--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "BillyG." <wgm4u@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], cardemaister <no_reply@> 
> wrote:
> > > From a linguistic POV that's so confusing that I'd like
> > > to know what exactly is your source for that.
> > 
> > The analogy of the crystal ball comes from Swami Yogananda's book,
> > "The Second Coming of Christ". 
> > 
> > > Actually, those Hindi truncations(?) of Sanskrit words
> > > make me "furious"! Well, at least a bit irritated...  :]
> > 
> > But there is a good reason for it as Brahm-a with 'short' a, 
> signifies
> > something different than Brahmaa (two a's for effect only) with a 
> long
> > a.  
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by "for effect only" but the difference
> between "brahma" (nominative singular *neuter* gender form of the
> word whose lemma , i.e, "dictionary form" is "brahman") and "brahmaa"
> (nominative singular *masculine* form of the..., etc.) is *almost*
> as essential as the difference in English between, say , "fit"
> and "feet". I know there's a *qualitative*, not just quantitative, 
> difference between the vowels in those words, but that's the closest
> analogy I can think of in English to the importance of the length
> of vowels in Sanskrit, where it is a so called distinctive feature,
> that is, two words with totally different meanings can differ from
> each other only by the length of their vowel, like for instance
> "sama" (same) and "saama" (song, and stuff).
> 
> Here are some forms of the singular inflectional paradigm
> of the word (whose lemma is) "brahman":
> 
> nominative singular masculine   brahmaa
> (Example: yatiinaam brahmaa bhavati saarathiH)
> accusative singular masculine   brahmaanam
> 
> nominative singular neuter      brahma
> (anaadimat paraM brahma...)
> accusative singular neuter      brahma
> 
> Actually, the "criterion" for a neuter gender
> word in Sanskrit is that its nominative and accusative
> (English: objective) are identical in form.
> 
> In the rest of the inflectional cases (instrumental, dative,
> ablative, genitive and locative) 'n' appears as a "separator"
> - or whatever it's officially called - between the stem and
> the suffix; for instance, genitive (English: possessive)
> singular of both masculine and neuter inflection is 
> "brahmanaH" (because of a peculiar assimilation , actually: 
> brahmaNaH - brahma-N-aH).


I just set'em up and you knock'em down, I'm NO expert!

Reply via email to