Re: "circumcision" of vowels in Tatsama words by Jai type Mastaans

On Nov 21, 2:35 pm, analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/aug/07rajeev.htm

It also struck me that the Arabic-Persian-Urdu influence is what makes
spoken Hindi so clipped, with its consonant endings, forgoing the
standard 'a' and 'a:' endings in Sanskrit. For Hindi is spoken like
the West Asian tongues, which suffer from a paucity of vowels.
Therefore most words end sharply in some consonant. I find this
jarring. For example when anyone misconstrues and mispronounces the
venerable Veda Vyasa as 'Ved Vyas,' I am uncontrollably reminded of
American serial killer Ted Bundy: same abrupt and sudden ending, a far
cry from the more mellifluous and continuous real Sanskrit.

I am nonplussed at hearing about 'Shiv' and 'Ram' and 'Krishan,'
whereas they are 'Siva,' 'Rama' and 'Krishna.' It is Kerala, or
Keralam, you know, not Keral.

Isn't it Shiv, Ram and Krishan(or Krishn) in Hindi?

I am not claiming Sanskrit should be pronounced thus and so out of
regional chauvinism. It can easily be proven through the rules of
sandhi (the way compound words are created in Sanskrit) that the 'a'
or 'a:' ending is necessary, else you have to invent all sorts of
plainly non-existent words.

end quote.

I would add that the millions of present day Northern Indians named
Ram or Krishan or Kishan are fine - but the guy who married Sita and
fought Ravana was Rama and the guy in the Mahabharata was Krishna.

English is a very poor language for writing Indian words. So writing
Rama doesn't make much sense if you cannot distinguish the hrasva 'a'
from the dirgha 'a'. The hrasva 'a' in Sanskrit, like other Indian
languages, is also samvrta. All this cannot be expressed in English. I
do understand what you are trying to say though. However, North
Indian pundits and cultured people who do know Sanskrit speak it
correctly. You must have surely heard "Yada yada hi dharmasya glanir
bhavati _bharata_" or "Karmanyevadhikaraste ma phaleshu _kadachana_"
from the Mahabharata serial. Note Bharata(not Bharat) and
kadachana(not kadachan). These were sung I assume by a North Indian. I
haven't heard a North Indian ever say "vakratund mahakay surya koti
sam prabh" or "asatoma sat gamay" either. Please listen to the Gita
here: http://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/. This is also I believe
rendered by a North Indian. Note that he says "Arjuna Uvacha",
"Shribhagavan Uvacha" and not "Arjun Uvach". The dropping of the last
'a' is a Hindi peculiarity not a North Indian (or North Indian
Sanskrit) peculiarity.

There are other differences in Hindi pronunciation that set it apart
from Sanskrit pronunciation. This is especially with respect to the
'a' and the 'ai'. Words like 'pahale' become pehle. The pure 'ai' of
Sanskrit is retained in only a very few Hindi words like bhaiya where
the 'ai' is followed by a 'y'. Otherwise it mostly sounds very similar
to 'fair'(eg., 'main', 'vairagya'). Since this is how it is mostly
pronounced in Urdu as well (ahmad for eg is closer to 'ehmad' in
pronunciation), I think this variance might have more to do with
Persian or Arabic influence that you allude to. I'm not sure though as
I don't know much about these languages and could be completely wrong.
Again this distortion is more prevalent in the north western and
western states of India. In Bihar, many people say pahale, bahan ji
and so on.

I wish to clarify that this is mainly based on my personal
observations. I don't usually read this newsgroup. I just saw this
thread while I was looking for something else and I thought I might be
able contribute something. If I have misrepresented anything or hurt
anyone's sentiments, I apologise up front.

Regards,
Ramachandra Iyer
.