Madhuvidya

SR No.: 006525
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 762
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Philosophy
File Size: 17 MB

Page 654

reviews and notices
GOSWAMI, Upendranath. A Study of Kāmarüpi: A Dialect of Assamese. Gauhati Department of Historical and Antiquarian Studies, Government of Assam. 1970. Price Rs. 15-00, IX + 312 pages. Reviewed by M. A. MEHENDALE, Deccan College, Poona.
In the book we find a detailed study of the Phonology and the Morphology of Kamarūpi, a dialect or Western Assam The author notes that "The people of Western Assam and their speech were looked upon with contempt and the term Dhekeri was applied to them." It is to be hoped that the situation has now changed. The treatment of the Phonology and the morphology is mainly descriptive, but we find that the historical and the comparative aspects have also been considered.
In the Introduction the author gives some useful information regarding the home of the dialect, the relationship of early Assamese and Kamarūpi, some special features of Kamarūpi which distinguish it from standard Assamese, and a brief analysis of the vocabulary of Kamarūpi. The author says that Kamarūpī has a distinct stamp because Kamarup remained as a distinct political entity for a long time and that the means of communication between the cast and the the west Assam were poor.
At the end we find an Appendix, which is divided under nine heads, some Specimens of the dialect, a Bibliography, and a Word Index.
•
On p. 56, the author purports to begin his treatment of 'Initial Vowels'. But his examples, kar, kalah etc., make it clear that what he means by initial vowels is really vowels in the initial syllable.
From p. 77 onwards the author gives examples of some' phonological chan. ges of a general character. Some of the examples cited by him are not quite happy. Thus, for example, he cites nārāyaṇa > nārān as a case of haplology (p. 81) which is not correct. Any word contraction is not haplology. Similarly the change noticed in pathasala > pātsālā (p. 83) is not a case of assimilation, since the retroflex th would have been replaced by th even in the absence of a dental
1.
2.
P. 13. The author does not explain the term 'Dhekeri '.
On p. 34, the author cites some words which he thinks are similar to Marathi. I am not able to recognise, except in a case or two, anything specially Marathi about these words.
MadhuVidya/629