Dear Dimitry,

I was very happy to hear that the PTS was working on a new dictionary,
and the first volume of "A Pali Dictionary" by Ms. Margaret Cone is
very satisfying. The problem with the PED is its dogged commitment
to etymology. While the history of words has its place among the more
academic linguists, surely most of us amateurs read the texts for
their meaning. Ms. Cone's dictionary is much welcomed as it focuses
on meaning and usage instead of history.
As to Monier-Williams, wasn't the first edition published in 1851?
I see references to an Oxford reprint edition of 1899 but I'm not sure
this is the same thing you are referring to.

Best Wishes,
Paul O Cuana


--- In Pali@..., "äÍÉÔÒÉÊ áÌÅËÓÅÅ×ÉÞ é×ÁÈÎÅÎËÏ (Dimitry A.
Ivakhnenko)" <koleso@...> wrote:

> Reconstructing rare Pali word on the basis of Sanskrit equivalent

is a

> common practice widely used by "paliglots", including Mr Rhys Davids
> himself.
>
> When PED was compiled in the beginning of 20th century, such

resources

> as Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary didn't exist yet. So we

should

> use such resources wisely in difficult cases.