The Punjab Heritage

	Summer – 2006	Volume – 21
Review

Turner’s Dictionary of Indo-Aryan Languages Some Observations

Publisher: Oxford University Press, London, 1966

Reviewer: G.S.Rayal ,Senior Fellow ,Dept. of Punjabi Development
Punjabi Bhavan, Punjabi University, Patiala-147002 (Punjab ) INDIA

        A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages’ (henceforth CDIA) by Sir R.L. Turner (former Director, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London) is a pioneer work in the field of Indo-Aryan languages. The work is an outcome of fifty years of long, arduous and dedicated labour made almost single-handedly.
        The CDIA consists of 14845 (serially numbered) entries of the selected words of the parent language, followed by the forms in emergent languages and their dialects.
Turner’s selection of languages is indeed phenomenal. This may be noted from the example of the Sanskrit word divasa (a day) which bears reference to a host of languages/dialects and even to the different varieties of dialects, such as:
        Pali, Prakrit, Gypsy, Tirahi, Pashai, Gulbahari, Gawar-bati, Bashkarik, Maiya, Phalura, Shewa, Gilgiti, Kohistani, Guresi, Kashmiri, Sindhi, Lahnda (Awankari, Khetrani, Multani), Punjabi, West Pahari (Padoari), Kumauni, Hindi, Awadhi, Marwari, Old Bengali, Bengali, Gujrati, Marathi, Nepali, Sinhali (Bihari, Oriya, Assamese being omissions in the relevant case).
        Regarding the assessment of Turner’s work, it would be appropriate to quote the author himself:-
“When in my seventieth year I was once more able to devote all my energies to the compilation of my work, no one could have been more conscious than I of the lacunae which waited to be filled. There were two alternatives: either to attempt to fill them with little prospect of being given time to complete anything for publication or to put what was already collected into a form utilizable by others…I decided to adopt the latter alternative and to publish the work as it now stands. I can only hope that the use to which students of the history of the Indo-Aryan languages will be able to put it will make them lenient critics of its manifold imperfections and omissions” –Preface to CDIA.
        Although the author admits lacunae in his work in a general way, yet he seems to be unaware of some serious methodological and theoretical discrepancies in his work. The main discrepancies may be elaborated below.
        In a number of cases Turner’s generalisations are variably labelled as: “possible; perhaps; more possible; less likely; rather than; but; or; question mark (?); alternatively; doubtful; very doubtful”.
Here and there in the CDIA, one comes across examples of alternative references to the derivation of words. Accordingly, we find the Hindi pâwarnâ, pawernâ (to scatter seeds) or pawerâ (sowing seeds by hand) shown to be derived from three different sources, as follows:-
- (8449) Skt.* prakerayati (scatters) ~ H. pawernâ to scatter seeds in a field); pawerâ (scattering seeds by hand) X2 paw0ârnâ < Skt. krapatayati-Rather than<Skt. *pravapakara. (For the relevance between pawârnâ and pawernâ cf. the Punjabi ukhârnâ (to uproot); same as ukhernâ.)
- 8683) Skt. prapâtayati (throws down) ~ H. pawârnâ (to throw, to make fall, scatter seeds in a field)
- (8780) Skt.* pravapakara (sowing) ~ H. pawerâ (sowing seeds by hand) see Skt. prakeryati
Similar treatment is meted out to the Hindi pali (a ladle) or the Gujarati Kali which is shown to be derived from four different sources, namely: (7952) pala; (7806) parigha ; (8533) pranita; and (8046) * panika.
By a modest estimate, the incidence of three cases of alternative references or “doubtful” cases per page of the CDIA amounts to come 2500 cases out of 820 pages (comprising some 15000 entries, as already indicated) . It is intriguing to note in this connection that the second entry of the CDIA (namely Skt. amśa) and the last one (namely Skt.* himna) are subject to the above treatment, that is, treated respectively as: “If not rather < Skt. aśri”, and “Rathr than <Skt. sniha?”.
        As a matter of fact, the determination of derivations, a concern of etymology, is something definitive and has no scope for any play or flexibility. Supposing there are three alternatives to a particular word, two would be certainly wrong or irrelevant, and the third one may be right or wrong, as the case may be. Turner’s treatment of derivations is in sharp contrast to the standard etymological dictionaries of the English language where such cases are a rarity or an exception to the rule.
Apropos of the CDIA, we also find cases of words expounded by the author himself and subsequently declared as doubtful or very doubtful. A case in point is the semantic mishmash of such ideas as “hospitality or kind treatment” on one side and “grain receptacle” along with “a stick to support the warp” on the other, which is dubbed as “doubtful” on the semantic ground4 (and so it outrightly is). But the question is what was the compulsion on the part of the author to accommodate this sort of stuff in the scheme of things in the first place?
        -“Skt. satkâra (hospitality, kind treatment) ~ L. sakâr (a mud-built grain receptacle); G. sakâr (a stick in the warp to keep threads in place)- “Very doubtful on semantic ground”.
        Another example under consideration exclusively deals with the so-called Jaunsari dialect (of West Pahari) which is likewise pronounced “very doubtful”5. It may be argued that it is not worthwhile to oblige an unknown dialect at the risk of branding the entry as “very doubtful”. Surely discretion is the better part of valour.
        Apart from the discrepancies of the work discussed above two facts are in order to be pointed out. One relates to the time and attention devoted by the author to the plethora of languages, which was certainly at the cost of other aspects of the work, especially its semantic aspect. The second fact pertains to the non-availability of the standard (bilingual) dictionaries of the Indo-Aryan languages, speak of their etymological works, which is a serious drawback to the derivational study of these languages.
But for the frequent cases of alternative references, a bane of etymology, Turner’s work is an outstanding contribution to the comparative study of the Indo-Aryan languages. His total commitment and life-long passion for the languages other than his own is all the more appreciable. The citation of cognate words of the various Indo-Aryan languages, as done by the author, is in itself a great achievement. It serves as a ready reckoner for further investigation into the field. In short, Turner’s Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages is an indispensable work for the scholars engaged in the linguistic study of the Indo-Aryan languages.
        The present observations are intended to draw the attention of the concerned authority to undertake a revision of the work and fill the lacunae as indicted by the author in the preface to his work.
The illustrations attached as addendum here, further support the points made above.
-Skt. * Chagdrti (goatskin) ~ Jaun. * chori (goatskin), whence choro (hide of cow or buffalo… “Very doubtful.”

Addendum
It would be appropriate to include here some more examples from the CDIA which need revision in one way or the other.

Skt. âsecayati (pours) ~ M. asavine (to season a pot by heating) – Or poss. <Skt. âsrâvayati.
Skt. *krimśati (presses) ~ L awan. krijjhun (to fret) – More prob. < Skt. karudhyati x Skt. kliśyte.
Skt. nipadyate (lies down) ~Pa. nipajati (lies down to sleep) ; Pk nivajjai (sits down…Rather than<Skt. niryâti but see also Skt. nidra
Skt. prakâśate (becomes visible) ~ Pa. pakâsati (shines forth, becomes visible); Kt. pakee (to look after); Si. payanova (to rise-of the sun) – Or <Skt. prabhâti or prabhâsate.
Skt. pravayati (weaves on) ~ Pk. koai (plaits); M. kovne (to gather threads of the warp…)-Altern. <Skt. privayati or pratudati :..
Skt. sampâdayti (completes) ~ Pa. sampâdeti
(produces)…Tor. sabâ (to prepare, arrange)- or <Skt. samphârayati…
Skt. pravata (a slope of a mountain) ~ Si. kava (valley)- Rather <Skt. prapâta.
Skt. *nava’janmita (newly-born) ~ L. nimmiâ (embryo); P. nimmiâ (newly born child)-Or <Skt. nirmita.
Skt. atvi (forest) ~ Pa. atavi; Pk.adavi…;Si. lâv (forest) But see Skt. dâva
Skt. sarjayati (causes to let go) ~ Pa. sajjeti (sends out); Si. sadanva (to make complete) ES95-Or <Skt. sajjayati or sâdhhoti
Skt. *sampadaka (congruent, right) ~Ku. sapya (right, proper); N.sabiu (right side up) –Very doubtful
Skt. upadhmâna (breathing or blowing on) ~ G. udhân (asthma) –Very doubtful
Skt. *lomiya (made of wool) ~H. loi (blanket made of fine powder rubbed on the bride on an auspicious day before the wedding) < Skt. varna (colour); see Turner
Skt. karkata1(a crab) ~ H. kekra (a crab)
Skt. karkata,2~ (names of various plants; Cucumis utilissimus) – Poss. Same as karkata,1 but cf. Skt. karkâru (a kind of gourd) ~P. kakkari ( a kind of cucumber)…CDIA
The Punjabi kakkari ( a kind of cucumber, Cucumis utilissimus) comes from the same source as kekri (a female crab), so named as the cuumber is curved at both ends, giving a hint of the pincers of a crab. Thus, the Sanskrit
karkata (a crab; a kind of cucumber) is a case of polysemy as quoted by Monier-Williams. The reference to the Sanskrit karkâru (as above) is untenable.
Skt. karcarikâ (a kind of pastry or cake) ~ Pk. kaccarâ (pickles made of dried melon fried with spices); P. kacri, a king of fruit or vegetable); Or kacuri (a cake made of pulse and flour)- CDIA.
The Punjabi kacri (a kind of fruit or vegetable; prop., raw or unripe melon) which is of the same origin as the Prakrit kaccarâ (pickles made of dried melons) is based on the idea of something raw or unripe (kaccâ i.e. unripe melon) and has nothing to do with kacauri (a kind of fried sandwich of wheaten flour stuffed with bruised pulses) except the phonetic similarity which is incidental and not genuine.
Skt. *phat (a cheat) ~ K. phar (a cock and bull story); B. phat (a cheat-CDIA.
The Kashmiri phar (as above) which is related to the Punjabi phar, a tall-talk, swagger (whence phar-bâz, a swaggler, cheat) historically means gambling which goes with bluffing, whence swaggering or cheating <the Sankrit phala (a gaming-board; board). N.B. The development of the Sanskrit phala into the Punjabi phar is permissible by the phonetic rule.
Skt caks1(to taste)
Skt. cks2 (to seem) - CDIA
The sense of tasting (properly, “feeling or knowing the flaviour of something by touching it with the tongue”) conforms to the idea of seeing or observing. From this point of view the above should be treated as a case of polysemy and presented as: caks (to see, to observe; to taste)
Cf. Eng. sapient (wise, i.e. one knowing or discerning); akin to sapid (having taste) <Lat. sapere. (to taste; to be wise) cf. Skt. vicaksana (wise, sagacious) <vi+ caks (as above).
Skt. ranj (to dye), ranjana1(colour) is to be separated from Skt. raj (to please, be attached); ranjana2 (Pleasing)- CDIA.
The Sanskrit ranj is actually the nasalized from of raj. Accordingly, the idea of colour which is feast to the eyes evolves into beauty, loveliness, charm which further extends to the notion of love, pleasure, mirth, diversion. In this connection cf. Skt. ranga (colour; diversion, mirth, pleasure, entertainment; see Monier- Williams) < ranj (as above). Again, Skt. ranjana (as quoted above) also means colouring, dyeing (see Monier- Williams).
cf. Russ. kraska (colour) which comes from the some source as krasota (beauty) < kras (to colour).