|
this sets my mind on fire ! is 27 year-old Rishi the next Ramanujan [^] ?Quote: A grammatical problem that has defeated Sanskrit scholars since the 5th century BC has finally been solved by an Indian Ph.D. student at the University of Cambridge. Rishi Rajpopat made the breakthrough by decoding a rule taught by "the father of linguistics," Pāṇini.
The discovery makes it possible to "derive" any Sanskrit word—to construct millions of grammatically correct words including "mantra" and "guru"—using Pāṇini's revered "language machine," which is widely considered to be one of the great intellectual achievements in history.
[^] ,,, Quote: A major implication of Dr. Rajpopat's discovery is that now that we have the algorithm that runs Pāṇini's grammar, we could potentially teach this grammar to computers.
Rajpopat said, "Computer scientists working on natural language processing gave up on rule-based approaches over 50 years ago... So teaching computers how to combine the speaker's intention with Pāṇini's rule-based grammar to produce human speech would be a major milestone in the history of human interaction with machines, as well as in India's intellectual history."
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
I find that last quote a bit terrifying.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
All the people working the call centers in India are scared by that too.
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
|
|
|
|
|
Reading the article, the rules only apply to Sanskrit, not languages in general. It is remarkable that a language used over 2,500 years ago would have such well-defined grammatical rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latin and, to a lesser extent, Hebrew are also languages with well-defined grammatical rules and relatively few exceptions. Furthermore, both languages have changed so little that contemporary readers can easily read texts from 2,500 years ago, and, with care, a contemporary speaker of the languages could make themselves understood to a speaker from 2,500 years ago (if one could be found  ).
I am not a linguist, but I suspect that English, with its large variability over the short term, is very much the exception among languages. for proof, compare the English of the first Elizabethan period to that of the second Elizabethan period. There are major changes in grammar and usage over a period of less than 400 years.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
The main Nordic languages have evolved a lot from Old Norse, though Icelandic has remained largely unchanged. It is emigrants tend to preserve their language even as it evolves back at home. This is true of the French spoken in Quebec (words that are now archaic in France) and the Swedish that was spoken by my grandparents (born in Russia, and whose ancestors left Sweden somewhere between 500 and 1200). Perhaps Latin and Hebrew remained stable because they were important in religious contexts, which is also true of Sanskrit and Avestan.
|
|
|
|
|
Need to be objective here, and not just go by what the University claims.
There is a very critical discussion running in Sanskrit mailing lists, and in Indology groups about this. One such is shown here, by a person well versed both in software and in advanced Sanskrit grammar - Balanced Critique on "In Panini We Trust" by Neelesh Bodas - YouTube[^]. More such discussions are available.
|
|
|
|
|
fascinating ! as an outsider to Sanskrit's complex identity as "sacred tradition" (shastra), as the refinement of syntax and grammar over thousands of years by a priestly elite (Brahmins), the great Puranic explicators that Milton Singer refers to as "orthogenic literati" ...
i can only listen in ignorance and awe, and fall back on weak certainties that hagiography is always ... ultimately ... involved in the maintenance of secular power structures 
cheers, bill
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: priestly elite (Brahmins)
One correction, if you may please allow me ...
The greatest authors of Sanskrit, Maharshi Valmiki, Sage Vedavyasa, and the later ones including Kalidasa, Bhartruhari - none of them are Brahmins. No mention gets made about many other authors - even if they were Brahmins, they choose not to mention so. Also, the greatest of Indian Gods - Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, and the great warrior Arjuna to whom Bhagavad Geeta was told, are not Brahmins. When we look at the Sanskrit literature, the plays, poems, prose and other works of more than a 1000 years ago, it is evident that Sanskrit was the language of the common man, spoken, understood and written just as we do today with our languages.
|
|
|
|
|
Sri Amarnath,
I appreciate your enlightening comments: my reference to "priestly elite" is limited to the later period long after Indo-Aryan Sanskrit was no longer commonly spoken in its classical (Vedic as formalized by Panini) form, where the Brahmins, as institution, with "pure" Sanskrit as a currency for intellectual exchange, formed what Milton Singer called an "orthogenetic literati [1].
I should keep mu mouth shut, and go back and study more 
[1] Milton Singer, "When a Great Tradition Modernizes" 1972 ... I no longer access to this book,
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there was one thing my academic fellowship for study in India (social science, 1975-1976, UC Berkeley Fellowship) taught me ... it was that Mahabharata is like Indra's Net, a web of infinite interconnections between perfect, infinitely faceted, jewels, that defies any reductive generalities. I am "haunted" by its sacredness.
cheers, Bill
p.s. I was not in India as guru-follower, "spiritual seeker," etc.
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Mahabharata
Regarding Mahabharata, there is a saying - यदिहास्ति तदन्यत्र, यन्नेहास्ति न तत् क्वचित् | - "Yadihaasti tadanyatra, yannehaasti na tat kvachit", which means "Whatever is found here may be found somewhere else also, but whatever is not in this Mahabharata cannot be found anywhere else". Mahabharata is indeed an ocean. A local publisher has published its translation in Kannada, and it spans more than 40 volumes, of a regular sized book. Studying the entire set is itself a project lasting a few years.
We, a set of friends have embarked upon a study of the Bhagavad Geeta, which is a small part of the Mahabharata, and we have spent nearly 130 hours in the last 1.5 years, and have finished just around 35 percent of the Geeta; we are doing a study along with a detailed Sanskrit Commentary, and have lot of discussions in our study; so to complete it may take two more years. Three more small extracts of the Mahabharata are also in our study list - the Vidura Neeti, the Yaksha Prashna and Vishnu Sahasranama. Maybe a 10-year plan.
Another thing to note about the India is that there is an ocean of change between India of 1975/76 and of today. My own place Bengaluru, was a sleepy pensioner's paradise and garden city called Bangalore then, and now it grown beyond all bounds, with so many people making a comfortable, sometimes extravagant living here. Somehow, i feel that the Bangalore of 1975 was much better to live in, maybe I'm an old timer.
|
|
|
|
|
I really respect your commitment to scholarship !
The meaning of the Gita, the revelation of the "divine form" of Krishna, the content that appears to set varna/caste in "concrete" compared to the cosmic equality of all beings (5:18).
I probably should not continue with this type of content/discussion here on CodeProject.
cheers, Bill
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
