Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52

Thread: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

  1. #1
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,162
    Rep Power
    1911

    Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste.

    Let us use this thread to post our doubts and learning difficulties in Sanskrit that may be answered to by other members and those who are well-versed in Sanskrit.

    My problem:

    I understand that words in Sanskrit have three forms: singular, dual and plural; these are dependent on the seven cases. For example, the name 'rAmA' has the forms 'rAmaH, rAmau, rAmA' in the first case; the forms in other cases differ suitably.

    Can we use the singular and plural forms as in English in a general way? For example, what are the dual and plural forms of a word like 'adhipatiH' and 'sAdhakA'? Some English texts simply suffix these words with 's' as with English words: 'adhipati-s', 'sAdhakA-s', which I think is not right. What is the correct usage of such plural forms?
    Last edited by saidevo; 15 December 2007 at 09:29 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    187

    Post Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Saidevo,

    The nominative singular case of adhipati is adhipatiH, the dual form is adhipatI, and the plural (i.e. three or more) is adhipatayaH.

    The nominative singular case of sAdhakA (i.e. durgA) is sAdhakA, the dual is sAdhake, and the plural is sAdhakAH. And sAdhikA (the usual feminine form of sAdhaka) follows the same pattern.

    To simply indicate the plural case of a foreign word in English it is common to just add an ‘s’, and writing something like ‘sAdhikA-s’ (for sAdhikAH) is no problem if we are communicating in English.

    Take the word ‘platypus’, for example. Should one search out the Greek plural (platypodes) or would it be OK to say ‘platypuses’ or to simply use ‘platypus’ as a collective noun? So long as the meaning is quite clear, I would say that it does not really matter. If one were trying to learn Greek, however, the correct grammatical form would be helpful.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    187

    Post Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    The nominative singular case of sAdhakA (i.e. durgA) is sAdhakA, the dual is sAdhake, and the plural is sAdhakAH. And sAdhikA (the usual feminine form of sAdhaka) follows the same pattern.
    And for the masculine sAdhaka, the nominative singular is sAdhakaH, the dual is sAdhakau, and the plural is sAdhakAH.

    The nominative singular case of the masculine rAma is rAmaH, the dual form is rAmau, and the plural is rAmAH ~ and rAmA is the nominative singular case of the feminine gender (with the dual form rAme, and plural rAmAH).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,162
    Rep Power
    1911

    Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Sarabhanga,

    Thank you for your kind explanations that are helpful. Very kind of you to have taken the time and efforts to clarify my doubts. Is there any simple Sanskrit text (unlike the grammar and dictionary texts of Monier Williams which are elaborate) that lists such forms (with or without meaning) for ready and quick reference?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    187

    Post Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Saidevo,

    The singular, dual, and plural, nominative cases are formed according to the following paradigms:

    Masculine, ending in -a (e.g. nara) ~ naraH narau narAH

    Feminine ending in -I (e.g. nadI) ~ nadI nadyau nadyaH

    Feminine ending in -A (e.g. bAlA) ~ bAlA bAle bAlAH

    Neuter ending in -a (e.g. phala) ~ phalam phale phalAni

    Masculine ending in -i (e.g. agni) ~ agniH agnI agnayaH

    Masculine ending in -u (e.g. guru) ~ guruH gurU guravaH

  6. #6
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    187

    Smile Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    And if those paradigms are insufficient, I am sure that this site contains the information you seek: sanskrit-sanscrito.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,162
    Rep Power
    1911

    Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Sarabhanga.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    And if those paradigms are insufficient, I am sure that this site contains the information you seek: sanskrit-sanscrito.com
    Thank you for this excellent information. Though I was aware of this Website, I haven't seriously looked it over. Perhaps now is the time.

    My learning Sanskrit is confounded by my fluency in Tamil which is my mother tongue and familiarity with Hindi which I learnt during my high school days. Most Sanskrit words happen to be at least vaguely familiar for me as they are used either directly (with a Tamilized accent) or as the base in Tamil; and due to my familiarity with Hindi, the mind readily seeks the plural and case forms of that language for Sanskrit words! I need to unlearn these habits and learn Sanskrit within its own holy sphere of influence. Besides, there is always the habit of laziness and procrastination of a householder, which also retards efforts of practical spiritual 'sAdhanA', though I happen to read a lot.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    69
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    219

    Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Hari Om
    ~~~~~


    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    And if those paradigms are insufficient, I am sure that this site contains the information you seek: sanskrit-sanscrito.com

    Namaste sarabhanga,
    I was looking at this site for dhātu-pātha. Is this a good URL? I am hoping to find all of them ( ~2,000 or so) in one location.

    Any help is welcomed.

    pranams,
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  9. #9
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    187

    Arrow Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Yajvan,

    The full dhAtupATha (in saMskRta) is available here: pANini dhAtupATha

    And the aSTAdhyAyI of pANini has been translated by shrIsha candra vasu.

    Otherwise, Monier-Williams often mentioned Sanskrit-English Dictionary includes all the verbal roots anyone could need.

    I doubt that the sanskrit-sanscrito site includes the whole dhAtupATha, but I would not have given the link if I didnt think it was good.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,162
    Rep Power
    1911

    Re: Learning Sanskrit by Interaction at HDFpuri

    Namaste Sarabhanga,

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    The singular, dual, and plural, nominative cases are formed according to the following paradigms:

    Masculine, ending in -a (e.g. nara) ~ naraH narau narAH

    Feminine ending in -I (e.g. nadI) ~ nadI nadyau nadyaH

    Feminine ending in -A (e.g. bAlA) ~ bAlA bAle bAlAH

    Neuter ending in -a (e.g. phala) ~ phalam phale phalAni

    Masculine ending in -i (e.g. agni) ~ agniH agnI agnayaH

    Masculine ending in -u (e.g. guru) ~ guruH gurU guravaH
    The masculine form of a word such as 'Alaya' (abode, house, temple) is mentioned as 'AlayaH' whereas its neuter form is given as 'AlayaM' or 'Alayam'. What would be the three forms for words ending in -m or -M?

    The Monier Williams online dictionary, however, mentions only 'Alaya' for both the male and neuter forms. But then the dictionary by V.S. Apte gives 'AlayaM' as the neuter form while the small dictionary published by Sanskrit Education Society, Chennai gives the neuter form as 'Alayam'.

    Another such word is the 'cakram' (wheel). The MWD gives its form as only 'cakra' whereas VSAD gives it as 'cakraM'. Old Theosophical books used the word 'chakram' for the spiritual 'chakra'.

    Is there a possibility that the dictionaries compiled by Western authors have anglicized Sanskrit words? This should not be done, however, in a Sanskrit dictionary. When English takes Latin words such as 'summum bonum', 'cerebellum', etc. almost in their original forms in Latin, why change only Sanskrit words?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •