What's new

Tamilnadu oppose India's Sanskrit week

our national lang and you can accept it as second lang in your state like in many other non hindi speaking states...no one is asking u to get away from ur state lang...u ppl not just discourage but spread hatred abt Hindi Lang....u must understand, hindi is spoken and understood by most Indians...Tamil is understood only by TN and God...so who need to adopt to change? If u cant , why do u learn and encourage English na? so , u r jealous of Hindi lang and its ur EGO which is not promoting Hindi in TN! true?

Nobody is banned here from learning Hindi, if they want to learn, they can. Still schools are there, if student wants to learn Hindi, they can. No importance is given by the govt here, for both English & Hindi. Can you tell me one policy by which the state govt is promoting English?? Its the students who are interested in English and learning. And where you got that, Hindi is the national language of India??
 
Last edited:
@ Indic

Relations between Tamil and Sanskrit
by Prof. George Hart (Univ of California, Berkeley, USA) p

Actually, Sanskrit has many Dravidian syntactic features as well as loan words from Dravidian. A few of these are very old -- even as old as the Rig Veda.
Clearly, Sanskrit came to be spoken as a second language by Dravidian speakers, and, as is common in such situations, these speakers transferred syntax from their native languages into the new language. Such features include the use of api, of iti, and of evam, and also, I believe, of certain compounds. These are Indo-European words, not Dravidian, but their usage is equivalent to similar particles in Dravidian languages (e.g. Tamil -um, enRu, taan). Prof. Murray Emeneau has written at length on this phenomenon. The North-Indian Indo-Aryan languages are even more akin syntactically to Dravidian languages.

I have tried to show that many of the major conventions of Sanskrit literature, and especially of poetry, come from a Dravidian poetic tradition (e.g. the messenger poem such as Meghaduta, the idea of lovers suffering in separation during the monsoon, etc. etc.). The fact is, it is not possible to talk about Sanskrit as a separate "non-Dravidian" tradition -- the truth is far more complex. George Hart.

Presumably, the people who adopted Sanskrit (or something akin to it) in North India didn't have a highly developed literature -- there are still some Dravidian languages in N. India like that. On the other hand, history is full of cultivated languages that have been replaced by less developed newer ones -- e.g. Elamite speakers started speaking Persian and Elamite disappeared. People tend to speak whatever language gives them influence, prestige, and the ability to survive -- to some extent,

English has this function in modern India (at least in some parts, e.g. IIT's). Most areas of the earth have changed their language 3 times in HISTORICAL times (at least this is what I learned in a linguistics class at Harvard a long time ago). I wouldn't say Sanskrit is Dravidian -- it isn't. But it has many intriguing "Dravidian" features not found in other (non-Indian) Indo-European languages.(Retroflexes, for example -- called murdhanya in Skt). This stuff is interesting, isn't it? GH

One of the most intriguing contributions of the Tamil area to Sanskrit is the Bhagavatapurana. It is pretty universally agreed that it was written by a Tamilian and that it is filled with motifs and themes from the Divyaprabandha and other Tamil literature. Its author also uses "Vedic" forms -- sometimes incorrectly!-- to try to make it sound old and hoary. This work has catalyzed Bhakti movements all over India and is, arguably, one of the most important works in the Sanskrit language. An example of a Tamilism is the word avamocana, "inn." This occurs nowhere else in Sanskrit -- it is clearly a translation of Tamil viTuti. On the other hand, the greatest poet of all Indian literature, Kampan, took his story from Sanskrit. There has been an enormously productive interchange between Sanskrit and Tamil.
 
Last edited:
@ Indic

Relations between Tamil and Sanskrit
by Prof. George Hart (Univ of California, Berkeley, USA) p

Actually, Sanskrit has many Dravidian syntactic features as well as loan words from Dravidian. A few of these are very old -- even as old as the Rig Veda.
Clearly, Sanskrit came to be spoken as a second language by Dravidian speakers, and, as is common in such situations, these speakers transferred syntax from their native languages into the new language. Such features include the use of api, of iti, and of evam, and also, I believe, of certain compounds. These are Indo-European words, not Dravidian, but their usage is equivalent to similar particles in Dravidian languages (e.g. Tamil -um, enRu, taan). Prof. Murray Emeneau has written at length on this phenomenon. The North-Indian Indo-Aryan languages are even more akin syntactically to Dravidian languages.

I have tried to show that many of the major conventions of Sanskrit literature, and especially of poetry, come from a Dravidian poetic tradition (e.g. the messenger poem such as Meghaduta, the idea of lovers suffering in separation during the monsoon, etc. etc.). The fact is, it is not possible to talk about Sanskrit as a separate "non-Dravidian" tradition -- the truth is far more complex. George Hart.

Presumably, the people who adopted Sanskrit (or something akin to it) in North India didn't have a highly developed literature -- there are still some Dravidian languages in N. India like that. On the other hand, history is full of cultivated languages that have been replaced by less developed newer ones -- e.g. Elamite speakers started speaking Persian and Elamite disappeared. People tend to speak whatever language gives them influence, prestige, and the ability to survive -- to some extent,

English has this function in modern India (at least in some parts, e.g. IIT's). Most areas of the earth have changed their language 3 times in HISTORICAL times (at least this is what I learned in a linguistics class at Harvard a long time ago). I wouldn't say Sanskrit is Dravidian -- it isn't. But it has many intriguing "Dravidian" features not found in other (non-Indian) Indo-European languages.(Retroflexes, for example -- called murdhanya in Skt). This stuff is interesting, isn't it? GH

One of the most intriguing contributions of the Tamil area to Sanskrit is the Bhagavatapurana. It is pretty universally agreed that it was written by a Tamilian and that it is filled with motifs and themes from the Divyaprabandha and other Tamil literature. Its author also uses "Vedic" forms -- sometimes incorrectly!-- to try to make it sound old and hoary. This work has catalyzed Bhakti movements all over India and is, arguably, one of the most important works in the Sanskrit language. An example of a Tamilism is the word avamocana, "inn." This occurs nowhere else in Sanskrit -- it is clearly a translation of Tamil viTuti. On the other hand, the greatest poet of all Indian literature, Kampan, took his story from Sanskrit. There has been an enormously productive interchange between Sanskrit and Tamil.

I know about Dravidian and Munda substratum in Vedic Sanskrit but you were have to prove the word 'Kavya' has a Dravidian origin. Seems you didn't put any effort for that. :sarcastic::sarcastic: Now, go and find me the proof. ;)
 
Tamilnadu oppose India's Sanskrit week

I pity such Tamilians who took an active part in opposing such an event, opposing Sanskrit:

The strongest impact of purism in Tamil has been on words taken from Sanskrit. During its history, Tamil, along with other Dravidian languages like Telugu, Kannada,Malayalam etc., was influenced by Sanskrit in terms of vocabulary, grammar and literary styles

record.png
 
No body is banned here from learning Hindi, if they want to learn, they can. Still schools are there, if student wants to learn Hindi, they can. No importance is given by the govt here, for both English & Hindi. Can you tell me one policy by which the state govt is promoting English?? Its the students who are interested in English and learning. And where you got that, Hindi is the national language of India??

You are wrong, English is promoted by every state of India.
 
good too see amma keeping chaddiwallah in check otherwise they are crawling out from everywhere. :devil:
 
I know about Dravidian and Munda substratum in Vedic Sanskrit but you were have to prove the word 'Kavya' has a Dravidian origin. Seems you didn't put any effort for that. :sarcastic::sarcastic: Now, go and find me the proof. ;)

I have tried to show that many of the major conventions of Sanskrit literature, and especially of poetry, come from a Dravidian poetic tradition (e.g. the messenger poem such as Meghaduta, the idea of lovers suffering in separation during the monsoon, etc. etc.).

You derided 'my theory' -Sanskrit was the language of the priestly class restricted to ritualistic worship only (hymns) . Whereas Tamil was much more developed and sophisticated in all fields - literature, science , medicine etc .

silly of you to think I would have deliberately drag in - "kavya" without any proof. I have substantiated my first postulate - Sanskrit literature conventions came from Tamil tradition .
 
You derided 'my theory' -Sanskrit was the language of the priestly class restricted to ritualistic worship only (hymns) . Whereas Tamil was much more developed and sophisticated in all fields - literature, science , medicine etc .

silly of you to think I would have deliberately drag in - "kavya" without any proof. I have substantiated my first postulate - Sanskrit literature conventions came from Tamil tradition .

I know about Meghdootam by Kalidas written by during Gupta dynasty in 4-5th century AD, every Indian kid know this. But you better find me the proof that the word Kavya has a Dravidian origin. Go find it out and tell me soon. :girl_wacko:
 
Tamilnadu oppose India's Sanskrit week

I pity such Tamilians who took an active part in opposing such an event, opposing Sanskrit:
record-png.40057


3rd BC Tolkapiyam is much more older than any Sanskrit literary works

Dr. Dubyanskiy also said, “Interestingly enough, there are cases when Tolkappiyanar himself shows his independence on the Sanskrit tradition

I know about Meghdootam by Kalidas written by during Gupta dynasty in 4-5th century AD, every Indian kid know this. But you better find me the proof that the word Kavya has a Dravidian origin. Go find it out and tell me soon. :girl_wacko:

its not what you know -but what you don't know, i.e Sanskrit literature conventions was a product of Tamil tradition

'kavya' - keep waiting .. adds to your anxiety
 
You are wrong, English is promoted by every state of India.
There are no special policies by the TN govt to promote English. The average middle class students studying in govt schools are less competent in English against the students from Private schools, which costs them in future studies and Jobs. To make them competent, JAYA announced some reforms in the govt school to increase their competency level in English. It's not like that Tamil Nadu given special promotions for English and banned Hindi/Sanskrit from learning.

If every state is promoting English, interact with us in English, why we need two languages to interact then?? It's an unnecessary burden on the students.
 
Last edited:
Good development.... now you started connecting religion with patriotism :-)

That was only directed at takeiteasy. The guy has been around quoting how Christians like him are more patriotic than RSS and Bajrang Dal. Now he is advocating partition of India and giving away of NE India and Tamil Nadu. Now it will be difficult for you to understand this mindset, but being a realist I have a fair grip on these things.

This same mindset was the root of separatism in Nagaland and other disturbed NE areas. Same mindset was responsible for agitation against nuclear power plant in TN. Same mindset which has been fabricating lies via organizations like Dalitistan.org

HOW JOHN DAYAL HELPS BREAK INDIA

John_Dayal.jpg

A leading Indian daily reported on 6 April, 2014 on a US Congressional panel’s hearing on religious freedom in India. The report titled “Row over timing of US panel’s Modi remarks” referred to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission (TLHRC)’s hearingtitled “Plight of Religious Minorities in India” held on April 4th, 2014 in Washington D.C.

The purported objective of the hearing, as described by the Commission, was to “examine this [phenomenon of] polarisation in the context of the US-India relationship.” In a blatant attempt to interfere in the legitimate democratic process of another country, the Commission most unfortunately foments the impression that the Indian elections – one of the largest democratic exercise in the world – are being held in a “polarised” atmosphere where the religious minorities face discrimination. In a brazenly partisan attitude which points to the fact that India and especially the BJP-ruled states remain the target of sizable external Christian missionary-connected or supported conglomerates, the Commission interfering in India’s internal domestic affairs and law making institutions expressed its concern that the “Freedom of Religion Act” implemented “across five Indian States” has actually “exacerbated” “discrimination” and “intimidation” of minorities. In other words, the Commission, by generalising particular local issues and that too of quite a vintage, was essentially criticising the fact that this Act impeded the free activities of missionaries and the free flow of external funds within India for the purpose of “harvesting souls.” How or under which capacity does an external commission reserve the right to comment on India’s domestic laws and issues, is something that needs to be seriously debated.

The Commission’s following observation is also an open manifestation of that interventionist mindset which is being increasingly displayed by a certain section in the West,

In the months leading up to India’s 2014 national elections, there has been a rise in acts of violence targeting religious minorities and an increase in discriminatory rhetoric that has polarised national politics along religious and class lines.” These intervention-advocating sections are now unable to come to terms with the fact that India is at last on the threshold of a new era which shall see the emergence of a strong and determined leadership. They clearly feel unnerved at the fact that they shall eventually be in no position to dictate or tutor India’s external policies and shall have to reconcile themselves to the rise of India. “The report also states that the panel’s leading witness, USCIRF’s Katrina Swett, made “no secret of her concern over a Modi-led government coming to power” and that ‘many religious minority communities fear religious freedom will be jeopardised if BJP wins…

While we do not need to take lessons on how to conduct our elections nor accept certificates on our conduct, the fact that needs to be reiterated is that the Commission’s stance reeking of interference and an attempt to blemish India’s democratic record while trying to adversely influence the outcome of our national elections as well.

The other major issue of concern is the fact that the Commission listed Mr. John Dayal,“Member, National Integration Council, Government of India” as one of the witnesses, who shall “focus on the human rights situation for religious minorities in India” and “provide recommendations for U.S. foreign policy relation to India.”

It is common knowledge that Mr. John Dayal was also closely associated with the activities of the Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC), especially in the body’s nefarious attempt at evolving a flawed and skewed Communal Violence Bill.

John Dayal has been a past master at misrepresenting India and especially Hindus and Hindu organisations on foreign soil. A look at some of his past antics in this respect only exposes the claims of this Government that it has done much to project India’s image abroad.

The fact that it has time and again harboured and patronised elements like John Dayal speaks of another plot. Let see how he has actually been involved in what can only be called the project of “breaking India.” In 2005 when the US Commission on Global Human Rights observed, on the testimony given by Kancha Ilaiah, another expert at denouncing India and Hindus on foreign soil, that “Converts to Christianity and Christian missionaries are particularly targeted, and violence against Christians often goes unpunished,” brother Dayal welcomed this criticism of India by a foreign agency as a “historic moment.”

As Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan documented in their path-breaking studyBreaking India” when the US based advocacy group Policy Institute for Religion and State(PIFRAS) held a South Asia Conference, sponsored by “United Methodist Board of Church and Society and the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA” John Dayal, as a participant, had contended that “minorities could not count on the Indian state to protect them, or to prosecute crimes committed against them.” Dayal’s repeated use of foreign platforms to denounce the Indian system and polity is something which has been largely ignored by the mainstream media as well as the powers that be – i.e. the Sonia Gandhi led Congress and UPA whose patronage he has continuously received.

Keeping in mind the crucial phase in our national life as well as issues of national security and sovereignty, certain questions need to be answered by the Government, the Congress and its more vocal courtiers:

  1. Whether Mr. Dayal went before the TLHRC in his individual capacity, and if so, why was he listed as an office bearer of a body instituted by the Government of India (GoI)? If no, then has the GoI taken note of this visit at such a crucial juncture when national elections are being held? Does this not merit a suo moto cognizance by the Election Commission of India as well as our other law enforcing agencies?
  2. Does Mr. Dayal share the concern expressed by some witnesses before the TLHRC regarding the jeopardisation of the religious freedom of minorities if the BJP comes to power: if so, is he then reflecting the biased concern of the current dispensation in India? And if yes, then is it proper or civilised that the UPA-led and Sonia Gandhi-directed Government of India deputes a member of one of its own institution to discuss our internal affairs on foreign soil and allows him to provide a completely negative and unfounded picture of the Indian polity and state of affairs?
  3. One must also ask whether the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi were in the know of this visit and whether John Dayal, as a member of the National Integration Council, had their consent and support in this matter.
  4. It is also necessary that John Dayal come out with his full testimony made before the TLHRC so that the truth may very soon be out on whether the Congress led UPA encourages and condones external interference and interventions into the internal affairs of India.
The fact is that the Congress, over the years, has patronized a sprawling intellectual mafia and mercenaries whose sole objective has been the denigration of Hindus. It did not matter to the Congress whether this mafia did it within the country or continued spewing the same venom abroad. India could be tarnished and it did not matter as long as in the process Hindus could be berated and demonised.

The John Dayal types belong to that intellectual underworld – supported, sponsored, nurtured and protected by the Congress and its hydra-headed system. The time has come for exposing and disbanding this insidious network.

(The author is the director, Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation, New Delhi. His Twitter handle is @anirbanganguly)

How John Dayal helps break India | IndiaFactsIndiaFacts
 
"Indian government has betrayed the entire Tamil race" – Thol Thirumavalavan | Asian Tribune

Question: You also accuse the Indian government of playing a role in the war against LTTE?

Thol Thirumavalavan: Yes. What happened in Sri Lanka would not have been possible but for Indian army’s help in training and logistics provided to the Sri Lankan armed forces. It was a huge betrayal of the cause of the entire Tamil race.

Question: Colombo, New Delhi as well the American government say LTTE was a terrorist movement and what happened was a war against terror?

Thol Thirumavalavan: No. LTTE’s movement is a liberation movement as the name suggests. It is a movement to liberate the oppressed Tamils by the Sinhala majority government. Much of the world, why even India and America know it.

Question: Do you think LTTE can revive itself and fight and achieve its goal of separate homeland for Tamils?

Thol Thirumavalavan: Yes, liberation movements never die. LTTE has a genuine cause. Tamils must get their own land to live with respect and dignity. Eelam is the only solution. Tamils will achieve that someday.
 
Back
Top Bottom