Talk:Proto-Dravidian
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
Contents |
[edit] .
there are various websites on the internet mentioning proto-dravidians, who obviously would have been the people who spoke the proto-dravidian language.
Gringo300 09:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
As per Devaaeya Pavanar, Proto Dravidian is the language of Tamil Itself. This fact has been the basis of declaring Tamil as a Classical Language by the Union Government of India. Can you cite a proof more valid than Govt of India to claim that Proto Dravidian is NOT Tamil Doctor Bruno 02:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- you should read and try to understand the article on proto-language.
PROTO DRAVIDIAN is an invention of the genius non-Tamil Dravidians, viz, Kannadigas who hate Tamil and Telugus and Malayalis. The very word Dravidian came from Tamila which was mispronounced as Tramila, Travida and then Dravida by the Greeks.
Proto Dravidian if at all it existed, must have been a very great language, a language giving rise to so many others must have had a name, even dialects like Kannada, Tulu etc have names, why not a great language like Proto Dravidian... The very absence of such a name, and the fact that Dravida came from Tamil and also the most important fact that 90% of Proto Dravidian is Tamil, strongly advocate the fact that Proto Dravidian is nothing but TAMIL.
- I'm not sure where you get any of this information from, but if you would read any reputable sources on the matter, you would see that there is definitely a Proto-Dravidian that is not "just Tamil". Of course, Classical Tamil is not very far from Proto-Dravidian, so there are many similarities, but trust me these languages were not just the same thing. Even the most conservative linguists at Ethnologue agree there was a Proto-Dravidian language that spawned Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam, and other languages. --SameerKhan 18:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:CITE
there are no references cited whatsoever. Especially the relationship claims are useless without attribution. dab (ᛏ) 16:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Times and events
Tamil is not attested as a distinct language before about 100BC when the first known literature Tolkappiyam is said to have been written. The bulk of tamil literature available today were composed in times well into the christian era. Rudimentary tamil (proto-tamil?) inscriptions are found as far back as 400BC.
There have been failed attempts to conclusively link the script of the Indus Valley Civilization with either Tamil or Sanskrit.
The article in its current state thus appears to be not neutral since it contains assertions that are not widely accepted as true. For example, the link between Dravidian and Harappan culture is widely discredited by current day scholars. The issue is very politicized.
[edit] Proposed merge with Dravidian languages
This artcile repeats the same things as those said in that article. Why not move this contents only to one page?--Imz 15:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- The article on Proto-Dravidian should specify the reconstructed grammar and lexicon. That's too specific for the Dravidian languages article, which should be a general overview and list. I propose we keep both, differentiating their contents better. CRCulver 16:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree, Proto 0f something is different from what it is today RaveenS 18:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Proto Dravidian is the name given to the language from which the present Dravidian languages developed. So the very focus of the two articles is different - atleast, should be different. Merging is not appropriate here. Sarvagnya 17:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
