Talk:Tamil language

Proto Dravidian is 90% Tamil

This was the language which was spoken when there was no name given to it or it was just Tamil and the non Tamils dont want to accept it. It should have been a really great language, and for it not to have a name, is the greatest injustice. Its name is Tamil and Tamil only. This should be mentioned in the article, at least it should give the benefit of doubt to Tamil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 07:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Is not Tamil a major Dravidian language? ... Will not the administrator correct this injustice?

With more than 60 million speakers Tamil is a major Dravidian language. When Kannada with just half as much, is called 'one of the major Indian and Dravidian languages' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kannada), why not Tamil? Someone edited this page putting the word 'major' but the word has been removed. This is prejudiced vanadalism. This proves that there is a major bias towards Kannada and a prejudice against Tamil, in this site. Is it being maintained by Kannada fanatics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

It is nothing like that. This article is a Featured Article, which is the highest quality of articles produced by Wikipedia. It is because that the major contributors want to maintain status quo and neutrality to preserve the FA status. Please note that the Kannada article you are quoting is not a Featured Article or not even Good Article (GA). That is why that article has all those bias. -- R.Sivanesh ^{✆ ©} 13:16, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

A Featured article should also be accurate! It should include all facts like for example, Tamil is the only totally Indian language. All other languages are but offshoot of Sanskrit, which itself has its roots in Europe. So the only Indian language is Tamil!

kwintessential.co.uk/language/about/tamil.html

Tamil is the first legally recognized Classical Language of India, as formally announced by the then President of India, Dr. Abdul Kalam, in a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament in 2004. The name ‘Tamil’ is an Anglicized version of the native name, the final letter usually transcribed as the lower ‘l’ or ‘zh’.

Origins:

A few scholars have linked the origins of Tamil to that of Sanskrit; however, unlike most of the other established literary languages of India, the origins of Tamil are independent of Sanskrit. Tamil has the longest unbroken literary tradition amongst the 4 major Dravidian languages (Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam).

Tamil tradition dates the oldest works to several millennia ago; the earliest examples of Tamil writing we have today are in inscriptions from the 3rd century BC, which are written in an adapted form of the Brahmi script (Mahadevan, 2003). Archaeological evidence obtained from inscriptions excavated in 2005 dates the language to around 1000 BC.

Tamil has had its share of borrowing words from other languages, notably that of Sanskrit words during the medieval period. This was, however, removed by many 20th century purists, notably Parithimaar Kalaignar and Maraimalai Adigal. This movement was called ‘thanith thamizh iyakkam’ (meaning, pure Tamil movement). Tamil, thus, in formal documents, public speeches and scientific discourses is largely free of Sanskrit loan words.

While other pre-Aryan languages were happily courting Sanskrit and Prakrit (600 BC-600AD), Old Tamil stood firm in its corner refusing to yield.

Where Tamil is spoken:

Tamil is the official language of the state of ‘Tamil Nadu’ in India. It is also widely spoken in other southern Indian states, the Union Territory of Pudhucherry, North east Sri Lanka and Malaysia.

Dialects of the Language and where they are Spoken:

Twently-two current dialects of ‘Tamil’ are listed in ‘The Ethnologue’ which include Adi Dravida, Aiyar, Aiyangar, Arava, Burgandi, Kasuva, Kongar, Korava, Korchi, Madrasi, Parikala, Pattapu Bhasha, Sri Lanka Tamil, Malaya Tamil, Burma Tamil, South Africa Tamil, Tigalu, Harijan, Sankethi, Hebbar, Tirunelveli and Madurai. Other known dialects are Kongu and Kumari. Although not a dialect, the Tamil spoken in Chennai (capital of Tamil Nadu) infuses English words and is called ‘Madras Bashai’.

Thirukkural:

One of the most notable literary and ethical treatises in the Indian languages, Thirukkural, is written by Thiruvalluvar. There is a general consensus among the historians and literary authorities that Thirukkural was written around 2000 years ago.

Dr. Albert Schweitzer, Nobel Laureate, notes that, “There hardly exists in the literature of the world a collection of maxims in which we find such lofty wisdom as in Thirukkural”

Dr. G. U. Pope, a Christian Missionary and Translator of Thirukkural in English writes, “The Kural is an integral painting of a civilization which is harmonious in itself and which possesses a clearly recognizable unity."

India’s father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi, notes, “I wanted to learn Tamil, only to enable me to study Valluvar’s Thirukkural through his mother tongue itself…. It is a treasure of wisdom…”

Interesting Facts about the Language:

Classical Hebrew terms like tuki and ahalat are close to the Tamil words tokai and akil respectively. Although English words like 'sandalwood' and 'rice' are borrowed from the Greek language, their origin, some claim, is in fact Tamil.

Even the minutest of fractions have a place in ‘Tamil’ language. Some interesting examples include the term immi referred to the fraction of 1/320 x 1/7, one-seventh of this fraction termed as anu, one-eleventh of an anu as mummi and one ninth of a mummi as kuNam.

Tamil’s Love for the Language:

The Tamil speaking people in the state of ‘Tamil Nadu’ in India are very passionate about their language, and feel that if Hindi, the national language of India, enters their land, their classical language and ancient culture/tradition would be no more, citing cities like Mumbai, Kolkata, Hyderabad where the native language is rendered nearly auxiliary.

In an address in 1962, former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, C N Annadurai, made the following statements opposing imposition of Hindi: "It is claimed that Hindi should be common language (in India) because it is spoken by the majority. Why should we then claim the tiger as our national animal instead of the rat which is so much more numerous? Or the peacock as our national bird when the crow is ubiquitous?”

Annadurai kept up the rhetoric in Parliament, saying, "Since every school in India teaches English, why can't it be our link language? Why do Tamils have to study English for communication with the world and Hindi for communication within India? Do we need a big door for the big dog and a small door for the small dog? I say, let the small dog use the big door too!"

The language issue still evokes strong passions among Tamils and the words of Annadurai are fondly remembered.

On Why Tamil is a Classical Language:

University of California, Berkeley, holds a ‘Tamil’ Conference annually. Its Chair in Tamil Studies, Prof. George L. Hart, writes, “To qualify as a classical tradition, a language must fit several criteria: it should be ancient, it should be an independent tradition that arose mostly on its own and not as an offshoot of another tradition, and it must have a large and extremely rich body of ancient literature. Unlike the other modern languages of India, Tamil meets each of these requirements. It is extremely old (as old as Latin and older than Arabic); it arose as an entirely independent tradition, with almost no influence from Sanskrit or other languages; and its ancient literature is indescribably vast and rich.” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 07:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Biased article

This article does not highlight the greatness of Tamil in full. There is enough evidence to show that Tamil is the source of all Dravidian languages. The concept of Proto Dravidian has been introduced by Kannadigas and others who just cant bear to think that their dialect, Kannada, originated from Tamil! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.99.62 (talk) 14:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Tamil is the source of all major languages of the world

There is a strong argument with evidence that Tamil originated when humans learned to speak. Devaneya Pavanar honored as Sun of language has a basis on which he proposed this theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devaneya_Pavanar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 06:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

This is Tamil nationalist nonsense. The article will give the point of view of historical linguistics. There is no such thing as "the mother of all languages" this concept only exists in the imaginations of all kinds of nationalists all over the world and always in regard to their own native language. Pavanar's theories are fringe and probably do not even deserve mention in the article, and certainly not in the history section. If they do deserve mention it would be in a section on Tamil language politics.·Maunus·ƛ· 15:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Maunus, you cant condemn anything in an offensive language. First learn to maintain certain decorum in a public forum like this. Devaneya Pavanar's conclusion is based on linguistic research. No other language has such evidence to prove it is the mother of all other languages. There was just one language in the beginning, for your kind information, from which others evolved. Until proved otherwise, Pavanar's statements do have value. It is not just politics. Dont hate any language, after all they are just medium of communication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 07:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

PAVANAR may be wrong but I am not sure. If anyone do not agree with his views, he/she should come forward to contradict Pavanar's conclusions with more valuable evidences/links instead of condemning outright using unpleasant words such as 'nonsense'.

K.Ramadurai 17:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Tamil is the pride of India

These are the exact words of her excellency, the President of India.

thaindian.com/newsportal/politics/tamil-is-indias-pride-says-pratibha-patil-lead_100384782.html

Coimbatore, June 23 (IANS) President Pratibha Patil inaugurated the World Classical Tamil Conference here Wednesday, describing Tamil history as India’s pride. “The history of the Tamils is our nation’s pride,” Patil said in her inaugural speech to applause from the thousands gathered for the five-day event. Speaking in this decked-up town some 510 km from Chennai, the president pointed out that Tamil got the status of a classical language in 2004 due to its role as a carrier of great culture, not just because of its age. “Many concepts intrinsic to India’s society and basic to its polity are found in Tamil discourse over the millennia. For example, respect for each other’s religion has long been part of Tamil cultural tradition,” she said. Patil added that Tamil Nadu — home to the largest number of Tamils all over the world — has been leading in “social reform, fighting social biases and working for achieving a society where people from all sections of society would be treated with equal respect”.

Thousands of Tamil scholars and language experts from India and about 50 other countries have gathered for the conference. About 1,000 academic papers will be presented at the meeting, including about 200 from abroad. Tamil, one of the oldest living languages, is spoken by an estimated 75 million people, mostly in Tamil Nadu. Patil said the Indian concept of devolution of powers to the village panchayats was an idea borrowed from economic units in Tamil Nadu over the years. “These village panchayats were, in fact, little republics enjoying a great deal of local autonomy with powers of taxation for local purposes. They also served as centres of social life and culture. It is this model of rural development that can bring progress and prosperity in our villages.” Saying that culture’s “most significant contribution” was its literature, Patil said Tamil Language was “amongst the oldest living languages of the world with its extra-ordinary volume of literature and grammar”. Mentioning the literature in Sangam period, she said that the poets were from all classes including women.

She urged the younger generation to anchor themselves with the “knowledge of Tamil culture, literature and values”. “I am confident that as living language, Tamil will evolve to meet the needs of a changing world, even as it draws strength from its ancient roots.” Speaking on the occasion, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi said Tamil was not only an international language “it is like a mother for all the languages of the world”.

“This World Classical Tamil Conference is different from the previous eight conferences. The three words — World, Classical and Tamil — not only contain a depth of meaning but also describe the conference,” he said. Tamil Nadu Governor Surjit Singh Barnala and Deputy Chief Minister M.K. Stalin also spoke on the occasion. Earlier, President Patil gave away the Kalaignar M. Karunanidhi Classical Tamil Award to Finnish Tamil scholar Asko Parpo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 14:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Nothing like Proto Dravidian

The statement that Tamil evolved from Proto Dravidian should be removed from this article, as it is not confirmed. It has been added by anti Tamils, the leading among them being Kannadigas who have invented this concept and the concept of Tamil-Kannada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 07:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC) There is no language like Proto Dravidian, because if such a language existed it should have been a really great language, at least great enough to have a name of its own. Only Tamil is closest to Proto Dravidian, and hence it follows Proto Dravidian is nothing but Tamil. The great linguist Dr.George Hart, doesnt talk of such a language. He says only Tamil and sanskrit can be called classical: tamil.berkeley.edu/tamil-chair/letter-on-tamil-as-a-classical-language The word proto dravidian is an invention to degrade Tamil and not to accept the fact that she is the mother of all the other South Indian languages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I also could not understand this mythical "Proto Dravidian". Its vocabulary is said to be 90% Tamil. If so, then it is Tamil! இது என்னவோ தமிழின் தொன்மையை மறைக்கும் முயற்சியாகத்தான் தெரிகிறது. அல்லது அப்பழைய மொழியைத் தமிழ் என்று அழைத்தால் "வேறு சிலருக்கு" வருத்தமோ என்னமோ? சில வலைத்தளங்களில் கன்னடமும் தமிழ் அளவுக்குப் பழைமையானது என்று பிரச்சாரம் செய்யக் கண்டிருக்கிறேன்.

The issue is a bit complicated. The oldest text defining the Tamil speaking areas says, "வடவேங்கடம் முதல் தென்குமரியாயிடைத் தமிழ் கூறும் நல்லுலகு" - the fair Tamil-speaking land lying between Vengadam (Tirupathi) and Kumari (Kanyakumari). This includes the present day Malayalam speaking areas, but specifically excludes the Telugu and Kannda speaking lands. That means at the dawn of the Christian era, Telugu and Kannada had already separated from the original Dravidian language, call it whatever you may.

The antiquity ascribed to Tamil is very conservative. By the third century B.C, Maamulanaar already notes, "நந்தர் மறைத்த நவநிதியும்" - the "nine treasures' the Nandas of Pataliputra were said to have hidden in Ganga, and "வம்ப மோரியர்" - the quarrelsome or upstart Mauryas. In நெடுநல்வாடை - Nedunalvaadai, a Sangam work, it is mentioned that the vernal equinox lies in the middle ten days of the month Vaikasi - around 24th of May. The vernal equinox is at present at March 21st. It was at May 24th in the third millenium B.C. ((63/365 X 26,000 = 4000 years ago, roughly) These and other antique references are simply ignored and Tholkaapiyam is assigned the first century B.C!

During the last Ice Age, the sea levels were lower, and the Tamil coast extended further than today. When the ice melted and the sea level rose, it subsumed large areas along the coast. I firmly believe that the legend of "குமரிக் கண்டம்" - the lost Kumari land, refers to this, and the Tamils have been there in their present homeland for the last ten thousand years at least. The submerged areas can be seen in Google Earth. My friend Thiru Balasubramaniam B+ve, popularly known as "Orissa Balu" is hunting for the lost sunken lands for the past two years, with some notable discoveries. - Gopalan evr (talk) 05:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Tamil script

Tamil script#Overview reads: "The Tamil script has twelve vowels (உயிரெழுத்து uyirezhuthu "soul-letters"), eighteen consonants (மெய்யெழுத்து meyyeẓuttu "body-letters") and one character, the āytam ஃ (ஆய்தம்), which is classified in Tamil grammar as being neither a consonant nor a vowel (அலியெழுத்து aliyeẓuttu "the hermaphrodite letter"). Though often part of the vowel set (உயிரெழுத்துக்கள் uyirezhuthukkaḷ "vowel class"), the script, however, is syllabic and not alphabetic[1]."

Perhaps this should be rewritten as: "The Tamil script has twelve vowels (உயிரெழுத்து uyirezhuthu "soul-letters"), eighteen consonants (மெய்யெழுத்து meyyeẓuttu "body-letters") and one character, the āytam ஃ (ஆய்தம்), which is classified in Tamil grammar as being neither a consonant nor a vowel (அலியெழுத்து aliyeẓuttu "the hermaphrodite letter"), though often part of the vowel set (உயிரெழுத்துக்கள் uyirezhuthukkaḷ "vowel class"). The script, however, is syllabic and not alphabetic[1]."

? Apokrif (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Tamil in Caribbean!!!???

Indian people that arrived in the Caribbean region were a jumble of different people from the larger India. Most spoke a form or hindi or decided to speak a form of Hindi by conscensous....and Hindi died out by the early 60's. Most people with Indian backgrounds only know a few words...probably mother / father / aunt / uncle/ brother / sister

Age

This link http://www.ciil-classicaltamil.org/project1.html referenced in the opening paragraph of the article is dubious. Please provide reliable and academic references (if any). 65.49.2.153 (talk) 20:28, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

== Dubious? A Centre belonging to the Indian government's Ministry of Human Resource Development is considered dubious?.Any logical explanations please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.54.134.5 (talk) 09:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

UNESCO MEMORY OF THE WORL PROGRAM

there were 3 enteries and all 3 were were ancient manuscripts.

first: in 1997 was India - The I.A.S. Tamil Medical Manuscript Collection it was an ancient medical prescription on herb - you can see here on its ancient mentioned

second on saiva manuscripts in 2005 - it too was with ancient antiquity

then rigveda in 2007.

NEXT: since out of the only three enteries from India the first two were in tamil - and this statement is pure commonsence since 1997 and 2005 is obviously earlier then the third entery in 2007. Its a factual true logic statement that refer Tamil manuscript in tamil language section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swetha55 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Tamil in Manipur?

Hi, just wondering about the claim that there is a sizable number of Tamil speakers in the northeastern state of Manipur. A citation for this rather surprising claim would be useful. --babbage (talk) 17:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Ack, I have no idea how that crept into the article. Thanks for spotting it, I've taken the claim out. -- Arvind (talk) 21:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh great, glad to be of service :)

Well the Tamils who fled Myanmar about many decades ago took refuge in Manipur as it is the territory controlled by the Indian union that is close to Myanmar.I once read an article in some site regarding it.This is not a baseless claim but deserves some research.A year ago I saw an TV[Makkal Tholaikkaatchchi]interview of a Myanmar Tamil guy who claimed there are about 10 lakh Tamils in Myanmar.But I hope ther will be atleast 500,000 Arun1paladin (talk) 23:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

That is correct. I couldn't find a source for the actual population, but the town of Moreh, India has a lot of Tamils as confirmed by this. However, given that the population of the town itself is less than 15000, that doesn't amount to much and is not important enough for this particular section. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 23:55, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure about the authority of people deleting line entries. Tamil in Manipur is not a claim. It is a fact. Question to Mr Aravind, have you heard these towns in Manipur called Moreh and Tamu. Before you delete entries, please check facts. Suggest you actually visit the places. Here is the website of Manipur's Moreh Tamil Sangam : http://tamilsangammoreh.org/ --தொழில்நுட்பம் (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Some information about Tamil Hindu temples and festival celebrations in Manipur can be found here: http://www.kamakotisevajharkhand.org/manipur.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.166.128.11 (talk) 17:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I had been to Moreh in 2002, and I found that quite a lot of Tamils were there. They claimed that there were about a thousand families on both sides of the border.- Gopalan evr (talk) 10:04, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Tamil in Gujarat:

Surat Tamil Sangam : surattamilsangam.org/

Ahmedabad Tamil Sangam Express News article : http://www.indianexpress.com/news/tamil-sangam-trying-hard-to-keep-language-a/633385/

there is not even a single mention of sanskrit on entire page

try the "find" function... it does not show up even once, that sanscrit is mentioned in this article!

the etymology and also historical relationship between these two most ancient india languages cannot not be mentioned in this article on the tamil language.

here are some references:

http://www.ifpindia.org/Relationship-Between-Tamil-and-Sanskrit.html http://www.aurovillelanguagelab.org/Research/A%20Comparison%20of%20Tamil%20and%20Sanskrit.htm http://tamil.berkeley.edu/Tamil%20Chair/TamilClassicalLanguage/TamilClassicalLgeLtr.html http://www.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?p=147743 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reetside (talk • contribs) 16:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You might want to try the search with Sanskrit rather than Sanscrit. :D Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 17:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

deleted "Tamil is the Classical Language" section

because it contained more political restatements of information already on the page (tamil is a classical language, the earliest literature in tamil, etc.) along with some pseudoscience about lemuria. that's not how this got to be a "featured article." Andrew Ollett (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The history section

Folks, the history section of this article needs serious work - it's not of FA quality as it stands. I suggest we work to redo it using Swedish language as the model - i.e., have three sections for Old Tamil, Middle Tamil and Modern Tamil with each describing the major characteristics of that stage of the language, the main changes that took place in the language in that stage and the type of works in which that stage is attested. Does that sound sensible? -- Arvind (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Very much. Please go ahead with the proposed rewrite. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 11:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, splitting it chronologically makes it much simpler to follow.Pectore^talk 05:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Sundar and Pectore. I've redone the lead now, do you think it's on the right track? I'll work on the rest section by section over the next few days if it is. -- Arvind (talk) 21:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on a brilliant rewrite! The quality is impeccable, especially those portions related to the Sangam period and Sangam literature. I had previously attempted to clean up some poor prose and questionable sourcing in that area, but it was nothing compared to what you accomplished. Please keep up the great work, and consider bringing that same quality to other Tamil articles  :) Doc Tropics 23:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Population of Tamil speakers

I have just reverted two edits changing population and associated reference in the infobox. I've done so because that reference uses Wikipedia as a source for the data and therefore will not qualify. Any other references would be acceptable. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 21:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; since we can't reference ourselves, your revert was just spiffy :) Doc Tropics 18:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I have modified the total Tamil speakers field in the infobox by replacing 66 million with 74 million. I have referred a reliable site which estimates total Tamil population up to 74 million.
- Mithun Chuckraverthy (talk) 06:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Tamilo.com is not a reliable source. It is a commericial portal. WP:RS explains what qualifies as a |reliable source.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:05, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Whoops! I thought it woulb be reliable. Thanks for the kind info! :-) Mithun Chuckraverthy (talk) 07:15, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

the best reliable sources are the census numbers. within a few months the tn 2001 census will be out and then this number can be revised upwards.--Sodabottle (talk) 09:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks bro! :-) Mithun Chuckraverthy (talk) 13:26, 01 October 2010 (UTC)

Consonant phonemes

This article shows a table of consonant phonemes different from the one on Tamil phonology and on Tamil script it's different again. What's right? Munci (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not the one who wrote the articles, and I agree that there may be some problems (especially about vowels), but basically, a phoneme may be mapped to several different sounds, while more than one phonemes may be mapped to the same sound too. In short, things in // and things in [] are different. For example, ட் is /ṭ/ as a phoneme while its actual sound may be [ʈ] or [ɖ] or [ɽ]. Additionally, there are some historical changes. I'm not an expert and I may be wrong, but AFAIK historically ந் is [n̪] and ன் is [ṉ] but today for many speakers the both are the same /n/ (which may be [n] or [n̪] in IPA) which is only contrasted to ண் /ṇ/ [ɳ]. —Gyopi (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

They're different because they're doing different things - the chart on Tamil script represents the different allophonic sounds a dialect can have, the chart on Tamil phonology represents the dominant sound in spoken colloquial Tamil, the chart here represents the dominant sound in spoken formal Tamil. If you look at the cited sources, they make this very clear. I'll insert a note to this effect and remove the contradiction template, if that is acceptable to you. -- Arvind (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The difference between them isn't clear in the body of the article though. Maybe it should be added there. The dental/alveolar n problem seems to be cleared up as a difference between formal Tamil making the distinction and colloquial Tamil not making the distinction. That makes the chart here showing the same phonemes as the script article now. On the other hand, there is still /s/ which appears only in the phonology article and /r/ which doesn't appear in the phonology one. I thought an explanation might be because Tamil only uses /s/ for loanwords. Or is it just an allophone of c? Munci (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

That's the theory - that colloquial Tamil doesn't distinguish between the two "r" sounds and formal Tamil only uses /s/ in loanwords. But in reality even formal spoken Tamil uses /s/ in native words (who ever says "cheyven"?). We probably need to rethink what the phonology chart shows. All three approaches - formal Tamil, colloquial Tamil and dialects - are legitimate, and to simply have one of them here as if it's the only correct one isn't really a good solution. -- Arvind (talk) 20:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

When you say the two "r" sounds, which do you mean? I see 3 rhotics total in the charts:ɾ̪, r and ɻ. Maybe we should just put all possible phonemes in the table and have superscript numbers explaining the ones that are only sometimes there including explaining register? Munci (talk) 13:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

That might work. I'll pull out a good source for the various allophones in Tamil dialects and take a crack at putting a table together. -- Arvind (talk) 18:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

"Two R's in Tamil script" mean ர and ற (ழ is traditionally considered as a kind of L, as in "l" in "Tamil" தமிழ் ), but you're right, it's confusing. What I can find online are Geometry, kinematics, and acoustics of Tamil liquid consonants, Liquids in Tamil, The Tamil Liquids, and Rhotics, final and otherwise. (The last one is a part of what I "cite web"ed in the article.) —Gyopi (talk) 14:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, maybe IPA for ன, ISO ṉa, should be simply [n], like in Tamil script. Officially, ந vs. ன = dental vs. alveolar, all right, but even so, it's just dental vs. alveolar isn't it? If we add the [ ̠] to [n], that means Retracted (phonetics) i.e. post-alveolar. Is this supposed to be dental vs. post-alveolar? ISO ṉa has the under-bar meaning it's not the dental na, which may or may not mean ṉa is post-alveolar [n̠]. If it's just alveolar as opposed to dental, [n] should suffice. I was confused myself and thought it was [n̠] as in the article, but we should just use [n] unless there is some evidence that it's postalveolar. — Gyopi (talk) 09:42, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

IPA uses n for alveolar and n̪ for dental - the bridge is added under the symbol for dental consonants when it is necessary to disambiguate between them and alveolar consonants. -- Arvind (talk) 20:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, sorry if I was not clear enough: I'm not talking about the bridge (not [n] vs. [n̪], i.e. not alveolar vs. dental)—the bridge is okay; I'm talking about the MINUS SIGN BELOW, i.e. [n] vs. [n̠], i.e. alveolar vs. post-alveolar. [n̪] is n + the bridge below (U+032A), which you're talking about. [n̠] is n + the minus sign below (U+0320), which I'm talking about. They are different. Besides, ன is alveolar, not dental. Let me repeat myself: IPA for the alveolar ன—currently [n̠] (not to be confused with [n̪]) should be [n], unless we say it's post-alveolar (it might be, but I'm not sure. That's what I'm asking about). IPA for the dental ந is currently [n̪], which is okay like you said. —Gyopi (talk) 08:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood. I'd never noticed the bar below the [n], it certainly wasn't there when we first put in the table. How odd. But you're absolutely correct - the IPA for ன should be [n], without a bar. -- Arvind (talk) 13:01, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I checked the log and it seems that the underline was first put in 2007 [1] (before that, the alveolar nasal was not in the table). The edit summery says it's "Annamalai et al table". It might be actually more correct. But both Schiffman and The World's Writing Systems say the same thing: ந and ன = dental vs. alveolar = phonetically different but phonemically the same.

There are 3 things to distinguish here: (1) dental nasal, (2) alveolar nasal, and (3) post-alveolar nasal.

• ṉ, U+1E49 LATIN SMALL LETTER N WITH LINE BELOW, means (2) in the ISO transliteration (=IPA [n]).
• [n̠], n followed by U+0320 COMBINING MINUS SIGN BELOW, means (3) in IPA.
• [n̪], n followed by U+032A COMBINING BRIDGE BELOW, means (1) in IPA.

[n̠] itself is not odd. Tamil's sister Toda indeed has (3). Apparently, Malayalam too, in some dialects. It's possible that Tamil has the same post-alveolar nasal. But it's also possible that the original editor simply mistook the ISO ṉ for the IPA [n̠]. —Gyopi (talk) 10:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

அலியெழுத்து ??

அலியெழுத்து ?? I don't think the ஆய்தம் is called "The hermaphrodite letter" or "அலியெழுத்து". So it should be rewritten as:

"The Tamil script has twelve vowels (உயிரெழுத்து uyirezhuthu "soul-letters"), eighteen consonants (மெய்யெழுத்து meyyeẓuttu "body-letters") and one character, the āytam ஃ (ஆய்தம்), which is classified in Tamil grammar as being neither a consonant nor a vowel, though often part of the vowel set (உயிரெழுத்துக்கள் uyirezhuthukkaḷ "vowel class"). The script, however, is syllabic and not alphabetic[1]." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogeshg1987 (talk • contribs) 06:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The word itself is அலி + எழுத்து ?! I too think it's a strange name, though I'm not sure (it might be actually correct. In grammar of an Indic language, anusvara and visarga are sometimes called medials, in this case perhaps suggesting that they are neutral existence, somewhat vowel-like and somewhat consonant-like). Personally, I think you can edit it that way, but please use ḻ instead of zh. It may look odd, but we use ḻ when formally transliterating ழ. —Gyopi (talk) 09:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The word அலி is in my opinion, relatively new. But I know this is no place for opinions, but facts. So will verify it soon. அர்தநாரி used to be the word to refer to hermaphrodites or transgenders. Even "hermaphrodite" is not the apt word. Can anyone cite a link for the அலியெழுத்து word as some kinda proof ?? Thanks --Yogeshg1987 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogeshg1987 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't use IAST

Currently many words are tagged wrongly as IAST, while ISO is used too as in {{transl|ta|ISO|tamiḻ}}. Don't use IAST. It's a system for Sanskrit, and Tamil cannot be transliterated properly with it. For example, {{IAST|peṇṭirēm}} is incorrect: IAST doesn't have short 'e' and long 'ē', as 'e' is always long in Sanskrit. The article itself says in the {{Tamil transliteration}} template that Tamil words used here are transliterated according to the ISO standard.

This is just a minor detail and not really important, but if you want to transliterate a Tamil word, you can use {{transl|ta|ISO|...}}; or if you just want to be nice to old MSIE so that it can display a special character like ṇ correctly using a special font, you might want to use {{Unicode|...}}. To quote a word used only in spoken language in ISO, {{Unicode|...}} might be more adequate because we're not transliterating a word written in Tamil script. Also, perhaps a historical form of a Tamil word used centuries ago can be transliterated and tagged simply as {{Unicode|...}} too, unless you're actually transliterating a historically-used Tamil spelling where apparently vowel signs were a little different from the ones used in today's Tamil script. —Gyopi (talk) 08:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I'd asked this question on another article, but was told that it's similar and no concerns. This is a little more prevalent across a few articles.-SpacemanSpiff 15:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Transliterating in ISO and tagging it 'IAST' is weird but usually harmless, I think. It just looks impossible and unprofessional when the language is Dravidian, and on Wikipedia, if you use IAST template, the word is marked as xml:lang="sa" (Sanskrit) too, though it's Tamil here (you can check that on Firefox by right-clicking on the word and selecting 'properties'). In this article, 'IAST' is often used this way: Traditional Tamil grammar consists of five parts, namely ''{{IAST|eḻuttu}}'', ''col'', ''{{IAST|poruḷ}}'', ''yāppu'', ''{{IAST|aṇi}}''. As you can see, col and yāppu are not marked, suggesting that editors used IAST tags simply to control fonts for special characters (ḻ, ḷ, ṇ), and not to specify the transliteration scheme. Besides, the article says in the "info box" that everything is transliterated according to the ISO 15919 standard. So they are ISO by default, and I don't think we need to mark everything with lengthy {{transl|ta|ISO|...}}. How about just replacing {{IAST| with {{Unicode| ? —Gyopi (talk) 08:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent adds on excavation and beliefs

I just removed the following bit from the article to figure out how and where to add the excavation/finding bit (the Pothigai hills bit is IMO not relevant in this section).

"There is a strong belief among tamil people that the language has been originated from Pothigai hills of Tirunelveli district in Tamilnadu. To add to this, a number of earthenware urns with the rudimentary Tamil-Brahmi script dating from around 3,800 years ago were unearthed from a place called Adichanallur[2] Adichchanallur, An Iron Age Urn Burial Site[3] Rudimentary Tamil-Brahmi script unearthed at Adichanallur near Tirunelveli."

Any opinions welcome. –SpacemanSpiff 17:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Spiff, the Adichannallur claims have never been verified and ASI has backtracked on the tamil brahmi claim.[4]. Iravatham mahadevan says, that the original potsherd has now disappeared, when he asked to see them.[5]. So this should be left out until someone actually writes up what actually is going on.--Sodabottle (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

need help in tamil language????

hi

can someone please help me translate "lucky 7" in tamil writing??

லகீ ௭.Kubek15^{T CS} 15:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

'லக்கி எ'

But I do not think that Tamil numerals are in great use among Tamils anywhere except in very limited circles.

K.Ramadurai 17:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jambolik (talk • contribs)

Sorry, The word ' லக்கி' is only a transliteration of English 'lucky'. Translation is 'பேறு'. Good luck translates as 'நற்பேறு' Lucky and luckily translate as 'நற்பேறுள்ள' and ' நற்பேறாக' respectively.. Ancient Tamil word is 'ஆகூழ்'. Generally we relate luck to goodness only. For long a Sanskrit word 'அதிருஷ்டம்' is in use in Tamil for English 'luck' with different spellings.

Therefore 'நற்பேறுள்ள எ' is the answer to the query.

K.Ramadurai 21:31, 13 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jambolik (talk • contribs)

Tamil writing

The whole para needs to be rewritten as it leaves the impression that Tamil script is derived from Vatteluthu. Tamil script is derived from Grantha (like it or not) and Vatteluthu died with the conquest of Pandya country by the Cholas and the movement of Kerala's to subsitute their Vatellethu with their newer Grantha driven Malayalam script. This needs to be done with citations. Kanatonian (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Diagnostic center —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.148.131 (talk) 08:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Réunion

There is absolutely no minority speaking Tamil on Réunion. I know that many documents from the English-speaking world stress the contrary, but they are all wrong. No French book will tell you that. That's because Reunionese people from Indian origin all speak French and Reunionese creole. Tamil is teached, as a foreign language, in only a very few schools. Thierry Caro (talk) 13:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

If that is the case, can you please add some French language /Reunion official sources to support it. Since this is sourced information, it would be better if we have official Reunion sources refuting them.--Sodabottle (talk) 13:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that there are generally no sources to affirm that something does not exist. By the way, someone has added this link on Malbars in this regard. I hope it will be sufficient. Thierry Caro (talk) 13:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

And here is a reference for a scientific paper about the dissociation of Tamil culture and language in Réunion. This one should be enough. Thierry Caro (talk) 14:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

You may also have a look at the third paragraph of this older scientific article claiming, in 1974, that Tamil language is almost completely forgotten. Thierry Caro (talk) 14:08, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

That would do Thierry. Thanks!. I will add a foot note using the sources. But i am curious, is there any census by language data for Reunion?. --Sodabottle (talk) 14:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic data are forbidden in France and thus in Réunion. As language is often related to ethnic origin, I suppose this is why there are no data about what people do speak at home. By the way, our main language-related debate is about Creole, how to write it down and its teaching at school. Thierry Caro (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

According to Languages of France#Statistics, there was census data for languages in 1999 but only for Metropolitan France. Oddly, I don't see anything about such data at fr:Recensement de population en France or at fr:Langues régionales ou minoritaires de France though. There is also English language source supporting loss:[6].

all the different groups on the island have lost their ancestral language and culture over the last two, three or four generations.

By the way, I did the same on the French version of this article. Munci (talk) 18:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Assertion regarding the mainstreaming of Tamil

Edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tamil_language&action=historysubmit&diff=367935293&oldid=367934751 added the text "It is very important Tamil becomes a part of mainstream and new media." This seems to violate WP:NPOV as it is a value assertion and not a verifiable fact. The accompanying quote from Jacques Chirac is also jarringly out of place - it's most likely that Chirac was talking about French (his native language) and not Tamil. If it's OK with everyone, I'd like to remove this text and recommend instead that further edits expand upon nationalist, political, and academic influences on the evolution of the Tamil language, in context. - Xenophon Fenderson (talk) 17:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

removed that commentary. Dont know how i missed that. That editor has been doing this POV pushing/commentary in many articles. Thanks for catching this.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Phoneme/Allophone

"Phonemes in brackets are voiced equivalents. Both voiceless and voiced forms are represented by the same character in Tamil, and voicing is determined by context"

Doesn't this mean that they're not really phonemes? Aren't they then allophones? Or are separate words homonyms (written the same), but not homophones (having separate phonemic and phonetic representations)?

If they are allophones, I think a better wording would be "The phones in parenthesis are allophonic variants" or maybe say "sounds" instead of "phones" if you, like me, dislike the use of the word "phone" haha. 97.81.65.138 (talk) 12:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Can I start a new page to list Tamil equivalents of the Sanskrit loanwords?

I've planned to create a new page to list equivalent Tamil words for the Sanskrit loanwords which are very common in spoken Tamil. As I am a new wikipedian, I seek help from the oldies if I can do so. Do I need any references? Will I be at the risk of violating any of the Wikipedia's rules and regulations? Please, help me guys! --Chuckraverthy (talk) 09:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

That wouldn't be an encyclopaedic article. It would be an indiscriminate list. The history of the thanithamizh movement has been documented already in Tanittamil Iyakkam. What you are describing belongs in the Tamil Wiktionary (not as a list or an article, but in indiviudual pages). You can improve the existing words at tamil wiktionary--Sodabottle (talk) 09:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought in that way too. Lemme check if I could do it on wiktionary. Anyways, thanks for the sufficient referrals and information! --Chuckraverthy (talk) 10:13, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I guess, I could submit it as a wikibook! --Chuckraverthy (talk) 10:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

See Tamil lists Here, if you have RS sources that publish what you are talking about then you can start the list but it has to be cited. Kanatonian (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, Kanatonian! Can you please explain me what actually are RS sources? --Mithun Chuckraverthy 21:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckraverthy (talk • contribs)

Lost sounds of old Tamil

The discussion should put light on pronunciation of following sounds 'ங்','ஞ்','ண்','ந்' (and even 'ழ')which is lost its prominence in modern spoken Tamil. But it is good to be informed that the sounds 'ந்'and 'ன்'; 'ற்'and 'ர்';'ல்' and 'ள்' are different and is still strictly preserved and spoken in Malayalam along with the above mentioned sounds, as it retains its old-Tamil pronunciation.

In Malayalam, 'ந்' is Dental( nasal sound 'n' in the group of 'த') where 'ன்' is Alveolar (nasal sound 'n' in the group of English "t)

'ற்' is hard 'r'(Alveolar) or say 'rr' while 'ர்' is soft 'r'(Dental)(with a slight 'j' in it ) say 'jr'

'ல்' is Dental ( 'l' with a straight tongue, where top of tongue touches upper mouth) and 'ள்' a Retroflex ( 'l' with a curved tongue, where bottom of tongue touches upper mouth)

Some short phrases in Tamil

The table shows some common short phrases in Tamil. This is converted from kannada and doesnt represent Tamil words properly. Someone can correct this and include it in the article.117.99.85.33 (talk) 09:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Words/phrases	Transliteration	Meaning
வணக்கம்	Vanakkam.	Hi/Hello.
நீங்கள் எப்படி இருக்கிறீர்கள்?	Neengal eppadi irukkireergal?	How do you do?
எப்படி இருக்கிறாயடா?	Eppadi irukkiraayada?	How are you? (informal, to a male)
எப்படி இருக்கிறாயடி?	Eppadi irukkiraayadi?	How are you? (informal, to a female)
தாங்கள் நலமா?	Thaangal nalama?	How are you? (formal)
தங்களை கண்டத்தில் மகிழ்ச்சியுற்றேன்	Thangalai kandathil magizhchiyuttren	Pleased to meet you.
மீண்டும் காணலாம்	Meendum kaanalaam	We will meet again.
நன்றி	Nandri	Thank you.
ஆம்	Aam	Yes.
இல்லை	Illai	No.
வேண்டாம், நன்றி	Vendaam, nandri.	No, thank you.
எவ்வளவு?	Evvalavu?	How much?
எத்தனை?	Ethanai?	How many?
எங்கே?	Enge?	Where?
எப்படி?	Eppadi?	How?
எப்பொழுது?	Eppozhudhu?	When?
யார்?	Yar?	Who?
என்ன?	Enna?	What?
காலை வணக்கம்	Kaalai vanakkam	Good Morning.
மாலை வணக்கம்	Maalai vanakkam	Good Afternoon.
இரவு வணக்கம்	Iravu vanakkam	Good night.
நல்வரவு	Nalvaravu	Welcome.

All phrases in the table are in standard Tamil and perfect. This style of speech is not in practice in any region of Tamil Nadu nor elsewhere. This is being used in news papers, movies related to mythology or history and TVs in news bulletins, mythological and historical serials only. I mean that no one can talk in this style in the bazaar freely without attracting comments. If desired the table can be added to the article.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

states by tamil speakers in India

Recently Manipur and Gujarat have been added to states that have significant Tamil speakers in India. We need to come up with some criteria as which states to add to that list. Do we go by absolute numbers or by percentage? In Manipur 0.011 % speaks tamil and in Gujarat 0.004 % speaks Tamil. These are not by any means "significant". If we add these we have to add a lot of other states. I am removing the both states there pending the outcome of the discussion here.

Here is the raw data from 2001 census - [7] and here is our article ordering states by tamil speakers - States of India by Tamil speakers. --Sodabottle (talk) 11:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

This article is not a list of every place where a Tamil speaker lives, listing the top 3-4 may be reasonable, but anything beyond that is entirely undue and shouldn't happen. —SpacemanSpiff 12:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

universities list

I have searched a lot and got only 32 no. of universities worldwide, teaching Tamil. I think there will not be more universities. If the universities have Tamil department, definitely they will include in their website, which will be available in Google. Most of the universities has Indian language department, but does not teach Tamil. I have searched a lot and got only this much number of universities. So i think we can include the links in Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajaram Sarangapani (talk • contribs) 08:48, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I believe such a list is completely unencyclopedic and certainly doesnt belong in this article - probably a separate article, but not as a section here. Again thats my opinion, lets see what others think. As this article is a featured article, we need to be careful about adding all sorts of directory like info, else this will lose its FA status--Sodabottle (talk) 08:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

We don't include such lists in any articles - wikipedia is not a directory.·Maunus·ƛ· 08:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Volcabulary

In this article it is said "Munda (e.g. tavaḷai "frog" from Munda tabeg)". I wonder why tavaḷai is not a native Tamil word! The word only means that a creature that jumps intermittently. Another Tamil word tavaṇai = installment and in Tamil ḷ > ṇ is common. There are many other words with close connection. I know this is not a place to challenge published results. But it sounds incorrect to me.--C.R.Selvakumar (talk) 06:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

inaccurate Indian maps

Maps of India created by user zakuya inaccurately depict the whole of jammu Kashmir as under Indian control, and makes no attempt to clarify this glaring error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.122.121.107 (talk) 15:44, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

2 surviving classical language?

I have some questions 1.Does the link mention what is the second classical language? 2.If it mention Sanskrit there,then the question is if Tamil is just a surviving language and NOT living language? 3.Though Kannada and Telugu are not considered as classical in international academic levels the Indian gvt made a political move of declaring them as classic.So if these languages have to be considered as a classic from an academic point of view then there are 4 classical languages.So why should the reference 2 exist in this article?(Arun1paladin (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC))

Agree with you to a certain extent. This article is not the place to allude to the status of other languages. I have now changed it to "Tamil is one of the classical languages of India.", This way we need not argue how many other classical languages are there and whether they are living or not.--Sodabottle (talk) 06:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi.Just note that since it is mentioned surviving language, it does not totally mean only surviving & not living then? and so coming to a conclusion or raising question "Then Not a living language?" -- is totally in-correct. Obviously it is very much certain that Tamil is also a living language along with its survival history over the years. Again unlike sanksrit, Tamil is not derived further or divided & so its longetivity is clear and certain. So the statements - 'Tamil is one of the two longest surviving classical languages' is very much correct and proper enough to mention it in the article. Also, I do not know why to bring sanskrit into this picture. ---- Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 09:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If you go to Sanskrit page then there is a difference in opinion among linguists that HOW dead is Sanskrit.Eg .Is it ass dead as latin?As dead as Greek?.But there the discussion is not the topic if Sanskrit is dead or surviving or living.Moreover what about the political movie of GoI having declared Kannada and Telugu as Classic.Aren't they surviving or living language?I don't know why undue importance is give to the dead language Sanksirt even by the GoI by having it in the 8 th schedule of the constitution and allowing people to write UNPSC exams in Sanskrit too.There can be no reason other than religious one in giving undue importance to Sanskrit by the GoI and a SECTION of people who follow numerous faiths native to India(Arun1paladin (talk) 11:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC))

Hi. Again keep reminded that the longevity of Tamil and its survival is not a question here and records including more reliable sources suggests that & approves it. And since it is a particular language page describing its features and its history, heritage, no need to bring in unnecessary, irrelevant commentary or reasoning questions in comparison to this article with others. It is simple to include and highlight the fundamental basic details of the article's content within the para-metrical limit of ency information with solid proof of relevance and reference in support of it. Thats it. All important that must be noted is, all info strict only within this article and so comparison of other sorts shows unnecessary extreme concern and degrading the present form and reducing its values -- which cannot be accepted. So mention of "Tamil is one of the two longest surviving classical language in India" is genuine & significant enough to include on the merit of the article & this does not relate to other articles in comparison of any-sorts. such claims are totally baseless and defaming the articles history (both) and beyond. ---- Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 02:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. The continuity of Tamil language existence (also as a living language) as a one of two ancient classical languages of India is not a mere written statement, but really does fully means it. Just mentioning facts on its antiquity and historical significance DOES NOT bring the relation (as comparison) of others in the pipeline of any sorts. Also no need to fear on its FA status as we are giving genuine reasons and including under clear reference and publications with full support. And so it very clear, evident & fully authoritative to include Tamil as one of the two longest surviving classical languages in India.

---- Sources: 

http://books.google.com/books?id=CF5Qo4NDE64C&pg=PR5&lpg=PR5&dq=dravidian+languages+sanford+b+steever&source=blots=buKA_anfx3sig=2GNNcWoppTefjTaAWLCaRvyyEGM&hl=en&ei=SJPYTbf-NMO-0AHHybz8Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9ved=0CEcQ6AEwCDgU#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&retailer_id=android_market_live&id=CF5Qo4NDE64C

https://market.android.com/details?id=book-CF5Qo4NDE64C

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39386758/Ancient-Languages-of-Asia ------ Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 04:55, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

So as per the present edit of Kenyan20.Kannada and Telugu are either dead languages or not classical languages.Because his edit says that Tamil is one of the 2 Surviving Classical languages in India.

I don't thing that this controversial line should exist in this article at first.I think it's better to remove that line rather than having the line and debating about editing it or not.(Arun1paladin (talk) 03:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC))

Hi. Look as I already mentioned before more than presenting its original form, you seems to be worrying more on comparison grounds which shows you are one-sided & against the acceptance of the matter concerned. Either you change yourself or understand the point behind the edit and the explanation given. You are causing serious damages to this very significant constructive change with unnecessary claims to bring needless attention. ---- Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 04:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I wonder who is one sided!!.Your citation from a book written in 90's contradicts the ground reality that India as per Government of India has 4 Classical languages namely Tamil,Sanskrit,Kannada and Telugu.I strongly believe that Kannada and Telugu are are not just surviving languages but living and I think that is what every average person from Indian subcontinent believes(Arun1paladin (talk) 05:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)).

Hi. Just see that my edits are genuine & not forced with any other issues behind and so no point of bringing down other languages of India. As it is a well understand fact that all circulated around in declaring classical status to Kannada,Telugu - was one of the pure political motive & push-through behind, since before that there was a official calling - in Tamil first & Sanskrit next. In fact, unlike others for that matter, Tamil to be declared as classical language was in pipeline for at least more than 5-6 decades & so it had its very own long waiting stand in the list before others. And again if you consider ground reality in detail, many Tamil scholars still believe that evidence of Tamil's antiquity is more than 50000 BC as per the Kumari Kandam theory. So will it be accepted since it is the ground reality? Isn't it? why?.. Hence one should go with materialistic proof and historian's & researcher's discovery and findings. Thats what I did. Also note I have made the subsequent change on the page. ---- Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 06:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

So if you go by logical reasoning then SANSKRIT is DEAD.You have brought a link and you are hanging with that.I can do the same by getting a link from Indian gvt site which is about the declaration of Telugu and Kannada as classic and write a line below that controversial line saying that Tamils is one of the 3 surviving language.Anyway it's the right of hindutvas or some individual to DREAM that SANSKRIT is alive.(Arun1paladin (talk) 12:22, 24 May 2011 (UTC))

influence on Korean and Japanese

These are minority views and giving them whole sections int he article would be WP:UNDUE--Sodabottle (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, this is very much a minority view at present. More extensive study (and publication) might change that, but the theory of these relationships is not widely known, and certainly not widely accepted in academic circles yet. The policy regarding undue weight excludes this for now. Doc Tropics 16:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

understood, thanks.--Avedeus (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

They aren't just "minority views", they are minorty views on a different topic. This article is about the Tamil language. Some joker has added a confused section about a supposed Dravidian-Japonic or Dravidian-Korean language grouping. This has nothing to do with Tamil in particular. If it turns out that these views have any notability at all, they would be relevant to Dravidian_languages#Relationship_to_other_language_families, not to this article. But this is apparently cargo-cult linguistics at the level of "Apa in Korean is the same as 'Appa' in Tamil", I have serious doubt this is worth anyone's attention. It's a case of WP:REDFLAG. If you bring up excellent references, you may argue for its inclusion at the relevant spot. --dab (𒁳) 17:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Mind your language "joker", keep your personal opinions to yourself and get your points across amicably. What you call cargo cult linguistics is actually from the President of 한국타밀연구회 the Korean society of Tamil Studies. --Avedeus (talk) 00:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Meaning of the word "Tamil".

For one who seeks the Meaning of the word Tamil.

த + மி +ல்/ழ்/ள் = வைத்திருப்பது + ஒரு இடத்தில் வெளி வராமல் + இடத்தின் உள். So the sound “Thamil” could mean, "One which is protected in that place" or "One which can protect itself". பாதுகாக்கப்பட்டது அல்லது தன்னை தானே பாதுகாக்கவல்லது. more... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malarmisai (talk • contribs) 12:13, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

That is a blog without any references. Not a reliable source. Kanatonian (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks like a forced meaning. If evidences are given quoting old Tamil texts/literature where the letters த, மி, ல் etc are used to give the meanings as brought out, it will really be great!!!

K.Ramadurai 20:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Why is there not a separate section for Literature?

Why is there not a separate section for Literature. Literature is a major feature of any language, and particularly Tamil. It would be a good section to add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.139.65 (talk) 03:41, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

No regulating body?

I remember that in the past I had seen in this article that the Thanjavur Tamil University and some other institutions are the regulating bodies for Tamil.But now I see in this article that there is no regulatory body to regulate Tamil language (Arun1paladin (talk) 13:02, 23 September 2011 (UTC))

There is no unified regulating body. The recent controversy over including additional grantha characters in Tamil Unicode subset demonstrated this. The TN govt and allied organisations get more say in these issues because of the population, but there is no single entity that can claim to be the official regulatory authority --Sodabottle (talk) 13:09, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Grantha was a script used by Tamils to write sanskrit.There is no sense in merging grantha script with current Tamil unicode or adding Tamil alphabets to grantha unicode.Only some sanskrit chauvinists want that move (Arun1paladin (talk) 04:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC))

முத்தமிழ்!

Why there is no word about முத்தமிழ் (இயல், இசை, நாடகம்). Instead of creating Old Tamil, Middle Tamil and Modern Tamil, we should have created Iyal, Isai, Nadagam.

இயற் தமிழ் - Spoken on Home and streets. Mainly the Dialects and variation in Tamil on day to day life.

நாடக தமிழ் - News, Public speeches, Press, other Media's. Normally understandable to all Dialects and Educated peoples.

இசை தமிழ் - Literature, Folklore, where you need translations and has more hidden meanings. Understandable by literates.

Correct me if I am wrong! Haribabu.P 01:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Servophbabu (talk • contribs)

This about Tamil as a lnaguge, what you are saying is an artificial division of literary Tamil to fit a cultural norm. It could be mentioned in literary Tamil section. Kanatonian (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Kanatonian this is what I am trying to clarify, the Literary Tamil comes under Isai tamil/nadaga Tamil. we should not take Muthamil into the Tamil Literature, because its not under it, but its reverse. Haribabu.P 07:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

jambolik's edits

User Jambolik has been inserting the text "This is a fact that Tamil was not merely the language of South India but before the Aryans came it was the language of the whole of India and was spoken from Kashmir to Kanniyakumari" sourced to Ambedkar's THE UNTOUCHABLES WHO WERE THEY AND WHY THEY BECAME UNTOUCHABLES ? who in turn sources it to a 1919 lecture. This is only one of the old theories. This is not the mainstream view. This doesnt belong in this article as a fact.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Ambedkar was more of a Dalit activist than a historian or a linguist. His views cannot be neutral. Moreover, the URL is not opening in my PC. What might be the reason?-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 18:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep, agree with Ravi here Kanatonian (talk) 15:39, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course. But we are not ignoring opinions/views expressed by Mahatma Gandhi or Jawaharlal Nehru on various non-political subjects though they were primarily Political Leaders. K.Ramadurai 00:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jambolik (talk • contribs)

There are opinions and there are facts. You cannot state a opinion of a person as a fact in the article, when especially the said person is not of the relevant field at all.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:48, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

INFLUENCE: I inserted the following text in the column 'Influence' after the sentence 'Tamil words are also found in Sinhala and Malay'.

'The above words came to English language after interaction of Britishers with Tamil speaking people after colonization of India. It is worth mentioning that more English words have close resemblances with Tamil even before Englishmen arrived in India which requires more study and analysis. For example, pearl ( from paral பரல்,0ld Tamil), speech (from pechchu, பேச்சு), one (from onru ஒன்று), eight (from ettu எட்டு), fish (from paasi பாசி old Tamil), naval (from navai, நாவாய்), alone (from alian, அலியன்,old Tamil which means singled elephant from the group) etc.,

But the said post has been removed on the ground 'Unsourced speculation'. Well ! If I am right, I remember that the famouse Indian linguist Mr.Suniti Kumar Chatterji once said, as I read in news papers long ago, that Tamils had reached the shores of England in ancient times and there were several English words roots of which could be traced to Tamil. He quoted words' naval' and 'force' had roots in Tamil words 'navai' and 'por sey'. It is astonoshing fact to look at similarities between English and Tamil words giving same meaning such as Victory( Tam.Vetri வெற்றி), kill (Tam.kol கொல்), war (Tam.por போர்), attach (Tamiடtakku.தாக்கு),one (Tam.onru ஒன்று), eight (Tam. ettu எட்டு),' in 'as preposition (Tam.il இல்) and other words I have already mentioned. Therefore the post has strong reason and base.. I am trying to bring facts to the light and not debating.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 16:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Please read wikipedia's policy on verifiability - WP:V. We dont add stuff based on what "we might have read in newspapers long ago" and speculation. The one who reverted you had good reason to do so. Without a reliable source to support it, any assertion can be removed.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:42, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

You have to provide sources. Specify the publication with its date and page number and we will allow your claims to remain. Else, we don't care the heck. Even if Suniti Kumar Chatterji had actually said so, still it is nothing but a fringe theory not supported by most of the academic world.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 18:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

"One" is also similar to "Ondu" (Kannada) and "Onji" (Tulu). It only points to some similarities between English and Dravidian languages and not that Tamils had settled in the United Kingdom long ago and invented the English language.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 18:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. Though I may agree with your points in not allowing my post, I am upset when you said a thing which I did not say nor had any intention to say i.e., " Tamils had settled in the United Kingdom long ago and INVENTED THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE" . It is always better to limit our writings to required points only. Little harsh !! It's OK.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 22:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, if I am not mistaken, that's what you've claimed Suniti Kumar Chatterjee had actually said.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 02:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I was just trying to be straight. Sorry, if you felt that I was being harsh.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 03:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

No, I never quoted Mr.Chatterjee as saying 'Tamils invented the English language'. It is someone's presumption from my post. I hate that sentence. Let the matter rest here please.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 16:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

=Influence

As read in the page=

"A notable example of a word in worldwide use with Dravidian (not specifically Tamil) etymology is orange, via Sanskrit nāraṅga from a Dravidian predecessor of Tamil nartankāy "fragnant fruit"

It is acceptable that the word Orange is from Sanskrit naranga. But linking it to Tamil nartankay is not a correct. Nartankay ( a green citron vegetable) never becomes orange in any stage. Both are totally different. While nartankay is used for making pickles only especially in Tamil Nadu, orange is eaten as fruit. One can peel outer skin of an orange with hand nails but not nartankay.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

That really is irrelevant. The word english word orange only began to apply to the color orange within the last centuries, before that it only applied to the citrus fruits of various colors.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:31, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for clarification.

K.Ramadurai (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I cringe when people pronounce Tamil with the 'l' rather than ழ(zh). Should we think about adding a tag next to the word Tamil, which would say that Tamil should be pronounced as tham-i-zh or tham-izh  ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jash121 (talk • contribs) 00:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)