Language Variant subtags for Sanskrit

Doug Ewell doug at
Tue Jul 20 03:22:58 CEST 2010

Peter Scharf <peter underscore scharf at brown dot edu> wrote:

> A nice vague term like 'classical' is just what is needed for the 
> standard Sanskrit, even better than the term, 'standard', since it is 
> what has been used for the past couple of hundred years.

People are not objecting to the vagueness of the subtag 'classical' (or, 
more precisely, 'classic', which is 7 letters long and therefore 
syntactically legal) because it would be inappropriate to describe 
Classical Sanskrit.  They are objecting because its vagueness would 
likely cause people to apply it to other "classical" languages, with 
different meaning.

When people talk about Classical Sanskrit *in* Sanskrit (any variety), 
do they use the English word "classical" to describe it?

Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA |
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­ 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list