4 ms·

Taleb says that some languages are only meant for ritual. IMHO, Sanskrit quotes sound cool to those who know Prakrit languages just like Latin and Greek quotat

Taleb says that some languages are only meant for ritual. IMHO, Sanskrit quotes sound cool to those who know Prakrit languages just like Latin and Greek quotations sound cool to those who know Romance languages (and even to those who know English, like myself). Yes, there is a revival, and an interest. But Sanskrit has always been known to the "priestly" class even though they never conversed in it. This new revival is not going to lead to actual communication, just a lot of visual art based on the script and quotations. IMHO.

alephnerd 3mo ago
> This new revival is not going to lead to actual communication, just a lot of visual art based on the script and quotations This, but also social sciences and interdisciplinary research (especially in the NLP, CompLing, and ML space).
smokeyfish 3mo ago
There's always Lithuanian.
- alephnerd 3mo ago
  Or Koshur - it still retains archaic word forms, syntax, and roots that fell out of other Indo-Iranian languages.
- ralfd 3mo ago
  Context?
  - cyberax 3mo ago
    It's a small language that has everything: a complicated case system, genders, a unique vocabulary, and even freaking tones.
    - senderista 3mo ago
      A famous example (similar to the ones you can find between West Frisian and modern English): Vedic Sanskrit: Devas adadat datas; Devas dat dhanas. Lithuanian: Dievas davė dantis; Dievas duos duonos. English Translation: God gave teeth; God will give bread.
      - senderista 3mo ago
        Just to save anyone the trouble of a web search: West Frisian: Bûter, brea, en griene tsiis is goed Ingelsk en goed Frysk. Modern English: Butter, bread, and green cheese is good English and good Frisian.
  - ivewonyoung 3mo ago
    Lithuanian underwent fewer changes than other European languages languages from the same root language that begat all the proto-Indo-European languages. So it shares a lot of similar words with Sanskrit which is extremely well preserved. https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2/C4D22AQGncdnVV2H6Mg/feedshare-shrink_800/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1621783194676?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=HrHsO8Ukdu3EK5hH6OytMfo4qFyD-u-7FMT-e1Ytu98 https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2/C4D22AQGncdnVV2H6Mg/fee... Other languages like English mutated too much so it shares fewer similarities to Sanskrit.
FlyingSnake 3mo ago
The majority of surviving Sanskrit literature is actually secular like Poems, Dramas, science and mathematics. Sanskrit was widely spoken and understood just like Latin or Avestan, in its heyday. Otherwise it wouldn’t be part of the liturgical traditions of Buddhism, Jainism and Nastika traditions. Why would Sudraka,Vatsayana, Brhathari write in Sanskrit if no one spoke it?
- busymom0 3mo ago
  I grew up in India and till grade 8 (or 9? Can't remember), it was mandatory for me to take Sanskrit lessons along with English and Hindi.
  - leosanchez 3mo ago
    Our state only had Sanskrit in 10, 11 and 12 and it was not taught properly.
- ashishb 3mo ago
  > Sanskrit was widely spoken and understood just like Latin or Avestan, in its heyday. Otherwise it wouldn’t be part of the liturgical traditions of Buddhism, Jainism and Nastika traditions. I think, and it is just my speculation, that for most of Indian History, Sanskrit was the link language. Just like "Latin" in the USA and Europe of the early 17th and 18th centuries, when all academic instructions were carried out in Latin! So, nobody used Sanskrit as the primary language, but everyone could or knew someone who could convert Sanskrit to the local dialect. It is almost like how Chinese and Colombian traders might sign a contract for coffee purchase in English. Neither might use English in most of their daily operations.
  - DiscourseFan 3mo ago
    Yes this makes a lot of sense, if I recall correctly the first grammar of Telegu was written in Sanskrit, and many South India languages use a lot of Sanskrit words, but of course they are not intelligible if you don't know the grammar.
  - 3mo ago
lioeters 3mo ago
The revival of Hebrew is a counter example, of a "ritual" language that managed to become a practical daily language for written and spoken communication.
- DiscourseFan 3mo ago
  Biblical Hebrew has no vowel markings (well it does, but they are an interpretation), so it cannot be used in daily speech. Modern Hebrew is distinct from Biblical Hebrew. Sanskrit itself does not have much use as an actual language because it lacks a lot of the features that, say, Hindi or English or Ancient Greek have, it has 7 past tenses that are basically identical and it does not make fine distinctions between moods, which it does not have enough of. Only Vedic Sanskrit could actually be used as a language, but similarly to Ancient Greek there are relatively few extant texts in Vedic Sanskrit and certainly the task of learning the language to fluency would be monstrous compared to studying a living language; and one that few, if any, would be willing to devote their life towards, especially considering that Classical Sanskrit already works fine enough as a literary language and is only so practical for that purpose because it has such a strictly defined grammar.
  - lioeters 3mo ago
    I see, very interesting, thanks! I've been curious about Sanskrit "indirectly" from learning about root words in Slavic (and other) languages, as they call it proto-Indo-European roots. Similarly with ancient Greek or Latin, I enjoy learning the etymology of many of the words in modern languages like Spanish, French, etc.
  - dinkelberg 3mo ago
    > Biblical Hebrew has no vowel markings (well it does, but they are an interpretation), so it cannot be used in daily speech. Modern Hebrew is distinct from Biblical Hebrew The same can be said about Latin (of which we do not exactly know how they used to pronounce words), or any other language. How to pronounce letters or words is always "interpretation" (or more accurately, tradition).
ColdStream 3mo ago
My favorite use of Sankrit is the plant 'Ashwagandha'. Sounds fancy but it means 'Smell of a horse' as that is what it smells like.
ccgreg 3mo ago
It's kind of interesting that you contradict much of what the article concludes, even though the article gives a lot of examples. Maybe your prediction will be true.

alephnerd 3mo ago

> This new revival is not going to lead to actual communication, just a lot of visual art based on the script and quotations This, but also social sciences and interdisciplinary research (especially in the NLP, CompLing, and ML space).

smokeyfish 3mo ago

There's always Lithuanian.

alephnerd 3mo ago
Or Koshur - it still retains archaic word forms, syntax, and roots that fell out of other Indo-Iranian languages.
ralfd 3mo ago
Context?
- cyberax 3mo ago
  It's a small language that has everything: a complicated case system, genders, a unique vocabulary, and even freaking tones.
  - senderista 3mo ago
    A famous example (similar to the ones you can find between West Frisian and modern English): Vedic Sanskrit: Devas adadat datas; Devas dat dhanas. Lithuanian: Dievas davė dantis; Dievas duos duonos. English Translation: God gave teeth; God will give bread.
    - senderista 3mo ago
      Just to save anyone the trouble of a web search: West Frisian: Bûter, brea, en griene tsiis is goed Ingelsk en goed Frysk. Modern English: Butter, bread, and green cheese is good English and good Frisian.
- ivewonyoung 3mo ago
  Lithuanian underwent fewer changes than other European languages languages from the same root language that begat all the proto-Indo-European languages. So it shares a lot of similar words with Sanskrit which is extremely well preserved. https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2/C4D22AQGncdnVV2H6Mg/feedshare-shrink_800/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1621783194676?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=HrHsO8Ukdu3EK5hH6OytMfo4qFyD-u-7FMT-e1Ytu98 https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2/C4D22AQGncdnVV2H6Mg/fee... Other languages like English mutated too much so it shares fewer similarities to Sanskrit.

FlyingSnake 3mo ago

The majority of surviving Sanskrit literature is actually secular like Poems, Dramas, science and mathematics. Sanskrit was widely spoken and understood just like Latin or Avestan, in its heyday. Otherwise it wouldn’t be part of the liturgical traditions of Buddhism, Jainism and Nastika traditions. Why would Sudraka,Vatsayana, Brhathari write in Sanskrit if no one spoke it?

busymom0 3mo ago
I grew up in India and till grade 8 (or 9? Can't remember), it was mandatory for me to take Sanskrit lessons along with English and Hindi.
- leosanchez 3mo ago
  Our state only had Sanskrit in 10, 11 and 12 and it was not taught properly.
ashishb 3mo ago
> Sanskrit was widely spoken and understood just like Latin or Avestan, in its heyday. Otherwise it wouldn’t be part of the liturgical traditions of Buddhism, Jainism and Nastika traditions. I think, and it is just my speculation, that for most of Indian History, Sanskrit was the link language. Just like "Latin" in the USA and Europe of the early 17th and 18th centuries, when all academic instructions were carried out in Latin! So, nobody used Sanskrit as the primary language, but everyone could or knew someone who could convert Sanskrit to the local dialect. It is almost like how Chinese and Colombian traders might sign a contract for coffee purchase in English. Neither might use English in most of their daily operations.
- DiscourseFan 3mo ago
  Yes this makes a lot of sense, if I recall correctly the first grammar of Telegu was written in Sanskrit, and many South India languages use a lot of Sanskrit words, but of course they are not intelligible if you don't know the grammar.
- 3mo ago

lioeters 3mo ago

The revival of Hebrew is a counter example, of a "ritual" language that managed to become a practical daily language for written and spoken communication.

DiscourseFan 3mo ago
Biblical Hebrew has no vowel markings (well it does, but they are an interpretation), so it cannot be used in daily speech. Modern Hebrew is distinct from Biblical Hebrew. Sanskrit itself does not have much use as an actual language because it lacks a lot of the features that, say, Hindi or English or Ancient Greek have, it has 7 past tenses that are basically identical and it does not make fine distinctions between moods, which it does not have enough of. Only Vedic Sanskrit could actually be used as a language, but similarly to Ancient Greek there are relatively few extant texts in Vedic Sanskrit and certainly the task of learning the language to fluency would be monstrous compared to studying a living language; and one that few, if any, would be willing to devote their life towards, especially considering that Classical Sanskrit already works fine enough as a literary language and is only so practical for that purpose because it has such a strictly defined grammar.
- lioeters 3mo ago
  I see, very interesting, thanks! I've been curious about Sanskrit "indirectly" from learning about root words in Slavic (and other) languages, as they call it proto-Indo-European roots. Similarly with ancient Greek or Latin, I enjoy learning the etymology of many of the words in modern languages like Spanish, French, etc.
- dinkelberg 3mo ago
  > Biblical Hebrew has no vowel markings (well it does, but they are an interpretation), so it cannot be used in daily speech. Modern Hebrew is distinct from Biblical Hebrew The same can be said about Latin (of which we do not exactly know how they used to pronounce words), or any other language. How to pronounce letters or words is always "interpretation" (or more accurately, tradition).

ColdStream 3mo ago

My favorite use of Sankrit is the plant 'Ashwagandha'. Sounds fancy but it means 'Smell of a horse' as that is what it smells like.

ccgreg 3mo ago

It's kind of interesting that you contradict much of what the article concludes, even though the article gives a lot of examples. Maybe your prediction will be true.