Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Unwritten language

Expand Messages
  • emillersa1
    I am confused. How is it that scholars can provide correct pronunciation and correct grammatical structure, yet it is a dead language that was only a spoken
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I am confused. How is it that scholars can provide correct
      pronunciation and correct grammatical structure, yet it is a "dead
      language" that was only a spoken language. At least with Latin and
      ancient Greek there are written records left to compare to modern
      languages.

      Ed
    • Ong Yong Peng
      Dear Ed and friends, Pali, not doubt, is a dead language . But, it is still liturgical, i.e. used in chanting in Theravada countries, preserving its spoken
      Message 2 of 9 , Nov 7, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Ed and friends,

        Pali, not doubt, is a "dead language". But, it is still liturgical,
        i.e. used in chanting in Theravada countries, preserving its spoken
        aspect. Buddhist texts are still written in Pali, preserving its
        written aspect (with South Asian, Southeast Asian and Roman
        scripts). Further insights into its grammatical structure and
        etymological aspects can all be derived from comparative language
        studies. Most of the Pali texts have also been translated into other
        languages, such as Chinese and Tibetan (and then to Japanese and
        Korean). Hence, the doctrinal authenticity is preserved too.


        metta,
        Yong Peng


        --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, emillersa1 wrote:

        I am confused. How is it that scholars can provide correct
        pronunciation and correct grammatical structure, yet it is a "dead
        language" that was only a spoken language. At least with Latin and
        ancient Greek there are written records left to compare to modern
        languages.
      • emillersa1
        Thank you for a succinct response which a great deal of sense. ... other
        Message 3 of 9 , Nov 8, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Thank you for a succinct response which a great deal of sense.


          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Ong Yong Peng" <ypong001@y...> wrote:
          >
          > Dear Ed and friends,
          >
          > Pali, not doubt, is a "dead language". But, it is still liturgical,
          > i.e. used in chanting in Theravada countries, preserving its spoken
          > aspect. Buddhist texts are still written in Pali, preserving its
          > written aspect (with South Asian, Southeast Asian and Roman
          > scripts). Further insights into its grammatical structure and
          > etymological aspects can all be derived from comparative language
          > studies. Most of the Pali texts have also been translated into
          other
          > languages, such as Chinese and Tibetan (and then to Japanese and
          > Korean). Hence, the doctrinal authenticity is preserved too.
          >
          >
          > metta,
          > Yong Peng
          >
          >
          > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, emillersa1 wrote:
          >
          > I am confused. How is it that scholars can provide correct
          > pronunciation and correct grammatical structure, yet it is a "dead
          > language" that was only a spoken language. At least with Latin and
          > ancient Greek there are written records left to compare to modern
          > languages.
        • Piya Tan
          Dear Yong Peng, It is an academic question whether Pali is a dead language or not. Technically, a dead language was once a living spoken language. Pali however
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 8, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Yong Peng,

            It is an academic question whether Pali is a dead language or not. Technically, a
            dead language was once a living spoken language. Pali however was never a "living
            spoken" language. It was a Kunstsprache used by monks probably from the Avantii
            region, with additions and modifications to recite the Buddha's Teachings. The
            language spoken by the Avantii people is probably dead by now or evolved into
            something modern.

            As such, I think it is more correct to call Pali a "sacred language" that is, we use
            it only for scriptural purposes, and not as a spoken language. Although I remember my
            abbot, the present acting Sangharaja of Thailand speaking Pali to the Sinhalese monks
            in Sri Lanka since neither side was conversant with the language of the other.

            Sukhi

            Piya

            Ong Yong Peng wrote:

            > Dear Ed and friends,
            >
            > Pali, not doubt, is a "dead language". But, it is still liturgical,
            > i.e. used in chanting in Theravada countries, preserving its spoken
            > aspect. Buddhist texts are still written in Pali, preserving its
            > written aspect (with South Asian, Southeast Asian and Roman
            > scripts). Further insights into its grammatical structure and
            > etymological aspects can all be derived from comparative language
            > studies. Most of the Pali texts have also been translated into other
            > languages, such as Chinese and Tibetan (and then to Japanese and
            > Korean). Hence, the doctrinal authenticity is preserved too.
            >
            > metta,
            > Yong Peng
            >
            > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, emillersa1 wrote:
            >
            > I am confused. How is it that scholars can provide correct
            > pronunciation and correct grammatical structure, yet it is a "dead
            > language" that was only a spoken language. At least with Latin and
            > ancient Greek there are written records left to compare to modern
            > languages.
            >
            >
            > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
            > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
            > Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
            > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Gunnar Gällmo
            ... I would like to re-formulate that: Pali however was never anyone s first language. It was a Plansprache... For two reasons: 1. Any language with a
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 8, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- Piya Tan <libris@...> skrev:
              >
              > Pali however was never a "living
              > spoken" language. It was a Kunstsprache...

              I would like to re-formulate that:

              "Pali however was never anyone's first language. It
              was a Plansprache..."

              For two reasons:

              1. Any language with a normalized grammar and spelling
              is more or less artificial; therefore, the term
              "Kunstsprache" ("artificial language") for languages
              like Volapük and Esperanto tends now to be replaced by
              "Plansprache" ("planned language").

              2. It is perfectly possible for a planned language to
              be a "living spoken" one, as can be testified by
              anyone who has visited an Esperanto congress - where,
              for many of its participants, the "artificial"
              language is actually more "living" than their second
              or third national language.

              What makes me doubt that Pali was ever a "living
              spoken" language, therefore, is not the fact that it
              is an artificial language, and perhaps a planned one,
              but the fact that it is so specialized. All Pali texts
              either deal directly with Buddhist matters (like the
              Tipitaka), or makes use of Buddhism for political
              goals (like the Mahava"msa), or are written to get
              into contact with Buddhists (like the Pali translation
              of the Bible), so the language seems never to have
              been meant for general use about everyday secular
              life.

              Gunnar


              =====
              gunnargallmo@...
            • Edward Miller
              If Pali wasn t a lingua franca of northern India, then what language did the Buddha speak? ... I would like to re-formulate that: Pali however was never
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 8, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                If Pali wasn't a lingua franca of northern India, then what language did the Buddha speak?

                Gunnar G�llmo <gunnargallmo@...> wrote:--- Piya Tan <libris@...> skrev:
                >
                > Pali however was never a "living
                > spoken" language. It was a Kunstsprache...

                I would like to re-formulate that:

                "Pali however was never anyone's first language. It
                was a Plansprache..."

                For two reasons:

                1. Any language with a normalized grammar and spelling
                is more or less artificial; therefore, the term
                "Kunstsprache" ("artificial language") for languages
                like Volap�k and Esperanto tends now to be replaced by
                "Plansprache" ("planned language").

                2. It is perfectly possible for a planned language to
                be a "living spoken" one, as can be testified by
                anyone who has visited an Esperanto congress - where,
                for many of its participants, the "artificial"
                language is actually more "living" than their second
                or third national language.

                What makes me doubt that Pali was ever a "living
                spoken" language, therefore, is not the fact that it
                is an artificial language, and perhaps a planned one,
                but the fact that it is so specialized. All Pali texts
                either deal directly with Buddhist matters (like the
                Tipitaka), or makes use of Buddhism for political
                goals (like the Mahava"msa), or are written to get
                into contact with Buddhists (like the Pali translation
                of the Bible), so the language seems never to have
                been meant for general use about everyday secular
                life.

                Gunnar


                =====
                gunnargallmo@...


                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
                [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
                Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
                Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.


                Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
                It is better to give?
                �Especially when giving to a child in poverty.�Click here to meet a child you can help.

                ---------------------------------
                Yahoo! Groups Links

                To visit your group on the web, go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/

                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                Pali-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Derek
                ... Dear Edward, It is sometimes said that the Buddha spoke the Magadhi language. The trouble is, we have no records of the Magadhi language, so simply saying
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 9, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Edward Miller <emillersa1@s...> wrote:
                  > If Pali wasn't a lingua franca of northern India, then what
                  > language did the Buddha speak?

                  Dear Edward,

                  It is sometimes said that the Buddha spoke the Magadhi language. The
                  trouble is, we have no records of the Magadhi language, so simply
                  saying "the Buddha spoke Magadhi" may or may not answer your
                  question!

                  Two hundred years after the time of the Buddha, yhe emperor Ashoka
                  (3rd century B.C.) had pillars with edicts on them put up over large
                  parts of India, and by studying the edicts on these pillars we can
                  get some idea of the way language varied from place to place. Hence
                  we can speculate a little about what Magadhi may have looked like.
                  For example the vocative plural form bhikkhave is thought to be
                  typically Magadhi. But that's about as far as we can go.

                  Derek.
                • Ong Yong Peng
                  Dear Derek, Edward, Gunnar, Piya and friends, thanks for the interesting discussion. To the common beliefs that 1. the Buddha may have never spoken Pali, 2.
                  Message 8 of 9 , Nov 9, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Derek, Edward, Gunnar, Piya and friends,

                    thanks for the interesting discussion. To the common beliefs that

                    1. the Buddha may have never spoken Pali,
                    2. the Buddha spoke the Magadhi language.

                    I would like to add that due to the fact the Buddha spent a good
                    portion of his time in Magadha, and Kapilavatu was a political ally
                    of Magadha, Magadhi was the dialect most often used by Him.

                    However, Magadhi was not the only vernacular the Buddha used. The
                    Buddha had also learnt the 'religious language' of the Vedas.
                    Furthermore, He did not set a particular language to be superior
                    than others. As recorded in the Tipitaka, the Buddha allows his
                    disciples to preach the Dhamma in the local language.

                    The Buddha's footsteps covered the entire Northern India and Nepal.
                    So, it is unlikely that he spoke only one language. Just like it was
                    impossible to travel across Europe and preached to masses all in one
                    language.

                    It is interesting to note that while each sutta records certain
                    statistics of the meeting, such as the place, time and attendees,
                    there is no mention of the language used.

                    My guesses are:

                    1. The reciter (Ananda) of the suttas did not perceive language as
                    an issue. It is known to the assembly of the Arhats the Buddhist
                    attitude towards language usage (as the mean to an end, Zen
                    saying: "finger pointing the moon"), hence it is not recorded.

                    2. It is social norm for people to speak in different tongues in
                    different places. This is especially true as the Buddhist sangha was
                    not elitist and did not promote the use of the Vedic language. So,
                    the language used was not much of a concern for the records, as it
                    is (for academic purpose) today.


                    metta,
                    Yong Peng


                    --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Derek wrote:
                    > If Pali wasn't a lingua franca of northern India, then what
                    > language did the Buddha speak?


                    It is sometimes said that the Buddha spoke the Magadhi language. The
                    trouble is, we have no records of the Magadhi language, so simply
                    saying "the Buddha spoke Magadhi" may or may not answer your
                    question!

                    Two hundred years after the time of the Buddha, yhe emperor Ashoka
                    (3rd century B.C.) had pillars with edicts on them put up over large
                    parts of India, and by studying the edicts on these pillars we can
                    get some idea of the way language varied from place to place. Hence
                    we can speculate a little about what Magadhi may have looked like.
                    For example the vocative plural form bhikkhave is thought to be
                    typically Magadhi. But that's about as far as we can go.
                  • Gunnar Gällmo
                    ... That s my theory as well. Asokas edicts, also, were written in different local Prakrits. That was practical when dealing with texts cut in stone, and not
                    Message 9 of 9 , Nov 10, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- Ong Yong Peng <ypong001@...> skrev:
                      >

                      > However, Magadhi was not the only vernacular the
                      > Buddha used.

                      ...

                      > The Buddha's footsteps covered the entire Northern
                      > India and Nepal.
                      > So, it is unlikely that he spoke only one language.

                      That's my theory as well. Asokas edicts, also, were
                      written in different local Prakrits. That was
                      practical when dealing with texts cut in stone, and
                      not to be carried around; but the Tipitaka, obviously,
                      needed some kind of standardized language, so I think
                      the members of the first council just elected one of
                      the Prakrits, or perhaps made a new one, without
                      making a great fuss about it.

                      Gunnar


                      =====
                      gunnargallmo@...
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.