Teaching the Indic Scripts: Tradition and Innovation

Acta Linguistica Asiatica

Current research exploits the orthographic design of Brahmi-derived scripts (also called Indic scripts), particularly the Devanagari script. Earlier works on orthographic nature of Brahmi-derived scripts fail to create a consensus among epigraphists, historians or linguists, and thus have been identified by various names, like semi-syllabic, subsyllabic, semi-alphabetic, alphasyllabary or abugida. On the contrary, this paper argues that Brahmi-derived scripts should not be categorized as scripts with overlapping features of alphabetic and syllabic properties as these scripts are neither alphabetic nor syllabic. Historical evolution and linguistic properties of Indic scripts, particularly Devanagari, ascertain the need for a new categorization of its own and, thus preferably merit a unique descriptor. This paper investigates orthographic characteristics of the Brahmi-derived Devanagari script, current trends in research pertaining to the Devanagari script along with other Indic scrip...

An analysis and interpretation of the so-called Harappan script, its decipherment and relation with other scriptures belongs to different cultures,theSigns of the script have the most peculiar and elaborate iconographies of Indus Civilization. It is represented on many stamp seals of fired steatite and corresponding clay sealing, terracotta tablets in bas-relief, copper tablets and tokens. The Harappan seal was composed of body parts derived from different animals, as well as humans and other fantastic beings of the Indus imagination. A detailed documentation and description of all the objects bearing chimaeras makes it possible to recognize not only a basic set of regular combinations and some aspects of their possible similarities, but also visual associations among selected signs from the different civilizations that could be perceived and semantically interpreted at different levels as this paper belongs to the visual analysis of the symbolic comparison of Indus Valley illegiblescript with other languages for its value. We believe that the sophisticated structure of these images fully deserves to be meaningful and have identity. Mostly resembles with the language of Dravidians.

This monograph posits that Brāhmī is a syllabic script and is NOT derived from logo-graphic catalogue system of Indus Script. However, the following excerpts from a monograph by Subhash Kak are presented to present a contra view. Subhash Kak claims to have identified the 'signs' used in Indus Script Corpora to signify the numerals 5 and 10 and also to have identified parallels in orthography between Brāhmī 'syllabary' for consonants and 10 Indus 'signs'. Surprisingly some of the glyphs, like the fish, looked similar in Brāhmī and in Indus Script. Such striking similarity is noticed in about 5 glyphs. "Kak also sees a particular Prakrit feature in the Indus script which is not found in Elamite and Dravidian. This particular feature — the gentive case marker — is used to specify ownership which could mean that the seals were used for trading purposes. Frequency analysis of the Indus script found that one of the signs is a representation of the numeral 5. The Nagari script, used since 8 CE, also uses the same sign; in Brāhmī, this sign means ‘pa’ – the first letter of ‘pancha’. Brāhmī.inscriptions found in Sohagaura on copper plates and caskets in Batthiprolu shows various compound signs, like in the Indus." http://varnam.nationalinterest.in/2009/11/the-indus-script-decipherments/ Further suggestions from Kak's studies (see Sources listed at the end) are that the Indus Script is based on underlying Indo-Aryan language (since Brāhmī. syllabary was used to write Indo-Aryan language) and that Brāhmī writing system is derived from the Indus Writing System. Excerpts: After Table 3. Kak (1988)Ten most common consonants in decreasing frequency Hunter, G.R.1934. The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and Its Connection with Other Scripts, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. • • Witney, W.D. 1888. Sanskrit Grammar, Reprint, 1983, New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. • "Since our objective, in this study, is to determine what letters the most likely Indus signs could represent, and then validate this on morphological grounds, we only indicate the most likely 10 consonants in decreasing frequency: t, r, v, n, m, y, s, d, p, k The frequency of each one of these consonants is greater than 1.99 percent. The next most frequent sounds are s (palatal sh) and s (lingual sh) with frequencies of 1.57 and 1.45 respectively. It is conceivable that like Prakrit, early Indo-Aryan could have often substituted s for s and s. If this were to have been the case the total frequency of s could be close to that of t... • Numerals. Consider numerals now. Frequency considerations suggest that should be the symbol for the number 5. This is seen in Figure 3b which shows that there is large probability that will appear together with symbols for 2, 3, and 4. The frequency of with 1 is 7 and with itself is 10 which do not, therefore, show up in Figure 3b. Presumably, the lower frequency for is because 6 is also written as six vertical strokes. It also appears that 10 is represented both as as well as one of the other signs. The identification of as 5 means that Mitchiner’s assumption that it might stand for 100 is invalid. considerations suggest that should be the symbol for the number 5. This is seen in Figure 3b which shows that there is large probability that will appear together with symbols for 2, 3, and 4. The frequency of with 1 is 7 and with itself is 10 which do not, therefore, show up in Figure 3b. Presumably, the lower frequency for is because 6 is also written as six vertical strokes. It also appears that 10 is represented both as as well as one of the other signs. The identification of as 5 means that Mitchiner’s assumption that it might stand for 100 is invalid. It is noteworthy that the later Nagari sign for 5 is this with a stylized tail added to it. Also Brāhmī pa is , which looks very close to this sign. Note further that the symbol for 5 in Brāhmī comes from the first syllable of panca. The fact that the same symbol was used by the Harappans indicates that their word for 5 started with pa as well. This is further evidence against the theory of Dravidian origin of the Indus language since 5 in Tamil is aindu, in Telugu aidu. It reinforces our identification of the Indus language as being Indo-Aryan. Conclusions. The frequency analysis of the most common Brāhmī and Indus signs confirms the hypothesis that the two scripts are related. The case-ending evidence suggests that the language of the inscriptions is Indo-Aryan. The inference that the language is Indo- Aryan is strengthened by the observation that the words that follow the formulae “ “ , which Hunter has argued should be proper names, indeed read as plausible Indo-Aryan names at several places. But an analysis of the case-endings alone has its limitations. It cannot, by itself, establish conclusively that the language is Indo-Aryan. That will have to await a full decipherment of the Indus texts. In any event, the demonstration that Brāhmī is derived from Indus, and the indubitable relationship between Brāhmī and the Phoenician script indicates that the theories of the rise of early writing systems require a complete revision." After Table 2. Frequencies of various sounds of the Sanskrit alphabet (Source : Whitney [9]). Sources: Subhash Kak, 1988, A FREQUENCY ANALYSIS OF THE INDUS SCRIPT • July 1988 • Cryptologia 12(3):129-143 Mirrored at Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233116026 Two related papers of Subhash Kak are: Subhash C. Kak, “INDUS – AND – BRAHMI – FURTHER – CONNECTIONS” Cryptologia 14, no. 2 (1990): 169. Subhash C. Kak, “AN – INDUS-SARASVATI SIGNBOARD,” Cryptologia 20, no. 3 (1996): 275. Kharosthi The Kharosthi, or Kharoṣṭhī, script was invented sometime during the 3rd century BCE and was possibly derived from the Aramaic script. It was used in Gandhara, an ancient kingdom in what is now the northwest of Pakistan, and the Jalalabad district of Afghanistan. Kharosthi texts have also been found along the Silk Road in Bactria, Kushan, Sogdia, and in parts of China. By the 4th century AD the script was no longer used in Gandhara, but may have been used until the 7th centuries in places such as Khotan / Hotan (和田), in what is now Xinjiang in the northeast of China. Unlike the Brāhmī script, which was invented at around the same time and spawned many of the modern scripts of India and South East Asia, Kharosthi had no descendants. Kharoshti was deciphered during the 19th century by James Prinsep, Christian Lassen, C.L. Grotefend and Edwin Norris. Bilingual inscriptions in Gandhari and Greek on coins helped with the decipherment. Since then further material has been found and the script is now better understood. Notable features • Type of writing system: syllabic alphabet or abugida - each letter has an inherent vowel /a/. Other vowels are indicated using diacritics. • Direction of writing: right to left in horizontal lines. Kharoṣṭhī a syllabic writing system used to write Gandhari, of Gāndhārī, a Prakrit language used in inscriptions in the Kharoṣṭhī script between the 3rd century BCE and the 4th century CE, and possibly until the 7th century CE. Sanskrit (संस्कृतम्), a classical language of India, which is still used as a religious and ceremonial language, and as a spoken language to some extent. Pali (पालि), the classical language of Theravada Buddhism that was first used in Sri Lanka during the 1st century BCE. I tried to see if the following ten consonants identified by Subhash Kak had cognates in Kharoṣṭhī t, r, v, n, m, y, s, d, p, k The 'signs' of Kharoṣṭhī for ten consonants are listed below. Ten Kharoṣṭhī consonants for ten frequent consonants of Indo-Aryan languages identified by Subhash Kak: I do NOT find any parallel between Kharoṣṭhī consonant glyphs and Brāhmī. I do NOT find any hieroglyphs of Indus Script which parallel the ten Kharoṣṭhī consonants. I have not attempted to compare the consonants of Kharoṣṭhī with Aramaic or other scripts of the Ancient Near East. ta ra va na ma ya śa da pa ka 10 ba ṣa za I have no comments to offer on the underlying assumption of Subhash Kak that the writing system is a syllabic system comparable to Brāhmī. My conjecture is that kharoṣṭhī writing system was necessitated by the imperative of syllabic representation of syllables in names of people and in writing down words related to philosophical topics such as Samghāta Sutra which is a compilation cognate with the words: samgraha, samgaha ‘catalogue’. This conjecture may explain the reality of early cast coins which bore both Indus Script hieroglyphs and also kharoṣṭhī and Brāhmī syllables to signify ‘names’. Based on clusteranalyses of 'signs' and 'pictorial motifs', the writing system is seen to be logo-graphic and each hieroglyph component is read as a word in Meluhha to compile catalogues of metalwork accounting ledgers. Meluhha of Bhāratīya sprachbund (speech union) links Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Munda streams of speech forms to signify the Harosheth (smithy) cognate Kharoṣṭhī which has been explained as an expression to signify: 'blacksmith speech'. See: Harosheth Hagoyim: Lady on the chariot lynchpin is Meluhha, Indus Script hypertext kharoṣṭhī goya, 'blacksmith speech community' https://tinyurl.com/yc3zndc6

International Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences, 2013

This paper brings together all available evidence for literacy in Post-Harappan India, still popularly known as Iron age Vedic India, most of which have been endorsed by mainstream researchers in some way or the other in the recent past and brings into attention the need to revise all earlier models dealing with literacy in Post-Harappan India to bring them in line with latest acculturation models and mainstream models of the development of alphabetic scripts. More importantly we refute the thesis that the Archaemenids introduced the alphabetic script into India. This theory has always been controversial and has been challenged by several mainstream researchers, both Western and Indian, for several decades. It is hopelessly antiquated now and a complete non-starter when all recent evidence and data is taken into account and no mainstream researcher will even be able to consider such a theory in view of the evidence, reasoning, logic and views of other scholars presented in the paper. The theory that Brahmi was a derivative of the earlier Aramaic script has been somewhat more popular, though still controversial, and we refute this theory as well. We also explain why updating theories based on latest research can have a bearing on research on alphabetic systems in general. All conclusions reached in this paper are presented using a figure-it-out-for-yourself approach and only the views of mainstream researchers are presented. Readers are strongly advised to exercise their own judgment as usual. Published in International Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences 2013

The paper addresses the multiple perspectives of the origin of the Indian script Devanagari. 14 verbal languages are spoken with this one script. it is the first attempt to bring together the diverse schools of thought.