I disagree with Sarvesh ji here
Sure. Outsiders may have seen it as different registers of same language. But I doubt if Indians ever regarded Prakrits as a register of "Sanskrit"
Also every Indo-Aryan tongue has a genealogical link to Sanskrit. Hindi does not stand out
Sure. Outsiders may have seen it as different registers of same language. But I doubt if Indians ever regarded Prakrits as a register of "Sanskrit"
Also every Indo-Aryan tongue has a genealogical link to Sanskrit. Hindi does not stand out
We shouldn't push this view that having a popular Prakrit with lots and lots of Tatsama words is somehow akin to learning Sanskrit - I see that view pushed in sections of H-twitter
Sanskrit is a distinct language. Learn it separately. If you can't speak it, say you don't know it
Sanskrit is a distinct language. Learn it separately. If you can't speak it, say you don't know it
The languages of Southern Europe today (be it Italian, Spanish, French) have a v v deep connection with Latin
They are suffused with Latin vocabulary
But that doesn't make them "Latin".
They are suffused with Latin vocabulary
But that doesn't make them "Latin".
The huge distance between modern Prakrits and Sanskrit can be illustrated with a simple word -
"is"
It is "है" in Hindi. Very distant from the Sanskrit अस्ति
In fact the Marathi आहे (for "is") seems a little closer to अस्ति than है
"is"
It is "है" in Hindi. Very distant from the Sanskrit अस्ति
In fact the Marathi आहे (for "is") seems a little closer to अस्ति than है
