Fix Böhtlingk & Roth entry svaras

[vvasuki]

Vedic accent and lexicography - https://zenodo.org/record/837826/files/Rau2017_vedic-accent-in-lexicography.pdf

(via @drdhaval2785 at #7 (comment) )

This will probably not be solved for a long time (Unless https://cceh.uni-koeln.de/portfolio/lazarus/ solves it? If anyone has contacts there, can you find out?). But still, for the record.

In the original

If the R̥ gveda system were used consistently for accent marking throughout the dictionary, the
diacritical underscore क॒ would have a single function in this work. With the introduction
of the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, the diacritical underscore क॒ becomes multi-functional mark-
ing pre-udātta anudātta accents in one system and udātta – or in another interpretation
pre-svarita syllables – in the other. The situation is further complicated by the fact that
not all passages from the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa are given in the same system. ... Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875) contains over 10000 references to the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. Although not all involve a quotation from the text, it is not possible to predict how accent is marked in all these cases and how the marking has to be interpreted.

LOL. Internal consistency problem!

The fact that some (but not all) quotations from the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa are in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa sys-
tem while others were converted into the R̥ gveda marking system by Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875) makes an automatic conversion virtually impossible.

Haha.

Added data entry problems

.... In particular, this means that the vertical stroke क॑ is internally rep-
resented as ^ regardless of whether क॑ represents dependent or independent svarita as
in the R̥ gveda accent marking system found in quotations in Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875) or independent svarita as in the headwords in Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875). In Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875), underscore क॒ is internally represented as \ regardless
of whether it represents anudātta accent as in the R̥ gveda accent marking system found in
quotations from the R̥ gveda, Atharvaveda, Sāmaveda, and some passages of the Śatapatha
Brāhmaṇa in Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875) or whether it is the only accent mark of the
Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa system with disputed function.

Plus:

At the time of writing, when the Devanagari script accent marks are converted into ISO
15919 romanisation, the diacritical उ udātta क꣫ is represented by an acute accent, under-
score क॒ is generally discarded, while vertical stroke क॑ is discarded in quotations, but rep-
resented as grave accent in headwords. This results in the correspondences for Böhtlingk
and Roth (1855-1875) and potentially Böhtlingk (1879-1889), given in 5.2 (above). However, this means that the accent marking is lost when quoted passages as found in Böhtlingk and Roth (1855-1875) are converted into Latin script.

[vvasuki]

This will probably not be solved for a long time (Unless https://cceh.uni-koeln.de/portfolio/lazarus/ solves it? If anyone has contacts there, can you find out?). But still, for the record.

@fxru can you comment on the above please?