In this thread, I will discuss new word forming suffixes in Telugu. I will compare with examples from English, which is rich in the fluid use of suffixes, making it an effective language for science and technology. I hope similar fluidity and ease will come in Indian languages.
I am writing this thread in English so as to inform speakers of other Indian languages as well. Please think of corresponding suffixes in your languages and comment below. This exercise will help us learn how to improve technically rich expression of concepts in Indian languages.
This thread is not about etymological roots, or full scale word derivation for complex scientific concepts. It is about suffixes that change the part of speech, a much simpler concept that all speakers should know. In fact, this facility with suffixes is very natural in English.
Essentially, there are 3 parts of speech, which we often want to transform from to another when discussing technical concepts: nouns (నామవాచకాలు), verbs (క్రియాపదాలు) and adjectives (విశేషణాలు). So there are 3*3=9 types of transformations (N->N, N->V, N->A,...) for such suffixes.
So I will go through these 9 groups of suffixes, one by one. This will not be exhaustive, but hopefully, will give you a flavor of what is possible in English. I believe an equivalent expressiveness can be developed in all Indian languages. But currently, it is not there.
Here is a nice reference which lists the various suffixes in English. It is not exhaustive. But it is a good starting point to roll the discussion. The website also groups the suffixes into those which create nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs. englishstudyonline.org/suffix/
Let's start with noun suffixes.
1.1) Noun -> Noun transformations:
Examples for this include
-ist (person who practices an art or sport) cartoonist, cyclist ..
-hood (being in the state of something) motherhood, victimhood ..
-ery (a trade or grouping) machinery, armory ..
I will try to translate them to Telugu. Some words are in spoken usage, but often, they're not. But with a good suggestion, they should be *intelligible*. This is our goal.
There will not be a one-to-one mapping with suffixes in English and Telugu (o any language). They arise from historical usage, how the words are borrowed etc. But it will still be helpful to study them in this grouping, to see which suffixes can be easily applied in new contexts.
-hood (a role): త్వం
motherhood మాతృత్వం victimhood బలిభావనత్వం
These are often Sanskrit suffixes borrowed into Telugu, but not always trivially.
English fluidly creates new words with such suffixes, and we don't find it too odd. People understand them. For example, I create
-programmerhood: విధికారత్వం, ప్రోగ్రామరత్వం
-ondophonist: తరంగనాదకుడు
Some suffixes will be comprehensible in new contexts.
-ery (business or trade): -అంగము, -దళము, -శాల -కొట్టము
In my system of classification, there are just 9 groups of suffixes. But this is not an easy task to discuss them all in one go. My brain also needs some breaks. 😀So I will keep coming back to this thread, and hopefully finish this off in a week or so.
The energy in any language is present in its verbs (called Ākhyāta आख्यात in Sanskrit). It is through verbs that meaning is "made known" to us. So the words generated from verbal roots (Dhātus) are the most extensive in any language.
Sanskrit is extraordinarily powerful in this.
In Telugu, sadly, these verbal roots are not adequately explored for dēśya words. For example, there are many common verbs: వచ్చు come, పోవు go, ఇచ్చు give, తెచ్చు bring, పంపు send, పెట్టు put, కట్టు build and so on.
These verbs are typically not used in creating new words.
I was once very concerned by this non-usage of dēśya verbal forms in Telugu. I wrote a set of 4 blogs trying to literally translate a few commonly used Latin roots into Telugu, using only dēśya verbs. In principle, these verbs can generate a huge cache of scientific terminology.
I will briefly link them here, for people who want to see these forms.
When discussing verbal nouns, I will try to include both the tatsama/tadbhava (Sanskrit derived) verbs as well as the dēśya verbs.
Although currently the dēśya verbs are rather unexplored, my experience was that, these words can also be made comprehensible and rather powerful.
By the way, English doesn't use its native verbal roots (put, go, bring etc.) in creating scientific terminology, but mostly uses Greek and Latin. But German does this very effectively. German has a more elegant grammar, which makes it possible to extend verbs and verbal phrases.
English may not have sophistication with verbal roots, but it does have a very effective engine for transforming the verbs (once given) into nouns and vice-versa. This is what makes it a great language for science.
So this facility must be developed for all Indian languages.
Let’s start with the verbal nouns that describe the entire action or process.
Or with a gerund form:
-ing: singing, landing, walking
In Telugu, the gerund form is made by adding -ట -డము -ट -डमु. These forms are dry common, but not suitable for word compounding.
e.g. singing పాడుట/పాడడము walking నడుచుట/నడవడము landing స్థానీకరించుట/స్థానీకరించడము
In Hindi, such forms are made with the -ना suffix गाना, चलना.
Verbal nouns meaning “action” can also be made in Telugu with the -డు डु suffix for dēśya words, or -న, -ణ -न, -ण suffix for tatsama words. This method is not widely used, especially the dēśya form.
e.g. Revision తిరిగిచూడుడు పునర్వీక్షణ पुनर्वीक्षण Division పంచుడు విభజన विभजन
Elimination తొలగించుడు/తొలగింపుడు బహిష్కరణ बहिष्करण Contemplation కూడి సమాలోచింపుడు समालोचना ధ్యానము ध्यान Entertainment ఆహ్లాదించుడు ఆహ్లాదన आह्लादन వినోదము विनोद Abandonment వదిలివేయుడు/వదిలివేత పరిత్యాగము परित्याग Retirement విరమణ विरमण Passage గడుచుడు గడుపు గమనము गमन
In the above examples, I gave the literal translation in the beginning, which is also comprehensible in Telugu but rarely used in such forms. The alternatives in the end are more and more Rūdha रूढ़, which are in usage. We can see the Sanskrit forms are the most in usage.
The verbal noun forms can also be used instead of the Gerund form. The Sanskrit suffix -न -ण is often softened as -नमु-णमु in Telugu.
Sanskrit has very precise forms for such words. For Telugu dēśya verbs, suitable noun forms are made with -త -त (like in Sanskrit), or often with -పు -पु or -క -क.
Another widely used verb suffix in English is “-er” to refer to the actor of an action. In Telugu, equivalent words can be very easily created using -కుడు -గాడు -కరి suffixes which are derived from the Sanskrit -कः.
Sanskrit words can also be used directly, just adding the -డు or -రి suffix, replacing the Visarga. The derivation in Sanskrit can follow in many ways from the Dhātu (verbal root).
- teacher ఉపాధ్యాయుడు उपाध्यायुडु villager గ్రామీణుడు ग्रामीणुडु jeweller స్వర్ణకారుడు स्वर्णकारुडु
The nouns made from dēśya verbs can also be easily extended to the actor form, through the addition of -అరి -కాడు or -రాలు suffixes. But this cannot be done with the gerund form -ట -డం.
We can see how easily the suffixes are given in English, even for new words. The same ease must be given for these simple Telugu words.
The word generating capacity in Sanskrit is many folds higher than in English. Essentially, Sanskrit gives the ability to coin words not only for the doer of an action (ప్రథమ విభక్తి, प्रथमविभक्ति) but also for all the 7 cases (విభక్తి). What more, we can create compound words.
These compound words in Sanskrit are created through the Tatpurusha Samāsa. All these Samāsa can be used as they are in Telugu (Siddham). They can also be made partially or fully with dēśya words, using the appropriate Sandhi.
Due to the extraordinary power of Sanskrit, as a general rule, the derived word in Sanskrit should often be shorter than in English and also able to compactly combine many constituent words. If it is not, it means the suggested word is bad, it must be improved.
The 2nd case noun form (ద్వితీయవిభక్తి द्वितीयविभक्ति) is sometimes created in English using the -ee suffix. Examples:
payee, attendee. Uncommon words can also be jokingly created: kickee, punchee (which are understood).
They can be translated easily with -ఇత -इत suffix. (+డు).
Now we come to the third group.
1.3) Adjective -> Noun transformations.
Examples in English include:
-ness (quality of a condition) happiness etc
-ity (state of a condition) probability etc
-ty (condition) honesty, certainty etc
-th (state or quality) warmth, birth etc
These noun forms describing the quality or state of a condition are typically coined by the Sanskrit suffixes -త్వ -త -त्व -त which is softened in Telugu as -త్వము त्वमु.
Words like -శీల शील -యోగ్య योग्य -పూర్ణ पूर्ण -ఆత్మక आत्मक can be used extensively in word compounding.
In fact, the palette of suffixes available in English for creating adjectival nouns (or adjectives themselves) is much smaller than in Sanskrit. So we can create many subtle shades of meaning through multiple alternative words in Sanskrit, and thus in Telugu.
There are also certain suffixes available for dēśya words in Telugu for adjectival nouns. The suffix -తనము तनमु or -దనము दनमु is typically used. Rarely, -మి मि or -త त are also used.
The next group of suffixes are
2.1) Noun -> Verb transformations:
Examples in English include suffixes like
-ify, fy: solidify, liquify, classify
ize: digitize, colonize, characterize, colorize, optimize
(none): station, finger
They can be translated with suffixes -ఇంచు -కరించు
Such compact verb forms improve the speed of expression.
The cunning way of reusing verbs as nouns (and vice-versa) is a great strength in English. It looks like grammatical frailty or imprecision, but it makes the expression more compact and fluid. I see this when comparing English with German (grammatically, a more elegant language).
But German is able to create verb forms or even phrases (aufrechterhalten: maintain-in-working-condition) into single words. In Indian languages, this capacity is being unnecessarily muted, splitting verbs with do-something (करना, చేయి). It is not good for technical expression.
Now, we get to the next group
2.2) Verb -> Verb transformations:
These suffixes in English are tense related transformations (-ed, -ing, -s) which we can ignore.
Indian languages have better verb compounding, and better verb suffixes:
make-do-an-action, do-for-oneself etc.
Sanskrit grammar has extraordinary power of verb transformations. Very long and complex sequence of actions and their constraints can be crammed into a single word. They can be phenomenally compact. I will just skip this part here. No alternative to proper learning of grammar.
The next group of suffixes is more interesting.
2.3) Adjective -> Verb transformations
Examples for such suffixes are:
-ate, -fy, -ize(to make a state/condition) captivate, decorate, animate, stabilize, equalize
-en (to become a state/condition) awaken, broaden, flatten
Generally, the same suffixes as previously -కరించు -ఇంచు would work for these transformations. But sometimes, alternative Sanskrit derivations can be more compact and precise. This is especially true if the English word is borrowed from Latin/Greek.
In Telugu, the suffix -పరుచు can also be used to mean “bring into some state/condition”.
The -less can be translated with -హీన हीन or with the negative prefix -అ अ ని नि
Worthless మూల్యహీన मूल्यहीन restless అశాంత अशांत
-ish, -ical, -ous, -ive (quality or nature) can be translated through -ఇక इक or with -ఆత్మక आत्मक -శీల शील etc. But they should preferably be combined into a compound word with the noun. Sanskrit and Telugu are good with word compounding (Samāsa సమాసము समास), more so than German.
If people are really lazy and don’t want to learn anything but only one Samāsa, I recommend the Avyayī Bhāva Samāsa అవ్యయీభావసమాసం अव्ययीभावसमास. It will already cure them from thinking in English and bluntly translating word per word.
The last group seems to be not popular in English.
3.3) Adjective -> Adjective transformations
In Indian languages, adjectives and nouns are treated very similarly, they both take the same Vibhakti. So whatever we discussed in group 1 is generally also applicable to group 3.
The morphology for adverbs or other parts of speech is not that complex. Like word morphology due to tense, Vibhakti etc, these are very widely known.
But the above expressions will help achieving an equivalence to various English suffixes for technical language. (End of thread)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, the state must be cut into manageable chunks. Each administrative division (or “state”) should be a city and its surrounding countryside. We can do with 100-150 such “states” in India. Then make long-term institutions in each state that protect local culture and identity.
One simple way to do that is to assign a royal family as the nominal custodian of each state. When we want to maintain republican spirit, replace this with a similar long term office. Then make bureaucrats answerable to local concerns, in some type of direct democracy.
This means the bureaucrats can be fired (not “transferred”). Their salaries are paid entirely from the local regional economy, and they gain bonuses based on how well that economy is going. Each “state” will then employ exactly the right number of administrative staff it needs.
I highly recommend this discussion by @suryakane and @ruchirsharma_1 on the @bharatvaarta podcast. The topic up front is the regime change in Bangladesh, but ultimately the discussion was about the structural weaknesses of India.
The most serious problem facing India is that it has no utility for any of the greater superpowers, as @suryakane put it, and would serve these powers better when broken up into 5 or 6 manageable states. As @ruchirsharma_1 mentioned, the parallels with Yugoslavia are very strong.
@suryakane @ruchirsharma_1 I’m not sure India can increase its level of utility to USA/China in any manner. India is far too big and potentially far too dangerous for any such utility to override other concerns. So Balkanization of India will remain the most desired objective for the greater superpowers.
Some thoughts on India’s Independence Day in this thread. Please feel free to comment. 😀
1) India’s territorial integrity is very hard to defend in its current borders. The partition of India denied us our natural borders and shot up the costs of our defense multiple folds.
2) The connections of Indian civilization to the Persian civilization on the west and to the extra-Gangetic Indic civilizations on the east (what we call “South East Asia” now) are cut off. This is a major loss of our self image. These must be rebuilt via land and sea routes.
3) Indian languages are in serious decay. Each language should identify a few cities where it should be prominently present in the economic and cultural spheres. Treating this as a local problem might give a better focus than just as a global policy problem.
You might be unaware, but Bangladesh had a law explicitly preventing Bangladeshi Hindus from seeking Indian residency or citizenship. In fact, they would be branded as enemies of the state and their property in Bangladesh seized if they did that.
If India is giving citizenship to a large proportion of Bangladeshi citizens, it also has the right to lay claim on land and property which is rightfully theirs. This would be a destruction of the state of Bangladesh as it stands. Both Indira and Mujib ur Rehman were aware of it.
In 1971, it was in India's interests to promote Bangladesh as an independent state. All the decisions of Indira Gandhi (including the withdrawal of Indian troops after the war for Bangladeshi independence) can be justified on this basis.
Interesting formulation here: “built a nation from scratch”. So the “nation” didn’t exist before. Please note, the historian didn’t say “state”, he said “nation”.
This is the kind of historians we have for Indians as a nation.
This is quite ridiculous for any nation, but particularly so for Indians - who are easily the most ancient nation attested, not only from native texts but also from other civilizations. Every external visitor to India - Greek, Chinese, Arab - saw Indians as a nation.
In fact, even Nehru stated many times and very clearly that Indians were an ancient nation. That is the whole point of his “India wakes up to freedom” speech on the eve of independence.
A hilarious article that whines about colonialism and western gaze, but fails to list one single scientific discovery made under the Mughal or Turkic rule!
The largest economic surplus in the world of that period failed to produce even one single unique scientific discovery!