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
E:
jonas.buchholz@hadw-bw.de
W: https://www.hadw-bw.de/htl
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.