japa

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�

Some time back we were discussing the proper way of pronuncing śiva.

I wrote,

Lets look at the sibilants in saṃskṛt. We talk of sounds not so much letters, so we have 3 sibilants:

• sa - like seek some say so
• ṣa - like ship or bushel
• śa - now this śa is a bit different as there is some 'h' and some 'c' in this sound.
  Some call it out as the sound that we find in hiss - then śiva almost sounds like c'iva.

I bumped into a word that assists one in the sound of this ś sound in śiva.
The word is caprice (kuh-prees); this 'es' sound found in this word sets the tongue in the proper place for the sound found in śiva .
One then can say kuh-prees, keep the same tongue and mouth postion and use it for the ś in śiva and there you have it.

praṇām

[smaranam]

Namaste YajvanJi

The first time I heard Lord Shiva being called S'iva only here on HDF. All Indians in real life or in media (TV, Videos) pronounce it as Shiva with a SH as in shell, shoe, sharp.

SanskRt devnAgari I have read has always been shiva, sadAshiva. Perhaps some north Indian dialects make it siva (as in seive) ?

Also, transliteration convention (when diacritics are missing) says S = sh and s = s/c

praNAm

----------

Shiva
Shankha
Shad-darshan (six darshans)
SharIr
ShambhU
shoka
shava
shantanu
shilpa

all sh

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

Namaste YajvanJi
The first time I heard Lord Shiva being called S'iva only here on HDF. All Indians in real life or in media (TV, Videos) pronounce it as Shiva with a SH as in shell, shoe, sharp.

This perhaps has been your experience. That said, it goes back to how śiva's name is written in saṃskṛtam as शिव. Due to this sibilant śa , is what initially started the conversation.
If śiva's name was written like this ṣiva षव , then shiva is the appropriate sound. The point being offered is the following: these 3 sounds are different pending the position of the tongue.

sa - is dantya or dental
ṣa - is mūrdhanya or cerebral
śa - is tālavya or palatal

Now that said my joytish teacher from Orissa goes out of his way to pronounce it śiva as mentioned. While spending time in Kanchipuram I heard it both ways, but needed to listen attentively to hear the slight difference.

If I look to various sources I use as pronunciation guides there is difficultly with trying to properly sound this śa by example; it easily falls into 'sh' , yet the guides say this is just an approximation. One guide that I respect suggests the sound is like the German sound 'ich' - this I can understand , others may not.


That said, I respect your views on the matter and appreciate your feedback and post.


praṇām

[Jainarayan]

Namaste good people.

Something we also have to consider is everyone's unique biomechanics in articulating sounds and enunciations. Some people simply can't form certain sounds, even being native speakers of the language. They try, but it just doesn't happen. And some people are more attuned to the nuances of sound than others. And then, some people are just lazy speakers.

And then, we have dialectal differences. People speak like those around them. I suspect that's the case in smaranam's example. Languages tend to move towards simplification. Sanskrit is a rich, highly inflected and nuanced language. Hindi and its relatives are less so. It's called "collapsing". Any system wants to move towards simplification. So, instead of two distinct phonemes: ṣa - is mūrdhanya or cerebral śa - is tālavya or palatal they've collapsed into the /sh/ phoneme of 'shoe' or 'shell'. It's quite a common phenomenon in linguistics.

This is all well and good for the common folk (that's how we got Hindi!), but because Sanskrit is a liturgical and holy language, one would think and hope that great care would be taken to preserve it as much as possible. I think that's the case.

[Jainarayan]

Now that said my joytish teacher from Orissa goes out of his way to pronounce it śiva as mentioned.

And people like that is exactly why Sanskrit is preserved pretty much unchanged... those who are educated in its nuances and requirements as a holy language will move Heaven and Earth to preserve it. Sanskrit is one of the very, very few languages that has remained virtually unchanged for milennia.

[smaranam]

Namaste Yajvanji

One guide that I respect suggests the sound is like the German sound 'ich' - this I can understand , others may not.

Ich verstehe "ich"

If that is the sound, then that is fine, and a subtle difference between the devnAgari letters :

1. sh (transliterated as z, no zee sound) श as in शिव ziva (This letter is usually used in the beginning of word: shAnti shankha shauNak, shaurya, shobhA )

2. sh (transliterated as capital S) ष as in पोषण poSaN (This letter is used in the middle/end, never as beginning syllable: AkarshaN, vishay, bhUshaN, santosh, piyush) - just observation

Since you said it is like "c'iva" i read it as cite, sieve, slope, smart. Surprisingly, many people without Indian language background, think Shiva is just plain siva - सिव with a स sound ! सिव Like saagar सागर, samudra समुद्र, sUrya सूर्य etc. I saw/heard that on YouTube - a video about pronunciation of Shiva. That is all I was objecting to.

praNAm

[Jainarayan]

Surprisingly, many people without Indian language background, think Shiva is just plain siva - सिव with a स sound ! सिव Like saagar सागर, samudra समुद्र, sUrya सूर्य etc.

Once upon a time I thought so too. In fact there are times I catch myself distinguishing between them when I see them written. Tha is, is the context referring to Lord Shiva or someone named Siva. I have a co-worker whose name is spelled Siva and pronounced Seeva. My presumption is that there is a name and pronunciation with the /s/ sound.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Regaeding S or Sh, I've often heard both, Siva, and Shiva, even in the same sentence from the same person. My question is where do people get the idea that this is the right way or the wrong way. On the larger grander scheme of things, does it really matter?

Personally, I usually use s, not sh, but it all depends on context. When in rome ....

Aum Namasivaya

[sm78]

Vannakkam: Regaeding S or Sh, I've often heard both, Siva, and Shiva, even in the same sentence from the same person. My question is where do people get the idea that this is the right way or the wrong way. On the larger grander scheme of things, does it really matter?

Personally, I usually use s, not sh, but it all depends on context. When in rome ....

Aum Namasivaya

Siva is just the tamilized version of Shiva.

[Jainarayan]

I'd think it would be important in liturgical usage if Sanskrit is being used (I know I mangled the spelling), but not necessarily in day to day usage.