Many Southeast Asian scripts are derived from #kadamba-pallava script, the early kannaDa-Telugu script. This South Indian script had international reach
Nagari/ other North Indian scripts clearly did not have the reach or prestige outside India as the kadamba-pallava script
2/6
#Nandinagari was used mainly in karNATaka for #samskRta inscriptions and writing, “in addition” to kannaDa script. Bulk of samskRta manuscripts are in kannaDa script. Same with samskRta inscriptions.
#tigaLAri script has also been used on some inscriptions and manuscripts
3/6
In TN, #grantha script has been used to write bulk of samskRta inscriptions & manuscripts
samskRta works were/ are routinely published in kannaDa, Telugu, tamiZ and Malayalam scripts in south India.
From all this, the argument for pushing #dEvanAgari doesn’t really hold up
4/6
From the perspective of sheer clout, reach & historic prestige, we should be using kannaDa script, the direct descendant of kadamba-pallava script for all Indian languages. kannaDa script can satisfactorily represent pretty much all sounds in Indic languages.
5/6
The short “e” ಎ & “o” ಒ are naturally present in #kannaDa script as also the trilled R ಱ & the three “lakAra”-ಲ, ಳ, ೞ
The writing is unambiguous
Telugu script is a variant of the kannaDa script developmentally and structurally & therefore Telugu people can easily read it.
6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The definition of what is pure/SiShTa differed from language to language. It is fairly black and white for a language that is largely only literary. For a spoken language, it is lot more challenging to define or agree on this- also it changes with time dynamically
Tampering with grammatical structure is a no-no for any language- spoken or written. For instance, you cannot use another language’s vibhakti pratyaya wily-nily. Same with application of grammar rules from another language. That will be “impure” even if done just once.
2/19
One may create a “maNipravALa” or “bhANDIra” style specifically for writing & that may in time be accepted for that purpose, but this will not become accepted in common spoken language. In common speech, it will still be “impure”. Again, this will have its own specific rules
3/19
Here we see the kanyādāna mantra. The words dāsyāmi दास्यामि and pradāsyāmi प्रदास्यामि clearly show that the kanyā (daughter, bride) is given to the groom. Of course the groom “accepts” her, but for him to accept, she first had to be “given”.
Lest we get carried away that the bride is “given away” for free use to the groom, there are conditions/ strings attached! Before taking he promises (thrice) to honour her and not transgress her in dharma, artha and kāma by uttering nāticarāmi
மன்னவன் தொண்டையர் கோன் வணங்கும் நீள் முடி மாலை வயிரமேகன்
தன் வலி தன் புகழ் சூழ்ந்த கச்சி அட்டபுயகரத்து ஆதி தன்னை
கன்னி நன் மா மதிள் மங்கை வேந்தன் காமரு சீர்க் கலிகன்றி குன்றா
இன்னிசையால் சொன்ன செஞ்சொல் மாலை ஏத்த வல்லார்க்கு இடம் வைகுந்தமே
2-8-10 #vairamEga
Ahem! These early references to asafoetida/ ಇಂಗು/ಹಿಂಗು iṅgu/ hiṅgu in kannaDa literature surely don’t matter. They must all be post-Mughal interpolations! But humour me anyway please
And for some comic relief from the permanent jester that is #GoogleTranslate🤪🤭
They are ever so clever- getting straight to the point eg! They sure know what Sringara rasa and ಮೋಹನತರಂಗಿಣಿ mōhanataraṅgiṇi are all about at the end of the day 😂
The fair-complexioned #Siva and the dark #kALi have taken black and white complexion respectively from each other, saying they will not accept any distinction between themselves, but will become one the other; the mother & father that are never two!
Name #Dravidian for lang family was coined by Robert Caldwell who discussed this at length in “A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages”1856
He gives his rationale-justification, also cleverly sowing seeds for today’s “Dravidian movement”
1/15
He sort of acknowledges Francis Whyte Ellis & Stevenson for recognising that today’s “#Dravidian” languages had much common between them, distinct from samskRta.
Ellis noted this in his intro to Alexander D Campbell’ book, “Grammar of the Teloogoo Language” (1816)
2/15
But the idea of putting tamiZ at the centre of this language, giving it a disproportionately large importance wasn’t just Caldwell’s. He mentions the use of “tamulic” and “tamulian” for this family by European writers prior to him.