Chapter 4 Al-Biruni’s Views on Indian Linguistics In the field of linguistics, there are three influential linguists. The first, Panini (around 500 BCE), a Sanskrit grammarian from ancient India, the second, Slbawayh (760-796 A.D.) Arab linguist and grammarian from Iraq, and the third, Biruni (973-1048 A.D.) Persian grammarian and linguist from Iran. It means that Biruni as a linguist on one hand, was completely aware with the theories of linguistics, and on the other hand, he had proficiency over many languages, that’s why he was able to analyse different languages together accurately. In this chapter, which is dealing with scope of Biruni’s views on Indian linguistics, the theories of Biruni on Indian linguistics are discussed, in three sections: 1) Section I: Language, 2) Section II: Linguistics, and 2) Section III: Philosophy of Language. Introduction: Some philosophers assert, “The language is the ultimate principle of the universe, the master of gods, the ruler of the universe, omnipresent in the universe, and imperceptible by the sense.”‘ They did not think of language as a symbolic means for communication of the will, but they acknowledge it was substantial principle. In this regard, the Indian idea of language to some extent corresponds to the Japanese belief in the “soul of language.”^ The Greeks began their study of language chiefly to enhance the beauty of their language,^ whereas the Indians were lead to the study of their power of language from sacred point of view and mystical opinion. Since they believed in the mystical and sacred power of language. In India, the Brahmana scholars were the first people who started to study linguistics.'' At a very early stage, they concentrated their efforts on the study the sentences in the Vedas. But, gradually, they extended their study to a systematic analysis of their language. The Sanskrit grammar was first established by Panini in the fourth century A.D. After that, the critical modifications added by Katyayana (S'** Cen. A.D.)^ was a Sanskrit grammarian. This grammar was transformed into a final authoritative form by Patanjali in the 2'^*’ Cen. A.D. their study of the Sanskrit grammar after Patanjali ended in the elaboration of the established 246 doctrine. And except some growth in the philosophical theory of language, they made no advancement from the established grammar. The ancient grammarians of India analyzed all words into three elements: the declensional ending, the stem, and the root. Not all these root forms are correct, when re-examined by present methods o f comparative grammar. Nevertheless, we are surprised at the thoroughness and consistency of the ancient Indians in their study of grammar. The Western grammarians adopted abstract concepts such as the stem and the root for the analysis of their languages only after the modem age,’ when they came into contact with the ancient grammar of India.* Also in the field of morphology and phonology Indians also made very careful studies. For instance, in the morphological study of language, they made strict distinctions between the primary and the secondary verbal endings. Moreover, they accomplished a very elaborate system of declensions and conjugations. No other ancient nation has ever produced such a detailed system of grammar as India. In the phonological field they invented a very reasonable and scientific arrangement of the Sanskrit alphabet. They put the vowels first in order and then arranged the consonants. In the West, until very recently, phonology or the study of sonic elements never developed an adequate system. Although the Greeks and Romans in some measure inquired into the physiological structure of vocal sounds, they failed to achieve a clear and distinct view that equaled the system of the ancient Indians.’ Modem linguistics began to develop in the 18‘'’ century. The most eminent figures of Modem linguistics are Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913 A.D.) in Europe, Edward Sapir (1884-1939 A.D.), Leonard Bloomfield (1887- 1949 A.D.) in the United States, Johann Gottfried Herder (1744 -1803 A.D.) in Europe and Johann Christoph Adelung (1732-1806 A.D.) in Europe. The 1960s saw the rise of many new fields in linguistics, such as Noam Chomsky’s generative grammar, William Laboy’s socio-linguistics, Michael Hallidays’ systemic functional linguistics and also modem psycho-linguistics. 247 Biruni as an Eminent Figure of Linguistics: The earliest Persian grammarian and linguist, who is known to us called Sibawayh (760-793 A.D.).“ He was one the important student of the Arab grammarian and linguist Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad al- Farahidi (718-786 A.D.).'^ The most important book of Sibawayh in grammar and linguistics called the Book on Grammar (i.e. Al-kitab ji al-nahw), which was frequently published in Baghdad, Paris, London, Germany (Berlin), Calcutta and Egypt. Therefore, Biruni after great Sibawayh, without a doubt is considered as the first Persian prominent linguist. And, in fact, Biruni is regarded as the pioneer expert linguist, who long before the Modem European linguists such as James Burnett (1714-1799 A.D), Lord Monboddo (1714-1799 A.D.) and Sir William Jones (1746-1794 A.D.) in the 18"’ century analyzed numerous languages and evolution of human language very carefully. The theories of Biruni in respect to language can be categorized in three parts: (1) Attitudes of Biruni towards language as a system, (2) Linguistics views of Biruni in respect to language, and (3) Philosophical approaches of Biruni in regard with language. Section I: Language: Language is the human ability to acquire and use complex systems of communication, and a language is any specific example of such a system.'^ Language is a system of symbols, generally known as words, and the grammatical and other rules by which they are manipulated. The word language is also used to refer to the whole phenomenon of language, and in this sense language is one of several forms of human communication. The scientific study of language includes their historical development, characteristics, and use in society, is called linguistics.‘‘‘ In this section we shall to explain views of Biruni towards language, as a system of communication and expression. He express his thoughts and reflections pertaining to Indian languages especially Sanskrit 248 Attitudes of Biruni towards Language as a System: Biruni, who is thoroughly master in knowing more than six languages, indicates two aspects that are the primary traits of language as follows: (i) Repetition of the Nouns: According to Biruni this is as special peculiarity, which is considered as one the important characteristic of the Hindus language as well as the Arabic language. Although, Biruni believes that, this feature from the standpoint of linguistics is regarded as a defect. For instance, they call the Sun by a thousand different names according to their own statement, just as the Arabs call the lion by many. Some of these names are original, while, others are derived from the changing conditions of his life or actions and faculties. The Hindus and their like boast of this copiousness, whilst, in reality it is considered as one of the greatest faults of the language. For, it is the task of language to give a name to everything in creation and to its effects a name based on general consent, so that everybody, when hearing this name pronounced by another man, understands what he means. If, therefore, one and the same name or word means a variety of things, it discloses a defect of the language and compels the hearer to ask the speaker, what he means by the word. And thus the word in question must be dropped, in order to be replaced either by a similar one of a sufficiently clear meaning, or by an epithet describing what is really meant. If one is called by many names, so that every tribe or class of people uses a separate one of them, and if, in fact, one single name would be sufficient, therefore, all the other names are to be classified as mere nonsense. And keeping people in the dark, and throwing an air of mystery about the subject. Anyway, this copiousness offers painful difficulties to those, who want to learn the whole of the language, for it is entirely useless, and only results in a sheer waste of time.'® Finally, Biruni says that the Hindus have a strong predilection to have as many names as possible, and to practice on them the rules and art of their etymology, and they take glory in the enormous copiousness of their language which they obtain by such means.'^ 249 (ii) Distortion of the Names: Biruni believes that when a foreign nation with a different language occupies a country, their tongues frequently mangle the words, and thus transfer them into their own language, as is, e.g. the custom of the Greeks. Either they keep the original meaning of the names and try to translate, but then they undergo certain changes. So the city of Shash, which has its name from the Turkish language, where it is called Tash-kand, i.e. stone-city, is called stone-tower in the book Geographia. In this way new names spring up as translations of older ones. Or, the Barbarians adopt and keep the local names, but with such sounds and in such forms as are adapted to their tongues. As the Arabs do in Arabizing foreign names, which become disfigured in their mouth. For instance, Bushang they call in their books Fusanj, and Sakilkand they call in their books Farfaza.'^ (iii) Distinction between the Classical and Vernacular Language; Biruni divides language into two parts. The first, a neglected vernacular and the second, a classical.