Is tamil derived from Sanskrit

[A P MASILAMANI]

//Thiru Paramanathan and he said we have invent these words so they come in use//

Thiru Nedunchezian avarkale!!

vanakkam.
I agree with thiru Paramanathan.

[A P MASILAMANI]

//Is silai//

The root of this word is chil meaning small. When people first made statues, they were smaller than life size and it was gradually that they made bigger ones. That is why the root word is chil, meaning small.

siRpam also means something small. chil+pu+am.= something small. Later there were larger ones.

People have forgotten the root word and its meaning. The result in such event is that the words become independent of root-meaning. According to Western etymologists, that is good for the growth of the language. So, according to this concept, (example) poyilai is better than pukai ilai. When you say pukai ilai, the term shows its internal split clearly and makes one think of smoke on one hand and leaf on the other and causes a hindrance in the mind. The mind may have to travel through smoke, leaf and then tobacco. So the commoner does not want such hindrance. He just wants to refer to one item with one word very quickly. So he says piyilai instead of pukai ilai. The words corrupt and inseparably amalgamate into one. ¦º¡ü¸û "´Õ¦º¡ýÉ£÷¨Áô Àð¼É. Those objecting should read western philologists first for a grasp of basic principles. But Tamil teachers and professors would stand in the way and say that poyilai is wrong. In language development, there is no rights and wrongs. Language is for communication, fast and unhindered communication. If more people keep on saying poyilai (assume so for argument), the pukaiyilai camp loses. Democracy is at work in language development. I am not saying this. Swedish and English philologists say so!

We must travel back in time to the stone age when people had few good equipment for their stone work. We must ask ourselves, what would have been the position then? Did they start making the greatest statue first and "progress" to smaller ones? or the other way round?

Not everything that stands is statue; not everthing that is small is silai!! If your listener objects, have ready answers.

Everything is contained in the language. So the study of language would involve everything.

[A P MASILAMANI]

contd

So, if someone says that when he looks at the word silai, the concept of "smallness" is not apparent. I have said some time ago: Tolkappiyar laid down that ¦Á¡Æ¢ ¦À¡Õ𠸡ýõ ŢƢôÀò §¾¡ýÈ¡."

"¦Á¡Æ¢ ¦À¡Õ𠸡ýõ ŢƢôÀò §¾¡ýÈ¡."

¦º¡ü¦À¡Õû ±ýÀÐ ¦Á¡Æ¢¨Â ¬Ã¡ö ¦ºöÀÅÛìÌò ¾¡ý ¦¾Ã¢Ôõ. ±ýÈ¡÷ §¾Å§ÉÂô À¡Å¡½÷. À¢ÈÕìÌò ¦¾Ã¢ÂÅ¢ø¨Ä ±ýÚ ÅÕó¾§Åñ¼¡õ ¾¢Õ ¦¿Îý¦ºÆ¢Âý «Å÷¸§Ç. Á£ñÎõ Á£ñÎõ ¦º¡øÖí¸û.

ºó¾¢ÃÛìÌ ÁÉ¢¾ý ¯ñ¨Á¢ø þýÛõ §À¡¸Å¢ø¨Ä ±ýÚ ´Õ À¡¾¢Ã¢Â¡÷ ¦º¡øĢ즸¡ñÊÕ츢ȡ÷. «¾ü¸¡¸ "¿¡º¡"¨Å ãÊÅ¢¼ÓÊÔÁ¡!? ¿ÁÐ §º¨Å ¦¾¡¼Õõ.

¡õ ¦ÀüÈ þýÀõ ¦ÀÚ¸ þù¨Å¸õ.

[A P MASILAMANI]

//They seem to stand strong on the point that 'foreign' etymologists don't accept it and that we can't seem to convince others that these words like "Vithavai; Viduvai" etc as Thamizh root word.//

Western etymologists may not have known of the word vidu in Tamil and many of them looked at the Skrt dictionary for roots but did not look at other language dictionaries. Did anyone of those etymologists expressly made a statement to say that we have considered the very close-sounding word in Tamil pronounced vidu. Its sound and meaning seem to coincide, But,all the same we reject it!!"

They made their ruling in absolute ignorance of the existence of the Tamil word "vidu" then!!

Here, we can apply the principle in legal philosophy. If a point was never argued before a judge by the advocates and that judge makes a ruling on a certain point of law, the ruling is not binding on the lower courts and the lower courts are free to expound the principles by which they should decide. Reason: the judge made the ruling in oversight. He did not consider or failed to consider or did not have the benefit of the arguments to consider that point on which he made the ruling. Very sound?

So, the western etymologists decided under circumstances in which they did not have the benefit of knowing the existence of vidu.

I have great respect for Prof Max Muller. He took the same route as William Jones and thought that Sanskrit literature was the earliest in point of time in the South Asian subcontinent. They were all pioneers: they did not have the benefit of facts and figures that subsequent linguists would unearth as time went on. They expressed an opinion on Sanskrit without any external evidence. They merely had the Skrt literature in their hands and looking at it, they opined that the lit was the oldest in the world.
They believed that other Indians were not civilised until the Aryans came and tought them everything including their languages!! Why did they believe that? What evidence? Nothing! Their learned opinions only. A number of Skrt words were sounding similar to German, French, Lithuanian etc. That is all they had.

How many stone inscriptions were in Skrt? What was the date of the earliest Skrt stone inscription? So how can Skrt be 5000 years old? Some Prakrit , Tamil and Pali writings predated Skrt. If Skrt was the lingua franca, why wern't the stone inscriptions in Skrt? Why in Prakrit? Why in Pali? You ask them gently but firmly!!

That is the way to take them along the road to thinking.

In the event you manage to corner them, they would say: Neduncheziyan, all world languages borrowed from one another!
Let's leave it.

[A P MASILAMANI]

Thiru Neduncheziyan avarkale!!

Another way of approach is the concept of Suruthi and Smiruthi.

Much of Skrt was being chanted verbally for many decades and a few centuries before they were written down finally in about 400 AD. This stage of the language is known as "Shuruthi" or Suruthi. (from Tamil suraththal > to flow out ).

So the development pattern for Skrt would be:

suruthi (verbal tradition) > Smiruthi (written form).

It was considered unacceptable to reduce them to writing. There is a certain way to chant and writing them down would result in a loss of that "divine" sound. The Bramanas were vehimently objecting!! Many of their verbal literature base (vedas) would be lost and forgotten before they decided to write.

Since it was all verbal, it follows that they did not need any writing system. They later used Aramaic and finally settled on pre-existing Devanagari ( a writing system that some researchers say were developed by Nagathiivu people ). - the naaga worshippers and not the Brahma worshippers, as the etymology would speak for itself. (This is like the Latin maxim res ipsa loquitur in civil law). You ask your lawyer friend about this concept - he will tell you, but I do not know if he will charge you a fee.

But what was the Tamil language development pattern?

speech + writing all the way!! all the way!!. literature! stone inscriptions! other epigraphs! so many found........!

Thiru Neduncheziyan!! the earliest Tamil stone inscription found in Jaffna is I remember dated 300 BCE whereas Skrt lifterature was documented only in 400 ACE (AD) - a gap of 700 years.

Tolkappiyam and Sanga ilakkiyam were not chanted down.......They were written records.

WE HAD WRITTEN RECORDS BEFORE ANY OF THE INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES.......!! I HAVE POINTED OUT MANY CHINESE WORDS SO CLOSE TO OUR TAMIL. THE JAPS have found so many Jap words so close our Tamil words!!

So, ask them: why do you still cling on to the 18 century etymologists and why must you close your eyes to the latest discoveries and researches?

I shall in turn deal with all interesting questions brought up by you.

In the meantime, get a copy of VADAMOZHI VARALAARU by Devaneyap Paavaanar and read it happily.

Do not worry. The more stubborn they are, the more enlightened you become. If no one brought up anything, we too would become rusty....

If nobody contested any case, the field of law would not have developed.......

What is hidden is only hidden to be revealed.

I will come back....

[Nedunchezhiyan]

Thiru A P MASILMANI avargaLae!

nanRi

Yes you are right..we should tell them again and again. However they prefer the name Peruvankiyam instead of Nathasuram and so on. Anyway I printed some pages of your explanation and gave it to Thiru Sivam Paramanathan and he was eager to read them.

Please check your e-mail.

nanRi, paNivu Thiru A P MASILMANI avargaLae!

[A P MASILAMANI]

Thiru Neduncheziyan avarkale!

A Tamil teacher has coined these words:

meter - niittar
ton - sumaiyam
kilogram - pannuuRi.

See whether they sound good whilst I search for words that might have been put out by the TN govt or other lexicographers.

NanRi, paNivaana anbu.

[A P MASILAMANI]

contd..
//they prefer the name Peruvankiyam instead of Nathasuram //

Preference is OK. Between two or more Tamil words of the same meaning, one may prefer one and another may prefer the other word(s).

nanRi paNivaana anbu.

SEASON'S greetings T0 YOU, S.P., brother Geno and all other thamizanbarkaL.

[A P MASILAMANI]

Thiru Neduncheziyan avargale!

A paragraph from "Dravidian as the Source of Indo-European" :

That Sir Jones who knew more than two dozen languages, and was an expert in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Germanic, and Persian, and who was thoroughly convinced that not only Greek and Latin, but Sanskrit had sprung from the same common source, did not consider Dravidian in any aspect of its identity may also be adduced to certain other factors: Neither during his lifetime, nor until scores of years later, many important discoveries or findings which could have directly or indirectly influenced his thinking about the identity of the common source had taken place. The ancient civilizations of the fertile triangle such as the ancient Indian, the Sumerian, and the Egyptian had not come to light. Many ancient scripts had not been discovered or their languages divined. Rev. Robert Caldwell had not published his monumental 'A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages' (1st ed.; 1856; London) even though he had considered only four languages as belonging to the group of south Indian languages which he called Dravidian. In fact, no one had heard the name Dravidian as the designation of the family of Indian languages until Rev. Caldwell, of all the scores of names of ancient Indian tribes listed in ancient Indian texts, selected it and formally introduced to the world. No Dravidian dictionary had been published, and it was not known that the Dravidian language family constitutes at least twenty-seven languages. And most importantly, such significant linguistic phenomena as the Indo-European phonetic correspondences had not been discovered, and the scholars had not recognized or reconstructed the Indo-European roots from which all the hundreds of thousands of Indo-European words have ensued. Compared to the present Age of Information, the 18th century, when a ship took about five months to reach India from England, was like the Dark Age, and Sir Jones was part of this world complete with its own follies.

K. Kumar

It(IE) from ithu(T/Dr)
Here(IE) from i (T/Dr) ; i > hi. hi+ ere (old suffix ) - here.
There: from T/Dr : ithu + a ; a (munnilaich chuttu). itha > there.
T: u = in front. (avan, ivan and uvan). u > English: You, address person in front.

T athu: that(IE). a+ thu = thu + a (IE). (syllables swap). thua> that!!

i + an (T) = ivan; = he.

i > (h)i > he.

chi - Tamil feminine gender suffix. T: chi = IE: shi.

If you get down to read details, too many.

Furthermore Skrt is only 1/3 IE. It is a made-up "language" of later years, mistaken to be of antiquity by Muller and Jones.

What are suffixes now, at a very early stage in T/Dr , they were complete words. It is due to constant usage they shrunk to being suffixes. IE sto;; preserve such words as complete words.

[A P MASILAMANI]

So thiru Neduncheziyan avarkale!!

The old etymologists of Indo -Euro languages knew not about Tamil /Dravidian and they did not even know vidu existed and could be the root of their words in Latin and Greek!!

Whether they are IE etymologists or gods, only considered opinions are valid. Otherwise useless and it is oversight. One who relies on such etymologists is like the blind being led by the blind.

Presently, linguists say that if you can pick out 200 words ( of Tamil from IE), it is good enough to start an investigation. How many did Lahovery pick out in Skrt?

NanRi. Anbu.