Language Variant subtags for Sanskrit

[CE Whitehead]

Hi.


 

I do not see a problem with using traditional names although I like both 'vedic' and 'epics' as names.

 

My opinion on subtag names is that a subtag name derived from a term used in the language/dialect in question, a well-known/widely used term of course, or else an English name that uniquely identifies the language/dialect, such as 'vedic', is the best solution.  Thus I still oppose 'classic.'

 

(I would have thought, from the information online which separates out Paninian from Vedic Sanskrit, that Paninian was a suitable substitution for 'classic,' with the English names -- 'Vedic', 'epics' -- for the remaining dialects.  But Peter Scharf's post states that it is not.  Perhaps the Sanskrit name for the classic variant will be something easily recognized.  Maybe we can still use 'vedic' etc for the remaining varieties.)

 

I have a question related to Michael's question:  is 'aarsha' the term for 'epic' Sanskrit?  Or is the term 'aarsha basha'? Or is 'aarsha basha' a more general name, not referring specifically to just epic Sanskrit, but to other varieties as well?


Best,

C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
Michael Everson everson at evertype.com 
Tue Jul 13 21:09:13 CEST 2010 


On 13 Jul 2010, at 19:48, Peter Scharf wrote:


>> But how Paninian is Classical Sanskrit?  NO one has yet modelled Paninian grammar and validated texts against it in any systematic way.  The more generic term makes less of a claim and IS THE TERM IN USE.

> Yes, but can you please tell me what the Sanskrit terms for the following are?

> Vedic dialect.
> Classical dialect.
> Epic dialect.
> Buddhist dialect.

> I assume it's something-or-other bhaṣa....

> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

 
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20100713/c817daa9/attachment.html>