DEBAPRASAD BANDYOPADHYAY

LINEAR HISTORY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE: SOME PROBLEMS OF

“INDIAN” HISTORIOGRAPHY(draft)

I wish to write the History of Language and Literature of X language spoken in India.

To me, history means chronological events with breaks—nothing more than that!

I have divided that X language into three periods: Ancient, Medieval and Modern.

At that moment of writing history, one of my learned friends came to my room and asked following questions:

•Does history follow the rail track?

•Are there any halting stations? Definite Breaks? Thresholds? Ruptures? Is history continuous or discontinuous?

•Is the discourse on the history of language and literature related to the non-discursive formation of power?

•Are the periods coming one after another in a linear manner?

•Is it a calendar? Sequences of chronological events?

He showed me the rail track—trajectory of train

Stations are coming one after another…

The next station….

The Destination….

.

According to my friend,

•History is not a mechanical rail track.

•Periods are not stations—coming one after another.

•Periods are not causally related…….

He then asked:

What types of methods related to the philosophy of sciences as well as historiography were followed by the historians of Indian languages and literatures?

He asked again,

Do you know what is historiography?

Writing history needs knowledge in Philosophy of History, i.e., Historiography, the methodological study of the writing of history and of arche-written histories (so-called oral history).

.

He observed:

Almost all the historians of Indian Language and Literature follow:

•Linear deterministic development of history with distinct periods: Ancient, Medieval, Modern.

•Periods are also causally related, i.e., history is perceived in (over-)deterministic way.

•That periodization of literature overlaps with the history of language as if changes in arbitrary substantive externalized language entail changes in literature or vice versa.

He called this as historicism. He explained me the notion of historicism and determinism and overdeterminism. He thought that these are necessary concepts to be learnt before writing history.

HISTORICISM

A hypothesis  that thinks that events /processes /states are (pre-) determined or conditioned by  inherent processes without being controlled by the human agents, i.e. history is pre-determined by some metaphysical forces.

DETERMINISM

Determinism is the pseudo-philosophical idea that every human action and decision or event, state and process, is the inevitable and necessary consequence of antecedent state/ event/ process. Cf. “Time present and time pastAre both perhaps present in time futureAnd time future contained in time past.”

-- The Four Quartets, T. S. Eliot

OVERDETERMINISM

Multiple, often antithetical or opposed or contradictory forces active at once in event, state and process, without falling into an overly simple idea of these forces being "contradictory."

Louis Althusser. "Contradiction and Overdetermination." In For Marx 1985

He said that there is a problem in causal relationship.

He said that someone called “David Hume” refuted the notion of necessary connection,

X is necessarily connected to Y

X determines Y

There are other factors that overdetermines the necessary connection between x and y.

X precedes Y.

But there is no necessary connection “really”

– in between X and Y .

That is ‘bad habit’ that states y entails x. i.e.,

x= f (y)

This type of entailment relationship does not work as there are only events.

Except Medical Science, none of the contemporary sciences follows entailment theory. (cf. Bertrand Russell. 1918. Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays)

Thus spoke Hume,

“We always presume, when we see like sensible qualities, that they have like secret powers, and expect that effects, similar to those we have experienced, will follow from them”

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding 4.2.16/33

In the Indian Philosophy, it is called

Asatkaryavada

What is that?

Satkaryavada (pre-existence of the effect in the cause): It maintains that karya (effect) is sat or existent (root ‘as’ means ‘to exist’). It is present in the karana (cause) in a potential and metaphysical form, even before its physical manifestation.

Asatkaryavada (non-existence of the effect in the cause: cause is not the embryo of effect): It maintains that karya (effect) is asat (a is a negative prefix) or non-existent until it comes into being. Every event/state/process, is a new entry-point and is not born out of cause. Carvaka and Nyaya-Vaisesika schools are committed to asatkaryavada.

My friend accepts asatkaryavada and Hume’s regulatory theory.

The causal relationship followed by the philologists is disturbed by the introduction of print capitalism, the institute for the constitution of the nation statist imagiNATION. The spelling as adjusted as prescribed by the language judge, language managers and language police (mediators) of the civil and political society play a crucial role.

My friend said, “Let me exemplify this with some instances.”

In Bangla, sixty or seventy years ago, Smito “blown, blossom, expanded, gentle” was pronounced as /siMto/. Cf. /biSSiMto/ “surprised”. Now due to spelling pronunciation it is pronounced as /Smito/.

The performers of Bangla recitations and Tagore songs prescribe to follow spelling (when singing and reciting) instead of pronunciations commonly used by the Bengalis.

Sondha > SOndha ‘Evening’ aMtma > attMa ‘soul’

NOTE: TAGORE’S NULLIFICATION OF

TATSAMA WORDS IN BANGLA The tatsama (Archaic Sanskrit words) words are not tatsama at all. The essence of tatsama is preserved in the disguise of spelling, though the pronunciation is totally different, e.g., sahya ‘tolerate’ is written following Sanskrit spelling, but pronounced as /Sojjho/. Tagore categorically nullified the existence of tatsama words in Bangla.

In these types of spelling pronunciations, which one is authentic and which is inauthentic?

Which one is chronologically earlier which one is chronologically later?

Antecedents and consequences are confused.

(Please note that the linear chronological order is disturbed in the cases of spelling pronunciation– anachronism observed! )

How do we know the authentic pronunciation?

For example, There is a controversy that /lalon/ (‘rear’, ‘bring up’, Name of a Fakir) was originally /nalon/. How do we attest originality?

Do we get something new in the content of Fakir Lalon Sai’s songs, if we get the original and authentic pronunciation of the lexeme “Lalon”?

Do we get something new in the content of Caryapada, if we can attest the nation statist authentic origin of those padas? (I will explain it later)

MY FRIEND, FURTHERMORE, PRESENTED THREE CASE STUDIES

The dating of the Rgveda: it is not the oldest Veda, but (re-) constructed in the 6th C. B.C. by marginalizing Samasongs by means of grammaticalization/ codification of Rg-recitations.

For detailed discussion please follow the following hyperlinks: •VEDIC SONGS: TECHNOLOGY WITHOUT MACHINEhttps://www.academia.edu/409175/VEDIC_SONGS_TECHNOLOGY_WITHOUT_MACHINE•FOLKSONG AND CLASSICAL SONG: THE DISCURSIVE FORMATION OF DIVIDING PRACTICE https://www.academia.edu/409174/Folksong_and_Classical_Song_The_Discursive_Formation_of_Dividing_Practice

Kosambi observed this anomaly:

Rgvedic Actions are put at 1500 BC (On internal evidence, not clear to me).…….The Rgveda has therefore to be divided into strata on the basis of language alone, much of which has now become obscure; Some of it was misinterpreted by later commentators ( Kosambi, 1975: 86).

The Jataka- narratives were composed almost 500 to 600 years (approximately within 1st to 2nd C A.D.) after the death of Buddha, though scholars had put it within the lifetime of Buddha. (6th C B.C.)—within the Early Middle Indo Aryan.

Buddha was an anatmavadin or nairatmavadin. anatman (Sanskrit, an- “non” the atman “I” , “soul”; Pali—anatta)— there is no soul.

If there is no soul, there is no question of rebirth.

Case Study-2THE TALES FROM JATAKA

•How did he, being an anatmavadin, subscribe Jataka Tales, the tales of rebirth?

•Buddha discouraged any questions on rebirth. It was redundant for him to discuss ‘useless’ things instead of discussing the question of sufferings.

Even he rebuked Kaibattaputta Sati and Malunkyaputta for discussing life after death and rebirth. (Mahatankha-Sanghaya sutanta, 1.4.8. culamalunkyaputtsutta, majhimnikaya, 63)

Almost all the historians of languages and literature ignored this fact of negating rebirth by Buddha and placed Jataka within the lifetime of Buddha.

My friend said, “Do we consider ksnikatavada (doctrine of momentariness) of Buddha as one of the methods of writing history of ephemeral and arbitrary signifiers? He added laughingly, “Then the whole project of writing this type of history will be sabotaged and collapsed.” In case of Child Language Acquisition.

CASE STUDY-3 ANALOGICAL FORMATIONS IN CHILD

LANGUAGEChildren are forming ”go- goed“ type of analogical formations, but they are rectified by the language-police/managers/judges or by the other-mirrors, e. g.,

•In the declension pattern of Bangla pronoun /Se/ ‘he’, children form /Seder/ ‘their’ in analogy with /ami/ ‘I’, /amader/ ‘our’. /Seder/ ‘their’ is substituted by the suppletive form /tader/.

•In case of Bangla numerals, children form /battriS/ ‘32’, /bayalliS/ ‘42’ instead of /bottriS/ and /beyalliS/ in analogy with previously learnt, /baro/ ‘12’, /baiS/ ‘22’…….

Julia Kristeva might find it as a case of primary repression at moment of child’s entry into the symbolic order. However, the question is:

which one is earlier and which one is later in the perspective of child’s ontogeny? Is it child’s fault?

With all these presuppositions, he asked me a peculiar question:

What is “India” in the phrase “Indian Philosophy” or in “Indian Languages and Literatures”?

If anyone has a chance to ask Dr. kapila (Samkhya Darsana) or Prof. Goutama (Nyaya Darsana) et al. or even Mr. Carvaka (?) the following question,

‘What do you think, as an Indian Philosopher or bharatiya darsanika, or as a Hindu philosopher, about the Indian Philosophy of science?’

(a)the meaning of India or bharata;

(b) the equation of Indian Philosopher or bharatiya darsanika as well as the semantics of Indian Philosophy/ bharatiya darsana;

(c) the meaning of ‘Hindu’;

They may ask in return, ‘What are these, you are talking about?’

They might be perplexed to answer such questions as they do not know

In fact, there are problems, when we are talking about something called “India”. We forget, at the moment of speaking about it that

•“India” is a socio-political construct that was born out of (mainly) 19 C. Industrial as well as print capitalist imagination of nation state.

•and that imagination was also appropriated by the different modes of colonialism.

My learned friend also clarified it with examples from Indian History of literature and language.

In case of History of Bangla, Odia, Maitheli or Nepali languages and literatures, the same question might be asked.

He said, “Use a time-machine and go to the 9th C.Eand ask

Luipada (one of the Carya- poets) or Candidasa (composer of Srikrsnakirtana) or the king Laksmanasena:

Are you a Bengali?”

Obviously they did not understand the connotation of Bangla/Bengali etc. that was a 19th C. product/construct or a historical apriori.

Caryapada is perceived and claimed as the ancestor of Bangla/ Odia /Maitheli /Assamese or Nepali languages.

It is a case of hasty generalization.

It is a fallacy!

As universal conclusion is drawn from a small sample (of 47 padas/poems) of population, viz. , Caryapadakaras and is applied to a large population.

We are assigning/ascribing/stipulating “Banglaness”, “Odianeness” etc. to the ancient texts and text-writers according to contemporary connotation of these nation states without considering the subjective appeal and positionality of the then agents. Thus, we are ignoring their subjective identity. They do not claim themselves as the citizens of nation state.

That is

genealogy of language and literature is constructed on the basis of retrospection.

attesting past by the knowledge of the present: looking back or reviewing past events/process/state through the episteme of the present.

This may be called as Pratyabhijna(as it is defined in the Nyaya darsana)

Or, rather a genealogical fantasy (Derrida, 1998)

My friend suggested that

it is ridiculous to talk about time without considering the space

as space and time are hyphenated in the contemporary physics as well as in philosophy.

My friend pointed out another problem in association with the concept of space-time:

What is the spatial boundary of that language and its literature ?

How do you determine that boundary?

Is it a geo-political construct?

A fellow was searching in the ground something at Krishna Nagar, Nadia, West Bengal. When I asked him, his answer was precise,

“I am searching Tropic of Cancer.”

)

My friend, juxtaposing Lacanian imaginary order with Anderson’s ‘nation as imagination’, cited Wittgenstein: “He sees a way of dividing the country different from that one used on the ordinary map. He feels tempted, say, to use the name ‘Devonshire’ not for the country with its conventional boundary, but for a region differently bounded. He could express these by saying, ‘Isn’t it absurd to make this a country, to draw the boundaries here?’ But what he says is: ‘The real Devonshire is this.’ We could answer: ‘What you want is only a new notation, and by a new notation no facts of geography are changed ‘“(Blue Book, pg. 57)

My friend said, “Take the instance of epenthesis in Bangla. /Koirra/ of so-called Bangali ‘dialect’(?) has become ‘kore’ in the Standard colloquial Bangla (SCB).

None pointed out that SCB is “derived” (?) from Bangali ‘dialect’(?)!!!

The derivation from one language-space to another language-space, the determination of privileged language-space is determined by some ‘other’ extra-/non linguistic factors or non-discursive formation of power.

He opened a new file—the file of memory!

He said, “In our memory, you may find a peculiar factor: diachronic events/ states/ processes are synchronized with and without calendar. This may be referred to as

“DIACHRONY IN SYNCHRONY”

My friend compared it with

“fast forward-rewind” process in the magnetic tape—

Memory operates events/ processes/states to and fro.....

Traces of past or even present appropriate and codify events/ processes/states....

My friend said the in-between time t1 and t2, there may be a time i, at time of constructing periods of languages and literature

When S.K. Chatterjee posited a transitional period In Middle Bangla, he said,

“We have no genuine specimens of Bengali which can be relegated to this period, But the national legends of Bengal- The stories of Gopicanda, of Behula and Lakhindar and Khullana and Dhanapati, of Phullara and Kalaketu and of Lausena which are treated in great poems in the following centuries, where probably taking shape during this century. But nothing can be asserted about that language and literature of this period, although little can legitimately be guessed (S.K.Chatterjee, 1926: 131).”

Please note the discursive formation—he is placing some literary works before the stipulated period of time! Is it not a fast forward-rewind type of phenomenon?

Take for an instance, the pronouncement of the Hon. Chief Minister of West Bengal at the inaugural session of Kolkata Book Fair 2015.

She said,

“Rabindranath, Keats and Shakespeare belong to the same regime.”

She said the word, zamana, ‘regime’.

Many people ridiculed her,

but please think over it by considering her non-specialist memory.

•Are we not comparing Kalidasa’s Avijnana Sakuntalam with Shakespeare’s The Tempest forgetting the specific space-time?

•As a sahrdaya reader or as a connoisseur, do we not go through Faust and One hundred Years of Solitude at the same space-time?

•In the introduction to the translation of Meghadutam, Buddhadeb Basu (1957) compared Vidyapati, Tagore and Jibananda’s poems by showing affinity and contrast without considering chronological history.

What is common in their contents?

The THEME

I understand that my friend was approaching towards

Foucauldian genealogy

that attacked linear history with regular order. He defied truth-seeking logic of history following Nietzsche.

He proposed to write thematic archaeology of literature and languages.

An instance of thematic history (?): Modernity or Postmodernity is a concept, a mental attitude…Not a chronological period of definite time….

You may find modernity or post-modernity in this type of pronouncement, written in the 17th C Bengal, addressed to the goddess Kali: When there was no universe, of my goddess, how did you get such garland of human-heads?

The enunciation itself is sabotaging the spiritual concept of Kali, who is supposed to be existed before the creation as the above song starts with the adirupa (primitive/original form) of Kali.

Now, I do not find determinism in Eliot’s Four Quartets, rather I found anti-historicism or Foucauldian Genealogy. That is the jouissance of plural reading text.

“Time present and time pastAre both perhaps present in time futureAnd time future contained in time past.

If all time is eternally presentAll time is unredeemable.

What might have been is an abstractionRemaining a perpetual possibility

Only in a world of speculation.What might have been and what has beenPoint to one end, which is always present.

Footfalls echo in the memoryDown the passage which we did not take

Towards the door we never openedInto the rose-garden. My words echo

Thus, in your mind.”