Saya Maung Khin Min (Danubyu)’s landmark reference book on sixty Myanmar linguistics treatises.

Saya Maung Khin Min (Danubyu) reached the venerable age of eighty-five on 24 January 2025, but regrettably, he passed away less than four days later on 28 January 2025.

Saya Maung Khin Min (24 January 1940-28 January 2025) (hereafter MKM) has published 133 books dealing mainly with literature, linguistics, memoirs, and belles’ letters. Yours truly has read 9 or 10 books of Saya MKM in their entirety. The second-last book MKM published before his demise is titled in translation ‘References to (and commentary on) sixty treatises on Myanmar language and linguistics’ Myanmar Barthar Sagar Kyan Khauk Hse Ah Nhun.

Structure and Organization of the Treatise

There are eight Parts in the Book. Some of the titles can be briefly mentioned: ‘Grammar’ Thada (Part II, Chapters 6 to 20), Myanmar (Modern) Vocabulary Waw har ya (Part IV, Chapters, 25 to 33), Dictionary Abidan (Part V, Chapters 34 to 40), Alphabet and System of Writing) Eik Kha Yar Sar Ayae Athar Sanit (Part VII, Chapters 50 to 54), Myanmar Language (general matters) (Part VII, Chapters 55-60).

There are sixty treatises mentioned in this superb reference book with descriptions and commentaries. As a dilettante, I am familiar with the titles of about twenty of them. I have learned a lot from each and every Chapter, for which I am grateful to Saya Maung Khin Min. This review can only be selective, indeed eclectic.

A Myanmar scholar’s work on Burmese linguistics in English published in the early 1960s

Seven of the sixty treatises on aspects of Myanmar language and linguistics are in English. Six of them are written or edited by mainly foreign scholars and specialists of the Myanmar language and linguistics. One of them is written by a Myanmar scholar.

Perhaps one can start with that treatise written by a Myanmar scholar titled (in English) Report on Studies on Burmese Grammar by Min Latt (Praha). Saya MKM praises Min Latt as one of the very rare linguistics scholars of Burmese heritage. He also states that U Min Latt’s work published over 60 years ago is of ‘great value’ in that it was a product of scientific, scholarly research work. MKM writes that Saya Min Latt’s work gives fresh perspectives and fresh knowledge in the study of linguistics.

A younger contemporary of Min Latt was Maung Tha Noe (1932-2022) whose book Ba Mar Sar Ba Mar Zagar (Bama spoken and written language) (Part VIII, Chapter 58, first published 1972) was also discussed (pages 276-84). Maung Tha Noe proposed writing in colloquial Burmese in a paper read in Mandalay in December 1965. U Minn Latt had in his treatise written in English several years earlier also made a similar proposal in that the classical style of writing Burmese should be eschewed.

The ‘Loom’ of Pali linguistics and a bit of Indo-European languages

 About 18 books in Saya MKM’s treatise on the treatises (so to speak) pre-date the 20th century. It is the assiduity and good fortune of Saya that he was able to collect all the volumes authored by Myanmar learned persons (pyin nya shi) a few dating back to the mid-18th century, albeit they were republished in the late 19th and 20th centuries. One of the earliest treatises was composed by the Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw I (the first) and republished in 1962 (Part II, Chapter 6, pages 46-9).

A fairly frequent theme or noticeable feature in the classical and indeed modern (that is up to about the mid-20th century and beyond in the treatises be it on grammar, old Myanmar usage (Paw Ra Na), Modern Myanmar usage (Waw Har Ya) alphabet and writing systems (Ek kha Yar Ya Thar Poan Sa Nit) is the loom of the Pali language. It is an influence that cannot be avoided.

Yours truly may be allowed to make a ‘spillover’ observation regarding foreign influence in what is Burmese customary law. Two scholars Sayagyi Dr E Maung (among others a former Supreme Court Justice and eminent jurist) (1898- July 1977) and Sayagyi Dr Htin Aung (among others, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Rangoon) (18 May 1909-10 May 1978) have stated that Myanmar customary law is a (totally) separate genre from that of Hindu law. Perhaps for a few centuries now it is ‘free of Hindu law’ but the partial inchoate origins of Hindu law should not be denied which apparently the two Sayagyis did not. In a different genre, the influence of Pali on the development of both classical Burmese nay even in modern usages is significantly greater than the influence of Hindu law on Burmese customary law.

I noticed two typos in the Chapter on the work of the first Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw. On page 48, 2nd paragraph yae that phyin (… ‘Sayadaw has written’) should be yae thar chin. On page 49 there is a sentence “The Sayadaw at the end of the Nyaung Yan dynasty in the year 1871 wrote a treatise on Myanmar grammar in juxtaposition with Pali grammar”. The Nyaung Yan/Toungoo dynasty ended in the mid-18th century. The year 1871 was the last 14 years of the Kongbaung dynasty of 1752-1885. Hence Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw wrote his treatise in the year 1748 at the end of the Nyaung Yan dynasty and not in ‘1871’.

Immediately following it is another treatise on grammar written by Taung Twin Sayadaw in the period of 1724 to 1762 (pages 49-56) followed by the Grammar of the Burmese language written by the Baptist missionary Dr Adoniram Judson (9 August 1788-12 April 1850). On page 56 it is stated that Judson’s book was published in the year 1816. I think this date is almost certainly a typo. Judson and his first wife arrived at Rangoon port on 13 July 1813 with very little -indeed almost nil- knowledge of the Burmese language. Even for a dedicated preacher determined to propagate the gospel in the vernacular, it would have taken more than 3 years to write a treatise on the Burmese language. Perhaps the year the first edition of the book was published was 1826 not ‘1816‘. Quoting scholar U Wun (Minthuwun) MKM states that Judson was fluent in Greek, Latin and English. Hence Judson’s view or perspective on the Burmese language is in the ‘format’ of Indo-European languages. Just as Pali’s influence was quite pervasive especially in medieval and to a certain extent in modern Burmese the influence of English grammatical structures can be discerned in grammar treatises published starting those from Judson in the 1820s to the grammar treatises written in the 1940s and 1950s.

Landmark work in the mid-18th century on the differences between Pali and Myanmar linguistics by Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw II

MKM devotes over 10 pages to the treatises of the second Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw (Sayadaw II) whose work ‘Treatise on the Vocabulary (rough translation)’ Waw Har Ya Pakathani Kyan completed around the start of the Konbaung era in the year 1769. The essay appears in Part IV (‘Vocabulary’ pages 135-46). Again, quoting U Wun MKM wrote that one of the most prominent personages who extrapolated into and more importantly distinguished Pali grammatical rules from Myanmar is the 2nd Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw (page 136). The Sayadaw was not a Pali ‘purist’ so to speak. In fact, Sayadaw can be considered a pioneer in pointing out the differences between the Pali and Myanmar languages semantically and grammatically. Producing a long excerpt from the Sayadaw’s treatise reproduced in 1958 MKM writes that even in the 18th century Sayadaw was clearly aware of (some) distinct differences between Pali and Myanmar languages. Yours truly learned from the 2nd Kyaw Aung San Htar Sayadaw through MKM that Pali (one could add somewhat like French?) has grammatical gender which the Myanmar language does not have (page 137). The rest of MKM’s article produces excerpts from Sayadaw’s treatise on both the influence of and differences between the Pali and Myanmar languages. At the end of the Chapter Saya Maung Khin Min solidly gives tribute to the Sayadaw’s great work. He states that it would stand as a landmark to be emulated in perpetuity (Asin Ashet) in the annals of Myanmar language and linguistics (page 146).

Two critical Chapters

In every Chapter MKM after describing the book makes some comments. A few of the comments are brief. Some of the comments are more extensive. Most of the comments are complimentary. Some are solid praises. But naturally, almost inevitably there are a few treatises where MKM makes critical comments. I will mention two.

In 1984 the then Myanmar Sar Aphewi (Myanmar Sar Commission) published a book on Myanmar grammar (Myanmar Thadar). MKM discusses this treatise in Part II (Chapter 19, pages 104-110). It is intended for (as it then was) fifth to the tenth (Matriculation) standards and for first- and second-year University students (for all majors or disciplines. where Myanmar Sar is a compulsory subject.) From pages 107 to 110 MKM made ten numbered comments. Some of the comments can be described as critical. On point 7, MKM stated that there is no such designation as an adjective (nar ma wi thay thana) and adverb (kyi wa wi thay tha na) in Myanmar grammar. The delineation in the treatise for students that there is such a lexical category in Myanmar grammar is doubtful (pages 108-9).

At point 10 MKM writes that parts of the high school curriculum can be considered as (unintentionally) encouraging the students to learn by heart the rules of grammar. There are also some lessons which may be beyond the comprehension of most of the young students. The last sentence of MKM’s comments reads (in my translation): ‘Parts of the text may not fulfil the stated purpose, instead, it may be a hindrance (Ahant-Atar) of facilitating students to be able to write grammatical Burmese which is the aim of the text written in its Preface’ (page 110)

Another article is on Part VII (Alphabet and Writing System, Chapter 53, pages 250-56). The book is written by U Thaung Lwin (BA). It has a sub-title in English: Burmese Alphabetology. MKM again makes numbered comments. On point 4 (page 255) MKM states that there are several sentences in the book) which can be considered somewhat personal. He writes that it can negatively affect, more or less (ahne hnint amyar), the scholarly value and objectivity of the treatise. (page 255).

A few typos and the usage of hmar

In a work of this magnitude, there could be some typos. I have pointed out two of them which occur in the same Chapter.

In Part VII, Chapter 57 in his discussion Myanmar Sar Hti ka by Saya U Thein Naing (born 27 March 1936) on page 273 MKM stated that the era that King Asoka ‘flourished’ was ’13th century BC’. Online sources state that Ashoka died in 232 Before the Common Era (BCE). Hence the insertion of an extra ‘one’ makes it the 13th century BC!

Another point which I want to humbly raise is Saya Maung Khin Min’s very frequent use of the word hmar, instead of the more formal twin or hnike. I have made about two dozen notations in my copy of the book changing hmar to either twin or hnike.

Saya MKM writes stylistically in formal prose but a few times colloquialisms creep in. For instance, on page 44 in the last line, the phrase taw taw twin kyey (quite prevalent) can be written as ah-tan pin twin kyey which is less colloquial and more formal and fits more with the formal style of Saya Maung Khin Min’s prose.

Landmark book of great value and an outstanding contribution

Saya Maung Khin Min’s book is, to repeat, a landmark work. It is a labour of love, devotion, careful research and relevant, persuasive commentary on the sixty treatises dealing with the intricacies of Myanmar language and linguistics. With this review, I give my humble tribute to the late Saya Maung Khin Min.

#TheGlobalNewLightOfMyanmar