Update: 2012-01-01 06:12 PM +0630

TIL

BEPS Sanskrit Dictionary

SED-vow-a1-indx.htm

by U Kyaw Tun, M.S. (I.P.S.T., U.S.A.), Daw Khin Wutyi, B.Sc., and staff of TIL Computing and Language Centre, Yangon, Myanmar. Not for sale. No copyright. Free for everyone.

index.htm | Top
SED-vow-a1r1-indx.htm

Contents of this page 

{a.ka.} - a1ka1-003b2.htm 
  {ak} /k/ - a1k-thut-025b2-2.htm
      includes अक्ष = क ् ष / {ak~Sa.} as a stand-in for {ak~hka.}
{a.hka.} - a1hka1-004top5.htm
{a.ga.} - a1ga1-004top7.htm
  {ag} - a1g-thut-004b1-4.htm
{a.Ga.} - a1gga1-004b2-5.htm
{a.nga.} - a1nga1---.htm 
      The {nga.}-onset pronunciation which is quite common in Bur-Myan is absent in Skt-Dev and Eng-Lat.
  {ing} - a1ng-thut-004b3.htm . ({ng} = <ng> as in English <king> where 'g' is silent.)
      Logically, when {nga.} has been killed we should get {a.ng}. However, the coda /ŋ/ influences the preceding peak vowel, and change the rime to /ɪŋ/. Unless we include this change in Romabama, we cannot tie up the sound to the spelling. It was probably due to this effect that the old Myanmar orthographists had introduced the {king:si:}, and we are seeing it here for the first time. The term literally means 'ridden by a centipede', and is really {ing}.

UKT: See my notes on Short vowel (Checking the inherent vowel {a.}/{aa.}.)
The "short vowel" is not exactly the same as the "creak" of Bur-Myan. It behaves as intermediate between the "creak" and "modal" of Bur-Myan.
See my note on the Two-three tone problem.
See TIL A Practical  Sanskrit Dictionary by A. A. Macdonell, 1893,
   which unfortunately gives an older system of transcription.
See downloaded Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary in another section.
Sorting {a.ka.} to {a.nga.} is a problem, because of two or three reasons:
  Skt-Dev spells {a.hka.} in two ways: using a base akshara {ak~hka.}, and
    a conjunct {ak~Sa.}.
  Paucity of words using {nga.t} which is quite common in Bur-Myan.
  Confusion due to English transcriptions. - 110822

Note to digitizer/Devanagari transcriber : you can copy and paste the following:
Ā ā  Ē ē  Ī ī  Ō ō  Ū ū
Ḍ ḍ  Ḥ ḥ  Ḷ ḷ  Ḹ ḹ Ṁ ṁ  Ṃ ṃ  Ṅ ṅ    Ṇ ṇ  Ṛ ṛ  Ṝ ṝ  Ś ś  Ṣ ṣ  Ṭ ṭ    ɕ ʂ
Instead of Devanagari ः {wic~sa.} use "colon" :
Root sign √
Sanskrit-Devanagari : श ś [ɕ]; ष ṣ [ʂ]; स s [s] 

Contents of this page

UKT notes

Short vowel {a.}/{aa.}
Checking the inherent vowel

- by UKT

 

In Bur-Myan, but not necessarily in Pal-Myan, it is mostly the "short vowels" that are checked. So, we rely on the difference between "checked-free" instead of "short-long".

Checking a short-vowel with plosive-stops is quite different from checking with nasals. The nasals are more sonorous than the plosive-stops, but not as sonorous as the liquids. Nasals are some times described as semi-obstruents, and the liquids as semi-sonorants.

You should remember that the term "checking a vowel" is used for describing a rime (V) with a coda-consonant in the syllable of the canonical form C(V). When the is a nasal, the rime comes to have vowel like qualities and we have three pitch-registers as in vowels - the creak, the modal, and the emphatic. It is interesting to note that checking with a nasal - in fact checking with any consonant affects the preceding vowel: {ing}, {i}, {aN}/{uN}, {n}, {m}. This fact is missed by Western phoneticians, who usually leaves the peak vowel unchanged. As an illustration, let's leave the peak vowel unchanged in the series: as {ang} {an} {am}. We arrive at unrealistic pronunciations in Bur-Myan. -- I am waiting for comments from my peers. UKT 110319.

A liquid in coda does not check the vowel at all. In fact the (V) is just like any other vowel. In Bur-Myan, can be considered to be "silent" as in {bol}. {bol} is pronounced as / {bo}/.

Checking the "short" vowels of the series (with consonant <t> or <k>) - see pix on the right

  {a} अ --> {t}, {ak}
  {} अे --> {it},
  {i} इ --> {ait},
  {u} उ --> {oat}, 
  {au} ओ --> {aut}
Can this type of "borrowing" a Burmese pronunciation to pronounce the Sanskrit sounds "help" (hinder?) a Burmese-speaker . This observation needs to be checked further. However, for indexing, I have no choice but to adopt it. -- UKT 100321

Go back short-vow-note-b

Contents of this page

The two-three tone problem

- UKT 110514

After working through BEPS Sanskrit-English Dictionary version 1, which I have completed early in May 2011, I realized that Pal-Lat as given by U Pe Maung Tin, may not be the same as Pal-Myan as given by U Hoke Sein, as far as the pronunciation is concerned. Though I can still accept Pal-Lat as an IE, I can no longer accept Pal-Myan as an IE. I would prefer to classify it with Bur-Myan, and call it an Tibeto-Burman (Tib-Bur) language. Sanskrit is an IE no doubt, but the Prakrit spoken by Gautama Buddha to the ordinary folks - not the learned Brahmins - of the Magadha region was bound to be regional dialect - a Tibeto-Burman language. - UKT 110514

Our task of comparing Eng-Lat to Bur-Myan is not easy because English have only two "tones" for vowels the short and the long, whereas Burmese has three, the creak, the modal, and the emphatic. The one way to reconcile them is to think in terms of 5 registers:

creak, short, modal, long, emphatic

The Bur-Myan "creak" register is strictly not a vowel, because it could not be sung continuously like regular vowels. It may be looked on as a "semi-consonant".

The English short vowel is sometimes close to creak and sometimes to modal. Similarly the English long vowel is between modal and emphatic. For the vowel /a/, we have

{aa.}, {a}, {/ə/}, {aa}, {aa:}
-- the short-a // and the long-a /a/ are transcribed as a and ā in Pal-Lat. Since both Bur-Myan and Eng-Lat do not have dedicated graphemes to represent the central vowel, schwa /ə/, I have to use {/ə/} for the modal. The Bur-Myan schwa is found in words like {a.ni} meaning the "colour red" in which schwa is represented by {a.} or {a}. [In Romabama the "middle dot " is reserved for schwa.] In some Bur-Myan words {a.} stands for the sound of {aa.}, but in others as schwa {/ə/} or {a}.  The following example is provided by my colleague, Saya Kalasan, a noted Manipuri-Burmese {poaN~Na:} author on Astrology-Astronomy, who speaks and writes Sanskrit and Hindi in addition to Burmese and English:


{am/ am/ am. a: ha/ a. ko a. lwun: t//}

Now which is the "consonant" {a.} and which is the "vowel"?

The correspondence between two tones of English and three tones of Burmese is a problem (as far as I know), and lacks a concise name, because of which I will refer to it as the Two-Three Tone problem.

Go back Two-three-tone-problem-note-b

Contents of this page

End of TIL file