இலக்குவனாரின் படைப்பு மணிகள் : 11. தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப் பின்னர்தான் ஆரியர்கள் எழுத்து வடிவைத் திருத்தி அமைத்துக் கொண்டனர் - பேராசிரியர் சி.இலக்குவனார்

20 views
Skip to first unread message

இலக்குவனார் திருவள்ளுவன்

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 7:27:03 AM7/12/11
to thiru thoazhamai

இலக்குவனாரின் படைப்பு மணிகள் :

11. தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப் பின்னர்தான் ஆரியர்கள் எழுத்து வடிவைத் திருத்தி அமைத்துக் கொண்டனர்


http://www.natpu.in/?p=10672 பதிவு செய்த நாள் : July 12, 2011

. . . . ஆதலின் அறியக் கிடப்பது என்ன? ஆரியம் தான் தமிழை நோக்கிக் தன் எழுத்தமைப்பை ஆக்கிக் கொண்டிருக்க வேண்டுமேயன்றி, தமிழ், ஆரியத்தை நோக்கி அமைத்துக் கொண்டது அன்று எனும் உண்மையே.  தமிழ் எழுத்தமைப்பைக் கண்ணுற்ற ஆரியர் தம் மொழியின் ஒலிக் கூறுகட் கேற்பப் புதிய வடிவங்களையும் படைத்துத் தம் நெடுங்கணக்கை அமைத்துக் கொண்டனர் என்று கூறலே உண்மைக்குப் பொருந்துவதாகும்.  அவ்வாறு அவர்கள் திருத்தி அமைத்துக்கொண்டது தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப் பின்னர்தான்.  ஏனெனில் தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்கு முன்னரே இது நிகழ்ந்திருப்பின் பவணந்தியார் சுட்டிக் கூறியிருப்பது போல தொல்காப்பியரும் சுட்டிக் கூறியிருப்பர்.  தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்தில் ஆரிய மொழியின் ஒலிக் கூறுகள் தமிழ் மொழியினின்றும் வேறுபட்டிருந்தமையால்தான் அவை தமிழில் பயிலுங்கால் தமிழோசை பெற்றே பயில வேண்டும் என்று விதித்தனர்.

(வடசொற் கிளவி வடவெழுத்து ஒரீஇ

எழுத்தொடு புணர்ந்த சொல்லா கும்மே

– தொல்.நூற்பா. 401)

-          செம்மொழிச்சுடர் பேராசிரியர் முனைவர் சி.இலக்குவனார்
தொல்காப்பிய ஆராய்ச்சி:  பக்கம்: 44

 அன்புடன் இலக்குவனார் திருவள்ளுவன்

/தமிழே விழி! தமிழா விழி! /

எழுத்தைக் காப்போம்! மொழியைக் காப்போம்! இனத்தைக் காப்போம்!



--
பின்வரும் பதிவுகளைக் காண்க:

www.ilakkuvanar.org
thiru2050.blogspot.com
thiru-padaippugal.blogspot.com
http://semmozhichutar.com


N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 7:43:40 AM7/12/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்

On Jul 12, 6:27 am, இலக்குவனார் திருவள்ளுவன் <thiru2...@gmail.com>
wrote:


>  இலக்குவனாரின் படைப்பு மணிகள் :
> 11. தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப் பின்னர்தான் ஆரியர்கள் எழுத்து வடிவைத்
> திருத்தி அமைத்துக் கொண்டனர்

> *
> *http://www.natpu.in/?p=10672பதிவு செய்த நாள் : July 12, 2011
>

அன்பின் திரு. திருவள்ளுவன்,

பேரா. சி. இலக்குவனாரின் அரிய படைப்பான
”தொல்காப்பிய ஆராய்ச்சி” முழுநூலையும் தட்டச்சு
செய்து இணையத்தில் வெளியிடலாமே. நன்றி.

தமிழ் ஆராய்ச்சி மாணவர்களுக்கு உதவும்.
அவரது கொள்கைகளை முன்னெடுப்பார்கள்.

பேராசிரியர் இலக்குவனாரின் அரிய மாணவி
முனைவர் ராஜம் அவர்களின் பென்சில்வேனியா
பல்கலை பட்ட ஆய்வேட்டை அனுமதி அளித்தால்
அதையும் இணையத்தில் பிடிஎஃப் செய்து வெளியிடலாம்.
பிடிஎஃப் ஸ்கான் செய்ய அன்பர்கள் உதவுவர்.

தமிழாராய்ச்சிகளுக்கு ஆசான், அவர் மாணவியார்
நூல்கள் பெருந்துணை செய்யும் அல்லவா?


அன்புடன்,
நா. கணேசன்


> . . . . ஆதலின் அறியக் கிடப்பது என்ன? ஆரியம் தான் தமிழை நோக்கிக் தன்
> எழுத்தமைப்பை ஆக்கிக் கொண்டிருக்க வேண்டுமேயன்றி, தமிழ், ஆரியத்தை நோக்கி
> அமைத்துக் கொண்டது அன்று எனும் உண்மையே.  தமிழ் எழுத்தமைப்பைக் கண்ணுற்ற ஆரியர்
> தம் மொழியின் ஒலிக் கூறுகட் கேற்பப் புதிய வடிவங்களையும் படைத்துத் தம்
> நெடுங்கணக்கை அமைத்துக் கொண்டனர் என்று கூறலே உண்மைக்குப் பொருந்துவதாகும்.
> அவ்வாறு அவர்கள் திருத்தி அமைத்துக்கொண்டது தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப்
> பின்னர்தான்.  ஏனெனில் தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்கு முன்னரே இது
> நிகழ்ந்திருப்பின் பவணந்தியார் சுட்டிக் கூறியிருப்பது போல தொல்காப்பியரும்
> சுட்டிக் கூறியிருப்பர்.  தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்தில் ஆரிய மொழியின் ஒலிக் கூறுகள்
> தமிழ் மொழியினின்றும் வேறுபட்டிருந்தமையால்தான் அவை தமிழில் பயிலுங்கால்
> தமிழோசை பெற்றே பயில வேண்டும் என்று விதித்தனர்.
>
> (வடசொற் கிளவி வடவெழுத்து ஒரீஇ
>
> எழுத்தொடு புணர்ந்த சொல்லா கும்மே
>
> – தொல்.நூற்பா. 401)
>

> -          *செம்மொழிச்சுடர் பேராசிரியர் முனைவர் சி.இலக்குவனார்*


> தொல்காப்பிய ஆராய்ச்சி:  பக்கம்: 44
>
>  அன்புடன் இலக்குவனார் திருவள்ளுவன்
>
> /தமிழே விழி! தமிழா விழி! /
>
> எழுத்தைக் காப்போம்! மொழியைக் காப்போம்! இனத்தைக் காப்போம்!
>
> --
> பின்வரும் பதிவுகளைக் காண்க:
>

> *www.ilakkuvanar.org
> thiru2050.blogspot.com
> thiru-padaippugal.blogspot.comhttp://semmozhichutar.com*

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 11:26:14 AM7/12/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, N. Ganesan, C.R. Selvakumar
Dear NG,

are you serious when you write

<QUOTE>
[...] தமிழ் ஆராய்ச்சி மாணவர்களுக்கு உதவும்.
</QUOTE>

while commenting on a post which has as a subject line


"தொல்காப்பியர் காலத்திற்குப் பின்னர்தான் ஆரியர்கள் எழுத்து வடிவைத் திருத்தி அமைத்துக்

கொண்டனர்" ?

As I understand it,
the topic is "epigraphy".

After seeing your post,
I had a look at the bibliography section
inside the book:

/தமிழ்க் கல்வெட்டியலும் வரலாறும்/
edited in 2001
by எ. சுப்பரயலு
and செ. இராசு.
(தமிழ்ப் பல்லைக் கழகம், தஞ்சாவூர்)

The bibliography section does not mention இலக்குவனர்.

If you want to give good advice to students,
recommend to them to read books which are uptodate.

What would Iravatham Mahadevan and Richard Salomon think of you
if they could read your message?

:-(


-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (EFEO/CNRS, Pondicherry)

N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 11:49:44 AM7/12/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்

On Jul 12, 10:26 am, Jean-Luc Chevillard


Dear JLC,

I understand your mail, I think. Your mail reminds me of what
Iravatham
told about Prof. Ilakkuvanar's thoughts.

My request to the sons of Prof. C. Ilakkuvanar like Tiruvalluvan and
Dr. Maraimalai
is still valid: It will be great to have ready access to the books of
him.
Of course, any Tamil book, to be read entirely and discussed, will
only be
done by very few. Tamils normally do not read (research) books as a
whole,
nor are they ready to discuss them. You must have read E. Annamalai's
statement about the critical differences of what we see in the West
and
Centamiz folks.
http://www.vallamai.com/archives/5197/

A similar essay was written by Maraimalai AdikaL ong ago.

N. Ganesan

Rich doesn't read Tamil at all.

> >> thiru-padaippugal.blogspot.comhttp://semmozhichutar.com*- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 12:13:16 PM7/12/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, N. Ganesan, C.R. Selvakumar
Dear NG,

you write

<QUOTE>


Rich doesn't read Tamil at all.

</QUOTE>

But why should it matter?

Does it mean that you use Tamil
for writing things that you would not DARE to write in English?

Is that not treating Tamil as a "substandard" language?

When I was first pondering
what the most appropriate answer to your message was,
I initially considered posting to the list
the review in the JAOS
by Richard Salomon
of Iravatham Mahadevan's book
on Early Tamil Brahmi inscriptions,
in order to show that there is NO
domain which can be considered as valid
in research
unless it has international ramifications.

There cannot exist a NATIONAL truth

-- jlc

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 1:16:18 PM7/12/11
to Jean-Luc Chevillard, tamil...@googlegroups.com
Dear Jean-Luc,
 
I appreciate your responses to MG (though I doubt its value or effect
on him), but your statement below was indeed intriguing!
 
//there is NO

domain which can be considered as valid
in research
unless it has international ramifications.
There cannot exist a NATIONAL truth//
 
What is considered "valid" and "Truth" is that which is upon
unbiased examination by "competent" (scholar) is found to
be "true" and "valid". [I am aware of the circular argument
and insecurities in the "who is considered competent" etc. ]
And it NEED NOT be "International" whatever you mean by it!
It may so happen that "international" scholars (a small fraction
of the interested "international" scholars) may come to examine
something and may acclaim or reject a claim, but being international
scholar is NOT sine qua non.
 
And trivially, there are national truths! :) River Kaveri flows in India!
X% of people in Tanzania are dark skinned in year 2011. :)
 
I think your statemet quoted above is not valid! Please
correct me if I'm wrong!
 
Regards
Selva


2011/7/12 Jean-Luc Chevillard <jeanluc.c...@gmail.com>



--
Regards
Selva
___________________
C.R.(Selva) Selvakumar

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 1:34:28 PM7/12/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, C.R. Selvakumar
Dear Selva,

why would the statement "River Kaveri flows in India!"
be a NATIONAL TRUTH.

Of course, the name is somehow arbitrary
but you don't have to be a Tamil speaker
or an Indian citizen
in order to agree that there is a river
in Tamil Nadu which has such and such characteristics.

I am about to go to bed
and won't continue this discussion now :-)

Best wishes

-- Jean-Luc

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 1:43:33 PM7/12/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, C.R. Selvakumar
Before turning off my computer,

it comes to my mind that what I wanted to convey
would be more clear if I said:

I don't believe there can exist different national versions of
the Law of gravity, etc.

(the expressions French Law of gravity, Tamil law of gravity, .. do not make sense)

If you need a Tamil version of Human history
or a French version of Human history,
it can no longer be called "History",
it is simply a "story"

I hope that formulation is more acceptable to you

I'll certainly find out tomorrow whether that is the case :-)

-- Jean-Luc


***************


Dear Selva,

why would the statement "River Kaveri flows in India!"
be a NATIONAL TRUTH.

Of course, the name is somehow arbitrary
but you don't have to be a Tamil speaker
or an Indian citizen
in order to agree that there is a river
in Tamil Nadu which has such and such characteristics.

I am about to go to bed
and won't continue this discussion now :-)

Best wishes

-- Jean-Luc


On 12/07/2011 22:46, C.R. Selvakumar wrote:

Ilakkuvanar Thiruvalluvan

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 6:16:46 PM7/12/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்
பேரன்புசால் திரு கணேசன் அவர்களுக்கு வணக்கம். தொல்காப்பிய
ஆராய்ச்சியைக் கணியச்சிட்டுள்ளேன். சீருருவிற்கு மாற்றியபின்னர்
இலக்குவனார் வலைத்தளத்தில் (ilakkuvanar.org)பதிவதாக உள்ளேன். அப்பொழுது
உங்களுக்குத் தெரிவிக்கின்றேன். அவரது பிற நூல்களும் இவ்வலைத்தளத்தில்
இடம்பெறும்.

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 6:49:53 PM7/12/11
to Jean-Luc Chevillard, tamil...@googlegroups.com
Dear Jean-Luc,
 
My example is not a good one, I admit, but
what I meant was a statement may be "true" and "valid"
and applicable to one nation/community and not another..
A statement like
"a dead person is eaten by others of his/her community,
as a way of paying respect to the dead", may be 'true" in
one community, say Fore people of Papua New Guinea who practiced
a form of ritualistic endocannibalism, but may not be a "universal truth";
it is a "truth" all the same applicable to one nation/community at least at
some point in time.
But Gravity is not one such "fact". Though even Gravity changes
on the surface of earth from place to place!
Whether a law of Gravity was proved by an italian or some other
that is still a  truth.
It doesn't become a truth or valid only when "international" scholars
accept it. Many different, unbiased individuals belonging to even one country 
can  "examine" and "test" and "uphold" as truth.
Many different idividuals should be able to test and uphold is often one of the
ways of upholding validity of someting in 'science', but it has not 'notion' of
'internationaltiy' and such 'internationality' is not any requirement.
The nationlity or internationality doesn't arise or matter.
 
What matters is whether a proper examination or test is conducted to
prove or validate a thing. Well known tirukkuRaLkaL
 
எப்பொருள் யார்யார்வாய்க் கேட்பினும் அப்பொருள்
மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்ப தறிவு.
 
எப்பொருள் எத்தன்மைத் தாயினும் அப்பொருள்
மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்பது அறிவு.
 
are perhaps the governing principles and not  "internationality" (whatever it means!).
 
I'm only questioning your claim,
 
//there is NO domain which can be considered
as valid in research unless it has international ramifications.//
 
I hope you have a good restful sleep :)

N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 6:59:03 PM7/12/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்

On Jul 12, 5:16 pm, Ilakkuvanar Thiruvalluvan <thiru2...@gmail.com>
wrote:


> பேரன்புசால் திரு கணேசன் அவர்களுக்கு வணக்கம். தொல்காப்பிய
> ஆராய்ச்சியைக் கணியச்சிட்டுள்ளேன். சீருருவிற்கு மாற்றியபின்னர்
> இலக்குவனார் வலைத்தளத்தில் (ilakkuvanar.org)பதிவதாக உள்ளேன். அப்பொழுது
> உங்களுக்குத் தெரிவிக்கின்றேன். அவரது பிற நூல்களும் இவ்வலைத்தளத்தில்
> இடம்பெறும்.
>

நன்றி, ஐயா. பேராசிரியர் இலக்குவனார் பெருமை உலகில் என்றும் திகழ அவரது
நூல்களும், அவர் மாணவர் இயற்றிய நூல்களும் இணையத்தில் எளிதில் கிட்ட
வேண்டும்.

இவ்வகையில் தமிழ்நாட்டாருக்கு முன்னோடியாய் விளங்குவோர் ஈழத்தாரே.
எ‍டு: நூலகம்.நெட்.

அன்புடன்,
நா. கணேசன், PhD

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 12, 2011, 9:23:17 PM7/12/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, C.R. Selvakumar
Dear Selva,

now being the morning,
I should try to explain myself more clearly,
so that you might be able to understand
what I was trying to say in my other posts
inside that thread
"http://groups.google.com/group/tamilmanram/browse_thread/thread/744260b084149af1"
<http://groups.google.com/group/tamilmanram/browse_thread/thread/744260b084149af1>


You write

<QUOTE>

I'm only questioning your claim,

//there is NO domain which can be considered
as valid in research unless it has international ramifications.//
</QUOTE>

I should probably have written that:

***************************
If a research article is valid,
it will eventually find its way
into international peer-reviewed journals
**************************************

OR

if the theses contained in a book are valid,
they will eventually find their way
into standard manuals for students.


For instance,
I personally DO NOT believe that the statements made on the web page
pointed at by the following URL
could be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

("international" means "internationally recognized")

"http://www.heritagewiki.org/index.php?title=Hammurabi_Wrote_in_Tamil"
<http://www.heritagewiki.org/index.php?title=Hammurabi_Wrote_in_Tamil>

And the same hold for the pseudo-scentific literature
published by Mr S. Victor

You certainly remember the strange article in the Hindu,
concerning a series of books written by Mr Victor.
See:
"http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/03/stories/2009010355020500.htm"
<http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/03/stories/2009010355020500.htm>


This is what I call
"NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC TRUTH"
i.e. a collection of statements which could never make it
into REAL scientific literature.


And all the people who casually use the words
"Lemuria" and "Kumari Kandam",
while talking about their research,
run the risk of having their writings fall into this category,
because instead of advancing the cause of the important domain
called "marine archaeology",
they are simply trying to please the believers in
some kind of "national scientific truth"

Is that more clear?

-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Pondicherry)

N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 13, 2011, 9:23:21 AM7/13/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்


On Jul 12, 8:23 pm, Jean-Luc Chevillard <jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> For instance,
> I personally DO NOT believe that the statements made on the web page
> pointed at by the following URL
> could be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.
>
> ("international" means "internationally recognized")
>
> "http://www.heritagewiki.org/index.php?title=Hammurabi_Wrote_in_Tamil"
> <http://www.heritagewiki.org/index.php?title=Hammurabi_Wrote_in_Tamil>
>

Dear JLC,

Just reading this. I don't know whether you were reading Yahoolists
then, (in tscii days). I wrote many times in yahoogroups contesting
the claims of Loganathan that Sumerian is old Tamil.
I mentioned then (10 years or so ago), unless he has Sumerian text
with an english translation he can't tell what Sumerian cuneiform text
reads.
The alphabet, and the meanings are so different. Sumerian & Tamil
- they are not even close, I mentioned.

Thanks for the link, it brought back my experiences in early Tamil
net.
With growth in the number of Tamils in the net, Tamil = Sumerian etc.,
ain't popular nowadays.

NG
> > It doesn't become a truth or valid _only_ when "international" scholars
> > accept it. Many different, unbiased individuals belonging to even one
> > country
> > can  "examine" and "test" and "uphold" as truth.
> > Many different idividuals should be able to test and uphold is often
> > one of the
> > ways of upholding validity of someting in 'science', but it has not
> > 'notion' of
> > 'internationaltiy' and such 'internationality' is not any requirement.
> > The nationlity or internationality doesn't arise or matter.
> > What matters is whether a proper examination or test is conducted to
> > prove or validate a thing. Well known tirukkuRaLkaL
> > எப்பொருள் யார்யார்வாய்க் கேட்பினும் அப்பொருள்
> > மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்ப தறிவு.
> > எப்பொருள் எத்தன்மைத் தாயினும் அப்பொருள்
> > மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்பது அறிவு.
> > are perhaps the governing principles and not  "internationality"
> > (whatever it means!).
> > I'm only questioning your claim,
> > //there is NO domain which can be considered
> > as valid in research unless it has international ramifications.//
> > I hope you have a good restful sleep :)
> > Regards
> > Selva
> > 2011/7/12 Jean-Luc Chevillard <jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com>>
> >>     2011/7/12 Jean-Luc Chevillard <jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com
> >>     <mailto:jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com>>
> >>             <mailto:jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com>>  wrote:
> ...
>
> read more »

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,
Jul 13, 2011, 10:25:14 PM7/13/11
to Jean-Luc Chevillard, tamil...@googlegroups.com
Dear Jean-Luc,
 
Yes, it is clearer. But I've some trouble when people make
broad sweeping statements or
make generalizations based on a few.
 
Although I understand  and accept your revised statement,
 
==<quote>==
 
I should probably have written that:

***************************
If a research article is valid,
it will eventually find its way
into international peer-reviewed journals
**************************************

OR

if the theses contained in a book are valid,
they will eventually find their way
into standard manuals for students.
 
==<end quote>==
 
I can cite many cases where wrong theories have been included
in books and even text-books. A recent example is about
taste map /region of tongue. Not to mention
outrageous theories of Ernst Haeckel, the father of embryology
on race. Even many famous Nobel laureates are guilty of
making such unsubstantiated 'truths' (e.g Watson, Shockley)
There are many cases in medicine, pharma etc. where
wrong theories have found their way into books, journal
articles and text-books.That one should not let such things
happen is still a goal. None of my statements here is meant to
support wild theories and speculations nor those advanced
without rigour or sustainable methodology.
That some people write some books full of
unsubstantiated 'truths", should not be
interpreted , imo, as advancing "national scientific truth".
Why do you assume that they are  "national scientific truth",
other than their particular views (though flawed)?

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 14, 2011, 12:56:07 AM7/14/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, C.R. Selvakumar, N. Ganesan
Dear Selva,

you write

<QUOTE>


That some people write some books full of
unsubstantiated 'truths", should not be
interpreted , imo, as advancing "national scientific truth".
Why do you assume that they are  "national scientific truth",
other than their particular views (though flawed)?

</QUOTE>

What about correcting this to "MONOLINGUAL scientific truths"?

That would refer to topics
which are discussed only by the users
of one language
inside books/articles written in that language
and never translated in other language,
probably because the claims made would appear unsustainable,
once translated in another language.

Such a situation allows the kind of DOUBLE-SPEAK
which I was reproaching NG.

(1) Telling in Tamil to Mr Ilakkuvanar Thiruvalluvan that it will be useful for students (of History? of Epigraphy) to read the books by the late Professor Ilakkuvanar

(2) Abstaining from telling in English the same thing to Richard Salomon.

Would that be more agreable to you?

-- Jean-Luc (Pondicherry)

N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 14, 2011, 5:40:34 AM7/14/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்


On Jul 13, 11:56 pm, Jean-Luc Chevillard
<jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com> wrote:

> (1) Telling in Tamil to Mr Ilakkuvanar Thiruvalluvan that it will be
> useful for students (of History? of Epigraphy) to read the books by the
> late Professor Ilakkuvanar
>
> (2) Abstaining from telling in English the same thing to Richard Salomon.
>
> Would that be more agreable to you?
>
> -- Jean-Luc (Pondicherry)
>

As usual, I think you misunderstand and twist. You asked whether we
can write
good important stuff in Tamil. See my recent article on PeNNai, in
which
language it's written?

I did not say Rich Salomon should not read or get translated Prof.
Ilakkuvanar's
books in original or get them translated by himself or get a grant to
his students.

N. Ganesan


N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 14, 2011, 5:44:06 AM7/14/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்
Dear JLC,

There is also an English book by C Ilakkuvanar which was brought
as a reprint by his family. You can ask for a copy if you or someone
else wants to read Ilakkuvanar's study.

N. Ganesan

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 14, 2011, 10:53:07 PM7/14/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, N. Ganesan, C.R. Selvakumar
Dear NG,

concerning the influence of the late Professor Ilakkuvanar,
and his relationship with earlier scholars,
what I would like to see commented
is statements such as the following,
found in a book published in 2002 in Chennai
for which the ISBN is
81-85170-27-4

(That book is the second edition;
the first edition appeared in 1936,
and I already quoted it on another mailing list
SEE:
"http://groups.google.com/group/mintamil/msg/a05e99fd2b835c12"
<http://groups.google.com/group/mintamil/msg/a05e99fd2b835c12>)

<QUOTE>

[...]

On May 30, 1980 -- a public meeting was going on at the Town Hall in
Coimbatore under the patronage of Pollachi Dr N. Mahalingam. The Tamil
Orator, the late K.A.P. Viswanatham proclaimed at the meeting that the
late Professor Ilakkuvanar was the first to translate /Tolkāppiyam/ into
English, the earliest extant Tamil grammar. The entire audience
spontaneously gave a deafening applause to this eloquent statement; but
the present writer became restless at this untenable statement.
Therefore, as soon as the meeting was over, he rushed to the stage and
bluntly told K.A.P. that Ilakkuvanar was not the first to translate
/Tolkāppiyam/. K.A.P. was nonplussed at this counter statement.
Thereafter the ensuing dialogue took place:

-- 'if not Ilakkuvanar, who else?'

-- 'Ilakkuvanar's teacher himself!'

-- 'who was he?'

-- 'The late Dr. P.S. Subrahmanya Sastri, a Sanskrit Professor of
Annamalai University!'

-- 'Is it so? I did not know till date!'

Yes, it is an open secret that a vast majority of Tamil Teachers do not
know about Sastri, leave alone his /Tolkāppiyam/ translation.

[...]

</QUOTE>

We have to understand why such things happened

-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Pondicherry)

N. Ganesan

unread,
Jul 15, 2011, 7:44:15 AM7/15/11
to தமிழ் மன்றம்


On Jul 14, 9:53 pm, Jean-Luc Chevillard <jeanluc.chevill...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> -- 'The late Dr. P.S. *Subrahmanya **Sastri*, a Sanskrit Professor of
> Annamalai University!'
>
> -- 'Is it so? I did not know till date!'
>
> Yes, it is an open secret that a vast majority of Tamil Teachers do not
> know about *Sastri*, leave alone his /Tolkāppiyam/ translation.
>
> [...]
>
> </QUOTE>
>
> We have to understand why such things happened
>
> -- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Pondicherry)
>

There are many reasons, JLC. You've read Sumathi's books.
There are lots more. I have given ref.s in various forums where
you're there over many years.

For the Coimbatore incident involving K. A. P. Viswanatham which you
love to quote - I have seen this quoted from you at least 4 times in
CTamil list, etc., - let me offer one reason to analyse:

K. A. P. Viswanatham did NOT complete high school. He was a good
orator,
successful businessman, and stood agaimst Hindi imposition. Also,
K. A. P. Viswanatham is the first one who sought to concentrate on
Taminadu issues, and asked Periyara nd Annadurai to forget about
Dravidasthan, all 4 literary Dravidian languages' speakers coming
together. Periyar quit Dravidasthan once language based states in
India were born, Anna was only continuing to talk Dravidasthan.

Peri. Chandra quit the TaniTamiz style of neologism formation
embedding Pavanar's principle - "Tamil is the mother of World's
languages, e.g., English" (See Gnanagiri Nadar's Tamil - Greek
dictionary !!) long ago. He said - we shouldn't create neologisms
clothed
in Tamil letters "aaGila vArttaikaLukkut tamizc caTTai pOrttal", That
will be
like Loganathan making Sumerian words written in Tamil script.

N. Ganesan

Jean-Luc Chevillard

unread,
Jul 17, 2011, 3:32:36 AM7/17/11
to tamil...@googlegroups.com, N. Ganesan
Dear NG,

I am having in Paris in my library a copy of a book printed in 1994
which is a reprint of a book which first appeared in 1994.

/THOLKĀPPIYAM in English with critical studies/
M. Neelamalar Educational Publishers,
Madras -- 600 101


I attach to this message
a 1.2 MB file which contains the scanned images
of the title page and the table of content.
(this is scanned from the EFEO Library's copy, in Pondicherry).

I suspect that the second part in the book
("Studies in Tholkāppiyam") is what you are referring to
in this message (see below)

I agree that anyone who is interested in understanding the history of ideas
in 20th century Tamil Nadu should read the book
but I would like to hear from you
in which way you think this book could be immediately useful to students
who study Tamil epigraphy today
(see our exchange in another message
"http://groups.google.com/group/tamilmanram/msg/e5714934dd579998"
<http://groups.google.com/group/tamilmanram/msg/e5714934dd579998>).

I have just had a look at the Bibliography section (pp. 685-704)
inside the 2003 book by Iravatham Mahadevan
and it does not refer to Ilakkuvanar
(unless I missed it).

-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Pondicherry)


On 14/07/2011 15:14, N. Ganesan wrote:

Pages_from_Ilakkuvanar_Tolk (c).pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages