Re: 'dyeus' chronology

Richard,
Please look at the devnagari script spelling in the dictionary and not at the english transliteration. There is no "m" in it is "n". My spelling in english is how it would be pronounced, syllabically. Next question is how it would be represented in a syllabic script. The "rt" would sound like english "rut" and hence the "u". Similarly the "i" could either be a "u" as in english "sun" or "i" as in english "sin" based on the dialect of the speaker.

-Shivraj

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "shivkhokra" <shivkhokra@> wrote:
> > Have you tried consulting a sanskrit dictionary and did you not find "sinhrutra" meaning destroyer?
>
> When I try Monier-Williams on-line ( http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/monier/ ), I don't find it either. The nearest we can find is saMhartR - no <i>, no <u>. The word's in the middle column of http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/monier/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw1123-saMhita.jpg .
>
> Now, we can see mechanisms by which _saMhartR_ might become "sinhrutra" over the years - /saM/ > /siG/ (G = velar nasal) is a plausible change, but younger than Indic writing so far as I can tell. The change of /R/ > /ru/ is attested in the South Indian tradition, so all that is need is an analogical change of /ar/ to /R/. However, these do not make "sinhrutra" Sanskrit.
>
> Richard.
>