سيڪشن؛ رسالا

ڪتاب: مهراڻ 1/ 2004ع

 

صفحو :9

سمجهه ۾ ائين ٿو اچي ته ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ سنڌي الف – ب لاءِ هارون لوهار واري رسم الخط کي سونهون بنايو آهي، اُن جي باوجود اکرن جون ڪيتريون صورتون منهنجي نظر مان نڪتل ڪتابن ۾ ڏنل ڪونهن. ان سلسلي ۾ جن به چڱن تعليم يافته سنڌين سان لهه وچڙ ۾ آيو آهيان، اُهي اُن کان واقف ڪونهن. تنهنڪري مان يقين سان چئي سگهان ٿو ته وسرڳي آواز ”ج“ ۾ ”ڪ“ ۾ نج سنڌي آواز ”گ“ ۽ مورڌني آواز ”ڻ“ مشنري سوسائٽي جي اسڪولن ۾ بلڪ اڻلڀ آهن ۽ اُهي عام استعمال هيٺ آيل اکرن جي صورتن کان بلڪل نرالا آهن. اُنهن ۾ هڪڙي صورت ته نهايت مشڪل آهي ۽ اُها آهي ”ن“ جو مورڌني آواز ۽ اُن کي شروع ۽ وچ ۾ لکڻ وارو مسئلو. سنڌي ”ڱ“ ۽ ”ک“ واريون صورتون به کل جهڙيون آهن. ٿي سگهي ٿو ته گهڻي استعمال کانپوءِ اُهي عام فهم ٿي وڃن، مگر جن به سنڌين کي اهي ڏيکاريم، تن جي شاهدي ان دعويٰ کي رد  ڪيو آهي. هارون ”گ“ کي قديم سنڌي اکر ڪري ڏيکاريو آهي، مگر سڌاريل الف – ب جي پڌرائيءَ کان اڳ مون اُن کي ”ک“ جي شڪل ۾ ئي ڏٺو هو. جيڪڏهن اِها حقيقت ڪانهي ته پوءِ پراڻي وقت جي سنڌين وٽ ”نک“ موجود آهي.جڏهن ته اِنهن ٻنهي کان ”نگ“ وڌيڪ موزون هو.

”ج“ جي وسرڳي آواز لکڻ لاءِ عام طريقو”ج“ ئي موجود هو ۽ ”ڄ“ جي لاءِ ڪا الڳ شڪل ڪانه هئي. حالانڪه مون سنڌيءَ ۾ اُن لاءِ ”ڃ“ جي شڪل به ڏٺي آهي. جڏهن ته آخري شڪل وڌيڪ عام آهي. مون پهرين جي چونڊ ڪئي ڇاڪاڻ ته پيون اکر ”نڃ“ کي ظاهر ڪرڻ لاءِ مقرر ڪيو ويو، جنهن لاءِ قديم سنڌيءَ ۾ ڪو هڪ اکر موجود ڪونهي.

”ڏ“ جي صحيح شڪل جيئن هارون ڏيکاري آهي.”ڏ“ ئي هئڻ گهرجي. منهنجي اڳيان اِها ڳالهه بيسود آهي ته اُنهن مان ڪنهن به هڪ شڪل جي چونڊ ڪئي وڃي، ڇاڪاڻ ته ”د“ تي اِنهيءَ نموني ٽن ٽٻڪن سان ٻيو ڪوبه اکر ڪونه ٿو جڙي. سڌاريل الف – ب ۾ ٽٻڪن جو انبار هيٺ مٿي ڪرڻو پيو ته جيئن ”ٽ“ جي مورڌني آواز جون مختلف صورتون ٺهن. ٽٻڪن کي ڪهڙي نموني سان استعمال ڪجي، ان سان ڪوبه فرق ڪونه ٿو پوي، اهڙي قسم جا متبادل طريقا ڪوبه لاڀ ڪونه ٿا پهچائين. ڊاڪٽر جي پسنديده هندستانيءَ ۾ ”ٿ“ کي ”ت“ يا ”ت“ ڪري لکيو ويو آهي، جڏهن ته ”ڏ“ يا ”ڌ“ يا ”ڌ“ مان ساڳيو ئي مقصد حاصل ٿئي ٿو.

ڇا مون کي ”ز“ ۽ ”ڦ“ جي صورتن بابت ڪو اعتراض هئڻ گهرجي، جن کي گذريل وقت جا سنڌي ٻنهي شڪلين ۾ لکندا رهيا آهن. پوئين طرز سڌاريل رسم الخط ۾ استعمال ڪيل ”ڦ“ کان به وڌيڪ عام رهي آهي، ڇاڪاڻ ته پراڻي سنڌي لکت ۾ ٻنهي ۾ ڪوبه فرق رکيل ڪونهي.

”ط“ کي ٽن وسرڳي آوازن ظاهر ڪرڻ لاءِ ڪتب آندو ويو هو، جن مان هڪ ته اڳيئي بيسود ٿي چڪو هو، باقي ٻن بابت به ڪيترا اعتراض اُٿيا ۽ نيٺ اُنهن مان هٿ ڪڍڻا پيا، ڇاڪاڻ ته ُهي سنڌين ۽ لسانيات جي ماهرن لاءِ بلڪل اوپرا هئا. باقي ٻن ٽن اکرن ”جهه“ ۽ گهه“ کي ڪتب آڻڻ ۾ ڪوبه حرج محسوس ڪونه ٿيو. اِهي ٿورا اڻانگا ضرور آهن، مگر گذريل وقت جيان وسرڳي ۽ غير وسرڳي آوازن کي همشڪل ڪري لکڻ کان ائين لکڻ بهتر سمجهيو ويو.

مورڌني ”ن“ لاءِ الڳ نشانيءَ جي اهميت کي ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ به مڃي ٿو. ان سلسلي ۾ ”ط“ جو استعمال ئي بهتر ٿيندو. اُن سان گڏ ٽٻڪي جو استعمال بيسود ٿيندو، ڇاڪاڻ ته ٽٻڪو ڪوبه مطلب پورو ڪونه ٿو ڪري، جڏهن ته ”ط“ جي نشاني ٻئي ڪنهن به اواز کي ظاهر ڪانه ٿي ڪري ۽ ڪنهن ٻي نشانيءَ سان ڀلجي پوڻ جو به انديشو ڪونهي، تڏهن ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ جي اُن بيان جو ڪو مقصد ڏسڻ ۾ ڪونه ٿو اچي ته ”ط“ ٽٻڪي کانسواءِ لاڀائتو ڪونه ٿيندو.

”ک“ کي ”ڪ“ جو وسرڳي آواز سمجهڻ ۾ مون کي ڪا دقت محسوس ڪانه ٿي ٿئي. اِهو هميشه ”ڪ“ جو وسرڳي آواز ئي رهيو آهي ۽ ڪن حالتن ۾ اُهو غير وسرڳي به رهيو آهي. جيئن ته اِهي ٻيئي شڪليون بغير ڪنهن امتياز جي ٻن الڳ آوازن جي نمائندگي ڪنديون هيون ته هاڻ اهو عمل ڪو ايترو شديد ڪونه ٿو لڳي ته اِهي ٻيئي الڳ الڳ آوازن کي ظاهر ڪن. دراصل ”ک“ کي ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ جيتري مڃتا ڏني آهي، اُها اُن کان گهڻُو ڪارائتو ڪم ڪري رهي آهي. اُها قديم سنڌي لکت ۾ ”گ“ ۽ ”ڪ“ جي وسرڳ طور ڪتب ايندي رهي آهي. اِنهن ٽنهي اکرن مان ڪنهن هڪ جي حدبندي ڪرڻ هڪ قدرتي عمل آهي، جيڪي سنڌي آسانيءَ سان سمجهي سگهن ٿا. جڏهن ته غير سنڌي اُنکي آسانيءَ سان سمجهي ڪونه سگهندا.

جيڪڏهن ”ڍ“ لاءِ الڳ اکر جي ضرورت ڪانهي ته اهو جلدي خودبخود متروڪ ٿي ويندو. ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ جي سماعت جو احترام ڪندي چئجي ٿو ته اُنهيءَ اکر ۽ ڏ يا ڌ ۾ وڏو فرق موجود آهي.

مان پنهنجي مشاهدي جي بنياد تي گهڻو ڪجهه وڌيڪ چئي سگهان ٿو، پر جيئن ته مون ڊاڪٽر ٽرمپ پاران مسلمان سنڌي الف – ب تي ڪيل بحث جي شروعات ڪارائتين ڳالهين سان ڪئي آهي، انڪري وڌيڪ گفتگو کي بيسود سمجهان ٿو.

هندستاني نشانين کي هيٺين حالتن ۾ ڪتب آڻي سگهجي ٿو: 1- رسم الخط ۾ صدين کان ڪابه نشاني موجود ڪانهي. 2- جتي اهي سنڌي آوازن جو پورائو ڪري سگهندا هجن.

جيڪڏهن اِنهن ٻنهي شرطن جو پورائو ڪونه ٿو ٿئي ته پوءِ هندستانيءَ جو استعمال”بنا مقصد ۽ مونجهارو پيدا ڪندڙ“ ٿيندو. ”جهه“ ۽ ”گهه“ جي حالت ۾ هندستاني کي ڪن نون ۽ اڻ ٺهندڙ اکرن تي ترجيع ڏيڻ گهرجي (جهڙوڪ ط)، جڏهن ته ٻين اکرن جي حالت ۾ مون کي اهڙي ڪا ضرورت ڏسڻ ۾ ڪانه ٿي اچي ته ڪو وڏي مڃتا ماڻيل قديم سنڌي اکرن کي رد ڪري ڇڏجي يا اهڙن اکرن کي هٽائي ڇڏجي، جيڪي ڪجهه وقت کان وٺي ڪتابن جي ڇپائيءَ ۽ ٻين ڪمن ۾ بخوبي ڪتب اچي رهيا آهن.

        بي ايڇ ايلس

8 جنوري 1855ع                   اسسٽنٽ ڪمشنر سنڌ

(”سنڌ آرڪائيوز“ ڪراچيءَ مان هٿ ڪيل ”ڪمشنر اِن سنڌ جو پراڻو رڪارڊ ، فائيل نمبر187، عنوان: ”سنڌي ٻولي.“)

Report of the Paren Committee of th Church Missionary Society (London)

By

Ernest Trumpp

Station Karachi, November 1854

I am happy to inform the committee, that I arrived on the point of my destination safely through the grace of God, the 12 Septembe of this year. Directly after arrival I took up the study of the Sindhi Language. I am sorry to sah, that I found everything in a confusion respecting the Sindhi language. I addressed myself to different Europeans, who have been for many years in the country; to get some information from the commissioner down to the loweat official nobody knows anything of Sindhi.  The Only Man, Who took some interest in the language, was the assistant Commissioner Mr. Ellis, but instead of making things better, he had made them worse by his silly alphabet.

In order to clear away the rubbish, I worote the included ‘pamphlet on the “Sindhi Alphabet” which I am happy to say, received the approbation of the oriental Scholars in Bombay, and of the Comissioner in Sindh.The alphabet therefore which Mr. Ellis had introduced in the government schools and in the government offices will be dicarded and that proposed by me introduced. 

Respecting the alphabet I insisted, that the Hindustani Alphabet with 3 slight modifications, should be adoptedL

1-        Because it suits the Sindhi Language perfectyly, as being of the same stock.

2-       Because it is known to eery body, even to a great many natives.

3-       Because it faculitates printing of books and the indroduction of the romanized syste.

Respectiing other details I beg to refer to the pamphlet. I move a petition to Government to the effect that Government should print Grammar, Dictionary and some school books to which Mr. Frere Willingly agreed, promising that he would do all in his power that the press should be established in Karachi itself. The petition is at the present before the Council in Bombay, Which will, without any doubt confirm the arrangement as the Government is even worse off in the matter than the Mission. The books wchis I am preparing at the presen are:

1-        A Sindhi reading Book, with grammatical notes and derivation of words, affixed to it as dicionary.

2-       A Dicionary, Sindhi, - English in which the derivation of every Sindhi word is given.

3-       A grammar of the Sindhi language.

 The Grammar I intend to split into two separate onesL

1-        A comparatice grammar, i.e. A scientific grammar elucidation the Katchi, the Sindhi, and modern Panjabi, all these being one and the same family. These languages are the key to the other great western branch, namlyL the Baruhuiki, The Balochi or Irani, the  ?? and Pushtu.

We hafe therefore in the west of India two brances of the great Arian familyL

a-        The India’s languages: i.e. Katchi, Sindhi, and Western Panjabi.

b-        The intermediary languages, between India and IranL Brahuiki, Balochi, Pushtu.

There is immense field for exploring these languages, which are little, or ulterly unknown, and which will clear up the way to the west.

Besides a comparative grammar I intend to comile a smal practical Sindhi Grammar, in the romanized system for the use of missionary labour putting aside all speculation and merely giving the colloquial use of the language.

For translationg school books there is at the present no time whatsoever, I shall not touch any translation, before I am completely master of the language and answer for what I am translatin. I can there fore not come before the Committee with a proposal to translate the holy scrioueres before two or three years. I know, that a translation into Sindhi has bee exemted, but is is mere work of natice munshis, who are not answerabale for that they are translation, I shalll neve consent to put our holy scrioture at the mecey of a munshi. Such translations are only ephemerea, not a Kiyas eis lei?

At the present I am studying, except Sindhi, Persian, Arabic, Pushtu, which later language is a pure Arian (Sanscrit) language, and not a fabulous Herbrew one. It is a great shame upon all those, who said it was Hrbrew tongue and the Afhans the descendants of the ten tribes.

As soon as I shal have carried through the press any book, I shal lay it before the Committree. Meanwhile I can assure the Committee, that I am in India, some few indispositins exempted, the only thing I have to complain of are the fearful dust stroms here, which have caused me frequent ache in the ayes and disabled me whole days from working. I am therefore longing to exchagnge this unhappye vallye as soon as possible for the Panjab, yet I will subject my own will to the command of the Committee,

Remembring my self to the kindess and the prayers of the Committee.

Karachi 20th  November 1854                I remain

Church Mission House              Your humble and

      obedient servant

                                           Ernes Trumpp

(C13/076/22-CMS Papers, Birmingham University Library, England.)

***

Report by B. H. Ellis

Dr Trumpp has recently published a memorandum on th Sindhi language in which after a residence of a few weeks in Sindh, he has summarily disposed of all who have ever had anything to do with the language including the Sindhians themselves. A few comments are therefore reuired.

Much of Dr. Trumpp’s memo contains matter which was very well known beore, and this portion of course requires no remark. Some space is also devoted to the discussion of the Hindoo Sindhi – but Dr. Trumpp states that the great majority of the population being Mohommedan a charcter is required which Mussulmans will read, and to this poin he has principally addressed himself so that the portion of his memo relation to the Hindoo Sindhi, may aslo be passed over through the verry slighting way in which the Dr. speaks of the labours of the late Captain Stack would other wixe dispose and to enter more into detail regarding this branch of the subject.

This charcater has for many years been adoptted by mussalmans for writing Sindhi. But as a matter of necessity addions have been madeto the original characters to express the sound which exit in Sindhee but are not found in the Arabic.

Presisely the same course was adopted in Hindustan to suit the Arabic character to the language thre current, and it is rather late in the day therefore for Arabic purists to shudder at the idea of placing extra dots upon the original forms of Semitic letters.

The Sindhee alphabet lately published did not as Dr. Trumpp admits essentially alter the old system in fact the object was to alter it as little as possible, and the alternotion are realy much fever than Tr. Trump states. He admits in one plan that in th Mussalman’s attempts to express in the Arabic alphabet those sound which were not orignally in it here is great varaiety in their writing and yet he refuses to give the revised alphabet credit vor having adopted some of the varuos forms wchich differ from those he has himself learnt.

Whether the old alphabet as in use in Sindhi is “irrational” and “aribtrary” appears hardly to the point. The alphabet is not a new one wchich we might frame a philogical principle. The English itself would have a poor chance if a similarly attacked, and the onlye question, it apears to me, was form the first, what additions or amendments are absolutely essential to the competeness of the existing alphabet, and not wheter it should be oblished and German, Roman or other lettletters subsituted for its present forms.

I agree with Dr. Trumpp that it is sad, very sad to see such a blunder in language as the use of a ف with extra dots as the aspirate of پ. I regret with him the blunder, but I am not prepared to say with him “This letter must be struck out” when it has existed (in both the forms ف &  ڦ) for years as a part of the writtend Sindhee languages. I would rather quote his own words that “we are bound to take letters as they are not as we like”

The introducion of the Hindustani is objectionable, because it does not provided for all Sindhi sounds, and more especially because the very confusion which Dr. Trumpp talk so much of, will be created by forms which now represent certain sounds beings made to stand for other sounds e. g. ٿ  now Th, will become cerebral T. if this be not confusing a language, I confess I donot undeerstand the meaning of words.

I consider the question of the style of hand writing to be quite seprate. It is clear that the Nuskh is not well adopted for running hand and as we find in other languages the use os this style chiefly confined to printing, so no doubt it will be found expedient hereafteer to use in Sindhee a Nushtalik a running hand of some sort for office work, The forms used to express different letters hoever would be just the same as in the printed hadnd. As in Hindoostanee books are printed in one variety, and correspondence is carried on in an othe.

I merely mentioned this for fear of being misunderstood when I assert, that there is no advantage in point of clarity of wirting gained by adopting the Hindustanee. I mean thereby that the adopion of the symbols used to express sound in Hindustanee would not aeven in this point of view repay us for displacing those forms to which the majority of the people of the country have been accustomed for ages. Of course, the running hand is more quickly written than that used in printing; this is the case equally in Hindustanee, which has both styles of wirting. Sindhee might of course have the same.

Dr. Trumpp objects to the use of dots to express aspirates in a Semitic language and says “This must lead to confusing heap of dots and is contrary to the nature of the alphabet”. The latter objection is disposed of by the fact that an alphabet applied represents sounds foreign to it, must as a matter of course; add signs contrary to its original nature. This has been the custom in Sindh, and it appears to me not a whith more unphilogical than the heaps of dots and other devices engrafted in Hindustanee upon a Semitic alphabet.

And dotting is surely a less “Cumbrous” though more arbitrary way of expressing what wanted, thus ڇ is much easier to write as the aspirate of چ  than the double letter subtituted in Hindustanee چهه.. But this is mere matter of opinion – the fact is the letter exists in the language and is universally wirtten as ڃ. I theerefore see no reason for this expulsion,and so with the other aspirates where they exist, and are generally recognized in all writings ancient and modern.

The summary mode in which Dr. Trummp corrected the mistakes of the Sindhees and their blundering languages does not surprise me, but I am astonished at a profssedc philogist’s being satisfied with a represention of the sounds of  ڱ (ngya) by نڱ (ng). He might as well propose the abolition of the Sanscrit …… and that in future it be represented by …. And he will lfind after a longer intercourse with Sindians that ng is a very incorrect representaion of the pure sound ڱ. The same remarks apply to Dr., Trumpp’s substitution of  ني  for ڃ.

And Dr. Trumpp objects that it is against the nature of a Semitic alphabet to express a nasal sound by two dotsl. Of cours and it is eqally against the nature of a Semitic alphabet to represent andy sounds other than Semitic. Yet such is the duty a Sindhi alphabet has to perform, and Dr. Trumpp may not be aware, that a similar nasal sounds to the one in question is expressed in the Semitic alphabet which represented the Trukish languages by three dots with a guaf گ The philogical enormity is therefore none third greater in Turkis than in the revised Sindhee alphabet, and we have at any rate an analogous adoptin in a Semitic alphabet for the purpose of representiong certain nasal sound which do not exit in the original Semitic tongues.

With regard to the alternation exibited by Dr. Trumpp in his comarision of the olf and revised alphabets a few words are necessary. The ط was introduced in two ways and not in four as Dr. trumpp iners where the retention of dots could make no difference, they were comitted as cumbrous thus ج  expressed no more than ح  there being no other letter for which the symbol could be mistaken if written wighout the dots.

But there was one great objection to the ط and that was its being new to Sindhes. At the time of the revision of the alphabet I was no aware of  ٺ  being in common use for the aspirate of ٽ  The first I saw of it was its insertion in an alphabet published last August by oe Haroon Lohar of the Mission House, and subsequent search has confirmed me in the belief that this letter should have beenretained in the revised alphabet as having been used in old wirtings and being generally )Though very far from universally) inteligible to modern Sindhians. Therewould then of course have been no use for ت  this letter might thus be struck oft and the ٺ  of Haroon Lohar retainde.

The alphabet of Haroon appears to have been Dr. Trumpp’s guide in reference to the former Sindhi alphabet but there are many forms there in given which not only do not occur in books that I have seen, but are quite unknown to many Sindhees of good educaion whom I have consulted.

Thus I am pretty confident that the forms be given for the aspirates of J, and K for the peculiar Sindhee Sound fo G, and for cerebral N, are so rare, that if they do occur in M.S.  They must be considered rather as peculiarities in writing than as forms which have received the sanction of general use. One of these forms is an impossible one for how could be cerebral n ن be presented when initial or medial? The forms for the Sindhee G, and for Kh, are so absurd, that nothing but universal use could have justified fgheir retention, and to this they certainly have no claim for they are utterly unknown to every Sindhee to whom I have shown them. Haroon has entered گ  as an old Sindhee letter, but until the publication of the revised apphabet I had always seen G expressed by ک and if not, how is it that the old Sindhees has نک  when نگ would be expected as the nearer of the two?

نئون صفحو --  ڪتاب جو ٽائيٽل صفحو
ٻيا صفحا 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
هوم پيج - - لائبريري ڪئٽلاگ

© Copy Right 2007
Sindhi Adabi Board (Jamshoro),
Ph: 022-2633679 Email: bookinfo@sindhiadabiboard.com