On Jun 11, 2005, at 3:55 AM, cardemaister wrote: > In my book his spelling of some Sanskrit words > might make even that rather superficial. But I don't > mean to imply that my spelling of Sanskrit indicates > anything other than interest in the language itself. >
I take the deliberate tack of not using Harvard-Kyoto transliteration or diacritics (the latter esp. since not everyone will see it the way it was intended). Only rarely will I use these--it would appeal to the few. The idea is that the largest number of people will understand what you are saying or get the gist of a Sanskrit word if you reproduce it more closely to typical transliteration sans diacriticals. So no, I don't pore over precise transliteration unless someone really needs that. Thus far, in hundreds of posts, no one has requested such. Also, since these are often casual responses, often on memory and without original sources at hand, response and spelling will follow that casual stance. As a contrasting observation I feel cryptic messages in Harvard-Kyoto transliteration without sufficient commentary will often remain that to most readers: cryptic. Hope that helps! Best, Vaj To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
