Hello, I have been reading this forum for a bit but I have never posted before. I hope this post is appropriate and finds you all well.
I have noticed that different English-language teachers make different choices as to how much they anglicize the pronunciation of Pali/Sanskrit terms— and additionally whether they use the Pali or Sanskrit word in the first place.
In my own conversations I incidentally tend to vary my usage based on who I am talking to. If I am talking to someone unfamiliar with Buddhism, I usually use very American pronunciations, e.g. CAR-muh, nur-VAH-nuh. I find that I do this partly to not ‘scare off’ someone who might be interested and to make Buddhism seem approachable. When I am talking with someone a bit more knowledgeable, I do my best to pronounce them in Sanskrit as they are spoken in Sanskrit. This is also how I read them in my head when reading a text.
I do find myself always pronouncing ‘Buddha’ the same though, dropping the breathy d to make bʊdə, rhyming with ‘coulda’.
I am simply curious to hear how the members of this forum pronounce these day-to-day and whether it depends on circumstances. Perhaps my flip-flopping is silly!
The longer a person is exposed to the correct pronunciation, the more natural it will come out in a conversation. What’s important is that any delivery be carried out with the intention to be accurate, and for many that means that the pronunciation won’t be perfect. As you said, different occasions bring about different pressure or obligations to perhaps make more of an effort, but that is squarely on the individual as far as how much that pressure will effect them.
The issue arises when accurate pronunciation is viewed as a representation of the speaker’s knowledge of more than just the language of itself, which it isn’t. Someone might pronounce words in Pali or Sanskrit perfectly, but be totally buried in hindrances.
Welcome to the D&D forum! We hope you enjoy the various resources, FAQs, and previous threads. You can use the search function for topics and keywords you are interested in. Forum guidelines are here: Forum Guidelines. May some of these resources be of assistance along the path.
If you have any questions or need further clarification regarding anything, feel free to contact the moderators by including @moderators in your post or a PM.
The Buddha, it seems would have agreed with your way of communication…
MN139
‘Don’t insist on popular terms and don’t overstep normal labels.’
That’s what I said, but why did I say it?
And how do you insist on popular terms and overstep normal labels?
It’s when among different populations they label the same thing as a ‘cup’, a ‘bowl’, a ‘jar’, a ‘scoop’, a ‘vessel’, a ‘dish’, or a ‘plate’.
And however it is known among those various populations, you speak accordingly, obstinately sticking to that and insisting:
‘This is the only truth, anything else is futile.’
That’s how you insist on popular terms and overstep normal labels.
And how do you not insist on popular terms and overstep normal labels?
It’s when among different populations they label the same thing as a ‘cup’, a ‘bowl’, a ‘jar’, a ‘scoop’, a ‘vessel’, a ‘dish’, or a ‘plate’.
And however it is known among those various populations, you speak accordingly, thinking: ‘It seems that the venerables are referring to this.’
With “Buddha” - I normally say “Buu-dah”. But I have the feeling that the way to say it with veneration is “Buhd-ha” - where the “h” is slightly aspirated and accentuated with the “a” - almost as if expressing relief (“ahhh”). I dunno tho. Not an expert by any means.
