Dear all,
If I remember correctly, there are different manuscriptal etc.
traditions as for the notation of "ch" or "cch / chch". As there is no
opposition of ch or cch, one can write one or the other. Whitney perhaps
chose "ch" for brevity.
As ch / cch / chch makes the syllable heavy (i.e. is treated like a
consonant group), a notation "cch / chch" is clearer than ch, but of
course the well-versed know that "ch" counts as a consonant group ;-)
Best wishes,
Agnes
Le 18.10.2023 à 05:39, alakendu das via INDOLOGY a écrit :
Mr. Spier,
I can cite an instance . We take the word"/ICCHA" /( wish or desire).
Here, we have doubling of "/Ch" /after a short or long vowel .
Regards
Alakendu Das.
From: [email protected]
Sent: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 06:56:35
To: [email protected]
Subject: [INDOLOGY] Whitney and doubling of "ch"
Dear list members,
Whitney in his grammar section 227 says about the doubling of "*ch*".
"As a general rule *ch* is not to be allowed by the grammarians to
stand in that form after vowels but is to be doubled becoming *cch*
(which in the manuscripts is sometimes written *chch*). . .According
to Panini *ch* is to be doubled within a word after a long or a short
vowel."
But if you look in his "Roots, Verb-forms and Derivatives" at the
entry for *iṣ, ich * nowhere does he double "*ch*" not even after a
short vowel rather he has*i**chati, ichaka,* * ichā* and*ichu * . Does
anyone know why for this root in all his examples he didn't double
*ch* after vowels?
Thanks,
Harry Spier
--
Agnes Korn, PhD habil.
CNRS ; UMR 8041 Centre de recherche sur le monde iranien (CeRMI)
**new address**:
7 rue Guy Môquet
94800 Villejuif
France
[email protected]
https://cermi.cnrs.fr/membres/korn-agnes/
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
