Varno Ka Vibhajan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text from "Varno ka Vibhajan" by Satyakam Varma, focusing on the linguistic concepts discussed:

The book "Varno ka Vibhajan" by Satyakam Varma, as presented in this excerpt, argues that the modern linguistic concept of allophones (sub-phonemic variations of a sound) was deeply understood and analyzed by ancient Indian grammarians. The author aims to demonstrate the profound depth of this ancient study, which is often attributed as a significant contribution of contemporary linguistics.

The text traces the evolution of this understanding through various ancient Indian grammatical works:

• Yāska's Nirukta: The earliest foundational idea is found in Yāska's Nirukta, which conceptually posited "padabhāga" (parts of a word) based on phonetic similarity. The term "padāntara" or "padāntarārdha" is considered significant in this context.

• Prātiśākhyas: During the same period, the Prātiśākhyas introduced the concept of "apinīhiti." This term was used to describe instances where phonetic rules were seemingly violated, such as in words like "ātma" becoming "idhya." The grammarians recognized an underlying, indistinctly pronounced sound in such cases. This is distinguished from Pāṇini's concepts.

• Pāṇini: Pāṇini acknowledged incomplete phonetic states in his discussion of āgamas (augmentations) like "kuk," "ṭuk," "ṅmuṭ," and "dhuṭ." In these cases, the introduced sounds, though not fully audible, exert an influence. More importantly, Pāṇini's concepts of "hrasvādeśa" (shortening or reduction) and "savarṇa" (homophones or similar sounds) are highlighted.

  • "Hrasvādeśa" suggests that sounds can change their position and duration.
  • The definition of "savarṇa" is particularly crucial. Pāṇini's assertion that entire consonant classes (e.g., ka, kha, ga, gha, ṅa) are "savarṇa" implies a similarity beyond mere articulation point. The author questions whether this similarity is solely due to shared place of articulation or if it implies an inherent phonetic or descriptive similarity. Varma suggests that a part of the "k" sound is present in all the velar consonants, and even if phonetic similarity is accepted due to being "kanthya" (produced in the throat), there must be some similarity in their "sound waves."

• Patañjali: Patañjali is credited with further clarifying these concepts by introducing scientific terms like "varṇakadeśa" (part of a sound) and "uttarapadabhūyas" (predominance of the latter part). He explains phenomena like hrāsvādeśa, sandhi rules, and sandhyaksharas (diphthongs) through the lens of "varṇakadeśa." The acceptance of "ekadeśa" (a part) in a "varṇa" strongly supports the idea of allophones. "Uttarapadabhūyas" suggests that in vowel changes (like guṇa and vṛddhi), a distinction between the "uttara" (latter) and "pūrva" (former) parts can be identified.

• Bhartṛhari: Bhartṛhari, in his seminal work "Vākyapadīya," takes this analysis to a more scientific level with his remarkable concepts of "varṇabhāga" and "varṇāntara svarūpa."

  • "Varṇabhāga" is considered equivalent to modern "allophones," representing the smallest divisible part of a sound.
  • "Varṇāntara svarūpa" is a broader concept where multiple "varṇabhāgas" combine to create a "savarṇabhāga" (a part of a similar sound). This concept underlies the idea of "savarṇas."
  • Bhartṛhari emphasizes that these "varṇabhāgas" are imperceptible and indistinguishable ("praviveko na kaścana").
  • He argues that for a "varṇa" to exist, the combination ("upśleṣa") of these "varṇabhāgas" is essential, as they are infinitely subtle and atomic.
  • While a verse in "Vākyapadīya" appears to deny the existence of "avayavas" (parts) in "varṇas," the author clarifies that this denial applies to the distinct existence of "padas" (words) within a "vākya" (sentence). Just as words can be distinguished within a sentence without losing the sentence's overall meaning, "varṇabhāgas" can exist within a "varṇa" without compromising the "varṇa's" integrity or phonetic function.

• Modern Linguistics: The author concludes by noting that modern linguists are increasingly acknowledging these ancient insights. While using instruments to analyze sound waves and phonetic segments, they have also struggled to establish definitive dividing lines. The work of American linguists like Josuhtavama and Porter Simon in identifying "sound waves" is mentioned, with a suggestion that they would benefit from considering the ancient Indian definitions.

In essence, the excerpt argues that the ancient Indian grammatical tradition, particularly through figures like Yāska, Pāṇini, Patañjali, and especially Bhartṛhari, had a sophisticated understanding of phonetic variation, anticipating the modern linguistic concept of allophones with terms like "varṇabhāga" and "apinīhiti." This demonstrates the advanced and enduring nature of Indian linguistic thought.