New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: lots of questions
in reply to a message by deann
Anand is of Sanskrit origin and means happiness, and used in the oldest texts. The word, from the prefix A + the root nand + suffix a was Ananda (long open A, dental voiced nasal n, dental voiced d, short closed schwa a) with the tonal stress on the last syllable. (The dental d is similar to the th- in the.) Stress in the vedic language was, however, often contextual, and disappeared early in the development of Sanskrit.
In many modern Indian languages of Sanskrit origin, words are usually unstressed. There is a length difference: the A is long and the a is a short schwa. A final -a is often dropped in Hindi (though written in the script): this gives you the pronounciation of Anand. The total length of the vowel A and that of the entire syllable nand is counted equal in prosody: both are longer than the length of a simple syllable like na.
In other Indian languages, the details will be different. For example, in Bengali, the same word will be Anondo, where the middle -o- could have a slightly differnt quality (short version of the sound in awe), especially when used as a word meaning happiness instead of the name. Again, no syllable is stressed, and, in Bengali, the length differences in syllables are almost imperceptible, so A-, -non-, and -do are almost equal in length.
In many modern Indian languages of Sanskrit origin, words are usually unstressed. There is a length difference: the A is long and the a is a short schwa. A final -a is often dropped in Hindi (though written in the script): this gives you the pronounciation of Anand. The total length of the vowel A and that of the entire syllable nand is counted equal in prosody: both are longer than the length of a simple syllable like na.
In other Indian languages, the details will be different. For example, in Bengali, the same word will be Anondo, where the middle -o- could have a slightly differnt quality (short version of the sound in awe), especially when used as a word meaning happiness instead of the name. Again, no syllable is stressed, and, in Bengali, the length differences in syllables are almost imperceptible, so A-, -non-, and -do are almost equal in length.
1
Replies
If I recall correctly, the name originally had two A prefixes - so, Aananda. Literally "not not joy" = joy.
1
Sorry, that is not how Sanskrit works. And, to understand it, you have to look at the spelling in a Brahmi derived script, or a transliteration of that where you know the transliteration being used.
In any case, there are two completely different letters: the a which is pronounced as a short closed sound schwa like the sound at the beginning of English about; and the A which is long open like the vowel in English car. The negative prefix is a- not A-, and, in front of a vowel (with one exception) becomes an-. `Not not' is therefore usually ana-, never aa-. In fact, the combination of two vowels without intervening consonant in the same word does not happen (for one possible definition of what counts as a word) in classical Sanskrit, and is rare even within a sentence.
Ananda is the correct spelling in the transliteration I am using. Unfortunately, this transliteration scheme uses both lower and upper case to denote separate letters, so one gets crazy looking transliterations like nandinI, and it is difficult to use when lower and upper case distinctions are not maintained. In such cases, people use a different transcription in which the Sanskrit A is represented as aa. It is the latter scheme which gives you aananda, which, since case distinction is not important in this scheme, can be written as Aananda.
As to the meaning, the prefix A- also exists. Its root meaning is a preposition, and like most prepositions is not translatable literally between divergent languages. It is used to mean from something towards or near something else (the ablative case with one exception signals the from, and the accusative case the to); but in many uses it means totally (`from something to itself'). Of course these do not correspond exactly to the English prepositions: `from' a group is often better translated into English as `amongst' a group; and in some uses it becomes a conjunction: `towards' is better translated in these cases as `furthermore'. Similarly, the meaning `as far as' is expressed by both the `to' and the `from' usages: A samudram and A samudrAt both mean roughly the same. And, in some uses, it weakens the word it controls: compare the English phrase `punishable by actions up to and including termination' is much weaker than just saying `punishable by termination'.
In any case, there are two completely different letters: the a which is pronounced as a short closed sound schwa like the sound at the beginning of English about; and the A which is long open like the vowel in English car. The negative prefix is a- not A-, and, in front of a vowel (with one exception) becomes an-. `Not not' is therefore usually ana-, never aa-. In fact, the combination of two vowels without intervening consonant in the same word does not happen (for one possible definition of what counts as a word) in classical Sanskrit, and is rare even within a sentence.
Ananda is the correct spelling in the transliteration I am using. Unfortunately, this transliteration scheme uses both lower and upper case to denote separate letters, so one gets crazy looking transliterations like nandinI, and it is difficult to use when lower and upper case distinctions are not maintained. In such cases, people use a different transcription in which the Sanskrit A is represented as aa. It is the latter scheme which gives you aananda, which, since case distinction is not important in this scheme, can be written as Aananda.
As to the meaning, the prefix A- also exists. Its root meaning is a preposition, and like most prepositions is not translatable literally between divergent languages. It is used to mean from something towards or near something else (the ablative case with one exception signals the from, and the accusative case the to); but in many uses it means totally (`from something to itself'). Of course these do not correspond exactly to the English prepositions: `from' a group is often better translated into English as `amongst' a group; and in some uses it becomes a conjunction: `towards' is better translated in these cases as `furthermore'. Similarly, the meaning `as far as' is expressed by both the `to' and the `from' usages: A samudram and A samudrAt both mean roughly the same. And, in some uses, it weakens the word it controls: compare the English phrase `punishable by actions up to and including termination' is much weaker than just saying `punishable by termination'.
1
Ah yes, it was Anananda that I read, not Aananda.
1