author: dr. b.v. venkatakrishna (bvk sastry) e-mail...

Dr.B V Venkatakrishna Sastry E-mail: [email protected]

1

Abstract

Title: A proposal for designing Sanskrit Digital Dictionaries with word-entries having detailing on accent specification and related meaning changes

Author: Dr. B.V. Venkatakrishna (BVK Sastry) E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation: Hindu University of America (www.ivhu.edu)

This paper is an extension on the observation of Monier Williams in 1872 reading as below* with the current development of Vedic Unicode for accented devanagari character representation.

The proposal is made with reference to Paninian guidelines associating word meaning and accent specification, which need to be considered and made a part of future Sanskrit Digital dictionaries (especially vedic studies). The case is elucidated with illustrations drawn from existing entries in the Sanskrit digital dictionaries.

Using Vedic Unicode standards, it is possible to make a better specification of input about the accent on each ‘varna’ in the Sanskrit word, listed in the dictionary. This is an improvement over the current models of listing-search-input options, using the Kyoto convention/ Diacritic notations. For example, in seeking the analysis of a given word like ‘rama’ राम [0930-093E -

092E ], it is now possible to seek a new model of dictionary listing-search-input where the ‘character unit association with the accent ’ is made as - रा॑म रा॒म राम ॑ राम॒. It is here that

Paninian deliberations related to ‘word-accent-meaning relation and representation’ becomes important for lucid and proper entry listing / meaning specification . In other words we are looking at development of a digital dictionary where a current entry like राम (MW-page 877-

col.1) may be figure as four distinct word entries due to accent shifts - राम॑ रा॒म राम ॑ राम॒.

This approach calls for a review of primary issues of Sanskrit word listing and meaning fixation in relation to accent on (i) base unit (ii) process rules and (iii) affix validations. This detailing is useful for building a new models Sanskrit digital dictionary, which would help distinguish a vedic word with accent, a classical language word with accent and a non-accented word.

* Ref: Quote reading as below from Page-xviii- A Sanskrit – English Dictionary- Sir Monier Williams’ – ISBN 81-208-3105-5 Motilal Banarasidass, New Delhi 110 007.

mailto:[email protected]�


2

Title: A proposal for designing Sanskrit Digital Dictionaries with word-entries having detailing on accent specification and related meaning changes

Author: Dr. B.V. Venkatakrishna (BVK Sastry) E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation: Hindu University of America (www.ivhu.edu)

Full Paper Introduction: This paper is an extension on the observation of Monier Williams in 1872 reading as below*1

‘And in real truth, the whole of Panini’s grammar is interpenetrated throughout by the ruling idea of the importance of accentuation to a correct knowledge of words and their meanings.’

with the current development of Vedic Unicode for accented devanagari character representation.

This presentation covers the following :

• Panini on importance of understanding accentuation for word meaning fixation

• How Sanskrit lexicographers have handled this guidance till Mw and Post MW.

• How Vedic Unicode standard is helpful in upgrading digital Sanskrit Dictionary for accentuation issues

The discussion points towards the possibility opened up by the Vedic Unicode standards in creation of

a new format of Sanskrit digital dictionary, which would help distinguish accentuation related

changes in the meaning of the word per se and in a given context. This will help in

understanding some intricate passages of the traditional commentaries on Vedic resources,

where accent based meaning is used as a critical filter to firm up the meaning.

Sanskrit traditional lexicography and Monier Williams model:

The traditional lexicography2

1 Ref: Quote reading as below from Page-xviii- A Sanskrit – English Dictionary- Sir Monier Williams’ – ISBN 81-208-3105-5 Motilal Banarasidass, New Delhi 110 007.

system of Sanskrit up to Monier Williams can be looked at in the following broad segments. The first three blocks, show some unique features in their

2 For the time being, we keep away from the debates of (a) whether Sanskrit was a spoken language of the masses at any time or other wise, leading to nativity of Sanskrit language issue (b) whether Sanskrit was an artificial language going by a rule book with no ground reality and mass base, (c ) whether Sanskrit is the mother of Prakrit or it is the other way around, concept of hybrid Sanskrit (d) whether Sanskrit of Panini, is a derivative of Vedic Sanskrit with a freeze on historic practice and mystic model.

mailto:[email protected]�


3

understanding of what the ‘accented / vedic Sanskrit word’ is and how it needs to be explained for its meaning.

Prior to Panini Panini to Amarasimha

AmaraKosha and Paribhasha based works

Inheritance to MW – Indian tradition and Maxmuller’s views

From 1800 Monier Williams and post developments

a) Total separation of vedic-classical-non Sanskrit vocabulary consideration for lexicon building (=Kosha) of accented vedic words (Chandas) and classical language (Bhashaa).

The rules of arriving at the meaning of the ooha-bhaashaa-non Sanskrit word groups are different from the rules for the ‘mystic revealed vedic accented word’ ( Shruti).

The human construction of accented Sanskrit word - Ooha words are used in yajna processes – like the Indra-shatru, where the sounding is almost similar to the primary shruti). Accent tolerant vocabulary is totally conforming to the Paninian rule base.

The domain of vedic word meaning construction is handled by Meemaamsakas /yajnikas/ nairuktas and pratishakhyas; The ooha words are handled in relation to Paninian guidance in conjunction with meemamsaks practices, the gruhya and shrauta sutra needs. The bhashaa words are handled by Kosha and grammar rule base. It is in this context, we have the rule of Panini – ‘Tadashishyam samjnaa pramanatvaat’ ( 1-2-53 ). Paribhasha works are different technical treatises which give domain specific meaning of words. Example: the word Purusha, Prakrtui, Linga, Bhaga, Prana, Gauh, Soma, Pada, Padartha, Aham, - are having different technical meanings in veda, Vedangas, Darshans, Upavedas and darshana domains.

b) There is no mixing up of Vedic document related accented Sanskrit words and classical language accent tolerant words and other non-sanskrit language vocabulary. AmaraKosha is a good example of this standard model of practice.

c) There is no confusion or mix up about the prime character set and ordering sequence in the three blocks marked above. Chandas wants a larger set of primary character set and integrated accent specification. This is given by special shiksha shastras. Paninian bhasha is bound by the character set listed in fourteen maheswara sutras , scope of the rule ‘tulsyasya prayatnam savarnam’ ( 1-19) and ‘upadesha’ – traditional vocal-aural standard. Therefore the model of alphabetical sequence ordered dictionaries need to be of a different structure for each segment.

Paninian guidelines and practice on accent:

The observations of Monier Williams is a good summary of what Panini intends to say in this matter. <‘And in real truth, the whole of Panini’s grammar is interpenetrated throughout by the ruling idea of the importance of accentuation to a correct knowledge of words and their meanings.’ >

This guideline is not implemented and this is an intentional act in the present format of MW print dictionary is the point of reference for seeking review-upgrade –reformatting in the digital presentation. The use of Vedic Unicode is helpful in this regard.


4

The notes on page xviii copy below presents how MW has handled the accent related issue in the current dictionary. This is the core of contention addressed by the tradition, that needs to be remedied by a review from a team of competent scholars. (url http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/ )

http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/�



5

This debate also need to stretch back to cover the following points:

(a ) The mounting of ‘ history of language related hypothesis’ inherited by Monier Williams from his predecessors, mainly from (i) Prof. Max Muller’s work (ii) contributions made by these scholars in several fields- H H Wilson,Franz Keilhorn, Hermann Brunnhofer, Bohtlingk, Roth & Grassman, Whitney, Aufrecht, Buhler, Garbe, Hillebrandt, M.Winternitz, MacDonnell, Whitney, Jackob, Pischel, Geldner, Bloomfield, A.Weber.

(b ) The design criterion used by MW in modeling a Sanskrit Language dictionary is to fit the model of Greek dictionary . Ref: MW page x : < Primary object of a Sanskrit dictionary should be to exhibit by a lucid etymological arrangement , the structure of a language, which as most people know, is not only the elder sister of Greek, but the best guide to the structure of the greek, as well as of every other member of the Aryan or Indo-European family – a language, in short, which is the very key-stone of the science of comparative philology. This was in truth the chief factor in determining the plan which, as I now proceed to show, I ultimately carried in to execution”.

(c ) The Shruti word and Ooha word need to be clearly distinguished. Ooha is human constructed accented word, using the paninian grammar and simulating the model of ‘Shruti’. The criterion of distinguishing shruti and ooha – models of accented words in the basket of ‘ current period Vedic Vocabulary’ needs a filtering review by a competent traditional team of scholars to work dedicatedly on identifying each word and context, to make a decision. It is not correct to say that Panini uses ‘Chandasi Vibhaashaa’ as a tool to escape the explanation of difficult, ‘long ago used / forgotten vedic word’. Each time the ‘vibhashaa- chandasi ‘ is invoked, in Ashtadhyayi, the word, the context, the processing issue is totally distinct and different. The pooling of this ‘accent related segment of rules impacting word meaning’, interspersed through out panini’s work for the convenience of achieving ‘sutra’-brevity- formation, are pooled by Bhattoji Deekshita under the ‘Vaidika Prakriya ’ part of Siddhanta Kaumudi , which is a restructured presentation of Ashtadhyayi for convenience of instruction.

What is the potential from Vedic Unicode for further advancement?

Using Vedic Unicode standards, it is possible to make a better specification of input about the

accent on each ‘var na’ in the Sanskrit word, listed in the dictionary. This is an improvement

over the current models of listing-search-input options, using the Kyoto convention/ Diacritic

notations. For example, in seeking the analysis of a given word like ‘rama’ राम [0930-093E -


6

092E ], it is now possible to seek a new model of dictionary listing-search-input where the

‘character unit association with the accent ’ as - रा॑म रा॒म राम ॑ राम॒. It is here that

Paninian deliberations related to ‘word-accent-meaning relation and representation’ becomes

important for lucid and proper entry listing / meaning specification . In other words we are looking

at development of a digital dictionary where a current entry like राम (MW-page 877-col.1) may be

figure as four distinct word entries due to accent shifts - रा॑म रा॒म राम ॑ राम॒. The further

subtlety of distinguishing the nasal and non-nasal svara-varna’s and accents would be more

accurate and authentic way of handling the traditional rule base paradigm.

Thus, in a futuristic Sanskrit Digital dictionary, the first phase of word entry for राम could look like this:

( The existing entry at MW –page 877 – at url http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/ is placed below for comparison i

. You may see the elegance of the proposed model of formatting, which separates the vedic usages, classical usage and the word-entry in multiple compounds and contexts. )

Meaning Reference

राम

• रा॑म

• रा॒म

• राम ॑

• राम॒

There can be more information and links to lead detailing of the related grammar rules, usage contexts as clickable links. The more advanced features can be on period specific usage and combinatorial explanations, user notes making and the like.



7


8

Conclusion:

1) Therefore, there is a need for a new formatted presentation of Sanskrit dictionaries in the

digital format, using the accentuation markers on the word entries in the dictionary, especially

for the vedic words.

2) The meaning association for the accented words need to be properly illustrated in relation to

(a) nature of the word (b) context of usage referenced ( c) A clear layered meaning association

process in relation to Paninian guidelines, Pratishakhya/ vedic commentaries guidelines and

other models of meaning construction like the PIE /Linguistics /comparative et al. This is more

important while providing the meaning approximations / equivalence in other languages,

especially English. A sub-set of this conclusion is a review of the several entries in the MW

dictionary (1872) where the vedic words are associated with a ‘L’-categorization for meaning.

The ‘L’ category is defined in the dictionary abbreviations as: L = Lexicographer’s (i.e a word or

meaning which although given in native lexicons, has not yet been met with any published text).

3) A sorting order inherent in the Vedic Unicode for the accentuation needs to be vetted in

relation to the traditional resources and rule books of Shiksha Shastra and Veda-Pratishakhyas.

4) It might be preferable to use the visual display model potential of digital page to sort out the

accented vedic words from the classical vocabulary to help ease of referencing for users and

researchers. This leads to a holistic review and upgrade of digital format presentation of Monier

Williams Dictionary using Vedic Unicode set of symbols.

=======================================================================


9

i


10

author: dr. b.v. venkatakrishna (bvk sastry) e-mail...

Documents