why many researchers use proto-dravidian instead of tamil

[maduraithamizhmanikandan]

why many researchers use proto-dravidian instead of tamil. Because they know tamil is the oldest language, so they use the word proto-dravidian and tell that all the four southern indian language are derived from that. But the truth is tamil is the root language of all other south indian languages.The proto-dravidian is nothing but tamil. Also they tell malayalam is derived from proto tamil-malayalam(The point i strongly oppose).I think malayalam is formed by mixing the sanskrit with tamil. I tell tamil is the oldest language in the world. The sanskrit is not a language created by the god, the sanskrit is not at all a language. if it is a language ,why the sanskrit is not spoken by many of the brahmins.In tamilnadu,most of the brahmins speak tamil.

[bingleguy]

1. The sanskrit is not a language created by the god, the sanskrit is not at all a language.

2. if it is a language ,why the sanskrit is not spoken by many of the brahmins.In tamilnadu,most of the brahmins speak tamil.

Vanakkam Thamizh

Can u brief me on the connection between the first line and the second line !

[srivatsan]

............why the sanskrit is not spoken by many of the brahmins.In tamilnadu,most of the brahmins speak tamil.

what is connection between Brahmanas and Samskrutham..pls explain

[bis_mala]

............why the sanskrit is not spoken by many of the brahmins.In tamilnadu,most of the brahmins speak tamil.

what is connection between Brahmanas and Samskrutham..pls explain

Wow! srivatsan, I think this is the best question so far asked in this forum by anyone. You should be commended for it!! I would await the answer!

[srivatsan]

............why the sanskrit is not spoken by many of the brahmins.In tamilnadu,most of the brahmins speak tamil.

what is connection between Brahmanas and Samskrutham..pls explain

Wow! srivatsan, I think this is the best question so far asked in this forum by anyone. You should be commended for it!! I would await the answer!

Ms. Sivamala,

I dont know whether you are Sircastic or not but I mean it...What is the very connection between Brahmanas and Samskrutham? As a language it is NOT a property of one sect........ :)

[bis_mala]

Ms. Sivamala,

I dont know whether you are Sircastic or not but I mean it...What is the very connection between Brahmanas and Samskrutham? As a language it is NOT a property of one sect........ Smile

No, I really mean to compliment you!! Keep it up.

[crazy]

hm yaarachum therincha answer pannungalen. iam waiting!

[srivatsan]

hm yaarachum therincha answer pannungalen. iam waiting! :lol: :lol: :lol: Crazy....i like your post!

[crazy]

hm yaarachum therincha answer pannungalen. iam waiting! :lol: :lol: :lol: Crazy....i like your post!

iam extremely sorry, did i say anything wrong?
iam just curious, being tamil and living in a country far way from india and eelam i only know a very little of tamil!

and sorry again, i didnt mean anything! :roll: i just wanted someone to answer!

[srivatsan]

hm yaarachum therincha answer pannungalen. iam waiting! :lol: :lol: :lol: Crazy....i like your post!

iam extremely sorry, did i say anything wrong?
iam just curious, being tamil and living in a country far way from india and eelam i only know a very little of tamil!

and sorry again, i didnt mean anything! :roll: i just wanted someone to answer!
hey no..no..it was very funny, I remembered a Vivek's dialogue!

[santhanv]

Hello everybody,

I just want to share with you what I know about Sanskrit. Please correct me, if I am not right.

Sanskrit is not a language spoken by anybody, but it is developed by Odhuvar or priests for praising God, and pronouncing Mandhirangal(Manthras) two millennium ago. Odhuvar were those who involved only in conducting Sacred rituals in Daily Poosai(Pooja) and pronouncing Mandhirangal(Manthras).

Only Odhuvar knew Sanskrit and they used only in Temple for pronouncing Mandhirangal (Manthras). In day to day life, Odhuvar spoke tamizh.

After some period, Odhuvar claimed that Sanskrit was Language of God.

Odhuvar became Brahmin, who are still conducting rituals in temple and pronouncing Mandhirangal (Manthras).

New information - Few days back, Kalaingar announced that anybody can become Archagar(priest). I appreciate his move. on this. I also read that Brahmins opposed this.

[bis_mala]

Hello everybody,

I just want to share with you what I know about Sanskrit. Please correct me, if I am not right.

Sanskrit is not a language spoken by anybody, but it is developed by Odhuvar or priests for praising God, and pronouncing Mandhirangal(Manthras) two millennium ago. Odhuvar were those who involved only in conducting Sacred rituals in Daily Poosai(Pooja) and pronouncing Mandhirangal(Manthras).

Only Odhuvar knew Sanskrit and they used only in Temple for pronouncing Mandhirangal (Manthras). In day to day life, Odhuvar spoke tamizh.

After some period, Odhuvar claimed that Sanskrit was Language of God.

Odhuvar became Brahmin, who are still conducting rituals in temple and pronouncing Mandhirangal (Manthras).

New information - Few days back, Kalaingar announced that anybody can become Archagar(priest). I appreciate his move. on this. I also read that Brahmins opposed this.

We also must bear in mind that most writers and poets in Sanskrit apaarently were not Brahmanas. Vethavyasan (Mahabharatha) was of ftraditionally fisherman profression. Vaalmiki was an Athivasi.(hunter).
Researchers say many of the veda composers were also not BrahmaNa.
The connection between Br and Sans is that Sanskirt is their "working" language when they perform the priestly job. Even Kamban who translated Ramayana from Sans to Tamiz was no BrahmaNa.

People of other religions such as Jains and Bhuddists had/have also used Sanskrit (or some related language)

It is just a language there for anybody who wants to use it.

[crazy]

Tamizhs are everywhere in the world. But there is no country for Tamizhs :thumbsup:

[Eelavar]

Crazy,

Tamil 'Nadu' is really a hypocrisy..
Nadu means country.. But it is an indian state !
Tamil Nadu will be very developped if it was not an indian state !
TN contribuate to develop the other states !

If GOSL and SLA continue this daily killing of Tamil people in NE of Sri lanka, Eelam will be the first modern tamil country..

(www.tamilnet.com to follow this slow genocide, by example http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=18447)

[crazy]

Crazy,

Tamil 'Nadu' is really a hypocrisy..
Nadu means country.. But it is an indian state !

If GOSL and SLA continue this daily killing of Tamil people in NE of Sri lanka, Eelam will be the first and modern tamil country..

(www.tamilnet.com to follow this slow genocide)

i know that!

God bless us, it will be the very first tamil country! :)
iam waiting for that wonderful day!

[Eelavar]

Yes Crazy God bless us . :D

[crazy]

Yes Crazy God bless us . :D

:)

[podalangai]

Tamil 'Nadu' is really a hypocrisy..
Nadu means country.. But it is an indian state !

Adeyappa! "Nadu" does not have to mean independent country. It can also simply mean "idam", or even "ulakam". For us Indian Tamils, Tamil Nadu *is* our thaaynaadu in a very deep way. Fortunately, we do not have to choose between our Tamil thaay and India. There is no contradiction in our naadu being a part of India, because it still belongs to us.


Tamil Nadu will be very developped if it was not an indian state !
TN contribuate to develop the other states !

We contribute much more than even most Tamils realise. But think how many thousands of our youth would have died if we had had to fight India. After the events of the 1960s (and particularly the DMK's election gains in 1962), India has treated us with respect and honour. What would we have gained through the fight? Money is not worth so much.

But it is a funny thing. In the early 1950s Tamils in Tamil Nadu wanted to break away from India. This was considered one of the biggest threats to Indian unity then. In Sri Lanka at that time, Jaffna Tamils thought Chelvanayagam was being unnecessarily quarrelsome when he asked even for federalism. As it turned out, we in Tamil Nadu received more concessions from India than we had thought we would (even today, TN is the only state to which the Official Languages Order does not apply). It was exactly the opposite for you in Sri Lanka. At that time, I don't think anyone would have thought that it would end up like this.

Seri pa, enough seriousness from me.

[Eelavar]

Thanks podalangai for your reaction.

For me Nadu does mean country and not a 'idam' or place.
By chance Tamil's struggle in Sri lanka helped Tamils in India to get the respect of India, unfortunately it is still not the case for us..

Now Tamils of India must help Sri lankan tamil to obtain a federal system or a separate state if federalism is not possible with this chauvinist govt.

TN is the richest state i think. It is a state which produce richness.

[srivatsan]

Thanks podalangai for your reaction.

For me Nadu does mean country and not a 'idam' or place.
By chance Tamil's struggle in Sri lanka helped Tamils in India to get the respect of India, .

Just for being a part of Bharatham is our pride....and dont think, that we got pride by your struggle!


Now Tamils of India must help Sri lankan tamil to obtain a federal system or a separate state if federalism is not possible with this chauvinist govt..

This is the problem between two sects in Srilanka. As a neighbour, may be we can do something to ease the tention. But this is not our duty or some thing.


TN is the richest state i think. It is a state which produce richness.

TN is not the richest state. Infact, we have worst natural resources.....and our state has been shattered by the continuous rule of Dravidian Parties...

[Eelavar]

ok srivastan ...
TN is so ONE of the most richest state of India.
Man do you live in TN or what ?

Sri vastan why Sri lanka was separated with India ??
I don't understand why now there is a country called Sri lanka...

It's a problem that britishes created but now they are hiding their face.. :roll:

[podalangai]

Thanks podalangai for your reaction.
For me Nadu does mean country and not a 'idam' or place.
Ningal solluvadhu sari daan, eezhavare! Nadu has the connotation of country, though it can also mean other things. The thing is, when people were interested in breaking away from India in the 1940s and 1950s, the independent Tamil country was to be called "Tamil Nadu". Permitting the renaming of Madras presidency to "Tamil Nadu" was a symbolic gesture on India's part, to say that we could have our ideal of a home for Tamils while still remaining part of India.


By chance Tamil's struggle in Sri lanka helped Tamils in India to get the respect of India, unfortunately it is still not the case for us..
The respect was not because of Sri Lanka, eezhavare! In the 1950s, there were some politicians who wanted India to become more uniform and less embracing of diversity. This was symbolised by the position of Hindi. But since the 1960s, the attitude has was abandoned, and now all Indians take pride in the culture of all parts of India, and no culture is seen as being "more" Indian. It is because of this that there is respect at the level of common man.

For Tamils in Tamil Nadu, the war with China also changed our attitude. During the war, even the most hardcore separatists of the DMK were collecting money and relief for the Indian army soldiers. It made us realise what a strong emotional bond we had with the rest of India.

I am going out of my character by writing a serious rather than a humorous post, but I am explaining this because I have met many Sri Lankan Tamils who do not understand how we feel about India and Tamil Nadu. Feeling Indian does not mean we have to feel any less Tamil, or that we have to give up anything (other than financial independence) which we would have had as a separate country. That is the wonderful thing about India, and that is the reason why we can easily have so much loyalty to the country. Like Krishna had both Yashoda and Devaki, we have both Tamil Nadu and India. Both are our mothers, and both treat us like mothers should.


Now Tamils of India must help Sri lankan tamil to obtain a federal system or a separate state if federalism is not possible with this chauvinist govt.
The people would do it, but God only knows what our various thalaivars and thalaivis have in mind.

[dsath]

Feeling Indian does not mean we have to feel any less Tamil, or that we have to give up anything (other than financial independence) which we would have had as a separate country. That is the wonderful thing about India, and that is the reason why we can easily have so much loyalty to the country. Like Krishna had both Yashoda and Devaki, we have both Tamil Nadu and India. Both are our mothers, and both treat us like mothers should.

:clap: bravo !!!! Well Spoken.

[Eelavar]

Podalangai,

Well ! Happy to see that you are united with whole India. It is not a bad thing to counter China emergence.

My frustration is why Sri lanka was separated of our Mother India...
If we were not separated Sinhalas could not play this game..

[srivatsan]

Podalangai,

Well ! Happy to see that you are united with whole India. It is not a bad thing to counter China emergence.

My frustration is why Sri lanka was separated of our Mother India...
If we were not separated Sinhalas could not play this game..

May be a valid point. But Britishers are like that....

[bis_mala]

Whilst whatever may be said of the attitude of the Britishers with regard to the manner in which independence was given, it is also clear that the "independence history" of India and Sri Lanka were different in many aspects. There was a congress organisation in Sri Lanka after Nehru's visit there to mediate with regard to the disputes between Indian labourers and plantation owners, but no politician either from that org'n or other political parties had asked to join "India". Gandhi and Nehru and other Indian leaders did not ask for Lanka to be included. So how do you pin the blame on the Britishers and if you did, would it be historically correct.?

Ref: 1. History of Sri Lankan Indians(2001), Prof S Sandarasegaran. Colombo University. KP Pte Ltd 201, Dam St, Colombo 12.
2. A History of the British Empire and Commonwealth, by J A Williamson.

[Eelavar]

Bis_mala..


So how do you pin the blame on the Britishers and if you did, would it be historically correct.?
Your post is a bit pathetic..

British have destroyed the royalty.. They fabricated India as a nation.. They ruled by dividing..

Like in Sri lanka majority of administration posts were gave to the minority Tamils but after the Independance, the Sinhalas took revenge giving the majority of the administration jobs for Sinhalas even where 95% of the population is Tamil (IT IS STILL THE CASE).

British favorised the minorities as that the majority could be against the minorities...Now look the mess, daily killings of innocents.

[bis_mala]

Bis_mala..


So how do you pin the blame on the Britishers and if you did, would it be historically correct.?
Your post is a bit pathetic..

British have destroyed the royalty.. They fabricated India as a nation.. They ruled by dividing..

Like in Sri lanka majority of administration posts were gave to the minority Tamils but after the Independance, the Sinhalas took revenge giving the majority of the administration jobs for Sinhalas even where 95% of the population is Tamil (IT IS STILL THE CASE).

British favorised the minorities as that the majority could be against the minorities...Now look the mess, daily killings of innocents.

I do not think you have got my point. You can blame the British for many things, that is not my point. At the time the independence was about to be given, Indian leaders did not ask for Sri Lanka to be given to them so that India and Lanka could form into one entity. The Lanka leaders too did not ask the Indian leaders to include them in their new India so that they could form into one entity. Both the Lanka leaders and Indian leaders did not address the British on this issue that both territoties should be amalgamated into one region. So, you cannot blame the British for the separation of Lanka and India into separate entities even if you are right in blaming the British for a lot of other things.

On the question of the alleged divide and rule policy, India was never a single entity before the advent of the British East India Company. They (a trading company) forged the subcontinent into one entity. Even the congress party was started by the white men!!

There is nothing pathetic about my post.

WHO COINED THE TERM "India"?

[Eelavar]

Bismala,

So if i understood you are great admirator of the British.. :lol:

Who resold Indian textile to Indians ?? :lol:
Who built railway for a dynamic stealing ??
Who propaganded the false AIT ?
Who profited of Tata Steel during the W.W ??
And a lot ...

I do not want to continue to talk about that here.. Open a new thread i you want argue about british colonisation of 1/4 of the emerged ground of this Earth !!

[Badri]

Eelavar, Crazy, and others: Please stick to this topic of this thread. This thread was not opened to discuss whether Tamil Nadu should be a separate entity or not.

Neither would we like to encourage such separtist discussions in this Forum.

[crazy]

Eelavar, Crazy, and others: Please stick to this topic of this thread. This thread was not opened to discuss whether Tamil Nadu should be a separate entity or not.

Neither would we like to encourage such separtist discussions in this Forum.

sorry badri!

[Eelavar]

Ok Badri, sorry.

It's why i asked to stop this discussion here. :roll:

[Sarna]

Feeling Indian does not mean we have to feel any less Tamil, or that we have to give up anything (other than financial independence) which we would have had as a separate country. That is the wonderful thing about India, and that is the reason why we can easily have so much loyalty to the country. Like Krishna had both Yashoda and Devaki, we have both Tamil Nadu and India. Both are our mothers, and both treat us like mothers should.

:clap: bravo !!!! Well Spoken.

:clap: :clap:

[bis_mala]

Apart from whatever reasons one may find in linguistics, using the term "proto-whatever" has the virtue of avoiding a feeling of having been left out, in the minds ( of people ) of the other members of a language family. It will promote an objective research environment.

[prashanth12]

The reason is because Tamil is a separate language that is spoken in modern society. Modern tamil is not the exact same as the ancient Tamil that branched off into the southern languages. It has evolved and made many changes. I have heard that Sri Lankan Tamil is actually more similar to ancient Tamil than that which is spoken in Tamil Nadu.

Anyways, they call it Proto-Dravidian because they want to avoid confusion with modern Tamil, which is different from ancient Tamil.

[bis_mala]

Proto-Dravidian > Proto-Telugu > Telugu;

Proto-Dravidian > Proto-Kannada> Kannada.

Proto-Dravidian > Proto-Ta/Mal > Malayalam.

Proto-Dravidian > Proto -Ta/Mal > Proto-Tamil > Tamil.


So it goes.


Ta/Mal = Tamil & Malayalam before they split.