Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages c7.s1.t3: 2.1.3 Characteristics of Indic writing
Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages c7.s1.t3
- Language
- English
2.1.3 Characteristics of Indic writing
c7.s1.t3.1
With only a few partial exceptions (see n. 37 and 2.2.5.1), all of the Indic scripts (that is, Brāhmī and its derivatives, and Kharoṣṭhī) follow the same basic principles of graphic representation. This system is, in historical terms, a modified consonantsyllabic script whose basic unit is the graphic syllable (which by definition ends with a vowel) typically consisting of a consonant with or without diacritic modification to indicate the following vowel, and/or other modifications such as nasalization indicated by the *anusvāra* sign. Various diacritic strokes are added to the top or bottom of the consonantal character to indicate the vowels *ā*, *i*, *ī*, *u*, *ū*, *ṛ*, and so on, but the vowel *a* is treated as inherent in the consonant. That is to say, an unmarked consonant is to be read with the vowel *a*; thus early Brāhmī + = modern Devanāgarī क = *ka*; 𑀓𑀸 = का = *kā*; 𑀓𑀺 = कि = *ki*, and so on.
c7.s1.t3.2
This system, and particularly the inherent vowel rule, leads to certain complications. First, to represent a syllable consisting of a vowel only, without a preceding consonant,²⁶ these scripts require a set of full vowel signs in addition to the more frequently used diacritic vowels; thus Brāhmī 𑀅 = Devanāgarī अ = *a*; 𑀆 = आ = *ā*, and so on. Second, the representation of consonants which are not immediately followed by vowels, that is, of consonant clusters and of word, line, or sentence final consonants, also requires special techniques. Consonant clusters are represented by various types of ligatures of the consonants concerned, joined together or abbreviated in such a way as to make it evident that the prior consonant(s) are to be pronounced together with the following one(s), without an intervening vowel. Thus in Brāhmī the syllable *tva* must be written as 𑀢𑁆𑀯 (= Devanāgarī त्व ) in order to distinguish it from 𑀢𑀯 = *tava* ( तव ). Final consonants are indicated either by a reduced form of the normal consonant or by a special diacritic sign (called *virāma* or *halanta*) indicating cancellation of the inherent vowel (e.g., Devanāgarī क् = *k*, not *ka*).²⁷
c7.s1.t3.3
²⁶ Such occurrences are relatively rare in Sanskrit, which in general disallows vowel hiatus within and between words, so that in Sanskrit texts the full or initial vowels mostly occur at the beginning of a sentence or line of verse. They are commoner in Prakrit and other languages which do permit vowel hiatus, but even here they are often avoided by writing a consonant such as *y* or *v* to represent an intervocalic glide.
c7.s1.t3.4
²⁷ The notation of final consonants is a relatively late development, first appearing in the earlier centuries of the Christian era (2.2.5.2). This is due to the fact that Prakrit, in which all of the early inscriptions are written, does not permit word final consonants, so that their notation only became necessary later when inscriptions began to be written in Sanskrit.
c7.s1.t3.5
The Indic system of writing is difficult to classify in terms of the traditional typology of writing systems which recognizes three main script types, namely, logographic, syllabic, and alphabetic.²⁸ The Indian system is syllabic in the sense that its basic graphic unit is the syllable (*akṣara*), but it differs from a pure syllabary in that the individual phonetic components of the syllable are separately indicated within the syllabic unit. It thus resembles an alphabet insofar as the vowels have a separate and independent notation but cannot be called a true alphabet in that the vowels do not have a fully independent status equal to that of the consonants (this being the defining characteristic of an alphabet in the strict sense of the term). Although the Indic scripts do have alphabetic symbols for the vowels in the “full” or initial vowel characters, these were never extended beyond their restricted use for vowels not preceded by a consonant, and thus did not attain full alphabetic status.
c7.s1.t3.6
²⁸ Ignatz Gelb (*A Study of Writing* [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953], 188) admits to “disturbing problems” in connection with the typological classification of the Indic and similar script types, and does not reach a definite conclusion on the point.
c7.s1.t3.7
Various terms have been suggested for this type of script, intermediate between syllabary and alphabet, such as “neosyllabary,”²⁹ “pseudoalphabet,” or “alphabetic syllabary.”³⁰ There is as yet no commonly accepted term in the relatively rudimentarily developed field of grammatology for scripts of this type. Thus, for the present it may be best to refer to it by general descriptive terms such as semisyllabary or semialphabet (since it partakes of significant features of both systems), or, more precisely, as "diacritically (or alphabetically) modified consonant syllabary." Whichever terminology one might prefer to adopt, the Indic script family, comprising all of the derivatives and modifications of Brāhmī script in India and firmly entrenched that they were not subject to fundamental reform, or through the influence of the previously mentioned linguistic principle of the *akṣara*, or for other reasons; the vowel-cancelling marker alluded to earlier is, in general, used only when there is no other way to represent a vowelless consonant, such as at the end of a word, sentence, or line.³⁶ In any case, the result was that the Indic system, remarkable for precision if not for simplicity, has been preserved virtually unchanged in nearly all of the many scripts used for Sanskrit and other Indo-Aryan languages.³⁷
c7.s1.t3.8
²⁹ James G. Février, *Histoire de l’écriture* (Paris: Payot, 1959), 333.
c7.s1.t3.9
³⁰ Fred W. Householder Jr., *Classical Journal* 54, 1958–59, 382. Recently Peter T. Daniels (*JAOS* 110, 1990, 730) has suggested the name “abugida,” “from the Ethiopian word for the auxiliary order of consonants in the signary.” This term, however, is more likely to appeal to Semitists than to Indologists, who might prefer a name like “*akṣara* script,” this being the Indic term which would come closest to a designation of this type of writing.
c7.s1.t3.10
³⁶ This restriction has, however, been somewhat relaxed in modern usage due to the exigencies of printing, in which some consonantal ligatures are impractically cumbersome and are therefore sometimes split up by use of the *halanta* sign.
c7.s1.t3.11
³⁷ Note that some Indic scripts which have been adapted for non-Indo-Aryan languages have introduced simplifications that eliminate the need for consonantal conjuncts. Such is the case, e.g., in Tamil (see also 2.2.5.1), which regularly writes vowelless consonants in their full syllabic form and marks them with a dot (*puḷḷi*) to indicate that no vowel follows (e.g., கண்டம் *kaṇṭam*, ‘piece’).