govindankutty -- from proto-tamil-malayalam to west coast dialects

8/12/2019 Govindankutty -- From Proto-Tamil-Malayalam to West Coast Dialects

1/9

F R O M P R O T O - T A M I L - M A L A Y A L A M T O W E S T C O A S TD I A L E C T S *

byA. GOVINDANKUTTY

Leiden University

Because the oldest Mal aya lam inscriptions and literary works 1 are notearlier than about the ninth century A.D. and accordingly were con-temporaneous with Middle Tamil, scholars have almost automaticallycome under the delusion that the devel opment of a separate languagehad to be dated to that period. 2 While concentrat ing entirely upon this his-torical process of differentiation, they have consistently o verl ook ed the* I am indebted to Professor F. B. J. Kuiper, who made a number of very valuablecomments and suggestions to improve the quality and contents of this article. I amgrateful to Professor Kamil Zvelebil for a number of useful comments.1 Since all ancient literary works written on the West Coast for a long time merelybelonged to conventional genres of Tamil literature, their authors continued to writein the traditional literary language of the East Coast dialect (cf. Cilappatikdram . Notuntil the fourteenth century approximately, are clear traces of 'Malayalisms' foundin certain literary texts, such as the Rdmacaritam. Therefore, it is for a long time almostexclusively the evidence of the West Coast inscriptions that gives us some informationabout the linguistic changes that have gradually taken place.

R. Caldwell, A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family o fLanguages (London, 1856), p. 12; 2nd ed. (1875), p. 23; 3rd ed. (1913, 1956), p. 18.He pointed out that Malayalam is an ancient offshoot of Tamil and regarded it ratheras a dialect than as a distinct Dravidian language. Similarly, e.g., Jules Bloch, Structuregrammaticale des langues dravidiennes(Paris, 1946), p. VIII ( . .. un dialecte d6tach6du tamoul ... ) and Emeneau, The South Dravidian Languages , JAOS, Vol. 87(1967), p. 365. See also Bhadriraju Krishnamurti, Comparative Dravidian Studies ,Current Trends in Linguistics, 5 (The Hague, Mouton, 1969), p. 327. Attempts toarrive at an exact dating of the separation were made by L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar andKamil Zvelebil. The former stated that Malayalam, in its earlier stages, was moreclosely allied to what he denominated as Early Middle Tamil (see Linguistic 'Preser-vations' in Malayfil.am , Journal of Oriental Research, Madras, Vol. XI [1937], p. 3).The latter pointed out that at the stage of linguistic development which he termedLate Old and Early Middle Tamil, Tamil and Malayalam were, very probably, basicallyone language, with Pre-Malayalam as a diverging western dialect of the spoken formof that common tongue (see From Proto-South Dravidian to Malayalam , ArchlyOrientdlni, 38 [1970], p. 56).


2/9

FROM PROTO-TAMIL-MALAYALAM O WEST COAST DIALECTS 53s i m p l e f a c t t h a t W e s t C o a s t d i a le c t s h a d p r e s e r v e d , f r o m th e ea r li e st t i m e so n w a r d s , f e a t u r e s w h i c h a r e n o t f o u n d e v e n i n t h e o l d e s t h i s t o ri c a l f o r m so f T a m i l p r o p e r , t h a t i s, t h e E a s t C o a s t d i a le c ts . T h e s e f e a tu r e s m u s tc o n s e q u e n t l y b e t r a c e d b a c k t o a p r e h i s t o r i c f o r m o f T a m il .

I t c a n f u r t h e r b e s h o w n t h a t i n th e W e s t C o a s t s p e e c h s o m e d i a le c ta ld i f f e r e n c e s m u s t h a v e e x i s t e d a t a n e a r l y d a t e a n d t h a t M a l a y a l a m m u s th a v e d e v e l o p e d f r o m o n e o f t h e se d i a le c ts , w h i l e a t le a s t o n e o t h e r d i a l e c tm u s t h a v e d i s a p p e a r e d i n h i s to r i c a l t i m e s , a

I t s h o u l d b e m e n t i o n e d i n th i s c o n n e c t i o n t h a t a f e w s c h o l a r s h a v e p u tf o r w a r d t h e v ie w t h a t M a l a y a l a m is a n i n d e p e n d e n t o f f s h o o t o f P r o t o -D r a v i d i a n . S i n c e t h is v i e w w o u l d s e e m t o b e a t v a r i a n c e w i t h b o t h t h eh i s t o r ic a l e v i d e n c e a n d t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r i n c ip l e s o f h i s t o r ic a l l in -g u is ti cs , i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t hi s p a p e r t o e n t e r m o r ed e e p l y i n t o a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h is t h e o r y . 4

T h i s p a p e r w i l l d e a l w i t h t h e h i s t o r i c a l r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n T a m i l a n dM a l a y a l a m . I n o r d e r t o m a k e c l ea r th is p r o b l e m , h o w e v e r , i t i s n e c e s s a ryf ir st to c o n s i d e r t h e p o s i t i o n o f T a m i l w i t h in t h e w h o l e g r o u p o f S o u t hD r a v i d i a n l a n g u a g e s .

T w o o f t h e m o s t i n te r e s t in g f e a t u r e s o f S o u t h D r a v i d i a n a r e t h e al te r -n a t i o n s i / e a n d u / o a n d t h e p a l a t a l i s a t i o n o f k - > c - b e f o r e i.

T h e v o w e l a l t e r n a t i o n s h a v e b e e n s t u d i e d b y C a l d w e l l, 5 S u b b a y y a , eS r e e k a n t h a iy a , 7 B u r r o w 8 a n d N a r a s i m h i a 9 a n d , m o s t e l a b o ra t e ly , b yK r i s h n a m u r t i , 1~ w h o h o w e v e r l i m i te d h i s s t u d y t o t h e f o u r l i t e r a r y

3 A linguistic analysis o f the language of the early M alaya lam text R6maearitarnforces one to arrive at this conclusion. This conclusion will be developed elsewhere.4 U. l f ir S . Param~swara Aiyar, K . G od a Varm a, K. M. G eorge and a few othersma intained the view that M alayalam is an independent offshoot of Dravidian. SeeVadasery I . Subrarnoniam, "M alayalam ", Curren t Tren ds in Linguistics 5 (The Hag ue,M outo n, 1969), p . 374.5 R. Caldwell, op. cit. 2nd ed. (1875), Part I , pp. 77-79.6 K. V . Subbayya , "P r imer o f Drav id ian Phonology" , Indian Antiquary Vol. 38(1909), p. 160.7 T .N . Sreekan tha iya , "The M uta t ion o f I , U , E and O in Kan nada" , Proceedingsand Transactions o f the Eighth All-India Oriental Conference (Mysore, 1953), pp. 769-800. Qu oted b y Bh. Krishnam urt i b ut no t accessible to m e.8 T. Burrow, "D ravidian Studies I I" , B S O S Vol. 10, pp. 289-97.g A.N . Naras imhia , G.O.K.L pp. 169-70. Qu oted f rom G . S. Gai , HistoricalGramrnaro f OM Kannada ( = Deccan College Dissertation Series 1) (Po ona , 1946), p. 5.xo Bh. Kr ishna m urti , "Alternations i/e a n d u/o in So u th Drav id ian" , Language Vol. 34(1958), pp. 458-68.


3/9

5 4 A . G O V I N D A N K U T T YSouth Dravidian languages. It can be stated as a general rule that inwords which have a in the second syllable, Tamil-Malayalam has i,whereas Kannada has e. Since Telugu has been shown to be a CentralDravidian language,11 it can here be left out of consideration. On theother hand, a s tudy of the Toda and Kota material which will be publishedelsewhere, shows that these languages have e and o in common withKannada. Since the palatalisation k- > c- before i is not a general SouthDravidian feature but is limited to Tamil-Malayalam, it is clear that thisdevelopment can only have taken place at a time when the vowel systemsof Toda-Kota and Tamil-Malayalam had differentiated with regard toi / e and u /o . The fact that at that time Toda-Kota had e offers a simpleexplanation for the absence of palatalisation in Toda-Kota, as well asin Kannada. The Tamil-Malayalam group accordingly stands quite apartfrom the other South Dravidian languages. This is clearly shown by suchstemmas as the one given by Kamil Zvelebil, 1~ which is as follows:

P roto)Ta.

To.-Ko.

Pre.Lit.Ta.OTa.

Late Old and EarlyMiddle Ta.

Ta. Ma.The object of this paper is to show that the relations within the Tamil-Malayalam group should be revised. To this end it will be necessary todiscuss the following features of the West Coast speech: 1) the g-problem,2) Second Person Oblique form and 3) the Sandhi l + k.

3 . T h e f i p r o b l e mComparative studies lead us to assume the existence of a phoneme/ fi /inProto-South Dravidian. In Proto-Tamil-Malayalam it must still havetx B h . K r i s h n a m u r t i , Telugu Verbal Bases = University o f California Publications inLinguistics V ol. 24) 1961), p. 269.x2 See Archly Orientdlni Vo l. 38 1970), p . 65 an d Comp arative Dravidian PhonologyThe Hag ue , M ou ton , 1970), p . 14.


4/9

FROM PROTO TAMIL MALAYALAM TO WEST COAST DIALECTS 55

be e n p r e se r ve d s inc e i t ha s c on t inue d to e x i s t i n Ma la ya la m up to thep r e se n t da y , a l t hough in a f e w wo r ds a va r i a n t f o r m w i th n oc c u rs inMode r n Ma la ya la m. I n Ta mi l , on the o the r ha nd , i t ha s pa r t ly be c omen f rom the o ldes t ex tan t tex ts onwards . I t fo l lows, accord ingly , tha t inthe p r e h i s to r ic pe r iod o f Ta mi l w he n th is d i a l e c t al d i f fe r e n ti a tion too kplace>13 the a nc e s to r o f M a la ya la m ( Old W e s t C oa s t d i a l ec t ) ha d a l r e a dyspl i t o f f f ro m th e O ld Eas t C oas t d ia lec t , ir r e spec tive of the q ues t ionw he the r the opt ion a l use of va r ian ts wi th in i t ia l g and n in th e t r ad i t iona ll i te ra ry id iom of the Sa ngam l i te ra ture re f lec ts a preh is tor ic d ia lec ta lsp l i t wi th in the Eas t Coas t speech i t se l f , o r whe the r the f i -va r ian ts havee n t ir e ly be e n de r ived f r om the W e s t C oa s t d i al ec t .

In th e fo l lowing pages , the tw o ca tegor ies wi l l be d iscussed separa te ly ,viz. , the Ta m il w ord s with ini t ia l n (3.1) an d with ini t ia l fi (3.2) .3 .1 Or ig ina l h has becom e n in Tam il in i tia lly in the fo l lowing w ord s :

Ta mi l1. narampu DED. 2364; Kali. 36.3; Pu_ram

109.15)2. na [ i DED. 2366; P u r a m 136.12; Tol . Col . 323)3 . n ~ k ~ l D E D . 2367; Tiruvac. 6.25)4. ndn.a l DED. 2370)5. n~rai DED. 2372; Pu.ram 24.20; Kuru. 114.5;

Pati_r_r. 23.21)6. n~val DED. 2375; Pu_ram 177.11; Tirukkdv.

191)7. net.t.u(DED. 2385)8. nerugcil DED. 2388)

neru~ci Pu_ram 155.4; Pati_r_r.26.10)9. neruppu DED. 2389; Pu_ram 125.2)

10. ne[i DED. 2393; P u r a m 23.15)11. neri DED. 2395; P u r a m 135.2)12. neri DED. 2394; P u r a m 330.1 ; Pari. 14.13)13. not . i DED. 2396; A k a m 47.7 ; Tol. E_lu. 7)14. n~n DED. 4234; Cil . 29.2.4)

M a l a y a l a m~arampu, narampuga[uizhukaga~halga.nalgara, naragavalget..tu, get.t.i~eruggilgerippu, nerippuge[iyukage_ri, ne_rivugeri, nerigot.i, not.ina_n

Am ong the w or ds quo te d a bove , T a m. na_n de se rve s spe cia l no t i c e be c a useis On this prehistoric split in Tam il see, e.g., T. Burrow, Dravidian Studies V ,BSOAS, Vo l. I1, Part 3 (1943-46), p. 606 and S. V. Shanmugam , Som e Problem s inOld Tamil Phonology , lndo-Iranian Journal, XIII (1970), p. 35,


5/9

56 A. GOVINDANKUTTYin th i s c a se Ma la ya la m i s t he on ly Dr a v id i a n l a ngua ge to ha ve p r e se r ve din it ia l h , t he a n t iqu i ty o f wh ic h ha s b e e n e s t a b li she d be yon d do ub t byrece nt research. 1~

F r om the p r e c e d ing ma te r i a l i t e me r ge s tha t , wh i l e Ma la ya la m ha sa lmos t c ons i s t e n t ly p r e se r ve d the P r o to - Dr a v id i a n h in in i t i a l pos i t i on ,Tam il has n ins tead o f i t.3 .2wi th n a re of ten a t te s ted as ea r ly a s the o ldes t tex ts :

Or ig ina l h ha s be e n p r e se r ve d in Ta mi l , a l t hough va r i a n t f o r ms

T a m i l1. han. .u D ED . 2362)~en.t .u Akam 176.8; K u r . 117.2, 401.3)nan. t.u nan. t.u

2 . ~ a m a li D E D . 2 3 6 3 ; P u r a m 7 4 . 3 ; A k a m 3 8 8 . 1 4 ; - -Ku_r. 179.2; N a r r . 285.5 ; Pat.t.. 140)

3 . hara l DED. 2365; Pati_r_r.30.6; M u r . 120)nara lum Pu .ram 120.18)n a r a l a A k a m 14.23)

4 . hahci l DED. 2368) h~hh6lnahci l Pu.ram 19.11) n~hgil5 . ban . DE D. 2369; M u l l . 63; Pu_ram 14.9) ~cT.n

nan. Kali . 15.2)6. hayi_ru DE D. 2371; Pati_r.r.88.38; P u r a m 6.28) hayi ru

nayi_ru Kamp. 1235.1)7 . ha l DED. 2373; P u r a m 82.2) g a l u k a

h a l C f va ka . 2513)8 . h a l a m D E D . 2374; Pu_ram 18.2; Kal i . 124.1) h a l a m9. ~a l .a l DE D. 2376; Pati.r_r. 51.5; K u r . 50.1) hal_al

nal_al TOvar . 1016.9)10. hal . i DED. 2377; A k a m 122.8)11. h a r u D E D . 2379; Cft[a. irata. 54)

na_ru C~vaka. 885; Pu.ram 113.9) n a r u12. ~ a . r u D E D . 2380; Peru. i lana. 11.51) h~ru

n~ru C~vaka. 885; Pu_ram 113.9) na_ru13. g6_n_ru D E D . 2381 ; K u r . 25.4, 36.4; Kal i . 37.14) g a n n u

na n u Tiv . iya_r. 1.17)

M a l a y a l a m~a.nt.u

g a r a h h u kan a r a h h u ka

z4 Fo r a detailed discussion of the tT-problem in the Fi rst Person al Pron oun cf.Bh. Krishnamurti, Dravidian Personal Pronoun s , Studies in Indian Linguistics(Annamalainagar and Po ona, 1968), pp. 189-205.


6/9

FROM PROTO-TAMIL-MALAYALAM TO WEST COAST DIALECTS14. hin.am (Pu_ram 177.14)

nin. am (D ED . 3037; Pu_ram 152.27; M an. i. 28.33) nin. a m15. h imi r (DE D. 2382)Remir (Net .unaL 90)nimir (ToL Por . 547; Pu_ram 14.7) niviruka

16. heki_l(DED. 2383; Kali. 73.8 ; Ku.r. 11.1)neki_ l (A ka m 26.17 ; Ku_r. 50.3; Pu_ram 251.3) - -

17. Reki l i (DED. 2384; A k a m 108.7)18. g e m i ( D E D . 2386; Tirukk6v . 165) gamun. uka19. Reri (DE D. 2387) ~er iyuka

neri (Pu_ram 174.8)20. Rel i (DED . 2390; Pu_ram 247.2)21. Ytel. D ED . 2391 ; Pu_ram 15.1)

ne (Pu_ram 18.28)22. R e l (DE D. 2392) Rellu

57

F r o m 3 .1 a n d 3 . 2 i t h a s b e c o m e c le a r th a t , w h i le M a l a y a l a m h a s a l m o s tc o n s i s te n t l y p r e s er v e d t h e P r o t o - D r a v i d i a n R , i n T a m i l 1 ) t h is p h o n e m ei s e i t he r p r e s e r ve d o r oc c u r s s i de by s i de w i t h a va r i a n t n, o f t e n i n one a ndt he sa m e te x t , a nd t ha t a s e a r l y a s the o l de s t l i te r a t u r e , o r 2 ) i t h a s be -c om e n i n a p r e h i s t o r i c pe r i od w i t ho u t le a v i ng a n y t r a c e o f t he o r i g i na l R.

S i nc e w e f i nd a l r e a dy i n t he e a r l i e s t e x t a n t T a m i l l i t e r a t u r e n - f o r m sw i t ho u t R- va r ia n t s, w h i l e M a l a ya l a m r e t a i n s t he h - f o r m s , 15 i t i s c l e a rt h a t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t fi > n m u s t h a v e t a k e n p l a c e in t h e p r e h i s t o r i cp e r i o d an i n o n e o r m o r e d i al e ct s o n l y o f w h a t w a s t o b e c o m e t h e g r o u po f E a s t C o a s t d i a le c ts . T h e d i f f e re n t i a ti o n b e t w e e n t h e W e s t C o a s td i a le c ts a n d s o m e o f th e E a s t C o a s t d i a l ec t s m u s t a c c o r d i n g l y h a v e b e e na f a c t a l r e a d y i n t h is p e r i o d a n d c e r t a in l y b e f o re t h e S a n g a m l i te r a t u re .

4 . Second Person Obl ique FormF r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r t i t s e e m s c le a r t h a t , w h i le M a l a y a l a m h a s i in t h ei n i t ia l s y ll a b l e o f t he o b l i que f o r m s , T a m i l h a s a l m os t e xc l u s ive l y u i n

is Cf. also L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Linguistic 'Preserva tions' in Malayft]am , JORMXI (1937), p. 4 and A Primer of Malayala m Phonolo gy , The Bulletin of the RamaVarma Research Institute Vol. V, Part 2 (July, 1937), p. 101. According to him,r~ > n is a late Midd le Ta~nil change, which theory is not acceptable.1B S. V. Shanmugam, op. c/t ., p. 37. .. . rTa > na must have begun even in the Pre-Tamil period.


7/9

58 A . G O V I N D A N K U T T Y

N o r a .

O b l i q .

Sg.P1.

Sg.

P1

T a m i ln~n h nn ~ h - k a [n i nu

u

/ ' / t / mt / m

M a l a y a l a mn~

n i h h a [n i n -

ni~ital. -

t h e s a m e p o s it io n . A c o m p a r a t i v e st u d y o f t h e D r a v i d i a n s e c o n d p e r s o n a lp r o n o u n s p o i n t s t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t - i- > - u-17 i s a l a t e r i n n o v a t i o na t t es t e d o n l y i n T a m i l. T h e o b l i q u e f o rm s w i th u a re f o u n d i n T a m i l a se a r l y a s t h e o l d e s t S a n g a m l i t e r a t u r e s i d e b y s i d e w i t h f o r m s h a v i n g - i - .T o q u o t e a f e w : u_n ( Ak a m 2 2 2 . 2 ), u r n - (Akam 56 .14 , Pu_ram 45 .5) , n u r n(Pu_ram 9.5) , n u n t a i (Ku_r. 40 .2) , n/_n (Pu_rarn 12.5, K ali . 91.2 2).

S i nc e M a l a y a l a m h a s n o t s h a r e d t h is i n n o v a t i o n s a n d s in c e w e c a na l s o d a t e t h is i n n o v a t i o n t o a p e r i o d b e f o r e t h e S a n g a m l i t e r a tu r e , i t i sn o w p o s si b le t o c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e s p l it b e t w e e n t h e E a s t a n d W e s t C o a s td i a l e c t s m u s t h a v e s t a r t e d i n t h e p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d .

5 . T h e S a n d h i 1 + kI n l i t e r a ry T a m i l , b o t h i n i n t e r n a l a n d e x t e r n a l s a n d h i , l + k b e c o m e s _ rk.T h e e a rl ie s t e x t a n t T a m i l g r a m m a r T o l k @ p i y a m r e f er s t o s u c h a c h a n g ei n o n e o f i ts s f i tr a s . 19 I n s t a n c e s a r e n o t w a n t i n g a n d i n t h e e a r l i e s t T a m i ltex t s i t i s a t t e s ted . S~~ Kami l Zvelebil, Personal Pronotms in Tam il and Dravidian , Indo-Iranian Yournal,V I ( 1 9 6 2 ), p p . 6 7 - 68 : T h e c h a n g e o f i > u m i g h t h a v e f ir s t o c c u r r e d i n t h e p l. nim,o b l . him > num ( u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f f i n a l -m ? ) .as L . V . R a m a s w a m i A i y a r , L i n g u i s t i c ' P r e s e r v a t i o n s ' .. . , op. cit., p . 8 : T h ei n f l e c t i o n a l b a s e ni_n- o f t h e s e c o n d p e r s o n s in g . p r o n o u n M , i~ c e r ta i n l y a v e r y o l da r c h a i s m i n t h e W e s t C o a s t s p e ec h , s i n ce e v e n d u r i n g t h e M i d d l e T a m i l p e r i o d u _n-h a dbegun to exercise dominance in Tamil.x, To lk@ piy am , E_luttatikdram, I lampftra.narn (Madras, S. S. Publishing Works,1964). E.g . , from the meta-language toli_rk~(s~tra 1 25). Cf. a lso sfitra 150.2o n a l+ ku > na.rku Na.rr. 19.9), Ko.rkai Na.r.r. 23.6), cuval + kali t ta > cuva.rkali t taKu.r. 204.3).


8/9

FROM PROTO-TAMIL-MALAYALAMTO WE ST COAST DIALECTS 59I n c o n t r a s t w i th t h e s i t u a t i o n f o u n d i n T a m i l , M a l a y a l a m h a s p r e s e r v e d ~1

t h e c l u s t e r lk , 2~ e v e n i n e x t e r n a l sa n d h i , u p t o t h e p r e s e n t d a y . T h e o n l ys a n d h i p h e n o m e n o n t h a t c a ll s f o r m e n t i o n i s t h e l e n g t h e n in g o f k , w h i c hi s m o s t l y , a l t h o u g h n o t u n i v e r s a l l y , f o u n d .

A n e a r l y in s t a n c e o f th i s c l u s t e r i s i n d i r e c t ly a t t e s t e d i n t h e G r e e ks p e l l i n g K r l k h o i ~3 i n t h e P e r i p l u s ( c ir c a 8 0 A . D . ) a n d P t o l e m y ( c i r c a1 5 0 A . D . ) , w h i c h r e f l e c t s a W e s t C o a s t p r o n u n c i a t i o n * K o l k k a i f o r w h a ti n t h e E a s t e r n d i a l e c t w a s Ko_rka i .

T h e c h a n g e l k i s o n e o f th e e a r l y f e a t u r e s w h i c h m a r k s a p r e h i s t o r i cd i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e E a s t C o a s t a n d t h e W e s t C o a s t d i a l e c t s .

6 . C o n c l u s i o n

T h e p r e s e r v a t i o n o f t h e in i ti a l h- , t h e i n h e r it a n c e o f th e s e c o n d p e r s o no b l i q u e f o r m w i t h - i- a n d t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n o f th e c l u st e r l k i n M a l a y a l a m ,w h e n c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e p r e h i s t o r i c c h a n g e s w h i c h t h e y u n d e r w e n t i nT a m i l , p o i n t t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e E a s tC o a s t a n d t h e W e s t C o a s t d i a l e c t s h a s s t a r t e d i n a p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d .T h e P r o t o - p e r i o d w h i c h m u s t b e p o s i t e d a s t h e r es u l t o f h i s to r i ca l r e c o n -s t r u c t i o n w a s , a c c o r d i n g l y , t h e c o m m o n s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r t h e a n c e s t o r so f b o t h T a m i l a n d M a l a y a l a m , w h i c h r e p re s e n t th e f in a l d e v e l o p m e n t so f t h e E a s t C o a s t a n d t h e W e s t C o a s t d i al ec ts . F o r t h a t r e a s o n i t w o u l ds e e m t h a t P r o t o - T a m i l - M a l a y a l a m ( p a ra l l el t o , e .g ., P r o t o - T o d a -K o t a ) i s t h e o n l y c o r r e c t d e s i g n a t i o n f o r t h is p r e h i s t o r i c s t a g e o fl i n g u i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t .

21 L. V. Ram aswa mi Aiyar, Drav idic Sandhi , Quarterly Journal o f the My thicSoc ie ty , Vol. 23, Nos. 3 and 4 (Jam-Apr. 1937), p. 2 50: Th e illustrations pdl-k-kit.M.i,mu.l-k-kombu, tOl-p-pett.i show how Mal., unlike literary Tamil, preserves -I and -1unchanged an d do ubles the following plosive.82 In th e W est Coas t inscriptions o f the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, in-stances with and without this sandhi change are found. However, in the fourteenthcentury insc riptions this san dhi is no t attested (see A. C. Sekh ar, Evolution o f Ma laya-lam, Deccan College Dissertation Series, 10, Poon a, 1953 , pp. 36-37). Th e thirteenthcentury Malayalam grammar Lf ld t i lakam mentions this sandhi chan ge (se e 3.26). InRdmacar i tam, an early M alayalam text, bo th varieties are found, e.g., viltta i (1.4.4),na_r.ru.na (8.3.2). The r-forms are obviously due to the influence of the East Coast(Tamil) dialect in l i terary usuage. For a detailed description of this phenomenon,see L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, A primer of Malayalam Phonology , Bulle t in o f theRama Varma Research Inst i tu te , Vol. VI, P art 2 (1938), pp. 91-96.~8 L .V . Ram aswam i Aiyar, Prim er . . . , Bull. Rarna Varma Research Inst., Vol. VI,Pa rt 2 (1938), p. 92; F. B. J. Kuiper, Tw o Problems in Old Tam il Phonology ,Indo-Iranian Journal, I1, 3 (1958), p. 221.


9/9

60 A. GOVINDANKUTTYN E W S T E M M A

P r o t o - T a m i l - T o d aP r o t o - T a m i l - M a l a y a l a m

W e s t C o a s t E a s t C o a s tD i a l e c t s D i a l e c t s

( p r e h i s t o r i c ) ( p r e h i s t o r i c )

O l d T a m i lE a r l y E a r l y M i d d l e

M a l a y a l a m T a m i l

K o . d . T o . K o .

F o r t he e x a c t l o c a t i o n o f K o . d a g u s e e B h . K r i s h n a m u r t i , C u r r e n t T r e n d sin Li zguistics 5 , p . 3 2 6 f .[NOT OFTHE EDITOR. S ince wrong conc lus ions wi th reg ard to th i s con t r ibu t ion m igh tb e d r a wn f r o m a r e c e n t p u b l i c a t i o n i n JAOS 92 , i t i s necessa ry he re to s ta te tha tGo v in d a n k u t ty ' s p a p e r wa s c o m p le t e d a t Ch r i s tm a s 1 9 7 0 a n d t h e n s h o wn to s o m eco l leagues fo r c r i ti c i sm. Only the s temm a was then add ed , on the adv ice o f P ro f .Z v e l e bi l , t o b r i n g o u t m o r e c l e a r ly t h e im p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e te r m P r o to - T a m i l - M a la y a -l a in i n t r o d u c e d b y t h e a u th o r . ]

govindankutty -- from proto-tamil-malayalam to west coast dialects

Documents