On a Recently Published Dictionary of Classical Newari Dictionary of Classical Newari Compiled from Manuscript Sources

Indo-Iran J (2006) 49: 151–161 DOI 10.1007/s10783-007-9014-5 REVIEW ARTICLE

On a recently published Dictionary of Classical Newari Dictionary of classical Newari compiled from manuscript sources. Nepal Bhasa Dictionary Committee. CwasaP¯ as¯ a.¯ Kathmandu: Modern Printing Press, Jamal 2000, pp. XXXV, 530. ISBN: 99933-316-0-0

Siegfried Lienhard

This ambitious work, begun in the eighties, represents the most comprehensive dictionary of Newari hitherto published1 and thus fills a long-felt lacuna. Being solely devoted to the classical form of Newari (like Jørgensen’s Dictionary), it will undoubtedly render prominent service to Newari studies as well as research into Tibeto-Burmese languages and literatures. The project was realized by a relatively large group of members serving on the Dictionary-Committee and Sub-Committees, whereas the Editorial Board consisted of a rather small team of scholars. Pages XXXIV and XXXV inform the reader of the composition of these bodies in the years 1980, 1984 and 1990. The last page of the book wrapper, however, mentions as editors of the Dictionary Ian Alsop, Gurushekhar Rajopadhyaya, Kashinath Tamot, Saraswati Tuladhar and Omi Sharma but not Kamal Prakash Malla, who has served as Chairman since January 1980, as Coordinator since February 1990 and as Chief Editor of the Dictionary since 1996. Minor inaccuracies can also be met with in the precursory remarks which com- prehend a Preface (I–VI), an Introduction (VII–XVIII) as well as A Reader’s Guide (XIX–XXI), followed by a few sections dealing with the Principal Parts of Classical Newari Verb and Their Inflectional Suffixes (XXII f.), which is a some- what enlarged and rearranged reprint of pp. 55f. of Hans Jørgensen’s Grammar of the Classical Newar¯ ¯ı2 1941, a list of the Sources of the Dictionary (XXIV–XXX), a list

1These are: H. Jørgensen, A Dictionary of the Classical Newar¯ ¯ı, København 1936. – Th.L. Manandh- ar Newari–English Dictionary. Modern Language of Kathmandu Valley, Delhi 1986. – N. Gutschow, B(ernhard) Kölver, and I. Shresthacarya, Newar Towns and Buildings – An Illustrated Dictionary Newar¯ ¯ı– English, Sankt Augustin 1987. – U(lrike) Kölver (and) I. Shresthacarya, A Dictionary of Contemporary Newari. Newari–English, Bonn 1994. 2H. Jørgensen, AGrammarofClassicalNewar¯ ¯ı. København 1994. S. Lienhard () August Wahlströms vág 1, 8 tr, 18231 Danderyd, Sweden 152 S. Lienhard of the Abbreviations of the Grammatical Labels (XXXI) and, finally, remarks on the Transliteration (XXXII f.). The whole project was sponsored by the Toyota Foun- dation. The dictionary, published in large format, each page with two columns, is dedicated to the memory of Prem Bahadur Kansakar (1917–1991), an eminent expert on Classical as well as Modern Newari, who played an outstanding role in the cultural life of the Newars of the Kathmandu Valley in the latter half of the past century. Prem Bahadur Kansakar was not only—together with Madan Locan Singh—one of the two founders of CwasaP¯ as¯ a¯ (“Pen Friends”), the oldest literary society of the Newars, but also the originator of a great number of cultural Newar institutions such as, for example, the Asha¯ Archives. As has been described by K.P. Malla on pp. I and II, work on the dictionary pro- ceeded in three phases. While in the first phase (1983–1985) attention was mainly given to the bilingual Amarakosas´ (Sanskrit and Newari), compilation during the second phase (1986–1999) focussed on manuscripts belonging to poetry, drama, nar- rative literature and similar texts, and that of the third phase (1999 until completion) on manuscripts of ritual and technical content. The Editorial Board would have been well advised to leave out pp. III and IV, the tenor of which is very polemic, since they reject—in rather harsh words—certain theories advocated by Kashinath Tamot, one of the collaborators. Two more accounts can be considered as private and too detailed. The first one discusses some unpleasant and unexpected events that occurred during the last two decades of the project, the second one the continuation of the work after Prem Bahadur Kansakar’s death. The entries contain the following data: class and meaning of the lexeme, title and date of the text, etymology and, finally, an illustration of the use of the word, followed by an English translation. The lexeme upadesa´ one may serve as an example. upadesa´ one, v.p., to go to search. SVI.095a04 NS: 884 Ety. S. “pointing out, refering to + N. one. Ill. ji barajuy¯ a¯ upadesa´ one. I go to search for my father. The abbreviations v.p., SV, NS, S, N und Ill. stand for verb phrase, Swasthan¯ ¯ı- vrata-katha¯, Newar Samvat, Sanskrit, Newari and Illustration. Unfortunately, punctuation marks are not always put as consequently and clearly as in the example above. A general revision of the punctuation of the dictionary was, as it seems, no longer planned. The manuscripts and inscriptions referred to are listed on pp. XXIV–XXX, which also supply short descriptions of the texts. The initials of proper names are rendered indiscriminately either with capital or small letter (Siva´ beside siva´ , Sve-´ taketu beside svetaketu´ ). Moreover, the members of many compounds are sometimes reproduced separately (example: am. guli pata¯ ), sometimes in one word (example: amgulica¯). The information given in the entries is frequently insufficient, especially with regard to etymology. In many cases it is wrong, in still other instances the pro- duct of pure fantasy. It is of course by no means feasible to discuss each and every entry of a dictionary of this size. I have, therefore, decided to choose at random a restricted number of pages, in order to, within the limitation of this choice, examine only those lexemes which seem to be wrong or at least questionable. In spite of these restrictions this procedure of examination offers at any rate a relatively good, hopefully just and broad understanding of the laborious work of the editorial team of the dictionary.