Research Works of Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

8/7/2019 Research Works of Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/research-works-of-debaprasad-bandyopadhyay 1/27

RESEARCH WORKS: AT A GLANCE

Debaprasad Bandyopdhyay (b. 1965), through his 20 years journey in the realm o

institutionali!ed a"ademi"s did 2# dierent types o $or%s, $hi"h are some$ay dierent

rom the earlier paradigms or, one might say that those $or%s are not only mere



reprodu"tions o his inherited institutionali!ed "ultural "apital or a mimi"ry o a "olonially

imposed model that leads to intelle"tual anore&ia or rather a type alsii"ation o earlier

paradigms.

'o$eer, that might be not only a loty "laim but it also hid the a"t that all our

inormation and %no$ledge are so"ially a""umulated %no$ledge that $as, it is matter o

regret, posed as priate property through the sign and the $isdom is rarely aailable.

Bandyopadhyay*s $or%s and proje"ts are the produ"ts o his so"ial milieu.

Bandyopadhyay is a lo"al sub+altern publi" sphere a"ademi"ian, $ho aoids the

te"hni"al intelligentsia (ollo$ers o ahib*s models and they are not "ommitted to the

persons $ho are a""ommodating surplus $or%+time to them by perorming surplus

labour) or inorgani" intelle"tuals and thus ails to be a part o a"ademi" tribe and its

subse-uent so"iali!ation pro"ess. "ourse, that so"iali!ation pro"ess does not lead to

legendary o"rati" dialogue.

'e is also a politi"al a"tiist though he has not ailiated to any politi"al parties as he $as

al$ays tal%ing about the "orporati!ation o politi"al parties $ithin the money+sign+based

demo"rati" system. 'e is a regular parti"ipant in /. and radio tal%+sho$s and

do"umentary ilms, street+"orners* tal%s and nternational seminars on so"io+politi"al,

psy"hologi"al, linguisti", enironmental and e"onomi" issues.

'e is also a part o parallel a"ademi"s as it is ound in est Bengal*s 3ittle 4aga!ine

4oement, though that $as not "ounted as the part his a"ademi" pursuit by his parent

institute. 'is parent institute justiiably does not beliee in the domain o parallel

a"ademi"s as this unorgani!ed se"tor does not dire"tly "ontribute in the transa"tions o

ormalorgani!ed print "apitalist e"o+enemy paper+publi"ation. /hough the dissemination

o %no$ledge is also obsered in this spa"e o these parallel a"ademi"s as all these

$ritings in publi" sphere simultaneously inluen"e the "lassroom+dis"ourse and some o

them are translated into nglish, 7ren"h and talian.

8ot only that, Bandyopadhyay also sought engagement $ith the people, $ho, by

supplying their surplus labour, are sustaining his lielihood. Bandyopadhyay, a linguist by

training and a h.D.+holder (1996), a junior le"turer (sin"e 1999) in an autonomous

"entral goernment institute in ndia, tries his best or those rom he has re"eied and is

2



re"eiing the maniestation o surplus labour by e&e"uting some sel+unded proje"ts on

e"onomi" issues in est Bengal, ndia.

'e (hen"eorth tal%er) has done ollo$ing 2# resear"h $or%s:

1. CRIPPLED CREATIVITY: AN INQUIRY INTO LANGUAGE, PSYCHE, SOCIETY:

2. VALENCY OF BANGLA VERB AND PROBLEM OF COMPOUND VERBS:

3. ARCHAEOLOGY OF BANGLA GRAMMAR :

4. CAN COMPUTER SPEAK?

5. FUZZY LOGICAL EXPRESSION IN BANGLA :

6. FOLKLORE AND FOLK-LANGUAGE: MYTH OR REALITY?

7. HISTORICISM IN THE DISCOURSE OF BANGLA LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

8. ABHABA, ECP, DELETION AND TRACE

9. SVATVA OR MY-NESS AND ECONOMIC ENTITLEMEMT10. TRANSLATION STUDIES

11. MASCULINITY STUDIES

12. YAYATI COMPLEX

13. SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEYS IN AGRICULTURE AND INDUSTRY IN WEST

BENGAL

14. CONCEPT OF BODY IN INDIAN PHILOSOPHY AND ARCHITECTURE

15. THE CONCEPT OF ERROR (KHYATI IN MAD-(WOMEN!S LANGUAGE

16. THE CONCEPT OF PERCEPTUAL TIME AND GRAMMATICAL TIME IN BANGLA

17. BANGLA CALLIGRAPHY, LANGUAGE ART AND LINGUISTIC PEDAGOGY

18. WO(L)D SPACES: NON-EXISTENCE OF WORDS

19. ANEKANTA METHODS

20. SILENCEME: SILENT OTHER IN LINGUISTICS

21. IMAGINED BOUDARIES AND PRE-COLONIAL INDIAN IMAGI-NATION

22. MAKING OF THE INDIAN PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

23. SEGMENTING THE SUPRASEGMENTALS : MUSICKING IN SPEAKING

24. INTERPRETING GENETIC STRUCTURE BY DEPLOYING LINGUISTIC

STRUCTURE

25. GLOTTOPOLITICS OF LINGUISTIC SUBALTERNITY OR AN AGENDA FOR

PLANNING FROM BELOW

26. SEMIOTICS OF PHOTOGRAPHY

3



27. SOCIOLOGY OF CONTEMPORARY ACADEMICS

; brie des"ription o his 2# resear"h $or%s (both old and on+going) is represented

belo$:

1. /he trans"endental "ogito o "onte&t+ree pea%ing'earing ubje"t (') does

e&ist really . <onte&t+sensitie ' are "reating inite $ell+ormed syntagms

$ithin the iolent lo"us o behaourial manipulation, and that is en"reti"

language. sy"ho+so"ial (psi) properties are $or%ing=be a$are= genote&t is

mingling $ith phenote&t=

1.1. as >ayati "omple& is $or%ing. t may be a narratie o patriar"hal age+

dis"rimination: ld >ayatis are snat"hing a$ay the itality o urus. nstead o

edipal ?haing mother, being ather@, it is yayati" patriar"hy that is reigning. t

emanates rom ather*s ego, not rom the d. "ourse, there is no uniersal

truth "laim.

1.2. n the other hand, the "aring attitude to$ards younger generation is named

ater $ar+monger Babar, by remembering his eort to sae his "hild. n this "ase,

the ne&us bet$een saing the progeny and the preseration o priate property

is also being obsered. ()tal%er -uestioned the 7reud*s ta&onomy o mind and

proposed a dierent ta&onomy by rearranging the "on"ept o mind as it is ound

in sahajiya tradition. /he simultaneous and oerlapping operations o >ayati

and Babar "omple& (thanatos and eros) originate rom "onte&t+sensitie ego.

1.3. Drona "ompelled %alaya to "ut o his right thumb. /ranslation+proje"t in the

"olonial "onte&t has got %alaya*s ate. /hus, rom no$ on, $e shall "all sour"e

language te&t as Drona"arya te&t and target language te&t as %alaya te&t.

iolen"e and threats are all perading real ities in the $orld o "ompetition.

udhindranath Dutta*s te&t $as analy!ed by the (s)ta%er.

1.4. <aptie 's are suering rom "rippling o "reatiity and simultaneously

bypassing the threat and iolen"e by remaining "reatie in the midst o iolen"e.

4



/hus "reatiity is at a time a presen"e and an absen"e=it is at a time bheda

and abheda.

1.5. 'o$ do $e distinguish bet$een error (khyati ) and non+error (akhyat i), $hen $e

are tal%ing about normal and natural languageA ell+ormed syntagms are used

as e&amples in the synta"ti" analysis. /hat is sanity. 3et us suer seere

insanity to understand at least at the dream stage o madhyama.

2. indly note that all o them, Drona and >ayati, are male i"ons. 7eminism, in

return, is $or%ing and the male spa"e is almost deleted $ithin the Bengali

imagined "ommunity. in"e 19 th <., super+males are spending "alories or

$oman eman"ipation. hat is the psy"hologi"al status o su"h super+malesA

/he semanti"s o some "ondemned publi"+sphere+$ords (antonyms o super+

males) that trigger against testis+poisoning are dis"ussed to understand the

misandrous Bengali+mindset, the $orshipers o the goddesses at the "rossroads.

3. grammar is $ithin ', $hy are you $riting grammarA pea%ing on spea%ing

means meta+spea%ing and that is the proje"t o grammar, philology and

linguisti"s despite their u!!y as $ell as determined thresholds. Crammati"al

orders o things are "ontrolledappropriatedappro&imated"odiied by the statist

and amilial non+dis"ursiity. Crammar is politi"al a"tion that "odiies '*s

do"ile body. /e&t boo%s o grammar $ere analy!ed to sho$ the ainities bet$een

statist "onstitution and the "onstitution o grammar.

3.1. /hereore, let us hae an anti+grammar=a pedagogi"al pra&is in

uns"hooling.

3.2. 3inear deterministi" history o language is a nation statist proje"t=a

genealogi"al antasy "onirmed by pratyavijna. nanimate arbitrary signs

are animated=thus philology has be"ome leisure "lass*s "up o tea.

8one tal%s about histori"ism.

3.3. 3inear history o Bangla literature had oerlapped $ith the ?deelopment@

and ?origin@ o the Bangla language in the dis"ourses o philologists and

literary historians. ut why-question here as a "onnoisseur.

5



3.4. <ompensatory lengthening or deaspiration phenomena as des"ribed by

Bengali philologists, are results o $riting+obsession. edupli"ation, as a

term , tautologous. elatie degree o arbitrariness or s$it"hing oer o

sense organs in "ase o so+"alled i"ons, though $as obsered, $ere

ignored. 'o$eer large "orpus $as generated to sho$ the autonomous

status o imagined order: 8ation state Bangla.

3.5. ol%ata ?diale"t@, the pro"ess o and history o standardi!ation, the

triglossi" situation $as obsered by the (s)tal%er in the early stage o his

"areer.

4. hat a diision: 7ol% and non+ol%E Loukika a"t has be"ome aloukika i"tion and

ise ersa. /he ol% and tribe are "olonially (either internal or e&ternal) "reated

"ategories that surrogate history and physiology. eporting o ol%lorists and

anthropologists helps goernmentality. 's* do"ile bodies are penetrated $ith

anato+bio+politi"al tools.

4.1 /he dier an"e bet$een ol%+artsongsplays and "lassi"al +artsongsplays has

be"ome blurred i nature o sponsorship is to be "onsidered. /hus e"onomi"s o

su"h diiding pra"ti"e is to be inestigated.

5. ' is desiring to be a ma"hine: 4a"hineF ('). 8on+algorithmi" !ones o

' $ith n+nary options are annihilated. 4eaning is solidiied. Binary ma"hine

does not understand $hat ?understanding@ is. Do $e not "onsider ussell*s

parado& or Codel*s theorem here or are ma%ing un $ith non+biodegradable and

disposable ostentatious tal%ing toysA

5.1. ' is sear"hing truths o Bangla erbs $ith sura"e synta"ti" rules o alen"y.

/oys are made and me"hani"al predi"tability is ine. 'o$ does su"h a parti"ular

' ind labour+time to do su"h $or%A thers are supplying surplus labour and

', as a member o leisure "lass or a"ademi" tribe is ragmenting the baikhari

(spea%ing $ith arbitrary signs at the time o $a%ing) . hat $astageE /ruths o

Bangla erbs are not reealed, instead transitiity is s$inging li%e a pendulum.

5.2. ne thing is "ertain that meaning is un"ertain. hat a parado&E ;poriaE nented

numerals are u!!y=indetermina"y preails. ;n ostentatious toy $as made.

6



()tal%er tried to depi"t some non+deterministi" and un"ertain phenomena reealed in

the e&pressions o numerals by Bangla spea%ers. /he points o arguments are as

ollo$s: 1. 'uman -uantii"ation is partly or ully dierent rom analyst*s rigorous

-uantii"ation. 2. /he ollo$ing "orpus rom Bangla has a pe"uliar nature o non+

"omponentiality or they are rather prototypi"al. /his prototypi"al nature o u!!y

numerals "annot be handled in "omputational rame$or% or een in the 3ogi"al 7orm.

/he irst set o data deals $ith idiomati" e&pressions li%e: 1. at+pa4" een+ie ?pros

and "ons@G 2. ny+"hy nine+si& ?topsy+tury@G H. unis+bi, nineteen+t$enty ?trile

dieren"e@ ja'a bahanno ta'ay tippanno. 5. ja'a ba'anno, ta'ai tippanno ?hateer

is ity+t$o, that is ity+three@ (i.e. 52F5H) I; trile dieren"e does not "ount.I

/he se"ond problem may be termed as ?one is not e-ual to one@ problem. ; rule o ?one

deletion@ $as proposed by robal Dasgupta (19J#).5 do%andu/o shop+t$o+"lassiier. 6.

do%an/a shop+singular+"lassiier. biously, Ione@ is deleted in 6. 'o$eer, Dasgupta

mentioned that Kone deletion* is not true in the "ases li%e #. jl/a, ater+"lassiier or

J. tel/a oil+"lassiier. n Bangla, one "annot say 9. L%/a jl Kne+"lassiier il@

'o$eer, there are some pragmati" "ases $here su"h e&pressions li%e 9 is possible.

/he pea%ing subje"t*s per"eption may still be ?oneI in those "ases++ it is Kone* as a

mass body. "ourse, this is not a deterministi" physi"al Kone*, but one as a $hole.

hen any Bangla spea%er says, 10. phrij the%e jl/a ano. ridge rom $ater+

"lassiier bring IBring $ater rom the ridge.@, hisher intention is to reer ?one bottle o $ater@. /hereore, Kone@ is there in the D+stru"ture, but it is a u!!y one. /he "on"ept o

this u!!y IoneI "an be urther illustrated in the ollo$ing moement+transormations,

$here deterministi" numeral e&pressions are "hanged to non+deterministi" Determiner

hrases:

11.a) pa4"/a ie+"lassiier (deinite)

11.b) go/a pa4"e% "lassiier( inde. ) ie+one Imore or less ie I

12.a) pa4"jon ie+"lassiier (deinite)

12.b) jona pa4"e% "lassiier( inde. ) ie+one Imore or less ie I1H.a) pa4"%hana ie+"lassiier

1H.b) %han pa4"e% ,"lassiier( inde. ) ie+one Imore or less ie I

1M.a) pa4" 'ajar Iie thousandI

1M.b) 'ajar pa4"e% thousand ie+one. Imore or less ie thousandI

15.a) pa4" la%h, ie la"s

7



15.b) la%h pa4"e% la"s ie+one Imore or less ie la"sI

&amples li%e 11+15 sho$ those deterministi" e&pressions in (a) and non+deterministi"

e&pressions in (b). <ompared to (a), e&amples in (b) sho$ the ronting o "lassiiers $ith

subse-uent morphophonemi" "hange and an addition o e% ?one@ to the spe"ii"

numeral &. /his one is not deterministi" N+1, but this ?one@ has a range more or less than

N+ 1.

/hese Bangla numeral e&pressions sho$ the $orld+ie$s o the "ommunity "on"erned

$ith a spe"ial reeren"e to their psy"hophysi"al $ay o loo%ing at things (per"eption) and

$ays o ma%ing order o things (understanding). /hereore, it is a hermeneuti" problem

that inoles the relatie gap bet$een human per"eption and understanding in relation

to their habitat. /he range o N+1 is dierent in dierent persons belonging to dierent

so"io+e"onomi" "lasses or een it may be dierent in a single person in dierent

psy"hoso"ial "onte&t. ; game had been deeloped by his engineering students and

seeral papers on this topi" had been read in "oneren"es and published in journals.

5.H. er"eptual time is supplemented by grammati"al tense. Do $e need to deploy

tensor "al"ulus hereA /hat is ridi"ulous. 3et us $at"h the $at"h in the time o e"o+enemy

te"hno"rati" so"iety guided by te"hni"al rationality. ;ter all, the members o a"ademi"

tribe are te"hni"al intelligentsiainorgani" intelle"tuals, snat"hers o surplus labour.

rgani" intelle"tuals are endangered spe"ies (<an you proide statisti"sA Oorry,

"annot).

5.M. notation system is aailable at hand and "an be noted by human hearing, $hy

should $e use ma"hine or gau!ing thatA hy should $e use 'igh, 4id and lo$

parameter $ith un%no$n interals in determining (dis)"ontinuous string o spee"hA Do,

re, mi, a, so, la, ti are aailable nodal points $ith uniersal interal 2 root 22. this

ormalism $ould be deployed, one "an "ut that, $hi"h "annot be "ut o=

suprasegmentals "an be segmented.

hat is about the dieren"e bet$een spea%ing and musi"%ingA Both o diers due toinstitutionali!ation o spee"h and at the moment o spea%ing $e are deerring musi"%ing

and ise ersa. Dier an"e "an be soled, but ho$A

6. 8irmal %umar Basu and tella ramris"h $ere arguing: $ere the bodies o the 'indu

temples "onstru"ted on the basis o physiologi"al "orporeal or meta+ physiologi"al

8



"onje"ture o bodyA 4ira 4u%herjee sho$ed the path $hen she introdu"ed isa%armas

to us.

6.1. /he so+"alled metaphysi"al body is eident in the so+"alled ?'indu@

ar"hite"ture. /he bisuddha-baikhari-jagrat (alsest), anahata-madhyama

(spea%ing $hen dreaming) -svapna (alser), manipura-pasyanti-susupti

(alsest) asso"iation might be established here $ith "#$% sadhaniya margas.

air, Dadu, 3alon, abindranath (though they $ere not $riters o papers in

a"ademi" journals) and other sahajiyas $ith the authors o

Mandukyoponisad , Vakyapadiya and Tantraloka "an be "onsulted to attain

the leel o paravak . hy then $as ragmenting brittle baikhari , $hen $as

$a%ing upA

6.2. a%ing e&isten"e is traumati!ed by the iolent other. nsomnia" ()tal%er is

sear"hing the atomi" leel o biologi"al e&isten"e. 'e s$inging rom

ormalism to non+ormalism and ise ersa.

/his proje"t is based on a presumption: triplets in a geneti" string behae almost li%e

linguisti" stru"ture. /he inestigators o this proje"ts analogi"ally "onsidered geneti"

string as a body o linguisti" stru"ture. By irtue o potentiality o o""urren"e in a

"ertain "onte&t, a linguisti" unit (li%e phoneme Pn "ase o "odons, all the nu"leotides

;, C, /, < may be metaphori"ally "onsidered as smallest unitsQ, 4orpheme, le&eme

Pall the tripletse&ons are, or the time being metaphori"ally "onsidered as $ordsQ,

senten"e) enters into interdependent syntagmati" relation. a"h triplet o""urs

syntagmati"ally $ith ea"h other, e.g., ;/C syntagmati"ally "o+o""urs $ith /// or

/C<, i.e., all the 6M triplets hae a deinite sele"tional restri"tion rule and they are

subje"ted to the roje"tion rin"iple at the moment o produ"ing innumerable

proteins. ne may also say that i some triplets are produ"ing same amino a"id are

said to be in a paradigmati" relationship (one "an be substituted by the other). /hey

are metaphori"ally "onsidered as synonymous. 'o$eer, there are some "ru"ial

-uestions: in a gien syntagm o a geneti" string, ho$ the triplets are distributed A s

there any (inter)dependen"y relationship among tripletsA Beore going to ans$er

su"h "ru"ial -uestions and beore going to deploy <homs%ian synta"ti" tool, $e had

set our primary tas% to ind out the ran%+re-uen"y distribution o triplets. e had

9



deployed a parti"ular statisti"o+linguisti" la$, i.e., Rip*s 3a$, to understand the ran%

ersus re-uen"y distribution o the "odons. hat $e had ound $as that the Rip*s

e&ponent dierentiates in "ase o geneti" se-uen"es.

7. Paravak is a supposed silent !one. Beore attaining that let us "on"entrate on, or the

time being, at the leel o baikhari and madhyama, the prolieration o silen"emes:

the silent other in mainstream linguisti"s.

7.1. linguisti"s is stipulated, or the time being, as an epistemologi"al

anthropo"entri" dis"ipline or the deployment o algo"entri" (a dis"ourse that

is motiated by metamathemati"al ormalism or "omputational algorithmi"

simulation and $hi"h ignores the non+algorithmi" "onstitutie ?rules@) meta+

symboli" order on the symboli" order, one may ind a marginal other in

linguisti"s=an order o non+signs. 7or these non+signs, let me introdu"e a

term: ?silen"eme@, $hi"h is at a time a non+sign and a sign and does not hae

a i&ed "omponential meaning and thus iolates the la$ o e&"luded middle.

; blan% par"hment $ith the supposed seal o <aesar, $hen $as ?read@ by

;ntony, s$ayed the "ommoners (Sulius <aesar, H.2). n /agore*s play, ost+

oi"e, a "onspirator, out o un, sent a blan% letter to an ?illiterate@ boy, $ho $as

e&pe"ting %ing*s letter, $hen he $as $aiting or death. 'o$eer, another

"hara"ter altogether dierently interpreted that blan% letter. /his blan%ness o the

$hite letter, then, $as not interpreted as a poisonous un, but as a ?real@ remedy

or that boy. /hus, the blan% spa"es are emitting dierent meanings in dierent

situations and non+signs $ere endo$ed $ith the supposed sign+ness. /hat*s the

de+sign o silen"eme as it is de+sign+ated $ithin the sign+ness.

hen you $ere as%ing me, ?hat*re you doingA@ said, ?8othing.@ /his single

$ord, @nothing@ , a supposed minimal ?ree@ (here does the essential reedom

o $ord lyeA ) orm, is not ree at all=?nothing@ *s reedom $as peraded by

?other@ non+signs, nothingness, the unspo%en or something unspea%able, the

non+dis"ursie sonority or unintended sounds (as in Sohn <age*s musi"al

"ompositions or in aus"henberg and obert yman*s 4inimalist paintings $ith

almost $hite sura"es.)

10



7.2 ord does not e&ist at the moment o spea%ing. 3et us hear the debate bet$een

$ord+atomist and dis"ourse holists.

; $ord+atomist introdu"es three deinitions o ?$ord@ per se and the opponent,

a dis"ourse+holist, nulliies those three "laims o the $ord+atomist. /he three

deinitions gien by the $ord+atomists and are as ollo$s: (a)ord () is

subordinate to senten"e () and thus G (b) ord is a minimal ree ormG

(")ord as a signiier denotes matter or the order o $orld.

;""ording the opponent* strategi" deinition, $ord is something (isual

bla"%any other "olored igure) in bet$een t$o ($hite or any other "olors)

spa"es (grounds) and the boundaries o $ord depend on the parti"ular literate

"ommunity*s $ay o manipulating blan% ( ?other@ spa"es or ?silen"eme@) spa"es

in their printing$riting. /hus, ?$ord@ is a "ulture+spe"ii" "on"ept, $hi"h has

only isual representation. ; literate spea%ing subje"t, in her printing "ulture,

has only a isual sensation o $ord. /he blan%other spa"es may be

per"eied "ogni!ed as a "ategory "alled absen"e or abhava. pponent*s irst

argument $as against the vyaiakaranika deinition o ?$ord@ as one o the

leels o hierar"hi"al linguisti" analysis. ;t that moment o spea%ing, rom the

subje"t*s position, it is not ($ord+) stress, but it is rather a harmoni" intonation

o a dis"ourse (that ollo$s logarithmi" pattern), $hi"h the ' is e&pressing

as a "ontinuum $ithout being ontologi"ally "ons"ious about the grammarians*order o things. /he memory o these blan% spa"es may also inluen"e the $ay

o spea%ing o a literate spea%er. /he isolated $ords are "itation orms as it is

lemmati!ed in the di"tionary produ"ed by the print "apitalism. /hus, the

typologi"al dieren"es o languages on the basis o $ord+morpheme ratio hold

no $ater at all i one does not "onsider the literate "ulture+spe"ii"ity o ?$ord@.

/he opponent also opposes the deinition+b by -uestioning the ethi"o+

epistemologi"al meaning o ?reedom@ o $ord as a minimal ree orm.

7.3. ilen"eme is a subje"tie spatio+temporal ?per"eption@ o absen"e o spea%ing.

n "ase o deinition+", that puts $ord as a signiier, $hi"h is signiying

something (signiied), the opponent proposes (&) $ord as signiying

representation represents other representatie signiiers, but not the obje"t,

than%s to the anthropo"entri" per"eptie limit as supposed obje"t is al$ays

11



un%no$n and un%no$able and all $o(l)ds are not subserient only to

ostensie deinitionG (y) the order o supposed signiied is al$ays subserient

to the spatio+temporal de+sign+ation and thereore, bears dierent

representations in dierent spa"e +time and thus e-uating pada ($ord as

deployed in senten"es) $ith padartha (matter) or $or(l)d+logi" that pursues

minimal substantie representation as the stati" meaning o the $or(l)d "uts a

sorry igure. ;ter reuting $ord+atomist ie$s, the opponent proposes her

dis"ourse+holism (not the senten"e+holism as proposed by Bhartrhari)

hypothesis by introdu"ing the theory o intimate atta"hment o sound+

"ontinuum in a gien dis"ourse that also bears the mar%s o s"attered,

ragmented blan% lo"i o silen"emes.

7.4. rimarily, (s)tal%er had a"ed a problem $ith so+"alled bound morheme O/a

("lassiier) in the Bangla senten"es li%e

1. %or"hi/a %iA

do+pr."ont+(+'on)+"lassiier $hatA

2. %or"ho/a %iA

do+pr."ont+(N+'on) "lassiier $hatA

3. %or"hen/a %iA

do+pr."ont+(N'on) "lassiier $hatA

4. 'o""he /a i A

happen+pr."ont+ "lassiier $hatA

n all these "ases bound morpheme /a is lonely as it is not a part o the

pre"eding erbs $hi"h hae already got inle"tions and thus are "losed though

orthographi"ally /a is $ritten $ith those erb. n all these "ases $h+obje"t is

missing as the spea%er o these senten"es does not hae the "ognition o that

$h+obje"t or other$ise she is "ogni!ing the absen"e. /he se"ond possibility is

that she may hae the pragmati" "ompeten"e o "ogni!ing that $h+obje"t but

she is pretending to be an ignorant, i.e. she has a "ognition o absen"e o

absen"e $hi"h is other$ise a presen"e. ;t that time, the author stru"turally

interpreted this phenomenon rom the perspe"tie o dead mpty <ategory

rin"iple. <on"ept o relational absen"e or abhava might be introdu"ed to

strengthen the semanti"s o the < and deletion. ;ny moed element that

12



leaes behind a tra"e in the lo"us may be "onsidered as a "ase o posterior

absen"e. /he open -uestion is $hether a moed element a"tually leaes behind

a tra"e or not. t "an be soled by an independent reason o posterior absen"e

or uttara-abhava, $hi"h, by assigning the absential -ualiier to the empty lo"us,

points out the on"e+upon+a+time "ognition o e&isten"e o the "ounter+positie. ;n

8+tra"e is an instan"e o posterior+absen"e. /he tra"e o moed element "an

be "ogni!ed in the lo"us rom $here the "ounter+positie is moed. /hus the

?tra"e o T@ "an be interpreted in the "hain o (-uliier, -ualii"and or

"ounterpositie, lo"and, lo"us) T, t or binder+bindee relation. /his is "alled as 3+

relation or sub+super stratumlo"us+"ounterpositie or bindee+binder relation or

the ante"edent+tra"e asso"iation. ;ssigning absential -ualiier emphasi!ed the

a"t emphasi!ed that any "ase o "hain li%e (Sohn, t) is not to be interpreted as

only a simple "ase o ?"opy and delete@ but a "ase o a deinite lo"us+

"ounterpositie relation or 3+relation. the lo"us*s ($here tra"e o""urs) being the

absen"e o "ounterpositie amounts to the lo"us*s being the obje"t reerred by

the $ord Kabsen"e* that is o""asioned by a prior "ognition o the "ounterpositie.

n the "ase o posterior absen"e, the "ounter+positie is destroyed and the

"ounter+positie is responsible or this type o abhaa. is a lo"us o the

"ounterpositie or ante"edent. t may be "alled posterior absen"e $here le&i"al

element is destroyed and thus "ontra"tion is possible, e.g. in "ase o $anna+

"ontra"tion. is al$ays "ontrolled by its "ounterpositie. osterior absen"e isalso ound in the "ase o pro in 8ull subje"t languages or pro+drop languages li%e

talian, $here pronominal is dropped or destroyed though the lo"us o that

"ounterpostie is there. /he property o "ounterpositie is rele"ted in the ;gr or

phi+eatures in those pro+drop languages. /he absen"e "ogni!ed in the t is under

the mode o limitorship o the moed element. /hus, there must be a lo"us or an

absen"e, though the "ontent o the "ounterpositie is moed. n a gien

senten"e, $heneer a phonologi"al matri& is la"%ing, the "ategory as a lo"us or

that moed or destroyed "ounterpositie e&ists or absential "ognition in a giensenten"e. lo"us is there the delimiting properties o "ounterpositieness is also

there. /hus, in "ase o deletion, both the "ategory and "ontent is not hammered

and erased, it is only the "ontent that is absent rom the "ategory+ness o

lo"ushood. /hus, though deletion is a posterior absen"e, it has the delimiting

property o being "ounterpositie+ness, e.g., in "ase o $h+deletion, the lo"us o

13



$h la"%s the $h ($here there is no oert $h) as $ell as $h+ness or is mar%ed by

the posterior absen"e o $h and $h+ness in its lo"us. /he underlying $h+phrase

undergoes $h+moement to <4 leaing an absen"e or tra"e behind and then

h+deletion or posterior absen"e o $h o""urs. /he "ategory persists by means

o inheren"e+relation. /he appli"ation o uniersal re"oerability "ondition is

subje"t to the a$areness o "ognition o absen"e in the lo"us o the "ategory.

/hus the absential -uantiier soles a "ru"ial problem o $hether a deletion

erases "ategory and "ontent or only the "ontents o a "ategory by positing the

"ategory as a lo"us o the "ounterpositie. 'o$eer, there must be a distin"tion

bet$een a moed element and a deleted element. n "ase o moed element, the

resident o t or +e&pression is an instan"e o posterior absen"e.

8. 3et us return at the leel o baikhari or the sa%e o lokasmgraha.

8.1 ()tal%er is no$ engaging both $estern and eastern tradition o understanding

signs by analy!ing both the still photography and "inemati" representations. 'e

is deploying both edanti" tools (ghata%asa+pata%asa tata) and post+stru"turalist

method or understanding all perading sign+system in the image+messages. 'e

had also "ondu"ted seeral seminars on isual litera"y, e"o+photography, oliti"s

and ethi"s o photography.

8.2 ()tal%er is sear"hing the imagined boundaries. 'e $as then sear"hing

linguisti"ally moement+prone !ones++$here there $as a needdemanddesire or

monolingual state, (s)tal%er $ould be there. 'o$ did people identiy themseles

$ith their languageA tal%er $as albeit "onused as she "ould not ind out the

enumerated boundary o monolingual state any$here in ndia. en some people

had "ut a sorry igure to name their o$n language.

8.3. Under the hegemoni" "ontrol o standard language $ithin an imagined nation

state, the "apital+in"entie language+ndustry is prolierated by the

introdu"tion o ele"troni" as $ell as print "apitalism $ith the help o

ideologi"al state apparatuses. ?other@ "aptie arieties* (so+"alled diale"t)

the ', reolt against the "entral 3 and $ithdra$ their ailiation rom the

abstra"t umbrella o the supposed monolingual nation state, the situation is

obsered as language moement. /his is a "ase o mutual resemblan"e or

anyonyopratibimba, $here the dominated is rele"ting on the images o the

dominatorG the dominating paradigm is ollo$ed and "opied=all the state

14



organs, ideologi"al and repressie state apparatuses, are repeated in a orm

o reerse mimi"ry. /hus, here svatva is not established, but is maniested in

a orm o sel+other e&"hanges and rele"tions.

8.4. 'o$eer, there is another side o the story, ()tal%er had seen the bareoot

pilgrims* journey= pilgrims* progress. /hey $ere "ommuni"ating $ith ea"h

other, at the vyavaharika leel, but surprisingly enough, they are maintaining

their languages $ithout using speed "apitalist instruments. /here is no

-uestion o identii"ation o language as "ommuni"ation is more important.

/his pluriligualism needs no money. $as asso"iating my e&perien"es $ith

Candhi*s 'ind $araj as (s)tal%er had ound su"h instan"es in that boo%.

8.5. /his proje"t o (s)tal%er $as an a""ount o pre+"olonial symboli" distributions

o imagined boundaries in the geo+politi"al "onstru"t "alled ?ndia@ and it is

also a response to the artha <hatterji+ ;martya en polemi" regarding the

pre+"olonial (non+)e&isten"e o ndian model.

<hatterji raised the ollo$ing -uestion:

? nationalism in the rest o the $orld hae to "hoose their

imagined "ommunity rom "ertain Kmodular* orms already made

aailable to them by urope and the ;meri"as, $hat do they

hae left to imagineAV.@ (<hatterji, 199H:5, emphasis added)

/he -uestion, raised by <hatterji may lead us to a reading that as a so+"alled third $orldsubalterns, $e do not hae any imagined model and $e, as a "olonial subje"t, are only

aping the dominant domain. n response to this, en "ommented:

?/he "on"eptual orms o Kthe nation as an imagined "ommunity*,

$hi"h ;nderson peruses, may not hae mu"h to "ommend it (

personally thin% that it does=but this is a dierent issue), but the

ear that its $estern origin $ould leae us $ithout a model that is

our Ko$n* is a some$hat pe"uliar "on"ern.@ (1996: 1#+1J, n. 1H)

<hatterji*s -uestion (?V$hat do they hae left to imagineAV.@) inaugurates the

-uestion o ?rem(a)inder@ (in 3a"anian sense o the term) in the "onte&t o "olonial

subje"tiity, $hi"h is, though destroyed by the imposed imagined symboli" order,

"onstru"ts its imagined ?real(+ity)@ as rem(a)inder through some so+"alled ?mythi"al@,

?spiritual@ (thus un+?s"ientii"@ rom the perspe"tie o enlightened ga!e) "onstru"tions.

/he author $ill try to dis"uss three eiden"es o pre+"olonial imagined boundary+

15



"onstru"tions in the "onte&t o outheast ;sia in "onne"tion $ith <hatterji+en debate.

(A)7ragmented Body o the 'oly 4other: Bharat is a body=a emale body=ati*s

(/he holy mother goddess, ia*s $ie) body+parts are s"attered all oer ndia=

these emale organs are $orshipped in dierent (almost 51, though numbers

dier in dierent puranas as $ell as in some marginal printed do"uments as

ound in side o dierent sati +pithas ) ndian tirthas. /hus, $e hae ound Bharat

as an imagined integration o "orporeal +state. the dierent distributions o

dierent s"attered body+parts are to be put into the map, that "artographi"al as

$ell as symboli"al a""ount o iso+"orporeal ( ". isopleth, isoline, isogram or

isorithm) gies us an integrated pi"ture o imagined boundary. /he author $ould

not enture to attest empiri"ally the ar"hial alues o the ?real@ do"uments (as it

$as inestigated by some empiri"al historians in the "ase o amjanmobhoomi),

but the author $ill try to unold the dis"ourses o puranas as $ell as marginal

do"uments. /he presen"e or absen"e o the ati*s body+part in the "ertain part o

the territory is not the author*s "on"ern.

(B)/he "elebration o 4ela: <ertain outheast ;sian a-uati" regions are sele"ted in

"onne"tion $ith "ertain "onigurations in the "elestial sphere (though, one must

remember, the pla"ement o "onstellation does not ollo$ "ontemporary

astronomi"al a""ount) to "elebrate ritualisti" airs. ilgrims rom dierent part o

outh+ast ;sia gather (in $hi"h ?language@ do they "ommuni"ateA) in the

parti"ular region and they are orming "ertain type o symboli" solidarity. hat is

noti"eable here is the asso"iation among geographi"al region, a-uati" region and

"elestial sphere. /he gathering o dierent margis (W marga or road) or panthis

(Wpantha or road, both means ollo$ers o "ertain marga or pantha), again

ma%es us remember the "onne"ted path$ays in the outh+east ;sia.

(C)7our 4athas o han%ar"harya: t $as told that the adi han%ar"harya (J th <.)

established our mathas in our dierent parts o ndia: (1)the !ttar"mn"ya

matha, or northern matha at Soshimath G (2)the P#rv"mn"ya matha or eastern

matha, the Coardhana matha, at uriG (H)the $akshin"mn"ya matha, or the

ringeri harada eetham, the southern matha, at hringeri G (M) the

Pa%&him"mn"ya matha, or the D$ara%a itha, the $estern matha, at D$ar%a .

16

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshimath

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govardhana_matha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puri%2C_Orissa


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sringeri_Sharada_Peetham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shringeri

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwaraka_Pitha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarka

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govardhana_matha


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sringeri_Sharada_Peetham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shringeri

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwaraka_Pitha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarka

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshimath



/he "artographi"al a""ount o su"h planned distribution o mathas also proides

us a "on"ept o imagined boundary, though that is not a mimi"ry o uropean

nation statist model.

/he problem $as inaugurated by the empiri"al historians, $hen they $ere sear"hing the

?real@ birthpla"e(s) o lord ama as i the ?true@ birthpla"e o ama $ould sole the

problems raised by the angh ariar. that is not the "ase, the (s)tal%er $ishes to

address all these imaginations o iso+"orporeal as the "hrodinger*s "at problem in

;r"haeology. ;ll these imagined eiden"es remind us the remainder o pre+"olonial

genealogy o ?our@ imagination.

9. hat does it mean by the $ord ?our@A

()tal%er had anti"ipated the in"iden"e o the se"ret moments o e"o+enemy primitie

a""umulation and thus he a"ted $ith his theoreti"al $eapons beore ingur+8andigram

in"iden"e. 'e started $ith these t$o -uotations rom arl 4ar&:

“From the standpoint of higher economic form of society, private

onership of the g!o"e "y sing!e individ#a!s i!! appear $#ite a"s#rd as

private onership of one man "y another% &ven a ho!e society, a nation,or sim#!taneo#s!y e'isting societies ta(en together, are not the oners of

the g!o"e, its #s#fract#aries, and !i(e "ona partes fami!ias, they m#st hand

it don to s#cceeding generations in an improved condition%)**+ar! ar',1894-1959. 776

“/he person, ho "y virt#e of the tit!e of portion of the g!o"e has "ecomethe proprietor of these nat#ra! o"ects i!! rest these s#rp!#s*profit from

f#nctioning capita! in the form of rent%) **+ar! ar', 1894-1959. 773

/hen he s$it"hed oer to the "on"ept o svatva as proposed by ana aghunatha. 'e

argued in his padarthatatvanirupanam=

? ;nother ne$ "ategory is possessedness (sata).

bje"tion: /hat is nothing but being it or use as one $ishes.

;ns$er: 8ot pre"isely, or one may use ood belonging to others.

bje"tor: ne is not enjoined not to eat ood belonging to others.

aghunatha: >ou see, you must already understand possessedness in order

understand su"h an injun"tion. ossessedness is a property that belongs to

people $hen they re"eie gits and that they loose $hen they gie things a$ay.@

17



/o summari!e, svatva as a "ategory does not depend on the e&"hange alue as

as"ribed by the mar%et e"onomy, thereore (s)tal%er $as paraphrasing ?it or use@

(viniyogayogyata) as ?use alue@ and it eradi"ates the sel+other dieren"es in the

"onte&t o my+ness.

'e $as then not tal%ing about +dentity or +ness, but on my+dentity or my+ness, i.e.,

$hat ?@ possesses or $hat are (being) belonged to me=my o$nership, endo$ment,

possessed+ness or rather entitlement or in other $ord, priate property. 7ollo$ing

navyanaiyayika term, one may "all this "ategory as svatva. /hus this proje"t $as a

psy"hoanalyti" shit rom the indiidual ego to the possession o ego as imagined and

symboli!ed $ithin "ertain domain order.

/his paper starts $ith some problemati" -uestions:

• Does ?@ possess something or something is imposed upon my +dentity or as my

?o$n@ by ollo$ing "ertain rules o so"io+"ultural or politi"o+e"onomi" legitima"yA

• ;s a homo sapiens, e&"ept my supposed geneti" endo$ment, do hae

something as my ?o$n@A Do hae my o$nership o our 3s: 3and, 3anguage,

labour and 3oe in the "onte&t or lo"us o this planet or unierse A

/hen $hat is about legal entitlement as proposed by ;martya en (19J1: 1+2)A ;n

entitlement relation applied to o$nership "onne"ts one set o o$nerships to another

through "ertain rules o legitima"y. t is a re"ursie relation and pro"ess o "onne"ting is

repeated.@

;martya en then "ited an e&ample o priate o$nership rom the mar%et e"onomy and

elaborated an e&"hange o "ommodity by using money, $hi"h is mere a signiier that

metaphysi"ally ma%es une-ual as e-ual and really do not %no$ the sui"ient and

ne"essary "onditions behind su"h e-uation o e&"hange. ithout -uestioning the

stipulated alue as"ribed to a "urren"y note, en put ?et".@ at the beginning o thee&"hange pro"ess. /he origin o entitlement starts $ith ?et".@, i.e. ?ityadi@ ( iti'adi( iti

means the ?end o a pro"ess or state or an eent@, on the other hand adi means the

?origin@) is put at the ?adi @ or origin. /his is the parado& o his rame$or% as it leads to

alla"y o ininite regress.

18



10. ;s there are seeral reeren"es to the ndian philosophi"al te"hni"alities in

(s)tal%er*s enun"iation, he $as eager to loo% at the ar"haeology o the dis"ursie spa"e

"alled ?ndian hilosophy@.

/here are three main problems, $hen $e are tal%ing about something "alled ndian

hilosophy (). e orget, at the moment o spea%ing about it that

(a) ?ndia@ is a so"io+politi"al "onstru"t that $as born out o (mainly) 19 <. ndustrial as

$ell as print "apitalist imagination o nation state.

(b) and that imagination $as also appropriated by the dierent modes o "olonialism.

(<) ?hilosophy@ is e-uated $ith the )darsana* as a part o politi"al translation. ;part

rom their obious similarities, there are also dieren"es as Ban%im"handra pointed

out that ?hilosophy@ is sadhya (is to be mediated) and darsana is sadhaniya

(ought to be mediated. <hattopadhyay, B. (+,/+012+-+,

(d) hat are "ategori!ed under the umbrella o homogeni!ed ?l@ is a purely ?good

orient@+al proje"t that e&"ludes ?other@ non+ans%riti!ed $ay o thought and

methods o proing truth. /his had a pre"eden"e in 3ayana Madhava4s

)savrvadarsansamgraha (1Mth. < ;.D.), $hi"h $as ta%en, at the moment o

"onstru"ting ?@ as an appropriate paradigm or setting up order o things.

(e) /his order o things are appro&imated and appropriated by the $estern %no$ledge+

base. /hus $hat is "alled as ?@ is also a deriatie dis"ourse.

() )vijnana* in the ndian tradition means ?"ons"iousness@ (as translated by Dasgupta,

19H6:J6). 8othing $as "lassiied separately as ?s"ien"e* in the so+"alled ndiantradition, though some elements o so+"alled ?ndian "ulture@ obiously may be

"ategori!ed as ?s"ien"e@ rom the uropean point o ie$.

(g) hat, as a $hole, may be "alled and per"eied as ?l o "ien"e@ today is merely a

result o retrospe&tive ee&t 5 pratyavbhijna ( i.e. appropriating past %no$ledge by

deploying today*s %no$ledge+base and te"hni-ues, $hi"h may be "alled

?epistemologi"al re"urren"e@ ollo$ing Ba"helard.

(h) Due to this re"urren"e and appropriation by the $estern epistemology, the de+sign

o modem ?l@ has emerged as a result o ?epistemologi"al amalgamation@.

;ll these problems must be seriously e&plained and elaborated beore going to enture

into the realm o ? o "ien"e@ as all these statements should be ?proed@ (i.e. need

pramana a""ording to the need o ?global@(A) hilosophy o s"ien"e.

19



11. ()tal%er, out o his seere guilt eeling as he is a member o the leisure "lass,

e&e"uted some sel+unded proje"ts related to so"io+e"onomi" "onditions o est

Bengal. 'e had sureyed jute "ultiation and industryG mines and -uarriesG unorgani!ed

retail mar%et and shopping mallG bri"% industryG "otton millsG tea+gardens in est

Bengal, ndia. 4ethodologi"ally spea%ing, he had not ollo$ed any statisti"al sample

surey te"hni-ues as he $ished to reje"t state+statisti"s unholy ne&us ollo$ing

7ou"auldian paradigmG se"ondly, under the deployment o s"heduled surey te"hni-ues,

subje"ts $ere obje"tiied and they under$ent metonymi" transormation. ;""ording to

(s)tal%er, that is a seer iolen"e. /hereore, instead o this te"hni-ue he ollo$ed his

o$n ersion o ethnomethodology or sno$+ball method or understanding su"h domains.

'is indings are as ollo$s:

• "onomi"s is not a so+"alled natural s"ien"e that "ould be guided by the la$s o

physi"s. /hus the uniersali!ation o e"onomi" la$s is not at all possible.

"onometri" analysis does not able to predi"t uture e"onomi" "ondition.

• /he goernmental statisti"s does not mat"h $ith the ground+reality narraties.

• /he so+"alled binary diision bet$een organi!ed and unorgani!ed se"tor does

not $or% at all= a u!!y !one o organi!ed+unorgani!ed se"tor has been eoled

in the est Bengal industrial s"enario.

• /he e&isten"e o disembodied (a ghost+li%e entity) o$ners o seeral industries

has been obsered in organi!ed jute industry, "oal industry as $ell as in

unorgani!ed basalt+-uarries.

• Due to automation and manipulatie pro"edures ta%en by the o$ners o

industries and due to the "onersion o surplus labour+ne"essary labour ratio in

the orm o money+sign, null+$or%ers are ?$or%ing@ $ithout any $or% in the

sphere o e"onomy. /he e&tra"tion is possible due to the dia"hroni"ally

a""umulated surplus labor rom the de"eased null $or%ers. 8ull $or%ers e&ist

and do not e&ist.• By the irtue o the labour o the de"eased null $or%ers, o$ners are "reating a

a""umulatie spa"e, $here one "an "onert money+sign to another money+sign,

i.e., the domain o dangerous share mar%et. pe"ters o the null $or%ers are not

at all haunting here, $here "apital to "ommodity transormation has be"ome

merely a pla"e o "onspi"uous "onsumption o the minority super+ri"h people,

20



$ho hae the etish or the ostentatious display o e"o+enemy "ommodities.

• /he role o state is minimal="ollusion o super+ri"h, a minority, is reigning $ith

the help o ideologi"al state apparatuses.

• mage pro"essing and remote sensing satellite te"hnologies ma%e it easier to

%no$ the mineral resour"es. /he minority hedge a""ount holders $ith

4althaseian mindset, ea"uate, terminate and annihilate the people o the land

to be a""umulated by "reating a simulated $ar. 'edge a""ount holders are

supplying $eapons to the (?terrorist@) state and to the so+"alled anti+statist

(though they are subs"ribing the statist order o things) ?terrorists@ ( (s)tal%er is

no$ "olle"ting linguisti" data or understanding the import+ e&port o arms and

ammunition. Dierent terms or antilanguage are used both or the ragmented

parts o imported arms, $hi"h are to be assembled and the diision o labour)

+++a "ase o simula"rum or theory o double rele"tions (anyonyopratibimba) Oone

is mirroring an+?other@.

• ()tal%er is emphasi!ing on using lo"al terms to depi"t the nature o e"onomi"s

as it is ound in glo&al (globalNlo"al) "onte&t o est Bengal. ahibs "ould use

so+"alled antilanguages li%e plum or lemon mar%et, $hat is $rong $ith the terms

li%e lokkhibar (no "onsuming day), tola (illegal ley), p67ta ("oert $eight),

gunda ta& (ta& to be paid too the goons), bani (the hidden residue o the gold at

the time o reselling), 3oru line (illegal path) phoe (the illegal agent), "in'at

(signs or a type o ar"he$riting that regulates the parallel mar%et $ith legal

"onli"t)A

• /he role o politi"al parties here surprising enough. /here is no -uestion o

ideology as adertised by the respe"tie parties, rather they are using ideology

as a mas%. /hey are a"ting as priate limited "ompany as the "orporati!ation o

those parties guided by management gurus has su""essully established in the

dollar+"ontrolled demo"ra"y.

• ()tal%er added a ariable, i!. e"ologi"al a"tors to analy!e the so"io+e"onomi"

situations. 'e is against the mar%et undamentalism and industriali!ation as $ell

as urbani!ation instead he is an a"tiist o e"o+e"onomi"s.

• ()tal%er*s utopia largely depends on the "on"ept o so"ially ne"essary labor, i.e.

ma%ing one*s o$n ood, "lothes and liing spa"e. /hat is the basi" edu"ation at

the vyabaharika leel.

21



• ()tal%er is proposing ?samavaya@ in a spe"ial sense o the term. /a%ing "ue rom

the 8yaya darsana, he is e&plaining samavaya as an non+deta"hable "onta"t

( samni%arsa) in "ontrast $ith ?samyoga@ (deta"hable "onta"t). By this term he is

not only emphasi!ing on the samavaya at the vyavaharika leel, but also at the

paramarthika leel. /he "on"epts o samavaya and paravak thus hae

"ompleted a ull "ir"le in the (s)tal%er*s system o philosophy.

12. ;s ()tal%er is no$ deeply interested in primary edu"ation, his "on"ern or "hildren

leads to a pedagogi"al proje"t. ; primer $as deeloped and it is meant or the primary

Bengali s"hool+tea"hers, $ho $ere introdu"ing Bangla alphabets to the "hildren belo$

si& years. /he strategy adopted here or introdu"ing target language graphemes to the

Bengali "hildren $as altogether dierent rom the usual "ultural pra"ti"e o introdu"ing

Bangla alphabet $ith se-uential ans%rit phoneti" order o things that "reated

ambiguities and "onusion in the mind o learning+subje"ts as there $as no stri"t one+to+

one "orresponden"es bet$een Bangla spee"h sounds and traditional graphemes. /here

might be one+many or many+one or !ero Oone (or i"e ersa) "orresponden"es.

/hereore, altogether dierent approa"h $as ta%en to tea"h language art by introdu"ing

art samples already aailable in the Bengali "ulture. /he simple "ontours o ;lpana

(?ritual painting in the loor o the house@ mainly pra"ti"ed by Bengali $omen at the time

o religious estialG the term denotes Xto "oat $ith*. /he idea o using ;lpana in the

"onte&t o learning $as ta%en rom the understanding o atyajit ay*s Bangla

"alligraphy. Craphemes $ere introdu"ed to "hildren ater tea"hing straight lines,

adjoining straight lines $ith dots, triangle, re"tangle and "ir"le respe"tiely. ;ll the

shapes are ormed either by the $ay o dra$ing or by using "lay. /hese basi" shapes

$ere gradually metamorphosed into the graphemi" shapes and that $as a strange and a

ne$ e&perien"e to the "hild learner. Craphemes, on the basis o their homogeneity, e.g.,

sounds li%e b, r, %, dh, jh et". $ith their atomi" triangular shapes or o, t, ou, oi $ith the

basi" "ir"ular shapes $ere put together $ith the "ontours o ?alpana@ or e&e"uting

learning pro"ess. ;long $ith this artisti" learning, songs "ontaining the sounds related to

graphemes $ere sung $ith e$ musi"al instruments. 3ater on stories are told and

perormed as a play (both tea"hers and students parti"ipate in the e&tempore dramas

and releant musi"%ing) $ith a ie$ to $rite stories in the latter stage o learning. /hus

the $hole pro"ess had be"ome a joyul bi+$ay ?learning@ pro"ess rather than that o one

$ay ?tea"hing@.

22



n all the "ases, the learning pro"ess, apart rom its "onte&t+spe"ii" lingua+aestheti"

"ontent, depended on the prior %no$ledge o the linguisti" eatures o Bangla language.

By anti"ipating phoneti" eatures, phonologi"al rules and "hild language a"-uisition

theory, the $hole (open) te&t $as built $ith the help o a Bengali "hild+learner. ;ll the

s%et"hes o this open te&t $ere dra$n by 4aster ;%har Bandyopadhyay ('e started

dra$ing $hen he $as H years old and he inished learning graphemes $ithin one and a

hal years. n "ase o aboe si&+year old illiterate learners, it too% 20 to 25 days to learn

almost all the Bangla graphemes along $ith e$ allographs, i she is taught in this $ay.)

/he redundant and opa-ue "lustered graphemes are aoided in this phono+"entri"

lingua+aestheti" dire"t learning pro"ess.

12.1. ()tal%er proided an a""ount o atyajit ay*s "alligraphi" te"hni-ues. atyajit

ay designed t$o nglish typea"es, i!., R#% R&"#$ and R#% B'#))*. ()tal%er made

another paper "on"entrating on ay*s artisti" playing $ith the Bangla graphemes as it

$as reealed in the "ine posters and "ine promo+bro"hures* "oers (/his paper

e&"ludes boo%+"oer designs by ay). (s)tal%er ound deep impa"t o

(a) ;rtisti" pattern o uropean sta notation in the graphemi" syntagmsG

(b) ;lpana in ay*s graphemi" representations.

/hus, so+"alled diision bet$een "lassi"al and ol% art $as blurred in ay*s

representation o Bangla graphemes. /he three+tier T+height o Bangla graphemes $aspresented in a manner o musi"al map and the "ontours, "ures in bet$een hori!ontal

and erti"al meeting+point, ollo$ the patterns o alpana. ;uthors also sho$ed the

metamorphosis o graphemes (/his might be designated as ?;r"he$riting@) as a liing

obje"t subje"t in ay*s artisti" manipulation o Bangla graphemes. (s)tal%er also

mentioned ay*s "alligraphi" impa"t on the Bangla printing te"hnology. Bengali "hildren,

$hen $ere to be introdu"ed in the 3anguage ;rt (espe"ially Bangla $riting system),

might pra"ti"e alpana $ith a estie mood or the easement o their inger+moements

and or alpana*s ainity $ith the Bangla graphemes. ;n ar"hie o Bangla graphemes $as made in "ollaboration $ith the ;siati" o"iety,

ol%ata. (s)tal%er $as the one o the prin"ipal inestigators o this proje"t.

1H. hat type o methodology ()tal%er did ollo$ in all these proje"tsA 3et us see

stal%er*s position in this regard.

23



“nd the peop!e in the ho#ses-!! ent to the #niversity-here they ere p#t in

"o'es-nd they came o#t a!! the same%%% Little boxes all the same, )** a!vina eyno!ds

s#ng "y ete eeger, 1962%

'ere am reiterating 8iet!s"he O truth+see%ing is a disease O $ill to %no$ leads to $ill to po$er.

en then, $e hae truth rooms (/) and $e are "elebrating our truth "laims. e are ollo$ing,

either in our lie+spa"esstatist+spa"e or in a"ademi" spa"es, dierent ?originalundamental@ /s.

hen am branding one / as undamentalist, do not "onsider my / as undamentalist,

though it is ?undamental original@ pie"e o $or%. 7ollo$ing 4alina eynolds, $ant to "all all

these /s as little bo&es. ithin this little bo& or / o one egetarian, all the animal proteins,

onion are prohibited and another egetarian thin%s she "an "onsume onion and egg and still

preseres egetarian status. n "ase o determining the semanti" status o the term Kegetarian*,

ho$ do $e in"orporate t$o /s o t$o egetariansA n the other hand, the Kmeaning* o the term

might be de"ided positiely by terminating one o them. here are the entry+points and "losureso su"h /sA r, they ?all loo% just the same@A 4y 3ittle Bo& gies me se"urity and proides me

$ith dis"omort. /his ery mu"h "laustrophobi" dependen"e on a single / ma%es me remember

o a giant, Damastes or other$ise ro%rustes, $ho laid all human beings on his bed and then ?lop

them or ra"% them out to ma%e it it.@ ;re these /s ro"rustean BedA 3et us s"rutini!e some /s

in reeren"e to dierent a"ademi" dis"iplines. 4. ouget argued that s"ientii" statements are

oten ?as i@ ?true@. ;s sometimes in <lassi"al hysi"s, $e presume su"h a"uum to "ontinue our

agenda or model+theoreti" approa"h. n "ase o 3inguisti" /, <homs%y*s ?ideal@ spea%ing

subje"t stands in a a"uum. <homs%y*s / is li%e this: ?<onte&t ree ideal "reatie spea%ing

subje"t $ith !ero history@, on the other hand in another /, one may postulate, ?<onte&t+sensitie "reatie spea%ing "orporeal $ith history ("hildhood "oniguration et".)@. n "ien"e, $e

generally ideali!e a ormula by "onsidering ?other@ ariables as non+e&istent entities. n <ri"%et ,

$e "an say, $ithout any hesitation that hane arne is "ontinuing his 6.5 oer. hat is the

status o .5 in si&+balls* oerA ittgenstein is to be belieed, mathemati"s is a pra"ti"e,

perorman"e o a "ommunity. 7or ittgenstein, "ommunalism o mathemati"s is determined by

the "ommunities* "onenien"e and ne"essity. n "ase o "onomi"s, "an $rite ?H goatsF 1 "o$

or ?one apartmentF Y 200000@ by adding some sui"ient "auses. 'o$ do put the signF in

bet$een t$o une-ual thingsA Zuestioning the e-uali!ing ee"t o a sign as a dangerous

supplement, a properly signed signiier "alled money, is prohibited $ithin e"onomi"s* /. amrepresenting the presentations o a priori, though it is neither analyti"al a priori, nor the syntheti"

one, but something "alled histori"al a priori=an a priori appro&imated by the histori"al

in"iden"es and they get epistemi" status $ithin a ghetto o a /. had then s$it"hed oer to

some problems o ordinary language, the problem o u!!y numerals in Bangla, $hi"h, rom

3ogi"al ositiist perspe"tie, is illogi"al. ;""ording to (s)tal%er, i do not li%e one /, let me

ta%e it as a legitimate possibility $ithout any "ommitment and on the other hand, i eel "omort

24



in one o these /s, let me "ommit mysel to that parti"ular /. ;lternatiely, $e may s$ing rom

one / to another /. hat ()tal%er $as paraphrasing here is nothing but the re+reading o

Saina ane%antaada by rishna"handra and alidas Bhatta"harya. ta!(er a!so too( his

inheritance of ane(antavada from "# ayed y#", #ddhade" as# and #dhindranath

#tta in ang!a !iterary criticism and trans!ation theory: %;% aha!ana"is and <%%%

=a!dane in tatistics and nat#ra! sciences% !! of them dep!oyed ane(anta*theory in their

respective fie!ds%

14% ()tal%er is no$ not at all interested in aparavidya, he is no$ sear"hing or para

vidya. /he unsu""essul and $ounded persons are generally ta%ing this type o "ourse in

their lie.

NEOLOGISMS USED BY THE (STALKER: <rippled <reatiity, si+properties,

pistemologi"al ;malgamation, allo"urri"uleme, triglossia, n+glossia, ;nti+Crammar (FCrammr), de+sign, de+sign+ate, de+sign+ation, "hrodinger*s "at problem in

ar"haeology, endulum o transitiity s"ale, ;lgo"entri" Dis"ourse, le"troni"

<apitalism, reerse mimi"ry or theory o double rele"tions (anyonyopratibimba as

mentioned in samkhya darsana), agina 4ahato yndrome, Drain o 3anguage,

3inguisti" /errorism, Bhasa+samaaya, &du"tion, iso+"orporeal, ilen"eme, my+nessmy+

dentity, >ayati and Babar <omple&, %alaya te&t and Drona"arya te&t, "olotage

("olonial su botage), 4ar&ise, 3anguage poli"emanagersjudges, pra"alit.

25



26

Research Works of Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

Documents

Transcript of Research Works of Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay