 |
|
tamil might be mother of sanskrit
tamil might be mother of sanskrit
Topic started by v (@ 203.94.222.48) on Sun May 23 01:52:53 EDT 2004.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.
|
|
There has been lot of Discussions on the net revoving around proving that aryans were native settlers and that of disproving that Dravidian civilization predates arrival of aryans.
For this the historians and linguist adopted two pronged approach:
1.Pooh-Poohing the efforts of early historians and linguistic findings as colonial-a policy of divide and rule, A composite missionary approach to malign hinduism.
2.To attach at best all the literary ,archeological, anthropological and linguistic findings to Aryans.
In their enthusiasm to take the credit away from the dravidians and to marginalise the dravidian culture and also to prove that aryans were orginal settlers of the land they had bypassed some of the basic questions which are enumerated below:
1.Who were Aryans?Were they white settlers.If so it is a popular scientific notion that whites first appeared in the poles and started spreading in all direction of the earth as nomads.Then they were outsiders to the land.
Were aryans cosmopolitan(comprising of all races)?If this be the case then literary evidences show conflict of civilization starting from Rg veda every bit of literature talks about glorifying one race against all that is supposed to have existed in this land.
2.Were they homogenous stock ?This means that they came from one genetic stock and settled more or less in the same period or in the same wave.It does not seem so even today The reference to aryan its usage is very vague and not definitive.Some induced meaning such as Noble which is an impersonal definition of quality also fails since literary evidences show it points to a particular race .
3.Rg veda points at several places to war between Indra and Dasayu(slaves) thereby pointing to indra stock encountering resistence prior to settlement to the lush lands.
4.Current demographic spread of population in India also points to the fact that the Blacks are heavily concentrated on the eastern coastal frontiers and deccan plateau where the lands are not very cultivable .Even the kokan coast has scanty population of dravids so is malabar.
5.While denying credit to tamil for harrapan script the aryologist are now trying to use arbitrary means to show the same as sanskrit.
6.Aryalogist are of the view of fixing tamils to the current land they occupy and prove that there is no material archeological and anthropological evidences tp prove their antiquity.This totally farce effort undertaken by them .It is a fact that sage agastya was sent south ,lord murugan left mount kailas and settled south even if were to believe that south is devoid of a civilization prior to 2500 years leaving aside great floods that swallowed vast lands that is addressed as leumaria today we can say south was having advanced civilization prior to arrival of agastya for he is supposed to have written the first tamil grammar. A grammar work always follws a literary tradition.
7.It is now being proved by linguistic evidence in absence of material evidence in the south (washed away due to floods) that the tamil language is Sumerian and the first tamil sangam might have been held some were in Iraq.
8.It is also getting proved that Rg krit is Tamil and consequently sanskrit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Responses:
From: Ramanan P.G. (@ 61.95.237.222) on: Sat May 22 02:59:45 EDT 2004
Rgkrit is an altered,manipulated and contradictory compilation of dravidian concepts ill-understood by a nomadic race driven by "cow-culture".
Proof of their nomadic existence prior to their contact with harappan culture is known from their "cow-centric" and "fire-centric" (yaham)concepts.Being nomads they disposed off their dead by burning the mortal remains.All civilizations burried their dead,beacause they lived a settled life and pursued agriculture-which is a basic requirement of culture."Culture begins with agriculture".The word POOJA in sanskrit owes its origin to tamil word POOSAI which originally meant offering of flowers.
Interstigly the holy book of Parsees throws more light on aryans than their own rgveda.Read the history of religion published by New century book house to know more about devas and asura concept of aryans-the villan-turned-heros!
From: Ramanan P.G. (@ 61.95.237.222) on: Sat May 22 02:59:50 EDT 2004
Rgkrit is an altered,manipulated and contradictory compilation of dravidian concepts ill-understood by a nomadic race driven by "cow-culture".
Proof of their nomadic existence prior to their contact with harappan culture is known from their "cow-centric" and "fire-centric" (yaham)concepts.Being nomads they disposed off their dead by burning the mortal remains.All civilizations burried their dead,beacause they lived a settled life and pursued agriculture-which is a basic requirement of culture."Culture begins with agriculture".The word POOJA in sanskrit owes its origin to tamil word POOSAI which originally meant offering of flowers.
Interstigly the holy book of Parsees throws more light on aryans than their own rgveda.Read the history of religion published by New century book house to know more about devas and asura concept of aryans-the villan-turned-heros!
From: v (@ 203.94.222.48) on: Sun May 23 00:23:44 EDT 2004
could it poo-choottu than poo-sei which is more lexically strong for tamil.
Thank you.
From: v (@ 203.94.222.48) on: Sun May 23 00:53:06 EDT 2004
The first verse in rgkrit tamil retrieved:
«ì¿¢õ ®§¼ ҧḢ¾õ.
¿¢õretained still in kannada(¿¢ý) «¸õ(¯ûÇõ-internal fire) ®§¼(equivelance)þðÎ(ignite)purohit=À¡÷¸¼õ(vast expanse)
lexically pawrkadam/parkadam/porkadam/porkitham/porhitham/purhitham/purohitam.
|
Responses:
- From: v (@ 203.94.222.48)
on: Sun May 23 01:56:26 EDT 2004
Sanskrit is Tamizh `s Ha-thiruththam.
Thiru+mozhi,Thrimozhi,Thramizh,Thamizh
Etymologically it could be "hathiruth-hathrith-sathrith-sanskrith."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Tolkaappiyar/
Oum Namaha Shivaya.
Agastya Rishi
This group is opened up to discuss the field of Historical Linguistics as a field belonging to Hermeneutic Science which was exemplified by Tolkaappiyar(c. 3OO BC). The postings may be technical and with active participation by all linguists especially the Dravidian and Indian linguists. Opportunity will also be taken to post classical articles and monographs related to these fields and which may later be uploaded in the Tolkaappiyam Campus. Linguists and amateurs interested in being aware of such dicussions are most welcome to join the group.
I remember that i presented a paper on tamil grammar a merry go
round way back in1989 to IITS_Taramani Chennai.
Somehow the article was not published nor any communication received
to that effect.
Unfortunately i did not retain a copy of my research. But the logic
i developed i recollect now which is as follows.:
With 12 vowels and one neuter which is called as "ayutha
ezhuththu"and 18 consonents it is by far the first attempt to
systematise a language into the structured format.
vowels A consonent preceding"
even vowels can precede them.
ya=is formed by=A+i+a
The peculiarity of cha is that at any place other than the first in
a word it lightens to sa and preceding with another half consonent
ich it regains cha status.
Language learners in the formal education pattern are not fed with
good logic resulting in bad pronounciation which we often see.
kha/gha" as "¸·«' and with that eliminate the need for '‹' in the
script?
"¸·«'can be "¸·"and "ig"can be"·ì"."ghan"(musik)can be"¸·¬ý".it
could be "¸·¡ý" .
Like this we transliterate sanskrit text but my idea goes beyond
this.
Since sanskrit is a derived language from tamil i am in the order of
fixing sanskrit to tamil orgin not to attempt adapting tamil to
sanskrit as i told you that sanskri is a derived language.
I had already told you that we have to eliminate intermediate
consonents from sanskrit words and adopt tamil equivalent to prove
that the world is classical tamil or sumerian tamil.There may be
varients in the process of development cycle of sanskrit.
One thing comes to my mind is that rg veda could be a product of 1st
tamil sangam.
tamil and sankrit are now two school of thoughts emerging from their
mother sumerian tamil.While formulation of rg veda there might two
school of thoughts one to restrict phonetics to first order
consonents and second to elongate to intermediary order this also
the reason i believe that we can reduce sanskrit to its orginal
tamil form.
May be we are making some progress here that may lead into
understanding better how from the same basic phonology of Sumerian
the phonology of Sanskrit as different from it developed.
>The need to induce large volume of words into the vocabulary
could have resulted in thinkers of those days to extrapolate (ha)to
form multitude of permutations in the language and form a new
structural varient from sumerian tamil.
sanskrit and c.tamil should then share same roots for their
ancestors are same that is dravidians and not aryans.
Attempt towards this proposition ahs already started and let us hope
in the near future we will be able to substantiate this view.
Hi
I believe you may be right. Once we seriously look at
the role Sanskrit played as a link language in India,
and accept the fact that the Dravidians introduced a
literary tradition in India and Central Asia, then we
can realize the role Dravidian played in providing a
frame for the Sanskrit language.
It is interesting that the Pakistani scholars
appear to accept the Dravidian influence over their
languag, yet the Hindi speakers will not. I wonder
why??? Let us remember that Sanskrit was used to unite
Indian people, later it became the property of the
elites, who made it into a code to unite their class.
C.A. Winters
Since i find C.Tamil and Sanskrit to be two schools emanating
from sumerian Tamil .I tend to apply the logic that Sanskrit
produced the three higher order of consonent at a later stage when
it branched out of C.tamil in order to refine the language structure
with the advancvement of then civilization But both are /should have
been from the same stock of people but with different affiliation of
language development like todays microsoft/sunmicrosystam or
anyother.It is yet probed what were those compulsions that Three
higher orders became imperitive in the development cycle of Tamil.
- From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ 142.76.1.62)
on: Fri Jun 4 11:28:18 EDT 2004
Oum Namaha Shivaya.
Agastya Rishi
Fools whoever use Agatsya RISHi is a 'arivili'! Agathiyar wasn't a RISHI or a KISHI! He was a great Thamizh 'AASAN' PROFESSOR and PHILOSOPHER! DON'T INSULT HIM FOR BEING THAT!
List all pages of this thread