Sprigg, R. K.

English

R. K. Sprigg

Crossref

D. N. Shankara Bhat: Tankhur Naga vocabulary. (Deccan College Building Centenary and Silver Jubilee Series, 67.) xii, 100 pp. Poona: Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, 1969. Rs. 15.

SOAS Research Online

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studieshttp://journals.cambridge.org/BSOAdditional services for Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies:Email alerts: Click hereSubscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click hereD. N. Shankara Bhat: Tankhur Naga vocabulary. (Deccan College Building Centenary and Silver Jubilee Series, 67.) xii, 100 pp. Poona: Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, 1969. Rs. 15.R. K. SpriggBulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies / Volume 34 / Issue 02 / June 1971, pp 427 ­ 428DOI: 10.1017/S0041977X0012991X, Published online: 24 December 2009Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0041977X0012991XHow to cite this article:R. K. Sprigg (1971). Review of D. N. Shankara Bhat 'Tankhur Naga vocabulary' Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 34, pp 427­428 doi:10.1017/S0041977X0012991XRequest Permissions : Click hereDownloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/BSO, IP address: 212.219.238.14 on 17 Oct 2012REVIEWS 427it is arguable that the particular form ofcontrol through personnel which the authorconsiders characterizes the period under study,may be a declining factor. A comparison withthe relatively more advanced Uzbekistanduring the same period would be illuminating.Mention of Uzbekistan raises an importantpoint which emerges from this study. In the1920's and 1930's the alternative to Russiancontrol for Tajikistan was not independencebut rule by the Uzbeks. In effect, the Russianserected a protective umbrella which permittedthe creation or reassertion (according to taste)of a Tajik nationalism. Tajik Soviet culture isthe subject of a chapter, but the omission ofany serious consideration of the position ofIslam and the heavy reliance upon Gafurov'sIstoriya Tadzhikskogo naroda as an epitome ofTajik historical writing does reduce its value.Dr. Rakowska-Harmstone's book is thereforeextremely interesting as a study of the politicalstructure of Tajikistan during a particularperiod and is a considerable contribution toknowledge. One's doubts centre on the generalpropositions about Russian imperialism whichare derived from it.M. E. YAPPD. N. SHANKARA BHAT : Tankhur Nagavocabulary. (Deccan College BuildingCentenary and Silver Jubilee Series,67.) xii, 100 pp. Poona : DeccanCollege Postgraduate and ResearchInstitute, 1969. Es. 15.Dr. Bhat describes Tankhul Naga as spokenby about 45,000 persons to the north-east ofManipur valley on the Bharat-Burma border.The greater part of the Vocabulary (pp. 1-72)is a morpheme dictionary arranged accordingto ' the alphabetical order of monosyllabicroots ', with every word containing a givenroot cited under the entry for that root. Thisarrangement will commend this section tocomparatists in the Tibeto-Burman field, fromwhom the greater part of its readers are likelyto be drawn. The ' alphabetical order ',incidentally, is not the roman but theDevanagarl order, with modifications, runningfrom k-, kh-, and y- to *- and h-.Specialists in Tibeto-Burman languages willalso be pleased to see that Dr. Bhat has beenable, in this later work, to meet one of thecriticisms levelled against his Boro vocabulary(reviewed in BSOAS, XXXIII, 2, 1970, 419-20) :he has included, in a section ' Root index ofEnglish meanings' (pp. 84-100), a list ofEnglish glosses of the various Tankhul' roots ',which will make it possible for the comparatistto see at a glance whether items that he isinterested in have been included, and to findthe entry without a lengthy search. It is, ofcourse, only by regular use that one can testthese two sections ; but, in a rough check, Iwas surprised to find ' iron ' and ' lead ' listed,but not ' silver ' or ' gold '. I was also puzzledto find ' six ' given as tharuk on p. xi, butthwtu on p. 48, and rut on p. 96.However, the ' Root index ' does make iteasy to exploit particular correspondences withBurmese and Tibetan cognates. One suchcorrespondence that comes readily to mind is ofTankhul th- with Burmese s- and with Tibetan(g)s- and sh- ; a glance through the th- entries,for example, yields (ka)thi ' die ', thir) ' tree ',(k2)thum ' three ', thdr ' new ', and that ' kill'.Between these two sections there is a furthershort vocabulary, ' Additional vocabulary '(pp. 73-83), in which the entries are not rootsbut unanalysed words, also in the Devanagarlorder, and comprising, for the most part,names of animals, and of unidentified flowersand plants.An ' Introduction ' (pp. ix-xii) gives a briefphonetic description of the symbols used, toobrief, really, for clarity. Pitch features areassigned to two of the tones (' high falling'and ' low falling ') ; but the pitch features ofthe remaining tone (' unmarked') are notdescribed. A more serious deficiency is that' since the tonal feature did not appear to bestable in word formation, and since no difinite[sic] rule could be formulated for its alternation,it has been generally neglected in the identifica-tion of roots except when the difference inmeaning appeared to be rather substantial '.When so much attention is now being given totone in relation to syllable-final features and tosuch syllable-initial features as aspiration,glottalization, and non-aspiration in the Lolo-Burmese sub-group of languages and inTibeto-Burman languages generally, it isimportant that the tonal characteristics ofTankhul should be adequately dealt with.One must hope that the author plans toremedy this defect in a separate study.Another phonological feature that is touchedon all too briefly is a ' sandhi change ' by whichprefixes that have their initials non-aspirated(k-3, p», ci) before roots with initial voicelessnesshave those initials aspirated (kha, pha) orfricative (si) before roots with initial voice ;for this statement seems to conflict with anearlier statement that ' p, t, and k becomevoiced intervocalically especially before avowel in low tone '. From that earlier state-ment one would expect root-initial p, t, and kto be voiced, intervocalically, to b, d, and gafter the prefixes k(h)a, p(h)d, and cjsi, inwhich case the prefixes would need to have theirmatching aspirated and fricative alternatives(khd, phd, si); yet such examples as cikay and428 REVIEWScitek fail to show either voiced initials (g, d)in the root or a matching fricative initial («)in the prefix.Some account of the relations of syllable-final consonants (p, t, k, m, n, y, r) and of -yand -w with the vowels (a, 3, i, e, u, o, ui) wouldalso have been useful. A brief analysis of theroots seems to show that u» is alone in occurringonly in syllable-final position. All the othervowels can not only occur finally in the syllablebut also combine with each of the syllable-finalconsonants too, and with -y and -w, exceptthat -iy, -ey, -uw, and -ow do not seem to occur.Of the initial consonants k and kh seem not tocombine with the vowel i, an instance ofsimilarity with contemporary Burmese.To summarize, then, Dr. Bhat's three pagesor so of' Introduction ' serve only to whet one'sappetite for a fuller phonological analysis ;but his Tankhul-English and English-Tankhulvocabularies should give wide satisfaction.R. K. SPRIGGJAMES E. BOSSON (ed. and tr.) : Atreasury of aphoristic jewels : theSubhdsitaratnanidhi of Sa skyaPandita in Tibetan and Mongolian.(Indiana University Publications.Uralic and Altaic Series, Vol. 92.) ix,398 pp. Bloomington : IndianaUniversity ; The Hague : Moutonand Co., [1969]. $12, guilders 44.The collection of aphorisms known generallyto the Mongols as Erdeni-yin sang subasidi hasbeen extremely popular among them, andamong the Tibetans, for some hundreds ofyears. The original text was composed by theSa skya Pandita, who died in 1251. There is noreason to suppose that a Sanskrit originalunderlies the Tibetan version, even thoughthe evidence of Indian influence is very strong.The book was translated into Mongol very earlyon, at latest towards the end of the thirteenthcentury or in the fourteenth. Mr. Bosson is byno means the first Western scholar to haveworked on, or indeed to have translated in full,this interesting and attractive text. Csoma deK6r6s was, in this as in much else, a pioneer,and other scholars to have worked on the textinclude Foucaux, Schiefner, and Campbell,who published a complete translation from theTibetan in 1925. Mr. Bosson's work, however,stands out from its predecessors by reason ofits scope and accuracy, and also, indeed, by theclarity he has brought to the interpretation ofwhat is frequently a puzzling original.The core of Mr. Bosson's work is a trans-literation of the Tibetan text, and the Mongoltext in the translation of Sonom gara, pub-lished by Academician Ligeti in 1948, followedby an English translation. For each stanza twoversions are given, the translation of theTibetan text being followed immediately bythat of the Mongol. Both texts have a limitedcritical apparatus. For the Tibetan, twoxylographs belonging to the University ofWashington were collated. For 59 stanzas ofthe Mongol Mr. Bosson was able to use acommentary made in the early seventeenthcentury by Dayigiing dayun siktt guosi. Hewas not able to consult the manuscript kept inLeningrad, but it became possible after thework was finished to quote from this manu-script some lines missing from Ligeti's manu-script, and which Ligeti himself had copied inhis own transliteration which appeared as Bolesmonddsok kincsestdra, Mongol nyelvendektdr,Budapest, 1965. Later Mongol versions ofSubasidi were also referred to, though notfor purposes of textual criticism. Mr. Bossongives in his introduction the necessary infor-mation about the authorship of the text and itshistory, and indicates the main points ofinterest in the ' pre-classical ' Mongol in whichthe translation is cast. The English version isfollowed by some 65 pp. of notes, a glossary ofwords discussed in these notes and of otherunusual Mongol words, a bibliography, and apostface in which work which has appearedsince this book was completed is referred to.Altogether this is an extremely competentand scholarly work, a model of its kind. It ispossible to disagree with some of Mr. Bosson'srenderings, but rather from the point of view ofstyle or emphasis than from that of technicalaccuracy. The Mongol text follows the Tibetanclosely, far more closely, for example, than doesthat of the eighteenth-century version by theChahar Gebshi (Caqar dGe bses Bio bzah ts'ulk'rims) which was published in both UlanBator and Mukden in 1958. To be really valid,criticism of Mr. Bosson's translation of theMongol should take full account of the Tibetantext on which it leans so heavily, and thereviewer, conscious of his quite inadequateacquaintance with Tibetan, offers the followingfew detailed suggestions with some hesitation.p. 106 : altan qatangyu bilgetele geskebesliboluyu ' while gold is hard, it is possible to meltit ' . I would suggest : ' while gold is hard, it isall right to melt it ' . The contrast lies in thefinal line of the quatrain : ' If one melts dogexcrement, a stench comes forth '.p. 108 : ariyalu goriigen oi-dur bilgutelekiling-tii ' while in the forest the carnivorousbeasts are ferocious '. I would prefer :' though they are in the forest, . . . '. Thesuffix -talaj-tele seems here certainly to indicateopposition or concession (' though ') rather than

Review of: Tankhur Naga Vocabulary by D. N. Shankara Bhat

https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/file/400923/1/Sprigg_review_1971.pdf

Tankhur Naga Vocabulary by D. N. Shankara Bhat

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

SOAS Research Online