Talk:Loanwords in Sri Lankan Tamil/Archive 3

Sanskritisms and Loan words

These terms should not create any contentions with informed readers. See article Limiting the influence of Sanskritisms in Sinhala so this is a common phenomenon in South Asia. With Democracy and the need for new terminology to apply it in governance, many post colonial South Asian countries created artificial terminology based on Sanskrit roots just like taxons are based on Latin and Greek. But these terms are not natural to the language and sometimes even replaced existing native terminology. Grama Sevaka etc are Sanskritism not borrowings from Sinhala to Tamil. Sri Lankan government has a department within a ministry to do that and it does it best to assure both the official languages end up with similar terminology for reasons of efficiency. Henne the Tamil terms are created at the same time as the Sinhalese terms. Also the Sri lankan government does it best to coordinate with the State of Tamil Nadu when new Tamil terms are created as best as it can be.

Loan words once borrowed can become naturalized, but they are still loan words. Threatening a veto such as an edit war is not going to bury the basic linguistic fact. Thanks RaveenS

So called "Sanskritisms" are borrowed in Tamil because Tamil is a Dravidian language. However they are not borrowed words in Sinhala because Sinhala has Prakritic ancestry. Graama Sevaka is a Sinhalese term that is derived from Sanskrit and is used in Sri Lankan Tamil most probably because it is a term that the Sri Lankan Government uses with regards to the administration of the island. Sri Lankan Tamil uses this Sinhalese term and has not come up with something of its own from the Tamil language. Just because Graama Sevaka is derived from Sanskrit does not mean that is is not a Tamil borrowing of the Sinhala term. Just like how French words with Latin roots were taken into English. Also, what exactly are "Sinhala words" to you? According to your line of thought possibly more than half the Sinhalese language is just simply what you call "Sanskritisms."

PS Like you I too can run along and create a Wikipedia article to back up my standpoint. Clozapine 13:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Simple fact Sanskritism is not equal to Loan words, these are two different linguistic phenomenon’s.

Official Sri Lankan Tamil language deployment is administered by the Sri Lankan government not by a independent entity for the Sri Lankan Tamil people unless you believe the Sri Lankan government is entirely only for the Sinhalese language users and Sri Lankan Tamil users should figure out a way to deploy their own language independently. I hope that’s not what you mean. Hence Grama Sevaka is a Sanskritism for all languages whether they are Dravidian in origin or Zulu in origin. I agree with you that the list names could be changes to Sinhalese words of Tamil origin and Sinhalese words of Dutch origin…....RaveenS 13:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

No I disagree, Graama Sevaka is a Sinhalese term that is derived from Sanskrit. It entered Sri Lankan Tamil through the Sinhalese language. The Tamil members of whatever committee quite obviously did not come up with a native Tamil word. They just borrowed the Sinhalese term and continue to use it in the language. Ditto for Pradeshiya Sabha. Like I said, I too can run along and create a Wikipedia article to back up my standpoint like you have done. Try popping the word "Sanskritisms" into google and see what items of value you can find that fit your definition (and Asiff Hussein's title of his article). Clozapine 13:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Please back up your argument or personal opinion with a dictionary or at the very minimum even a website link (like the one I referenced) or it will remain an opinion. Thanks RaveenS

I have already backed up my argument. Yours stands on a definition you seem to have made up yourself. Sinhala, as a Prakritic language, can inherit words from Sanskrit. It is difficult for Tamil to inherit words because it does not have something that could be termed an "ancestral language", unless perhaps Proto-Dravidian is taken into account. Clozapine 14:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you are new to these terminologies as well as to Wikipedia. Please read up on these subjects and we can can discuss the merits of impact of Sanskritism in Sinhala, Tamil, Zulu ...... You did make one good point about changing the name of Sinhala language lists, I have already proposed it in the discussion page. Good byeRaveenS 14:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Please don't go running along and making up Wikipedia articles to suit your arguments. I mean really. Have you tried putting the term "Sanskritisms" into Google? I am yet to come up with the magical definition you seem to have pulled out of the air (or from Asiff Hussein). What it seems to be is simply Sanskrit-derived words. Trying to act all high and mighty might make you feel good but it's not really conducive towards fruitful discussion. What is your definition of "modern usage"? So words that were incorporated from Sanskrit into a particular Prakritic language, say, 500 years ago, are not "Sanskritsms" even though there is no difference from what is being done now to what was being done then i.e use the ancestral language for terminology?

Is the Sinhala term for history (itihaasaya) a "Sanskritism"? If not do you consider the Sinhala term for skeleton (asti panjaraya) a "Sanskritism"? What about the Sinhala word for television (rupavaahini)? Then what about something basic like arm (baahuva) or nerves (nahara)? My, there does seems to be a heck of a lot of so-called "Sanskritisms" in Sinhala huh? Wonder where the language would be without these "Sanskritisms"...

Let's face it, the term "Sanskritisms" which is being bandied about here simply means "words that are derived from Sanskrit." Well, unbelievely huge chunks of the Sinhala language are then "Sanskritisms." Ditto for Bengali. Perhaps Shudh Hindi is in a similar situation too. Maybe I should go along and create a Wikipedia article titled "Sanskritic/Prakritic Languages using Sanskritisms." I just might, although I'm afraid it would make as much sense as an article titled "Germanic Languages using Germanic words." Clozapine 14:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

In Hindi grammar a distinction exists between words which are tadbhava, that is, part of the stock of words inherited from Sanskrit through Prakrit and which in consequence display sound shifts, and tatsam, that is, words directly taken into Hindi from Sanskrit to enrich the language's vocabulary. I suppose the latter could be called "Sanskritisms" or "loan words". I don't know if there's an equivalent in Sinhala, though. -- Arvind 16:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we can have an article on "Tamilisms", "Greekisms" and "Latinisms"? Clozapine 02:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, Latinism is a known concept in linguistics, and the idea of Sanskritism was actually coined by European Indologists by way of analogy with the concept of Latinism (you'll even see the occasional use of "Prakritism"). Anyway, I should have been clearer. I was trying to say that the term "Sanskritism" is used in the context of Hindi to refer to some types of tatsam words, particularly if the speaker wants to convey the impression of excessive Sanskritisation. Its sense, therefore, is not "words derived from Sanskrit" or "words of Sanskrit origin" (which would cover most Hindi words), but "the adoption of Sanskrit vocabulary or features as a substitute for native words or features" (which covers relatively fewer words). It is, for example, a Sanskritism to coin a new word using Sanskrit word-elements that do not exist in Hindi, rather than building the word using existing Hindi words of Sanskrit derivation. This phenomenon also occurs in other modern Indian languages but not to the same extent that it does in Hindi. I have no idea whether it has any relevance to Sinhala, I was just hoping that the example of Hindi might make the issue clearer. -- Arvind 02:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC) (edited 11:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC))

An example is the use in Hindi of "Vrdh avasta" for old age (I have actually seen this in government documents) instead of the more normal "budhdhapan". Other examples are the use of "gram" instead of "gaon" for village in compounds and the construction of words such as "vishramgrha" for "guest house" rather than "aaramghar." I hope you find this information useful in analysing whether or not a similar phenomenon exists in Sinhala. -- Arvind 03:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC) (edited 11:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC))

Guys see Neologism 64.201.162.1 20:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Sanskrit loans in SL Tamil

I purposely left out Sanskrit loans into SL Tamil when I created this list because after all these borrowings are not unique to SL Tamil and if we create such a list that should be a list sepertae due to the shear number of words and it should be Tamil words of Sanskrit origin not just SL Tamil words of Sanskrit origin. Hopefully we can keep Sanskrit loans out of this list unless they are derived through Sinhalese into SL tamil.RaveenS 15:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree as far as this list is concerned, unless there are any Sanskrit words that only exist in SL Tamil (which I doubt). On the idea of a list of Tamil words of Sanskrit origin, I'd suggest we avoid making such a list unless there's very good reason for it. First of all, it'd have to be thousands of words long and, secondly, it's begging for problems with Thani Thamil people, who argue that the majority of these are actually Sanskrit borrowings from Tamil.

Incidentally, have you thought of making a list of native Tamil words that are unique to Jaffna Tamil, along the lines of Differences between Malay and Indonesian? I'm thinking not of words that are in everyday use in Jaffna but rarely used in TN, but of words that mean slightly different things in standard Jaffna Tamil and standard TN Tamil (like "koppai" as we discovered earlier), or which only exist in Jaffna Tamil. -- Arvind 15:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Now you are giving me work to do, I am trying keep away from Wikipedia :-))))

Sanskrit(isms), loanwords, Elu etc.

Ben/Clozapine,

I will now try to give you some satisfying answers to the many comments given and questions you have raised. Firstly, let me express my dislike of you threatening me with "a possible edit war". That's not really in the spirit of good cooperation, and it's not good manners.

Note to the readers: This is going to be a discussion mainly of Sinhala linguistics and history which seems strange when discussing an article on a Tamil subject. However, the questions raised by Ben demand an explanation of these very points.

Another note: I'm crazy doing this, investing more time into a discussion than in writing an article. :-)

Neologisms in Tamil

• Akin to Sanskritism, Tamil too has its Neologisms but due to its conseravtive nature, Tamil linguists try to create new words for technology, democracy ... from Tamil itself. A good example of SL Tamil contribution to Tamil language is the word for computer which is Kanani. Compare this to Wapuro for a computer in Japanese derived from English Wordprocessor. Hence the words Kirama Sevakar and Piratesiya Sabai stands out as they are Sanskrit in origin. They must have been created in the early part of the post colonial era in Sri Lanka to find acceptance. It would be intereting find the real history behind these words such as the original Government of Sri lanka publication. I would like to see a List of neologism words in Tamil

• Tamil has borrowed Sanskrit and Parkrit words for the last 2,000+ years, infact the earlierst grammar written for Tamil language Tolkappiyam has specific rules as to how to borrow Sanskrit words into Tamil. Simple words such as Mukham for face and Singam for Lion are from Sanskrit, but as a conservative language like French and Icelandic it undergoes periodic purges of outside influences. At some point a Sanskrit-Tamil creole language called Manipralavam or Manipravalam was used in Tamil Nadu and Kerala. In Kerala it fused with Malayalam where as in Tamil nadu it has ceased to exist.

• This linguistic conseravtism has influenced neibhouring Sinhala and Kannada but as the discussion here betrays in Sinhala this movement has its detractors and probably doesnot have cultural roots unlike in Tamil, French and Icelandic.RaveenS 12:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Why do you say "from Tamil itself." If we are to apply the same argument that is being applied to Sinhala with regards to Sanskrit then much of what is Tamil is actually Proto-Dravidian and NOT Tamil. And the article "Sinhala words of Tamil origin" should be retitled "Sinhala words of Proto-Dravidian origin" or "Sinhala words of Dravidian origin" shouldn't it? And just as you created an article on Sanskritisms you should create an article for Proto-Dravidianisms, shouldn't you? Clozapine 09:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Clozapine, because unlike Sinhala, Tamil language has not changed much in the last 2000 years. Standard Tamil and spoken Tamil has diverged keeping with its diglossic nature but the Standard Tamil vocab. of Sangam era is still available to current day Tamils to borrow from unlike Hindi, English, Sinhala and Navaho. Further Proto-Dravidian unlike Sanskrit did not have a Painini to polish up in antiquity hence it was created just like Proto-Indo-European_language within the last 100 years by linguists and is based mostly on Archaic Tamil of the Sangam era. When Sinhala needs to coin words it has the option to go to Sanskrit, Pali or a former version of itself but Tamil has self restricted that to an archaic version of itself unlike Malayalam which has no qualms borrowing from Sanskrit or even English when borrowing. Huracane

It doesn't matter whether Tamil has changed or not, much of its vocabulary would have come from Proto-Dravidian and if we are to take the line put forward by Krankman (and to a lesser degree by SRaveen) with regards to Sanskrit and Sinhala then these words are not Tamil words but Proto-Dravidian words and should be treated as such, instead of being "bandied about" as Tamil. "Tamil words" would then be words that are not borrowed from Proto-Dravidian or any other language. The fact that no one (to my knowledge) has really done much research on the area, and Proto-Dravidian didn't have a Panini-like person a la Sanskrit does not invalidate the argument. Clozapine 03:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)