Hemacandra And The Linguistic Tradition

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided English text from "Hemacandra and the Linguistic Tradition" by Prabodh Bechardas Pandit:

The article explores the linguistic insights of Hemacandra, a significant medieval grammarian of Prakrit, focusing on his understanding of language relationships. The author acknowledges that while Hemacandra's work might be criticized for mixing data or borrowing from predecessors, his classification of Prakrit varieties offers valuable insight into medieval linguistic thought.

Hemacandra's Classification of Prakrit Dialects:

• Hemacandra, in his Siddha-Hema, treats various Prakrit languages and dialects as distinct entities, describing the major dialect, Maharastri Prakrit, in detail.
• Sauraseni is presented as a variation of Maharastri.
• Magadhi, Paishachi, and Apabhramsa are categorized as variants within the Sauraseni group. Hemacandra concludes his description of these with the statement, "the rest are like Sauraseni."
• The author notes that Maharastri can be distinguished from the others (Sauraseni, Magadhi, Paishachi) by the complete loss of certain intervocalic stops, whereas these stops are retained or voiced in the others.
• Hemacandra groups Apabhramsa under Sauraseni due to shared phonological features, specifically the change of intervocalic '-y-' to '-d-'.
• He further classifies Ardhamagadhi as a subgroup of Magadhi and Chulika-Paishachi as a subgroup of Paishachi, identifying them as variants differing by only one or two features.

Implications of Hemacandra's Grouping:

• This hierarchical classification of languages and dialects, even with literary data, suggests that Hemacandra engaged in the process of identifying general versus specific features, which is fundamental to comparative linguistics.
• The article posits that this understanding likely forms a basis for the classification of Prakrit grammarians.
• While later grammarians (like Ramasarma and Markandeya) might define languages based on their use in dramatic performance versus non-theatrical literature, Hemacandra's subgroupings and his inclusion of Apabhramsa within the Sauraseni group indicate a clear judgment of linguistic relationships.

Hemacandra's Comparative Linguistic Tools:

• The article also highlights Hemacandra's familiarity with comparative linguistic methods through his compilation of words of doubtful (non-Sanskritic, native) origin in his work, Desi-sadda-samgaho (also known as Desinamamala).
• This lexicon, containing items that didn't fit his established Sanskrit-Prakrit correspondences, is seen as analogous to how a comparativist would handle the remaining lexicon after identifying cognates with regular correspondences. The remaining words are typically explained through analogy or borrowing.
• While acknowledging that modern linguistic tools are more refined and his etymologies might not hold up to current scrutiny, the author emphasizes appreciating Hemacandra's grasp of the concepts of "regular" and "irregular" in comparative historical linguistics.

In essence, the article argues that Hemacandra, despite potential criticisms regarding his methodology, was a significant figure in understanding and articulating linguistic relationships within the Prakrit tradition, demonstrating an awareness of comparative linguistic principles.