ancient language.

​Thanks and all best,

Ananya Vajpeyi. ​


--

Ananya Vajpeyi 
Fellow
Centre for the Study of Developing Societies
29 Rajpur Road, Civil Lines
New Delhi 110054
ext: 229



 

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)




--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 




--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )