산스끄릿어(Sanskrit) 또는 빨리어(Pāli) 표기상의 몇 가지 문제와 제안

Abstract

The Buddhist languages Sanskrit and Pāli have a considerable amount of externalities and look at what the two similar languages are experiencing, it will be almost impossible to draw a unified notation. Usually, the "Korean Linguistic notation" and various unification plans work as very important criteria, but unifying something in humanities research can bring more confusion than any order of order. In particular, in Indian or Buddhist studies, demanding unification in traditions shared by the Northern and Southern tradition while simultaneously speaking similar but subtly different languages, such as Sanskrit or Pāli Language, is no different from ignoring the context and characteristics of the two. Sanskrit in Indo-European languages is sometimes treated as a dead language, but it lives in the language of the text in the fast language, and, above all, plays a crucial role in the network of modern European languages. There will also be no language such as Sanskrit or Pāli Language in establishing the first largest system of grammar, phonetics, and prosody. The various uses and notation of these languages will continue to be found better, but for now, they will be firmly established by contrast to Chinese phonemes and by visiting European co-denominators. Above all, the vocabulary that Buddhist literature is choosing is valuable in that it is linked to the concept of more languages. Researching and developing this lies in discovering complex personalities while revealing diversity, not in cutting them off and neatly unifying them.