Friday, November 7, 2014

86. ORTHOGRAPHY OF INDIAN PROPER NAMES- भारतीय नामों की प्राचीन परंपरा

A uniform system of spelling native names formed one of the essential preliminaries of the " Imperial Gazetteer," and has at last been authoritatively adopted by the Government of India. Thus a serious official attempt is to be made to finish the great battle of Indian orthography, which has now been raging for upwards of a hundred years. There are two systems of exhibiting Asiatic words in our own letters, " founded," as Sir William Jones said, " on nearly opposite " principles, but each of them with advantages. The first proposes " to regard chiefly the pronunciation of the words intended to be " expressed, the second consists in scrupulously rendering letter for " letter, without any particular care to preserve the pronunciation." In after years the second has received the title of the " scientific system" and the first that of the " phonetic system." Each has had a succession of able and persistent advocates, and during the century that the battle has raged, there has existed a complete state of anarchy as regards the spelling of Indian names, the confusion and absurdities of which have every year become more intolerably inconvenient. In the first years of English occupation of India, proper names were written down by ear, without any attempt at correctness ; and according to the fancy of each writer. Thus we have " Sir Roger Dowler " for Sirdju'd-daulah, " Crotchy " for Karachi, and " Isle of bats " for Allahabad. For the word Khdn, the historian Orme has Cawn, while Dow adopts Chan. But the greatest variety of these barbarisms will be found in the speeches of Burke, a very fitting casket for such gems.1 1 Incorrect spelling is sometimes the cause of very serious errors. A striking instance is mentioned by Mr. Eastwick. The popular form of spelling Cawnpore led to the notion that it was a town founded by some Muhammadan Khan or Cawn. Hence it was supposed to be a place of no antiquity, and accordingly Thornton, in his " Gazetteer," says that it is quite modern. But the correct spelling is said to be Kanhpur, the city of Kanh or Krishna, and it is a place of primajval antiquity Dr.

The first advocate of any system at all was Major Davy, an officer who studied Persian in India just a century ago. He prided himself on his pronunciation, and was a strong supporter of the phonetic system. Major Davy instructed Professor White, the editor of the " Institutes of Timour," to use his plan of exhibiting the pronun ciation of the Persian language in our characters ; and the plan is retained, with minute care, throughout the work, which was published in 1784. But Major Davy had a contemporary who advocated the scientific system, and was the first to give the Nagari and Bengali alphabets accurately in English characters. This was Mr. Halhed, whose method is given in the preface to his code of Hindu law, compiled under the orders of Warren Hastings in 1775. Mr. Halhed made no distinction between the hard and soft d, dh, t, and th ; but every vowel in his system had its long or short mark above it. Sir William Jones, not satisfied with the system of Mr. Halhed, devised the alphabet which bears his name.1 He gives an analysis of each Nagari letter separately ; and provides for all the sounds used in Sanscrit, Arabic, Persian, and Hindu. He discarded the phonetic system, by which the pronunciation of Asiatic names was to be shown by English letters ; because there are no consistent rules of orthography in English, and every vowel may be used to articulate one and the same sound. Sir William gives the following sentence, as an example, — "A mother bird flutters over her young — " in which every vowel and the diphthong ou have the sound of u in but. He, therefore, used the Roman or Italian sounds of vowels. This great scholar thus identified himself with the scientific, which is hence also called the Jonesian system. It was scrupulously adhered to by Colebrooke and Wilkins. It prevails in the "Asiatic Researches," in the "Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal," and in that of the Royal Asiatic Society ; and it was adopted by Rottler in his Tamil dictionary, by Campbell in his dictionary of Telugu, and by Shakespear in his Hindustani dictionary. Hunter, however, adopted Khanpur as the correct form, to be spelt Cawnpur. He observes that Hindu Pandita give it Kanhpur, while Muhammadan Maulavis return it as Khanpur, and that local usage inclines to the latter form. 1 " A Dissertation on the Orthography of Asiatic words in Roman Letters," by the President, 1788. In the "Researches of the Asiatic Society of Bengal," vol. i. Also in the collected works of Sir William Jones, i., p. 176.

Dr. John Borthwick Gilchrist soon afterwards became the great advocate and supporter of the phonetic system ;x but the difference between his scheme, and that of Sir William Jones, lies entirely in the vowels. In the Jonesian system all distinct vowel sounds are represented by the same letters, and differences of length are shown by accents ; while in the Gilchristian system one vowel sound, vary ing only in the accident of quantity, is represented by two distinct letters. The plan of Gilchrist became the more popular of the two. He used the short u, instead of a, for the silent unexpressed inherent letter of the languages of India ; and substituted oo for the u of Jones. He also discarded the au of Jones (for ow in hoic) and substituted ou in its place. Dr. Gilchrist clearly states that his method of rendering Asiatic words is studiously founded on the orthoepy rather than on the orthography of their respective characters and languages; and he urges that, as the work is designed for British subjects only, there is no necessity for attending to general or continental pronunciation.2 Thus the names of Jones and Gilchrist became the watchwords of orthography and orthoepy, of the scientific and phonetic systems ; and their disciples continued to argue, while absolute confusion and anarchy prevailed in the spelling of the general public. For 30 years they had a fair field and no favour ; but, except among the learned, there was a decided leaning from the first in favour of Gilchrist's 1 " A Grammar of the Hindoostanee Language, or part i. of vol. i. of a System of Hindoostanee Philology," by John Gilchrist. (Calcutta, 1796.) " Hindoostanee Philology, comprising a Dictionary, English and Hindoostanee, with a grammatical introduction," by John Borthwick Gilchrist, LL.D., Hindoostanee Professor in the College of Fort William. (London, 1810. Again 1835.) * Halted. Jones and Wilson. Gilchrist. English equivalents. 8 a U As a in above, or « in up, fun. ec i i As i in hill, in, bit. ee i ee As t in police, or ee in heel. So u 00 As u in push, or oo in wool. 00 ti 00 As u in rule, or oo in cool. ni ai ni As ai in aisle, or ui in guide. ou au ou As ow in owl. 0 o a 0 As o in note, pole. As a in art, father, tartan. e e As e in there, a in mate.

CONTROVERSY BETWEEN MR. TREVELYAN AND MR. PRINSEP. 387 system. At last, in 1820, the Government ordered an accurate record to be made in English, of the land tenures, and uniformity became an important object. Dr. Gilchrist's scheme, in a simplified form, was then adopted, and the same system was used for maps and revenue survey records. The Record Committees succeeded in entirely reforming the orthography of names of places on this system,1 and it continued to be that of all official correspondence for many years while the Asiatic Society and scholars were faithful to Sir William Jones. This was only a lull. The battle began to rage again, in 1834, with renewed fury. Mr. Thompson, a missionary at Delhi, had written an English and Urdi dictionary in Roman characters, which Dr. Yates, another missionary, recommended to the Calcutta School Book Society. Mr. Prinsep protested against the innovation ; while Dr. Duff, a missionary, declared for the Roman alphabet. Sir Charles Trevelyan, then a young civilian, vehemently supported the publication of vernacular books in the Roman character, and on the scientific system. He allied himself with four missionaries, Duff,* Yates, Pearce, and Thomas, for the purpose of printing and circulating such books, and 57 had been published by the end of 1836.* Meanwhile a sharp controversy was carried on between Sir Charles Trevelyan, who upheld the scientific or Jonesian system, and Mr. Henry T. Prinsep, who maintained the superiority of the phonetic system of Dr. Gilchrist. Mr. Prinsep said that the system of Sir William Jones was a style of writing to be reverenced and respected, but not imitated, and that it should be reserved for recondite science.6 Mr. Trevelyan replied that the phonetic system of Dr. Gilchrist was not a system of orthography, but of kakography, or of confusion, mystification, and absurdity. While such was, he maintained, the 1 Reports of Record Committee, Aug. 6th, 1820, and May 12th, 1821. 2 Mr. H. Thoby Prinsep's Minute, June 1834. 3 " Dr. Duffs Modification of the Jonesian system, as finally approved by the Com mittee of the Calcutta Bible Society, with an alphabet," is given by Colonel Thuillier in his " Manual of Surveying for India," (third edition) p. 405 (note). * " Original Papers illustrating the History of the Application of the Roman Alphabet to the Languages of India," edited by Monier Williams. (London, 1859, 8vo., pp. 276.) 5 See " Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal," iii., p. 281. " On the Adaptation of the Roman Alphabet to the orthography of Oriental Languages," by H. T. P.

388 DIRECTIONS FOR REVENUE OFFICERS. plan of Gilchrist, the system of Sir William Jones, after having completely stood the test of learned criticism, after having gone through a probationary period of sixty years, and approved itself to the great body of scientific men throughout the world, was at last claimed for general use. It was true, as Mr. Prinsep had urged, that it had long remained unused except by scholars. But that was no reason why it should continue to be so. " The jewel," he declared, " must no longer remain shut up in a casket, but must be brought " forth to shine in the face of day. The money must no longer " remain hoarded in the treasury, but must now pass into circu- " lation."1 Mr. Trevelyan returned to England in 1838, and published his work on the education of the people of India ;2 but his missionary allies continued their labours, and in 1857 Mr. Mather reported that the Roman character, with the Jonesian system, was universally used by the missionaries in the Upper Provinces. In 1845 Mr. Crow, a deputy collector, published an ingenious treatise on the best mode of writing oriental words, in which he advocated the scientific system. But in the same year Sir Henry Elliot published a work in which he " conformed to the system of " Gilchrist, or rather to that modification of it in use in our " P^evenue Survey, which certainly has the merit of enabling an " Englishman to pronounce a word in such a manner as to make " it easily comprehended by the natives of Hindoostan ; while Sir " William Jones' system is better suited to the learned."3 Moles- worth also adopted the system of Dr. Gilchrist in his Marathi dictionary. In the directions for revenue officers in the North- West Pro vinces,4 they are instructed to convert Urdi and Hindu words into English according to an alphabet which is given in the Appendix. This alphabet has the double oo and ee, and the initial U for the Jonesian A. It is, therefore, on the Gilchristian system, and is the same scheme as that adopted by the Record Committee in 1820. It is recommended as " that which an Englishman " would naturally adopt, without aiming at great refinement or " accuracy." 1 August 27th, 1834. * Longman, 1838. ' , • 3 " Supplement to the Glossary of Indian Terms," by H. M. Elliot, B. C. S. Sudder Board of Revenue, Feb. 1844. (Agra, 1845.) * Published at Agra in 1849, para. 7. of sec. ii., p. 28, and App. No. 1., p. 89.

In 1851 Colonel Thuillier published his " Manual of Surveying for India," in which he devoted a section to the question of ortho graphy,1 observing that surveyors of all persons must be most interested and concerned in such a question. The rules he laid down were that all vowels were to have the Italian sound, no others being used ; all consonants to bave the ordinary English sound, the C being excluded and K or S always substituted ; the reduplication of consonants to be dispensed with as much as possible ; super fluous letters of all kinds to be dropped; and old established orthography of historical places not to be interfered with. But he allowed the double oo to stand for u, and the ee for i, as a com promise which would enable the generality of people to attain a better pronunciation. In his third edition of 1875 he of course adopted the official system of Dr. Hunter.2 Thus the phonetic system of Dr. Gilchrist was the one that was officially adopted in the Revenue and Survey Departments of the Bengal Presidency from 1820, certainly until 1851 ; and, indeed, it appears to be the system which enjoyed official sanction up to the issue of the Government resolution of 1870. The new system will, therefore, be opposed to that used in all the official despatches and records during a long course of years, which will be one source of inconvenience. When Professor H. H. "Wilson published his " Glossary of Indian Terms," he adopted the scientific system of Sir William Jones throughout, discussing the whole question in his preface ; and he gives equivalents in Roman characters for every letter in nine alphabets used in India. But a key is provided at the end of the book, in which the popular spelling is given, with a reference to the equivalent scientific form in the body of the work.3 These controversies prevented any uniform system of spelling from being introduced, and there was such hopeless confusion on the subject, that Mr. Thornton when he compiled the " Gazetteer of India," gave it up in despair. He simply inserted the names as he happened to find them spelt in official documents.4 Thus Amritsur and Ambala are the one in the first, the other in the fourth volume,5 1 Page 628. 2 Page 404 (3rd edition). Dr. Hunter's rules are given in the Appendix, p. cxcii. 8 " Glossary of Indian Terms," compiled by H. H. Wilson (London, 1855). * Thornton's "Gazetteer," Preface, p. iv. (1854). » The one " Umballa," the other " Amritsir." • •

390 professor wilson's system. though their initial letters are identical in the vernacular (the a of Jones and u of Gilchrist). A town and district having the same name are spelt quite differently. The word fath is spelt in eleven different ways, all wrong. Since the publication of this gazetteer the confusion has become worse and worse. Such uniformity as may have been secured by the Record Committees fifty years ago, when the phonetic system was in the ascendant, has long since disappeared ; and has given place to the most perplexing and deplorable anarchy, than which any system would be preferable. In 1858 the controversy broke out afresh, and was carried on with some spirit in the "Times " and other English newspapers, with Sir Charles Trevelyan, under the signature of Indophilus, and Mr. Monier Williams on one side, and Professor Garrett on the other. Sir Charles went out as Governor of Madras in the same year, and used his utmost influence to introduce the scientific system there in all official correspondence, but without auy effect. That system also found an advocate in Mr. Eastwick, who edited Murray's Handbooks for India in 1859 ; and Keith Johnston adopted it for the maps of India in his atlas published in 1861. It was also adopted by Mr. Thomas in his system of transliteration and application of diacritic marks to English type in the " History of India by its own Historians ; M1 and it is explained in a pamphlet issued by the Philological Committee of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. It also forms the basis of the rules issued by Colonel Walker for the guidance of officers of the Great Trigonometrical Survey, in spelling names of places.2 The Syndicate of the Uni versity of Calcutta, in 1859, published a key to Professor H. H. Wilson's system of transliteration as modified by that body.3 In this pamphlet it is observed that a general disregard of all fixed rules of spelling prevails ; and it is hoped that the adoption of a fixed system by the Calcutta University and the Education Department in Bengal will have the effect of gradually securing a general uniformity of spelling throughout the country in public documents and in literary productions. This key gives a complete and an optional form of Roman equivalents to be used for the letters of the 1 See page 342. 2 Dehra, Jan. 27th, 1865, Dept. Order, No. 33. 3 " A key to Professor H. H. Wilson's system of transliteration as modified by the Syndicate of the Calcutta University, and ordered to be adopted in University pro ceedings and records." Calcutta, 1869. Pp. 71.

DR. BADGE R's SYSTEM. 391 Sanscrit, Bengali, and Arabic alphabets. Every Indian letter must, in accordance with the rule of Sir William Jones, be represented by its fixed Roman equivalent. The vowels are to have powers as in Italian, but not as in English ; diacritical marks attached to consonants may at option be omitted in writing proper names ; but accents on long vowels must invariably be inserted. The best system for the transliteration of Arabic and Persian names has also been much discussed. The following is a statement of the system adopted by the Rev. Dr. George P. Badger, D.C.L., one of the most accomplished of our Arabic scholars. He says : — " My main object has been to convey the correct sound, and, as far as may be, to preserve the etymology of Arabic words, without resorting to unfamiliar expedients, such as the use of arbitrary diacritical points. " Nobody can be more aware than I am that neither of these ends can be perfectly attained without the aid of devices of some kind to indicate the sound of those Arabic letters which are foreign to our language. But bearing in mind that persons unacquainted with Arabic would undoubtedly fail to pronounce such words correctly even with that help, I have eschewed resorting to it, resting satisfied at present with giving, through Roman letters, the nearest approach to the right sound practically attainable by the generality of English readers. " I represent both the ^ and 2 — two radically different letters, the first a deep pectoral, and the second a slight aspirate — by our h. 'Whenever the latter occurs as the feminine termination of a word, and preceded by the vowel a, as in JHekkah Jezirah, the h is nearly mute, as in our heir, hour. a sibilant, and ^o, a faucial, I repre sent by s ; c and t, the former our t, and the latter like the same letter as more emphatically enunciated by Irishmen, by t ; and j and £ — the first a guttural and the second like our k — by that letter only. " The other Arabic letters, which have no equivalents in our language, are ^ j, ^ £, and £. The sounds of ^ and ^ are expressed nearly enough for all practical purposes by kh and dh respectively, j I write dz and zh, by way of distinguishing them, and also for etymology's sake, rather than because the expedients convey any very clear idea of the proper native sounds. Those who are puzzled by the combinations may content themselves with

392 DR. BADGER'S SYSTEM. pronouncing both as z. In order, however, to prevent the bizarre appearance of four consonants coming together in the transliteration into English, whenever either of these four letters is double in the Arabic, I separate the combinations by a hyphen ; thus, fakh-khdr, nadh-dhddh, kadz-dzdf, mtmdzh-zham. Fortunately, such words are of rare occurrence. " I adopt the same expedient with ^ — adequately represented by 8h — when that letter is doubled ; thus, hash-shdsh,fash-shdr. Also, when it occurs at the end of a syllable and is followed by h, as in Mdsh-had, which, otherwise, English readers might pronounce Ma- shad. And, again, when a syllable ends with h and the succeeding one begins with s, as in Ah-sd. " The guttural £ I express by gh, and the ^ with an apostrophe before the vowels a, i, u, when they follow that letter in the Arabic, as 'Abd, 'Irak, 'Ulamd, Sand'd, and after the vowels when it occurs at the end of a word or syllable, as rabla\ Bddha', ez-Zaila'. " The remaining Arabic consonants correspond generally with those of the English alphabet. The sound of our c, as in cat, being supplied by my use of k, I only resort to it, conjoined with h, to express the Persian s, which is equivalent to our ch in Charles. " There are only three vowels in Arabic, in sound like a, i, n, in far, pit, lunar, respectively. The Arabic equivalent of a takes, in some positions, the sound of e in beg — a grammatical nicety seldom correctly observed ; and I should have preferred expressing the corresponding Arabic vowel sound always by a ; but the use of the e has so long prevailed, especially in writing the definite article el (properly, al), and such words as Ahmed and Jezirah (correctly, Ahmad, Jazlrah), that I have regrettingly retained it in such cases. For the same reason I have retained the vowel o in names which have become familiar by long usage, such as 'Omar, 'Oman, 'Othman, which should severally begin with 'U. " To indicate the prolongation of a vowel, I place over it the familiar circumflex (*), as in Bukhdra, Turdn, Baghddd, in preference to the acute accent (') recently sanctioned by the Government of India, whereby the hitherto universal use of that accent by English lexicographers to denote where a syllable should be accentuated is overlooked, and its utility lost. I retain it with that object, which is one of great importance in the pronunciation

DR. BADGER'S SYSTEM. 393 of Eastern names. Thus, Kdjar, Mdskat, Ldhej, are severally marked as requiring the accentual emphasis to be given to the first syllable. " The Arabic diphthongs are ai, ei, au, in sound like ie in pie, ei in vein, and 010 in how. When doubled in the same word, I express the au by avow, as in Tawwdm. " The Arabic suffix ^, when used to denote an ordinary or gentilic adjective, I represent by y, which somewhat in the same way constitutes the formative of many of our English adjectives, as windy from wind, stormy from storm. I prefer this expedient to that which has recently been adopted, of expressing the suffix by a circumflexed i (as in Hindi), because that mark is generally used, as I use it, to denote a prolonged vowel, from which this adjective termination differs very essentially. The y in such cases should be pronounced with a ringing Italian t sound. " I notice, lastly, that in addition to the use made of the apostrophe, as stated above, I avail myself of it, as in English, to denote the elision of a letter, as in won't. Its utility is great in this respect, especially in transliterating compound Arab names, which generally require to be put into the construct case. Thus, 'Abd-el-Majtd, Ndsir-ed-Din, ' Abd-er-Rahmdn, should be written and pronounced 'Abdu-'l-Mdjtd, Ndsru-d-Din, 'Abdu-'r-Hahmdn, the apostrophe representing the elision of the e of the article, in its different forms here presented of el, ed, er, and the junction in one syllable of the u, the final vowel denoting the nominate of the nouns 'Abd and Ndsir, with the /, or second letter of the article, which remains. But however correct and desirable this style may be, I do not advocate its adoption in names which have become familiar to the ordinary English reader under a different form. " I wish it to be understood that my system is tentative only, and designed to facilitate the introduction of a perfect transliteration of Arabic into Koman characters, which shall correctly represent not the sound only, but also the etymology of the former language." Mr. Thomas, for the " International Numismata Orientalia," has adopted a system both for Arabic and Persian, and gives a table showing the systems of Sir "William Jones (1828), Mirza Ibrahim (1841), Mr. F. Johnson (1852), and M. Chodzko (1852), in their Persian Grammars, Dr. Wright in his Arabic Grammar (1874), Dr. Puerst in his Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (1867), Mr. Lane in

394 SYSTEM FOR THE " NUMISMATA ORIENTALIA." his Arabic Lexicon (1863-74), together with the Persian and Arabic methods adopted by himself for the "Numismata Orientalia."1 But the phonetic system, first advocated by Gilchrist, in spite of this great weight of authority against it, continued to have powerful supporters : chief among whom were Mr. Marshman,2 and Colonel Meadows Taylor. It was advocated by the latter very high authority on the ground that the English language possessed phonetic equiva- 1 Contrasted methods of transliteration variously advocated for Arabic and Persian, •with the systems finally adopted for the " International Numismata Orientalia." J. 2 3 4 5 S 7 8| 9 X 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 9 • 6 Num ismata Orien- him. c Numismata 4 1 1 aj i Orientalia. O c a Fuerst. R 1 8 M o A. Cho •g J UtUU. O o a Wrigh 2 £ W.J •E | C 1 ►.a i .F.J 5 «i o 1 j d & £ h h 1 .2 h i s S k s S » A i. P n CO a Pm \ a a a •.» • a t £ a t 'a » •a 1 a b b b b b b b b b i gh gh gh i g gh gh gh V P P P P P — — P — »-» I f f t t f f f I £> t t t t t t t t t o k ck k q k k k k k th or s ■ s 8 t t.0 th a th k k k k k k k k k z j J i dj g g j j j g g g g g - - g 5 ch ch ch tch 0 - - ch 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C t h h h hh h h h h h r m m m m m m m m m kh kh kh kh h h kh kh kh n. n n n n n n n n d d d d d d d d d J v, w T v,» T, Ou w V,W, ft w T, » w j z z z z d _d dh z d a h h h h, 6 h h h h * J t r r T r r r r r y 7 J y.' J y.i y y.i.e 7 j z 7. z Z z z z a z a a a e a, e, e a or e a ore a, S a J 3 J J j j - - ah - — i i i i. 1 i ory i i. e i u~ s s s s • 8 a s a 1 u Q u u u,o,6 o oru u oro u ■ cA ah •h sli til s S ah sli ah \^ a - a a a - a a 4 o° • s s s s s s s s IS— I or e - I - 1 - ce i. e 1 o*> l z I 1 (1 d ll ? d s u or o — u 6orou ft — 00 ft Q b t t t t t 1 t t t > ail or nw — an oou ati, 0 — ow, 6 au, 6 au la I | z z 7. z r. (111 7. z tS~ ni - ay ai, 6 — ey, ei ay, ai The diacritical dole may be omitted at option, but preferentially where the original text accompaniet the romanized version. 2 " Observations on the establishment of a uniform orthography of Indian names and places." (Londen 1870.) A pamphlet by J. C. Marshman, Esq.

DR. HUNTER'S SYSTEM. 395 lents for all sounds in Indian proper names. But, in the phonetic system, the sound rather than the othography of the Indian languages must be followed. Colonel Meadows Taylor drew up and submitted to the Secretary of State a set of simple rules for the use of English equivalents for Indian phonetic sounds.1 The scientific system is essential to the scholar. The phonetic system is supposed to be better suited for the use of travellers, and of the general public. Mr. Barton deprecated the notion that the claim of linguistic science and the necessities of popular usage were so opposed to one another as to be altogether irreconcilable. He, therefore, proposed that in a gazetteer or other similar work the scientific spelling should follow the popular one in each case in brackets. He thought that the requirements of popular utility might thus be reconciled with the claims of science.2 The present action of the Government of India originated with a proposal which was made by the Bombay Geographical Society in 1868, for the preparation of a vernacular and English index of Indian geographical names. On April 30th, 1868, the Government of India invited aid from the local governments in the preparation of such an index, and suggested the adoption of a uniforn system- of transliteration, at the same time drawing attention to Professor Wilson's modification of the system of Sir William Jones. Dr. W. W. Hunter, LL.D., of the Bengal Civil Service, was appointed to compile the Gazetteer of Bengal, and he was instructed to use his exertions to secure uniformity of spelling in the preparation of the other gazetteers throughout India, the system of Professor Wilson being again recommended as a model. Dr. Hunter submitted a plan, on November 6th, 1869, in which he recommended a com promise. The " scientific system," though admirably adapted for scholars, was allowed to be too elaborate for general use. The diacritical marks were omitted in Dr. Hunter's plan, and a certain freedom was allowed in spelling names which were familiar to the public, or had become historical, in an unscientific form. He divided such names into two classes. Some, such as Calcutta, 1 With a letter dated Sept. 26th, 1870. He also discussed the question in the preface to his " Manual of Indian History." 2 "Remarks on the Orthography of Indian geographical Names, with especial reference to the proposed new Indian Gazetteer," by the Rev. T. Barton, M.A., late Principal of the Cathedral Mission College, Calcutta. (Stanford, 1871.)

396 DR. HUNTER^ SYSTEM; Bombay, Lucknow, were to have remained unaltered. Others were to have been brought a little nearer to the pitch of scientific accuracy without losing their popular identity. Thus Dinapore, the correct form of which was said to be Danapur, was to be JDinapur. Cawnpore, which should be Kanhpur, was to be Caimpur. Oitde, which should be Avadh, was to be Oudh. The Government must, Dr. Hunter submitted, consider, not what is best, but what is practical. He endeavoured to get rid of accents as much as possible, but at the same time he attempted to show the true pro nunciation at a glance. Dr. Hunter's plan may be described as the nearest approach to the " scientific system " that it is believed the general public, in the present state of education, are able to endure.1 The Government of India approved of Dr. Hunter's plan for the Gazetteers on February 28th, 1870. A guide to the ortho graphy of Indian proper names was prepared in 1871,* containing the spelling of 2,186 postal towns and villages of India accord ing to Dr. Hunter's system; and on February 28th, 1872, this guide was ordered to be circulated to all the local authorities. A second guide was printed in 1872. 8 The plan of Dr. Hunter, thus sanctioned by the Government, was adopted in legislation, in the gazetteers, by the Surveyor General, in the Post Office Guide, in the Railway Time Tables, in the Telegraph Department, by the East India Railway, by the Government offices, and by several 1 The following are the powers of the vowels in Dr. Hunter's plan. They are identical with those of Sir William Jones and Professor Wilson. Short a - .- .- as a in the second syllable of tartan, and as u in but Long a - - as a in the first syllable of tartan. i - - as » in ravine. u - - '•- as u in rural. e - - as a in mate, dare. o - - - as o in note. at - r as i in ride, size. au - - - as om in cloud. He omits J and u of Jones. 2 " Guide to the Orthography of Indian proper Names, with a List showing the True Spelling of all post towns and villages in India," by W. W. Hunter, Esq., LL.D. Director-General of Statistics to the Government of India. (Calcutta, 1871.) Folio, pp. xiii. and 146. Dated at Simla, Nov. 10th, 1871. 3 Dr. Hunter prepared the second orthographical guide : — " Standard spelling of Indian geographical names, by W. W. Hunter, Esq., LL.D., Director General of Statistics to the Government of India." (Calcutta, 1872), pp. 162, octavo. It is arranged in three columns. I. Name as spelt in Dr. Keith Johnston's Royal Atlas. II. Correct spelling. III. Column for local verifications from the vernacular.

DR. HUNTER'S SYSTEM, 397 newspapers. Up to that time the spelling of the same place had varied in the different local gazettes. The Postal Guide spelt the name of a town in one way, the Railway Companies in another. Even two officials, dating their letters from the same place, often spelt it in a different way. The well known province of Sind was officially spelt in no less than six different ways, namely Scinde, Scvtid, Scindh, Sindh, Sinde and Sind. On June 27th, 1872 the Secretary of State in Council, having considered the ahove proceedings of the Government of India, addressed a despatch to the Viceroy, " on the orthography of the " Roman character of Indian proper names." In this despatch assent was given to the measures which had been adopted, but it was suggested " that some extension should be given to that part of " the scheme which permits a departure from the new system, in " the case of those places of which the names have acquired a widely " recognized mode of spelling, either from popular custom or in " consequence of historical notoriety." Vernacular lists were then prepared of the names of districts, towns, rivers, and places in the various provinces, and carefully translated, on the above basis, into the Roman character. In the case of well-known places which have obtained a popular or historical fixity of spelling, this customary spelling was to be retained. For other names the correct transliteration was to be enforced. In this way lists have been drawn up, approved, and published in the Gazette, for Assam, the North-Western Provinces, Oudh, the Punjab, the Central Provinces, the Berars, Bombay and Sind, Mysor, Coorg, and Bengal. That for Madras has not yet been received, and for Burmah it is not known whether any list will be prepared. Unfortunately the various compilers of lists have adopted no uniform rule in the selection of "names which are to retain an old and incorrect spelling. In some lists the number of instances in which old spellings have been retained is so large as to make the desired improvement a nullity. It is to be hoped that these inconsistencies will be eliminated before a general and com plete list is sanctioned. Dr. Hunter states that through the agency of the Gazettes, official reports, the new maps, and the greater part of the Indian newspapers, the adoption of the scheme is gradually becoming general. "But" (he continues) " the tangled growth of a century " cannot suddenly be transformed into order or cleared away. A

DR. HUNTER'S SYSTEM. " whole generation of Anglo-Indians must pass before general " uniformity can be looked for, but meanwhile the old standing " difficulties in the way of a uniform orthography for the 1 Imperial " ' Gazetteer ' have been removed." It is vain to hope that there will be a general agreement as to the best system of orthography for Indian proper names. At the same time uniformity has become essential, especially between maps and gazetteers ; and the official introduction of one uniform system, if there is a fair chance of its being generally adopted and becoming permanent, is undoubtedly a very great advantage. A recension of all the names in the Postal Guide of India was a very formidable undertaking ; and that Dr. Hunter should not only have completed it, but also have achieved so large a measure of success in his efforts to secure the adoption of the new system, are striking proofs of how much good service may be done by the judgment, tact, and per severance of one man, within a comparatively short time. It is very important that an authoritative general list, giving the officially adopted spelling for all names in British India, should be published without further delay.

No comments:

Post a Comment