Re: 'dyeus' chronology

No Brian they are not irrelevant. All ansuvars in Harvard Kyoto are written as an "M" and they are not pronounced "M". My example distinguish these cases.

Secondly in another post I have requested Dr Brighenti to show us how each of the sanskrit words would be pronounced syllabically so that we can understand if he knows anusvar phonetics.

Regards,
Shivraj

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <bm.brian@...> wrote:
>
> At 5:55:02 AM on Tuesday, March 8, 2011, shivkhokra wrote:
>
> > Dear Dr Brighenti,
>
> > Pronunciation of anusvar sound in sanskrit word "Sundhi"
> > <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF#Sans\
> > krit>> (meaning junction) (it is *not* pronounced rhyming with english
> > word "sand" as one might believe reading the english spelling)
>
> Irrelevant.
>
> > and the sanskrit words "sunghar or singhar"
> > <http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.6:1:40.apte>
> > (meaning destruction) and "sunhrutra or sinhrutra"
> > <http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.6:1:39.apte>
> > (meaning destroyer) is *identical* and the sound one would
> > hear is an "n" sound. In otherwords the anusvar ("the dot
> > character in devnagari") corresponds with the letter "n"
> > in the syllabic spellings given above.
>
> Also irrelevant.
>
> > In contrast the anusvar in RV 1.1.1
> > <http://tinyurl.com/rv111> is pronounced differently and
> > the words "Purohitam" and "Hotaram" (just look for the two
> > words with "." above them in the first sukta) are spelt
> > syllabically with m sound as I have written.
>
> Yet more irrelevance. Francesco addressed examples of this
> type in his post.
>
> > You have just proved my assertion of anusvar understanding
> > given in the previous post.
>
> One the contrary, you've just proved that you didn't
> understand what Francesco wrote, and you're starting to make
> a good case that your understanding of anusvAra is weak.
>
> Brian
>