Update: 2015-10-25 01:59 AM -0400


A Practical Sanskrit Dictionary


by A. A. Macdonell, 1893,
http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MDScan/index.php?sfx=jpg; 1929.
Nataraj ed. (reprint of 1914ed.), 1st in 2006, 2012.

Edited, with additions from Pali sources, by U Kyaw Tun (UKT) (M.S., I.P.S.T., USA) and staff of Tun Institute of Learning (TIL) . Not for sale. No copyright. Free for everyone. Prepared for students and staff of TIL Research Station, Yangon, MYANMAR :  http://www.tuninst.net , www.romabama.blogspot.com

index.htm | Top

Contents of this page

Akshara Order : not Alphabetic
Punctuation : colon & semi-colon
Transliteration : different from "transcription"
Accent & stress

UKT notes :
Accent and Stress with sound <)) from Learn to Speak English
Indology - Sacred Books of the East, 1879

Contents of this page

Akshara Order
[not Alphabetic]

UKT 110709, 130715, 140628 :
The reader should realize that distinction between Alphabetic system of writing and Akshara {ak~hka.ra} - the unit of abugida system - came only in the late 20th century. The distinction has to be made because the Akshara {ak~hka.ra} 'syllable' is the principal unit in the abugida system. The {ak~hka.ra} is sound and the glyph to represent it in script is also called {ak~hka.ra}. The meaning of the word implies an unchanging link between sound and script or a one-to-one mapping - the idea behind the phonetic system. Thus, the Akshara system is the Phonetic system of the Ancients which has been carefully studied for more than 3000 years.

Before the script or writing came into common use, it was the articulation to produce the sound had to be learnt by the student at the "feet" of the master. This training method is still practiced by the monks and nuns of modern Myanmarpr, and was used by the layman before the British colonialists uprooted the monastic system. As a child, during WWII when the British had been driven out of the country for some years, I had to practice a part of it. However, after the British came back and now up to the present time the system has been uprooted in government educational system. The result is today, even the MLC (Myanmar Language Commission) has come to equate the Akshara (phonetic) to the Alphabet (non-phonetic).

The unit in the alphabetic system is the 'letter' which cannot be pronounced. The 'akshara' which already contains an inherent vowel, likened to the short English <a>, can be pronounced. The canonical form of the syllable in the alphabetic system is CVC, whereas in the abugida it is CV where is the 'killed-consonant'. Thus in the alphabetic system <k> /ka/ cannot be pronounced unless supplied with a vowel such as <a> /a/. In the akshara being a syllable can be pronounced, e.g. {ka.} क ka , can be pronounced.

What Macdonell means by "alphabetical order" is actually the "akshara order" {ak~hka.ra si}.

Macdonell's  p-roman09 contains quite a number of Skt-Dev words. I have added my own Bur-Myan and Romabama scripts to familiarize the reader with the graphemes involved. Remember, Bur-Myan {sa.} can be either the palatal-plosive {sa.} च ca, or dental-sibilant {Sa.} ष ṣa - they are differentiated only in Romabama. However, they are different as codas, {c} and {S}. I have to use this scheme because my work consists not only of Sanskrit but all the four languages - BEPS (Burmese-English-Pali-Sanskrit speeches in Myanmar-Latin-Devanagari scripts). Please note that I am beginning to include the IPA transcriptions whenever possible. However please remember that the IPA has been designed for European languages, and when extended to Myanmar and Indic languages the IPA transcriptions can be misleading. 

From this order (see p. xii) I have, from considerations of practical utility, never deviated, with one very slight and rare exception. I have sometimes transposed the order of two words, either to obviate breaking up a paragraph or to avoid repeating a definition (e.g. smarya). The words being in immediate juxtaposition, neither of them can be missed.

Under this head I ought to add a few remarks in order to remove some common stumbling-blocks from the path of the beginner. Owing to variety of spelling, especially in Indian editions, words with initial   va {wa.} and  sa {sha.}/ {hya.} may not be found under those letters. They will be discovered by looking up  ba {ba.}, and ष sha {Sa.}, or s {a.} respectively. The reverse also applies. [UKT ]

The akshara alphabetical position of Anusvra followed by an approximant semivowel or sibilant is before   ka {ka.}. Thus संवर  samvara {n-wa.ra.} and संशर  samsaya {n-sha.ra.} precede सक saka {a.ka.}. [UKT ]

UKT 140628: To explain the above para, I will have to refer to the akshara 7x5 matrix of consonantal aksharas. It is not easily realized by the Westerner and the modern Western-educated Easterner that presentation of the akshara in a matrix form is to bring out the phonemic principals of the basic akshara where the rows gives the POA (Point Of Articulation), and the columns the MOA (manner of articulation).

The 7x5 matrix is divided into two: the upper 5x5 matrix gives the well-defined or classifiable aksharas known as {wag}-aksharas, and the lower 2x5 of unclassifiable aksharas of the {a.wag}-aksharas. On comparing to the IPA, you'll find the {wag} to be the regular consonants known as plosive-stops: velar, palatal, retroflex, dental, and bilabial.

The {a.wag} are the approximants beginning with {ya.}, {ra.}, {la.}, & {wa.} va forming the "semi-vowel" group, and {sha.}, {Sa.}, {a.} forming the "fricative" group, and,  {ha.}, {La.}, & {a.} not forming any group. Macdonell's "sibilants" are the hissing dental fricatives in Skt-Dev. In Bur-Myan, there are no hissing dental fricatives, and {a.} is a non-hissing dental thibilant .

On the other hand, the Anusvra [Skt-Dev ं - same as {::ting} 'dot above' ] which occurs before a mute of one of the five classes and is interchangeable with the nasal of that class, occupies the place of the class nasal. [UKT ]

UKT 120719 :
The "five classes" are the five rows of the {wag}-portion of the akshara matrix:
r1: {ka.} {hka.}   {ga.} {Ga.} {nga.} // {ngn} <-> {nging}
r2: {sa.} {hka.}   {za.} {Za.} { a.}  //  {n} <-> {i}
r3: {Ta.} {HTa.} {a.} {a.} {Na.} //  {Nn} <-> {NN}
r4: {ta.}  {hta.}    {da.} {Da.} {na.} //  {nn} <-> {nn}
r5: {pa.} {hpa.}  {ba.} {Ba.} {ma.} //  {mn} <-> {mm}

While I was working on this section, a friend of mine, a Buddhist monk, U Zawtika of Zeyathukha monastery, Sanchaung,  referred me to a book on Pali grammar (in Pal-Myan and Bur-Myan} on {kic~s:} Sutta #31 The Basic Grammar by Ashin Zanakabi Wuntha {za.na.ka-Bi-wn-a.}, 1936, presumably Rangoon, Burma, p030. The text is reproduced above. It states essentially what Macdonell has written. - UKT110709

I still have a hard time trying to understand what is given by all above. For instance, I have interpreted that for row #1, it means:

{ngn} <-> {nging}. (?)

It is not true in Bur-Myan because it entirely changes the meaning: {ngn} 'salty' is not equal to {nging} 'to pull (with a rope)'. The pronunciations are also worlds apart, the peak vowel of the first is /ʌ/ and that of the second /ɪ/. However for rows #4 & #5 the rule seems to hold for the pronunciation but not for meaning, ie.

{nn} <-> {nn}
{mn} <-> {mm} 

I must admit that my interpretation of both Macdonell's complex English statement, and Shin Kicsi's Pali statement may be grossly wrong. -- UKT120719

UKT 120904:  I still have to look into "A Pali grammar on the basis of Kachchayano ", by Rev. F. Mason, D.D., 1868 [before the total Annexation of the Burmese Empire by the British], printed and published in Taunggoo. --  (on line) http://archive.org/details/apaligrammar... 130517 , downloaded 251 pdf pages - PDF<> (link chk 150617)

Thus   sam-kaksha (=  saṅ-kaksha) immediately follows सघृण sa-ghrina. Similarly, the unchangeable or necessary Visarga (i.e. preceding a hard guttural or labial) comes after a vowel before any other consonant. Thus  अन्तःकरण antah-karana and  अन्तःपुर  antah-pura follow अन्त anta and precede  अन्तक anta-ka.

UKT 140701, 150617: Remember Skt-Dev Visarga and Bur-Myan {wic~sa.pauk} are not the same: e.g.,
   Bur-Myan: {na:} - vowel duration: 2 eye-blk + emphasis
   Mon-Myan {na:.} - vowel duration: 1/2 eye-blink
   Skt-Dev:  नः naḥ equivalent to Mon-Myan {na:.}

The Visarga which precedes a sibilant, may be assimilated into it. Thus अधःशय adhah-saya and अधःशायिन् adhah-syin follow अधश्चरण  adhas-karana and precede अधस् adhas.

Contents of this page


A full list of these together with their explanations with be found on p. xii. It is, however, perhaps advisable to add a few remarks showing how some of these symbols should exactly be understood to apply. [UKT ]

When a sign such as V. (=Vedic) is added in parentheses after a form, a grammatical symbol, or a meaning, its application is restricted to these only. Thus under √ yam, yma (V.) means that that present base is exclusively Vedic; a. (V.), m. (V.) signify that as an adjective or as a masculine noun, the word in question is exclusively Vedic; when 'sd-as, n.' is defined as (seat, place, abode, dwelling (V.),' the meaning is that all these synonymous senses are Vedic. [UKT ]

The application of such notes as 'ord.mg.' (=ordinary meaning) is similar. Thus under 1. mna, all the preceding words separated by commas, viz. 'respect, regard, honour, mark of honour,' are indicated as included in the ordinary meaning of mna (cp. Punctuation). If, on the other hand, a symbol followed by a colon is used before a meaning, its application is carried on till another symbol occurs. For example, under vriddhi the sense 'growth' is indicated to be both Vedic and Classical, 'delectation, delight,' Vedic, but all the signification from 'adolescence' onwards post-Vedic only.

Contents of this page


UKT 120628, 130717, 140703: In Myanmarpr, we have two words in Bur-Myan, {sa} चा (also written as {sa} -- palatal) and {sa.ka:} चका . [Note the different use of visarga {wic~sa.} (the shortened form of {wic~sa.pauk}) in Bur-Myan and Skt-Dev.] .

The word {sa.ka:} चका means speech "articulated human spoken sound", and / {sa} चा is script "what you write down on paper". Speech is phoneme, and script is grapheme. In order to be unequivocal (specific), whenever I describe a language I write in the form of a compound hyphenated word "speech-script", e.g. Bur-Myan (Burmese-Myanmar, or Bama speech written in Myanmar akshara), Karen-Myan (Karen speech in Myanmar akshara), Mon-Myan (Mon speech in Myanmar akshara), and Shan-Myan (Shan speech in Myanmar akshara) for indigenous languages of Myanmarpr. For others, Eng-Lat (English speech in -Latin alphabet), Pal-Myan (Pali speech in Myanmar akshara), and Skt-Dev (Sanskrit speech in Devanagari akshara).

Remember the speech of the people of ancient Rome was Roman. It was written in Latin alphabet. Thus "Latin speech" is a misnomer. It should be Roman-Latin. As important as the Latin alphabet which is mainly used in western Europe is the Cyrillic alphabet. Eastern European languages are written in Cyrillic. Thus we must say Rus-Cyr  (Russian speech written in Cyrillic alphabet).

Be careful of how humans speak and how it is graphically represented. Take care of the way you spell a word, for the adage is "Writing is correct (unchanging) - Speaking (or reading aloud) is just sound and is lost as soon as it is uttered".

The problem comes in when we compare Bur-Myan to Eng-Latin & Skt-Dev, because Burmese has 3 pitch-registers (or tones), whereas the IE (Indo-European) generally has two. Take note of how long these "tones" lasts in time-duration measured by the blinks of your eye. 

I have come to notice that Sanskrit spoken by native-Tamil speakers sounds quite differently from Sanskrit as spoken by native-Hindi speakers. {a:.} is an adaptation of Tamil visarga ஃ .

It is usual to say English has just two tones - the short and the long, whereas Burmese has three (now called pitch-registers). This I have been calling the two-three tone problem, and the reader should note that I am more careful about the spelling than the pronunciation in the present work.

The small Devangar character is used for all articles except the verbs, for which the large type is reserved. [UKT ]

UKT 130716, 140703: Macdonell's usage "small Devangar character" is in "small letter vs capital letter" usage. All Devangar characters are of the same size. However, for verbs, there is a special set known as "vowel letters". It is the same in Bur-Myan, e.g. {I.} इ & {U.} उ . To get the verbal-sounds with other aksharas, we use vowel-signs, e.g. {ki.} कि & {ku.} कु .

Ordinary Roman Latin type is employed for transliteration immediately following a word in Devangar; but when a word occurs in transliteration only, it is printed in thick type so as to catch the eye at once (as in article akshara). When there is no object in attracting the attention, as for instance (p-roman09end p-roman10begin) when Sanskrit words occur in definitions or explanations, they are not made conspicuous in this manner.

UKT 110709: Macdonell's use of lower case (small) vs. higher case (capital) is disturbing because in both Devanagari and Myanmar only small letters are used. In Romabama, in order to extend the ordinary Eng-Lat graphemes from 26 to 52, capital letters convey differing script from small letters. Thus, {na.} and {Na.} are different: {na.} न vs. {Na.} ण
   Macdonell's use of thick type (bold), and slanted (italics) is also very confusing in HTML editing, and I am obliged to ignore them in many places.

To the special use made of italic type, I attach considerable practical value. Its occurrence in definitions always implies amplification or elucidation, whereas the ordinary Latin Roman type represent as far as is possible the exact literal equivalent of the Sanskrit word. [UKT ]

UKT 140704: "Roman" is the speech of the people of Rome, whereas "Latin" is the script to represent the speech. I have therefore struck-through the word "Roman", and have substituted "Latin".

Thus samvarava-sarg is defined as 'wreath given by a girl to the man of her choice' (compare also samna upam). By this means needless repetitions and waste of space are avoided, while much is gained in clearness of definition at one and the same time.

Contents of this page

Punctuation : colon & semi-colon

UKT 140704: The English colon is a punctuation mark, and it should come only at the end of a phrase or word as a  sign of pause. When Macdonell says, in the following para, "colon immediately before a transliterated word or suffix" , it does not make sense to me. We should remember that an English colon looks like visarga {wic~sa.}. The visarga {wic~sa.} is used in Skt-Dev, and Mon-Myan to show the time-duration of the sound of an akshara (either vowel or consonant). In Bur-Myan, it is used only after long-vowels to show emphasis. It is not a punctuation mark. What the IPA uses is not a colon, but what is called a "triangular colon" with two small triangles - not circular dots: /ː/ .

The colon immediately before a transliterated word or suffix, indicates that the latter must be attached to the end of the preceding Sanskrit word. Thus : -ka after the heading word losht is to be read as loshta-ka. This is in no way affected by the intervening special uses of cases or idioms often added at the end of an article. Thus: -kesarin undr vi-krama must of course be understood as vikrama-kesarin, in spite of the inflected forms of vikrama which immediately precede -kesarin. [UKT ]

The special significance of the semi-colon is, in addition to marking off distinctly different meanings, to separate within a paragraph the latter halves of the compounds which it contains. [UKT ]

Thus; -kakshus under lola-kara, is to be read as lola-kakshus, and the following [there is no page break here in the Nataraj ed.] ; -t as lola-t. Had a colon preceded the latter, it would have meant lola-kakshus-t. The semicolon will sometimes be found instead of the colon when it is perfectly obvious that nothing else could be done with the following word but attach it to the end of the preceding one. This is for instance the case with; kra after loha. [UKT ]

The comma is employed as has already been indicated, to separate more or less synonymous meanings, while the semi-colon marks off distinct differences of sense. The other specific use of the comma is in paragraphs with compounds to show that the following word is to be applied exactly in the same way as a preceding one introduced by a colon. Thus sat-krya followed by : -vda and subsequently by, -vdin, must be read as satkrya-vda and satkrya-vdin.

Contents of this page


UKT 130716: Keep in mind the difference between Transcription and Transliteration. Because, I was not making the difference, Prof. Toni Green chided me for my failure in my early days of entry into this field. He pointed out that my Romabama was just a transliteration and not a transcription. I am forever indebted to him for correcting my mistake. Now, I am confident to say that Romabama has matured into a transcription .

The system is that which has been adopted in the 'Sacred Books of the East,' and already followed by me in my edition of Professor Max Mller's Sanskrit Grammar. Had I been guided exclusively by my own judgment I should have preferred c (for {sa.} ) and j (for {za.} ) to represent the hard and the soft palatal [UKT ]

UKT 140704: The series "Sacred Books of the East" (SBE) is a series of 50 volumes, edited by Max Muller, an early Indologist,  and issued by the Oxford University Press between 1879 and 1910. It has translations on various religious traditions of the East. See: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Books_of_the_East 140704

UKT 110709: "च c {sa.} and ज j {za.}" are "tenuis-voiceless" and "voiced" respectively. They are pronounced as / {kya.}/ and / {gya.}/ by the Hindi speakers. As for the English and other Europeans who could not differentiate the "tenuis-voiceless" from the "aspirate-voiceless" the sounds become the "affricates". 

I should have retained the italic t  and d  for the linguals, but made the lingual ष sh also an italic s, representing the palatal sibilant श by . The connexion of these two sibilants with the mutes of their classes would thus have been clearly indicated. [UKT ]

The employment of a double letter sh  the latter half of which otherwise represents an aspiration, to express the simple sound of a spirant, is not strictly scientific, though convenient for the Anglo-Saxon. It is , however, not a good thing to multiply systems.

UKT 140704: I use the term 'digraph' in stead of "double letter" . I try to keep the digraphs out of Romabama because they tend to make the uninitiated to think they are diphthongs. Bur-Myan has no diphthongs, it has only monophthongs because of which Bur-Myan speakers cannot pronounce the English diphthongs such as <boy> and <oil>. 

UKT 110709, 140704: I am curious how Macdonell has termed श śa as the palatal. I would have it as dental-alveolar. The IPA phonemes /θ/ /s/ /ʃ/, the dental-alveolar fricatives are sufficient to represent the respective sounds in all four speeches of BEPS. See my suggestion on Expansion of the IPA Table of Consonants in
Introduction to Romabama - RBM-intro-indx.htm (link chk 150702)

I must here refer to some practical application of transliteration which I have made.

When one or more letters in thick type are added after a Sanskrit word either in parentheses or following a semi-colon, colon, or comma, the meaning is that that letter of those letters are to be substituted for precisely the same number at the end of the word in question. Thus 'paurusha, a . (i),' 'yamaka, a. (ik)' signify that the feminine of the former adjective is paurushi and that of the latter yamik. Similarly 'samna-mrdhan, a. (ni)' indicates that this word has the form samna-mrdhn in the feminine. The letters :i-ka, referring to a preceding paurna, must be read as paurna-ka.

Contents of this page


UKT 140705: To understand this section, see my note on Accent and Stress

Wherever the accent is known from Vedic texts it has been given in the transliteration, the Udtta (acute) accent being marked in the usual way (e.g. vdhar) and the svarita (circumflex) accent being indicated by a curve above the vowel (e.g. svr).

When an accented word is exclusively Vedic this is indicated by a V., while if nothing is stated, it may be assumed to be post-Vedic also, e.g. vn. As the meanings of an accented word may be partly Vedic, partly post-Vedic, and partly common to both periods, this is broadly indicated by the symbols V. (=Vedic in general), C. (= post-Vedic in general), and V. C. (- both Vedic and post-Vedic), as for example in the article vrat. [UKT ]

Unaccented words may be assumed to be post-Vedic, since in the rare cases when they happen to belong to the Vedic period, this is noted. Sometimes I distinguish subordinate periods, as Br. = Brhmana, S. = Stra, E. = Epic, P.= Purna. It would, however, have been beyond the scope of the present work to go into details of this kind. That would belong rather to the sphere of an exclusively etymological dictionary. I may mention in passing that na   are indicated, a single occurrence in the Rig-veda, for instance, being marked as RV.1, just as words and meanings quotable only from native grammarians and lexicographer are made recognisable by an asterisk. This is an important safeguard; for the signification of the former class of words is often very doubtful, while the genuineness of the latter is uncertain. [UKT ]

I have (p-roman10end p-roman11begin) frequently seen non-quotable words, without any indication that they are such, used by comparative philologists, as well as made the basis of far-reaching conclusions. [UKT ]

Thus I remember a few years ago hearing an Oriental scholar, who was not a Sanskritist, using as an argument for Babylonian influence the word man, to which the older Petersburg dictionary in one passage attributed the meaning of 'a certain weight of gold,' and which was therefore supposed to be identical with the Greek . This meaning no longer appears in the smaller edition of that work.

Compounds arranged under an accented heading word, must be assumed to be unaccented and therefore post- Vedic unless any indication to the contrary is given. Thus - ketu under vigay is to be read as vigaya-ketu. It follows as a matter of course that, if the second half of a compound has an accent, that is the accent of the whole word. Thus - mya occurring under loh represents loha-mya.

Contents of this page


My original plan was to make the present work a comparative as well as a practical Sanskrit dictionary. After a good deal of reflection I abandoned this project on the ground that while [there is no page break here in the Nataraj ed.] greatly swelling the bulk of the volume, the etymological material would not in this combination admit of being groped and classified from various points of view as it should be in a thoroughly valuable and scientific etymological dictionary. [UKT ]

The treatment of this material in a separate volume which I had contemplated, may be rendered superfluous by a work that is, I understand, in preparation at Strassburg. [UKT ]

My taste for etymological studies I trace in great part to Professor Fick's lectures on Comparative Greek Grammar, which I attended when a student at Gttingen. Though not comparative, the dictionary is nevertheless historical and etymological in its character. It is historical inasmuch as the meanings are not given in an arbitrary order, as in the Indian dictionaries, but are arranged as far as possible in accordance with their chronological development, while the literary period to which both words and their senses belong, is plentifully indicated. It is etymological from the Sanskrit point of view inasmuch as all words, except the small number -- far smaller than in any other Aryan language -- which defy analysis, have been broken up into their component parts in the transliteration either by means of hyphens, as in  yag-a, or of hooks where vowel coalescences occur, as in mrigaikshana for mrigekshana. [UKT ]

Where these means are insufficient , the derivation has been concisely added in brackets, as under √ mrkh, yaksha, rdhi. I have inserted in brackets a not inconsiderable number of roots, the former existence of which, though not occurring as verbs, is either deducible from Sanskrit derivatives alone or is proved by the evidence of comparative philology also (e.g. √  mag, √ 1. rudh). The structure of Sanskrit words being so much clearer than that in any other Aryan tongue, I have thus availed myself of the opportunity of supplying students of the language with an easy instrument of linguistic training.

Contents of this page


The present work derives its material mainly from the newer Petersburg dictionary. It could not be of much value were this not the case. I have of course also carefully worked through Bhtlingk and Roth's older dictionary [7 vols, 1852-75], on account of the vast array of quotations and references which it contains. The consultation of these was necessary in the laborious process of verifying meanings.

The rapid strides made by Sanskrit studies during the last thirty years [Nataraj edl, 60 yrears] , are chiefly owing to the lexicographical labours of those two great scholars. [UKT ]

Sanskrit lexicography being a product of the present century, it was for the subject indeed a fortunate combination of circumstances, that the task was undertaken in an age when strictly scientific methods had begun to be applied to scholarship, and tat the work fell into the hands of scholars of such eminent ability. The result has been that Sanskrit lexicography, not having had gradually to clear away the unscientific accumulations of previous centuries, is already in a more advanced state than that of the classical languages. This is indeed indicated by the fact that the large Petersburg dictionary contains more than double the mount of matter supplied by the last edition of Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon.

I have also used throughout Grassmann's Lexicon to the Rig-veda, as well as a copy of Benfey's dictionary annotated by the author himself. To the latter half of Apte's dictionary I owe some quotable compounds not to be found in the Petersburg dictionaries. [UKT ]

Down to about the end of the vowels I am indebted to Cappeller's Wrterbuch for some Sanskrit equivalents of Prakrit [UKT ?] words occurring in Sanskrit plays. I had reached this point when I was informed by the author that he intended translating his lexicon when complete into English. I accordingly at once ceased referring to it, and have not looked at it since. From the same work I have borrowed the very convenient abbreviations -  and   - .

I have further consulted Whiteny's Sanskrit Roots, the glossaries contained in the Readers of Lanman, Hillebrandt, and Windish, as well as in Johnson's Hitopadesa, Kellner's and Monier- Williams's Nala, Stenzler's and Johnson's Meghadta, and Burkhard's Sakuntal, besides the Index to Pischel and Geldner's Vedische Studies. I have also made use of Prof. Aufrect's Catalogus Catalogorum, various articles in the Jorunal of the German Oriental Society and Kuhn's Zeitachrift, as well as one by Prof. E. Leunann in the Festgruss (to Bhtlingk, on his jubilee), and Prof. Bhler's lexicographical notes in the Vienna Oriental Journal. In addition to what it derives from these sources of information, my book embodies all the matter with which it is concerned from the numerous appendices of the smaller Petersburg dictionary, besides words, compounds, and meanings collected by myself from post-Vedic works, such as the Pakatantra.

For etymological purposes I have consulted the large Petersburg dictionary, Grassmann's Wrterbuch, Lanman's Glossary, Brugmann's Gruudriss, and Ficks's comparative Dictionary of the Indo-European Languages. [there is no page break here in the Nataraj ed.

Having utilised all these sources of information, I venture to think that work may be regarded as registering the advance of Sanskrit lexicography up to the present time.

Sir M. Monier-Williams's Sanskrit-English lexicon has not been consulted, partly because it is based on the older Petersburg dictionary, and having been published twenty years ago contains no new material, and partly because I wished to avoid being influenced by the system of a work of which a new edition is in preparation.

I take this opportunity of expressing my sincere gratitude to Prof. E.B. Cowell for the kind way in which he assisted me during the course of the work in solving difficulties I submitted to him in the departments of grammar, philosophy, and rhetoric. It is no exaggeration to say that in combined knowledge of these subjects he surpasses all other Sanskritists. The generous manner in which he sacrifices his leisure in the interests of those who whish to avail themselves of his great learning, is well known to his pupils, but not so well known to others as it ought to be.

In conclusion I must not omit to express my belief that the fact of this book having been printed by the University Press at Oxford, under the eye of its Oriental Reader, Mr. J.C. Pembrey, whose skill could not be surpassed, is in itself a sufficient guarantee of accuracy.


September, 1892

(p-roman11end p-roman11begin)

UKT: The Nataraj edition is signed:
20 Bardwell Road, Oxford
January, 1914.


Contents of this page

UKT notes

Accent and Stress

- UKT 140705: The two words are not the same yet they are usually interchangeably used. I need to find out what Macdonell has meant by Accent. The following two articles are from Wikipedia, and I have to make my thinking straight by reading them. For the present, I am giving them as they were.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accent_phonetics  140705

Accent is the phonetic prominence given to a particular syllable in a word, or to a particular word within a phrase. [UKT ]

When this prominence is produced through greater dynamic force, typically signaled by a combination of amplitude (volume), syllable or vowel length, full articulation of the vowel, and a non-distinctive change in pitch, the result is called stress accent, dynamic accent, or simply stress ;

- when it is produced through pitch alone, it is called pitch accent  ; and

- when it is produced through length alone it is called quantitative accent.

English has stress accent . [UKT: I have given sound files below for you to listen.]

A prominent syllable or word is said to be accented or tonic; the latter term does not imply that it carries phonemic tone. Other syllables or words are said to be unaccented or atonic. Syllables are frequently said to be in pretonic or post-tonic position; certain phonological rules apply specifically to such positions. For instance, in American English, /t/ and /d/ are flapped in post-tonic position.

Some languages combine stress accent and pitch accent, in that accented syllables are both dynamically prominent and may have more than one tone, whereas unstressed syllables do not carry tone. An example of this is Serbo-Croatian accent. Such systems are typically called accent or pitch accent, because the latter term is not well defined.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_linguistics  140705

In linguistics, stress is the relative emphasis that may be given to certain syllables in a word, or to certain words in a phrase or sentence. The term is also used for similar patterns of phonetic prominence inside syllables. The word "accent" is often used with this sense, but it may be used for other kinds of prominence; stress specifically may thus be called stress accent or dynamic accent.

The stress placed on syllables within words is called word stress or lexical stress. The stress placed on words within sentences is called sentence stress or prosodic stress. The latter is one of the three components of prosody, along with rhythm and intonation.

Another classification lists word stress (conventional emphasis of certain syllables within words), phrasal stress (the natural emphasis of certain words within phrases or sentences), and contrastive stress (used to highlight an item that is given particular focus).

UKT: More in the Wiki article.

From English Pronunciation Guide in Learn to Speak English Part 1: Consonant, the Learning Company, Foreign Language Division - HyperGlot TM, 6493 Kaiser Drive, Fremont, CA 94555. -- no longer on the market .
See English pronunciation guide - EPG-indx.htm (link chk 140705)

There are, unfortunately, no rules for stress in English. There is no way of knowing which syllable or syllables are stressed in any English word. Consequently, you must learn the stress of a word when you learn the word. There is, however, a general tendency in English accentuation that will help you make educated guesses when you meet a new word and do not already know what syllable is stressed.

UKT: In the following click on high-lighted words to hear the sound.

The great majority of two-syllable words in English are stressed on the first syllable, for example, English, second, photo, upper, etc. You should note, however, that sometimes the same word might be stressed on the first syllable to mean one thing and also stressed on the second syllable to mean another, for example, 'produce and produce, the first being a noun and the second a verb. There are many examples of this phenomenon, such as 'subject (noun) and subject (verb), 'object (noun) and object (verb).

Of historical interest is the fact that when determination of syllabic stress in English is related to the origin of the words under discussion. Thus, in the sequence love, lovely, lovable, loveliness, lovableness, we see that the stress is constant on the first syllable. These are native English words. However, in the sequences, photograph, photography, photographic and 'equal, equality, equalization, equilitarian, we find the stress shifting from one syllable to another as the word gets longer. Words that follow this stress pattern are from Greek or Latin origin.

UKT: The programme that I had bought before the turn of the century could no longer be played. I had salvaged what I could from its sound files and write out the English word myself. I listened again and again and the following are confirmed as correct. If you are a native Bur-Myan speaker practice on them. 
S1_1_01 English S1_1_02 second S1_1_03 photo S1_1_04 upper
S1_1_05 produce S1_1_06 produce
S1_1_07 subject S1_1_08 subject
S1_1_09 object S1_1_10 object
S1_1_11 love S1_1_12 lovely S1_1_13 lovable S1_1_14 loveliness S1_1_15 lovableness
S1_1_16 photograph S1_1_17 photography S1_1_18 photographic
S1_1_19 equal S1_1_20 equality S1_1_21 equalization S1_1_22 equalitarian

UKT: More in Pronunciation Guide

Go back Accent-Stress-note-b

Contents of this page


UKT 140216: A Hindu story that I would have to follow is:
http://krishna.org/lord-chaitanya-defeats-the-buddhists/ - 140216, 140830
to be included in my notes.

-- UKT 140830

I have been chided by Prof. Antony Green of mistaking transliteration for transcription for which I sincerely thank him.

Before we can transcribe a spoken language, the first step is to transliterate the written text. What I had not realized in the beginning of my study is that there are more than one method of transliteration of Devanagari script. Early Indologists such as Max Muller used a transliteration different from the modern IAST (International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transcription). We find that A. A. Macdonell has used not only an older script for writing Skt-Dev, but also an older transcription used by early Indologists such as Max Muller, who has done a tremendous amount of translating Sanskrit texts.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indology 140830

Indology is the academic study of the history and cultures, languages, and literature of the Indian subcontinent (most specifically the modern-day states of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal), and as such is a subset of Asian studies.

Indology may also be known as Indic studies or Indian studies, or South Asian studies, although scholars and university administrators sometimes have only partially overlapping interpretations of these terms.

The term Indology or (in German) Indologie is often associated with German scholarship, and is used more commonly in departmental titles in German and continental European universities than in the anglophone academy. In the Netherlands the term Indologie was used to designate the study of Indonesian history and culture in preparation for colonial service in the Dutch East Indies.

Specifically, Indology includes the study of Sanskrit literature and Hinduism along with the other Indian religions, Jainism, Buddhism and Pāli literature, and Sikhism. Dravidology is the separate branch dedicated to the Dravidian languages of South India.

Some scholars distinguish Classical Indology from Modern Indology, the former more focussed on Sanskrit and other ancient language sources, the latter on contemporary India, its politics and sociology.

--- --- ---

In the wake of 18th century pioneers like William Jones, Henry Thomas Colebrooke or August Wilhelm Schlegel, Indology as an academic subject emerges in the 19th century, in the context of British India, together with Asian studies in general affected by the romantic Orientalism of the time. The Asiatick Society was founded in Calcutta in 1784, Socit Asiatique founded in 1822, the Royal Asiatic Society in 1824, the American Oriental Society in 1842, and the German Oriental Society (Deutsche Morgenlndische Gesellschaft) in 1845, the Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies in 1949.

Systematic study and editorial activity of Sanskrit literature became possible with the St. Petersburg Sanskrit-Wrterbuch during the 1850s to 1870s. Translations of major Hindu texts in the Sacred Books of the East began in 1879. Otto von Bohtlingk's edition of Pāṇini's grammar appeared in 1887. Max Mller's edition of the Rigveda appeared in 184975. In 1897, Sergey Oldenburg launched a systematic edition of key Sanskrit texts, "Bibliotheca Buddhica".

UKT: More in the Wikipedia article

Go back Indology- note-b

Contents of this page

End of TIL file