RE: Oriya: mba / mwa ?

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Sun Nov 30 2003 - 15:09:52 EST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Brahmic list ? (was: Oriya: mba / mwa ?)"

    From: on behalf of Michael Everson

    >>Regardless of the etymology of that thing, though, what matters is
    >>whether all of these should be encoded with BA, and I wouldn't find
    >>it hard to go along with that: I've got a couple of sources ("Oriya
    >>Self-Taught" and an Oriya booklet, "Caattassaalli Paattha") that
    >>show a nominal form underlying this conjunct that looks like BA.

    >>But there's some confusion thrown into the mix, though, by the fact
    >>that they list the shape twice in their "alphabet" (their ordered
    >>list of consonants), one being where you'd expect to find a wa;
    >Who lists, where?
    Lists in the two sources I had just mentioned: "Oriya Self-Taught" and "Caattassaalli Paattha"
    >Compare these to the chart in N2525

    >ya ra lla la VA WA

    Which tells us what? That both the dotted-ba (VA) and the WA are attested as early as 1931, and considered by one source to be ordered after la.
    What I haven't seen is clear evidence that the wa-phallaa is considered to be related to nominal BA and not a distinct character falling after LA.
    Peter Constable

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 30 2003 - 15:54:21 EST