13. Linguistic comparison

It is very clear that the Gitagovinda has deeply influenced not only the Kishore-chandrananda-champu but the whole Odia literature. But Baladeva was an extraordinary linguist, an acclaimed 85. Miller, B.S., Ed. The Gitagovinda of Jayadeva, p. 77 86. T. Patniak, Ed. Kavisurya Granthavali, p.173 169

scholar in Sanskrit and master of at least five other Indian languages 87. In this point Kavisurya is more skilful than Jayadeva. No doubt Jayadeva was a saint and his major ambition of composition was to please the Almighty Krsna, but Baladeva was a master composer in different languages as a poet. He was a magician of apt display of archaic speech 88. He has used different words of four categories within one small composition for which it is considered as the master piece of the poet. The successful application of Baladeva means his careful blending of Sanskrit and Odia languages in collection of the words of tatsama and tadbhava varieties with admixture of the local and Arabic words and the dexterity of dialogues to create curiosity and entertainment 89. One of the speciality of the Kishore-chandrananda-champu is its ornamentation of language. He has used peculiar words from the four languages to suit his situation. He collected some unprevailed Sanskrit words to assist him in his poetic talent. In this context he followed Upendra Bhanja, another blessed poet of Odisha. Some words of Baladeva are like this -ghasranatha, mrda, khamani, paribrdha, praksvedana, samamsamina, samvesa, camikara, sarvasamha, jambunada, tapincha, vrjina⁹.. The country born words of Baladeva are anauni, tapa, dhaba, dhale, tipiba, duin, dhupiba, phatua, hati, phuruna, taliba, cahakai, etc. 91 The more are discussed by S.K. Chatterji in his criticism 92. The Arabic words of the poet are given in the former chapter. Kavisurya composed small poems in Telugu, Urdu, Sanskrit, Odia 87. Mansinha, Mayadhar, A History of Oriya literature, p.129 88. Behera, K.C., Ed. Kisoracandranandacampu, p.127 89. Mishra, S.N., Baladeva Ratha, p.124 90. Dasa, Asok, Kahita nuhai bharatire, p.134 91. Ibid, 134 92. Chatterji, S. K., Ed. Kavisurya Baladeva Ratha, p.52 170

and Hindi, heavily laden with Persian. For this ability Kishore-chandrananda-champu is appreciated by the people of all categories 93. Baladeva has created new words by combining two words of separate language like mrgamdakali, jhasadhvajapida etc. The mixing of Sanskrit and other languages improve the communicative skill of his poem. The poetic figure of Kishore-chandrananda-champu is like the Ardhanarisvara 94. Baladeva has faithfully followed the Gitagovinda but his scholastic composition sometimes lost the poetic beauty. tadastadakarnya karnabhyarnacumbiturna-kridalolalocanam dahottirnasvarnasavarnyapurnavarna sirna nidhuvanotsahatireka sa prakirnamalyamutthaya satrasatrapi kisoresvaram prati ‍ Another scholar states that Gitagovinda is an incomparable poem, Kishore-chandrananda-champu is less popular than Gitagovinda Kishore-chandrananda-champu is more meaningful but less circulated than the Gitagovinda The union of Radha and Krsna is more natural in the Kishore-chandrananda-champu than the Go 96. So Kishore-chandrananda-champu may be musical text but not the best literary composition like the Go⁹7. The language of Gitagovinda is more expressive than Kishore-chandrananda-champu Through thread-bare description the characters they have lost their real charm. Though it has excellent composition but the expression of Kishore-chandrananda-champu is self-contained and stressed more on the subject than the diction as seen in Gitagovinda