aathi tamil <aathi1956@gmail.com> 1 நவம்பர், 2018 ’அன்று’ பிற்பகல் 4:03
பெறுநர்: aathi tamil <aathi1956@gmail.com>
Do Malayalis know about their Tamil origin?
11 Answers
Ilavaluthy Mahendran (இளவழுதி), History Buff
Updated Aug 12 2017 · Author has 164 answers and 922k answer views
Let me begin my answer by stating that the question details contain a couple of historical inaccuracies. The timing of the question also seemed to have played a role here and what has followed is a barrage of historical inaccuracies, fallacies and fantasies masquerading as answers. Both the sides are at varying degrees of fault here.
As a history buff, my primary intent in answering this question is to “rebunk” some of the things that are claimed to have been “debunked”.
Note: Historians use literary evidence only to validate what other branches of science suggest. They don’t use it as a primary source, so we will do the same.
Historicity of Cheras in Kerala:
Ashoka’s edict - The first historical record of the Cheras comes from Ashoka’s second rock edict in Girnar. This is dated to around 257 BCE. It’s English translation[1] reads like
“Everywhere [2] within Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi's domain, and among the people beyond the borders, the Cholas, the Pandyas, the Satiyaputras, the Keralaputras, as far as Tamraparni and where the Greek king Antiochos rules, and among the kings who are neighbors of Antiochos …”
The original text[2, page 98 in the PDF] in Prakrit reads like this
“Coda Pada Satiyaputo Ketalaputo”
A couple of things are quite clear here:
The edict talks about people not regions.
In the original text, the term “Kera” is not used but “Keta” is. This is in all probabilities a corruption or an adaptation. The scribes who adapted the name modified it to suit their language and culture. Chola became Coda, Pandya became Pada. Similarly Keta is a corrupted/adapted version. [Using an another example, Yeshua in Hebrew was adapted as Iesous in Greek, Iesus in Latin and Jesus in English. It became Yaeshu or Ieshu in Tamil].
Satiyaputo collectively refers to the Velir clan chieftains who ruled the Ay and Adhigaman kingdom.
That covers the entire geography to the south of Mauryan empire.
Other historical records:
Ptolemy refers to these people as Kerabotras/Calobotras[3].
Pliny the elder who is dated to the first century AD writes the following in his book, The Natural history. “At the moment that I am writing these pages, the name of the King of this place is Celebotras." Note that Pliny refers to the king not the place [4].
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, a Greco-Roman map dated to the 2nd/3rd centuries refers to this kingdom as Cerobothra or Keprobothra [5].
“Then come Naura (Kannur) and Tyndis, the first markets of Damiricia or Limyrike, and then Muziris and Nelcynda, which are now of leading importance. Tyndis of the Kingdom of Cerobothra; ..."
— The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, 53-54
As you can, there are many variations of the name even between versions of the same texts. However, one thing becomes clear from these. Modern-day Kerala was being ruled by someone who was known as Chera/Kera/something similar.
Chera coins:
The early Cheras - Three different excavations at Pattanam in Kerala (which is traditionally connected with Muziri) has yielded Chera coins [6]. How do we know they are Chera coins? These coins have bow and arrow inscribed onto one face of the coin and an elephant inscribed on the other. Bow and arrow is the traditional insignia of the Cheras. These are dated to the time of early Cholas, possibly the sangam period.[7][8].
Chera coins dating to the same period has been found in Karur [9]. Amaravathi river banks and Pattanam are two regions that have yielded the maximum number of early Chera coins.
The 2nd or later Cheras - We know that the later Cheras used the epithet Kulasekhara, so why are they considered Cheras? Three reasons
Coins were still being issued with the bow and arrow inscribed on it. We have coins from Kongunad [9] and Venad[10][11] to support this. The Kongunad coins are dated between 10 and 12th century CE. The Venad Chera coins is a huge collection dated between 11th and 16th century CE.
Venad has also yielded coins with the name Chera inscribed on it [12]. Some of these coins are dated to 14th/15th century. And they do turn up in auction frequently these days.
Maintenance of historical records during the medieval Chola period was impeccable and these records refer to these people as Cheras.
Historical context:
Assuming modern-day Kerala did not have a ruler or a king, its quite certain that the Mauryas or the Satavahanas would have annexed it with their kingdom. Mauryas, in particular, were always expanding their territory [13].
It is believed that Cheras might have had two lines of rules - Cheralathan and Irumporai and multiple capitals [14]. This is quite common for that period. The Pandyas always had two kings(one major and other minor) reigning from two different capitals and at times, the same capital. This was done to ensure that line of succession and lineage was never broken. Remember, the dynasties were always at war with each other and possibility of getting killed was higher.
It is also not quite uncommon to appoint local chieftains to govern smaller regions while the king attended to more important matters and for other practical reasons as well. The Pandyas and Cholas did so. It would be unwise to assume that Cheras did not.
Conclusion: From these evidences, it is quite obvious that there was a family, possibly calling itself the Chera dynasty, that was active during and after the Sangam period in modern-day western Tamil Nadu and parts of Kerala. They had trade links with Greeks and Romans. They issued coins with their insignia. The sangam literature validates all this.
The curious case of the coconuts:
In modern times, people have suggested that the etymology of Kerala comes from “Kera” for coconut in Malayalam. By this definition, Kerala means the land of coconuts.
This word “Kera” for coconut comes from the Sanskrit word Narikela. It became Narcole in Bengali, Naliyer in Gujarati and Nalikeram in Malayalam[15]. This was then shortened to Kera. We do not know for certain when this borrowing and the subsequent corruption happened. But use this etymology in the historical records and Ketalaputo becomes sons/descendants of the land of coconut. Now, use the traditional etymology and Ketalaputo becomes sons/descendants of Cheralatha. I will let you figure which one makes more sense in the suggested context.
Note:
Even today, in most parts of Kerala, coconut is referred to as Thenga derived the Tamil root word Thengai.
Observe the proponents of this coconut etymology and figure out where their sympathies lie with respect to hinduism, caste system and sanskrit and you will figure out why this etymology is being proposed.
The language of the Cheras:
Now, that we have established that “certain people” ruled modern-day Kerala during Ashoka’s times, that they used bow and arrow in their coins, they had trade links with Greeks and Romans, we will move onto figure out the language they spoke.
We will begin with the classification of Indian languages. In the late 18th century, when similarities between Sanskrit, Greek and Latin was discovered, linguists suggested a common ancestor. Their initial theory was that all European languages came out of Sanskrit. Linguists worked on the Indo-European classification as well as the vast collection of Sanskrit literature. At that point in time, Sanskrit was considered to be the mother language of all Indian languages as well.
It was during this time Robert Caldwell arrived in South India and began studying Sanskrit and South Indian languages. His comparative linguistic study revealed to him that South Indian languages evolved independently of Sanskrit. He also learned that South Indian languages were indeed related. He published his findings in his book, “A comparative grammar of Dravidian or South Indian languages”.
Proto-Dravidian, Proto-Tamil and Tamil-Brahmi:
It is in this book that the south Indian languages were collectively called Dravidian languages. Robert mentions in the book where he borrowed this term from. It is from a 7th/8th century book titled Tantravarthika [17] written by Kumarila Bhatta, a mimamsa philosopher. The book was written in Sanskrit in defence of mimamsa philosophy. This book uses a phrase “Andhra-Dravida” which Robert Caldwell interpreted as Telugu-Kannada and Tamil-Malayalam respectively. He used the term Dravidian because Sanskrit philologists were loosely using the term to refer to south India and south Indian languages.
So, in essence, a sanskrit book that always considered South Indian languages as lowly languages was used to name the language family. Dravidian is a gross misnomer for a language family name (So is Indo-Aryan).
Look at the following tree classification. Why is Tamil represented in every stage of language evolution? Because an archaic form of Tamil itself was the ancestor language for all south Indian languages and it, unfortunately, was termed Proto-Dravidian[18].
So, the correct language family tree should have the following corrections:
Proto-Dravidian → Proto-Tamil/Archaic Tamil/Sangam Tamil
Proto-Tamil → Proto-modern Tamil
Tamil → Modern-Tamil.
So, how did these languages evolve?
An archaic form of Tamil was spoken in modern day South India.
During the Satavahana rule[19], Vedic religion and Vedic language arrive din South India.
First phase of Sanskritization - Old Telugu and Old Kannada broke-away from archaic Tamil.
Tamil itself evolved to become medieval Tamil.
Kalabhra rule in modern day Tamil Nadu and Kerala came to an end. Vedic religion arrived. Bhakthi movement began.
Second phase of Sanskritization - Malayalam and Manipravalam broke away from medieval Tamil. Tamil itself tooka back seat.
Efforts were made to promote Tamil. Manipravalam slowly waned off. Modern-Tamil evolved.
So, we can conclude safely that while Archaic Tamil and medieval Tamil are ancestors to Malayalam, modern-Tamil itself might be a sister language. Also, modern-Tamil and to some extent medieval Tamil are younger than Old Telugu and Old Kannada. Old Telugu and old Kannada are contemporaries. However, Archaic Tamil is the ancestor language for all these old and modern languages[20].
This is what the written evidences suggest as well. The oldest Tamil inscription is dated to 490 BCE[21]. The ancestor of Kannada and Telugu scripting system is dated to 3rd/2nd century BCE[22]. The earliest Kannada and Telugu inscriptions are dated to 5th and 6th century AD[23]. And the earliest Malayalam inscriptions come in the early 9th century[24].
Note: Sankara Narayanan was kind enough to point that the terms old-Tamil, medieval Tamil and modern Tamil might imply a meaning that these three cannot be mutual understood or significantly different. That is not the intent of using these terms here. They mean slight changes to the language. All three of these are mutually intelligible. I have shown that here.
Oh, and there is the Tamil-Brahmi myth and Tamil-Brahmi misnomer, isn’t it ? Tamil-Brahmi is named so because
It is used to write Tamil.
All inscriptions are found within ancient Tamil country.
The Brahmi script found is Andhra Pradesh is known as Bhattiprolu[22], not Tamil-Brahmi. It is considered one of the ancestor scripting system for Telugu. These are in fact the correct names, not Dravidian. The term Dravidian was used to refer to a geography different from ancient Tamil country in Mahabharatha [25]. In medieval times, the term referred to the five families of South Indian Brahmins [26]. Tamil-Brahmi is most definitely not a myth or a misnomer.
So, what languages did Cheras speak? The early Cheras would have spoken an archaic dialect of Tamil. It is traditionally known as Malainattu Tamil. Look at the division of Chera country and their names - Kuttanadu, Kudanaadu, Wayanaadu, Kongunaadu, etc. All of them can be traced to Tamil. The later Cheras spoke most probably Old Malayalam. And this is in fact what Kerala’s official stand is [27].
Historicity of sangam period:
Finally, I also see claims for fictional sangam literature/period. So a clarification on that. Sangam period itself is not fiction. It is traditionally dated between 300 BCE and 300 AD based on the first mention of Tamil kings in Ashoka’s edicts and the Kalabhra interregnum. However, I do not deny that sangam works might itself might contain some fictional work. However, they are not fantasy, they are historical fictions. In simple terms, they are not Harry potter, but are similar to Ponniyin Selvan. They can be used to infer the socio-cultural practices, religion, economic conditions, evolution of languages, etc. of the time period.
Sangam literature works are placed in this period because they do not falls under the Bhakthi movement literature. Their language is more archaic, the social conditions they describe are from an earlier period.
Dating texts are difficult not because they don’t portray history, but because we only have copies of copies of copies and not the original text. Scribes copying the texts made their own additions. They also corrected language in texts to suit the spoken language of that period.
Conclusion:
Modern day Kerala was ruled by a dynasty before the arrival of Vedic religion. We can call them whatever we want to. However, they spoke Archaic Tamil, not modern Tamil. Any comparisons made between modern languages to identify the root are most certainly futile.
References:
His Edicts and His Times
http://asi.nic.in/asi_books/5282...
Chera dynasty - Wikipedia
Muziris - Wikipedia
Pattanam - Wikipedia
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea - Wikipedia
Pattanam and the excavations| Historic sites at Muziris Heritage Area, Ernakulam
The Hindu : Kerala
AmaDio Coin Catalog
CHERA KINGS FROM 430 BC TO 2011
TRAVANCORE COINS AND ORNAMENTS
http://thehobbyofkings.blogspot....
Conquests of the Mauryan Empire, c.324-261 BC
Kingdoms of South Asia
Coconut meaning and translation in Malayalam, Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Hindi, Bengali, Gujarati, Marati, Oriya and Punjabi
Robert Caldwell - Wikipedia
https://archive.org/details/Tant...
What are the evidences to ascertain that a language termed 'Proto-Dravidian' existed?
Satavahana dynasty - Wikipedia
Peratchi Selvi's answer to Is Tamil older than Telugu?
Porunthal excavations prove existence of Indian scripts in 5th century BC: expert
Bhattiprolu alphabet - Wikipedia
List of languages by first written accounts - Wikipedia
Bhuvanesh Nair's answer to Why do Keralites think that Malayalam came from Sanskrit but not from Tamil even though it is very obvious?
Category:Kingdoms in the Mahabharata - Wikipedia
Pancha-Dravida - Wikipedia
https://kerala.gov.in/early-history
11.9k Views · View 166 Upvoters · View Sharers
Promoted by Mailchimp
Keep your business growing.We make it easy to find your people with social ads, postcards, landing pages, and more.
learn more at mailchimp.com
Related QuestionsMore Answers Below
Are Tamils and Malayalis close in habits and achievements?
Do Tamils have a certain liking towards Malayali's, If yes Why is it so?
Who can understand language of Sangam Literature better, Tamils or Malayalies?
What do Malayalis think about Tamil people?
Are there differences between Tamilians and Malayalis?Ask New Question
Anuraj Ennai
Updated Feb 14 2016 · Author has 84 answers and 265.9k answer views
Originally Answered: Do Malayalis know about their Tamil origin?
First let me debunk some of the utter falsities promulgated by anonymous people here
1. No - Malayalam was not called Kodumtamil till 19th century. I am yet to see that usage any where in ancient Malayalam works. Please see Malayalam preface of Hortus Malabaricus, the first printed work in Malayalam (1678) here - Hortus Malabaricus : Hendrik van Rheede : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive - It is clearly written 'Malayam Bhasha' (മലെയാം പാഴ)
Also Kunjan Nambiar writes (around 1750):
ഭടജനങ്ങടെ നടുവിലുള്ളൊരു പടയണിക്കിഹ ചേരുവാൻ വടിവിയന്നൊരു ചാരുകേരള ഭാഷതന്നെ ചിതം വരൂ
So here the usage is 'Kerala Bhasha'
Usage of Keralam, Malayalam and Malabar are much older. Ashoka's edicts calls the natives 'Kerala Putras'. Pliny called them 'Kerobatros'. Both refer to Kerala directly. Ibn Battuta calls the place Malabar.
Lilathilakam (13th century) talks about Bhasha and Sanskrit grammar - 'Bhasha' is a very common usage to denote Malayalam in middle literature and has been in vogue till recently.
2. No - ezhuthachhan is not the first one who wrote in chaste modern Malayalam by a long shot - That distinction should go to Cherussery - at least 100 years senior to Ezhuthachan.
ഇന്ദിരാതന്നുടെ പുഞ്ചിരിയായൊരു
ചന്ദ്രികാ മെയ്യിൽ പരക്കയാലെ
പാലാഴിവെള്ളത്തിൽ മുങ്ങിനിന്നീടുന്ന
നീലാഭമായൊരു ശൈലംപോലെ
മേവിനിന്നീടുന്ന ദൈവതംതന്നെ, ഞാൻ
കൈവണങ്ങീടുന്നേൻ കാത്തുകൊൾവാൻ
കീർത്തിയെവാഴ്ത്തുവാനോർത്തുനിന്നീടുമെൻ
ആർത്തിയേ തീർത്തു തുണയ്ക്കേണമേ.
This is as contemporary Malayalam as it can get. And even before this Tholan's attaprakarams and Krama Deepika (10th century around), Bhasha Kautilyam (12th century around), numerous champoos (11-14th century), and numerous astronomical, mathematical and medicinal works were written in middle Malayalam which is quite intelligible to an average modern Malayali. By 14th century, we see literary works coming out from the north to the south of Kerala in high frequency.
Vazhappalli inscription is the first long form inscription discovered in Malayalam (AD 830) .Before that we find occasional epigraphs like the ones in Edakkal caves and elsewhere which can be identified as Malayalam as well. Oldest surviving folk literarature in Malayalam including numerous thottams and hymns associated with Theyyam, Thira, Mudiyettu, Thiyyattu etc. also are not Tamil - though distinctly devoid of Sanskrit influence. So we can safely say that Malayalam was an independent language much before and became a court language well before 10th century.
Very little Tamil inscriptions or literary works have ever been found from Kerala. Majority of discovered works from Kerala are either in Sanskrit or Malayalam.
Also the Chera hypothesis is without much basis in archeology - as we have not found any unassailable evidence of Chera presence in Kerala - and nothing about their usage of Tamil or any other language during the time from within Kerala.
Cheras are known to have ruled from Karur in Tamilnadu and archeological evidence is available for the same. It is likely that Tamils denoted the area west of Cholas as Chera Nadu - but as other writings show (evidenced before) - Kerala has been identified as Kerala from ancient times (at least from 3rd century BC).
The so called 2nd Chera dynasty (7-12th century) is a misnomer propagated by few historians as the dynasty called themselves only 'Kulasekaharas' . Chera epithet is never used in their inscriptions which are mostly in Malayalam again (as in Thrikkakara inscriptions).
It can be argued that Malayalam and Tamil share common language ancestry. But the argument that Malayalis were Tamils or Malayalam is formed out of Tamil do not explain differences in demography, culture and language features. Tamil manipravalam which is a mix of Sanskrit and Tamil still do not become Malayalam. Kerala's castes, customs, cuisine, cultural mores, festivals, rituals, art forms etc. are ancient, unique, non brahmanical and visibly different from those of Tamil Nadu.
5.5k Views · View 83 Upvoters
Promoted by Conduent
What kind of a career makes an impact on the world?Work with Conduent technologies to create impactful innovation.
apply now at jobs.conduent.com
Gouri Shanker, A writer on Dravidian languages and historical linguistics.
Updated Nov 20 2017
This is a century old question, whether the Malayalam language has originated independently or branched out from the middle Tamil. I'll explain the reasons why many reject the notion of Malayalam being a branch of the middle Tamil, and discuss the linguistic and archaeological evidence pointing towards independent origin of Malayalam language.
Pro-Tamil arguments often cite the historical Tamil kings who ruled over Kerala and the existence of Tamil Sangam literature. However, it is erroneous to assume that the rulers and their subjects spoke the same language, or Tamil was the only language in the entire region stretching from the east coast to the west coast.
As Zvelebil (1968) acknowledged, “It is not correct to say that the speech of Kerala was almost identical with the neighbouring Tamil area, during the period of early or middle Tamil” (p. 64).
Next, some argue that the existence of Tamil Sangam literature in Kerala proves everyone must be speaking only Tamil. Not necessarily true, this situation is not different from the British India when many Indians have authored English literature. That Kerala was under colonial rule of Tamil kings is evident from the following;
“From the statement of Pliny, it would appear that the Cheras who were foreigners took possession of the West Coast only recently.” Discover the history of Muziris
If the Tamil speaking Chera rulers were foreigners to Kerala, then who were its original inhabitants? The answer lies in prehistoric settlement pattern in ancient India in the second millennium bce. Apparently, the early Dravidians were small groups of farmers in search of suitable pastures to feed their animals and to grow crops.
Initially, Renfrew and Cavalli-Sforza (1973) suggested that Proto-Dravidian was brought to India by “farmers from the Iranian part of the Fertile Crescent” (pp. 343–357). Next, based on linguistics analysis McAlpin (1981) observed, “The Dravidian languages were brought to India from southwestern Iran” (pp. 1–155).
Renfrew, Cavalli-Sforza and McAlpin aren’t the only ones, similar views are expressed by other scholars. Currently, there is a good amount of accumulated evidence to support the hypothesis about external origins of Dravidians.
A well known Dravidian linguist and the author of a commentary on Malayalam grammar, Andronov (2003) said, “Based on the opinion of archaeologists, the Dravidian settlement of Indian subcontinent and their subsequent migration to South India could have taken place around the 2nd millennia BCE ” (p. 23).
True, Sankalia (1985) and many others have already documented the archaeological evidence of prehistoric settlements on the upper Godavari river (The Jorwe) and along the Andhra-Karnataka border (“The Southern Neolithic Core”).
Gundert (1872), a 19th century scholar and the author Malayalam grammar and dictionary, suggested, “Early Dravidians formed settlements on the west [Malabar, Kerala] coast first, and later came into contact with those in the east [Tamil Nadu] as Aryans did much later”, as mentioned by Caldwell (1875, p.20).
The linguistic states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu are connected through the Palakkad gap in the Western Ghat mountains, even today this gap remains a major artery between the two states. This implies that the earliest Dravidian dialects are spoken in the west [Kerala] before they appeared in the east [Tamil Nadu]. During the prehistoric times, when these two Dravidian groups got isolated from each other, their dialects became distinctive languages namely, Malayalam and Tamil.
“Malayalam separated from the parent language very early and that language is nearly as old as the migration of early Dravidians to the west coast”, said George (1956, p. 100), the well known author of “Ramacharitam and the Study of Early Malayalam”.
Another a literary historian, Parameswaran Nair (1967) agreed, “Malayalam had an existence of its own, independent and different from Tamil since the earliest days in the known history”(p. 7).
The linguistic evidence of west to east migration of the ancient Dravidians has been noted by Prof. Achuthan Govindankutty of Leiden University Centre for Linguistics. He gave a convincing explanation why the parent language of Malayalam could be proto-Tamil-Malayalam rather than the middle or Sangam era Tamil.
“West Coast dialect [Malayalam] had preserved, from the earliest times onwards, features which are not found even in the oldest historical forms of Tamil proper, that is, the East Coast dialect [Tamil]” (Govindankutty, 1972, p. 52).
Prof. Govindankutty then proceeded to demonstrate how the Malayalam language has preserved many of the archaic features of proto-South Dravidian that are lost in Sangam texts. He concluded that, “Proto-Tamil-Malayalam is only correct designation for this prehistoric stage of linguistic development” (Govindankutty, 1972, p. 59).
Govindankutty’s analysis remains unchallenged and valid even after 45 years. It has changed the perceptions about Malayalam language. ‘Proto-Tamil-Dravidian’ node has been introduced into Dravidian language hierarchy, often represented as a tree diagram. It has established the credentials of Malayalam as an independent language whose origins may have predated Tamil. Despite these developments, misconceptions about Malayalam language still persists as explained here.
1)Malayalam is the product of mixing Koduntamil and Sanskrit. This is not true because it is not possible to reconstruct Malayalam language by using a combination of Sangam Tamil and Sanskrit.
2) The earliest inscriptional evidence was from the 8th century CE, so Malayalam is only a recent language. This is another fallacy about languages. The absence of inscriptions doesn’t imply the absence of Malayalam as oral speech.
“It can be safely concluded that Centamil, ‘standard Tamil’, was used as the language of literature during the Sangam period. It can be nevertheless assumed that a form of speech that can be designated as Proto-Malayalam was prevalent in this region” (Shanmugam, 1976, p. 10).
3) Proto-Dravidian is nothing but Tamil. Sorry, this is too big a claim to handle here. However, I would like to respond elsewhere. Meanwhile, those who believe should demonstrate how proto-Dravidian can be reconstructed from Tamil. A simpler task would be to prove Govindankutty is wrong and demonstrating that proto-Tamil-Malayalam is nothing but Centamil.
Conclusion: Malayalam has independent origins from a common ancestor designated as ‘proto-Tamil-Malayalam’ during the prehistoric period. The earlier belief that it evolved from the middle Tamil is based on misconceptions about the evolution of languages.
List of References
Ammerman, A. J., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Renfrew, C. (1973). The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory. A population model for the diffusion of early farming in Europe., 343-357.
Andronov, M. S. (2003). A comparative grammar of the Dravidian languages (Vol. 7). Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, Weisbaden.
Caldwell, R. (1875). A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages. Trübner.
George, K. M. (1956). R'amacar'itam and the Study of Early Malayalam. National Book Stall.
Govindankutty, A. (1972). From proto-Tamil-Malayalam to West Coast dialects. Indo-Iranian Journal, 14(1), 52-60.
Gundert, H. (1872). A Malayalam and English dictionary. Stolz.
McAlpin, D. W. (1981). Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: The evidence and its implications. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 71(3), 1-155.
Parameswaran Nair, P. K. 1967. History of Malayalam Literature (Translated from Malayalam by E.M.J. Veniyoor,) Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi.
Sankalia, H. D. (1985). Studies in Indian archaeology: professor HD Sankalia felicitation volume. Popular Prakashan.
Shanmugam, S. V. (1976). Formation and development of Malayalam. Indian Literature, 19(3), 5-30.
Zvelebil, K. V. (1968). From Proto-South Dravidian to Old Tamil and Malayalam. Hoe.
2.6k Views · View 50 Upvoters
VIJIN(Vishwajith), My mother tongue (എന്റെ ഭാഷ)
Updated Mar 19 2016 · Author has 86 answers and 548.2k answer views
Originally answered to:
Did Malayalam borrow words or vocabulary from Sanskirt or Hindi? Did it borrow the grammar, too?
Malayalam is the Language which is the combination of Sanskrit and Proto-Dravidian. We can't say that it was originated from another Language. Because, Though it is similar to Sanskrit, Tamil and Kannada, it also has lots of dissimilarities with these three languages.
I understand Tamil movies more than 60%. But When I listen to sanskrit chants, I understand it more than 70%. This is only because I am a Malayalam poet(not a famous poet, yeah but I like to write poems). So I learnt different malayalam words as much as possible. I like cherussery's, Ullur's, and kunjiraman nair's poems more than modern literature in Malayalam, and I like to read all types of malayalam literature.
But for a malayali, who hasn't learnt the malayalam in depth can't accept this fact that almost all Tamil words used in malayalam can be replaced by sanskrit words. But all sanskrit words used in malayalam can't be replaced by tamil words( are used in malayalam). This is a fact that all malayalies have to accept. (Mama hridayam Tava charanam). About 70% of malayalam words(spoken+literature, don't confuse with only spoken language) was borrowed from Sanskrit. Still we can't say that malayalam was originated from Sanskrit. Because Malayalam has its own origin.
When it comes to the Grammer, South Indian languages like Tamil, Kannada,Malayalam have similarities (I don't have good knowledge about Telugu. So I didn't mention that Language). But there are differences. For example, There is no gender difference in malayalam verbs. But There gender differences in Tamil as well as Kannada verbs(Tamil: solkiral, solkiran| Kannada: hogiddhane, yogiddhale|Malayalam: Povukayanu, Povukayanu{no difference}).
Some Examples
----------------------------------------
Translation for 'I don't know'
Tamil : Theriyathu
Kannada: Gothilla
Malayalam: Ariyilla.
Note that usege of 'illa'
--------------------------------
Translation of 'won't go'
Tamil: Poga mattein.
Kannada: Hogalla
Malyalam: Pokilla
----------------------------
Traslation of 'didn't understand'
Tamil : Puriyalai
Kannada : Arthagililla
Malayalam : Manasilayilla.
So Isn’t structure of the word grammer?
Common words in all three languages:
Kannu Kaalu, Kai, Kashta/m, Uppu etcs
Common words in Kannada & Tamil (not in Malayalam):
Thappu(Wrong: Thettu), Nambu...(trust: Vishwasikk), Keli kekku(Ask: chodikku..), Alakiren, Ala beda..(Cry: Karayuka), Anna,A(Chettan), Yaaru(Aaru), Kopam(Angry: deshyam) etc.
Common words in Tamil,Malayalam (But Kannada with little modification ):
(Poovu,Poo,Hoovu), (Paal,Paal,Haalu,)(Mazha,Mazhai,Male) etc.
Though there are some common words in Tamil and Malayalam, pronunciation is different
Kaatru(Kaatu), Soodu(Choodu), Ponnu(Pennu), Prashnam(Prachnam) etc..
Malayalam poems(which follow thaalanibandhana{vrittham}) have more similarities with sanskrit. Sandhi, Samasam, Alankaaram(not to that extend), Vritham, kakali, manjari etc,.. are more about Sanskrit.
Kerala boards with Tamilnadu. So the relation with the peoples of that state is getting increased day by day. We watch Tamil movies because such movies(Action oriented and colourful) are not made in Malayalam. So the Tamil language influences is also getting increased in our daily conversation. These also are the reason for more similarities in spoken Malayalam and Tamil. But malayalies don't watch kannada films(less no of malayalies who live in karnataka may watch). And in cities like bangalore, mangalore you can survive without learning kannada. But we will have to learn tamil when we go to tamil nadu. Tamil is used in many malayalam movies. Many people from tamil nadu in film industry speak in tamil during malayalam interviews. There are tamil music included in malayalam shows, tamil judges speak tamil in malayalam reality shows. Even tamils song rounds are included in malayalam reality shows. So malayalies are more attatched to tamil rather than Kannada. It doesn't mean that Malayalam was originated from Tamil(may be both are children of the same mother). But we have to consider the vocabulary too when we analyze a language. If you are excellent at grammar with zero vocabulary makes no sense.
I am not sure but, it is considered that Hindi borrowed most of the vocabulary from Sanskrit. (But Now a days many Urdu words also are used in Hindi.Listen to Modiji's speech. He uses more sanskrit words.) So there are many words which are common in malayalam and Hindi. But malayalam didn't borrow much words( I am not sure about it) from Hindi. But Malayalam has some vocabulary from Arabic, Chinese etc(not a considerable percentage)
Thank you for A2A.
Malayalam is a different language, that was not originated from Tamil. Both were the children of same mother(We assume so because there are similarities. Such similarities can be found in Kannada also. But Malayalam has lots of difference in Scriptures as well in structure).
3.2k Views · View 45 Upvoters
Guha
Answered Feb 26 2016
A Primer of Malayalam Literature (A Primer of Malayalam Literature ) Read page 8, 9 and 10. "The late Chattambi Swami, whose encylopaedic knowledge was the wonder and despair of his contemporaries, held that Sanskrit, is refined Tamil. In Lilatilakam, very old work of Malayalam grammar, it is shown that Manipravalam is a combination of Malayalam and Sankskrit. The work then says that Tamil there means Malayalam. Tamil was the generic term for all dravida lanaguages in those times."
"The late A.R. Rajaraja Varma, the author of Kerala-Paniniyam, says in that classical work that the literary Tamil was called Chentamil, while spoken Tamil was called KodumTamil. There were different varieites, one of which KarinTamil, grew to become Malayalam."
I understand everyone likes their mother tongue. But we should not loose history.
Ilango Adigal, who wrote Silapathikaram was from Kochi. It was first read at Kodungallur Bhagavathy Temple.
1.9k Views · View 26 Upvoters
Jacob Jose, studied at The Lawrence School Lovedale
Answered Nov 24 2015 · Author has 95 answers and 170.6k answer views
Though Anuraj Ennai's answer for this question pretty much sums up everything, i'd like to add some more to it:
Malayalam language and culture has a distinct origin with little to do with Tamil, proven by the tribal languages of Kerala and the earliest written records being different from the language of Tamil Nadu. In the later centuries (i.e., after the 9nth century AD), heavy influx of Nampoothiris (and possibly Nairs) from Tulunad in the Northern half of Kerala resulted in the entry of several sanskrit vocabulary and grammar into the Malayalam language. However, Travancore (the southern half of Kerala) had the least influence from the Tulu derived cultures due to its geographic location. Also, the Travancore region (which consisted of Kingdoms such as Thiruvathamcode, Thekkumkoor, Vadakkumcoor, Pandalam, Poonjar etc) have historically experienced migration from Tamil Nadu, especially of groups such as the Vellala Pillais, Chetties and Thulukkar Muslims (Tamil muslims). Note that the popular surname found exclusively among the Travancore Nairs - Pillai - is of Tamil Origin. Also, some of the Kingdoms of southern Kerala such as Poonjar and Pandalam were established by a group of run away princes from the Tamil Pandyan royal family of Madurai.
Thus it could be said that, while Kerala in general shares little in common with Tamil Nadu, the Travancore region has quite strong links with the Tamil language and culture.
2k Views · View 8 Upvoters
Eric Kirubasuthan, தமிழ்த்துறையில் உழல்வன் யான்.
Answered Apr 3, 2015 · Author has 249 answers and 393.2k answer views
I will get down to writing a full answer at some point in the summer in response to Anuraj Ennai. But in the meanwhile, please consult:
Elements of South-Indian Palaeography, from the Fourth to ... - Page 25
A handbook of Kerala - Volume 1 - Page 109
Some Early Dynasties of South India - Page 12
Just one point, Asoka mentioned in his borders the lands held by the Cola, Pandya, Satyaputras and Keralaputras: it cannot be disproved that these correspond to the Chola, the Pandya, the Cheraman and the Athiyaman
dynasties.
Any Tamil/Malayalam speaker ought to see the connection between "mAn" ('mOn', makan) and "putra."
But like I said, I'll get back in a couple of months.
2.4k Views · View 12 Upvoters
Sai Nath, Structural Engineer
Answered Mar 26, 2018
Every humans are African origin and migrated to other places. So are you a proud African or a proud tamilian?
Tamil language was originated just 2000 to 3000 yrs ago. And humans started communication through verbal languages from 60,000 BC itself . So it's very clear that the so called 'Tamil Nadu' had used a completely different language for long 57,000 years before the origin of Tamil. Do you ever care about that?
When something evolves it is completely change to a new thing or new things. Humans are not evolved from monkies, they both are just evolved from a common ancestors which is not existing today. Like Malayalam is not originated from Tamil if so Tamil would have been dead. Admit the fact that they just evolved from a completely different language which is not existing today.
We Malayalies are very proud about our beautiful language even more than Tamiliana do. But we don't try to show-off it and also we tries to learn new languages also. So please don't ask such fooling questions again.
351 Views · View 6 Upvoters
John Moshi
Answered May 31, 2018
There is an element of chauvinism common Malyalees to resist the inconvenient fact that the source language of Malayalam is Tamil. However,it has been proved by Malayalee linguists conclusively that Malayalam is indeed a derivative of Tamil.
மலையாளி சான்று கல்வெட்டு மண்மீட்பு சேரர் அசோகர் நாணயம் அகழ்வாராய்ச்சி
கருத்துகள் இல்லை:
கருத்துரையிடுக