Dear Harry (if I may),
Retroflex l (ळ)
is quite common in South Indian Sanskrit manuscripts and prints. For example, in the Śaiva
Kāñcīmāhātmya (a Sanskrit sthalamāhātmya on the city of Kanchipuram), I find the following examples just in the first two chapterts: śītal̤a, yugal̤a, uddhūl̤ita, kāl̤ikā, vakul̤a, nāl̤ikera, dal̤a, niṣkal̤a, sakal̤a, kramel̤aka, maul̤i…
Sanskrit loanwords in South Indian languages also often reflect the pronunciation with retroflex l, e.g. the goddes Kālī is called
காளி
Kāḷi (with retroflex l) in Tamil.
My impression is that there are certain words in which l is quite consistently replaced by retroflex l, while other words retain then
“normal” l. However, I have not been able to find any consistent pattern when l becomes retroflex – any insights would be appreciated!
Another question is how retroflex l should be represented in Roman transliteration. The most straightforward solution would be ḷ (in
analogy with ṭ, ḍ, ṇ, ṣ), which is also the character used for retroflex l in Tamil transliteration, but in IAST transliteration ḷ is already reserved for vocalic l (ऌ).
As you can see above, I have tentatively been using l̤ for retroflex l, but I would be happy to know if any other conventions have been used.
Best wishes,
Jonas Buchholz
____ _____
Dr. Jonas Buchholz
Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Project “Hindu Temple Legends in South India”
Karl Jaspers Centre
Voßstr. 2 | Building 4400 | Room 004
69115 Heidelberg, Germany
P: +49 (0)6221 54 4095
Von: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces@list.indology.info>
Im Auftrag von Harry Spier via INDOLOGY
Gesendet: Freitag, 24. März 2023 02:10
An: indology@list.indology.info
Betreff: [INDOLOGY] ळ
in south Indian grantha sanskrit manuscripts
Dear list members,
I'm looking at the devanagari transcription of a south indian grantha manuscript. most consonent l's are the classical sanskrit l i.e. ल
but some words have the letter, ळ .
Some examples are:
प्रक्षाळ्य
नाळिकेरोद्भवं
पादौप्रक्षाळ्याचम्य
मुकुळीकृतिय
पिण्गळाय
वामांघ्र्यब्जदळासह्रिताम्
अण्गुळ्यग्रेण
शुद्धविद्यातत्वव्याप्तसर्वमणळोपेतं
I'm pretty sure this isn't from typist misprints because प्रक्षाळ्य
occcurs many times always spelled with ळ
Any explanations would be appreciated. My understanding is that sometimes manuscripts were created by one scribe speaking the text and another scribe writing what he hears. Is that a possible explanation for the occurance of this letter ळ .
I.e. local pronounciation creeping in.
Thanks,
Harry Spier