Sanskrit Discussion: Sanskrit Pronounciation Sources

Sanskrit Pronounciation Sources
Posts: 118

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)

Joachim Pense
2006-07-30 07:05:46 EST
Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?

Joachim

Ruud Harmsen
2006-07-30 07:39:21 EST
Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:05:46 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
in sci.lang:

>Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
>material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?

No audio/video, but this may be useful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit


--
Ruud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com

Joachim Pense
2006-07-30 10:46:15 EST
Am Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:39:21 +0200 schrieb Ruud Harmsen:

> Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:05:46 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
> in sci.lang:
>
>>Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
>>material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?
>
> No audio/video, but this may be useful:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit

Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
"voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?), and I think I'll just
have to hear the palatal unaspirated c, or the four-way distinction
voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.

Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
reading.

Joachim

Me
2006-07-30 11:27:46 EST
Joachim Pense wrote:

> Am Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:39:21 +0200 schrieb Ruud Harmsen:
>
>> Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:05:46 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
>> in sci.lang:
>>
>>>Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
>>>material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?
>>
>> No audio/video, but this may be useful:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit
>
> Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
> have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
> "voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?),

English "ham" and Malayalam "Rahel" use voiced h's; if they were unvoiced,
they would sound similar, although not identical, to the Hebrew
pronunciation of ch in Rachel and Chaim or the Arab pronunciation of h in
Ahmed.

> and I think I'll just
> have to hear the palatal unaspirated c,

You might not hear it from an Indian. It's usually pronounced as a gingival
affricate now, equivalent to Hanyu Pinyin c and further forward than the
alveolar affricate tS pronounced by native English speakers.

> or the four-way distinction
> voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.

k marking
kh Markham
g Margeret
gh "grass" pronouced with a French accent would probably be heard as ghAs by
a Hindiwala. If you're unfamiliar with French accents, ghoul has a
pronunciation in the range between g & something short of gh (i.e., the
range includes g and while it excludes gh, it includes sounds between g &
gh).

> Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
> reading.
>
> Joachim


Ruud Harmsen
2006-07-30 12:03:08 EST
Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:46:15 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
in sci.lang:

>Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
>have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
>"voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?),

Very different. English h is generally voiceless, the Dutch one is
voiced. Examples here:
http://www.rudhar.com/lingtics/intrdutc/dutch.htm
in words like huis, hoofd, hoed.
I don't know if the Sanskrit sounds are similar to that, I never heard
the language spoken, and learned there was a distinction only today.

>and I think I'll just
>have to hear the palatal unaspirated c,

Similar to the ch in English church, of tj in German tjüss, for lack
of something more accurate. Also Hungarian ty, Albanian q, Chainese j.

>or the four-way distinction
>voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.

Not difficult when you hear it.

Here are samples of the letters of Devanagari, based on Hindi:
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/indiangallery/devanagari.htm
(Hover mousepointer over Indian letter to see a Latin transcription,
click to hear it as wav).
>Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
>reading.

I think hearing is helpful, I couldn't do without it myself, when
learning unfamiliar sounds.

See also
http://sanskrit.farfromreal.com/index.php?x=writ_alpha
http://www.1destinyproductions.com/foreign-language-voices.php

--
Ruud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com

Peter T. Daniels
2006-07-30 12:49:45 EST

Joachim Pense wrote:
> Am Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:39:21 +0200 schrieb Ruud Harmsen:
>
> > Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:05:46 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
> > in sci.lang:
> >
> >>Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
> >>material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?
> >
> > No audio/video, but this may be useful:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit
>
> Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
> have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
> "voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?), and I think I'll just
> have to hear the palatal unaspirated c, or the four-way distinction
> voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.
>
> Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
> reading.

Surely by now you know better than to follow Ruud's wikipedia
"references"?

I don't know whether he knows any more about Sanskrit than he does
about Semitic, but he's clearly not competent to evaluate materials on
the latter, yet he sent someone to its Semitic article just today.


Joachim Pense
2006-07-30 13:18:41 EST
Am Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:03:08 +0200 schrieb Ruud Harmsen:

> Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:46:15 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
> in sci.lang:
>
>>Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
>>have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
>>"voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?),
>
> Very different. English h is generally voiceless, the Dutch one is
> voiced. Examples here:
> http://www.rudhar.com/lingtics/intrdutc/dutch.htm
> in words like huis, hoofd, hoed.

Sounds like a plain German h to me. Probably I've tin ears. Or is our
h voiced?

> I don't know if the Sanskrit sounds are similar to that, I never heard
> the language spoken, and learned there was a distinction only today.
>
>>and I think I'll just
>>have to hear the palatal unaspirated c,
>
> Similar to the ch in English church,

That sounds like an affricated t to me.

> of tj in German tjüss,
Hm, the word is "Tschüss".

> for lack
> of something more accurate. Also Hungarian ty, Albanian q, Chainese j.

I am not familiar with those sounds as well. Would it be just like a
palatalised vowel after a t or a k? Like Japanese "kyoo"?

Only I expected a single palatal sound here, the c, not a velar k plus
a palatal voiced affricate.

>
>>or the four-way distinction
>>voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.
>
> Not difficult when you hear it.

That's why I'm looking for a source.

>
> Here are samples of the letters of Devanagari, based on Hindi:
> http://www.latrobe.edu.au/indiangallery/devanagari.htm
> (Hover mousepointer over Indian letter to see a Latin transcription,
> click to hear it as wav).

Hey, that's what I'm looking for!!! Thanks! (BTW: ca and cha sound
just the same in my ears)


>>Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
>>reading.
>
> I think hearing is helpful, I couldn't do without it myself, when
> learning unfamiliar sounds.

You seem to have a special interest in phonetics. What do you normally
do to practise it? Talk and listen to people a lot?

>
> See also
> http://sanskrit.farfromreal.com/index.php?x=writ_alpha
> http://www.1destinyproductions.com/foreign-language-voices.php

Thank you for the sources!

Joachim

Joachim Pense
2006-07-30 13:29:55 EST
Am 30 Jul 2006 09:49:45 -0700 schrieb Peter T. Daniels:

> Joachim Pense wrote:
>> Am Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:39:21 +0200 schrieb Ruud Harmsen:
>>
>>> Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:05:46 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
>>> in sci.lang:
>>>
>>>>Are there audio (and/or video) sources on the net that provide
>>>>material on the pronounciation of Sanskrit?
>>>
>>> No audio/video, but this may be useful:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit
>>
>> Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
>> have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
>> "voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?), and I think I'll just
>> have to hear the palatal unaspirated c, or the four-way distinction
>> voiced/voiceless combined aspirated/unaspirated.
>>
>> Probably hearing is not very helpful, but maybe better than just
>> reading.
>
> Surely by now you know better than to follow Ruud's wikipedia
> "references"?
>

Why? It's only that I wanted an audio source, and the WP reference is
sort of - eh - obvious. (I must say the verbal endings in the dual
(present active) are given as vas, thas, tas in WP, where coulson has
vah., thah., tah., and the stress pattern ḱāmābhyām sounds wrong to
me (shouldn't it be kāḿābhyām according to the penultima rules? Or is
the accent given in WP Vedic?) But before I go into more detail with
that, I have to go on struggling with the sounds and the characters.

> I don't know whether he knows any more about Sanskrit than he does

It doesn't require competency in Sanskrit to point me to some sources
in the net, and in his second posting he did.

Joachim

Me
2006-07-30 13:40:33 EST
Ruud Harmsen wrote:

> Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:46:15 +0200: Joachim Pense <snob@pense-mainz.eu>:
> in sci.lang:
>
>>Thanks, but I think I'm just stuck with the descriptions; maybe I'll
>>have to buy a CD (I think there are some). I cannot make much of a
>>"voiced h" (what's the difference to a schwa?),
>
> Very different. English h is generally voiceless, the Dutch one is
> voiced.

They're both voiced. English h is more slackly voiced; the Dutch one is more
strongly voiced. Sanskrit pandits in India use a pronunciation like the
English one, not the Dutch one.


Me
2006-07-30 13:48:59 EST
Ruud Harmsen wrote:

> http://www.latrobe.edu.au/indiangallery/devanagari.htm

These pronunciations seem didactic; they're palatal or alveolopalatal. Most
Hindi speaker's pronunciations are, on the other hand, further forward than
the alveolopalatals in English. Compare, if you can, a Hindi speaker's
jangal with an Englishman's "jungle" (jungle came into English from Hindi
jangal).

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron