Translation and the challenges it poses

[Cino]

Sakngaka or Murthaja?

Go ahead and tell me, I have no clue what you are referring to. (I assumed you meant the naming of Sinhalese retroflex characters)

 

[Cino]

Cmon Cino. Haha. The languages are related, but not "closely related" Why do you make comments like this brother when you don't know either language that well? Yes yes. they are related. But that's not my question. We can discuss the same verse, in both languages. No problem. ANd you are making blunders that are irrevocable. It's absolutely absurd. We can discuss those mistakes later. In different topics, we could learn from eachother.

No need for a separate thread, I feel. Tell me where you think I made blunders. I'm at best a dabbler in Pali. I really think you are mistaken when you imply the word "samma" ("all", "completely" etc) to be in this verse, but I am open to being proven wrong.

 

[Firedragon]

Go ahead and tell me, I have no clue what you are referring to. (I assumed you meant the naming of Sinhalese retroflex characters)

Right. Sakngaka would mean "I will give you" while Murthaja would mean "space or room". Bottomline. The website you are getting your information from is good. But it does not breakdown the sandi or conjunctions in the words.

Sammanthi is not one word. It's two words. Samma and Antha which means Hilt and comprehensive. Or in other words, the hilt of what's meant by comprehensive. The epitome of a comprehensive situation. Sammanthidha means an area of absolute. It's an explanation of an ontology.

I appreciate your effort Cino.

 

[Cino]

Right. Sakngaka would mean "I will give you" while Murthaja would mean "space or room".

I fail to understand what you are saying here. Can you go into greater detail? Where do these terms originate from, they do not sound like Pali? What do they mean in conjunction with "idha"?

More info above the bottom line, please?

The website you are getting your information from is good. But it does not breakdown the sandi or conjunctions in the words.

I am working from some old notes from when I was formally studying Pali. Which website are you referring to?

Sandhi was one of the first things we were taught, after the alphabet. Without an understanding of sandhi, a Pali dictionary is useless.

 

[Firedragon]

No need for a separate thread, I feel. Tell me where you think I made blunders.

I didn't mean separate thread.

Let me tell you the blunders you made. No offence.

I don't know other Indian languages or any other Asian language. But I know very well that Sanskrit is very close to Hindi. Unlike Pali. Pali quite distant in terms of etymology though they are closer than western languages. For example, in Pali Vera is similar to Vairya which is sanskrit in etymology but also quite different when you compare with other languages in that region where vairya is just the same. Exactly the same. In Pali it's more concise than Sanskrit.

Ill give you any amount of examples if you wish Cino. In Pali, Setta or Seththa is means Shresta in Sanskrit. But in other languages, it will exactly be Shresta. Just in pronunciation there will be an additional aspirate. Sh. Not like in Pali which is in comparison, very different.

There is absolutely no pronunciation difference in Sa between Pali and Sanskrit. Zilch. Both of these languages are fully capable of pronouncing Pali as it is, since the pronunciations are exactly the same. It is not the pronunciations that differ, it is the syllable itself.

I don't know what "accent" you are talking about on the "S" sound. There is no difference. Sa is Sa. the only difference is that the sanskrit script is used to write Pali. that does not make any difference. The sanskrit translation makes a difference. not the script. The translation will have different pronunciations and absolutely different words. Sometimes simple differences, and sometimes big differences. Sometimes it could be a Mana and a Mano, which is just a vowel or symbol that is different. Sometimes it's a whole different letter like ba and va. In English when something is written with an a at the end, like gama, in pali it could be gama or gamaa which are totally different words. But in English you cant write it. Because you don't have a choice. You will have to replace ma in Pali with an "m" which would gam which does not make any sense whatsoever. So when these words are written in English or English transliteration, it's very difficult to write clearly.

 

[Firedragon]

I fail to understand what you are saying here. Can you go into greater detail? Where do these terms originate from, they do not sound like Pali? What do they mean in conjunction with "idha"?

Lol. They don't sound like Pali? Brother. That's quite hilarious. This is the script, not the language.

Tell me truly. Do you know the language at all?

Could you tell me what Sakngaka means? And how it's pronounced? Why do you think it's not Pali? Can you explain in detail?

I am working from some old notes from when I was formally studying Pali. Which website are you referring to?

Website?

Sandhi was one of the first things we were taught, after the alphabet. Without an understanding of sandhi, a Pali dictionary is useless.

My God.

Thanks for the discussion brother. It was great to have engaged with it. I shall take my leave.

Cheers.

 

[Cino]

Lol. They don't sound like Pali? Brother. That's quite hilarious. This is the script, not the language.

Tell me truly. Do you know the language at all?

Could you tell me what Sakngaka means? And how it's pronounced? Why do you think it's not Pali? Can you explain in detail?

I already freely stated that I am a dabbler in Pali. I do know which consonant combinations there are. "kng" without a vowel in between is not one I learned. Maybe there is a short 'a' missing between the "k" and the "ng" - I am assuming you are transliterating niggahita as "ng". And I already asked you what the word "Sakngaka" means, and also stated that I did not understand your reply. Come on, give a straight answer to someone willing to learn. You demand as much from your discussion partners, yourself.

By the way, there is an exact romanization for Pali, which accounts for all the nuances available in scripts like Devanagari, or the Sinhalese script, or the Burmese, the Thai, the Khmer - in short, any of the traditional scripts used for Pali throughout the millennia. It is a subset of the romanization also used for Sanskrit. There are 1:1 counterparts for all geminate consonants and consonant clusters, all vowels and semi-vowels including their lengths, and notations like the niggahita. For all purposes, this is a fully-fledged Pali alphabet.

Sanskrit has three different sibilants. In the Sinhalese script, they are

ස (romanized as 's')
ශ (romanized as 'ś' - the one I referred to, with an accent on it in the romanization), and
ෂ (romanized as 'ṣ')

Devanagari, Burmese, Khmer, Thai... these scripts all retain characters for these three separate sounds, even if the contemporary languages of these countries do not have all three.

My point about the Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit version of the Dhammapada verse under discussion here was, that the cognate for the Pali "sammantidha" in Sanskrit - "śāmantīha" - actually uses a different sibilant than the Sanskrit word "samma", but is recognizably directly similar to the Pali counterpart. It's like cognate words in Italian and French, for example, different but similar spellings, pronounciations, and shared ancestry in Latin. This is why I think your derivation from "Samma and Antha" is not correct, and in addition your translation "an area of absolute" does not make sense to me in the context of that Dhammapada verse.

Come on, @Firedragon for the sake of intellectual honesty, you've got to at least address what I wrote and match it with an argument at least on its own level, even if you have to compulsively belittle it as well, which is just poor form and in the eyes of a casual reader will probably make your replies look less than serious or reputable. I respect your superior scholarship and knowledge of Pali - at least try to make your contributions here worthy of that respect?

Website?

You wrote that I got my word-by-word translation off some website:

The website you are getting your information from is good. But it does not breakdown the sandi or conjunctions in the words.

That is what I was referring to - your own post. Slow down, you wrote a lot of posts these past hours, maybe you lost sight of what you wrote?

My God.

If you say so - I have no gods

Thanks for the discussion brother. It was great to have engaged with it. I shall take my leave.

Cheers.

Too bad you lost interest in this discussion. Thanks anyway, I enjoyed it - if you'd like to get back to it at some later point, I'd be thrilled.

Take care!

 

[Firedragon]

"kng" without a vowel in between is not one I learned.

I don't know how else to write it in English. This is transliteration and cannot represent the pronunciation. It's actually written as "KDH" as a conjunction of two letters K and DH, pronounced as a nasal NA. I have only seen English transliteration written as "Kng". And anyone who knows a little bit of any Pali script will know the word.

 

[Firedragon]

Sanskrit has three different sibilants. In the Sinhalese script, they are

ස (romanized as 's')
ශ (romanized as 'ś' - the one I referred to, with an accent on it in the romanization), and
ෂ (romanized as 'ṣ')

Ah. This is transliteration of different sounds you are referring to. Cino. I don't know these "romanisations" as you refer to. So thanks for telling me. '

These letters are Sa and Sha. Both second and third letters are simply Sha and are always, and eternally interchangeable in any word. Any word using both of those letters interchangeably don't make any difference. It's always "Sha".

The first letter is "Sa". It's the same in Sanskrit. Exactly the same.

I really don't know why someone has to put some markings on the "s" to differentiate that because the transliteration will anyway have a vowel somewhere to pronounce it. Anyway, I do not use English to study another language. I have said this to you right at the beginning. So I must apologise for that. I only use the language directly. If you want, I can write what ever word I am using and photograph it and post it in a post.

 

[Firedragon]

My point about the Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit version of the Dhammapada verse under discussion here was, that the cognate for the Pali "sammantidha" in Sanskrit - "śāmantīha" - actually uses a different sibilant than the Sanskrit word "samma", but is recognizably directly similar to the Pali counterpart. It's like cognate words in Italian and French, for example, different but similar spellings, pronounciations, and shared ancestry in Latin. This is why I think your derivation from "Samma and Antha" is not correct, and in addition your translation "an area of absolute" does not make sense to me in the context of that Dhammapada verse.

Samma is not sanskrit. It's Pali. Of course they are similar. There is no difference in meaning, but only in pronunciation.

But your Visandhi is wrong. It is indeed Samma and Antha. Sorry Cino. This one is quite absurd really. No offence but don't make statements like that brother. If you have a question just ask and you will receive the answer. Don't make assumptions like that.

If it's Samantha, it's Sama + Antha. This is probably the most common usage of words in these languages. Antha means hilt. And it's probably the most common word used as conjunction to many.

Hope you understand.

 

[Cino]

All right, then let me ask my question, so I may receive an answer.

If it's Samantha, it's Sama + Antha. This is probably the most common usage of words in these languages.

(I note you are now spelling "Sama" with a single "m", which makes it a different word from "samma". I think the non-geminate one, with a single "m", is correct. This is what I've been getting at all these posts.)

My question: Would you spell the Sanskrit version of "sama" with a "sa" or a "sha"?

 

[Cino]

These letters are Sa and Sha. Both second and third letters are simply Sha and are always, and eternally interchangeable in any word. Any word using both of those letters interchangeably don't make any difference. It's always "Sha".

Historically, the two "sha" sounds were pronounced differently, which is why there are two different symbols in the writing systems.

Regarding Pali and Sanskrit romanization - it would make discussions like ours here so much easier if you looked into it. It is really quite useful and straightforward.

Feel free to post the mystery word in an indic script here. I'm sure with your knowledge and my bloody-mindedness, we will work it out.

 

[Firedragon]

(I note you are now spelling "Sama" with a single "m", which makes it a different word from "samma".

Lol. I mentioned that word Sama purposefully to show you how the script works because you have not understood it. Samantha and Sammantha are absolutely two different words. Okay. Ill tell you what. Can you tell me what Sama means and what Samma means? Since you said they have different meanings.

Thanks.

 

[Firedragon]

Historically, the two "sha" sounds were pronounced differently

Okay. Tell me how they are pronounced are differently.

Thanks.

 

[Firedragon]

Feel free to post the mystery word in an indic script here. I'm sure with your knowledge and my bloody-mindedness, we will work it out.

No problem. Seems a bit blurred but you can read it easily.

 

[Cino]

Okay. Tell me how they are pronounced are differently.

Thanks.

Possible historical pronounciations, in IPA, are /ɕ/ and /ʂ/.

The former sounds a bit like the Swedish s. Instead of the tip of the tongue almost touching the inside of the gums just behind the teeth, it is an area slightly further back on the tongue which forms the gap to let the air whistle through.

With the latter, the tip of the tongue is curled back, yielding a sort of hollow sounding "sh".

 

[Firedragon]

Possible historical pronounciations, in IPA, are /ɕ/ and /ʂ/.

No. That's not "possible". It's "Impossible".

The former sounds a bit like the Swedish s. Instead of the tip of the tongue almost touching the inside of the gums just behind the teeth, it is an area slightly further back on the tongue which forms the gap to let the air whistle through.

With the latter, the tip of the tongue is curled back, yielding a sort of hollow sounding "sh".

Nope. that's absolutely alien to the Sinhalese script. It is not the script you just showed above, it's something else, and there is no difference between Payanu and Sankngaka or Murthaja in the letter sha. Zilch. It does not exist, and never did.

Brother. If you have not learned it, try not to make such facade claims. There is no need to do that. It's not like a religion or a worldview you are propagating. This kind of conjecture is absolutely unnecessary.

If you don't know the script, why don't you just ask questions instead of making such absurd guesswork? I am only urging you. Please try to not make such conjecture.

Sorry Cino. It's unbelievable to me when you make that kind of statement which are honestly bizarre. You are making a distinction between payanu and normal sakngaka. Please just stay in the position that you don't know the alphabet, or the script, or the method it's been used in the Pali language, and just ask questions so that you could be educated. What you are saying is absurd.

I am typing so much because this kind of conjecture is unbelievable. I have never come across a single person in my life who makes this level of baseless claims about a language someone else is using. Why do you do that?

 

[Cino]

No problem. Seems a bit blurred but you can read it easily.

I read:
සකූකූක
But that does not seem right. What needs to change?

 

[Firedragon]

I read:
සකූකූක
But that does not seem right. What needs to change?

Nothing needs to change Cino. You don't know the language and that's why you are making such magnificently false statements. It's honestly unbelievable why people would do that.

Thanks for engaging so far. Ciao Cino. Have a great day.

 

[Cino]

Nope. that's absolutely alien to the Sinhalese script. It is not the script you just showed above, it's something else, and there is no difference between Payanu and Sankngaka or Murthaja in the letter sha. Zilch. It does not exist, and never did.

Please slow down, re-read the thread, and follow what I am saying for a change?

I am not saying that Sinhala or Pali have these sounds, but that Sanskrit does, and that the Sinhala script, due to its genesis, still has letters to represent these three different sibilant sounds.

Let me know when you have read and considered what I wrote about the Patna Dhammapada's parallel verse in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit.