Talk:Sanskrit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

[edit] It is not the nationwide language dears

Hello fellow wikipedians,

Understand the wikipedia project to provide authentic sources alone.This article features sanskrit is speaken nationwide in India . mm . This is a dead language dears. and u r giving as much hype to make it alive. - what is your problem with comprehension? Nowhere the article says it is " speaken nationwide in India" . It says Sanskrit is used ofr liturgical and religious purposes and has lots of prestige, which is true.

Please provide some useful or if u dare give REAL facts about sanskrit.There are a bunch of blog entries to defame sanskrit than that of its promoters. No false info —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.92.36.96 (talk • contribs) February 21, 2006.

It is one of the "scheduled languages" by definition of the "Official Language Commission", not by virtue of being "alive" in any way. dab (ᛏ) 18:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An Explanation against thy argument

(By User:Bsskchaitanya)

My dear brother, i wish to atleast to satify ur question by the explansion given by me. I dont believe in what others feel and talk unless i get a conslusion by myself about believing it.

Sanskrit had been to Hindus and Ancient India like a divine language. Each word is considered as divine with some deeper meaning existing in it. Anyway that was feeling of those people like the people who still think that a person who died 2000 years ago has arisen and will again visit earth. So, lets stick to a rational and impartial discussion about that language.

Sanskrit is nothing more than a language. People according to their understanding and ideologies comment on it. Before the advent of Panini sanskrit was just an ordinary natural language which was changed along with time. Thats why we see lot of words and sentences used in vedic sanskrit deviating from the existing grammar rules. Presence of accents, letters like "f" and "q" and "retroflex fricative". But with passage of time they disappeared.

[edit] Advent of Panini

Panini had tried to analyse (qualitative and quantitative) sanskrit language just as an "language". This made him to think about gender, tense, mood, verb, noun etc., He wrote in his book about the grammar on sanskrit giving rule for almost all types of linguistic usage. Some exceptions existed in Vedic sanskrit literature with his grammar, so he called it as Ārsha Sāmpradāya. Next great person was patanjali who wrote an elaborate commentary on Panini's work. Aftermath him came bhartrihari who wrote Vakyapadiya. That person perceived Sanskrit as a means of expressing & understanding. These three works made revolutionary changes in the so called great divine language which was nothing but an normal vernacular language subjected to significant changes.

[edit] Aftermath Panini

From that time, Sanskrit sticked to the rules without subjecting to significant changes.
An Example quoted in Vakyapadiya:
In Vedic Sanskrit, the verb To bear - Grbhnāti
But in classical one it became - Grhnāti (Even after 2000 years it is same)

Now for an sanskrit learner the former one will sense as a nonsense and distorted version of the later one. Though later one was the distorted one of the former.
No language or dialect is superior to other. It is the qualitative literature and vernacular usage that makes it significant.
With the work of Panini, Sanskrit learners got knowledge of Structural linguistics, descriptive linguistics and generative linguistics. That made it a very power language in means of expression of the inner feelings.
Since it sticked completely to grammar rules rather than vernacular usage obviously the usage of people drastically reduced. Means the distorted dialects considered as outside the so called pure and divine sanskrit whom later developed into different languages such as hindi, bengali, marathi etc.

[edit] Reasons "for" the official status

Though India was nothing but a cluster of provinces and kingdoms, it was the feelings that,

All belong to same nation called bharatavarsha.
All langauges came from the mother Sanskrit.

These two feelings were mixed in the Indian blood throughout the ages though there was a drastical diversity in culture, language, way of life, religion etc.

Because of above reason, In Independant India, some leaders thought of keeping Sanskrit as national langauge though it considered nothing more than a mere dead language. The reasons are,

All kinds pujas and mantras are in Sanskrit, which makes every hindu (80% in India) to atleast think about sanskrit.
Though sanskrit is dead language, it has profound undeniable indirect impact on,
- Hindi
- Marathi
- Bengali
- Oriya
- Kashmiri
- Nepali
- Telugu
- Kannada
- Malayalam

[edit] Reasons against the official status

Because of some presence of muslim population in India, it was decided that if Hindi was made as official one, then even urdu speakers can enjoy the benifits by being just like a different dialect. So, Sanskrit was made as one of the official languages of India. Nothing was there to say that it was classical language by default.
Moreover it was used as a medium to prove the superiority by some section of people (so called upper castes), so it looked as symbol of oppression for peoples of some other castes, muslims and christians.

[edit] Alternative for its Status

Many attempts were made by government for revival of sanskrit. To perfectly say for survival of it. For futher info, refer the article.
It was given official status in the list of scheduled official languages.

[edit] Conclusion

Every body will have their own opinion, so we should atleast respect though we may not accept it.
I think you concentrated on sanskrit only. I suggest you to go through some other great Indian languages like Tamil. Then you can find how they became into a great language through grammar and literature.
Through some light on historical linguistics, sociolinguistics and comparative linguistics. Then you can have a much clear-cut idea about Sanskrit.
It for Constitution of India, like Latin and Greek for the western world. The Constitution of India-Part III Article 24 Fundamental Rights clearly mentions, "Any community that has a language and a script of its own has the right to conserve and develop them". We Indians ought to obey and follow our constitution. If you are a foreigner then atleast you have to respect the longest written constitution of any independent nation in the world, containing 444 articles and 12 schedules, as well as numerous amendments, for a total of 117,369 words in the English language version. I think Sanskrit clearly suffices the above criteria.
Government of India uses the Standard Hindi which derived much of its formal and technical vocabulary from Sanskrit as means of communication. The motto of World's largest democracy Indian Republic is a sanskrit sentence, Satyam Eva Jayate (Truth alone triumphs). Every seal bearing the Coat of Arms of India will have that.
For Indians, sanskrit lives throught out India
- Whenever people utter the words from the languages derived from it.
- Whenever people use hindi which was the Sole Official Language of Indian Republic (The Constitution of India, adopted in January 26, 1950, declares Hindi in the Devanagari script as the "official language (rājabhāṣā) of the Union" (Article 343(1)).)
- Whenever people go indian literature and Indian History.
- Whenever they discuss Indian philosophy.

-User:Bsskchaitanya 15.45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure the above user is aware of the contributions of several grammarians before and after Panini. People like Yaska, Shaunaka, Patanjali, Katyayana, Bratrihari, Sakatayana, Pingala, Gargeya come to mind immediately. So Panini was not the "creator" of classical sanskrit, although he was definitely one of its most important grammarians. Sanskrit existed all the way from the Vedas and even before that in the Indo-European form as one of its most important branches. All this is however irrelevant to trolls and vandals who dont know the difference between subjectivity and objectivity--> ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 10:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Calling someone a troll is considered a personal attack. Please assume good faith. Comment on content not on the contributor. Thanks - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 11:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Trolls are to be called trolls. I meant trolls and I used the word trolls. There is no contributor I am talking of. --ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 11:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

What is this section even about? Sanskrit is a "scheduled language" in India. The definition of this lies with the Indian govenment, not with Wikipedia, and we're merely reporting the fact. Sanskrit is the topic on this page, so of course it is concentrating on Sanskrit (wth?) -- if you want to discuss the relative notability of languages of India, you are looking for languages of India. dab (ᛏ) 11:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Dab, that's the same thing I'm saying. Why feed trolls? And what do the claims have to do with the article in question? -- ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 04:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronouncing Vowels

In section Sanskrit#Vowels, it is mentioned that IAST /a/ is equiv. to English schwa. Isn't it a little closer a short IPA /ɑː/ ? Also, as noted in section Sanskrit#Phonology, is IPA /ŗ/ pronounced /ri/ in modern Sanskrit? I have heard /ŗg/ being said as it is in the name of the veda, and, in Malayalam, the name of Christ pronounced /kŗsθu/. Kummini 16:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

No, IAST /a/ is NOT the short form of IPA /ɑː/ . It is a central vowel, and it is pronounced as schwa (the open-mid central vowel). Yes, for sandhi purposes, the ancient Sanskrit grammarians agree that a + a = IPA /ɑː/ . And the Pandits of modern India are no longer to speak vowel-like /ŗ/ , they approximate it as /ri/. Exceptions are always there, though. Cygnus_hansa 20:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Most Sanskrit pandits from Tamil Nadu across pronounce /ŗ/ as r. Lay speakers of Telugu pronounce it /ru/, while the /ri/ pronounciation from what I understand is dominant in the North. I've tried to clarify this, but feel free to change the wording. Ambarish 05:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

-I will try to clarify your doubt. Telugu people name it as "aru". In pronunciation of that vowel you need to know the following

Place of origin: Cerebral (Mūrdhanya) [Touch your tip of the tongue to the alveola inside mouth]
Now narrow your mouth (i.e., it is a tensed vowel) and try to pronounce the consonant "ra".
The pronunciation will be inbetween ra, ri and ru.

User:Bsskchaitanya 13.57 14 November 2006.