New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: Meaning of the name Saisha
in reply to a message by তন্ময় ভট্টাচার্য্য
Actually, thinking about it, a compound that is allowed in Sanskrit is sa (with, together; cognate with a part of the English same) + eSA (desire, from the root iS, to want, cognate with English ask). This would give saiSA 'with desire', though I haven't seen this word used ever.
1
Replies
Thank you Ora and তন্ময় ভট্টাচার্য্য for the information :-)
'with desire/wish' sounds good as a meaning! I had read about that meaning 'with desire' in some sites although all of them had the name spelled as Saesha (as sa + eSha/एषा) rather than Saisha (though I am not sure if that's going to be a big deal when telling someone the meaning of the name considering that the name itself isn't strictly following the rules of Sandhi)
I have also heard about one other meaning from a few people that Saisha could mean:
sa (with) _ eesa(ईश: Lord Shiv) - which means 'with Lord Shiv'
That could also be one reason why people give the meaning as 'God' in some sites (@Ora (hufflepuffer))
I am not sure if we can give either of these 2 meanings, or if one is more appropriate than the other per spelling or whether the spelling doesn't matter.
Could you give your input on that too please?
Thanks
Vivek
'with desire/wish' sounds good as a meaning! I had read about that meaning 'with desire' in some sites although all of them had the name spelled as Saesha (as sa + eSha/एषा) rather than Saisha (though I am not sure if that's going to be a big deal when telling someone the meaning of the name considering that the name itself isn't strictly following the rules of Sandhi)
I have also heard about one other meaning from a few people that Saisha could mean:
sa (with) _ eesa(ईश: Lord Shiv) - which means 'with Lord Shiv'
That could also be one reason why people give the meaning as 'God' in some sites (@Ora (hufflepuffer))
I am not sure if we can give either of these 2 meanings, or if one is more appropriate than the other per spelling or whether the spelling doesn't matter.
Could you give your input on that too please?
Thanks
Vivek
1
If you derive it from sa (with) + eSA (desire), it is following all the rules of Sanskrit grammar. It is probably just a neologism (not used before), but using productive rules, so this is OK.
According to Sanskrit liaison (sandhi) rules, sa+eSA is indeed saiSA, and the liaison is mandatory. sa + Isha (etymologically, 'master' from Ish, to own, but used as a common epithet of God, often shiva), would have been sesha instead.
Incidentally saisa means made of lead (from sIsa) so, the palatalization (sh instead of s) is important :-)
According to Sanskrit liaison (sandhi) rules, sa+eSA is indeed saiSA, and the liaison is mandatory. sa + Isha (etymologically, 'master' from Ish, to own, but used as a common epithet of God, often shiva), would have been sesha instead.
Incidentally saisa means made of lead (from sIsa) so, the palatalization (sh instead of s) is important :-)
1
Re palatalization: needs an explanation. The sound is actually retroflex, but retroflex sibilant in most of north India has moved over either to a velar sound (in a few conjuncts) or a palatal (and the phonological contrast between retroflex and palatal sibilants has thereby been lost). In East India, the process proceeds and only one sibilant is heard, which is either dental or palatal depending on the dialect, but in the west a two way: palatal/dental distinction remains.
1