A satisfactory explanation of the historical developments probably should start with Burrow (Sanskrit language, 2nd end., 1955, pp 90-95): PIE sḱ, the source of (c)ch, underwent the general development of *ḱ > ś, resulting in the cluster *sś which was assimilated to *śś. This development was parallel to that of *ḱs, where *ḱ underwent the conditioned change to š before obstruent; the resulting cluster *šs assimilated to *šš which turned into *ṣṣ. Subsequent to these changes, *śś and *ṣṣ underwent regular contact dissimilation to *cś and *ṭṣ. The latter underwent different environmentally conditioned changes resulting in final ṭ and medial kṣ (with exceptions as the result of analogy and other secondary changes. *cś may have stayed as such in some varieties of Vedic (compare the Kerala MSS). The phonetic cluster *ćs would be difficult to distinguish from cch, with the palatal quality of the stop overlapping the aspiration (leading to a palatal voiceless fricative release), so that *cś could be reinterpreted as a voiceless palatal aspirate, and with gemination preserving the coda weight of the preceding syllable. (On this issue see also the following: Hock, Hans Henrich. 1974. Historieal change and synchronic structure: the ease of the Sanskrit root nouns. Towards tomorrow's linguistics, ed. by R. W. Shuy and C-J. N. Bailey, 329-42. Washington: Georgetown University Press. [Reprinted in International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 3: 321-35 (1974).] Hock, Hans Henrich. 1987. Regular contact dissimilation. A festschrift for Henry Hoenigswald, ed. by George Cardona & Norman Zide, 143-153. Tübingen: Narr. A very different view in Kuiper, F B. J. 1967. The Sanskrit nom. sing. viṭ. Indo-Iranian Journal 10: 103-25, which however suffers from numerous problems, including apparently being unaware of Burrow’s 1955 proposal.) As I show in my 1987 paper, the dissimilation is sporadically shared for *ss, as in vatsyati from vas- vs. apassu/apaḥsu. (The irregularity of ss-dissimilation is attributable to the fact that there is a preexisting contrastive ts as in vetsyati from vid-)

On Oct 20, 2023, at 13:56, Harry Spier via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Phillip Maas pointed me to W. Sidney Allen's Sandhi (on archive.org https://archive.org/details/allensandhi2ndedition1972/page/n43/mode/2up )
He discusses the historical basis for doubling of ch, and what he says agrees with what has been said on this thread.

Attached are the two relevant pages on vowel+ch .

Harry Spier

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 11:12 AM Christophe Vielle via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

I am not a grammarian but I must confess that I do not understand the following passage in this interesting article, which appears to have forgotten that the rules of external sandhi (generally) apply to words forming compounds, and that the sandhi between words forming compounds cannot be rightly called "internal sandhi". I quote:

Pāṇinian grammar records compulsory gemination of ch when preceded by (i) a short vowel in both internal and external sandhis (Aṣṭādhyāyī́ 6.1.73: ché ca) as in svacchāyā and tena cchinnam, (ii) the particles ā and mā in both internal and external sandhis (Aṣṭādhyāyī́ 6.1.74: āṅmā́ṅoś ca) as in ā cchāyā and mā cchaitsīt (iii) a long vowel in internal sandhi (Aṣṭādhyāyī́ 6.1.75: dīrghā́t) as in vicācchāyate. Optional gemination of ch is prescribed only when preceded by a long vowel in an internal sandhi (Aṣṭādhyāyī́ 6.1.76: padā́ntād vā) as in mālā chinnā or mālā cchinnā. There are not many words in Sanskrit which begin with ch and therefore, as the rules of grammar suggest, a non-conjunct ch is fairly rare.

In (i) the example of "internal sandhi" should have been e.g. gacchati or icchati

(ii) with ā and mā it concerns "external sandhi" only, even if the prefix ā is used in composition

(iii) ok in this case, the Kāśikāvṛttī gives the list of verbal forms: hrīcchati, mlecchati, apacācchāyate, vicācchāyate (the last two ones made with apa- and vi- on cho 4 P. (chyati, acchāt-acchāsīt, caus. chāyayati) - McD gives here the subst. mleccha-

(iv) should be corrected into "in an external sandhi", ex. sā chinatti or cchinatti, badarī(c)chāyā (Renou §8)

Le 20 oct. 2023 à 15:34, Dominik Wujastyk via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> a écrit :

This paper may be of interest in the context of scribal practice:

Chakraborty, Deepro, Jason Eric Birch, Dominik Wujastyk, Andrey Klebanov, Harshal Bhatt, Madhusudan Rimal, and Vandana Lele. 2021. “The Graphemes Ch and Cch in the Nepalese Script.” Academia Letters, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.20935/al3954.

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 03:45, Nagaraj Paturi via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

This discussion of paurushetva and apaurusheyatva of the Vedas is not related to , so a digression from the present relevant topic of primacy of orality while deciding the 'spelling' of certain phonetic/phomemic sequences.

Prof. Hock, Hans Henrich brought up the pertinent point of primacy of orality while deciding the 'spelling' and Sri Harry Spier too rightly is focusing his attention on that aspect and trying to know the history / chronology of the shift from orality alone situation to literate (oral-literate dual ? ) situation..

गीती शीघ्री शिरःकम्पी तथा लिखितपाठकः ।
अनर्थज्ञोऽल्पकण्ठश्च षडेते पाठकाधमाः ।। ३२ ।।

is from पाणिनीयशिक्षा/सप्तमखण्डः available here.

So , that is the reason , the guru in Pune was apologetic in saying that the sishyas were using the printed version only tentatively.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 12:21 PM alakendu das via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Mr. Hart,
Mahabharata's 'Shantiparva ( 210/19) specifically mentions the Apaurasheya " nature of the Vedas.

" Hrrishaya MantraDrashtarO

Na tu Bedasya Kartaro"

Na Kaschid Veda Karta cha

VedaSmarta Chaturbhuja".

SayanaAcharya's commentary on Vedas, too, reflects an identical view

"Josya niswashitam Veda jo VedabhyaAkhilam Jogot. "....

I apologise for my inability to type in Sanskrit.

Any further elucidation/ correction on the above would be highly beneficial.

Regards

Alakendu Das

From: indology@list.indology.info
Sent: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 03:04:48
To: Indology List <indology@list.indology.info>
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Whitney and doubling of "ch"

Well, perhaps not entirely apauruṣeya. See the RV:

ए॒तं ते॒ स्तोमं॑ तुविजात॒ विप्रो॒ रथं॒ न धीरः॒ स्वपा॑ अतक्षम् ।

यदीद॑ग्ने॒ प्रति॒ त्वं दे॑व॒ हर्याः॒ स्व॑र्वतीर॒प ए॑ना जयेम ॥ ५.००२.११

On Oct 19, 2023, at 12:13 PM, alakendu das via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:

Mr. Spier,

What we have learnt from Indological studies, Vedas were never written. We call it "Apaurasheya"... i. e. not written.

The Vedic Mantras came as revealations to the seers( we call them 'Drashta" i. e. one who sees) while in Meditation.

The hymns or mantras were then recited orally and passed on across generations of disciples. who memorised them.

Finally, sage Vyasa arranged a compilation and divided them among his 4 disciples namely, Poilo, Boishampayan, Jaimini and Sumanta.

Thus we got the 4 Vedas

In the 19th Century, Max Mueller edited the

Vedas.

Regards

Alakendu Das.

From: indology@list.indology.info
Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:40:15
To: "Hock, Hans Henrich" <hhhock@illinois.edu>
Cc: McComas Taylor via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info>
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Whitney and doubling of "ch"

Hans Heinrich Hock wrote:

Whatever the motivation may be for the spelling with a single <ch> in the Rig Veda (and let’s keep in mind that the “real” Rig Veda is oral),

1) Can someone point me to some article on when and why the Rg-veda was first written down . what script etc.  Was it a British initiative or was the whole or parts written down before the colonial period? I've seen in a modern Taittiriya Vedashala the students practicing some of their mantras using written material. Did the medieval and later Vedashalas also use written materials to teach their students?

2) Is it possible that this "Rg-veda written spelling gachati etc." is just a reflection of what was written when the Rg-veda was first written down?

Thanks,

Harry Spier

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

--

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Senior Director, IndicA

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies,

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

–––––––––––––––––––
Christophe Vielle
Louvain-la-Neuve

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

<ALLEN-SANDHI-45-46.pdf>
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology__;!!DZ3fjg!-pKPVo7MxcwGzPQRK15YlrKce7Lptu5ZdsNJbl4f0jWBWHW09s5rfHCkfVjdvhpYWnyLoNF7De3u8xNUdFDgN-WhGDg4$