search

sanskrit-lexicon / MWS

Monier Monier-Williams, Sir; A Sanskrit-English dictionary. Oxford, 1899
Other
7 stars 5 forks source link

Capital letter words #121

Closed funderburkjim closed 2 years ago

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

This issue a placeholder for following up suggestion in #120 regarding this list of Capital letter words.

This list might have several uses, one of which is to search for unmarked ls references.

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

yes, these words do include some untagged ”bot" words as well!

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Examining the capwords.txt list of words unearthed many errors and awkward codings in the mw.txt digitization.

About 2000 changes have been made to mw.txt as a result of this examination.

The LOG section of the readme.txt file of capword_changes folder, provides a summary of the changes. The change_1.txt file has the detailed change transactions.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

help wanted

In the course of developing the changes to mw, several additions were made to the abbreviations and the literary sources for mw. In some of these (esp. the ls additions), I made a suggestion for the tooltip, and in a very few could make no reasonable guess. These are marked with << help wanted in the readme file. Request others to check my work, especially in these items, and provide improvements as warranted.

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

A quick look at the << entries in the readme file resulted in this- response to readme entries.txt

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

And in the <ab> list,

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Some more << entries checked- response-2 to readme entries.txt

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

O. S. -> O.S. unmarked abbrev (1) <<< tooltip help wanted: 171842854,1yuga It is 'o. s.', not 'O. S.' A "remote" possibility could be "old system" as used in chronological citations. [Just for ref.- Handy_book_of_rules_and_tables_for_verifying_dates.pdf]

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

It is 'B n.', not 'Bn.' Could it be B(ombay ed.) n(ote) [of the Pañcatantra]?

(From response-2... file)

By context, the 'n.' is probably 'neuter' . Not sure of 'B', possibly 'Bombay' Changed markup to

<s>durga/</s> ¦ <lex>n.</lex> 
(<lex type="hwalt">m.</lex> only <ls>Pañc. v, 76</ls>; <ab n="Bombay?">B</ab> <ab>n.</ab>) 
a difficult or narrow passage, a place difficult of access, citadel, stronghold (
<ab>cf.</ab> <s>ab-</s>, <s>giri-</s> &c.)
funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Rec. agree Recension.

Not sure about SivaP. Rev. is SkandaP(urāṇa). Rev(ākhaṇḍa), so have not changed.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Pan. unmarked ls ? << help wanted print error for Pāṇ.? <L>74573<pc>400,1<k1>cud Seems probably to be Pāṇ.

(from response-2... file)

Made print change to <ls>Pāṇ.</ls>

S << help wanted <L>74857<pc>401,2<k1>cUlA (<ab>ifc.</ab>; <s>cOla</s>, S) Could it be Śūdradh(arma), as at चौल?

Agree. Changed markup to

<L>74857<pc>401,2<k1>cUlA<k2>cUlA<e>1B
¦ the tonsure ceremony, <ls>Ragh. iii, 28</ls> 
(<ab>ifc.</ab>; <s>cOla</s>, <ab n="Śūdradh(arma)">Ś</ab>)<info lex="inh"/>

and noted as print change (S -> Ś).

V. -> W. unmarked ls (1) << <L>75248<pc>403,2<k1>cOli<k2>cOli<e>2 What are B and V ? B seems to be for Bohtlingk's text of Pravarādhyāya. (cf. the prev. entry) and does V stand for variant?

Agree with B. Change markup to 

<s>cOli</s> ¦ <lex>m.</lex> = <s>cOqi</s>, <ls>vi, i</ls> 
(<s>°lakAyana</s> <ab n="Boehtlingk text of Pravarādhyāya (?)">B</ab>, <s>°lika</s> V). <info lex="m"/>
funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

O. S.

First, did change to lower case, per text. Second, found reference to 'o.s.' = 'old style' for dates in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Style_and_New_Style_dates

and will use 'old style' as as 'local' abbreviation in the yuga entry:

while the <s1 slp1="kali">Kali</s1>, which began at midnight between the 17th and 18th of 
<ab>Feb.</ab> 3102 <ab>B.C.</ab> [<ab n="Old Style">o.s.</ab>], is that in which we live
funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

for Windisch ?? << help wanted. <L>14876<pc>85,3<k1>ayAsya, I used tooltip 'Ernst Wilhelm Oskar Windisch' instead of suggested 'Friedrich Heinrich Hugo Windischmann' ( cf. `response to...' file above).

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Them. Thema or base (from MW72) What does 'Thema or base' mean?

Goth. ais, Thema aisa

Used 'Thema or base' as suggested.

But what does it mean?

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Three remaining puzzles

Thanks @Andhrabharati for the detailed suggestions. 👍 I think all are now resolved except for these:

Hpar. -> ls unmarked (2)  (variant of HPariś., Hemacandra's pariSizwaparvan ?)
   << help wanted tooltip >1639<pc>8,1<k1>aNgArakArin
EDITED NOTE: This is NOT a remaining puzzle

V unmarked ls (1)
 << <L>75248<pc>403,2<k1>cOli<k2>cOli<e>2  What is V ?
???

VRJ. unmarked ls (1) tooltip=? << help wanted tooltip
   <L>84423<pc>444,2<k1>tArukzAyaRi
???
Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Not sure about SivaP. Rev. is SkandaP(urāṇa). Rev(ākhaṇḍa), so have not changed.

Suggest looking for tIrTa (slp1), where Revākh. occurs 27 times; and this Revākhaṇḍa is a part of SkandaPurāṇa.

Of course. the tIrTa entry occurs in many books incl. Mahābhārata etc. also.

As ŚivaP. also ocuurs quite many times, probably it can be retained as is; but Rev. does indicate Rev(ākhaṇḍa) only!! [May be those tIrTas are mentioned in both ŚivaP. & Rev(ākhaṇḍa), not sure; but then, there must be a semicolon between two diff. sources which is absent in the print.]

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

I guess you might've skipped this in my response-2 file, @funderburkjim

Hpar. -> ls unmarked (2) (variant of HPariś., Hemacandra's pariSizwaparvan ?) << help wanted tooltip >16398,1aNgArakArin It is also known as Sthavira Valicarita Or ( Parisishtaparva) Of Hemchandra

Or are you not fully convinced about this?

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Not sure about SivaP. Rev. is SkandaP(urāṇa). Rev(ākhaṇḍa), so have not changed.

Suggest looking for tIrTa (slp1), where Revākh. occurs 27 times; and this Revākhaṇḍa is a part of SkandaPurāṇa.

Of course. the tIrTa entry occurs in many books incl. Mahābhārata etc. also.

As ŚivaP. also ocuurs quite many times, probably it can be retained as is; but Rev. does indicate Rev(ākhaṇḍa) only!! [May be those tIrTas are mentioned in both ŚivaP. & Rev(ākhaṇḍa), not sure; but then, there must be a semicolon between two diff. sources which is absent in the print.]

I was wrong here!

Just looked at the PWG entry,

image

and found that the Aufrecht catalogue has the clue.

It is Revāmāhātmyam of ŚivaP. that is meant here.

p.64 for the Revāmāhātmyam- image

and p.67B for आखाटीश्वरतीर्थ- image

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

I could not digest that I was wrong here, so looked closely at the Aufrecht's catalogue again and found that the sections 114 to 126 all belong to Skandapurana only (Revamahatmyam, Gayamahatmyam, Kasikhanda, ...)

As the page title is Sivapurana marked wrongly here, it is taken as such by MW. PWG played safe by just mentioning the page no.s for these tIrTas listed under section 114 (Revamahatmyam).

So I take back my words above, and go with my original posts.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Hpar

As I read your comment, you agree with tooltip 'hemacandra pariSizwaparvan' for Hpar., which is the same tooltip as for 'HPariś.'.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Still uncertain about SivaP. Rev. First point - It occurs 6 times in MW, all without the ';', 

6 matches for "Rev\." in buffer: mw.txt
  57258:<s>arjune<srs/>Svara-tIrTa</s> ¦ <lex>n.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a <s1 slp1="tIrTa">Tīrtha</s1>, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="n"/>
  70879:<s>aSoke<srs/>Svara-tIrTa</s> ¦ <lex>n.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a <s1 slp1="tIrTa">Tīrtha</s1>, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="n"/>
  71785:<s>a/Sva—parRI</s> ¦ <lex>f.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a river, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="f"/>
  72379:<s>a/SvA-vatI</s> ¦ <lex>f.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a river, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="f"/>
  78274:<s>ahalye<srs/>Svara-tIrTa</s> ¦ <lex>n.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a <s1 slp1="tIrTa">Tīrtha</s1>, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="n"/>
  81959:<s>ANgirase<srs/>Svara-tIrTa</s> ¦ <lex>n.</lex> <ab>N.</ab> of a <s1 slp1="tIrTa">Tīrtha</s1>, <ls>ŚivaP. <ab>Rev.</ab></ls><info lex="n"/>

ākhāṭīśvaratīrtha in MW only has reference to ŚivaP. not to ŚivaP. Rev.

RevāKh. (revākhaṇḍa)has 30 references in MW.

Do you have a link for the two scanned images shown above?

Why do you say the title śivapurāṇa in those images is a printing error?

<ls>ŚivaP. Rev.</ls> == śivapurāṇa revāmāhātmya looks like the most likely explanation. (Is śivapurāṇa revāmāhātmya actually the name of a work?

gasyoun commented 2 years ago

Used 'Thema or base' as suggested.

But what does it mean?

Thema = a

emicolon between two diff. sources which is absent in the print

Agree @Andhrabharati

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

ākhāṭīśvaratīrtha in MW only has reference to ŚivaP. not to ŚivaP. Rev.

I now extend my comment about MW error of ŚivaP. Rev. to all 57 occurrences of ŚivaP. wrt the -tIrTa HWs.

They all should be made SkandaP. as they are from the Revamahatmyam (which is one of 7 sections of SkandaP.) which exclusively talks about the tIrTas in the AryAvarta region (ancient India).

This clearly strengthens the argument of people who say MW has mostly relied on secondary sources, than the primary sources for his references! [It is very rare that Aufrecht had erred in his works; his catalogues were (and still are) the most widely acclaimed works for the Skt. manuscripts across the globe.]

You can have a look at wiki entries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Purana and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanda_Purana to get the section names in Siva and Skanda Puranas.

[My posts are based on whatever little knowledge I have gained looking at the Primary texts themselves!]

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Is śivapurāṇa revāmāhātmya actually the name of a work?

There is no such work ever existed in the literature!

Revakhanda/Revamahatmya is the section in SkandaPurana. [There is a tale behind the listing of all the tIrTas in here; once there was a competition between Ganesa and Skanda, due to which Skanda has roamed across the globe visiting all the tIrTas. And Ganesa has won it, just by making three pradakshinas around his parents (Siva & Parvati).]

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Hpar

As I read your comment, you agree with tooltip 'hemacandra pariSizwaparvan' for Hpar., which is the same tooltip as for 'HPariś.'.

What I meant is, this need not be listed under "remaining puzzles"!

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Do you have a link for the two scanned images shown above?

I gave the link in PWG, while I was on the <ls> work in it few months back. https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/PWG/issues/37#issuecomment-882338955

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

I guess, in the mwauth.txt, the following does not give a "meaningful" expansion- Wh. Wh. au <expandNorm>Whitney, W. D. (1872). [Cologne Addition]</expandNorm>

It should've been "Whitney, W. D. (1872), Müller's Rig-Veda translation"; [Whitney's review(?) in 1872, on (Max) Müller's Rig-Veda translation]

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

What I meant is, this (Hpar) need not be listed under "remaining puzzles"

Agree

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Do you have a link to Whitney's review(?) in 1872, on (Max) Müller's Rig-Veda , and further do you find word 'Asamsaya' in the link to the document? We need to examine this before revising the 'Wh.' tooltip as you suggest.

Here is the digitization where the sole 'Wh.' literary source markup occurs in MW:

<div n="to"/><ab>Caus.</ab> (<ab>Impv.</ab> <s>A/-SaMsaya</s>, 
<ls>RV. i, 29, 1</ls> and [with <ls>Wh.</ls> and <ls>Ro.</ls>] <ls>AV. xix, 64, 4</ls>) 
to excite, hope for.<info verb="pre" cp="PĀ" parse="A+SaMs"/>

In RV i,29,1 link we find śaṃsaya (but not āśaṃsaya); and no form of śaṃs is found in AV. xix, 64, 4.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Your observations regarding the SivaP references in tIrTa headwords are quite interesting; sort of a 'tip of the iceberg' kind of situation. I think further reflection and study is needed before making corrections or changes to various entries. So I'm opening a separate issue just on this topic.

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Do you have a link to Whitney's review(?) in 1872, on (Max) Müller's Rig-Veda , and further do you find word 'Asamsaya' in the link to the document?

I have traced the scan of Whitney's book (Oriental and Linguistic Studies, 1872) containing the above mentioned article (chapter)- "Müller's Rig-veda translation".

Let me check it and come back on the point.

gasyoun commented 2 years ago

Is the Leṭ case similar, to be tooltipped?

let

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

Do you have a link to Whitney's review(?) in 1872, on (Max) Müller's Rig-Veda , and further do you find word 'Asamsaya' in the link to the document?

I have traced the scan of Whitney's book (Oriental and Linguistic Studies, 1872) containing the above mentioned article (chapter)- "Müller's Rig-veda translation".

Let me check it and come back on the point.

@funderburkjim,

Looked at the Whitney's book (Oriental and Linguistic Studies, 1872), and there is no reference to the said word anywhere in it.

So, looked back at the MW entry again to see that I went in a wrong track linking Wh. and Ro. to the preceding RV citation [skipping the word 'and'], instead of to the following AV citation.

Then found that Atharvaveda Samhita by Rudolf von Roth, William Dwight Whitney is being referred here. (Ro. = Roth)

See the snap from this work- image

[from https://archive.org/details/AtharvaVedaSanhitaTextVolume1/page/n402/mode/1up] [Another scan at https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.70884/page/n392/mode/1up]

Let me try to get the mysterious VRJ unfolded next.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

Nice detective work!

drdhaval2785 commented 2 years ago

Anything pending? Or closeable?

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

  1. @funderburkjim is yet to correct the Wh. and Ro., though he had appreciated the detective work done.

  2. The remaining one in the list VRJ is in fact a print error; it should've been VAJ. (Vajasaneyi Samhita). [We can refer the two VEI entries- <L>1142 Tārukṣya and <L>1143 Tārkṣya- that MW is dealing with here.]

If these two are considered and corrected in the mw.txt, the issue is closable, @drdhaval2785 !

Andhrabharati commented 2 years ago

And probably one might consider the issue #112 as a continuation of this "Capital letter words" issue, which is exactly what Jim started with--

This list might have several uses, one of which is to search for unmarked ls references.

funderburkjim commented 2 years ago

The remaining two corrected:

<L>84423<pc>444,2<k1>tArukzAyaRi
 <ls>VRJ.</ls> -> <ls>VĀJ.</ls>
  vAjasaneyi saMhitA

<L>27372<pc>157,1<k1>ASaMs
 <ls>Wh.</ls> and <ls>Ro.</ls> -> <ls>Wh. and Ro.</ls>
  Atharva Veda Sanhita, Volume 1, by  R.Roth and W.D. Whitney, 1856