3 ms·
Sanskrit is interesting because all symbols are direct phonetic representations. If you hear a sound, you know how to write it. This is why it was able to be su
by prox 6y ago
Sanskrit is interesting because all symbols are direct phonetic representations. If you hear a sound, you know how to write it. This is why it was able to be super effective at keeping the texts intact through centuries of passing down texts orally.
- mkl 6y agoSanskrit has the big advantage for that purpose of being "dead" (not taught as a first language), so its existence is academic and pronunciation is relatively fixed through time; Latin would be similar, and its alphabet, this one we're typing, is a good phonetic representation. The pronunciation of "living" languages changes quite a bit. Most languages with phonetic writing systems (alphabet, abugida, syllabary, etc., but not pure abjad [1]) have direct phonetic representations. English, French, and a few other European languages are unusual. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abjad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abjad
- prox 6y agoBesides being dead as a reason for it being fixed, I think it might also reflect the high reliance on the oral transmission of texts (which your excellent examples I hadn’t heard about emphasize) The name for learning (sacred) texts in Sanskrit is “shruti” , that which is heard. Sanskrit grammar did change over time, at least until Panini wrote down the rules around the 6th century bc.
- prox 6y agoAlso, something I just remembered, in vedic rituals there is actually a priest present who checks if the ritual and the sanskrit recitation is correct. This is also a reason we still have access to vedic sanskrit and we can be confident in its transmission accuracy afaik.