A
TIBETAN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY
|
A TIBETAN-ENGLISH
DICTIONARY
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE
PREVAILING DIALECTS.
TO WHICH IS ADDED AN ENGLISH-TIBETAN VOCABULARY.
BY H. A. JASCHKE,
LATE MORAVIAN MISSIONARY AT KYELANG, BRITISH LAHOUL.
PREPARED AND PUBLISHED AT THE CHARGE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA IN
COUNCIL.
LONDON 1881.
Download (part 1 - 19Mb).
Download (part 2 - 19Mb).
Download (part 3 - 2Mb).
Password for archiv
(ïàðîëü ê àðõèâó): simurghus
About djvu file
format, (î ôîðìàòå
ôàëîâ djvu).
Ñëîâàðü Åøêå
(Jaeschke) äî ñèõ ïîð íå óñòàðåë, êàê íå ìîæåò óñòàðåòü ñëîâàðü äðåâíåãî
ÿçûêà, ñîñòàâëåííûé íà îñíîâå òåêñòîâ (êñòàòè,
îòñûëêè ê òåêñòàì - îäíî èç äîñòîèíñòâ ñëîâàðÿ). Ïåðñèäñêèå è ñàíñêðèòñêèå
ñëîâà äàþòñÿ â îðèãèíàëüíîé ãðàôèêå, òèáåòñêèå - â îðèãèíàëüíîé
ãðàôèêå ñ ëàòèíñêîé òðàíñêðèïöèåé. Ìàëåíüêèé àíãëî-òèáåòñêèé ñëîâàðèê
â êîíöå èçäàíèÿ - ïðèÿòíîå äîïîëíåíèå ê ñàìîìó ñëîâàðþ. Ïðèíöèïû
ôîíåòè÷åñêîé òðàíñêðèïöèè è ñîïîñòàâèòåëüíàÿ ôîíåòè÷åñêàÿ òàáëèöà ïî
òèáåòñêèì äèàëåêòàì ïðåäâàðÿþò äàííûé Ñëîâàðü.
PREFACE.
This work
represents a new and thoroughly revised edition of a Tibetan-German
Dictionary, which appeared in a lithographed form between the years 1871 and
1876.
During a
residence, which commenced in 1857 and extended over a number of years, on
the borders of Tibet and among Tibetan tribes, I and my colleagues gathered
the materials for this Dictionary.
We had to take
primarily into account the needs of missionaries entering upon new-regions,
and then of those who might hereafter follow into the same field of
enterprize. The chief motive of all our exertions lay always in the desire
to facilitate and to hasten the spread of the Christian religion and of
Christian civilization, among the millions of Buddhists, who inhabit Central
Asia, and who speak and read in Tibetan idioms.
A yet more
definite object influenced my own personal linguistic researches, in as much
as I had undertaken to make preparations for the translation of the Holy
Scriptures into the Tibetan speech. I approached and carried forward this
task by way of a careful examination of the full sense and exact range of
words in their ordinary and common usage. For it seemed to me that, if
Buddhist readers were to be brought into contact with Biblical and Christian
ideas, the introduction to so foreign and strange a train of thought, and
one making the largest demands upon the character and the imagination, had
best be made through the medium of a phraseology and diction as simple, as
clear, and as popular as possible. My instrument must be, as in the case of
every successful translator of the Bible, so to say, not a technical, but
the vulgar tongue.
Thus, in contrast
to the business of the European philologist, engaged in the same domain, who
quite rightly occupies himself with the analysis and commentary of a
literary language, the vocabulary and terminology of which he finds mainly
deposited in the speculative writings of the Buddhist philosophers, it
became my duty to embrace every opportunity, with which my presence on the
spot favoured me, to trace the living powers of words and of expressions
through their consecutive historical applications, till I reached their last
signification in their modern equivalents, as these are embodied in the
provincial dialects of the native tribes of our own time.
These
circumstances, it is hoped, will excuse and explain the system of my work.
As an inventory of
the whole treasure of the language, as a finished key to its literature,
this Dictionary, when judged by the high standard of modern lexicography,
may seem inadequate; I have, for instance, been unable to consult, much as I
could have wished to have done so, all the original and translated treatises
in Tibetan which, down to the present, have appeared in Europe, and the
reader of a Tibetan work may thus, here and there, look in vain for the
assistance he expects. On the other hand, a consistent attempt is here made
for the first time, 1. to give a rational account of the development of the
values and meanings of words in this language; 2. to distinguish precisely
the various transitions in periods of literature and varieties of dialect;
3. to make sure of each step by the help of accurate and copious
illustrations and examples. I have done my utmost to arrive at certainty
where, heretofore, much was mere guess-work, and I cherish the hope that,
from this point of view, my contribution will be welcomed by the comparative
philologist, and will be serviceable to the general cause of learning, as
well as a useful volume within that narrower circle, whose requirements I
was specially bound not to overlook, of persons whose main purpose is to be
taught how to write and speak the modern Tibetan tongue.
There are two
Chief periods of literary activity to be noticed in studying the origin and
growth of Tibetan literature and the landmarks in the history of the
language. The first is the Period of Translations which, however, might also
be entitled the Classical Period, for the sanctity of the religious message
conferred a corresponding reputation and tradition of excellence upon the
form, in which it was conveyed. This period begins in the first half of the
seventh century, when Thonmi Sambhota, the minister of king Srongtsangampo,
was sent to India to learn Sanskrit. His invention of the Tibetan alphabet
gave a twofold impulse: for several centuries the wisdom of India and the
ingenuity of Tibet laboured in unison and with the greatest industry and
enthusiasm at the work of translation. The tribute due to real genius must
be awarded to these early pioneers of Tibetan grammar. They had to grapple
with the infinite wealth and refinement of Sanskrit, they had to save the
independence of their own tongue, while they strove to subject it to the
rule of scientific principles, and it is most remarkable, how they managed
to produce translations at once literal and faithful to the spirit of the
original. The first masters had made for their later disciples a
comparatively easy road, for the style and contexts of the writings, with
which the translators had to deal, present very uniform features. When once
typical patterns had been furnished, it was possible for the literary
manufacture to be extended by a sort of mechanical process.
A considerable
time elapsed before natives of Tibet began to indulge in compositions of
their own. When they did so, the subject matter, chosen by them to operate
upon, was either of an historical or a legendary kind. In this Second Period
the language shows much resemblance to the modern tongue, approaching most
closely the present idiom of Central Tibet. We find a greater freedom in
construction, a tendency to use abbreviated forms (thus the mere verbal root
is often inflected in the place of a complete infinitive), and a certain
number of new grammatical combinations.
The present
language of the people has as many dialects, as the country has provinces.
Indeed, as in most geographically similar districts, well nigh every
separate mountain valley has its own singularities as to modes of utterance
and favourite collocations of words. Especially is it interesting to note,
in respect to pronunciation, how the old consonants, which would seem to
have been generally sounded and spoken twelve centuries ago, when the
Tibetan written character came into existence, and which, at any rate, are
marked by the primitive system of writing, remain still extant; every one of
them can still be disinterred, somewhere or other, from some local
peculiarity of language, and thus even the very diversity of modern practice
can be made to bear testimony to the standards imposed by what was termed
above the Classical Period. (Compare my Essay on the Phonetic System of the
Tibetan language in the Monthly Reports of the Royal Academy of Science at
Berlin 1867, p. 148 etc.)
I have already
adverted to the circumstances which, especially in the case of the student,
who has for immediate object to learn how to read and write the Tibetan
language, render existing dictionaries almost if not quite useless. They
give but scanty information concerning modes of construction, variations and
limits of actual application, shades of meaning etc. In my own case, I was
forced from the beginning to compile my own German-Tibetan dictionary, and
found myself for all practical purposes thrown back upon my own resources.
But the cause of truth appears to require a further word or two in regard to
the Lexicon by Professor I. J. Schmidt of St. Petersburg, the relation of
that work to its predecessors having been left by its author in some
obscurity.
The first Tibetan
dictionary, intended for European students, was published at Seram-pore, as
long ago as 1826. It contains the collections, amassed in view of a
dictionary and grammar, by a Roman Catholic missionary, who was stationed in
eastern Tibet or close to the frontier in Bhotan. There was nothing to
assist him, except the scanty contributions, given by Georgi, in his
Alphabetum Tibetanum. He had to cope with an entirely unworked language. He
evidently took the one way possible of making acquaintance with it,
sufficient to enable him to understand, to speak, to read and write. Each
word or sentence was jotted down, as soon as it was heard, or was committed
to writing, at the request of the learner, by some native expert. After a
while, the attempt could be made to master a book. In the instance of our
missionary, Padma Sambhava's book of legends appears to have been selected,
a work which represents rather a low level of literature, yet just on that
account, perhaps, as a specimen of popular and current literature, not
unsuitable to start from. Then, step by step, as best he could, our
missionary had to possess himself of some abstract views, which would serve
as a preliminary basis for a grammar. And had it been granted to this first
occupant of the field to reduce his materials to an ordered system and to
prepare them himself for publication, it is possible, that in Europe the
knowledge of the Tibetan language might have reached, some fifty years
earlier, the stage at which it has now arrived. The very name of that Roman
Catholic missionary, however, has been lost. The papers which he left
behind him, unsorted and unsifted, came into the hands of Major Latter, an
English officer, and were passed on by him to Mr. Schroter, a missionary in
Bengal. English was substituted for the Italian of the manuscript, and the
East India Company made a grant which defrayed the cost of the Tibetan types
and the further expenses of printing. But there was no Tibetan scholar to
correct the proofs. The author himself would doubtless, on reconsideration,
have detected and dismissed much erroneous or unnecessary matter. As it
was, many additional mistakes crept in during the passage through the press.
Thus the work, though it has a richer vocabulary than can be found in the
later dictionaries, cannot on any questionable point be accepted as an
authority, and has only value for those who are already competent, for
themselves, to weigh and decide upon the statements and interpretations it
advances. I have not been able to extract from it much that was serviceable
to me. Nevertheless, any one who knows by experience what time and toil
such a work must have cost, though its design remained unfulfilled and its
object unaccomplished, will not easily be able to repress his indignation at
the tone, in which this book in the preface to his Grammar (p. VI) is
recklessly and absolutely condemned by Professor Schmidt. High praise,
however, is awarded by the Professor to a second work, the Tibetan-English
Dictionary by Csoma de Koros, which appeared in 1834. This work deserves
all eulogy; but the Professor's manner, which imitates that of a master
commending a pupil, is, though on other grounds, as unwarranted and as
offensive in this as in the former case. The work of Csoma de Koros is that
of an original investigator and the fruit of almost unparalleled
determination and patience. The compiler, in order to dedicate himself to
the study of Tibetan literature, lived like a monk for years among the
inmates of a Tibetan monastery. It is to be regretted that, with the
knowledge he certainly must have possessed of the later language and
literature, he should have restricted the scope of his labours to the
earlier periods of literature, and when in his Grammar
conversational phrases are quoted as examples, they are almost without
exception in the dialect of the Kangyur, and of little practical value.
This
Tibetan-English dictionary by Csoma has been adapted for a German public by
Professor I. J. Schmidt of St. Petersburg. The translation from English into
German is good; in the general alphabetical arrangement improvements have
been introduced, and such as are in conformity with the spirit of the
language; moreover, three Mongolian dictionaries have been consulted, and
from these a certain number of words have been supplemented. But it cannot
be said that even on the work of revision Professor Schmidt has bestowed
much pains. For example, Csoma's rough grouping of words under the
principal headings is left unaltered, though here especially a reduction to
alphabetical order was obviously required. Mistakes and superfluities, very
pardonable in the case of a first issue of an original publication, are
repeated in this translation, and these cannot be so readily overlooked and
condoned, when they are made at second hand, and are sanctioned and
subscribed to by one, who has assumed so severe a critical and editorial
attitude.
The national
dictionaries of Tibet itself, so far as I have met with such, arc either
little handbooks, meant only to furnish a correct orthography, or they are
glossaries of antiquated forms. The absence of an alphabetical order in them
makes the business of reference very troublesome. It is by great good luck
that one sometimes finds an otherwise unknown word after a prolonged
search.
My own dictionary,
in the main, pursues the object and accepts the plan of the work, which was
published by Mr. Schroter. As I said at the beginning, I have not restricted
myself to the Classical Period, but I have endeavoured to deal with the
Tibetan language as a whole, though I do not pretend to have performed this
task exhaustively. My dictionary derives its matter and its principles, so
far as possible, equally from the literature and from the speech of the
people. Each word has been made the object of observation in its relation to
the context as it occurs in books, and in its value and place among others
when it is used in common conversation, and then the attempt has been made
to define its range and to fix its meaning.
All the words,
cited by Csoma and Schmidt, even such as I myself had never seen or heard, I
have embodied in this work, stating, in each case, the source from whence I
drew them.
The signification
in Sanskrit has been added, whenever this seemed likely to be useful or
interesting to the student of Tibetan literature. Of proper names only the
most important are given.
The great number
of diacritical marks will perhaps prove irksome to the English reader; yet,
they were not to be dispensed with, if the pronunciation of Tibetan letters
and words was to be represented with any degree of exactness, and the method
of Prof. Lepsius seemed the most eligible among all the systems available
for my purpose. The student, however, need not be disheartened, as he is not
obliged to make himself acquainted with all the minutiae of the system, but
need only direct his attention to the peculiarities of that dialect, within
the limits of which his inquiries, for the time, are confined. And by-the-by
it may be observed, that the multitude of little marks, of manifold
description, cannot be startling to the Indian reader, who was ever
necessitated to make himself familiar with systems quite as complicated, as
e.g. the Urdu alphabet.
One word more of
apology. Of publications in general it has been said, that "when human care
has done its best, there will be found a certain percentage of error". And
the probability is but too great, that this dictionary will exhibit a number
of deficiencies and faults, in the English text as well as in the Tibetan
transcript. Still, I venture to hope that an indulgent Public will be ready
to make every reasonable allowance, in
consideration of the peculiar difficulties, which attach to the execution of
a work like the present, and which, moreover, were not a little increased,
in this instance, by the fact that the compositors of the press were
altogether unacquainted with English.
I should be guilty
of great ingratitude, if I were not to mention my obligations to two
friends, without whose kind and efficient aid it would have been impossible
for me, in my present infirm state, to complete this work, which was
commenced in the days of health and vigour, viz. to the Rev. T. Rei chelt,
formerly a Missionary of the Moravian Church in South Africa, and to Mr. F.
W. Petersen, a relative of mine.
Further, I desire
to record my obligations for various acts of kindness, encouragement,
assistance and advice, during the prosecution of my researches and the
completion of my work, to À. Ñ Burnell Esq. M. R. A. S., in India; Dr. E.
Schlagintweit in Bavaria, Dr. Thomson and Dr. Aitchison of Kew, Dr. Kurz of
Calcutta, and R. Laing Esq. M. A., Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford.
Not the least debt
of gratitude is that which I owe to Dr. R. R ost in London, Secretary of
the Royal Asiatic Society, to whose exertions, indeed, the execution of this
work is, properly speaking, entirely due, inas much as he kindly interested
the Indian Government on behalf of my undertaking.
Herrnhut, January
1881.
H. A.
J. |
