Catastrophic English: English as a Dialect of Sanskrit

English as a Dialect of Sanskrit

As a general rule its harder to learn new languages as you get older and its even harder to match the linguistic abilities of a native speaker when you learn a new language as an adult.

Therefore, one huge linguistic advantage P. N. Oak had [and his writings still have] over most Western Academics was the fluency in four languages he acquired as a child.

P. N. Oak
Born at 9.54 a.m. On March 2, 1917 in Indore (Central India).

P. N. Oak was born in a Maharashtrian Brahmin family in which his father talked to him only in Sanskrit, mother only in English, relations in Marathi and town-folk in Hindi.

That gave him fluency in these four languages from childhood.

Back Cover: Author Biography
Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition

Coupled with his Brahmin family background P. N. Oak was well equipped to identify Sanskrit derivations [even mangled ones] in English and cultural doppelgängers in British Culture.

After obtaining his B. A. degree from Agra University and completing M. A., LL. B, courses of the Bombay University, Oak worked for a year as tutor in English at the Fergusson College, Pune and later having joined the army was posted to Singapore at the age of 24.

Back Cover: Author Biography
Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition

Brahmin is a varna (caste) in Hinduism specialising as priests, teachers (acharya) and protectors of sacred learning across generations.

Brahmins were traditionally responsible for religious rituals in temples, as intermediaries between temple deities and devotees, as well as rite of passage rituals such as solemnising a wedding with hymns and prayers.

Therefore, when P. N. Oak writes English is a Dialect of Sanskrit its worth spending [at least] a couple of minutes reading his arguments that have [according to Wikipedia] “been summarily rejected in academia”.

Chapter 25

English is a Dialect of Sanskrit

It is very seldom realized that English is as much a dialect of Sanskrit as most of the Indian languages.

Almost total ignorance of this fact has resulted in compilers of the English dictionary themselves going wrong.

They have either failed to give the Sanskrit origin of their words where necessary or have
provided wrong etymological explanations.

Take the word ‘upper’.

From its spelling it should be clear that its original pronunciation is ‘ooper’ and that is how it it used and pronounced in Hindi and Sanskrit.

And yet an English dictionary doesn’t tell the reader that ‘upper’ is a Sanskrit word.

Moreover, if only the English-speaking people stuck to the phonetic pronunciation ‘ooper’ they would have no difficulty in making themselves understood by Hindi and Sanskrit speaking people.

‘Mouse’ if phonetically pronounced would be ‘Moos’, it is not then difficult to realise that it is a truncated form of the Sanskrit ‘mooshak’.

‘Sweat’ in English is ‘swed’ in Sanskrit.

‘Name’ is ‘nam’ in Sanskrit.

In English it is also used in combination as in ‘pseudonym, antonym’.

The English word ‘synonym’ is therefore fully Sanskrit since in the latter language we would convey the same meaning by saying ‘sam nam’.

‘Centre’ phonetically pronounced would be ‘cen-tra’.

In English ‘c’ is often pronounced as ‘k’ as in ‘cut, cough, cot, caught’.

Using the ‘k’ sound of ‘c’ we find that ‘cen-tra’ is in fact ‘ken-tra’.

The equivalent Sanskrit word it ‘kendra’.

English pronunciation branching off at a tangent after it lost touch with its source – Sanskrit, has got its letter ‘c’ pronounced sometimes as ‘k’ or ‘s’ all confused.

Thus while in the word ‘centre’ the proper pronunciation should have been ‘kendra’, in the word ‘committee’ the proper pronunciation should have been ‘samiti’ because in the English alphabet ‘c’ is pronounced as ‘see’.

Committee when pronounced as ‘samiti’ can be immediately spotted out to be a Sanskrit word.

This indicates how English has slipped up on its pronunciation while retaining the original phonetic Sanskrit spelling of words like ‘committee’.

Taking the two words ‘central’ and ‘committee’ together we find, therefore, that they should be pronounced as ‘kentral samiti’.

We find that the term ‘central committee’ used in English, is identical with the Sanskrit term ‘kentral’ or rather ‘kendriya samiti’.

Its English usage has been confused and confounded because of two sounds ‘s’ and ‘k’ having been saddled on a single letter ‘c’.

The English pronouns you, we and she are truncated Sanskrit pronouns ‘yuyam, wayam’ and ‘sa’.

The Sanskrit word ‘madira’ for wine is still in vogue in English and other European languages as ‘madeira’.

The word ‘psalm’ (pronounced ‘sam’) for verse meant to be sung, is Sanskrit as may be
seen from the term ‘Sam Veda’.

The words ‘known’ and ‘unknown’ when phonetically pronounced will be seen to be the Sanskrit words ‘jnan’ and ‘ajnan’.

‘Truth’ and ‘untruth’ are not explained to be of Sanskrit origin.

That is an instance of the great etymological drawback of the English dictionary.

Remove the letter ‘t’ from the two words and one gets ‘ruth’ and ‘unruth” which are Sanskrit.

That proves that the letter ‘t’ is an English interloper in those two Sanskrit words.

The words ‘hunt, hunter’ and ‘hunting’ are of Sanskrit origin as may be seen from the Sanskrit word ‘hanta’, (meaning ‘killer’), ‘hantarau’ (two killers) and ‘hantarah’ (several killers).

The English prefix ‘para’ as in ‘para-thyphoid’, ‘para-military’, ‘para-psychology’ is the Sanskrit ‘para’ meaning another kind of or foreign or strange as in ‘para-desh’, ‘para-rashtra’ etc.

Another English prefix ‘dis’ as in ‘disparate, disentangle, disengage’ is the Sanskrit ‘dus’ as in ‘dushchar, dustar’.

‘Peri” meaning ‘all round’ as in ‘perimeter’ or ‘peripheral’ is Sanskrit ‘pari’ as in ‘pari-bhrama’ and ‘pari-matra’.

The English word ‘perimeter’ is actually Sanskrit ‘parimatra’.

Similarly, ‘trigonometry’ is Sanskrit ‘tri-guna-matra’ i.e. ‘three dimensional measurement’.

This indicates that the ancient world studied its mathematics in Sanskrit with the help of Sanskrit texts.

The word ‘metre’ for measure if phonetically pronounced is the same as the Sanskrit word mat-ra’.

In Sanskrit, Hindu tradition ‘matra’ is an all pervading measure used in music, medicine, mathematics etc.

Even in English prosody the measure is known as ‘metre’ as in Sanskrit prosody.

Moreover, even the divisions of a poetic line are known as ‘foot’ which is an exact translation of the Sanskrit prosodic terms ‘charan’ and ‘pad’.

Even the word ‘prosody’ is from the Sanskrit word ‘prasad’ – a quality essential in all verse, namely the ability to please the listener’s mind by its grace.

The blend of drinks called ‘punch’ in English is a Sanskrit word signifying a combination of five as in other Sanskrit terms like ‘punch-gavya’ (the five products of the cow), the ‘punch-amrita’ (the five-fold nectar), ‘punch-ratna’ (the five jewels) and the village ‘punch’ (council of five).

‘Soup’ is a Sanskrit word as is explained in Sir Monier Williams’ dictionary.

Cooks in the Jagannath temple in Puri are know as ‘supakar’.

English ‘sugar’, old French ‘zuchre’, Greek ‘sakkharon’ derive from Sanskrit ‘Sharkara’.

The word jaggery also is a mal-pronunciation of ‘sharkara’.

English ‘tutty’, French ‘titie’, Arabic ‘tutiya’ stem from Sansknr Tuttha.

English ‘pepper’, Latin ‘piper’, Greek ‘peperi’ originate from Sanskrit ‘pippali’.

English ‘orange’ is ‘naranj’ in Arabic, and ‘narang’ in Sanskrit.

‘Lilak’ in French, Spanish, Persian, is ‘nilak’ in Sanskrit.

Ginger is ‘gingiber’ in Latin, deriving from ‘shringaver’ in Sanskrit.

Candy is ‘candi’ in French, ‘qand’ in Arabic, from ‘khand’ in Sanskrit.

Beryk is ‘berullos’ in Greek from ‘waidoorya’ in Sanskrit.

Anil’ in English and Spanish, is ‘al-nil’ in Arabic from the word ‘nili’ in Sanskrit for indigo.

The word ‘aniline’ derives from the same root.

This explains the ancient Hindu name ‘Nile Krishna’ to the river ‘Nile’ in Egypt.

Over the centuries Egyptians cut off from their Sanskrit, Hindu heritage forgot that ‘Nile’ stood stood for ‘blue’ in Sanskrit, and they added the adjective ‘blue’ calling their river ‘Blue Nile’ which is a philogical absurdity.

‘Aggressor’, is a Sanskrit word since ‘agra’ means ‘for-ward’ and ‘sar’ is ‘to move’.

One who moves into another’s territory is, therefore, an aggressor.

The Sanskrit word ‘nasika’ has been corrupted to ‘nose’ in English, and led to words like ‘nasal’.

English ‘terrestrial’ derives from Sanskrit ‘dharatal’.

This indicates that Sanskrit ‘dhara’ meaning ‘the Earth’ becomes ‘terra’ in Latin.

Likewise, the Sanskrit word ‘madhya’ for ‘middle’ becomes ‘medi’ in Latin and English.

The term ‘Mediterranean’ is, therefore, Sanskrit signifying an ocean situated between two big land masses.

This should explain the Sanskrit origin of words like mediator, meditation, middle.

Terms like dentistry from Sanskrit ‘danta shastra’ indicate that in the immemorial past the world learnt all arts and sciences at the feet of Sanskrit teachers through Sanskrit text books.

This may be further illustrated by terms like ‘gerantology’ from Sanskrit ‘jara’ signifying ‘old age’ and ‘onto’ meaning ‘the end’ (of life) i.e. death.

‘Heart’ derives from the Sanskrit ‘hrt’ leading to the adjective ‘heardic’ (i.e. heartfelt).

Likewise ‘hikka’ in Sanskrit is ‘hiccups’ in English.

‘Osteomalacia’ is a compound of the Sanskrit words ‘asthi’ for ‘bones and ‘mal’ meaning getting ‘bad’ i.e. diseased.

The term osteoporosis also derives from the Sanskrit word ‘asthi’ for bones.

This indicates that the ancient world practised the Indian system of medicine – the Ayurved and therefore, even though allopathy is now in vogue it still uses Ayurvedic terminology.

The Sanskrit word ‘mal’ meaning ‘dirt… soiled… spoiled’ is widely used in English as in mal-administration, mal-adroit, mal-practise, malign, malevolence.

The term ‘suo-moto’ is in fact Latin but is wdely quoted in English legal parlance.

It is a crude pronunciation of the Sanskrit term ‘swa-mata’.

Sanskrit prefixes ‘a’ and ‘un’ to yield the negative of a word are also frequently used in English as in ‘a-moral’ and ‘un-known’.

In Sanskrit they would say ‘a-mal’ (i.e. pure) and ‘un-bhijna’ (i.e. one who does not know).

The English word ‘two’ though pronounced as ‘too’ was originally the Sanskrit ‘Dwou’.

Its spelling indicates that it was meant to be pronounced as ‘twou’ i.e. ‘dwou’ which is the Sanskrit word for ‘two’.

Likewise, English ‘three’ is Sanskrit ‘tri’ as in ‘trilogy, triple, triplicate’.

The English word ‘trident’ is wholly Sanskrit since ‘tri’ means ‘three’ and ‘dent’ signifies a ‘tooth’ or ‘spike’.

Similarly the word ‘dent’ as in ‘making a dent’ is from the Sanskrit ‘dant’ (for tooth) as when the tooth leaves an impression when one bites off a loaf of bread.

English ‘tree’ is Sanskrit ‘taru’.

All words ending with ‘bility’ as in ‘advisability, gullibility, perceivability, palatability’ use the compound Sanskrit termination ‘bal-iti’ meaning “that which has the power as such”, for instance “that which has the power to please the palate is ‘palatability’.”

It will then be realized that the English word ‘navigability’ is a pure Sanskrit compound ‘navi-gaman-bal-iti’ because in Sanskrit ‘navi’ means a ‘boat’, ‘ga’ signifies ‘movement’, ‘bal’ is that which has the power or capability, and ‘iti’ means ‘as such’.

That shows that the English word ‘navigability’ is all Sanskrit.

Yet no English dictionary explains it as such.

Similar is the case with the word ‘stability’ which in Sanskrit is ‘stha-bal-iti’ meaning “the power to remain fixed in a particular position”.

This leads one to realize that the Sanskrit root ‘stha’ is widely used in English as ‘st’ as in ‘stand, stationary, station, stationing’.

Words in Sanskrit akin to them are ‘sthan, sthanak, sthita’.

The Sanskrit root ‘bhar’ signifying ‘pressure’ or ‘burden’ leads to the English words ‘barysphere, barometer’.

The Sanskrit word ‘sama’ for equal gives us the English words ‘semi-circle, semisphere (i.e. hemisphere), semblance, sample, similarity, similar’.

English ‘maternity, paternity’ are Sanskrit ‘matri niti, pitri niti’.

Mater-dei in Latin is ‘matri devi’ in Sanskrit.

All words like ‘mother, maternal, matrimony’ stem from the Sanskrit forms ‘mata, matar’.

The English words ‘son, sonny’ derive from the Sanskrit word ‘soonuhu’.

From the Sanskrit word ‘mrityu’ for death one gets English words like ‘mortal, mortuary, morgue, post-mortem, immortal’.

From ‘pad’ meaning ‘foot’ in Sanskrit one gets words like ‘biped, tripod, chiropody, centipede, pedestrian, pedestal’.

The words ‘suicide, patricide, matricide’ are Sanskrit ‘swachhid, pitri-chhid, matri-chhid’.

That explains words like germicide, insecticide, pesticide since Chhid-Chinna in Sanskrit means ‘cutting, killing, ending, exterminating’.

That shows how Western languages still coin words from Sanskrit roots.

The Latin word ‘quo’ as in ‘quo vadis… quo warranto’ is from Sanskrit as ‘quo gacchhasi’ – ‘where do you go’.

‘Myth’ in English is ‘mitthya’ i.e. false in Sanskrit.

English ‘Peter’ derives from ‘pitar’ in Sanskrit.

Likewise David is ‘Dravid’ and Abraham is a mal-pronunciation of the Sanskrit word Brahma.

Brahms, an English surname, is indicative of the ancient Sanskrit moorings of the family like surname ‘Brahme’ in India.

Panorama, cinerama are the same as ‘manorama’ in Sanskrit.

The termination ‘rama’ in Sanskrit indicates ‘pleases or enchants or entrances the mind’.

The word ‘mar’ as in “mar somebody’s chances” is Sanskrit meaning ‘kill’ or ‘hurt, harm’.

Bond, bondage, bandage are from the Sanskrit ‘bandh, bandhan’.

Accept is a-kshipta (that which is not thrown away).

Succinct is ‘sankshipta’.

The English ‘cough’ is from Sanskrit ‘kaf’.

Though Sanskrit ‘kaf’ signifies phlegm while ‘cough’ is slightly different, it is not difficult to see that cough arises from ‘kaf’ i.e. phlegm.

The slight difference in the English and Sanskrit connotations of the same word are due to many centuries of separation of English from its Sanskrit source.

The Sanskrit word ‘antar’ is pronounced in English as ‘inter’ as in ‘international, intervarsity, interpret, interpolate, intermediate, intermittent, interdependent’.

Path has an identical meaning in both English and Sanskrit with a very minor difference in pronunciation.

English also uses Sanskrit endings for comparatives and superlatives.

In Sanskrit this is called the ‘ter-tum bhava’.

In Sanskrit one says ‘adhikatar, mahattar, laghutar’ etc. for ‘greater, bigger and lesser’ respectively.

The corresponding superlatives terms are ‘adhiktum, mahattum, laghutam’ like the English words ‘optimum, maximum’.

The English word ‘fraternity’ is Sanskrit ‘Bhratri-niti’.

Nocturnal, diurnal derive from Sanskrit ‘naktam’ for night and ‘divas’ for day.

The English words regime, reign, sovereign, suzerain are Sanskrit ‘rajyan, rajan, swarajan’.

The English word ‘go’ is from the Sanskrit Gamagachcha.

‘Cow’ in English is ‘gow’ in Sanskrit.

‘Vestry’ is the room where ‘vastra’ (clothes) are kept in a church.

In Sanskrit too such a room is called ‘vestry’.

Likewise, the term ‘vesture’ is ‘vastra’.

Saint (Sanskrit ‘saint’), preacher (Sanskrit ‘pracharak’) and ‘adore’ (Sanskrit ‘adar’).

‘Door’ (for Sanskrit ‘dwar’), ‘man’ for ‘manav’, peter, mater, daughter, pita, mata, duhita, son, sonny from Sanskrit ‘sunuh’, deity from ‘devata’, theos from Sanskrit ‘devas’ are all Sanskrit.

The prefix ‘pro’ as in pro offer, pro create is the same as Sanskrit ‘pravakta, prabhat, prabhakar’.

Since all such explanations are lacking in the English dictionary it is obvious that English philologists and etymologists are largely unaware of Sanskrit being the source language of English either directly or through Latin and Greek as illustrated above.

This ignorance has resulted in compilers of the English dictionary committing grave errors in explaining the origin of their words.

As an instance we may point out to the explanations appended to the words ‘widow’ and ‘widower’ in the average English dictionary.

The word ‘widow’ is rightly explained as ‘a woman who has lost her husband’.

The next word ‘widower’ is said to derive from ‘widow’ with the suffix ‘-er’ added.

This is a gross etymological error.

In English the suffix ‘-er’ as in ‘labour-er, sort-er, lecture-er’ means a person who labours, sorts or lectures.

If then ‘er’ had been a suffix of the word ‘widow’ the word ‘widower’ would have meant ‘one who makes a woman a widow’ and as such it would have signified the murderer of a married woman’s husband, while it actually signifies a man whose wife is dead.

English lexicographers have committed this gross error because they don’t know that the words ‘widow’ and ‘widower’ are the corrupt form of the Sanskrit words ‘widhwa’ and ‘widhur’.

A more diligent study of the English derivatives would reveal many more mistakes.

This should also impress on compilers of the English dictionaries to explain many of their words in terms of their Sanskrit origin as ‘truth’ and ‘untruth’ being ‘rut’ and ‘unrut’.

We may go a step further and say that not only English but all European languages would do well to have their dictionaries thoroughly examined by Sanskritists.

That is to say European dictionaries will have to be rewritten with the help of Sanskrit.

If chauvinistic and political considerations make they shy from such a task Indians would have to undertake the task as part of the rewriting of their maimed and distorted history.

Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition

Some Missing Chapters Of World History

Click to access SomeMissingChapterOfWorldHistory_text.pdf

Gallery | This entry was posted in Books, British History, Catastrophic English, History, Language. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Catastrophic English: English as a Dialect of Sanskrit

  1. THX1138 says:

    We are told that our numbering system, 1, 2, 3… is Arabic. Is this true? Also, is Russian associated with Sanskrit? Fomenko might be interested if it is. All of those “-stan” countries mean “place of” as in Place of Paki (Pakistan)?

    Do you think this was a natural occurrence, or maybe the bastardization of Sanskrit was a deliberate act to confuse the people and cut them off from their origins, a power grab by those-who-would-rule?

    I tried the Google Translate Add-on in my browser on some of the above Sanskrit words, and it did a fair job of translating them, even though Sanskrit is not listed as one of the languages that Google translates.

  2. malagabay says:

    We are told that our numbering system, 1, 2, 3… is Arabic. Is this true? Also, is Russian associated with Sanskrit?
    I have no specific information.

    the bastardization of Sanskrit was a deliberate act to confuse…
    Squeezing languages into the “Latin character set” has generated a lot of academic confusion.

  3. THX1138 says:

    It’s quite clear that the Roman number system was completely inadequate to accomplish anything like the architecture they supposedly accomplished, let alone any celestial calculations. I, II, III, IV may be good enough to count commodities, but without a zero or fractions, absolutely impossible to accomplish much else. It’s obvious that something is definitely afoot insofar as the history we’ve been taught about the Roman Empire. To think I spent 4 years learning “Omnia Gallia in tres partes divisa est.” Our minds have been hijacked by false history. Retracing the steps is a way to unshackle ourselves.

  4. Carsten says:

    The Arabs got their numbers from the Indians who were early users of “0” as were the Mayans and Babylonians.

  5. malagabay says:

    Thank you for that gem 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.