Seergazhi Govindarajan

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 27 Jun 2007, 20:05

>>Sanskrit being the mother of all languages should continue to be accepted as a contributor to any language and thus should not get delinked in any form.<<

I beg your pardon, kaumaram! Isn't that another faux pas? Whoever said that Sanskrit is the mother of Thamizh? The brahmins are the ones who imported several Sanskrit words into usage in Thamizh. I agree there have been exchanges of words from each other. Even tEvAram has some Sanskrit words adapted to the context. Sangam period Thamizh literature did not have to borrow words from Sanskrit since Thamizh was an independently-evolved language. Having said that I am not against borrowing (and adapting) words from other languages to keep up with the times. To paraphrase John Milton (the poet) "to borrow and better in borrowing is no plagiarism". I don't want to discuss it further lest it should create problems here.

I agree with dkfan here that nothing should be said even remotely denigrating about someone who is no more, unless the whole world hates that person.

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 27 Jun 2007, 20:18

I agree with mahakavi on Sanskrit vs Tamil,

I would however, hasten to add that in-so-far-as Unicode allocation is concerned, Devanagari is the super-set of scripts of all Indian Languages and more. Therefore, this is an asset for us and, IMHO, it is time that we evove a common approach between languages so that there is no hurdle in exchange of information.

Such discussions should concretise into some sort of draft proposals for submission to Government forums so that our pride as a successful multi-lingual society doesn't remain a pipe dream. Utopian?

Vocalist · Post by **Vocalist** » 28 Jun 2007, 07:20

arunk wrote:We can and should talk about music instead .

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 28 Jun 2007, 13:28

vgvindan wrote:I agree with mahakavi on Sanskrit vs Tamil,

I would however, hasten to add that in-so-far-as Unicode allocation is concerned, Devanagari is the super-set of scripts of all Indian Languages and more. Therefore, this is an asset for us and, IMHO, it is time that we evove a common approach between languages so that there is no hurdle in exchange of information.

Such discussions should concretise into some sort of draft proposals for submission to Government forums so that our pride as a successful multi-lingual society doesn't remain a pipe dream. Utopian?

I fully agree with you. We definitely must take up with the highest level of the Government. Mere classification or status accorded to a language as Classical should not develop into a stage where we get totally isolated from others.

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 28 Jun 2007, 13:30

dkfan wrote:
arunk wrote:We can and should talk about music instead .

Yes, we should talk about music, musicians and composers. But incidental comments cannot be avoided either. It is this tendency to snub dissensions in the context of general discussions that destroys creativity in general. When I point out the drawbacks of an artist, I consider the person as "living" with us all. I am not infallible either; but this forum has endorsed the drawbacks of several other artists too. To that extent, my postings on the subject are not derogatory.

My postings will continue to reflect my likes and dislikes so long as these are not expressly prohibited by the rules of the forum, please.

Kaumaaram

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 28 Jun 2007, 17:24

vgvindan wrote:I would however, hasten to add that in-so-far-as Unicode allocation is concerned, Devanagari is the super-set of scripts of all Indian Languages and more. Therefore, this is an asset for us and, IMHO, it is time that we evove a common approach between languages so that there is no hurdle in exchange of information.

I am afraid I do not agree that dEvanAgari script is a superset. The symbols for the short vowels "e" and "o" are all artificially created as also the letter zh. There are scripts like the kannaDa and telugu scripts, Malayalam also, which naturally have representations for these sounds. I dont see why we should not make one of these a as a super-set of scripts for all Indian languages.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 28 Jun 2007, 18:12

drs,

i think vgv was referring perhaps mainly to how devanigiri specifically as in in unicode specification uses most slots of the allotted block (i.e. compared to other indic languages in the unicode spec).

I agree that some of the slots are artificial constructs but it looks like the allotment was perhaps done with some intention of using unicode devanigiri to transcribe more languages that what its use outside of computer world it is. But that was perhaps an arbitrary development as same could have been done for some of the other languages too.

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 28 Jun 2007, 18:15

kaumaaram,

i agree that incidental comments are quite fine (as some of you may already know my take on this). But the one you made could have presented a major diversion, and it could have been too volatile too. That is why I suggested that instead we talk about music instead.

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 28 Jun 2007, 18:16

Arun- that is the same with the kannaDa script I metnioned, so also with telugu IIRC. You are one of th best persons to know this. Correct me if I am wrong.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 28 Jun 2007, 18:55

Arun, I checked the Unicode charts for dEvanAgari and kannaDa. In so far as the number of allocated spaces being used, yes dEvanAgari uses more. But does that in itself translate to greater number of sounds being represented? I think not. In place of the many letters given in dEvanAgari (like fa), kannaDa code has one symbol for 2 dots below a main lettor symbol(glyph). This can be used in conjunction with so many letters to represent many sounds. The candrabindu, and the symbol for aum and the single and double lines (full stops) are not shown in kannaDa. First one yes needs to be created, Om is easily written in kannada as also the lines at the end to represent full stop. So, one can achieve a greater range to represent most sounds by simple addition of 1 or 2 more symbols to the kannaDa script rather than having to add a whole range of artificial symbols/representations as is done in dEvanAgari. Just my humble opinion.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 28 Jun 2007, 19:23

drshrikaanth wrote:Arun, I checked the Unicode charts for dEvanAgari and kannaDa. In so far as the number of allocated spaces being used, yes dEvanAgari uses more. But does that in itself translate to greater number of sounds being represented?

Not necessarily as some seem to be intended to represent pure script artifacts which may not carry additional phonetics (??). But there does seem to be some additional sounds - like the additional consonants like qa, khha, ghha etc. While I can guess where some are used, others I have no clue

. My guess is some north indian languages which use devanagiri (or can use) employ these. I for one cannot tell which ones are artificial and which ones are real.

If we just restrict to representing south indian languages many of these additional consonants are a non-factor, but if the utopian view (i must insist it is just that. Fat chance - some/many local governments/people allowing this

) is to represent most indian languages, then these would have to be factored in.

But again if one requires introducing new symbols no matter which unicode block, then it is quite true that this could be added to any language block. So yes as you say kannada block can be extended by introducing new symbols to represent these sounds.

The argument of which block then is the "best fit" would depend on at least 2 factors:
1. Least # of artificial (i.e. not found in practice outside computers) symbols required to be introduced in a script.
2. The prevalance of the script among Indians.

At least with #2 I would think fits devanagiri better.

In place of the many letters given in dEvanAgari (like fa), kannaDa code has one symbol for 2 dots below a main lettor symbol(glyph). This can be used in conjunction with so many letters to represent many sounds. The candrabindu, and the symbol for aum and the single and double lines (full stops) are not shown in kannaDa. First one yes needs to be created, Om is easily written in kannada as also the lines at the end to represent full stop. So, one can achieve a greater range to represent most sounds by simple addition of 1 or 2 more symbols to the kannaDa script rather than having to add a whole range of artificial symbols/representations as is done in dEvanAgari. Just my humble opinion.

Certainly possible. You would definitely know better than me

. I know only the technical aspects without knowing much of linguistical aspects.

Arun

Vocalist · Post by **Vocalist** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:09

kaumaaram wrote:but his pronounciation of Sanskrit went for a six.

If your remarks aren't intended to be offensive, then what motivates you to post them? General statements like the one above can be entirely avoided (as it is unnecessary/disrespectful) or if one insists, can be worded more carefully. A couple of examples following that general statement hardly suffice to make a comment like that.

Generally, I (would like to) think that active participants of this forum point out such drawbacks in a much more actively inoffensive manner, while remaining illustrative and educational (eg; pointing the drawbacks out where a particular rendition of a composition is being discussed to begin with, or in the kutcheri reviews and recordings thread). So, again, in my view, it appears more offensive than educative here. I suppose it is subject to opinion, but to me, it appears careless too.

kaumaaram wrote:My postings will continue to reflect my likes and dislikes so long as these are not expressly prohibited by the rules of the forum, please.

It is commonly accepted by humankind that it is disrespectful to speak of the wrongs or dislikes of someone who has passed away. It's an unwritten rule of courtesy, consideration and decency - perhaps why there are no such express prohibitions. However, one could assume that the rules imply that discussion is more for educative and illustrative purposes rather than for making statements like that.

I hope you (and others) understand my concern - I think it's a very valid one

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:18

Several of the posts here have nothing to do with SG at all (as a vidwAn)--not even peripherally. In the past, mods have stepped in earlier to move the discussion on unicode to language topic. Sigh....

Vocalist · Post by **Vocalist** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:27

mahakavi wrote:Several of the posts here have nothing to do with SG at all (as a vidwAn)--not even peripherally. Sigh....

:/

sorry for my other digression too!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:49

sorry! I see that I digress a lot.

I hereby anoint myself with an M.D degree => Master of Digression.

Arun

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:53

dkfan wrote:
kaumaaram wrote:but his pronounciation of Sanskrit went for a six.
If your remarks aren't intended to be offensive, then what motivates you to post them? General statements like the one above can be entirely avoided (as it is unnecessary/disrespectful) or if one insists, can be worded more carefully. A couple of examples following that general statement hardly suffice to make a comment like that.

Generally, I (would like to) think that active participants of this forum point out such drawbacks in a much more actively inoffensive manner, while remaining illustrative and educational (eg; pointing the drawbacks out where a particular rendition of a composition is being discussed to begin with, or in the kutcheri reviews and recordings thread). So, again, in my view, it appears more offensive than educative here. I suppose it is subject to opinion, but to me, it appears careless too.

kaumaaram wrote:My postings will continue to reflect my likes and dislikes so long as these are not expressly prohibited by the rules of the forum, please.
It is commonly accepted by humankind that it is disrespectful to speak of the wrongs or dislikes of someone who has passed away. It's an unwritten rule of courtesy, consideration and decency - perhaps why there are no such express prohibitions. However, one could assume that the rules imply that discussion is more for educative and illustrative purposes rather than for making statements like that.

I hope you (and others) understand my concern - I think it's a very valid one

Thanks for a well-written criticism of my views.

My comments remain plain and would continue to remain so as that is what I had intended to write. If you have taken it personally, offensive, indecent or anything like that, well, that is your perception and I am not here to change that. We must generally avoid the tendency to shower encomiums alone on artists; it would be better to bring out the flaws too so that the next generation could avoid making such mistakes. That is how refinement happens everywhere. If you are open to accept this fact of life, then you will end up agreeing with me.

Kaumaaram

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:53

Kaumaram's post had the line 'while they (mispronouciations) are acceptable, they are avoidable'. I think we all agree on that.
The artiste was distnguished. Yes, 'nil nisi bonum' (speak not ill of the departed), but digressions do occur. If they get to be unrelated to the subject, either they are put under a different thread, or, if they aren't worth our while, they are deleted, that's all.

Yes, SirgAzhi had a veNkala (alloy metal, as in temple bells) voice, his singing added a lot of richness to both cine music and concert singing...

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:25

Unicode allotment is same for all languages - 128 slots. I fully agree with drs that any language can (be modified to) represent all the possible sound patterns, but it has been Devanagari's fortune? to have maximum slots utilised.

I may point out here that key board version of CDAC iLeap (Indian Language WP) has been totally accepted for Unicode also. I am using the iLeap (Indian Language Word Processor of CDAC) for the past 8 years and I know that there is no difference between the keyboard layout of iLeap and Unicode (excepting one in Tamil). Even in the iLeap version, the Devanagari script has short 'e' and short 'o' and the same method of wavy top curve is there for such short vowels.

Therefore, I presume that it is CDAC who have been most involved in the Unicode allotment also.

Now, here we are entering into a grey area. Why languages other than Devanagari did not have their slots fully utilised?. I would not venture to answer for obvious reasons.

My point in raising this issue is that 'can we, utilising the existing resources, build a common platform for information exchange between Indian languages - atleast South Indian Languages?'. As the unicode allotment is in steps of 128, it is easy to convert from one language to another if a consensus is reached.

PS : 'fa' 'kha' belong to Urdu and similar languages of Persian origin.

Vocalist · Post by **Vocalist** » 28 Jun 2007, 23:39

Even as a "digression", it really isn't an excuse. It's "plain" insensitive and disrespectful, especially when other ways are available. If the best way to stop the next generation from avoiding such mistakes is by informing them in the manner in which you do, then you are teaching them to follow a flaw in human virtue as you are teaching them to avoid one in music. There are ways of clearly intending to bring out flaws for educational and illustrative purposes with an express intention to not disrespect a vidwan's memory and music. It doesn't take much more effort if each and every one did their bit. I hope this indifferent attitude doesn't continue, as it will be just as much detrimental as it is beneficial - not worth it!

That's all.

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 29 Jun 2007, 01:43

Can we please agree to disagree and concur to stop this dicussion? Unicode and other issues can be discussed under the language thread.
DKFAN,
Rasikas do have the right to say that they find some artist's pronunciation improper. And, since this is the thread for discussing SG, it is OK to discuss his pronunciation goof ups here. Radnor Guy in his write up on NCV clearly states that her hindi pronuciation left much to be desired. These issues have been discussed in the past and will continue to be debated in the future as long as artists' sing and rasikas opine. No disrepect is intended!

grsastrigal · Post by **grsastrigal** » 29 Jun 2007, 09:07

Whenever I think of SG, I think of the movie "Karnan"

Karnan is the movie which has some interesting Raagas. Actually, I still get the grip of Hindolam from the beautiful short-piece sung by SG. (MaRai Kodukkum). This verse was followed by PBS in Hamsanandhi, Kanada (I forgot the singer's name).. But HIndolam stood out, because of SG's "Ganeer" (Top class) voice. The one more beauty of this song-at the end of the song-chorus verse-"Aayiram Karangal Neetti"- If we hear this, SG's voice stands out.

Ennuyir Tozhi- (Amir Kalyani) is another top class (though not sung by SG). But the beautiful Sahana (where Krishan is teaching Arjuna-Bhagavath Geetha) is always here in my heart. Finally, the best of the best-ULLathil Nall ULLam- I thought it is Ahir Bhairavi. Someone said "No". But SG is again Top Class.

There is no better cinema "love song" I heard, than "Amudhum Thenum edaRku". !!!! It is the best "Nalangu" song any of us can sing to woo our other half. How many of you have missed this ? Visualise singing the song-surrounded by Mamis and young girls and having your girl in front of you ! As JK says bliss is sometimes better than real happiness.

I hope I am not off the subject

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 29 Jun 2007, 14:42

dkfan wrote:Even as a "digression", it really isn't an excuse. It's "plain" insensitive and disrespectful, especially when other ways are available. If the best way to stop the next generation from avoiding such mistakes is by informing them in the manner in which you do, then you are teaching them to follow a flaw in human virtue as you are teaching them to avoid one in music. There are ways of clearly intending to bring out flaws for educational and illustrative purposes with an express intention to not disrespect a vidwan's memory and music. It doesn't take much more effort if each and every one did their bit. I hope this indifferent attitude doesn't continue, as it will be just as much detrimental as it is beneficial - not worth it!

That's all.

I did not mean any digression. I meant what I said. If "plain" is insensitive and disrespectful, I will have to compose a poem to please the artist and to criticise him. Just because others write with a lot of verbosity it does not mean that I am being disrespectul, indifferent and so on. I have taken the points expressed by one and all here and the fact remains that I do accept criticisms. The substantive portion of my first ever posting on this artist is plain and simple, loud and clear. It cannot be understood by those who pick holes and would like to demonstrate their so-called culture of accepting complacency and mediocrity. We must learn to accept both brickbats and bouqets in the right earnest and manner so that meaningful discussions can be carried on. And that is where the beneficial aspects would flow into the system. That's all indeed.

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 29 Jun 2007, 14:55

grsastrigal wrote:Whenever I think of SG, I think of the movie "Karnan"

There is no better cinema "love song" I heard, than "Amudhum Thenum edaRku". !!!! It is the best "Nalangu" song any of us can sing to woo our other half. How many of you have missed this ? Visualise singing the song-surrounded by Mamis and young girls and having your girl in front of you ! As JK says bliss is sometimes better than real happiness.

I hope I am not off the subject

Plain (again!) comment: You have missed either of the words "better" or "bitter" and carefully used the word "other" before "half".

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 29 Jun 2007, 17:41

>>(MaRai Kodukkum).<<

grsastrigal:
I think it is mazhai (rain) koDukkum koDaiyum oru mUnRu mAdam

shan_subra · Post by **shan_subra** » 15 Dec 2007, 03:10

Kosalai Pudhalvanai - was a composition of Shri Papanasam Sivan. It was a compilation of the entire Ramayanam . It was recorded as a Long Play Record by HMV. It would be good if they could HMV/EMI /SaRe GaMa release it for archival purposes and for the younger generation who can learn quite a few things

shan_subra · Post by **shan_subra** » 15 Dec 2007, 03:24

I was just surfing when I got into this site. I know for a fact that Sirkazhi takes great care in his fully understanding the lyrics, whatever the language may be. He would ask them how it should be pronounced, where the sylable should be stressed and where should be softer etc. In fact even for his archival recordings of abhirami andhadhi and Kandar alankaram and many such traditional literature he would sit with Variyar Swami and learn where they should be seperated etc.

Tamil Language does not have Ka, Kha, ga and Gha and it is vinayaGane NOT vinyaKane and Sagala not saKala

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 15 Dec 2007, 16:36

shan_subra wrote:Tamil Language does not have Ka, Kha, ga and Gha and it is vinayaGane NOT vinyaKane and Sagala not saKala

Then the Keralites are correct if they pronounce lalitha as LeLidha, gopi and GoBi, ravi as Revi and so on.

Raag Dhanyasi may be pronounced as Thanyasi. Karaharapriya may be called as Kara-kara-piriya in Tamil. What's wrong? "Pranava" may be pronounced as "Piranava".

I reiterate, that the beauty of a language gets enhanced if it is interspersed by words from other languages especially Sanskrit.

I do not understand why the so-called pure Tamils (howsoever classical the language and original it may be) or Tamilians should endeavour not to pronounce Sanskrit words in the way it is intended. If that attitude preserves the classical Tamil, may it prevail. I do not consider it beneath my dignity to say "Namaskaram" as opposed to "vanakkam".

Namaskaram.

sindhu · Post by **sindhu** » 15 Dec 2007, 17:18

When we say kadai(shop), kadal(sea) we pronounce 'da' only and not ta, tha etc, In fact, in my opinion, Tamil has more versatality in its usage. One alpha represents not just one but 4 as well. gr8.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 16 Dec 2007, 00:24

This issue has been discussed at length here: http://rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=2054&p=1 and other threads in this forum.

Usually there are no resolutions of any sort for these things even when there is a logical answer. For some reason, either camp would not want to look sympathetically to the points of the other camp and end up genuinely believing that the other side is a fanatic. One thing that is easy to see is: It is not just about languages: There is this whole socio-caste-cultural background that we bring to these discussions which is hard to cleanly separate from the pure Linguistics aspects.

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 16 Dec 2007, 08:09

My stomach turns at all those occasions I have been labelled a Gulagarni by Doctors( who have had the experience of travelling all over the country and the world , too.)

The issue is that once an awareness sets in , about the individualities of each poles , one must have an outlook to keep shifting from one to another, as the situation demands.If people can go off to faraway lands and adapt to practices that are developed through reason over generations (like not hanging out your clothes from your apartment window-for example) , I cannot understand the failure to use the correct letters while writing in English , or even pronouncing.

I must thank my stars that the demands of Tamizh language are not such that I have to be addressed as Kozhakarni (Kozhaka stands for dirty chap in kannada) .I might have ended up with an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder , in my 26 years of stay in Chennai , always busy,washing and cleaning myself.

chalanata · Post by **chalanata** » 16 Dec 2007, 08:53

my boss a northeast man pronounces 'arumugam' as 'Aramhakham' despite his best efforts. most unfortunately he has to frequently use his name because 'Arumugam' is his personal attendent.
Rose does not smell any less sweet in which ever name it is called.
coolji,
you also sound more musical when you are addressed 'Gulgani'!

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 28 Dec 2007, 13:38

Thayumanavar Paadal

அத்துவித வத்துவைச் சொப்ரகா சத்தனியை
அருமறைகள் முரசறையவே
அறிவினுக் கறிவாகி ஆனந்த மயமான
ஆதியை அநாதியேக
தத்துவ சொருபத்தை மதசம்ம தம்பெறாச்
சாலம்ப ரகிதமான
சாசுவத புட்கல நிராலம்ப ஆலம்ப
சாந்தபத வ்யோமநிலையை
நிர்தநிர் மலசகித நிஷ்ப்ரபஞ் சப்பொருளை
நிர்விஷய சுத்தமான
நிர்வி காரத்தைத் தடத்தமாய் நின்றொளிர்
நிரஞ்சன நிராமயத்தைச்
சித்தமறி யாதபடி சித்தத்தில் நின்றிலகு
திவ்யதே சோமயத்தைச்
சிற்பர வெளிக்குள்வளர் தற்பரம தானபர
தேவதையை அஞ்சலிசெய்வாம். 3.

What an amazing combination of the two languages! One should sing this in Viruttam style in Raaga Chenchuruti.

Kaumaaram

sridhar_ranga · Post by **sridhar_ranga** » 29 Dec 2007, 01:36

@coolkarni sir:

K becoming G in the middle of a word could apply to KannaDa also I guess? recently a tourist guide in Hampi was explaining something about old kannaDa to our group and I asked him, you mean "halE kannaDa" trying to show off my "general klnowledge" ...he corrected me immediately pronouncing it as "aLeGannaDa" or something close to that...

Sri

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 29 Dec 2007, 06:25

On the rule of ka becoming ga in Kannada (or in general the 1st letter of a varga becoming 3rd):

ka *might* become ga in a samAsa pada (which dictates that there should be 2 words) as in the following examples.

haLe + kannaDa -> haLegannaDa
bisilu+ kudure -> bisilgudure

But you would not be terribly wrong by saying haLekannaDa and bisilukudure.

However, ka will NOT become ga within single word - as vinAyaka, oDaka, haruka, muruka etc

-Ramakriya