cardemaister wrote: > Just bought Kale's A Higher Sanskrit Grammar, from 1894 > (Motilal Banarsidass). > > I wonder if Indian books still are in general technically > (or whatever) that "sucky". Or is the main reason perhaps > that the book is a reprint (1972, 1977, 1984, 1986, 1988, > 1992, 1995, 2002, 2007)? > > For instance, especially some of the devanaagarii characters are > quite messy and the Roman printing color is rather uneven. > > "Interesting"(?) detail from the book: > > "The Aryans who were much fairer in color than the aborigines of > India are the Devas referred to in the name /Devanagari/ > (from 'div', to shine, those of a brilliant complexion)."
Probably about the same. A lot of Indian publishers are "vanity publishers" and you pay to get the book published. They don't proofread much though nowadays these would probably be submitted as word processor files so the author could take care of proofreading. As you go back in time some of the books were probably done with Linotype machines and whoever typed in the pages was likely to make some mistakes. Reprints may have been done as an offset of an original.
