PDA

View Full Version : all Truth summarised abt Tamil n sanskrit



Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
Topic started by siva (ramji_money@email.com) (@ cache82.156ce.scvmaxonline.com.sg) on Mon Jan 6 09:39:32 .


HISTORY
Which Indian language is the world's oldest living language?

Tamil is the oldest of all Indian languages and also the oldest living
language in the world. It represents certain literacy types not found in
Sanskrit or other Aryan languages and traces its history to
Tolkappiyam(200bc), the earliest extant manuscript of Tamil grammar,
dated 500 B.C.


Among the four ancient literary languages of southern India
(Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, and Telugu) Tamil has
the longest tradition. The earliest records date from inscriptions
from 200 BC. Other early works exist which were preserved on manuscripts
made by palm-leaf and through oral transmission. Part of this rich and varied
literary output includes a Tamil indigenous grammatical tradition
independent of that of the ancient Sanskrit grammarians. The earliest
text which describes the language of the classical period is the Tolkappiyam
(dating from around 200 BC); another dates from the year 1000.

Three stages appear in the written records: ancient (200 BC to 700),
medieval (700 - 1500) and modern (1500 to the present). Sometime between 800
and the turn of the millennium, Mayalayam, a very closely related
Dravidian language, split off and became a distinct language.

All Kannadigas before 9th century A.D spoke Tamil. This is evident from the
fact that all the temples carved before 9th century A.D has Tamil
Inscriptions.

During the medieval period Tamil absorbed many loan words from
Sanskrit in the verbal system, but in the 1900s attempts were made to
purge Tamil of its Sanskrit loans with the result that modern scientific
and bureaucratic terminology is Tamil-based and not Sanskrit-based as in
other Indic languages.

.Tamil is written in an alpha-syllabic system derived from the
Ashokan Brahmi script. Tamil uses two varieties of the language:
high status variety in most writing, and a low status in speaking.
Sri Lanken Tamil is relatively conservative. The earliest text date from
200 BC. Early works were preserved on manuscripts made by palm-leaf.
Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic and English have influenced it.
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Larry Trask
COGS
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9QH
UK
larryt@cogs.susx.ac.uk

Sanskrit is an ancient language of India. It was, and is, a language of
great religious, literary and cultural importance in India, but it wasn't
even the first Indian language to be written down. Tamil was merely the
first of the Dravidian languages -- a family of languages spoken mostly in
southern India -- to be written down, and it is far from being one of the
world's earliest languages to be written. Hebrew, Phoenician, Greek,
Etruscan, Latin and many other languages were written down long before
Tamil was.
__________________________________________________ ____________________________
Sumerian was the first language to be written - it is *not* the
world's oldest language. We do not know what the world's oldest
language is.

Sanskirt, Tamil and Sumerian are all three different languages.
Sumerian was apoken in Mespotamia in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages.
Sanskirt and Tamil are two languages of India attested millennia
later.
************************************************** ****************************
Tamil Language -
A brief review of its history and features
___________________________________________
Old Dravidian
In the historical past Proto-Dravidian was spoken throughout India. When the
Turanians and the Aryans came to India through the Khyber and the Bolan
Passes respectively, and mingled with the local population of the North,
the North Indian languages of Proto-Dravidian origin changed to a great
extent. As a consequence Praakrit and Paali emerged as the languages of
the masses in the northern part of India. Despite the commingling of local
and foreign ethnic elements, a section of Proto-Dravidians maintained their
ethnic and cultural identity in some isolated areas, spoke corrupt forms of
Proto-Dravidian languages and these have survived, to this day, as living
examples of ancient Dravidian languages. Languages such as Kolami, Parji,
Naiki, Gondi, Ku, Kuvi, Konda, Malta, Oroan, Gadba, Khurukh, and Brahui are
examples of Dravidian languages prevalent in the North. Today
Proto-Dravidian speakers are increasingly mingling with other linguistic
groups and learning their languages. Therefore, their numerical strength is
on the decline. People living in the Rajmahal mountains in Bengal and in the
areas adjacent to Chota Nagpur are good examples of the intermingling.
A section of people living in Baluchistan speak Brahui, which has many
linguistic features similar to the Dravidian languages spoken in South India.
Scholars are surprised today to note many linguistic similarities between
Tamil and Brahui, especially in numerals, personal pronouns, syntax and in
other linguistic features. The Indian Census report of 1911 classified Brahui
as a language belonging to the Dravidian family. It was then spoken by about
170, 000 people, although this number over the years dwindled to a couple of
thousands. Whatever be their numerical strength now, they are proof of the
fact that the Dravidians in some age of the historical past were spread in
the region between Baluchistan and Bengal and spoke the Proto-Dravidian
idiom.

North Indian Languages
Since the Dravidians lived throughout the Indian subcontinent at some
historical past, certain syntactical affinities are noticeable even today
between the South and a large number of North Indian languages.
When Praakrit and Paali became popular in the North, the Proto-Dravidian
language lost its ground there, and confined itself entirely to the South.
Even in South India it did not remain as one single language for a long time.
Dialectical differences arose partly due to the political division of the
Tamil country into three distinct Tamil kingdoms and partly due to the
natural barriers created by rivers and mountains. The absence of proper
land communication among the three Tamil kingdoms also accentuated this
process of dialectal differences. As a result the Dravidian language spoken
by the people. who lived in the regions north and south of the Tirupati
mountains, varied to such an extent as to become two independent languages,
Tamil and Telugu. The language spoken in the region of Mysore came to be
known as Kannada. Malayalam emerged as yet another distinct language in
Kerala. All these far-reaching changes occurred at different periods of time
in the history of the Dravidian languages. Among these four languages, it is
'only the Tamil language which has a long literary tradition.

The term Dravidian, which refers to the language of South India, is of a
later origin. Originally it was derived from the word tamil /tamiz> .
This word in course of time changed into dravida after undergoing a series
of changes like tamiza, tramiza, tramiTa, trapida and travida. At one time
the languages spoken in the regions of Karnataka, Kongu and Malabar were
respectively known as Karunaattut-tamil, Tulunattut-tamil and
Malainattut-tamil. Today however, these regional languages are classified
under the blanket term "Dravidian family of languages".

South Indian Languages
Many common linguistic features are still discernible among these Dravidian
languages. Some five thousand words are common to these languages.
Many grammatical forms are common. The overwhelming influence of Sanskrit
scholars and the indiscriminate borrowing of Sanskrit words resulted in the
emergence of Kannada and Telugu as distinct languages from Tamil some fifteen
hundred years ago. The influence of Sanskrit on Malayalam language came to
be felt only about eight centuries ago, and therefore, the areas of
difference between Tamil and Malayalam are not many. Tamil was the language
of bureaucracy, of literati and of culture for several centuries in Kerala.
In fact, fifteen centuries ago the rulers of Kerala were all Tamils.
Up to the tenth century the Pandya kings ruled Kerala with royal titles such
as 'Perumaankal and 'Perumaankanar'. It was a Tamil poet from Trivandrum who
in fact presided over the academy of Tamil scholars, when they met to
evaluate the famous Tamil grammatical work Tolkappiyam. From the third
century 13.C. to the first century A.D., many poets from Kerala composed
poems in Tamil and their compositions are included in Tamil anthologies such
as Akananaru and Purananaru. All the one hundred poems in the anthology
PatiRRuppattuextol the greatness of the kings of the Kerala region.
The author of the famous Tamil epic Cilappatikaram was a poet from Kerala.
The shrine in honor of KaNNaki, the heroine of Cilappatikaram, was built at
Tiruvancikkulam in Kerala. Among the Saiva and Vaisnava composers,
CEramAn PerumAl Nayanaar and KulacEkara Alvaar respectively, belong to the
Kerala region. AiyanEritanaar, the author of the tenth century grammatical
work PuRapporul VeNpaamaalai, hailed from Kerala. Many scholars and pundits
from Kerala contributed much to the Tamil language and literature and the
historical evidence shows that the region now known as the State of Kerala
was once an integral part of Tamil Nadu at some period of time. Because of
these reasons there is greater affinity between Tamil and Malayalam than
between Tamil and Kannada or Telugu.
Contact with Foreign Countries
Tamil occupies a distinctive position among the Dravidian languages owing to
its geographical expansion, for it has spread beyond the frontiers of India.
Apart from being the language of forty million people in Tamil Nadu it is the
spoken and written language of several millions of Tamils living in Ceylon,
Burma, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, South Africa, Fiji Islands and
Mauritius.
That the Tamils were well advanced in sea-borne and inland trade is evident
both from Tamil literary sources as also from the accounts of foreign
travellers.* Even as early as the tenth century B.C., articles of trade
such as peacock feathers, elephant tusks and spices intended for King
Solomon were sent in ships belonging to the Tamil country. Some words in
Hebrew, Greek and English point to the existence of trade between Tamil Nadu
and the countries around the Mediterranean region. Classical Hebrew terms
like tuki and ahalat are close to the Tamil words tokai and akil respectively.
Although English words like 'sandalwood' and 'rice' are borrowed from the
Greek language, their origin is in fact Tamil. Likewise the Greek words for
ginger and pepper also owe their origin to Tamil. Sea-borne trade flourished
between the Tamil country and the Roman Empire during the period of
Emperor Augustus. This fact is borne out by numerous coins issued during his
reign, which were unearthed by archaeologists in the Tamil country.
Iron age finds in Philippines also point to the existence of trade between
Tamil Nadu and the Philippine Islands during the ninth and
tenth centuries B.C. This apart, Tamil traders frequented the shores of
Burma, Malaya and China with their wares and bartered them for Chinese silk
and sugar. The Tamil word ciini for sugar indicates its origin.
In Tamil classical works.
The renowned Sanskrit epics the Raamayanaa and the Mahaabhaarata also speak
about the Tamil country and in particular the importance of Madurai as the
capital of the Paandyaa kings. Megasthenes, who came to India during the
period of Chandragupta Maurya, refers to the Paandya country and its polity.
The edicts of the famous Indian Emperor Asoka also mention that during his
rule the Tamil kings in the far south of India enjoyed political independence.

Antiquity of Tamil Grammatical Works
Among the ancient grammatical works available, the Tolkappiyam was the
earliest and it was written around the third century B.C. There are over two
hundred and fifty references in Tolkaappiyam which, provide substantial
evidence of the existence of many classical and grammatical works in Tamil
prior to Tolkaappiyam itself. It classifies Tamil words into four categories,
iyarcol, tiricol, ticaiccol, and vatacol. Iyarcol refers to the words in
common use, while tiricol refers to the words used specifically in poetry.
Regional words are known as ticaiccol. Words borrowed from Sanskrit are
called vatacol. Certain specific rules were stipulated in borrowing words
from Sanskrit. The borrowed words were to strictly conform to the
Tamil phonetic system and to be written in the Tamil script. All these
indicate the sound grammatical basis on which the Tamil language has evolved
over the years.
Besides, Tolkaappiyam also classifies the Tamil language into centamil and
kotuntamil. The former refers to the classical Tamil used exclusively by
literati in their works and the latter refers to the colloquial Tamil,
spoken by the people. This shows that even in those distant days differences
had grown to such an extent as to enable the Tamil grammarians to classify
the language into written and spoken.

Tamil Scripts
The earlier Tamil inscriptions were written in braahmi, grantha and
vaTTezuttu scripts.* Inscriptions after the seventh century A.D. contain
Tamil characters similar to the one now in vogue. This prompted some scholars
to argue that vatteluttu and Tamil scripts originated from braahmi scripts.
This view has no solid base, for one can see a copious description of Tamil
scripts in Tolkaappiyam, which belongs to third century B.C. It is obvious
therefore, that Tamil language had a distinct script of its own even at that
early period. In fact vaTTezuttu is none other than the old Tamil script.
Even the southern braahmi was a corrupt form of vaTTezuttu .
Distinct differences exist between the southern and the northern braahmi
script, for the southern one had its genesis in vaTTezuttu .
Much before brahmi scripts could become popular the Tamils possessed a
script of their own which they put to use in their commercial transactions
and in their writings.
---
* According to Professor M. Varadarajan, vaTTezuttu was nothing but the
scripts inscribed on stones. They had been known as veTTezuttu or letters
inscribed on stones. But in course of time and by usage it was transformed
into vaTTezuttu . For an in-depth study of Tamil scripts refer,


"What the vaTTezuttu is and how it came into being and how it was
practiced we cannot say definitely. But we can say almost with some
definiteness that it represents a very ancient cursive alphabet, perhaps
the primitive South Indian alphabet which existed long, long before the
inscriptions of Asoka." V.R.R. Dikshitar, Pre-Historic South India, Madras,
1951, p. 218. Yet for another view of the origins of Tamil scripts refer,
John R. Marr, "The Early Dravidians" in A.L. Basham (ed.), A Cultural History
of India, London. 1975, pp. 32-34.

The Tamii characters which are in use today also can be deemed to have
originated from vatteluttu. There are twelve vowels in Tamil consisting of
five short vowels

Unnecessary Polemics

Tamil language and literature. Besides, the ancient classical Tamil
literature originated and blossomed from the folk song and poetry of the
Tamil country. The forms of such poetry were also not borrowed from any other
language, but were culled from the folk poetry and songs that was in vogue
among the people of Tamil Nadu. The existence of such combination of
antiquity and individuality in Tamil literature, was forgotten by later day
Sanskrit scholars. As such they not merely denied the greatness due to the
Tamil language but began to look upon it on the assumption that it borrowed
immensely from Sanskrit from its very inception. Therefore, Sanskritists
indulged in unwanted polemics by arguing that Tamil had no intrinsic merit
of its own because it borrowed heavily from Sanskrit and its only during
medieval period (after 1500bc) Tamil absorbed many loan words from
Sanskrit in the verbal system.
To establish this assumption, Caminata Desikar, a Sanskrit scholar and author
of a grammatical work entitled ilakkaNakkottu compared the alphabets of
Sanskrit and Tamil and found that all, expect five alphabets, the two short
vowels e (±) and o (´) and three consonants Ra, na and za (È, É, Æ ) are
common to both the languages. Therefore he argued that all the characters
common to the two languages essentially belonged to Sanskrit and the five
rare symbols which are absent in Sanskrit belonged specifically to Tamil.
Based on his findings he wrote an unusual verse in which he posed insolently
a question whether Tamil with only five letters of its own could ever be
called a language.

Stupid Sanskritists quoted that Intelligent persons will be ashamed
To call it a language
That possesses only five letters
This scurrilous verse only indicates the irrational attitude of the
Sanskrit scholars of the seventeenth century.
Such unreasonable attitude became obvious in analysing the origin of words
that were common to Sanskrit and Tamil. Basic words like niir (water) and
miin (fish) which had been in use from time immemorial in Tamil language was
interpreted by Sanskrit scholars as having originated from Sanskrit roots.
They refused to consider the possibility that Sanskrit would have borrowed
these common words from Tamil, the most ancient language of the region, and
even propagated that most of the words in Tamil had been borrowed from
Sanskrit. The Tamil scholars were perplexed by such unfounded claims.
However with the arrival of linguists like Caldwell from Europe, and with
the publication of books in English refuting the claims of Sanskritists,
Tamil scholars gained confidence in the intrinsic value of Tamil language.
Despite this, the biased views held by Sanskritists held sway ir the world
of letters even up to this century until linguists in England like Burrow
falsified these erroneous claims by their researches. This controversy
persisted even in analysing the names of places in the Tamil region. After
translating certain names of places from Tamil to Sanskrit, the Sanskrit
scholars argued that they were borrowed from Sanskrit. One classic example
was Vriddhachalam which is a literal translation of the Tamil place called
MutukunRam. Likewise, several names of deities were translated into Sanskrit.
The devotional hymns of the Nayanmars in fact mentioned these names in their
pure Tamil form. Instances are not wanting that while translating names of
places from Tamil into Sanskrit, the Sanskrit scholars failed to comprehend
the real meaning of the criginal Tamil words and translated them erroneously.
Without knowing the actuai meaning of the name of a town ArkkaTu (Arcot),
the Sanskrit scholars translated it Sataranyam, which literally means six
forests, whereas the Tamil word arkkaTu literally means a forest of fig trees.
To perpetuate these Sanskritised names, they wrote stories as well.
Despite their efforts Sanskritised names failed to gain currency among the
people. The Sanskrit scholars, for example, tried to Sanskritise the name of
the river Paalaaru as Ksra Nati. It could not be perpetuated.
Thus the Sanskrit scholars unnecessarily sowed the seeds of dissension in
the Tamii country.


Tanit-Tamil Iyakkam (Pure Tamil Movement)
Sanskrit scholars attempted to Sanskritise Tamil several centuries ago by
the liberal use of Sanskrit words. They argued that such a liberal mixture
enhanced the beauty of the Tamil language and compared the hybrid language
to an ornament made out of equal number of pearls and corals. They called
the hybrid style as manippravala style and attempted to popularize it in the
country. Some of the Jain and Vaisnava Sanskrit scholars employed that style
using grantha scripts Their attempts, however, failed because of the
naturally rich vocabulary and literary wealth of the Tamil language.
Sanskrit scholars, however, refused to acknowledge the real merit of Tamil
literary works. Although they were born in the Tamil country, spoke the Tamil
language, and lived as Tamilians, they seldom read such important works as
the TEvaram and the Tiruvaacakam. They treated lighty those who attained
scholarship only in Tamil. Even the hymns of Nayanmars, which found a pride
of place in remple rituals during the Chola period, lost their importance at
a later stage. They went to the extent of denigrating Tamil as the language
of the mortal and extolling Sanskrit as the language of gods. If the
Sanskritists found laudable ideas in Tamil works, they tried to belittle
their merit saying that those were borrowed ideas from Sanskrit works. They
tried even to underrate the importance of Tiruvalluvar's Tirukkural by
running it down as a compendium of ideas translated from Sanskrit works.
Likewise they considered that Tolkaappiyam, the first grammatical work by
Tolkappiyar was based on Sanskrit. To substantiate their view, they assigned
the work of Tolkappiyar to Tiranatumakkini who was a scholar in Sanskrit.
The RaamayaNaa, Mahaabhaarata, PuraaNas and other philosophical works were
no doubt borrowed from Sanskrit but the Sanskrit scholars tried to camouflage
the very existence of great literary works in Tamil like the Cankam classics,
didactic and devotional literature. But their efforts were halted only when
scholars like V.K. Curiyanaraayana Sastriar and Maraimalaiyatikal focussed
the attention of the people on the literary treasures of the Tamil language.

Chronological Listing of Tamil Literature :

SANGAM PERIOD

nakkirar thirumurugARRuppadai
perungunRup perungAsikkanAr malai padugadAm
mAnguti marudhanAr madhuraik kansi
muththAmak kaNNiyAr porunNARARttup padai
kadiyalUr uruththiran kaNNanAr perumbANARRuppadai
nappUdhanAr mullaip pAttu
kabilar kuRaNYippabAttu
naththAdhanAr siRubANARRuppadai
tholkAppiyar tholkApiyam
anthology naRRinai
nakkIrar nedunalvAdai
kadiyalUr urttiran kaNNanar pattinappAlai
aga nAnURu
ainguRu nURu
kaliththogai
kuRundhogai
puRanNAnURu
padhiRRup paththu
paribAdal

Flashes and glimpses of the glory of the Indus valley was once again visibly
seen during the Cholla era.That was the Golden age of India.
The Ashoka dynasty was never the golden age as what the Aryan scholars has
made us to believe.They were never seafarers and neither did they have a
literature worldly acclaimed for its richness as the Tamil sangam period.
The classical lterature of the Dravidians were second to none in the world.
You don,t find any of such in the North of India.External scholarships both
European and Aryan have distorted and served their common Indo - european
loftiness and bias.You will notice that the Dravidians were reapeatedly
ignored and never credited.

Historically, there had been a strong Tamil identity that included
Cera, Chozha and Pandiya countries and the several minor vELir
principalities. The Tamil classic CilapathikAram, was written by a cEra
Prince, iLangO adigaL and it describes the story of a chOza woman kaNNaki
who seeks justice in the Pandiyan capital. Finally, when the cEra king
cenguttuvan marches north to punish the Aryan kings kanaga and vijaya, he
does it on behalf of the entire Tamil country. Cilapathikaram describes him
marching up to the Himalayas, defeating his Aryan foes along the way and
marking the signs of all three Tamil vEnthars on the Himalayas.

Even the might asOka's empire stopped short of the Tamil country because the
Tamil alliance united to stop the invaders. Under rAjarAja The Great,
the Chozha empire ruled over the pAndiyar country and conquered the cErAs.
That was perhaps the only time the Tamil country was a single political unit.

The cEranAdu (kEraLa) was an integral part of the Tamil mind space until the
great chOzhas completely alienated them with their ruthless wars.

Amongst the spoken languages of the common people of India
(which has a long history and is ancient) Tamil alone is the spoken language
of the common people till date. NOT SANSKRIT



The Scientific history of Earth of states that Earth was a fire ball, then a
ice ball, water appeared in this stones appeared, then Sand appeared.
The Proverb clearly states the Birth of Tamil was even before Mun (Sand) was
formed.

Is this possible? Pathinen Siddhars in their Guruparambiryam,
Arasaparambiryam who record history state that a Crews from space visited
this earth, under the leadership of Anathi Sivanar, explored this earth,
estimated time of this earth, researched on the various life atoms, divine
atoms. The language spoken by them was TAMIL. That is Guruparabiryam clearly
records that TAMIL is Language spoken across the entire galaxy (Anda peradum)

Some of them had continued to stayed back in this earth and they had
civilized the Manishan ( Mun+isan - mean the ruler of this earth) uinto
Manithan ( culturered man). That is why you still hear stories about Sangam
was formed in Mukadal Nagar under auspicious leadership of Anathi Sivan to
preach, promote Tamil.

Tamil race spread across the world to develop new races, and it is one of
the reasons why till the 19th Century people across the world revered to
some how find a route to India.

But Tamilians have forgotten their history. Guruparabiryam clearly records
the history that

1. Mahabhatra occurred 5100 Years back
2. Ramayana occurred 8,64,000 Years back
3. Kanda puram occurred 12,96,000 Years back

(Note the above is only approximate nos)

Now recently NASA Satellite have found the Bridge between Rameswaran and
Lanka and state it existed so many years back. The photographs have been
published across Tamil Newspapers

The Dwarka of Kannan of Mahabharat epic, his seal etc have been recovered by
divers near Gujarat.
Note all these wars / fights happened between TAMIL and the Tamilian Race.
That is why Kannan is described as Karumai Niram BLACK in all the songs.
However due to our ignorance, magnanimity, foolishness, innocence,
selfishness of few we have donated our History, language, hereditary
rights, Temples, ....... to the PiraManinar (People from different land.)
They were wise, and perseverant enough to utilize and till date ensure to
retain their supremacy.
And we fools are happy to state, preach, accept that Sanskrit and tamil are
equally good.

thanks to all who have contributed ur ideas and comments i"m bringing all together and trying to reach to all out there

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
Old responses (http://forumhub.com/tlit/21540.8677.09.39.32.html)

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:0ac21f686b]Mr. Kal. K. hello? Is there anything inside your brain? ahah[/tscii:0ac21f686b]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
Please spend your time in useful ways. Try to develop some maturity in your life time.

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:8c09213603]very good u have given a excellent mesagge to the tamils
HATS OFF FOR UUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TAMIL VALZHA!
VANNAKAM.[/tscii:8c09213603]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:3e79ca775a]But still,

Please study HINDI. After all Hindi is national language and try to transfer TAMIL knowledge through HINDI to other indian.

GYAN DHAN.[/tscii:3e79ca775a]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:44d09ec8a4]Thamizh Knowledge don't need to be coded through Hindi to transfer to other languages in India. The fact that hindis dominate the parliment of India and the hindi language dominate the so called India after the Independance of India. I suggest you learn Thamizh Mr. Ramesh, didn't the Central government of India 'also' made it Classical? Beside don't you think its better to know an Ancient language and the language where ur mother tongue came from?

According to what I know..If Hindi is mostly Sanskirit and that Sanskirit is 40% Thamizh and 30% Thamizh related languages....Who is your mommy?[/tscii:44d09ec8a4]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:cf4738c077]Correction: The hindis[/tscii:cf4738c077]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:dc8cba19b8]I guess I should remind you what Arijar. Annathurai said to the hindi politicans.

If Hindi is to become as the offical language of India, then all non-hindis will become as 2nd level citizen of India. Now prove me wrong Mr. Gyan Dhan aka Mr. Ramesh.[/tscii:dc8cba19b8]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:ce6e60e367]-------------
I guess I should remind you what Arijar. Annathurai said to the hindi politicans.

If Hindi is to become as the offical language of India, then all non-hindis will become as 2nd level citizen of India. Now prove me wrong Mr. Gyan Dhan aka Mr. Ramesh.
---------------------

Infact , this is very true. Most of my north indian friends believes that if someone dont know hindi , then they are not indians. :) :) . W§hat to say to them. [/tscii:ce6e60e367]

Oldposts
12th December 2004, 08:33 AM
[tscii:01745db1b9]Thiru. Inian, It is amazing that you agree and accept what Arijar. Annathurai said. I have encountered some Thamizhans of TN who have said, "TN is just a state like others and hindi is the official language of India." It is pathetic! I don't know if those people are from TN, but if they were, they are senlsess or brainwashed or didn't think of it as a big deal for some weird reason. Lot of Thamizhans seem to give up on important things, they seem to agitate against things that which need no agitation at all. The important things like hindi dominion in TN, the killing of Thamizh Nadu Fishermans are like truth behind the screen! I mean if whole TN agitate against this, are they going to arrest the whole Thamizh Nadu Thamizhans? What are we? Defendless?

//Most of my north indian friends believes that if someone dont know hindi , then they are not indians. :) :) .//
You should listen to what a Gujuarati told me, "They speak Hindi in Thamizh Nadu" as in Hindi is the first offical language! Although he was wrong, hindi is official in TN government offices. Not to mention English along with Hindi. It is very confusing to be a Thamizhan and see your language and communitry trapped in some blackhole. Most of our population although is 'religious' it does not worry to gain the linguistic understandings nor to learn well about their own culture. I mean who is going to do that if there is no country and your language has no worth even in its own soil! Thamizh is presented as something burden to learn even in TN; The home of Thamizh and Thamizhars. Can you believe that in Toronto, Canada they accepted Thamizh as a credit course in Highschool to enter the Universities before Thamizh course was accepted as one of the course in the TN private schools. They accept Thamizh in an 'English' country b4 it is accepted in the Thamizh soil, very sad. The thing about Thamizh being adopted into foreign countries and given less right in Thamizh soil is that, people will learn 'Tamil' not 'Thamizh'.[/tscii:01745db1b9]
<a name="last"></a>

min
6th February 2005, 02:55 PM
this is just a thought. english should be made indian states link and hence national language. Just think about it. This will terminate the untolerable impossition of hindi on states like tamilnadu which has nothing in common to hindi. This will help people of other states especially people of tamilnadu to enter into the national government cadre level. I am talking about ordinary tamilians living far away into the country. This will open them not only to delhi but to the world and will let us have our language. so called cbse's will also have to learn tamil in tamilnadu. any other language can be learnt on their own will. And to the so called tamilians whose mother tongue is tamil and ridicule tamil just read about tamil from scholars who have done good their research and yet to be translated works fron archaic tamil that still exists. These people who ridicule their mother language are doing the same thing as seeing their own mother die even though they are able to save her and a mother who has managed to exist till this day from recorded history against a lot of odds.

arul mozhi devan
18th February 2005, 06:59 PM
siva , thank u very much......

other south indian people than thaamizhians saying that hindi is the national language.........
they're ready to forget their mother tongue .......
not only that....everyone thinking that tamizhians are fool....and so on..
i studied malayalam and came to know that it'z mixed up of tamil and sanskrit....
but they're not accepting... everybody giving importance to pronunciation of letters...
bcoz, they have pa, ba, bha.., like ta, da, dha, tha and so on...
but we tamizh won't hav this much difference........but we have very good vocabulary .......


thanks .

Anil123
23rd February 2005, 01:48 AM
"Kanda puram occured ......."

Could someone please shed some light on this topic.

sundararaj
1st December 2006, 05:37 PM
Thanks for the wealth of information in this thread.

devapriya
4th December 2006, 06:39 PM
Friends,

Brahmi was mother of writing of all Languages in India.

Any Serious research with knowledge of Tamil/Prakrit/Sanskrit Vowles will clearly tell us that Brahmi was writing system developed for Sanskrit and adopted by all INdian Languages.

sundararaj
30th December 2006, 10:30 PM
Friends,

Brahmi was mother of writing of all Languages in India.

Any Serious research with knowledge of Tamil/Prakrit/Sanskrit Vowles will clearly tell us that Brahmi was writing system developed for Sanskrit and adopted by all INdian Languages. :huh:

bis_mala
24th February 2007, 03:31 PM
Friends,

Brahmi was mother of writing of all Languages in India.

Any Serious research with knowledge of Tamil/Prakrit/Sanskrit Vowles will clearly tell us that Brahmi was writing system developed for Sanskrit and adopted by all INdian Languages.

Why are there so many writings in India? When was each writing system in India developed and by whom? Do you have records to say who developed each system (except Malayalam) and how each letter of each writing system was formed or developed?

How do you come to the conclusion that Brahmi was developed for Sanskrit? So, prior to that Sans did not have any writing system? Were the Vedas composed before or after the writing system was invented? Did you find any record or stone inscription to say that Brahmi was developed for Sanskrit?

Please clarify and we shall discuss further.

sivaram ram
17th April 2007, 10:28 PM
Tamil is infact the cradle of indic tongue

It is just not the mother of Dravidan language but a language which was spoken throughout the whole of India during the period of Indus Valley and even tens of centuries beofre the Indus Valley.

The Lemuria or Kumari Kandam is a good support for this say which is why Historian belief , even Sumerian lnguage is known to be Archaic Tamil.

Tamil language is just not what it seem in the present day India or Tamil Nadu.
It is way much more than that.
Sanskrit on the other hand came from nowhere, no doubt Sanskrit is old, it is not the oldest language.

If the age of Tamil and Sanskrit were to be compared
(Tamil)9000bc - 1500bc(Sanskrit)

The difference is 7500,
no where to be compard with the richness of Tamil language

NVK Ashraf
12th June 2007, 06:18 PM
Copy pasting below from the first posting:

Tamil is the oldest of all Indian languages and also the oldest living language in the world.

This is a tall claim. Languages like Greek, Hebrew have older literary tradition than Tamil. These are still living languages. No body can say which is the oldest language in the world.

bis_mala
22nd June 2007, 07:21 PM
Tamil is infact the cradle of indic tongue

It is just not the mother of Dravidan language but a language which was spoken throughout the whole of India during the period of Indus Valley and even tens of centuries beofre the Indus Valley.

The Lemuria or Kumari Kandam is a good support for this say which is why Historian belief , even Sumerian lnguage is known to be Archaic Tamil.

Tamil language is just not what it seem in the present day India or Tamil Nadu.
It is way much more than that.
Sanskrit on the other hand came from nowhere, no doubt Sanskrit is old, it is not the oldest language.

If the age of Tamil and Sanskrit were to be compared
(Tamil)9000bc - 1500bc(Sanskrit)

The difference is 7500,
no where to be compard with the richness of Tamil language

U are right!! Keep it up.

sar
6th June 2008, 10:21 PM
THIS I would like to add in this post....

And the UNDENIABLE but neglected reasons that would account for a claim that Tamil is atleast thousands (not exactly known) of years older than well acknowledged Tolkappiyam back traceable period of 300BC would be

1. Undeniable literature evidences that before to Tolkaappiyam/Last sangam period that there were two earlier Tamil sangams sunk down in to sea due to tsunami (for example, before to tolkaappiyam there was a grammar book called Agattiyam, although tolkaappiyam is the oldest among existing)

2. Undeniable literature evidences that before to Tolkaappiyam/Last sangam period that there was a vast land down to kanyakumari with multiple mountain range was sunk into sea due to tsunami

(evidence: pan malai adukkam - kodum kadal koLLa from 'SILAPPADHIGAARAM' meaning: pan- many, malai-mountain, adukkam - stack/sereis, kodum-cruel, kadal - sea, kolla - to hold within )

deriving to the theory of Lemuria/kumari kandam with a map...(but might be just a theory)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemuria_(continent)

3. Tholkaapiyam classifies two types of Tamil prevailing during that period... kodum tamil - rude tamil , sen tamil - perfect/excellent tamil; and also says that tamil (sen tamil?) speaking land is between kanya kumari to tiruppathi;

hence there has to be considerable atleast few hundreds to some thousands of years for a language to spread over the vast tamil land (including existing srilanka, kerala, tamilnadu and some other portions of south india below vindhya range) and that too into linguistic variations of sen tamil,kodum tamil, malai naatu tamil etc etc; as per linguists..

4. Relationships between words and scripts of world's oldest languages can be found in the dravidian languages - tamil. (which is a separate topic).. so the evidence that mutual linguistic exchange between the oldest languages takes it back far ahead than acknowledged 300BC.

hence it is undeniable that Tamil is atleast thousands (not exactly known) of years older than well acknowledged Tolkappiyam back traceable period of 300BC and in fact very well COULD BE THE OLDEST among the living languages...

gunniboy
1st September 2008, 03:53 PM
Dear Brothers & Sisters, I am no expert. I just put forth my points in another forum & someone else has put forth his counter points.
I am posting the same here... So that the Experts here can provide me with the retorts to those counter points. Please guide me. Thank You.

gunniboy
1st September 2008, 03:56 PM
My Point:
"I believe that the Tamil described in Tolkappiyam (300-200BC) itself is a Classical language of great antiquity EVEN AT THAT TIME itself!"

Some one else' Counter:
Tolkappiyam was written in Tamil Brahmi and mentions use of pulli at the top of mei ezhuthu. Tamil Brahmi refers to Brahmi script modified for use in Tamil and has pulli (dot) at the top of the consonants, unlike original brahmi. Earliest Tamil brahmi is in inscriptions of Mahendra Varma Pallava dated 8th century. Based on this evidence, it is unlikely that TK can be dated to 3rd century BC (i.e 1100 years before first Tamil Brahmi inscription). 3rd-2nd century BCE is actually the period of earliest Ashokan Brahmi used for writing Prakrit languages, and it would have taken atleast a few centuries to be adapted to Tamil. Iravatham Mahadevan (scholar of Tamil Brahmi) assigns a range of 3rd-5th centuries AD for TK's age based on origins of Tamil brahmi and TK's reference about use of Pulli. Other modern scholars give dates that vary between 2nd to 10th centuries AD.
----------
My Point:
"Tolkappiyam mentions the Diglossia of Tamil even in those days itself AND there are supposed to be several references in Tolkappiyam itself pointing to past literary/grammatical works in Tamil (which unfortunately have been lost to the elements)"

Someone else' Counter:
Yes, we can expect good level of diglossia if the tolkappiyam were to be dated at around 5th century to 10th century AD. Kannada is supposed to have split from Tamil (both of which emerged from South-Dravidian branch) by the time of Christ or shortly before that, and tamil would have taken atleast a few centuries for diglossia to develop.

Interesting to hear about references in Tolkappiyam to older grammars/literature. Can you please give the citations as to which verses contain these references?
----------

gunniboy
1st September 2008, 04:03 PM
My Point:
30% of Rig is supposed to be Dravidian! So, even in the vedic times there was some Dravidian.

Someone Else' Counter:
Again this is also quite interesting. Could you provide any scholarly citations, because what I heard is that its not 30% but a few words

My Point:
Sumerian (supposedly the oldest known language culture) is supposed to be close to Tamil (or perhaps the other way round)!

Someone Else' Counter:
Has this theory been accepted by the mainstream scholars? Are there any published papers regarding this connection in any linguistics journal?

My Point:
Sanskrit had a relative- Avestan.. Now, nobody knows who was the elder among the two! Was Avestan the parent of Sanskrit? Sanskrit & Avestan are way too similar to be dismissed as a mere happenstance.

Someone Else' Counter:
Avestan is not directly related to Sanskrit, although it is quite similar. Even old Baltic and Slavic are quite similar to sanskrit. The oldest forms of Latin and Greek also show remarkable similarity to sanskrit. But these are not due to one being the parent of the others. The oldest Avestan that we know pertains to 800 BCE. The Vedas are said to have been completed between 1500BCE and 1200BCE, the Rigveda and Samaveda taking older dates and the other two being nearer to 1200BCE. They are said to be composed over hundreds of years and not within a single century. This is confirmed by Mitanni kings of Syria who mention the vedic gods Indra, Varuna, Ashwins etc in their treaty with egyptian pharoah dated to about 1500 BCE. But owing to Avestan being part of Indo-Iranian sub-group, it is very much close to sanskrit.

My Point:
But whereas Sanskrit has retroflexes Avestan does not. Where do you think did Sanskrit borrow these retroflex phonetics from???

Someone Else' Counter:
When we talk of retroflexes in Sanskrit, we should consider two things:

1. The difference between Vedic and classical sanskrit.
2. The reconstruction attempts that are being carried on for Vedic using metrical restoration etc.
By the time of classical sanskrit was in common use (i.e 600-500 BCE), it is widely believed that sanskrit had acquired retroflexes from proto-dravidian.

However the same cannot be said of Vedic since Vedic had some sounds that were lost in classical sanskrit as well as not having the newer sounds i.e retroflexion. Studies regarding when exactly the retroflexes entered sanskrit is being carried on, because it is found that the sanskrit and prakrits which spread to Thailand etc in early centuries AD do not contain retroflexes.

podalangai
26th September 2008, 06:34 PM
Is it even worth replying? :banghead:


Earliest Tamil brahmi is in inscriptions of Mahendra Varma Pallava dated 8th century. Based on this evidence, it is unlikely that TK can be dated to 3rd century BC (i.e 1100 years before first Tamil Brahmi inscription). 3rd-2nd century BCE is actually the period of earliest Ashokan Brahmi used for writing Prakrit languages, and it would have taken atleast a few centuries to be adapted to Tamil.
Actually, the earliest Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions are from the 2nd century BC. The Mangulam inscription of Pantiyan Netunchezhiyan dates to around that period, and the Theni herostone inscriptions discovered a couple of years ago are possibly a little older. The dating is pretty sound - the letters include ones that appear to be based on forms of Asokan Brahmi that weren't used after Asoka's time (such as the ḏ, from which the Tamil Brahmi character for ḻ seems to have been derived), so they couldn't have evolved much later than his time.

There are no Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions from the 8th century - in point of fact, by the 6th century AD, Tamil-Brahmi had evolved into Vattelutthu. What dates from the time of Mahendravarman I (who died in the 7th century, and definitely wasn't around in the 8th century) is the modern Tamil script, which the Pallavas created by simplifying the Grantha script and combining it with some letters from Vattelutthu. That has nothing to do with Tamil-Brahmi.


Tolkappiyam was written in Tamil Brahmi and mentions use of pulli at the top of mei ezhuthu.
Actually, we have absolutely no idea in what script the Tolkappiyam was written. It's likely to have been in Tamil Brahmi, originally, but that's an educated guess. Unless we find a 2nd century BC manuscript of the Tolkappiyam (which, given the average lifespan of palm-leaf manuscripts, is extremely unlikely), we'll never have definite proof.



Tamil Brahmi refers to Brahmi script modified for use in Tamil and has pulli (dot) at the top of the consonants, unlike original brahmi.
Not really. Tamil Brahmi used two systems to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with the inherent vowel. The first system (TB-1) involved treating the consonant sign as representing only the consonant, and adding a special marker to represent the "a". As a result, the work "makan" written in TB-1 would have been read "maakaana" in standard Asokan Brahmi. It's only the second system (TB-2) which uses the pulli, and that comes much later - the first inscription that uses it is the Anaimalai inscription, which is from around the 2nd century AD. But its use didn't really become common until the period when Tamil Brahmi evolved into early Vattelutthu.

And, quite apart from this, Tamil Brahmi is distinguished from Asokan Brahmi in two ways. First, its inventory of letters differs. Like the modern Tamil script, it does not distinguish between voiced and unvoiced stops, and lacks aspirates. It also has four letters which Asokan Brahmi lacks, to represent Tamil consonants that don't exist elsewhere. Second, the shapes of some of the consonants differ somewhat from Asokan.


Iravatham Mahadevan (scholar of Tamil Brahmi) assigns a range of 3rd-5th centuries AD for TK's age based on origins of Tamil brahmi and TK's reference about use of Pulli. Other modern scholars give dates that vary between 2nd to 10th centuries AD.

Mahadevan dates the Tolkappiyam to the 2nd-4th centuries AD, based on the fact that it mentions the use of the "pulli" to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with the inherent vowel. But that's because he treats it as one work. The current scholarly view sees it as a composite work, with various layers that date to various periods.

Rajam points out that there are two discrete systems of naming sounds in the Tolkappiyam, one which uses the terms "uyir, orru, mey", and one which uses the terms "uyir, orru, pulli, mey". She demonstrates quite convincingly that the former is the original Tamil one, and the latter is a later variant which never achieved full acceptance. Differences in nomenclature are precisely what one expects to see in different layers within a work. Arguably, therefore, the different systems documented by Rajam belong to two different layers within the Tolkappiyam, which would mean the pulli simply dates the more recent layer. Zvelebil takes the view that the earliest layers of the Tolkappiyam are from the 1st or 2nd centuries BC.



Yes, we can expect good level of diglossia if the tolkappiyam were to be dated at around 5th century to 10th century AD. Kannada is supposed to have split from Tamil (both of which emerged from South-Dravidian branch) by the time of Christ or shortly before that, and tamil would have taken atleast a few centuries for diglossia to develop.
See above. The references to diglossia occur in the bits of the Tolkappiyam that are generally taken to belong to the oldest layers, and therefore are much older than the 5th century AD.


Interesting to hear about references in Tolkappiyam to older grammars/literature. Can you please give the citations as to which verses contain these references?
Grammars are not mentioned by name by Tolkappiyar himself, but he repeatedly cites opinions of older scholars in generic terms. See e.g. verse 33 "enpanar pulavar" ("so the learned say").

devapriya
2nd October 2008, 03:41 PM
I quote from a Meeting excerpts of Iravadam Mahadevan which was given earlier in
http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?t=7281&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=105

as still false claims are made just on Superstitions.

Here I Give the details on developments of Tamil Writings and how Brahmi was dechiphered,and all this are the views of Iravatham Mahadevan.

//* 1906ஆம் வருடத்தில் கல்வெட்டுகளை ஆராய்ச்சி செய்துகொண்டிருந்த வெங்கய்யா என்பவர், மேட்டுப்பட்டி என்னுமிடத்தில் கிடைத்த கல்வெட்டுகளைப் பார்த்துவிட்டு இதில் எழுதப்பட்டிருப்பது 'பிராக்ரித்' மொழியாக இருக்குமோ என்று நினைத்தார்.

* பின்னர் அவரது மாணவரான கிருஷ்ண சாஸ்திரி, 1919 வாக்கில் இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகளில் திராவிட மொழிகளின் தாக்கம் இருக்கிறது, ஒருவேளை தமிழாக இருக்கலாம் என்று சொன்னார்.

* 1924இல் சுப்பிரமணிய அய்யர் தன் ஆராய்ச்சியின் முடிவாக இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகள் பிராக்ரித் ஆக இருக்க முடியாது, ஏனெனில் இவற்றில் 'ள', 'ற', 'ண', 'ழ' போன்ற எழுத்துக்கள் காணக்கிடைக்கின்றன, நாகரி/பிராக்ரித் மொழியில் வரும் இரண்டாவது/மூன்றாவது/நான்காவது 'க', 'ச' க்கள் (ख, ग, घ, छ, ज, झ போன்றவை) இல்லை என்று கண்டுபிடித்தார். ஆனால் அதே நேரத்தில் 'தந்தை' என்னும் சொல் 'தாநதய' (?) என்று எழுதப்பட்டிருந்தது என்றும் கண்டார்.

* பின்னர், பட்டிப்ரோலு (ஆந்திரம்) என்னுமிடத்தில் கிடைத்த கல்வெட்டுகளைப் படிக்கையில் மெய் எழுத்துகள், அகர, ஆகார மெய்கள் ஆகியவற்றைக் குறிக்க நீட்டல் கொம்புகள் பயன்படுத்தப்பட்டுள்ளதை அறிந்தனர். [படமில்லாமல் இதனை விளக்குதல் கடினம், ஆனால் அந்தப் படங்களை இப்பொழுது இங்கு வரைய முடியாத நிலையில் உள்ளேன்.]

* K.G. கிருஷ்ணன் என்பவர் 1960களில் அரச்சாளூர் கல்வெட்டுகளைப் படிக்கையில் அங்கு புள்ளி வைத்த மெய் எழுத்துகள் இருப்பதைக் கண்டுபிடித்தார். இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகள் கி.பி ஒன்றாம் நூற்றாண்டின் இறுதியைச் சேர்ந்தவை என்று கண்டிபிடிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளதாம். இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகள் புள்ளி இல்லாத மெய்யெழுத்துகள் உள்ள மேற்சொன்ன கல்வெட்டுகளுக்குப் பிந்தைய காலமாக கண்டறியப்பட்டுள்ளன.

* சாதவாகன காசுகள் ஒரு பக்கம் பிராக்ரித் மொழியிலும், மற்றொரு பக்கத்தில் தமிழ் (புள்ளி எழுத்துக்களுடனும்) இருப்பதும் கண்டறியப்பட்டுள்ளது. இந்தக் காசுகள் வழங்கப்பட்டது கி.பி. 1-3 நூற்றாண்டுகளுக்குட்பட்டவை.

* இந்த ஆரம்பகால வரிவடிவங்கள் அசோகர் காலத்து பிராமி வரிவடிவங்களைப் பின்பற்றியுள்ளன. ஆனால் பிராக்ரித்தில் இருந்த, தமிழில் இல்லாத வரிவடிவங்கள் விலக்கப்பட்டு, பிராக்ரித்தில் இல்லாத 'ள', 'ற', 'ண', 'ழ' ஆகிய எழுத்துகளுக்கான புது வரிவடிவங்கள் சேர்க்கப்பட்டுள்ளன. அப்படிப் புது வரிவடிவங்கள் சேர்க்கப்படும்போதும், ஏற்கனவே இருக்கும் 'ல', 'ன', 'ர' ஆகியவற்றின் குறியீடுகளை எடுத்து, அவற்றினை நீட்டித்தது போல் உள்ளது. //
//- அசோகன் பிராமி வரிவடிவத்தைப் பின்பற்றியே தமிழ் பிராமி வரிவடிவம் உருவாக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.

- இதனை சமண முனிவர்கள், மதுரை அரசனின் (பாண்டியன்) ஏற்பாட்டின் பேரில் செய்துள்ளனர் என்று சொல்லலாம். அதிகபட்சமான கல்வெட்டுகள் மதுரையைச் சுற்றிக் கிடைத்துள்ளன. சமணர் குகைகள் என்று கருதப்படும் இடங்களில் கிடைத்துள்ளன. இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகளுக்கும், காஞ்சி/பிறவிடங்களில் கிடைக்கும் கல்வெட்டுகளில் காணப்படும் வரிவடிவத்திற்கும் பெருத்த வேறுபாடு உள்ளது. (இரண்டு வேறுபட்ட வரிவடிவங்கள் தமிழ்க் கல்வெட்டுகளில் காணக் கிடைக்கின்றன.)

- அசோகன் பிராமி தமிழுக்கு வந்தது போலவே, தேவநாகரியாக மாறியுள்ளது.

- அசோகன் பிராமி, தக்காணப் பிராமியாக மாறி, அதிலிருந்து கன்னட, தெலுங்கு வரிவடிவங்கள் உருவாகியுள்ளன.

- தமிழ் பிராமி, கிட்டத்தட்ட கி.பி ஐந்தாம் நூற்றாண்டில் வட்டெழுத்தாக மாற்றம் அடைந்துள்ளது. அப்பொழுதுதான் பனையோலையில், இரும்பு எழுத்தாணி கொண்டு எழுதப்பட்டது.

- கி.பி. ஏழாம் நூற்றாண்டில் பல்லவர்கள் தமிழகத்தை ஆளுகைக்குள் கொண்டுவந்தபோது, கிரந்த எழுத்தாக மாறிய தக்காணப் பிராமியைக் கொண்டுவந்தனர். சோழர்கள், பல்லவர்களுக்குக் கீழ் இருந்து தமிழகம் முழுவதையும் ஆட்சி செய்தபோது இந்த கிரந்த வழித் தமிழெழுத்து, வட்டெழுத்தை முழுவதுமாக அழித்து விட்டு கோலோச்ச ஆரம்பித்தது. அதன் வழியே (பின்னர் வீரமாமுனிவர் வழியாக மாற்றத்துடன்) இன்று நம்மிடையே உலவி வருகிறது.

- கி.பி. பதினொன்றாம் நூற்றாண்டில் வட்டெழுத்து முற்றிலுமாய் அழிந்துவிட்டது.

- கி.பி. பதினாலாம் நூற்றாண்டில் கிரந்த எழுத்து, மலையாள எழுத்தாக மாற்றம் கொண்டது.

- வரிவடிவங்கள் மாறினாலும், மொழி ஆயிரக்கணக்கான ஆண்டுகளாக அதே தொடர்போடு உள்ளது. இந்தக் கல்வெட்டுகளில் கிட்டத்தட்ட 75% சொற்களை இன்றைய தமிழர்களால் புரிந்து கொள்ள முடியும். (சில கல்வெட்டுகளைப் படித்துக் காட்டினார்.) மீதமுள்ள 25% சொற்கள் பிராக்ரித் தழுவலாக உள்ளது.

- கி.பி. ஐந்தாம் நூற்றாண்டுக்குப் பிறகு, பிராக்ரித்துக்குப் பதில் சமஸ்கிருதக் கலவை அதிகமாக வருகிறது. [அரையர்/அரசர் என்பது பிராக்ரித வழிச் சொல் என்றும், இராசர்/ராஜன் என்பது சமஸ்கிருத வழிச்சொல் என்றும் குறிப்பிடுகிறார்.]

- குகைக் கல்வெட்டுகளில் சமணர்களைப் பற்றியே காணப்படுவதாகவும், புத்தர்கள், ஆஜீவகர்கள் பற்றி எந்தச் செய்தியும் கிடைக்கவில்லை என்றும் சொன்னார்.

- ஒருசில தமிழ்க் காசுகள் எகிப்து, அலெக்சாண்டிரியா போன்ற இடங்களில் (அமெரிக்கத் தொல்பொருள் ஆராய்ச்சியாளர்களுக்குக்) கிடைத்துள்ளது என்றும் அவற்றின் தேதி கி.பி. ஒன்றாம் நூற்றாண்டு என்றும், அதில் காணப்படும் எழுத்துகள் தமிழ் பிராமி என்றும் ஆதாரங்கள் உள்ளன என்றார்.

- தொல்காப்பியத்தில் மிகத் தெளிவாகப் புள்ளி எழுத்துகள் (மெய்), தமிழ் எழுத்துகள் 12+18=30 என்று சொல்லப்படுவதாலும், இது பல காலமாக இருக்கிறது என்று அழுத்தமாகச் சொல்வதாலும் தொல்காப்பியத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. 2-3ஆம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று தான் கருதுவதாகச் சொன்னார்.

- இப்படிப்பட்ட கூற்றைத் தமிழ் அறிஞர்கள் விரும்பமாட்டார்கள் என்றும், ஆனால் தன்னுடைய கண்டுபிடிப்பு கல்வெட்டியலை மட்டுமே சார்ந்திருப்பதாகவும், இதுவரை கிடைத்துள்ள ஆதாரங்கள் தன் கூற்றை நிரூபிப்பதாகவும் சொன்னார்.

- அசோகன் பிராமி எழுத்துக் கல்வெட்டுகள் கி.மு. மூன்றாம் நூற்றாண்டைச் சேர்ந்தவை என்றும், அதற்கு முந்தைய கல்வெட்டுகள் எதுவும் இந்தியாவில் இதுவரை கிடைக்கவில்லை என்றும், அசோகருக்கு முந்தைய காலத்தில் கல்வெட்டுகள் இல்லாமல் துணியில் எழுதியிருக்கலாம் (அதாவது அசோகர் காலத்தைய பிராமி வடிவம் அதற்கு முந்தையதாக இருந்திருக்கலாம், ஆனால் எந்த ஆதாரமும் கிடைக்கவில்லை...), அழிந்துபோயிருக்கலாம் என்றும் சொன்னார்.

- கல்வெட்டுகளில் கிடைக்கும் செய்திகளைக் கொண்டு பதிற்றுப்பத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. இரண்டாம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று கொள்ளலாம்.

- "சத்தியபுத்தோ அதியமான் நெடுமான் அஞ்சி" (ஔவையாரின் நண்பர், தகடூர் அரசர், நெல்லிக்காய் வள்ளல்) என்று ஒரு கல்வெட்டில் பொறிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இதில் சத்தியபுத்தோ என்னும் பாலி மொழி யாரைக் குறிக்கும் என்று ஒரு புதிர் பல நாட்கள் இருந்ததாகவும், அது அதியமானையே குறிக்கும் [சத்திய புத்தோ -> சத்திய புத்திரன் -> சத்திய மகன் -> அதிய மான்] என்றும் சொன்னார்.

Thanks to http://thoughtsintamil.blogspot.com/

podalangai
2nd October 2008, 09:11 PM
- தொல்காப்பியத்தில் மிகத் தெளிவாகப் புள்ளி எழுத்துகள் (மெய்), தமிழ் எழுத்துகள் 12+18=30 என்று சொல்லப்படுவதாலும், இது பல காலமாக இருக்கிறது என்று அழுத்தமாகச் சொல்வதாலும் தொல்காப்பியத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. 2-3ஆம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று தான் கருதுவதாகச் சொன்னார்.[quote="devapriya"]

Yes, I'd said in my last post that that was Mahadevan's view. I'd also pointed out that others disagree. To repeat, Rajam points out that the use of the term "pulli" appears to be a later innovation, which obviously contradicts what Mahadevan says in the above quote. Zvelebil dates the Ur-Tolkappiyam to the 2nd century BC. They're all eminent scholars, but obviously someone is wrong here.

[quote=devapriya]கல்வெட்டுகளில் கிடைக்கும் செய்திகளைக் கொண்டு பதிற்றுப்பத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. இரண்டாம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று கொள்ளலாம்.
Actually, the kalvettus are ambiguous, and not everyone agrees with the theory that the rulers of the Irumporai line of Cheras referred to in the kalvettus are the same as those referred to in Sangam poetry. Just as, for example, nobody suggests that the Nedunchezhiyan of the Mangulam inscription is the Ariya padai kadandha Nedunchezhiyan of Sangam poetry.

Mahadevan's views are his own, and as the views of one of the greatest living scholars of inscriptional Tamil, they deserve a lot of respect. But so do the views of those who disagree with him.

thamizhvaanan
2nd October 2008, 10:33 PM
Iravatham Mahadevan (scholar of Tamil Brahmi) assigns a range of 3rd-5th centuries AD for TK's age based on origins of Tamil brahmi and TK's reference about use of Pulli. Other modern scholars give dates that vary between 2nd to 10th centuries AD.

Mahadevan dates the Tolkappiyam to the 2nd-4th centuries AD, based on the fact that it mentions the use of the "pulli" to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with the inherent vowel. But that's because he treats it as one work. The current scholarly view sees it as a composite work, with various layers that date to various periods.


Hmm.. I have heard of similar view regarding Kambaramayanam that its a composite work. Podalai na, do you know how such assumptions/assertions are made? Is it with respect to the poetic style and etymology of the words employed?

And if Tolkappiyam is composite, what does the dating of 2nd to 3rd century BC refer to ? which portion is considered the oldest?

:D

podalangai
5th October 2008, 11:17 PM
Hmm.. I have heard of similar view regarding Kambaramayanam that its a composite work. Podalai na, do you know how such assumptions/assertions are made? Is it with respect to the poetic style and etymology of the words employed?

Style and etymology, yes. People also look to repetition, episodes which break the flow, portions which are suddenly more ornate than those that surround it, and so on.

So, for example, when scholars were trying to figure out whether the southern version of the Mahabharata (24 parvas, best preserved in TN) or the northern version (18 parvas, best preserved in Kashmir) was closest to the "original" text, the fact that the southern rescension was much more literary and ornate in style than the northern rescension was a major factor in the ultimate conclusion that it was the northern rescension that was closest to the original, while the southern rescension incorporated later layers that had been closely woven into the original.


And if Tolkappiyam is composite, what does the dating of 2nd to 3rd century BC refer to ? which portion is considered the oldest?
:D
Portions of ezhutthadhikaram / soladhikaram (the oldest works actually use the Tamil "-pal" rather than the Sanskritised "-adhikaram") are considered the oldest, while portions of poruladhikaram are considered the latest.

gunniboy
6th October 2008, 06:54 PM
Please go through this link:
http://www.cmi.ac.in/gift/Epigraphy/epig_tamilorigin.htm

And with the Adichanallur discovery :D , it becomes clearer that Tamil Brahmi is much older than what it is projected to be by vested interests.

This theory of Brahmi script being imported from Tamil into Prakrit & others is more plausible. But the thing is that none of the MAJORITY will wanna accept it. :oops:

thamizhvaanan
6th October 2008, 07:12 PM
Thanks Podalai :D

devapriya
17th October 2008, 11:39 AM
The following article discusses on dating of Tholkappiyam more based on merit and up to date informations.

http://controversialhistory.blogspot.com/2007/05/myth-of-antiquity-of-tamil-language.html

Myth of Antiquity of Tholkappiam

Let us continue seeing how tamil languages date is taken to antiquity
Date of Tholkappiam
The dating of the earliest tamil grammatical work Tholkappiam has been debated much and it is still imprecise and uncertain and has seen wide disagreements amongst scholars in the field. It has been dated variously between 8000 BCE and 10th CE.
While most of the antediluvian datings which stem mostly from a descriptive commentary in an 12th century work called Iraiyanar AgapporuL, about the existence of three Tamil Academies, which have been rejected as being devoid of any evidence, the genuine disagreements now center around widely divergent dates lying between the 3rd BC and 10th AD. As the Tolkappiyam is often claimed as the earliest extant work of Tamil literature, the dating of Tolkappiyam is inherently tied to the dates ascribed to the birth and development of Tamil literature as a whole.

Viyapuri Pillai, the author of the Tamil lexicon and towering figure in the field dated Tolkappiyam to not earlier than the 5-6th CE.

Kamil V. Zvelebil, a Czech indologist specialised in the Dravidian languages, dates the core of Tolkappiyam to pre-Christian era.

Robert Cladwell, a 19th century linguist who, for the first time, categorised all Dravidian languages as one language family, maintains that all extant Tamil literature can only be dated to what he calls the Jaina cycle which he dates to the 8th-9th CE to 12-13th CE.

Dr.B.G.L Swamy, a renowned botanist by profession and an acknowledged historian in his own right, contends that the Tolkappiyam cannot to be dated to anything earlier than the 10th CE.

Takahashi Takanobu, a Japanese Indologist, argues that the Tolkappiyam has several layers with the oldest dating to 1st-2nd CE, and the newest and the final redaction dating to 5th-6th centuries CE.
T.R. Sesha Iyengar, an eminent scholar and expert on Dravidian literature and history, estimates the date of Tolkappiyam to have been composed 'before the Christian era'.

Dr. Gift Siromoney, an expert on ancient languages and epigraphy, estimates the date of Tolkappiyam to be around the period of Ashoka(c 300 BCE)

V. S. Rajam, a linguist specialised in Old Tamil, in her book A reference grammar of classical Tamil poetry: 150 B.C.-pre-fifth/sixth century A.D. dates it to "pre-fifth century AD".

Herman Tieken, a Dutch author, who endeavours to trace the influence of the Sanskrit Kavya tradition on the entire Sangam corpus, argues that the Tolkappiyam dates from the 9th century CE in his book, "Kāvya in South India : old Tamil Caṅkam poetry". He arrives at this result by reassigning new dates to the traditionally accepted dates for a vast section of divergent literature.

A C Burnell, a renowned indologist of the nineteenth century who has contributed seminally to the study of Dravidian languages dates the Tolk., to the 8th CE in his book.

Iravatham Mahadevan an Indian epigraphist, in his work on epigraphy published in 2003, advances a theory where he claims that Tolkappiyam could not have been written before 2nd CE.

You may say Holy God. Why such a variation. But this is the nature of dating tamil literature. People come with dates usually the oldest based on flimsy assumptions.
Pulli theory
One of the dating methods used is the use of alphabets to determine the date. As tholkappiam talks about alphabets. Pulli theory is one of the such. The pulli is being talked about in tholkappiam ,it is a point on top of the alphabet as against the brahmi pulli which is on side. Since there is no evidence of such pulli in any inscriptions before 7th century AD, The tholkappiam is said to belong to later than 7th century AD.
Influence of Sanskrit
Influence of Sanskrit grammarians See also: Aindra school of grammar Tolkāppiyam is claimed to have been modelled on the Sanskrit grammar of the Aindra school. The preface of Ilampuranar's twelfth century commentary of the Tolkappiyam, describes it as aindiram nirainda ('comprising aindra'). This annotation was interpreted by Arthur Coke Burnell as alluding to the pre-Paninian Aindra school of Sanskrit grammar mentioned in the Ashtadhyayi. To investigate his hunch, Burnell compared the Tolkappiyam with the non Paninian Katyantra grammar and concluded that the Tolkappiyam indeed exhibited a strong influence of the non Paninian school of grammar. However, this claim has also been met with skepticism from recent researchers. The issue of the Aindra school notwithstanding, the grammar expounded by the Tolkappiyam owes a great deal to Sanskrit. The influence of various Sanskrit works like Manavadharmashastra, Arthashastra, Natyashastra and grammarians like Panini and Patanjali is evident in the Tolkappiyam. Parts of the Collathikaram are, for instance, almost a direct translation of the Sanskrit texts. The eight feelings mentioned in the Porulathikaram seem to be heavily inspired by the eight rasas or the rasa theory of the Natyashastra.

If you see the various arguments you will find that date cannot be before 8th century AD forget about before christian era.

podalangai
17th October 2008, 05:05 PM
The pulli is being talked about in tholkappiam ,it is a point on top of the alphabet as against the brahmi pulli which is on side. Since there is no evidence of such pulli in any inscriptions before 7th century AD, The tholkappiam is said to belong to later than 7th century AD.

Oh good heavens :banghead: Once more, as I said in the first post to which you responded, the Anaimalai inscription, from the 2nd century AD, uses the pulli.


The influence of various Sanskrit works like Manavadharmashastra, Arthashastra, Natyashastra and grammarians like Panini and Patanjali is evident in the Tolkappiyam.
It would be useful if you could care to explain how the Tolkappiyam can, simultaneously, embody both non-Paninian Aindra and Paninian schools of grammar. Part of the point Burnell makes - if you actually read the book you refer to - is that the two are radically different.


Parts of the Collathikaram are, for instance, almost a direct translation of the Sanskrit texts.
Parts? In the plural? There is one measly verse, which is almost universally acknowledged to be a later interpolation, that closely resembles a verse in Patanjali. If there're more, please feel free to provide details - you'll revolutionise Indology with them.


The eight feelings mentioned in the Porulathikaram seem to be heavily inspired by the eight rasas or the rasa theory of the Natyashastra.
Except that in the Sanskritic system, the meyppadus would be considered sthayibhavas, not rasas. Also, the key point of rasas is the distinction between the emotions expressed in the performance, and the emotion engendered in the "rasika". This distinction - which, I emphasise, is the main point of the entire rasa theory - doesn't exist in Tamil. Meyppadu - in stark contrast with rasa - is the emotion associated with the text, not with the characters or the audience. You can hardly call this a "heavy" inspiration.


If you see the various arguments you will find that date cannot be before 8th century AD forget about before christian era.

The 8th century? The Tolkappiyam is later than Iraiyanaar Akapporul?? Right, Solomon, now you've made your true views known. According to you, Kamil Zvelebil, Iravatham Mahadaven, Takanobu, Vaiyapuri Pillai and just about every 20th century scholar is wrong. :roll: Ungaloda pesi payan illai.

gunniboy
17th October 2008, 10:10 PM
Mr. GIFT SIROMONEY dates Tolkappiyam to about 300 BCE.

But none of you MAJORITY are gonna reconcile to that. You'll even try and prove that it is a recent 20th century creation! ;-)

And in any case, Tamil language is much older than the Tolkappiyam... Or do you have doubts about that too? ;-)

mugil123123
28th October 2008, 03:31 AM
[quote="devapriya"]
- தொல்காப்பியத்தில் மிகத் தெளிவாகப் புள்ளி எழுத்துகள் (மெய்), தமிழ் எழுத்துகள் 12+18=30 என்று சொல்லப்படுவதாலும், இது பல காலமாக இருக்கிறது என்று அழுத்தமாகச் சொல்வதாலும் தொல்காப்பியத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. 2-3ஆம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று தான் கருதுவதாகச் சொன்னார்.[quote="devapriya"]

This says Mei ezhuthukal were there. It need not be pulli ezthukal !

Interestingly, Korean language has grammer similar to tamil.
They have mei ezhuthu but no pulli !

I was very much surprise to see so much relationship between tamil and korean grammer when i studied korean !

Also there no few tamil words which still exist in korean.
To name few Amma, appa, vaa da(come here ), appuchi , ammuni etc

So the message here is, Tholkappiyam says mei ezhuthu but it did not say pulli ezhuthu !

This says there is too much of ignorance on languages among people.



[quote=devapriya]கல்வெட்டுகளில் கிடைக்கும் செய்திகளைக் கொண்டு பதிற்றுப்பத்தின் காலம் கி.பி. இரண்டாம் நூற்றாண்டு என்று கொள்ளலாம்.

Kalvettu's need not be true always. It can be used as a reference not as a strong proof.
If a king gifts a poet many things , poets hail him like anything and convert that to a poem and as kalvettu sometimes. Even tamil kalvettu's has lot of misleading information about some kings saying he captured himalayas etc.

Anyway analysis done by a person in 1902 without having so much information cannot be taken as item to discuss to check "tholkaapiyam's date"

Thirukural and Tholkaapiyam almost belong same same time.
Pls compare the words and grammer in these two literature !

I am sure they will match ! If thirukural is true then Tholkaapiyam should also be true ! If somebody says both are wrong, then its something problem with the person who says it ! Because he/she is challenging the existence of one of the world's oldest language which is being accepted by the whole world.

mugil123123
28th October 2008, 04:10 AM
This says Mei ezhuthukal were there. It need not be pulli ezthukal !

Interestingly, Korean language has grammer similar to tamil.
They have mei ezhuthu but no pulli !

I was very much surprise to see so much relationship between tamil and korean grammer when i studied korean !

Also there no few tamil words which still exist in korean.
To name few Amma, appa, vaa da(come here ), appuchi , ammuni etc



My next topic for the discussion on this issue is,

There are lot of relation between tamil & japanese and tamil & Korean !

why is the sanskrit link is missing in these two languages?

Also, pls see the man's migration part. Man reached Japan from South India(i mean india which was connected by land with srilanka till australia). This is done based on Migration marker in the Chromosome and its called M168 marker.

When man migrated from south india he also carried basic ethinic values along with him(some of which he got it from africa too).
Along with those ethinic values, he also carried some part of the languages in form of words(dont expect a grammer book in hand).


Since i knew about korean/japanese part i was thinking in this direction. This is just my view and may or may not be right.
But this makes sense to me !

So people should consider migration,civilization, sea levels(basically land connection) etc when they want to prove the language's authenticity !

devapriya
1st November 2008, 11:00 AM
[tscii:ff1d286f1a]We see quiet a few Tholkappiyam’s Grammer rules were Slipped in Sangam Literature, and later. This is in spite of the fact that Tholkappiyar wrote Tholkappiyam later than most of the Sangam Literature. These were amended in later Grammar Books.

தமிழ் பிராமிக் கல்வெட்டுகளில் கிடைத்த செய்திகளையும், பண்டைத் தமிழ் இலக்கண நூலான தொல்காப்பியச் செய்திகளையும் ஒப்பிட்டு நோக்குதல் சரியானதே. இவ்வகை ஒப்பாய்வினைப் பல ஆசிரியர்கள் நடத்தி சிறந்த பிரச்னைகளைப் பற்றி விளக்கம் அளித்துள்ளபடியால் மீண்டும் இப்பிரச்னைகயை இங்கே ஆராய்வது தேவையற்றது. இக்கல்வெட்டுகளில், தொன்மைவையானவை, தொல்காப்பியத்திற்கு முற்பட்டவையாவும், பிற்பட்ட கல்வெட்டுகள் தொல்காப்பியத்தின் காலத்தோடு, பொருத்துவது என்றும் நிர்ணயம் செய்ய உதவும். இவ்வகையில் இவை எழுத்து வடிவ, மொழி வளார்ச்சியில் நம்பத்தக்க முக்கியபடிநிலைகளை அமைக்க உதவும். கட்டுரை-தமிழ் பிராமி கல்வெட்டுகள் - ஒரு வரலாற்று மதிப்பீடு; பக்க-167 தொல்லியல் ஆய்வுகள், Prof.கே.வி.ராமன் H.O.D.-Archeaological Dept. Chennai University. அணிந்துரை-Prof.கே.கே.பிள்ளைThis Article was Originally Published in Journal of Epigraphical Studies-Vol-I, as Article-Brahmi Inscriptions of Tamilnadu- A Historical Assessment.
தொல்காப்பியம்:- தொல்காப்பியர் இயற்றிய நூல் தொல்காப்பியம் எனப் பெயர் பெறும். எந்நூலுக்கும் இல்லாத தொன்மையும் சிறப்பும் பெற்றது இந்நூல். இது கடைச் சங்க நூல்களுக்குப் பிந்தியது எனக் கூறலாம் பக்க-92 கட்டுரை- சங்க கால இலக்கியங்கள், நூல் தமிழ்நாட்டு சமுதாய பண்பாட்டு வரலாறு. Prof. Dr.A.சுவாமிநாதன். [/tscii:ff1d286f1a]

Punnaimaran
15th November 2008, 11:59 AM
உலக மொழிகளில் மூத்த முதல் மொழி தமிழாகத்தானிருக்க வேண்டும் "இப்படிச் சொன்னது ஒரு தமிழ்நாட்டு தமிழறிஞரா? இல்லை! வடநாட்டு அறிஞரா? இல்லவே இல்லை! சொன்னவர் அமெரிக்க மொழியியல் ஆய்வறிஞர் நோவாம் சாம்சுகி ஆவார்! "இங்கே ஒரு தமிழ் மாணவன் உறங்குகிறான்" என்று தம் கல்லறையில் எழுதிவைக்கச் சொல்லி உயிர் துறந்த தமிழ்பற்றாளர் யார் தெரியுமா? தமிழகத்தில் பிறந்த தவத்திரு தமிழ்க் குடிமக்களில் ஒருவரோ? இல்லை! "என்னை அடக்கம் செய்த பிறகு கல்லறையின்மேல், 'நான் ஒரு தமிழ் மாணவன்' என்று நீங்கள் எழுத வேண்டும்'' என்று 1908ஆம் ஆண்டு பிப்ரவரி மாதம் 12ஆம் நாள் ஜி.யூ.போப் தன் விருப்பம் தெரிவித்தார்.

இங்கிலாந்திலிருந்து இங்கு வந்து தமிழ் கற்று பாரதியின் வாக்கை தனக்கே சொன்னதாய்க் கருதி வள்ளுவத்தை தம் மொழியில் சொல்லி வைத்த அருமைப் பாதிரியார் ஜி.யு.போப்தான் லண்டன் மாநகரில் தன் கல்லறையில் மேற்சொன்ன வாசகத்தைச் செதுக்கி வைக்கச் சொன்ன தமிழ் மாணவன். இப்படி நம் தமிழை பிறர் மெச்சி உச்சி குளிர வைப்போர் வரிசையில் இன்றைக்கு வாழும் வரலாறாக*... பேரா.ஜார்ஜ் எல். ஹார்ட் (Prof.George L.Hart).

தமிழாய்விற்கு அமெரிக்காவிலிருந்து தொண்டு செய்யும் தமிழறிஞர்களுள் பேரா. ஜார்ஜ் ஹார்ட் முக்கியமானவர். அவர் சங்க இலக்கியப் பாடல்களை அருமையான ஆங்கிலத்தில் மொழி பெயர்த்ததோடு அல்லாமல் சங்க இலக்கியப் பாடல்களைச் சமஸ்கிருதம், பிராகிருதம் ஆகிய மொழிப் பாடல்களோடு ஒப்பிட்டு ஆய்வும் செய்துள்ளார். இவர் பெர்க்கிலியிலுள்ள கலிபோர்னியா பல்கலைக் கழகத்தில் 1975 முதல் தமிழ்ப் பலகையில் பணியாற்றி வருகிறார். ஹார்வர்டு பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் சமஸ்கிருதப் பட்டம் பெற்று 1969 லிருந்து சமஸ்கிருதப் பேராசிரியராக இருந்தவர். இவர் தமிழ், வடமொழி தவிர கிரேக்கம், இலத்தீன் போன்ற மொழிகளையும் கற்றவர். மலையாளம், தெலுங்கு இலக்கியங்களையும் கற்றவர். தமிழ் செம்மொழி அந்தஸ்து பெறுவதற்கான தகுதிகள் அனைத்தும் பெற்றது என்று முழக்கமிட்டவர்.

தமிழ்மொழி பழமையான மொழி; தமிழ் மொழியிலுள்ள இலக்கியங்கள் நவீன இந்திய மொழிகளின் இலக்கியங்களை விட ஆயிரமாண்டுகள் பழமையானவை. சங்க இலக்கியங்கள் தமிழரின் தனித்தன்மைகளை வெளிப்படுத்தும் இலக்கியங்கள். காளிதாசரின் செவ்வியல் இலக்கியங்களுக்கு 200 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்னர் தமிழிலக்கியங்கள் தோன்றின. சமஸ்கிருதம் தென்னிந்தியாவில் தாக்கம் செலுத்துவதற்கு முன்னரே தோன்றியவை. எனவே தமிழ் இலக்கியங்கள் (குறிப்பாக சங்க இலக்கியங்கள்) செம்மொழி தகுதி உடையன என்று கூறினார். தமிழ் இலக்கிய மரபுகள் பிராகிருத மொழி இலக்கியங்கள் வழியாகச் சமஸ்கிருத இலக்கியங்களுக்குச் சென்றன என்கிற ஆய்வு முடிவை வெளியிட்டவர். இவரது மனைவி கௌசல்யா ஹார்ட் ஒரு தமிழர். கணவருக்குத் தமிழாய்வில் உதவிகள் செய்து வருகிறார். இவ*ரும் பெர்க்கிலி ப*ல்க*லையில் த*மிழ்த்துறையில் ப*ணியாற்றி வ*ருகிறார்.

"பேரா. ம*றைம*லை அவ*ர்க*ள் கேட்டுக் கொண்ட*த*ற்கிண*ங்க* தமிழை உய*ர் த*னிச் செம்மொழியாக்க* வேண்டும் என்று 11,ஏப்ரல்,2000ம் ஆண்டில்"தமிழ் ஒரு செம்மொழி என நிறுவ நான் ஒரு கட்டுரை எழுத வேண்டியிருப்பது எனக்கு விந்தையாக இருக்கிறது. இது இந்தியா ஒரு நாடு என்பதையும் இந்து மதம் உலகின் மாபெரும் சமயங்களில் ஒன்று என்பதையும் நிரூபிக்க வேண்டும் என்பதுபோல் இருக்கிறது.

உலகின் பெருமை வாய்ந்த செவ்வியல் மொழி தமிழ் என்பது இத்துறையில் ஞானம் உள்ளவர்கட்கு ஐயம் திரிபற வெளிப்படை. தமிழின் செம்மொழித் தகுதியைப் புறக்கணிப்பது இந்தியப் பண்பாட்டுப் பெருமையின் அதன் வளத்தின் சக்தி வாய்ந்ததும் மையமெனத் தக்கதுமான சிறப்பை இழப்பதுமாகும். தமிழின் செம்மொழித் தகுதி என்பது தமிழின் பெருமையோடு நிற்பதன்று: அது மொழி வளர்ச்சியில் இந்தியப் பண்பாடு எட்டியுளள உச்சியின் இன்னொரு சிகரம். நமது பாரத அரசு நிலைநிறுத்த முயலும் இந்தியத்துவத்தின் பெருமைக்கு இன்னொரு மகுடம்." என்று எழுதினார். அந்த* முழுக் க*ட்டுரையையும் ப*டிக்க* இங்கே சுட்டுக*:

http://tamil.berkeley.edu/Tamil%20Chair/TamilClassicalLanguage/TamilClassicalLgeLtr.html

பெர்க்கிலியில் உள்ள கலிஃபோர்னியா பல்கலைக்கழகத்தின் "தமிழ்ப் பலகை" சமீபத்தில் தனது பத்தாண்டு நிறைவு விழாவைக் கொண்டாடியது. இந்தியாவில் அரசியல்தான் எல்லாவற்றையும் தீர்மானிக்கும். கிரேக்க மொழியைப் போலவே தமிழ் வளமான இலக்கியத்தையும் நவீன இலக்கியத்தையும் பெற்றுள்ளது. சாதி என்பது சமயப் பழக்க வழக்கமல்ல என்று அழுத்தமாகச் சொல்லும் "தமிழ்ப் பலகை" தலைவர் பேரா.ஜியார்ஜ் ஹார்ட் 1996ல் "தமிழ்ப் பலகை" (Tamil Chair) ஒன்றைப் பெர்க்கிலி பல்கலையில் உருவாக முக்கிய காரணகர்த்தாவானவர். அவருடனான* மின்காணலைக் காண செல்வோமா?

? பெர்க்கிலி பல்கலையில் "தமிழ்ப் பலகை" (Tamil Chair) ஒன்றை உருவாக்க நீங்கள் பட்ட சிரமத்திற்கு பலன் அடைந்ததாக அல்லது நோக்கம் நிறைவேறியதாகக் கருதுகிறீர்களா?

1996ல் "தமிழ்ப் பலகை" என்பது ஓர் அறக்கட்டளை. அது பெர்க்கிலியில் எங்களால் நடத்தப்படும் தமிழ்ப் பாடத்திட்ட நடவடிக்கைளை மேற்கொள்வதற்கு உறுதுணையாக இருக்கும் பொருட்டு பணத்தை வழங்குகிறது. கடந்த 10 ஆண்டுகளில், கொடுக்கப்பட்ட பணம் மாநாடுகள், மாணவர்களுக்கான ஆதரவு, மற்றும் சிறப்பு விருந்தினர்களை அழைத்தல் போன்றவற்றிற்கு முக்கியமாகப் பயன்படுத்தப்பட்டது. சற்றேறக்குறைய இன்னும் 3 ஆண்டுகளில் நான் ஓய்வு பெற்ற பிறகு, பெர்க்கிலியில் தமிழ்த்துறை (தமிழ் பீடம்) தொடர்ந்திருப்பதை உறுதி செய்யும் முக்கிய நோக்கத்தை இந்த அறக்கட்டளை கொண்டுள்ளது. பெர்க்கிலியில் நாங்கள் மேற்கொள்ளும் தமிழ்த்துறை நடவடிக்கை சிறிதளவாகவே இருந்தாலும் கிட்டத்தட்ட 40 ஆண்டு காலமாக அது எங்களின் தென்னாசிய மொழிகள் திட்டத்தின் ஒரு முக்கிய கூறாக இருந்து வந்துள்ளது. கல்வித் துறை சார்ந்த ஒரு திட்டம் நிரந்தரமாக உருவாக்கப்படுவதற்கு நீண்ட காலம் பிடிக்கும். எங்களின் திட்டத்தின் மையமாகக் கூறாக இருப்பது தமிழ்ப்பீட அறக்கட்டளையாகும். திட்டம் வெளிப்படையாக எல்லோரும் அறியும்படி இருப்பதற்கும் திட்டம் தொடர்வதற்கு மிக அவசியமானதாகவும் இந்த அறக்கட்டளை உள்ளது.

? தாங்கள் அழகுபடுத்திக் கொண்டிருக்கும் பெர்க்கிலி தமிழ் இருக்கை பத்து ஆண்டுகள் பூர்த்தி செய்து விழா எடுக்கும் நிலையில் பெர்க்கிலி தமிழ் இருக்கை போல தமிழர்கள் அதிகம் வாழும் நியூயார்க், சிகாகோ போன்ற பிற பல்கலையிலும் தமிழ் இருக்கை அமைய தங்கள் ஆலோசனை என்ன?

உலகில் உள்ள வளமிக்க மொழிகளில் தமிழ் மொழியும் ஒன்று. அதனிடம் (மற்ற நவீன இந்திய மொழிகளைப் போல் அல்லாமல்) உண்மையிலேயே செம்மையான இலக்கியப் பாரம்பரியம் உள்ளது என்பதுடன் முக்கியமான விரிவடைந்து வரும் நவீன இலக்கியமும் உள்ளது. கிட்டத்தட்ட 7 கோடி மக்களால் பேசப்படும் மொழி அது. இருந்தாலும் கூட அது மறைக்கப்பட்ட பொக்கிஷமாகவே உள்ளது. தங்களின் பாரம்பரியம் எவ்வளவு வளமையானது என்பதை ஒரு சில தமிழர்கள் மட்டுமே அறிந்துள்ளனர்.

தமிழ்நாட்டிற்கு வெளியே மேலை நாடுகளில் கிட்டத்தட்ட அதனைப் பற்றி யாருக்கும் தெரியாது. வட அமெரிக்காவில் உள்ள மற்ற பல்கலைக்கழகங்களில் தமிழ்த்துறையை அல்லது தமிழ்ப்பீடத்தை அமைப்பது உண்மையில் பெரிய செயல்தான். டொறோன்டோவில் 3 லட்சம் தமிழர்கள் (பெரும்பாலும் யாழ்ப்பாணத் தமிழர்கள்) உள்ளனர். அவர்கள் நிச்சயமாக ஒரு விரிவான தமிழ்த் துறையை தமிழ்ப் பீடத்தை டொறோன்டோ பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் அமைத்து அதற்கான நிதியை நிச்சயம் அவர்களால் வழங்க முடியும். வட அமெரிக்காவில் உள்ள மற்ற பல்கலைக்கழகங்களில் தமிழ்த்துறையை அமைத்து அவற்றிற்கு வளமூட்டுவது பெரும் பயன்மிக்க சாதனையாக இருக்கும்.

? பெர்க்கிலியில் வருடம்தோறும் நடத்தி வரும் தமிழ் விழாவில் தமிழ் அறிஞர்களளைப் பங்கேற்கச் செய்வதுண்டா?

நாங்கள் நடத்தும் மாநாட்டில் பொதுமக்களும் கலந்து கொள்ளலாம். தமிழ் மொழியில் ஆர்வம் உள்ளவர்கள் யாராக இருந்தாலும் அவர்கள் கலந்து கொள்வதை நாங்கள் வரவேற்கிறோம்.

? தமிழ் மொழிக்கு ஏன் "செம்மொழி" தகுதி வழங்கவேண்டும் என்று 7 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பே எழுதியிருந்தீர்கள். இப்போது தமிழ் மொழிக்கு செம்மொழி தகுதி கிடைத்திருப்பது குறித்து என்ன கருதுகிறீர்கள்?

உண்மை என்ன என்றால், எந்த ஒரு நவீன தென்னாசிய மொழிகளைப் போல் அல்லாமல், தமிழ் மொழியின் மேல் உண்மையான செம்மை வாய்ந்த இலக்கியம் உள்ளது. தென் ஆசியாவின் மற்ற எந்த நவீன மொழியிடமும் சங்க இலக்கியம் போன்று ஒன்றும் இல்லை, சங்க இலக்கியம் தன் சொந்த மரபுகளைக் கொண்டுள்ளதுடன் (சமஸ்கிருதத்தில் காணப்படவில்லை) கடன் வாங்கிய சொற்கள் மிகக் குறைந்த விழுக்காட்டிலேயே உள்ளது. இதைப் பற்றி அதிகம் சொல்ல வேண்டியதில்லை ஏன் எனில் வானம் நீல நிறமானது என்ற எல்லோருக்கும் தெரிந்த உண்மையைக் கூறுவது போலத்தான் இருக்கும். எவ்வித பகுத்தறிவுக் கேள்விக்கும் அப்பாற்பட்டு, தமிழ் மொழியிடம் உண்மையான செம்மை வாய்ந்த இலக்கியம் உள்ளது.

இந்திய அரசாங்கம் இந்த உண்மையை இறுதியில் உணர்ந்து கொண்டு முடிவு செய்தது நல்ல செயல்தான். இருந்தாலும் இந்த முடிவு அரசியல் அடிப்படையில் பெரிதும் தீர்மானிக்கப் பட்டதாகத் தெரிகிறது. கன்னட மொழியின் தொடக்ககால இலக்கியம் அதன் மரபுகளையும், சொற்களையும் சமஸ்கிருதத்திலிருந்து பெற்றது என்ற போதும், இந்திய அரசாங்கம் தற்போது கன்னட மொழியையும் ஒரு செம்மொழியாக அறிவிக்க உள்ளது. அதனிடம் வளமான பாரம்பரியம் உள்ளது என்றாலும் அது ஆங்கிலம் அல்லது பிரஞ்சு மொழியை விட செம்மையான மொழியல்ல. இந்தியாவில் அரசியல்தான் எல்லாவற்றையும் தீர்மானிக்கும்.

? ஹார்வார்டில் இயற்பியல் படிக்கப் போய் தமிழ் படிக்க நேர்ந்தது குறித்துச் சொல்லுங்களேன்?

வேதியில் மற்றும் இயற்பியலிலிருந்து சமஸ்கிருதம் மற்றும் இந்திய மொழிகள் துறைக்கு பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் கற்றுக் கொடுத்த பல ஆண்டுகள் கழித்து மாறினேன். இப்படி மாறுவதற்கு இயற்பியல் பேராசிரியடம் கையொப்பம் நான் பெறவேண்டும். அவரிடம் என் திட்டத்தைச் சொன்ன போது நான் வேடிக்கையாகச் சொல்கிறேன் என்று நினைத்தார். ஆனால் என்னிடம் திறன்கள் இப்பினும், அவை மொழிகளைக் கற்றுக் கொள்வதில்தான் இருந்தன.

சமஸ்கிருதத்தின் மேல் நான் மிகவும் ஆழமாக ஆர்வம் கொண்டிருந்தேன். நான் ஏற்கனவே பல இந்தோ-ஐரோப்பிய மொழிகளைக் கற்றிருந்தேன். ஆகவே அவற்றுடன் தொடர்புடைய சமஸ்கிருத மொழியின் அமைப்பு முறை வளர்ச்சி குறித்து நான் வியப்புடன் கூடிய ஆர்வத்தைக் கொண்டிருந்தேன். அதன் பிறகு, நான் தமிழ் மொழியின்பால் ஈர்க்கப்பட்டேன். சமஸ்கிருதத்தைப் போலவே தமிழிடமும் மிகவும் பழமையான வளம் மிக்க இலக்கியம் இருக்கிறது.

நான் தமிழ் மொழியைக் கற்கத் தொடங்கியதும், நான் அதன் மொழியியல் அமைப்பு முறை, சொற்றொடரியல் ஆகியவை குறித்து, அவை இந்தோ-ஐரோப்பிய முறை சார்ந்ததல்ல, என்பதால் ஈர்க்கப்பட்டேன். மற்றொன்றையும் நான் சொல்ல விரும்புகிறேன், சமஸ்கிருதத்தை விட தமிழ்தான் கணினிக்கு அதிகமான அளவில் பொருத்தமுள்ள மொழி. ஏனெனில், சமஸ்கிருதத்தில் மிகவும் சிக்கல் மிக்க இலக்கண முறை உள்ளதுடன் இந்தோ-ஐரோப்பிய மொழிகளிலிருந்து ஆயிரக்கணக்கான விதிவிலக்குகளையும் கொண்டுள்ளது. சமஸ்கிருத மொழியின் அசாதாரணமான சிக்கல் தன்மையை விலக்கி ஆண்டது பாணினியாரின் பெரும் சாதனையாகும். அதனை அவரால் அறிவியல்பூர்வமாகச் செய்ய முடிந்தது என்பதால் அம்மொழியை இலக்கண வாய்ப்பாட்டு முறையில் தலைசிறந்ததாக ஆக்கி விடவில்லை. திராவிட மொழிகள் நேர்த்தியான, சீரான அமைப்பு முறையைக் கொண்டுள்ளன. (தமிழ் மொழியில் எண்களை எண்ணிப்பாருங்கள் அதே வேளையில் இந்தியிலும் எண்ணிப்பாருங்கள்).

? கணினியில் தமிழில் எழுத மென்பொருள் உருவாக்க வேண்டும் என்ற எண்ணம் ஏற்பட்டது எதனால்? என்னவிதமான மென்பொருளை உருவாக்கினீர்கள்? தற்போது அந்தமென்பொருளை எவராவது பயன்படுத்துகிறார்களா?

தமிழுக்காக ஒருங்குறியீடு முறை செயல்படுத்தப்பட்டதுதான் இதன் தொடர்பில் ஏற்பட்ட அதிக முக்கியத்துவம் வாய்ந்த வளர்ச்சியாகும். இது தொடர்ந்து உருவாகி வரும் ஒன்று. தமிழுக்கு பல மாறுபட்ட (லிசா மற்றும் மெக்கின்டோஷில் நாங்கள் 70களில் உருவாக்கியது உட்பட) குறியீடுகள் நடைமுறைப் படுத்தப்பட்டுள்ளன. ஒவ்வொரு இணைய தளமும் வெவ்வேறான எழுத்துருக்களையும் எழுத்துக் குறியீட்டு முறையையும் பயன்படுத்தி வருகின்றன. ஒவ்வொரு ஆங்கில இணைய தளமும் மாறுபட்ட, அஸ்கி குறியீட்டு முறை அல்லாத எழுத்துக்களைப் பயன்படுத்துகின்றன என்ற தோரணையில் இதுவும் செய்யப்படுகிறது என்று நினைக்கிறேன். முழுமையான எழுத்து ஒருங்குறியீடு முறையீடு இன்றி, கணினியில் தமிழ் பயன்பாடு பரவலாக இருக்காது.

? பெர்க்கிலி தமிழ் இருக்கையில் தமிழ் பயின்ற மாணவர்கள் இன்றைக்கு குறிப்பிட்டுச் சொல்லுமளவுக்கு தமிழ்த்துறையில் ஏதும் சாதனை செய்திருக்கிறார்களா?

பெர்க்கிலி பல்கலை மணிக்கூண்டு... எங்களின் அறக்கட்டளை பல மாணவர்களுக்கு ஆதரவளிக்க எங்களுக்கு உதவியுள்ளது. காலப்போக்கில், நாங்கள் அளித்த ஆதரவின் வழி பலர் பயன் அடைந்ததுடன் அவர்கள் தங்களின் படிப்பையும் முடித்துக் கொண்டுள்ளனர்.

? 30 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன் நீங்கள் எழுதிய நூலில் சர்ச்சைக்குரிய கருத்துக்களை இன்றைய &#2