Guest guest Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 Thank you for this. Re: >Verse 17 of Arunachala Akshara Mana Maalai :- >GIRI URUVAAGIYA KRUIBAI KADALE >KRIBAI KOORNTHARULUVAAI ARUNACHALA ! The use of capitals is most inelegant and is considered as "Screaming" in Netiquette. Neither does it make any sense in either Sanskrit or Tamil. When using Sri Ramana's words in their native tongue, please endeavour to use a logical transliteration system. Here is one of them: Verse 17: kiriyuru vaakiya kirupaik kadalee kirupaikuurN taruLuvaa yarun>aasala anbudan John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya, I am sorry John - yez, you have already indicated this in one of your mails. I will follow this in future. Please correct us like this whenever we slip. With warm regards, Ramanaarpanam. Ganesh John <ramanachala (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote: Thank you for this. Re: >Verse 17 of Arunachala Akshara Mana Maalai :- >GIRI URUVAAGIYA KRUIBAI KADALE >KRIBAI KOORNTHARULUVAAI ARUNACHALA ! The use of capitals is most inelegant and is considered as "Screaming" in Netiquette. Neither does it make any sense in either Sanskrit or Tamil. When using Sri Ramana's words in their native tongue, please endeavour to use a logical transliteration system. Here is one of them: Verse 17: kiriyuru vaakiya kirupaik kadalee kirupaikuurN taruLuvaa yarun>aasala anbudan John All-new Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 In my humble opinion, "Screaming" or not, Ramachnadran Ganesh's transliteration of the Tamil verse was phonetically closer to the "Brahminised" Tamil that I speak, and which, I suppose, was the language that Bhagavan spoke, too. Though there is but one letter to signify either "g" or "k" in tamil, we native Tamil speakers do tend to distinguish between the two orally. Sorry, John, no offence meant, just my very personal opinion. Transliterations can be tricky stuff! Yours in Bhagavan, Sharada >"John" <ramanachala (AT) onetel (DOT) com> >RamanaMaharshi >RamanaMaharshi >[RamanaMaharshi] Re Eternal Guru 12 >Tue, 12 Sep 2006 05:16:26 -0000 > >Thank you for this. > >Re: > > >Verse 17 of Arunachala Akshara Mana Maalai :- > > >GIRI URUVAAGIYA KRUIBAI KADALE > >KRIBAI KOORNTHARULUVAAI ARUNACHALA ! > >> _______________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 >Sorry, John, no offence meant, just my very personal > opinion. Transliterations can be tricky stuff! Transliteration is merely the act of taking one letter (be it Tamil or Sanskrit or whatever) and substituting it for a named roman character. What could be simpler than that? As there is one character in Tamil which signifies what we call 'g' or 'k', a single letter should be likewise selected to reflect this. The acid test of a good transliteration is that is should 'flow back' into its native script when the transliteration criterion is applied. Because Indian languages use both retroflex and dental letters, it is necessary to keep the roman capitals in reserve as they have a special use, there being insufficient letters in roman to represent all the sounds if one uses solely upper or lower-case characters. If you study Sri Miles transliteration of "Ramana Sahasram", you will see mixtures of uper- and lower-case characters. In this instance, capital consonants depict the retroflex letters, and capital vowel signs (A, E, I....) depict long vowels. As it has been requested from one devotee that sound transliteration rules be used for Sanskrit, it is fair that all devotees should attempt to be accurate when posting in these languages. Sri Ramana was most meticulate and careful in everything which he did: cooking, cleaning, and in writing and translating also, having picked up many mistakes. Although we may not always be able to match his conscientiousness, it is fitting that we should try to emulate his sterling qualities. Yours in Sri Bhagavan, John RamanaMaharshi, "Sharada Lartet" <jslartet wrote: > > In my humble opinion, "Screaming" or not, Ramachnadran Ganesh's > transliteration of the Tamil verse was phonetically closer to the > "Brahminised" Tamil that I speak, and which, I suppose, was the language > that Bhagavan spoke, too. Though there is but one letter to signify either > "g" or "k" in tamil, we native Tamil speakers do tend to distinguish between > the two orally. Sorry, John, no offence meant, just my very personal > opinion. Transliterations can be tricky stuff! > Yours in Bhagavan, > Sharada > .................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.