think twice before you say something idiotic
[tscii]
Quote:
The Ja and Sha etc we use in Tamil were letters invented or formed for the Tamil language by ourselves. Sanskrit is not the only language with such letters. The Tamils had trade and other relationship with many other countries in the past, notably Arabs, Romans etc. These letters are not a gift from Sanskrit. .
No connection to my quotation.
Quote:
They are made by making slight changes in our own letters: e.g. the Tamil "i" is changed slightly to make the Tamil "ja". The Tamil "ha" is made by combining Tamil "u" and "Ra". Only stupids who had not studied the Tamil letters closely will say that they were borrowed from scriptless Sans
See who teaches me tamil :lol: . It is better for people to keep their very little knowledge amongst themselves. By the way, `ha` is not made by the combination of u and ra, moreover it is not ra, it sounds tra when spoken correctly( as in maTTRum or munneTTRa).
Quote:
They are not forged from Devanaagari, which at any rate was also made in Jaffna, by the "thiivu naagar"s. Idiots should keep out of academic and linguistic discussion.
Yes, very true, Idiots should not try their hands at linguistics.
dEvanAgari means `of dEvanagar` that is, any guesses?
place in history which was for some instance in Indian history, its capital and for gods sake no more jokes owing its origins to jaffna :lol:
Quote:
Sanskrit itself had used Aramaic script first and learnt of the letters from Aramaic. Those with some brains for history will know this kayu!!
Armaic and Samskrith, good try, but very bad `match-the-following`.
Quote:
Dravidian languages are branches of the fake and invented language Sanskrit?, stateless and never in home speech? Only first class prize idiots will say so!! You are completely devoid of any knowledge of linguistics. bodoh!
You are trying to get away by using emoticons?
No no no. I never said that, so, who becomes the idiot? :lol:
You`ve mistaken me. They are not mere branches but derivatives of Samskrith. Had I been devoid of linguistic knowledge, then you and I would have become a great pair.
Quote:
Afghanistan is featured well in the history of India from ancient times. One historian wrote that Indra, the general of the Aryans had his force in one of the mountains there. Another said that the Vedas were composed there as well. Afghan Aryans were the purer Aryans according to some.
Using of names of Gods as general of aryans is an offence and it is against many people`s emotions.
Quote:
Another version is that the Vedas were composed in Punjab and recomposed in the Gangetic area.after there was a split between the Aryan groups.
vEdAs are compositions of Gods and not creations of humans like you and I.
Quote:
Vetham is a Tamil word. Upanishad is also a Tamil word – that is these words were from Tamil roots.
vEda is not any dravidian word, it is derived from the root `vid`, meaning `knowledge` in Samskrith .And `upaniSad` is also a Samskrith word meaning ,taught in a sitting posture
Tamil connection with ancient tongues
Amazing similarity in words have been found with Tamil and the Australian aboriginal languages. These relate to animals and parts of the body.
As philologist PavaaNar said, these relationships of other languages may be traced back to many thousands of years. There has been no recent contact between the Tamils and the others such as the Australian aborigines. Hence the remoteness of the linguistic connections.
Sanskrit relationship with Tamil was most recent in the scheme of things and came mainly through religion. Sanskrit-claimed terms such as vEtham and upnishad can be better interpreted through Tamil as we have already done sometime back.
Some Sanskrit etymological explanations are laughable for example Upanishad is said to mean receiving instruction in the sitting position!! Then does veda mean receiving it in the standing position? Hence the Sans pundits' explanation does not click. Veda came from Tamil vEithal (composing or hiding as FSG explained; upnishad from uvaneyavu which means sub-text).
The studies vis-a-vis the aboriginal languages are not due for publication as yet. This pleasure of publishing them should be left to the researchers who are toiling over them and therefore reserved.
