Proto-Dravidian.html |
| | | ca | | | de | | | en | | | es | | | fr | | | it | | | nl | | | no | | | pl | | | pt | | | ru | | | ro | | | fi | | | sv | | | tr | | | vo | | |
| |  |
Proto-Dravidian is the proto-language of the Dravidian languages.
Contents |
Hypothetical language
Proto-languages are, by definition, hypothetical languages reconstructed by linguists, and hence no proto-language has any historical record. So is the case with Proto-Dravidian. Due to a dearth of comparative linguistic research into the Dravidian languages, not many details as to the grammar, epoch, or location of Proto-Dravidian are known.
Differentiation
It is thought to have differentiated into Proto-North Dravidian, Proto-Central Dravidian and Proto-South Dravidian around 1500 BC, although some linguists have argued that the degree of differentiation between the sub-families points to an earlier splitcitation needed. The only book which covers all the Dravidian languages which can point to Proto-Dravidian forms is Dravidian Etymological Dictionary still consist only of lists of related words without further explanation; therefore for a talented linguist Proto-Dravidian offers large possibilities
The Reconstructed Language
Here we discuss the salient features of the reconstructed Proto-Dravidian language.
Historical Phonology
Vowels: Proto-Dravidian contrasted between five short and long vowels: *a, *ā, *i, *ī, *u, *ū, *e, *ē, *o, *ō. The sequences *ai and *au are treated as *ay and *av (or *aw)1
Consonants: Proto-Dravidian is reconstructible with the following consonantal phonemes (Subrahmanyam 1983:p40, Zvelebil 1990, Krishnamurthi 2003):
| Labial | Dental | Alveolar | Retroflex | Palatal | Velar | Glottal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasal | *m | *n | *ṉ | *ṇ | *ñ | (*ṅ) | |
| Plosive | *p | *t | *ṯ | *ṭ | *c | *k | |
| Fricative | *ḻ (*ṛ, *r̤) | (*h) | |||||
| Flap | *r | ||||||
| Approximant | *v | *l | *ḷ | *y |
The alveolar stop *ṯ in many daughter languages developed into an alveolar trill /r/. The stop sound is retained in Kota and Toda (Subrahmanyam 1983). Malayalam still retains the original (alveolar) stop sound in gemination. (ibid). In Old Tamil it took the enunciative vowel like the other stops. In other words, *ṯ (or *ṟ) did not occur word-finally without the enunciative vowel (ibid).
Velar nasal *ṅ occurred only before *k in Proto-Dravidian (as in many of its daughter languages). Therefore it is not considered a separate phoneme in Proto-Dravidian. However, it attained phonemic status in languages like Malayalam, Gondi, Konda and Pengo due to the simplification of the original sequence *ṅk to *ṅ. (Subrahmanyam 1983)
The glottal fricative *h has been proposed by Bh. Krishnamurthi to account for the Old Tamil Aytam (Āytam) and other Dravidian comparative phonological phenomena (Krishnamurthi 2003).
Homeland
- Further information: Harappan language
This geographical and chronological horizon can correspond with an identification of Proto-Dravidian with the unknown language of the Indus Valley civilization, and the individual groups of Dravidian speakers would have been scattered after its collapse in the early 2nd millennium BC, a fact that receives some support from human genetics: the frequency of Haplogroup L (Y-DNA) in Dravidian upper and middle castes suggests that it may have been (perhaps besides J2) the original Y-haplogroup of the creators of this civilization (Sengupta et al. 2006).
Various substratic influence on Vedic Sanskrit ascribed to Dravidian lends further support to this Proto-Dravidian as the IVC language. Asko Parpola has suggested that Meluhha may be the Sumerian rendition of the a native Proto-Dravidian name for the Indus Valley Civilization. The hypothesis is further informed by the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis, which would indicate that languages of an an Elamo-Dravidian linguistic phylum in the Middle Bronze Age were spoken from the Persian Gulf along the coast of the Arabian Sea as far as the mouths of the Indus.
The identification of Indus Valley Civilization language with some form of Dravidian has not been conclusive or successful, and the speculative nature of this hypothesis is undisputed.
Iravatham Mahadevan, who with his knowledge of both Tamil and Sanskrit, spent many decades studying the IVC script said in an interview in 1998 that IVC script is undeciphered. According to Michael Witzel, the well-known Indologist, there are not many Dravidian loan words in the earliest stratum of Vedas, even though, the Dravidian influence quickly increases in the post-Rigvedic period. In the essay "Substrate Languages in Old Indo-Aryan", Prof. Witzel says "As we can no longer reckon with Dravidian influence on the early RV, this means that the language of the pre-Rigvedic Indus civilization, at least in the Panjab, was of (Para-) Austro-Asiatic nature."
Spread
Many linguistswho? tend to favour the theory that speakers of Dravidian languages spread southwards and eastwards through the Indian subcontinent, based on the fact that the southern Dravidian languages show some signs of contact with linguistic groups which the northern Dravidian languages do not.
References
- ^ Baldi, Philip (1990). Linguistic Change and Reconstruction Methodology. Walter de Gruyter, 342. ISBN 3110119080.
- Krishnamurti, B., The Dravidian Languages, Cambridge University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-521-77111-0
- Subrahmanyam, P.S., Dravidian Comparative Phonology, Annamalai University, 1983.
- Zvelebil, Kamil., Dravidian Linguistics: An Introduction", PILC (Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture), 1990
- S. Sengupta et al.: Polarity and Temporality of High-Resolution Y-Chromosome Distributions in India Identify Both Indigenous and Exogenous Expansions and Reveal Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists. American Journal of Human Genetics, 2006, p. 202-221 [1]
See also
External links
T. Burrow (1984). "Dravidian Etymological Dictionary, 2nd Edition". Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved on 2008-10-26.