Ya-sruti in Prakrit
Summary
Satya Ranjan Banerjee’s paper examines the phenomenon of yā‑śruti in Prakrit languages, which refers to the pronunciation of the medial semivowel ya as a lightly articulated vowel after certain vowels in the Ardhamāgadhi and other dialects. The author begins by explaining that the term śruti itself implies a pronunciation used for recitation rather than writing, and that yā‑śruti means the replacement of the original ya‑kara by a lighter sound. Using examples from ancient inscriptions, Banerjee traces yā‑śruti in canonical texts like the Jaina Agamas and Prakrit dramas, and notes that although the phenomenon is regularly described by Prakrit grammarians such as Hemacandra and Markandeya, their prescriptions differ. The study surveys the treatment of yā‑śruti in Eastern and Western schools of Prakrit grammar and assesses views of scholars like Hemacandra, Pischel, Vararuci and others regarding the conditions under which yā occurs. Banerjee observes that while some manuscripts use the symbol for yā‑śruti after any vowel, other editors restrict it to specific environments. Through a detailed survey of grammatical commentaries and manuscript variants, the author concludes that yā‑śruti can usually be avoided in modern editions of Prakrit texts by retaining the semi‑vowel ya or a, as the phenomenon was largely tied to pronunciation. The paper also compares yā‑śruti in Jaina Prakrit with corresponding sound changes in non‑Jaina texts and notes similar elisions in Pāli and other Indo‑Aryan languages. By presenting tables of examples and citing debates on whether yā‑śruti should be restored, Banerjee highlights the editorial challenges faced by modern scholars. Overall, the article situates yā‑śruti within the broader evolution of Prakrit phonology and argues for a cautious approach to restoring this feature in critical editions.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
Banerjee concludes that yā‑śruti is primarily a pronunciation phenomenon linked to regional recitation practices, not an inherent morphological feature. While early grammarians debated its usage, the evidence from manuscripts and non‑Jaina literature shows that the insertion of a lightly articulated ya after long vowels can often be omitted in edited texts. Editors should therefore avoid automatically restoring yā‑śruti and instead follow the usage of the manuscripts they consult. The paper stresses that understanding the historical development of Prakrit requires recognising both grammatical prescriptions and the practical realities of scribal transmission.