corrections for verses

[funderburkjim]

@Andhrabharati would you post your corrections to the Sanskrit verses for volumes 2 and 3 and supplement?

[Andhrabharati]

I did only volume-2 those days and waiting for Sampada to finish her work, taking that you won't be touching my file even if I post it earlier.

Probably I can do volume-3 as well and give it to you.

[funderburkjim]

Sampada is working on volume 2, but it is going slowly. Go ahead and post your work now while you are thinking of it.

Would be glad to get volume 3 also, if you want to spend the time to do that.

[Andhrabharati]

@funderburkjim just seen that Sampada has finished her work on volume-2 today.

And here is my boesp-2 file for comparison as before-- boesp-2_deva_AB.txt

But before you compare the files, you need to

1. do the additional 4-liner splits at S.3077 & S.3359, which are missed in your file and also in Sampada's work.
2. delete the first (duplicate) line at S.3996
3. note the print change at S.4029, which makes the verse properly match the meter of AryA.
4. add the <HS> text as L-4041.1, page 2.374

Otherwise, these changes would make the files mismatch at all those places; and of course the total line count differs, which is the first item that you would comment upon.

[funderburkjim]

@Andhrabharati There is now a first difference for volume 2 between your form and that of @sanskritisampada. 174 lines with differences. See boesp-2_deva_diff1.txt.

Request that you prepare a revision of boesp-2_deva_AB.txt.

When this revision is received, I'll generate a second diff for review by Sampada.

Notes:

1. Noted the 'print change' comment at L="4029"
2. Not sure how to handle the 'Calembourg.' item which you suggested to be a new HS at 4041.1. This word currently appears (in the digitization) in a footnote for 4041. Will request opinion of @thomasincambodia .

[Andhrabharati]

I cannot understand how the "Calembourg" could be in a Footnote!

[funderburkjim]

Yes, I'm not sure why the word is currently in a footnote. By print position, it is similar to 'HS' But it doesn't look like the typical 'HS' either.

Calembour (without the 'g') seems to be a French word meaning 'play on words'; not sure if this is a relevant observation.

Would like to get Thomas's opinion.

[Andhrabharati]

I am writing my notes against each difference marked, and hopefully be posting before I retire for the day.

[Andhrabharati]

@funderburkjim Just finished looking at the marked differences.

And, here is the differences file with AB comments added-- boesp-2_deva_diff1 (AB comments).txt

The summary is- 'NO change' cases : 139

1. AB version is correct at 136 places. [Print correction at S.4029 not made, though mentioned as 'noted' by Jim.]
2. At 3 places, the space within a samAsa word is deleted by AB, as a std. practice, and would like to retain as such.

'To change' cases: 33

1. AB is wrong at 20 places.
2. AB has made unintended corrections at 4 HS places.
3. At 9 places, AB has made the anusvAra as n, which can be reverted, without causing any syntactical error.

'To decide by debating' cases: 2 S.2495 and S.2743 ----------------- I would suggest going for Sampada's review also, for the same diff1 file given to me. [As such, I did not correct/revise my file yet.] Let her also see/know what obvious mistakes AB has made.

[Andhrabharati]

@funderburkjim

On a 2nd thought, I agree that it is better to revise my file to save Sampada's time.

Here are the revised boesp-2 file and diff1 file with AB comments-- boesp-2_deva_AB (revised).txt boesp-2_deva_diff1 (AB comments) -revised.txt

As I was incorporating the corrections, seen that I had wrongly commented at one or two places in the night (sleepy!!?) and now they all stand corrected.

[Andhrabharati]

Further revision remarks--

1. My comment at S.2918 seems to be a hasty one; the text न्विदम् does exist. So my file needs correction here.
2. The print correction for S.3198 is mentioned in the VN2/VN3 pages.

[maltenth]

Yes, I'm not sure why the word is currently in a footnote. By print position, it is similar to 'HS' But it doesn't look like the typical 'HS' either.

Calembour (without the 'g') seems to be a French word meaning 'play on words'; not sure if this is a relevant observation.

Would like to get Thomas's opinion.

Calembourg is just a spelling variant of Calembour.

@Andhrabharati

It is a sort of commentary by B., but not on verse no. 4041 but on 4042 and should therefore be shifted to the footnote of 4042.

---

A calembour is a play on words based on similar sounds and differences in meaning, - a pun -, very common in French and English. In German puns are rarely not looked down upon. This is expressed by the word Kalauer (actually derived from Calembour) 'corny pun', 'groaner'.

The reference is to natayA 'bent' versus na tayA 'not him (Dat.)' in the second line of 4042. (I don't know whether this creation of different meanings by deliberately splitting a Sanskrit word is part of the definition of śleṣa as a poetic device but if so then possibly it is not as common as śleṣa produced by multiple meanings of a single word?)

How did Calembourg get into boesp? My guess is when boesp was to be printed, B.'s index cards (with Calembourg written on top of the card/slip 4042) were turned over to the typesetter for composing and later the proofreader failed to remove Calembourg in the galley proofs.

[Andhrabharati]

I don't know whether this creation of different meanings by deliberately splitting a Sanskrit word is part of the definition of śleṣa as a poetic device but if so then possibly it is not as common as śleṣa produced by multiple meanings of a single word?

Yes, it is a kind of citrakavita as it is called. As we all know, there were no 'spaces' in the 'early' manuscripts, and the words are to be split by the conscious reader. And there is the possibility of the letters to be split to different words, to render different meanings.

And thank you @thomasincambodia, for your explanation. [I did not look in detail into the text matter yet; otherwise I would also have got the point myself.]

[sanskritisampada]

Revised boesp2 and sent Corrected & Comments file to Jim.

[funderburkjim]

@sanskritisampada Got your work, and am examining now.

[Andhrabharati]

@funderburkjim

Noted that almost all my suggestions were incorporated in the files thus far, except one major one.

This prompts me to take up the remaining vol.3 verses file now; and also I have a moral responsibility to share a hand, as I had pulled you to do this boesp work as a linkable target!

Expect to finish in about 5-6 days' time, and keep ready to post when Sampada finishes her work.

And seen that the full data (xml form) [incl. Footnotes, Greek text etc.] is now available in Devanagari as well, which I had asked you to make long back. When is this done?

[Andhrabharati]

Would be glad to get volume 3 also, if you want to spend the time to do that.

@funderburkjim I had finished proofing the volume 3 verses and closing this issue now.