George,
I agree, and the old commentary explains that mispronunciation of the sounds
(akkhara) makes it difficult to understand the meaning of the canonical
texts. The background is oral presentation of the suttantas. Interestingly,
there are parallels in the Pali canon. See, for instance, D III,128ff., and
A II 147,20: idha … bhikkhu duggahita.m suttanta.m pariyapu.nanti
dunnikkhittehi padabyañjanehi. dunnikkhittassa … padabyañjanassa attho pi
dunnayo hoti.
Notice that /hi/ of the commentary is to be construed with /tasmaa/. /hi/
functions syntactically as equivalent to /yasmaa/. The same usage is found
in Sanskrit commentarial literature: hi (= yasmaat) ... tasmaat ...
Ole
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Bedell" <gdbedell@...>
To: <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 4:48 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Kc 1
All,
Consider the English sentence (1):
(1) "The meaning is correctly known through the letters."
Pretend (for the sake of argument) that we don't know (a) that this is a
translation from Pali, (b) what the translated Pali words are, (c) what the
Sanskrit words are which correspond to them, (d) what later commentaries
have said about them, or (e) how they are defined or analyzed in Pali
dictionaries and grammars.
What does (1) tell us? First of all, it is talking about written, not
spoken language.. Maybe it is telling us to be careful in reading and
writing; if we don't know how to spell, we may misunderstand or cause others
to misunderstand.
What about (2); what does it tell us (those of us who know a little Pali and
are studying Kaccaayana)?
(2) Attho akkharasaññāto.
It isn't about written language or spelling at all, but a fairly profound
statement about the relation between sound and meaning either in Pali or (I
would like to think) in all languages, whether in pre-literate or literate
times. I propose (1') as a preferable translation of (2):
(1') "Meaning is known through sounds."
I have eliminated the definite article since this is the first statement in
the grammar, and there are no specific meanings or letters to which it
refers. And 'correctly' is redundant (since incorrect knowledge would not
be knowledge at all). We still need to ask exactly what Kaccaayana means by
(2), but to insist on 'letter' as opposed to 'sound' (for whatever reason)
still strikes me as mistaken.
I think this agrees with Ma Vajira when she said:
> We need to understand as much as possible what is written in Kaccaayana,
> but
> we also need to develop an English translation that is meaningful and
> practical.
* * * * *
George Bedell
230/5 Suan Lanna Village, Huay Kaew Road,
t. Chang Phuak, a. Muang
Chiang Mai 50300, Thailand
+66-53-414100
New Email names for you!
Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and
@rocketmail..
Hurry before someone else does!
http://mail.promotions.yahoo.com/newdomains/aa/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links