Extracted from Arise Arjun: Awaken my Hindu Nation 1st Ed of 2003 pg 139-140
There seems to be a common impression that if ‘a’ appears at the end of any word written in English it is supposed to be indicative of long ‘a’ as in ‘arm’. People in India as well as in the Western world tend to pronounce Sanskrit terms like Yoga, Buddha, Dharma, Adharma, Veda, Shiva, etc with a long ‘a’ emphasis at the end. In reality, Sanskrit terms ending with ‘a’ in English are actually intended to be pronounced like short ‘a’ as in ‘rural’. If we look at Sanskrit prints we will never find them spelt with the syllable that represents long ‘a’ in Sanskrit.
A reader, who does not already know this, cannot be expected to know it by simply looking at the English spelling. We can therefore, try to spell Sanskrit terms in English script in such a manner that by their look and feel a reader is automatically prompted to pronounce them as close as practically possible to the original intended pronunciation of Sanskrit. This can be attained, to some extent, by dropping the tailing ‘a’ and leaving it as Yog, Buddh, Dharm, Adharm, Ved, Shiv, etc. This could inspire pronunciation that might be called ‘relatively’ closer to short ‘a’ as in ‘rural’ than to long ‘a’ as in ‘arm’.
It is also necessary that such spellings are not made unduly complex by adding ‘accent’ symbols/notations that dictionaries usually provide for its users because most readers do not truly care to pay attention to those notations and they rarely check the dictionary for intended pronunciation. Readers generally use their common sense judgment to make up their mind as to how the written word ought to be pronounced from the very ‘look and feel’ of the printed word. We need to respect this natural human tendency.
Sanskrit has three visually distinguishable different syllables for ‘i’ as in ‘pin’, short ‘a’ as in ‘rural’ and long ‘a’ as in ‘arm’. We are familiar with the English spelling Brahmin. If we look at original Sanskrit text for the word Brahmin we will not find it written with the Sanskrit syllable meant for ‘i’ of ‘pin’. Braahman could, by its look and feel, inspire a pronunciation that might be called relatively closer to how it is written in Sanskrit syllable.
People from diverse backgrounds come in contact with Sanskrit terms through literature published in English, which provides a common platform to all readers. They do not have direct contact with Sanskrit and are exposed to Sanskrit terms through their appearance in English alphabet and they tend to pronounce Sanskrit terms from perspective of ‘their orientation’ in English. This necessitates proper blending of English and Sanskrit phonetic traditions.
It is not possible to present Sanskrit terms in English alphabet protecting their phonetic integrity ‘in totality’, but it is possible to respect the needs and limitations of the end-users. We need to take cognizance of these needs and limitations while developing any system of transliteration. Readers simply look at the word and then pronounce it by the feel that they get looking at it. The ‘look and feel’ of a foreign word when presented in English alphabet, therefore, becomes important to the end-user.
Sanskrit language was developed through ages with considerable perfection and it has a phonetically scientific script. We need to give our original linguistic traditions the respect they deserve. Those eyes that are now used to seeing Buddha, Dharma, Adharma, Shudra, Veda, Shiva, Krishna, etc will soon become used to seeing Buddh, Dharm, Adharm, Shudr, Ved, Shiv and Krishn because these are simply matters of habit. Such pronunciations may then come into practice over a period of time through repetition.